him, mor zuckerman. many of younow him as the chieeditor of u.s. nws and world report. i amlso joined today by msnbc political analyst pat chanan. d so, mort, i'm ing to start with you. first, good morning. >> good morningo you. >> so how surprised we you about sarahpalin's decisionnd is it an act of political genius for all the critiquethat we hear? >> if that isn act of potical genius, i have to say to yo then i consider myself to be a political genius. i thinkt is one of the-- i haveo objections to r decidi to whdraw from politi. but an act of political genius one ofhe most incorent rambling unfortuna atements. if whater her asons, i'm sure she reayas sensitive to the attacks on her family as a part of it, it's the ong way to do it. this i not somehow or other i ink her making national politics not the natural

platform for her. >>at buchanan, want to bring you in here becauseou old friend, bi crystal, said she mae crazy like fox there could be polical genius invo here. she could stand make a lot of money and posion herself for a more serious 2012 run than she coulhave if you were isolated up in alaska. yo thoughts? >> i think there's a clear possibily. look. she's going to take a hit, ven what mort said, the mann i which she did i when she stood down and how it was haled. but there is no doubtbout it that onc she leaves the goveship of alas, she gets out from these constant accusations that have cost her $500,000 inlegal fees. her family is off the map fr all these attacks and she is liberad to come south and campaign all through the unid states in 2010 for reican candidates taken barack obama directly. think republicans will pick up house seats. athat oint, however, she decides to run f president of

the united states, i don't know that she's ruled it out, she'll have to swer why she wald aw from the jo so it'sot pros to andt it's got negatives to it. >> p, here is what i would say. would say, clear, mort, i ink shs got an oortunity to make $10to $on 20 million the next two years be it through book, radio d tv als. ain, i go back to pat's experien in '92 and, again, to some extent in'96. i thin the voters aleast in ose early statesin iowa and new hashire, i think they may be more forgivi of her tn mae the national media will be and who knows wat happens if she wins one of those firs two stat. >> nobody can prect anything but i have to say to you the voters in new hampshire and early states are not stupid and, frankly, sheid not come ross as a credible candidate even en she was vice presidential candidate and, frankly, this does not add to e luster of her rutation. dy comes away from wching this and sayi, you know, i thin she really showed she's

got the stuff to be the president of the united states. i don't think it word then and i don't think it worksnow. i think she can make a lot of moy and i wish her well and i ink some of the atacks on her werenfortunate but having said that, s is not qualified in the minds of mosteople that i know and most peoe that you know and most people who make these judgments earl on to be the preside of the united stat. and it's goi to really hold her back to run for the nomination. >> heypat -- >> yeah.s? >> caos, this was like nixon's mont in 1962 wen he butted into that press conference of herb klein and said think of the fun you'll be missing, you won't haveick nixon to kick around anymore and h walked off. howard k. smi and abc d the political obituary, nationwide story tha weekend. xon wo the presidency twice. i think she ge out to iowa and runs, she's enoously poible wh half of the republican base isin love with

her. that i an enormous advantage to wipe out any nuer of candidates in the replican primaries. i do agree with mort if s goes through therimaries and sould win the nomination, she's really got mountain to climb because ddle america, whh was excited about her and wild about her when she first arrived, really wonders now whether she is qualified by intelligence an temperament to be president o the united state and she wouldave toonvince the whole country about that and she ain't there yet. >> pat, mort, i'm going to move quickly d we're going to com back to tis but i want to move to the other big toretory we're following. 2 million of jacon's fans are learning if they are one of 8,750 peop who ultimately get tickets fo tomorrow's public memorial at the staes center. alof this come i want you to hear this in full -- one leading congressman lehed a tirade against jackson. listen to what peter kingad to

say. >> this guy s a pvert, child molester, a pedophile and toe giving this much coverage to him day in and day out, what do it say tos about our country? nothing about this gu y have been a good singer and did some dancing but the bottom is would you let your ild or andchild be inhe sa room with michael jackson? >> ouch joining me from dodger stadium ere tickets for tomorrow's memorial is being hand o is nbc's al meger. how much excitement is there that 2 milon people are waitg for what are ahandful of tickets? is there that frenzy right now as we speak some. >> yeah. everne who is coming here knows they have won a ticket. so many fos were expected to co here, they actually started opening the gates about 30 minutes early. a liveicture behind me, what you're looking at is actuall the cars ofhe 8,700 peoe who ha been told they won tickets. they need to show their i.d.s an e-mail confirmation get

the tickets. they don't have to get out of cars. obstacle course they have se up. driver swing trough the course one at a time a show tt e-mail confirmation an show thr i.d. and they willet that wristband and a ticket to either go to t staples ceer or the nokia center. the first people who show up get tickets to the staples center but once they n out of wri wristbands f the staples center, the rest get a chance for th nokia center. the chances to win is 1 in 183 cae over aillion registed for tickets. dodgers stadium expected to get busy. folks ve until 6:00o get here if they have won tse tickets. it going to be a busy day at dodgers stadium. >> miel, thank you. guys, right now, i want to ing in georgetown uveity professor and author michae eric dison isoining us and we'r joined byat buchana michael eric i tur to you, first.

didou hear peter king comments? the congressman om long island? >> ah id. >> whatdo you make from tha that? is a legitimate part of the conversaon? has he overepped his bounds? >> i think he has overstepped his bounds to be ure. michael jackson wento trial, was exonerated and cleared of all charg, numr one. number two, however,ou might still foster suicion or skepticism about his particular practices, buto call him a pervert i think is radiation tinged and certain tinged by bias against thekind of entertainment at michael jacksoperformed. it isgnorant of his enor d clossal spacket impact on the culture a misstates our comprehension that alluman beings even if they legends or icons are flawed and think mr. king needs to look wthin his o fellowship an fraternityhere enough corruption i think have manifeed themselves inrecent days to suggest he needs to ean up congress befor before he goe down to the stage of

tertainment. >> cling out the republicans broadly. >> look. i thinwe are celebrating something quewonderful in michael jackson. he was an unbelievable performer. i happened to see several o sort of reprisals of h world tour and his music a talents evved. the manwas such an extraordinary talent. i mean, we have almo never seen that in our letime as an entertainer. that's what we'r really celebrating. this man really, what just charged, unbelievable nuer of people withis music,his singing andcing and his dancing put him on a level of fred astre. only two or three peopleike that the last 50 years and i can totally understa why he is beg sell braid celebrated. i think the points by representative king is off the line at thistage of the game. >> pat chanan, what areo thoughts on what peter king h to say and michael eic dyson' comments as well? >> i don't see any racial motivation in peter king. he clearly did notlike michael

jackson and clearly had some hard feelis what has been learned and allegedndll of the re of it. i do agree wth mort that the ting of this is probably not the right time an secondly, i peter king is going to run statewide, i think certain areas of new york are probably not going to be visiteby him if he is going t runor the u.s. senate. i do th -- ido thk this. there's a certain time when peopleass awaythat you give it a decent interval, whi people who loved him and appreciated him and admired m, mourn for him and you hold off your commentar during that. but i do thk the coverage of course, it has been enormous and exhaustive. i think, by and large, enormouslyavorable to micel jackson. i've never seen michael jackson clips. i'veeen more of michael jacksos videos in the last five days than i've seen in my whole life! >> guys -- >> pat, you'ad avery, very, you know, cautious and restrained life. it's not true of all of s, pat, as you know. >> iot elvis stuff, mort!

>> michael eric dyson,he final rd. only 30 seconds. >> agree with both mortnd pat that michael jackson is an extraordinarperformer. i sawim per live. incredibly talted person who touched every race, class, gender and sexual orientatn in the wod and think we need to celebrate and uplift the positives of him. it's not we don't have room for crical analysis as mr. buanan said but let that hold off. this man's genius shoulde celebrated and i think put the othestuff to res >> thank you all. at a crew! what a way to start off this morning show. thanks to all three of you. new detas coming out ght now as president oba and his russian counterpart agree to redu their nuclear stockpiles and nuclear delivery systems and more information on the strategi importance to the pentagon that the rusans aged to allow the united

states to y troopsnd weapons through russia othe way to afghantan. big news. nbc white house corresndent savannah guthrieis traveling with president obama and live in mosc. that would sm to be a fairly signifant news,specially given the dramaticincrease in fightingn afghanistan, including 21,000 new troops. >> wl, it's verysignificant for e military because wt it does is allow it to diversify itsupply roes. russians are essentially allowihe.s military to transport weapons,supplies, troops through russian terriry into afghantan. so the obama ainistration is really highling that as a significantachievement. then the other, quote/unquote, deliverable toome out tt we're just learning abou they have a frework now number for the new start treaty that expires in december of this year. now there's going to be new start treaty. they have to negotiate it. the details wille difficult but the numbers are there. under the old treaty, we had 2,200 warheads allowed.

>> looks like we may have lost savannah guthrie who is in moscow rig no presidenobama, again,t the kremlin and met already with the ruian president dmitry medvedev a he also is scheduled to get togeth torrow with the prime nister vladimir ti serious conversation not only abou reduction in nuclear stockpiles but russian cooperation oking american ples to fly over russian possib into afghanist. a very gnificant change in policy. that ultimately formaled. nt, we continue is conversation wh russ with one ofobama's closest confidanted, rhode island now a framework for a nucle arms dl in place between russian and the united states. we'll talk abo that with senator reed aerer the break. pudding fitit all th rich, hocolatey taste in 60alories? ♪ ♪ o oh, so delicious whwho cares jell-o sugar free ddg. every didi needs a little wiggle ro.

relief can't come fast enough. introcing bayer quick relse crystals. it's readydyo dissve faster thanaplets or tablets. it's a whohole new w y from bayer to d dlve pain fast. new bayer qck release crysts. in thesearkets, i'm glad i turned to fidelity for an annui with aranteed income for lif that'sight, guaranteedome for life. my annuity frofidelity means my retirement income is safe. it guaranteed, no matr what happens. if guarantd come for life sounds good to you, do what i did -- let fidelitye your guide. call fidelity at. for details about guaranteed income for life.

> welcome back to msnbclive. m carlos watson. we're watcng live pictures in moscow right now where presint barack obama has met withis counterpart in russia, president dmitry medvedev. you see a signing that looks the genel joint chiefs of staff. admiral mull is there. our savannah guthrie nfirmed russians willll ameran planes to fly or russia and supply our troops in afghanistan. a major announment today. i want toring in rhode island senior sator and member of the armed services committee, senator jack ed. good to se you. >>ood to see you, too, carlos. >> senator reed, what should we ho from this trip that prident barack obama has me to russia? are the significant things beyond thiafghanistan announcement we should expect to hear? >> i think the ahanistan announcement is a iticalone.

it will help us to havemuiple lines of communicati and sulies into afghanistan at a critical moment whene're building our troop strength. in addition,as you've also discussed, carlos, the issue of the art treaty. they fured out numbers of reduion. , i think,is a significant issueship not ly in terms of russia andhe united states but al giving us additional levera as we sk to peuade nuclear weapons. developing >> how do you thin the cut could take place in the stockpile? at start treaty i scheduled toapse in december and some thinking w not get something in place fore tn. if something is put into place, how much redon in t nuclear sckpile do you thk we'll see? >> i think we'll se both sides keeping aredib stockpile but probably hundreds ofeans that could, on both sides, be

put in storage and deactivated. that is going to beord out on the details. but i think the positive news is that it looks like there ll be agreemen it looks like ther will be reductions and thatwill, as i said, not only benefit the united states an russia but also give the united states more credibilitand mo influence as they try persuade hers who abandoned or redud their stockpile. >> senator reed, i'm joined by my guest co-ho mort zucker o s a question for you. >> senator, isn't the most serious ise that we want t deal wh with the russians is to see if theyl join us in imposing serious sanctions on iran as the only real method that we uld like to pursue to persuaran to cut bac on their program to seekut nuear weapons? and this is where they havbeen the least cooperative, not the most cooperative. at could we don your judgment to cnge that particular position? >> i'msure the president and medvedev a putin have

discussions exactly ont topic. you're right, mort. irans one of the critical issues we have to face and russian cooperatiowould be tremelhelpful. but i think it's a god sign that the president has been able to get this agreement with effect through afghastan and talk about start taty and as vice president biden said a few months ag try to reset the relationship and gack into pructive relationship. ultimately, e president has to be able to convince the russians that if their self-interest, i think he can, to help us with iran. iran is muchloser to russia. they he contacts with russian territoriemuch cser to iran thanhe united states. so i think this progss on this front, but not as dramac. >> senator ree i'm going to talk to you. i know u're on the banking committee and i know you got ba from visiting your home state rhode island whe unemployment is among t five highest in the cou. what are your thoughts right now on the potential need r a

second stimulus package? we heardavid axelrod raise that a couple of eks and yesterday, vice president biden they may have underestimated t extent of economic pain. what are you thoughts on what we need do to get theconomy ouof the slump? >> well, the only way we're going toet the economy out of the slump is to get people ba to w and to stabilize housing lues. i don't thinwe should rule out a second imulus package but as you understand, carlos, this package is a two-yea arrangement so additional money forthcing to the state in the next several mont. we haven expend all of the moneyet. hink the administratio and, frankly, they have to be much more aggressive on the housing market. ep in, avoid foreclosures and stabilprices to manyarts of the country, that's at is bringing the local economies down a it's n providing the kind of power to brin it ck again. so i thk more aggressive action on hoing would be very helpful. >> well, no doubt but look. let's face it.

the stimulus pgram was too little and t late. a lot of peopl sa that at the very beginning. the ct is according to the government accounting office, only 49 bllion dollars of ne money will be snt between no and the end of this fiscal year but it'sn the early part of a downrn you want to prevent it fromeeding on itself. e government sur has to do more and do more quickly in order to prevent this om becoming a very seriousand long-term recessiowhich will badly hurt the democts not onlyn next ear's congressiol elections but for the next several years. what is the hodback? what is the reservation about getting prepared it? at least if it turns out that th economy is rse than expected, which is clearly is, that there i something that is ady to go instead of having sort , you know, put together a whole package ain and again and it kes so muchime and then you lose the effectof it. >> well, mort, you know, we d a very difficultime getting the first package through. we had virtually no cooperaon expt two republican senors. so at was one of the stumblin blocks o getting that pkage through. there s a sense, i think,nd

still a see on the republican side that-- >> senator reed, i apologiz i have tonterrupt you. the presidents are stepping to the lectern having signed an reement. weect to hear sof what they achieved right now. i' not sure how good your russian is, butplease jo us inlistening >> the decision s been adopted on setting up the joint ruia/u.s. presidential commission to develop cooperation. [ speaking in foreiglanguage ] >> translator: a u.s. prident barack oba and rsia was a very busy one. th first day showed thate

managed to discuss all of the items of our agenda and it was a very big one. i would like fom the outset to say that there was a ve uful and ry open business-like conversation this, you dot, was meeting that had been expted, both in y country and the united states of america, andn which noonly the future o our two countries depend, but, to a large extent, the worl development. i would like to emphasize, once again, of course, the firs day ofnegotiations, our meeting in one-on-one and in limited composition were verypen a sincere. anthis is extremely important. weave agrd that wwill continue to comnicate in this

mode further on in reality, forur relations, it is verymportant and i is noa simple job, becse the backlog of problems quite impressive. t we had enough of mutual wish and wl and posions of prinples thate have always occued and still ocpy to the discussion of this problems in a business-like manner and we have reacd mutually beneficial results. uld like to emphasize that the counies understand its role in its own way but, at the same time, we reaze our re and responsibility for the situation in this wod. especially a perd when the level of gbazation h reached such dimensions and such parametershat the decisions we

make very open determine e situation in general. anduch powerful states that the ited states of america and the russian federation have special responsibility for everything tt is hppening in our planet. we have manypoints of conversions, many mutual interes, and global and economic ones,nd a variety of rs. interests. but our desire to discuss the subjects was mutl and this is also o of very imrtant sults of our meeting, sie the work we are doing reqres goodwill, mual respect, and honest understandi of each otr's position. we ao came to theonusion th russian/american relations

and the level achieved today does not corond to their potentl, to their oth possibilitiesf our countries, and the important thing ishat th level that we have today does not correspond to the need of the current age, and withou active develment of our relas on the foreign affairs on scientic trade, educatiol laons. will note ale to build the road to the 21st century. weave spent several hours in ry busy negotiions, very specific, and, at t same time, we del on the questions of velocity of our cooperation. i'grateful to the president of the united states for the understandg he showed the principals that we put forward

and our attention to he proposals made by thamican side. so despite of theact that the several hours we cannot remove the burden o older problem we have agreed that we will go forwd, without stopping, that we wmake the decisions that are needed for the development of relations between our two countries. we have scusse quite specific problems and i woulde to share so othem with you. we, of course, discussed international subjects. wepoke about such difficult probms is a the pross of middle east settlement we agreed to continue work, taking into account the business we had in the middle east recently, and the plans that we discussed -- we discussed e possibility of holding moscow conference on the middle east. wepoke aut a very important

subject, that seemingly requires of our activiti. this is the prm of afghanisn. without our joint work in this area, we would not beble to aceve success in this area and, on that score, we have agreed on a speci statemen our relations will be also consolidated by our links in humanitarian field, the field of science. this has to be done by all mea and we will be dealing th this after this meeting in very persistent w. now, a few specific results of ourgotiatns. you e aware of them. we have agreed a very importt subject. the new agreement of strategic offensive arms. this is basic ement of our mutu security. the work was very intensify and

i must admit that our tes, our delegations worked this suect in a vy fruitful way. theyave swed reasonable compromise a would ke to thank everyone who took part in this negiations or is going to take part in them. the result of th is that we havechedotnly mutual understanding of what -- how we ould move forward, but also to the basic levels onhich we will advan our cooperation. we aeed on the - on t vels of carriers and warheads, meaning that this is a very ncrete subject in the mut unrsnding that we have just signed with the president the united states, it is said tat our two countriesan have fm 0 to 1,100 carriers of strategic arms and from 1,5 hundred to 1,600, 1,675 for the

waeads. these are the new parameters within rch. we will be going on and where w hope to achieve fil agreement that will be part of the treaty. we have agreed, so, that the offensive and dsive systems both countries should b considered together. we have adopted a joint statement on -- this is al important result of our work even taking inccount that we have divergenc on the number of items. nevertheless, we managed to si, to approve a joint document. we have discussed measures of cooperion in the nuclear and thmost important is that we will continueur cooperation in every area. a lot depends our countri.

we have signed an agreement on military transit to afghanist. we decided toreate a presidential commissionon coeration which will be coordinating rations amg variou agencies of the ute states and russian federation respectively. in all priority areas, including economic and military areas. in the military area, these questions will be dealt by the chiefs of saffs that have jus signed the document. general mullen. soon, alheseocuments will be published and you'lle able toamiliarize yourself with them. on the whole by characterizin our first dayf work athe sults of negotiationshat we have had. i would like to say tt i view them as, first, but ry

important, start in the process of improvingfu-scale cooperatiobetween our two cotries, which should go to e benefit of both states and if both states benefity it, at means everybody will benefit by it. i would like tomphasize in conclusion that ourcountr would like to reach such a vel of cooration with the united states whi would be realistically worthy of the 21st century,hich will ensure international peace and security this is in our interests a we e gratulo our arican colleagu f the int work we have de. it is true that the solution of manyorld problems depends on the int will of the united states and russia. thank you. >> good afternoon, everybody. an i want to thank president

medvedev and the russian people for their hospitality. michelle and i and our children are pleased to be here moscow and to be here so early in my adminiration. we've st concluded a very productive eting, president meedev just indicat. the president and i agreed that e relationship betweenussia and the united states has suffered fm a sense of drift. we resolved to reset u.s./russian relationso that we c cooperate more effectively in areascommon interes. today, after less than six nths of claboration, we've done exactly that, by takin concte steps forward on a range of issues, while paving the way for me progress in the ture. and i thinkt's particly notable that we've adessed the top prioritie these are not second-tier issues. they are fundamental to th security and thesperity of bo cntries.

first, w have taken important steps forward to increase nuclear curity and to s t preed of nuear weapons. th starts with the reduction of our ownuclear arsenal thewod's two lead nuclear powers, the united states and russia, must lead byexample. and that is what we're doing re today. we have signe a joint undersndg for a follow-on treaty to the start agreement that will reduce our nuclear war hes and delery systems to a third from current treaty limitations. this legally biing treaty will be completed this year we've also reed on a joint atement on nuclear security cooperation that wil help us achieve the goal of securing all vulnerable nuclear tels within four years, progresswe can ild on later this week at t g- summit. togeth, these are important steps foard inplementing thagda that iaid out in ague. as we keep our commitments, s

we must ensure that oer nations keep theirs. to that end, we had construive discussions abt north korea and an. nortkorea s abandoned its own commitmentsnd violated international law and that'shy i'm pleased that russiaoined us in passin a u.n. serity council resolutionhat calls for strong steps for north kore's nuclear programs to b ocked. iran poses a serious in its failure to live up t this is not just problem for the united states. a nuclear ar race in the middle east which would endanger global securitwhile iran's balltic missile pam could also pose a threato the broader region. th's why i'm pleased we've agreed on a joint statemen on cooperation on missile defee and a jnt threat assessment of th ballistic missile challenges of the 21st centy, including thosposed by iran and north korea.

second, we have taken important steps forward to strengthen o security through geater cooperation. esident medvedev and i agreed upon the need to combat the threat of violent extresm particular from al qaeda and, today, we signed an agreement that would allow the transit of leth mlitary equipment rough russia to ahanistan. this is a sstantial contributionly rsia and save the ited states time and resources and givingur tros the support thathey need. thanks to admiral mullen and his russian counterpt we he agreed to resume military-to-military cooperation betwn the united states and russia. this provides a framework for improved cooperaon and operatity between o forces so we can better address the threats that we face from terrorism to privacy. we'valso agreed reore a joint commission on proners of war and missing in action which will aow our governments to

coopere i our unwavering commitment to our misng rvicemen and women. third,e've taken important steptoward to brden our cooperation on a full range of issues tt affect the rity and prosperity of our people. president medvedev and i are creating u.s./rus blael presidentialommission to serve a new foundationfor this coeration. too often, the united states and ruia only comnicate on a narrange ofsss or let old habits withi our bureaucracy stand in t way of our progress. that's where why this cmmission wi include working groupsn the devopnt and economy, energy and the environment, nuclear ergy and secity, arms control and iernational security, defense, feign policynd counterterrorm, preventing and handling emergencies, civ society, sciee and technology, space health, educatio a culture. this work will be cordinated by secretary clion an secrery clinton will tvel to russia th fl to carry this effort forward.

just to giv you one example of this cooperation, is theew memoryum of mem ran dumb on undersnding of health. pwe learn that a disease that emerges anywherean pose a risk to peopl every why and where our department of health and humaservices will cooperate with its russiancountparts to impactnfectious and chronic and nne commune ka commuble seases. i'm happy tt russia taken the st oflifting important restrictions on u.s. lifestyl e cost o these businesses is ov 1.3 billion and we've made impoant progress. i won't retend that the united ates and russia agree onvery issue as presiden medvedev indited, we've had some frank discussions other areas where we stilldisagree. for instance, we had a frank discussion on russia, on georgia and i reiterated my firm beli

that georgia sovereignty must be respected. even as we work through our disagreements on geoia's boers, w do agree that no one has annterest i rewed military nflict. in going forwar we must speak candidly to resolve tese differens peacefully and constructively. presidt medvedev and i are committed to leaving behind suspicn in therivalrin the past wen advance the interests at we hold in common. today, we made meaningful progress in demstrating throug deeds andwords what a mo constructive .s./russian relationship can look like i the 21st ntury. morrow i include badening this concept among the american and russian people. i believe that all o us have an interest in forgin a future in which the united state and russia partner effectively on behalf of our security and prosperity. at is the purpose of resetting our relations,t is the progresse made today, and i,

once again,ant to thank present medvedev and his entire team for beg ch ruffle hts and working so effectively with our team. ank you. >> tralator: now we begin -- >>is carlos watson. u've bn following the presses conference with president medvedev and president oba. perhaps me than someeopl expected, i'm going to inve back my guest host mort zumer man zuerman. we willause for a moment. president obama s announced a couple of major iniatives here including reducg nuclear warheads and work the north korean and iran nan situation. >> a series of trust after this period of rocky relationsith th countriesutlso the agreements you've ju ld out today. having spe time with president medvedev, do you feel like you ha full trust in him and have you settlein your mind who is

reallyn carge here in russia, the president prime minister pun? and president medvedev, i'd like to a you, polling show that the amic people have some hard feelings about -- i'm sorry, that the russian pele have some hard felings about america. i'm wondering wh youthink present obama can do to try to change this? >> ok. well, first of, this is now my second lengthy bilaterally eting with president medvedev and we also h a series of telephonealls and other exchans. and throughout our interactions, i found him to be straigforward, professional. he is clear abouthe interests of theussian people, but he is also interested in fding o what thenterest the united

stat are and we have found, i think, an abilit to work together extremely effectively. so, yes, i trust president medvedev t not only listen and to negotiate construcvely, but also to follow thrgh on th reements that we have discussed here today. and again,'m very appriative not only ofhe manner iwhich he s dealt bhe, you with me, but t manner fch in whi our teams worked gether. you thk out our short meeting in london to today and thfact we have essentially accomplished all of the goals thatwe had set i london, and theseare not insubstantial achievemts. i think it's a good sign for progress in the ture. tomorr, i'll be havg breakfast with prime minter putin. i ve not met him before.

i'm looking forward that meetg. my undersing is tt president medvev is the president. prime minister putin is the prime minister. an they allocate power in accordance with rusa's form of government in the same way th weallocate power in the ited states. and so my interest is in dealing directly wh my counterpart, the presint, but also reach out to prime minister putin and all other influential ctors in russian society so that i can get a fullpicturef the needs of the russia people and the concerns of the russn ople, and my strong impression ithat president medvedev and prime minister putin are working very effectively togethernd our interest isealing with the russian government as a olin order to aieve the improved

bilatelly relationship i thi can be accplishe >> transto i would like to thank president obama for the kind words h just said about th and the level of openness that we enjoy in our pernal relationship i said something about it alrey previously. peonal relationship arevery important,ecially whe you spk about the building o interstate relationshi and when therelatiship between the governments and personal relationship are on the same level, positive, tt always good forhe relationship of the

countries. eaking of the attitu toward the americ people,hey are friendly. i dot see any negative onus there, but when tre are problems beten the states, whenthere areegative signals being sent by the gornment, then, of crse, theseignals reflt on theood othe ordinary people an the best relationship between t countrs are more -- the more emp empathy people have towards each other inifferent countries. we touched upon different -- d the relationsp betwn our countries, new ups andwns. we, during the world war i saved e world, and was strategic partnership between us.

now, we also have a feeling that alot depends o o retionship and the success in delivering on all those expectatns on different fronts. a lot depends on our efforts, bearing in mind that our people have alwys had sympathy. you have the flo. thank yo i have question oth presidents. russia and the u.s. are the rgest clear powers he world, accounting for 95 of warhds. they have been working on th

documents on the -- for quite sometime. in fac since the 1970s. do you think you will be able to have the situation in the area on the -- under control when there are so many negave around the globe? the nonprofetion problems very important for our counies, because we have and share the largest burden in the area of nonproliferation. we do have the major nuclear arsenals and we have full responsibility for those arsenals. and i agree wi you totally. there are negive trends in the world and they are due tohe emergence o new nuc plays. some of them are not officially members of the nuclear clb,but they have asrations to have

nuclear weapons andeclare so openly or which is worse, dng it has a very gave bearing the world. and due to reaso very we knowhere are regions around the world where the presence of nuclear arms would create huge problems and the are aas where wehould concentrate our efforts together with our american partners. those regns, those areas are well-kno there is no see naming them but it's quite obvious that on the situation in the middle , on the korean peninsula, ll depend e climate throughout the glob it's our common, joint sponsibility and we should make o utmost prevent a negative threat there and we are ready to do that. our negotiations with president obamaave demonstrated th we

share the same attitude towas this problem. >> well, i think president meedev sd it well. this is an urgent issuend one which the united states an russia have to take leadership. it is very difficult fors to exert that leadership unless we deal with our own nuclear ing to stockpiles in a more rational way anthat is why this st-start agreement is so important and i'm hopeful that we can rece ouruclear arsenals bas muc as a trd an hopefully,can move even beyondhat in subsequent agreements and treies. the critical issue that president medvedev identified is the fact that we areing a

pace of potential proliferation that proliferation that we have not seen in quite some time. and he mentioned twopefic areas. the middle east, the is deep concern about iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons capability. notimply becauseof one country wanting nuclear weapons, but the fact that if iran obtained nuclear apons, it is an almost -- it is alst certthat other countes in the region would then decide to pursue their own programs and we would then see a nuclea ar race in pes t most volatile part of the world. in the korean pinsula, we've already seor korealout its own commments and international obligatis in pursuit of nuclea weaps. and i all of the ses, as u see more proliferation of nuclear weapons, the possibility

isot only of state actors targing populations with nuclear weons, but the possily that those nuclear,s could fall into t hands of nonstate actors,xtremist organizations, pes an extraordinary threato both russia and the united states. so i'm pleased on the progress that we've madeso far. i think the fact tt we've got joint threat asessment in termsof what bllistic missile capabiliti and nuclear weapons could pose to our countries, th we will be conducting a review of thatnd min assessnts to find ways that the united stes and russia can cooperate more effectively. that's goingo be more importt. i think continug to pursue the cooperation that already exists between russiand the united stes on loose nuclear materialandaking sure those are secure, i tnk that's going

to be ve important. struuring a new rnvigorated nonproliferationreaty that applies seof rules toll countries,llows them to pursue peeful nuclear energy,ithout having the capacity to weaponize th nuclear capacity, that going to be ry imptant. so we've actually suggested a global nuclear securityummit that we intend toost next year d i discussed withpresident medvedev the stro possibility th in a bsequent summit, it could be hosted by russia, where we bring all the countries togeer around the world to art making proess on this critical issue. >> reuters.

>> thank you deep divisis over a proposed u.s. missil shield have contributegreatly to the deterioration o s./russia relations in recent years, and does t seem that you gentleman have finally resolved th issue either. president obama, you have sai ry clear that you would not accept the linkage between the missile systems and ar control talk. president medvedev you and prime minister putin have said that the issuemust be linked. are either of you gentleman willing to bud or compromise on ts issue? and if not, could this ao contribute to a blockage or obstacle to reachi a final start toagreement? and also, president obama, i woer if you cld give u your reacon to the chinese government cracow on the northwest of the country on rioting and unrest that has killedore than 140 people.

>> with respect tohe china situation, unfortunately, i've been traveling all night and in meetings all day, so i have n been fully briefedd i don't want to comment until i actually see all the information. i assure yo that our tam will get a statement to yous soon as i've been able to do that. on mile defense, we have agreed tha we are going to coinue to discuss thi critic issue. that is part of theoint stements that we've signed. i also believe at it is tirely legitimate for our discussions to talk not only about offensive weapon systems, but al defensive weans systems. rt of what got us througthe coldar was a sufficient sense parody and deterrent

capabilityhat both sides, during those very difficult times, understood that a first strike, the attempt to use nuclear weapons a mitary conflict versus -- against the other, could result in an extremelhey price. and so, any discussion of nuclear strategy, security, has to include defensive as well as offeive capabilities. the diffence that've had has been on the specifics of a missile defense system that the uned states views as a iority, not t al with russia but to deal wh a missile comg in from iranor north korea or some other stte,

and that it's important f the united states and its allies to have the capacity to prevent such a strike. the is no scenario from our perspective in which this misse defense system would provide anrotection against a mighty russian rsenal. and so in tha ense, we have not tout that it is appropriate toink diussions of a missile dense system designed to de withn rely different threat unrelated to the kinds of robust capabilities that russia poesses. now, having said that, presint medvedev has been very clear that this is a point of deep concerand sensity to the russian vernment. i suspec when i speak with president -- pri minister

putin tomorrow, he wi say the same thing. an what we wouldike to do is to workith russia to advan a system thatnsures that a stray missile, whether it was one or ten or a handful of missiles, comi from a third source, that we have the capabilities to prevent those fm doing ge. think we can arrive at those kis of understandings, but it's going to take some hard work, because it requires e breaking down long-standing suicions. withespect to this particular configuration that was prosed several ars ago, as u know, we're unergoing a thorough review of whether it works or not, what has been proposed. at review should be mpted

by thend of the summer and i indicated to president medvedev that as soon as that revw is colete, we w provide t russian govement our assessment of how we thinke should proceed and that wi be th subject of extensive negotiations. so ultimately, think e more progressing weake on some of the issues that i discussed earlier, noproliferation, being able to track ballisti missiles coming from other soces, to the extent at we are buiing deeper cooperaon on those frontsi think the more efctively we're going to be able to resolve this issue. i believe that over time, we will end up seeing that the u.s./russian positio on these issues can be reconcilednd that, in fact, we have a mutual intest in protecting both of

our populationsrom the kinds ofangers thateapons proliferatns is posing today. >> translator: on this subjt, of course, the ballistic missile defense, not ballisticissile defense, but the problem of the region area is a difficult subject for our discussion. but i would like to draw your attention towa what predent obama said and i wod like to point it out myself. and our mutual understanding that has just been sig we talk about the linkage between offensive and defensive weapons. and it already set forward. some time a on this question, we had only differences. no ts liage