states unilaterally moved away dropped the anti-ballistic missile treaty the very foundation of arms control speed up to the munich security conference in two thousand and seven read that speech read the speech that putin gave to the general assembly the united nations in two thousand and fifteen and then we have last week what i'm doing is connecting a lot of dots anyone that's paying attention understands perfectly well what's going on here ok mary go right go ahead. well i think that everybody sort of thinks that they understand what's going on but one thing that they certainly didn't understand or at least i felt that about the british reaction was that they did not understand that putin is in an election campaign so i think you have to understand that this was a state of the nation speech given in the context of a russian election in less than a month's time and it's all very well for people in the west to say oh it's not a proper election no putin's bound to win and there's no contest and all that is probably true but the fact is that there is a campaign and putin needs to get his vote

where we work with some 25 countries on verification technologies that will be needed for future arms control verification. this is just one of the many thing that is we are doing in terms of moving towards disarm meant. it doesn't mean you need flashy headlines with new arms proposals. they are hard work so let me just put in a plug for that and some of the issues. >> you mentioned that on february 2nd your department briefed the russians and chinese. can you she had light on the conversations and interactions and what should the approach be going forward in dialoguing with the russians and chinese. >> yes, absolutely paul. we have no secrets here. we wanted the allis and wanted russia and china to know we are moving forward with the npr. we did brief them and had good discussions. and talked about opportunities for the future for future engagements and specifically, we have a number of dialogues we are pursuing with china. with russian -- implementation, the successful implementation of the new standard of care treaty, cannot be over emphasized. both sides are doing so without any problem.

i know the americans would hate this idea but why don't we have a global arms control agreement on nuclear weapons so you bring in the chinese also bring the nato countries that have the bomb india pakistan israel it doesn't it it made it but it has it in everybody does know that and even north korea now see the way it is global and everyone knows the rules of the game but the americans would never allow that to happen because in the case of the neo-cons negotiation is appeasement go ahead george. yes yes you know i think that's an excellent idea at all it was always a very strange that the only participants in these nuclear disarmament negotiations were used to be like the united states and the soviet union whereas britain and france and china or the other nuclear powers they were just. out of it they were they weren't considered but i just going back to what daniel said i think that. he's absolutely right i mean that this is a more dangerous situation than was the case during the cold war because during the cold war i mean there were the crises in berlin there was a crisis in cuba but ot

returning to nucular parity with the united states and we have to comment about the erosion of arms control regimes that are very important you know mark and looking at the major cable stations in the broadsheets they don't give much of a background why this speech was given and its significance go ok well there's two speeches the first part of the speech was a domestic state of the union speech saying this is what i've accomplished in my years in office so far this is what we haven't accomplished this is where we want to go this is our obstacles and this is how we think we can get there and it was a very good the majority of the speech it was a two hour speech the majority of it was the voted to domestic matters lots of facts and figures he's clearly on top of his game knows is economy inside out know is where he wants to take it. focus on. increasing g.d.p. per capita and also science technology education spending. the other part of the speech was a reply to the u.s. it was a reply to two things one the u.s. unilaterally pulling out of the anti-ballistic missile treaty that was the bedroc

review it discusses the possibility of a first strike this is throwing away his entire history of arms control not only did they rip up the b.m. treaty they're actually even going further there is no interest in the west about a new start to intermediate weapons and their note there's no talking about that ok again this is one of the reasons why putin said what he had to say go ahead dan you . you know i think the the anti-ballistic missile batteries in poland and romania that you referenced earlier was also about enabling a western first strike prohibiting retaliation i think president putin said it many times before this is not about defense this is to enable all offense but you mentioned earlier you know hysteria and i think the u.s. is is under such a cloud of mass hysteria that i it's palpable you know this past week in italy there were elections where the non-mainstream parties did very very well and someone joked how soon until explained on russia well and today already has just a day later played on russia by none other by samantha power by samantha power and here's here in italy are p

and russia were reaching arms control agreements like they did under reagan and under bush and their group. to reduce our souls but even if the u.s. and russia are are increasing arsenals maybe especially if they're increasing arsenals including new and different kind of weapons then the communication and constraints becomes even more important because if you're building up your arms and i'm trying to perceive what the consequences of that are for me and i building up my arms including new arms and you're trying to perceive what the consequences are the real fact is if we end up in a war we kill each other so that's a disaster for both of us so would we like to have a chance of that happening. by misperceptions or misunderstandings or accidents or would we like to limit that risk and i think say a sanity suggests we should limit that risk and that's actually what both american and soviet and russian governments that would the conclusion they came to after having tried the other for some period of time and i suspect in the current competition at some point this fact will reemerge beca

returning to nucular parity with the united states and we have to comment about the erosion of arms control regimes that are very important here mark and looking at the major cable stations in the broadsheets they don't give much of a background why this speech was given and its significance go ok well there's two speeches the first part of the. each was a domestic state of the union speech saying this is what i've accomplished in my years in office so far this is what we haven't accomplished this is where we want to go this is our obstacles and this is how we think we can get there and it was a very good the majority of the speech it was a two hour speech the majority of it was the voted to domestic matters lots of facts and figures he's clearly on top of his game knows is economy inside out though is where he wants to take it. focus on. increasing g.d.p. per capita and also science technology education spending. the other part of the speech was a reply to the u.s. it was a reply to two things one the u.s. unilaterally pulling out of the anti-ballistic missile treaty that was the bedrock o

and russia were reaching arms control agreements like they did under reagan and under bush and their group. to reduce our souls but even if the u.s. and russia are are increasing arsenals maybe especially if they're increasing arsenals including new and different kind of weapons then the communication and constraints becomes even the more important because if you're building up your arms and i'm trying to perceive what the consequences of that are for me and i building up my arms including new arms and you're trying to perceive what the consequences are the real fact is if we end up in a war we kill each other so that's a disaster for both of us so would we like to have a chance of that happening. by misperceptions or misunderstandings or accidents or would we like to limit that risk and i think say sanity suggests we should limit that risk and that's actually what both american and soviet and russian governments that would the conclusion they came to after having tried the other for some period of time and i suspect in the current competition at some point this fact will reemerge be

how has he dealt with arms control issues?know that could well be an issue in the next year or so. >> absolutely. mr. bolton has been a fairly strident opponent of many arms control agreements din particular, while he worked in the bush administration as theto arms control official at the state department, he was one of the peoo honchoed the bush administration, the united states' withdrawal of the anti-ballistic missile treaty with russia. >> woodruff: last thing i want to ask is what happened years ago when george w. bush nominated him to be the ambassador of the u.n.ry nusual, the republican majority foreign affai committee, foreign relations committee in the senate refused to confirm hm, and there was a lot of testimony about john bolton. ju in a nutshell, what happened is this. >> well, some of these cases i st brought up came up. there was also allegations that he went after a former u.s.a.i.d. contractor, a woman in moscow harassing her over a business dispute while he was out of business goverent. >> woodruff: you don'

in russia is a very important nuclear power let's all face it ok we have an entire history of arms control agreements because. a possibility of. of a mistake a miscalculation that's why we have these agreements but they're running out running out in two thousand and nineteen to twenty twenty one and then we will have none of these things here so i think it was prudent to reach out. but will the united states do it because considering the environment particularly in the united states i mean. trump has his hands tied i mean this is on these issues he cannot do anything go ahead danny. well i think you know certainly a brilliant move by the neo cons to put in a vote put him in a box they have prevented him from fulfilling any of his campaign promises if he moves or even says putin without spitting. there he goes again he's on putin's payroll so it is a disastrous to the question of whether in a new cold war i would almost say i'm not the first who said this that we're actually in a new hot war during the cold war. the better minds in washington were doing their best to prevent an active confl

they could amend the arms control export act or the licensing of defense services or the national defense authorization. authorization act. instead we face a resolution which purports to require the president to withdraw u.s. forces from hostilities in yemen. hostilities which we have not entered. in a recent speech secretary mattis explained, quote, history proves that nations with allies thrive, working by, with, and through allies who carry their equitable share allows us to gain the greatest possible strength. imagine how challenging that would become if every advise and assist mission our forces undertake around the globe becomes subject to misapplication of the war powers resolution. thus, mr. president, i oppose this resolution on grounds of policy and procedure. and i would urge our colleagues to join me in afternoon. now, on a final matter, later this week the senate will consider an omnibus spending package to address a number of critical priorities, from rebuilding america's infrastructure to fighting the opioid epidemic. in particular, building on the funding agreement passed

states unilaterally moved away dropped the anti-ballistic missile treaty the very foundation of arms control speed up to the munich security conference in two thousand and seven read that speech read the speech that putin gave to the general assembly the united nations in two thousand and fifteen and then we have last week what i'm doing is connecting a lot of dots anyone that's paying attention understands perfectly well what's going on here ok mary go right go ahead. well i think that everybody sort of thinks that they understand what's going on but one thing that they certainly didn't understand or at least i felt that about the british reaction was that they did not understand that putin is in an election campaign so i think you have to understand that this was a state of the nation speech given in the context of a russian election in less than a month's time and it's all very well for people in the west to say oh it's not a proper election no putin's bound to win and there's no contest and all that is probably true but the fact is that there is a campaign and putin needs to get his vote

i know the americans would hate this idea but why don't we have a global arms control agreement on nuclear weapons so you bring in the chinese also bring in the nato countries that have the bomb india pakistan israel it doesn't it it made it but it has it in everybody does know that and even north korea now see the way it is global and everyone knows the rules of the game but the americans would never allow that to happen because in the case of the neo-cons negotiation is appeasement go ahead george. yes yes you know i think that's an excellent idea at all it was always a very strange that the only participants in these nuclear disarmament negotiations were used to be like the united states and the soviet union whereas britain and france and china or the other nuclear powers they were just. out of it they were they weren't considered but i and i just going back to what daniel said i think that. he's absolutely right i mean that this is a more dangerous situation than was the case during the cold war because during the cold war i mean there were the crises in berlin there was a crisis in cu

states unilaterally moved away dropped the anti-ballistic missile treaty the very foundation of arms control speed up to the munich security conference in two thousand and seven read that speech read the speech that putin gave to the general assembly the united nations in two thousand and fifteen and then we have last week what i'm doing is connecting a lot of dots anyone that's paying attention understands perfectly well what's going on here ok mary go right go ahead. well i think that everybody sort of thinks that they understand what's going on but one thing that they certainly didn't understand or at least i felt that about the british reaction was that they did not understand that putin is in an election campaign so i think you have to understand that this was a state of the nation speech given in the context of a russian election in less than a month's time and it's all very well for people in the west to say oh it's not a proper election no putin's bound to win and there's no contest and all that is probably true but the fact is that there is a campaign and putin needs to get his vote

returning to nucular parity with the united states and we have to comment about the erosion of arms control regimes that are very important here mark and looking at the major cable stations in the broadsheets they don't give much of a background why the speech was given and its significance go ok whether there's two speeches the first part of the speech was a domestic state of the union speech saying this is what i've accomplished in my years in office so far this is what we haven't accomplished this is where we want to go this is our obstacles and this is how we think we can get there and it was a very good the majority of the speech it was a two hour speech the majority of it was the voted to domestic matters lots of facts and figures he's clearly on top of his game knows this economy inside out though is where he wants to take it. focus on. increasing g.d.p. per capita and also science technology education spending. the other part of the speech was a reply to the u.s. it was a reply to two things one the u.s. unilaterally pulling out of the. anti-ballistic missile treaty that was the bed

yalzine pobley will be assistant secretary for department arms control when confirmed. this is important particularly in light of upcoming negotiations with north korea. she was nominated 298 days ago and is a previous staff director of the foreign affairs committee. isabel lieu nass, reported out of committee in july, nominated to be assistant secretary of the treasury for intelligence and analysis. this helps work with many of the sanctions you have covered. so many of these positions in fact are national security positions. lastly, kevin mclenan, to be commissioner of customs and border patrol was nominated 298 days ago. obviously it's been a priority of this administration to highlight the security threats we face on our southern border. kevin in taking that role will be safeguarding our borders and helping to prevent terrorists and contraband from entering the united states. yet congress and the senate continues to dither and not have a confirmation vote. we're pleased that he finally got through a cloture vote last week. we expect him to be confirmed monday night

in the soviet arms control and national security field therefore what we need to do is to set the terms for what we would like to see five or ten years down the road with a sense of realism about what is possible. but if you're simply just waiting for both sides to grind through the bureaucratic process, even with the best staffers, that's not going to suffice. as we know in march of '85, gorbachev comes in just before that. the nuclear and space arms talks had commenced in geneva and they persisted throughout the gorbachev era and just to the b clear, we don't forget about the arms reduction achievements during this period, you have inf in '87, you have the nuclear risk reduction center has completed, you have an upgrade to the hotline, you have the strategic arms reduction treaty, the open skies treaty, stark two, the conventional forces in europe treaty, the chemical weapons convention. two very important presidential nuclear initiatives that are understudied and then start two. so it's an extraordinary period that really gets launched during the middle of the 1980s and i think that

yleem poblete has been nominated for secretary of state for arms control. she worked to verify compliance of arms control including disarmament agreements and missile defense cooperation. we need her in place so she's able to fully represent the united states at upcoming international meetings to discuss syria's use of chemical weapons. and to participate in april's nuclear nonproliferation treaty preparatory committee meetings. say that really fast. and yet senator schumer is holding her up putting the safety and security of the american people and frankly the entire world in danger. senator schumer is blocking nominees indiscriminately. he forces time wasting procedural votes on nominees and then eventually votes in support of them. just yesterday the senate had to waste precious floor time on a universally respected nominee. terry doddy, confirmed 98-0. even senator schumer eventually voted in favor of the nominee yet still demanded the senate go through archaic senate procedure that delays votes and wastes the american people's time. it's a disgrace, da

arms control and national security field. for that to happen simultaneously with a consensus to emerge in the soviet arms control and national security deal. therefore, what we need to do is to set the terms for what we would like to see 5 or 10 years down the road with a sense of realism about what is possible. if you are simply just waiting for both sides to grind through the bureaucratic process even , with the best staffers, that is not going to suffice. as we know, in march of 1985, gorbachev comes in just before that. the nuclear and space arms talks had commenced in geneva. they persisted throughout the gorbachev era. just to be clear, we don't forget about the arms reduction achievements during this period, you have ins in 87, nuclear risk reduction center is completed. we have an upgrade to the hotline. you have the strategic arms reduction treaty. the open skies treaty. start 2, the conventional forces in europe treaty. the conventional forces initiative treaty. it is an extraordinary period that really gets launche

leaders expressed concerns about putin's remarks on arm's development and its negative impact on arm controls effort, he said. megan sat down with vladimir putin after that address yesterday. listen. >> several analysts in the west have said this is a decoration of a new cold war, are we in a new arm's race right now. >> if you were to speak about arm's race, it began exactly the time and moment when the u.s. opted out of the anti-ballistic missile treaty. >> some have suggested you've tested it and it's failed and that's why you only showed animations of it today and not produced any videos. >> translator: are you walking about ibcp? >> yes, the one you claim renders useless. >> translator: several weapons system discussed today surpasses. >> have you tested it? >> translator: the tests are excellent. some are already available to the troops and batter ready. >> for the record right now, you have a workable irk c bm that's powered that you tested successfully if. >> translator: all of those tests were successful. each of these weapon systems are at a different stage of readiness. one of them

in the 90s the clinton administration thought they had an arms control deal with the north koreans.o i think that, yes, it would be a major achievement if in fact, there was follow through on this. we're not having lucy and charlie brown and the football once again. >> alana shore, let me ask you what you heard on the hill after the news came down. what's the reporting and reaction among other congressional friends? >> well, i think republicans wish they had been in town when this handled. they had a tough thursday over this tariff plan. and then this really good north korean news that allows them to say, look, there's the prospect of a testing suspension, the prospect of a real agreement on denuclearizati denuclearization. democrats are caught on the back foot right now thinking how hard should we warn donald trump against going into a negotiation that, to karen's point, he may not have a clear way out of that doesn't work. >> alaina, what did you hear, the same thing alana did? >>. >> a bit more tepid response. they are excited we're talking about peace and not war. trump is ultim

do you feel an erosion of arms control? >> i feel both of those. we are entering a new arms race for sure. reminds me of the 1970s and '80s. i don't think americans are that focused on this at this poi, but us the not only the russians modernizing their forces, with some very capable weapons they know how to build and maybe some fictional weapons we don't know whether they will build or not, but the russians are cereal deciding they want tosee clear weapons as an important element in eir policy. the trump administration is going doing the same. in fact, even under barack obama, the united states decided to enge in a $1 trillion-plus nuclear buildup with new msile submarines, new intercontinental rangeli bic missiles, new strategic bombers, so we're kind of sleep walking into this new arms race. si don't think eithere in the near term is going to gain some important advantage, but under these conditions, we could lead to a situation where one or t se othee felt that, in a crisis, a serious disagreement, that the other was going to strike and that tha

of arms control speed up to the munich security conference in two thousand and seven read that speech read the speech that putin gave to the general assembly the united nations in two thousand and fifteen and then we have last week what i'm doing is connecting a lot of dots anyone that's paying attention understands perfectly well what's going on here ok mary go right go ahead. well i think that everybody sort of thinks that they understand what's going on but one thing that they certainly didn't understand or at least i felt that about the british reaction was that they did not understand that putin is in an election campaign so i think you have to understand that this was a state of the nation speech given in the context of a russian election in less than a month's time and it's all very well for people in the west to say oh it's not a proper election no putin's bound to win and there's no contest and all that is probably true but the fact is that there is a campaign and putin needs to get his vote out and i think without that context the picture is incomplete but if we go back to t

the former arms control co—ordinator.st month. abiy ahmed inherits a country that has seen some of the world's fastest economic growth but also years of protests by people who feel marginalised, and accuse the government of human rights violations. from addis ababa, emmanuel igunza reports. this is the moment state television broke the news of the election of doctor abiy ahmed. he won more than 60% of all ballots cast. it ran on late into the night. he is now poised to take over from hailemariam desalegn, who resigned abruptly last month. many across the country have welcomed the choice of abiy ahmed, who comes from idiot you's largest ethnic community, the 0romo. translation: from what i have heard he has a good reputation among the people. it might happen in the day, but he will bring great change over time. translation: if he repeats the mistakes hailemariam desalegn made of taking orders from someone else, you'll make the same errors. if he listens to the concerns of the public there will be a good chance for him. tra

rosemont realty does a major deal with a chinese company that is control would by the fifth arm.tou you have a military related company buying in to a company that is owned by the decision makers in washington d.c. it is it outrageous. >> and chinese are trying to buy up what they can in silicon valley. the level of corruption is horrific and it is outlined in the new book, sweet secret empire and peter, we highly recommend the book. secret empires and thank you for doing everything you do. i don't know where we would be without your investigations and your terrific writing. and stou thank you, sir. >> thank you for your support over the years, lou, appreciate it. >> lou: roll our nightly voochlt high flying adventure tonight. look at that. i never have seen a helicopter do that. i am sure i would never want to be in a helicopter doing that. chuck aaron takes his helicopter in depravitiy defying stunts. and we mutt on an aerial display. and upside down. are you kidding me? i have never seen a helicopter come dloes to doing that and i am not sure i want to not that or in person. p

the assistant secretary for arms control at the department of when confirmed -- obviously, arms control is important and particularly heightened in light of upcoming negotiations with north korea. she was nominated 298 days ago passed been previously through the house foreign affairs committee. nominated -- the nomination for assistant intelligence working with many of the sanctions you have covered, so many of these positions are natural -- national security positions. lastly, the nomination to be commissioner for border patrol was nominated 290 eight days ago. obviously, it has been a priority of this administration to highlight the security threat we face on our southern border. kevin could take on that role to help prevent terrorists and contraband from entering the united states. yet, congress and the senate --tinue to dinner -- dinner dither and not have a vote. 298 days later, the american people have been anxious to make sure our borders are secure and we do not have a head of customs and border patrol. as you and i know, we are focused on personnel. we ask that you shed light o

getting to the diplomatic piece of it, the arms control, the economic sanctions --if the treasury, the department of commerce, dhs in terms of the export control issues involved. we meet on a constant basis with otheroutinely, weekly and interagency constructs we can speak on in closed sessions. it is a integrated effort in terms of the players. >> i want to hear about the resourcing and marginalizing of other federal agencies likely --artment of state affect me affect the cw? >> i know the cooperation is very strong. >> the general officer and i had pasthance to meet and the weeks. the challenge for the department, as general osterman said, illuminating network so we can get it or agencies involved. as opposed for it becoming a dod only problem. we did a global synchronization conference where we re-emphasize the need for the interagency to be involved and with the burden is on many of those partners is lack of analytical capability and lack of information that the dod has. to get into better information or sharing --information sharing enhances the abilities the agencies have. >> as

government to resume still insists that britain has one of the most rigorous arms export controls in the world we spoke to the author of shadow world. arms exports in the united kingdom is not amongst the most rigorous in the world and we've seen that over years and years and years it's my view that simply by exporting to a country like saudi arabia whose human rights abuses at home have been documented over decades and decades his involvement in conflicts in the middle east both historically and currently is almost the stuff of legend it's so pronounced and so important in that region that by exporting to the country the united kingdom government is violating its own laws let alone the international arms trade treaty of which it was a claimed proud signatory let alone the e use common position on arms exports let alone the rules of war and a whole lot of international humanitarian law but while going underground has been covering the ever worsening crisis in yemen as hundreds of cases of cholera turn from thousands to now a million here is journalist and filmmaker john pilger to expl

twenty years if not beyond that the united states has had no interest in any discussion of space arms control so although it's hard to tell how sincere trump is at this point one thing is fishel trying feels the force is with him. the right wing canadian activist has been detained in france and banned from an. britain lauren southern was held at a british border point in kalai the u.k. home office told her she was being banned for distributing racist material in the town of luton last year one of the posters said is a gay god officials described the twenty two year old as a threat to u.k. public policy southern says she was interrogated in the french report under the u. case terrorism act i got a knock on the door from the kent u.k. police who handed me this form and that's where things kind of went sideways it's the schedule seven terrorism act and they said you need to read this you are being brought in to be questioned under the terrorism act. well other right wing activists have been barred from britain for similar reasons austria's barton selmer and american commentator brittany pettibon

the overall effect is you have a breakdown of arms control pacts and china is not even party to those. a 21st century nuclear nonproliferation concern that is centered in this region across eurasia. outstanding issues like iran and notably you see the saudi's saying we want a civilian nuclear program predicated on jcpoa. oh a -- the united states wants to make sure it is in the best position to strike a deal with the saudi's, not the russians. mark: thank you for joining us. atfor vicen, strappe president of global analysis. namedsullivan has been sole president in coo putting him in line to replace lloyd blankfein asked ceo. the latest in a live report. this is bloomberg. mark: i mark barton. vonnie: i'm vonnie quinn. this is bloomberg market. is -- goldman has elevated solomon from copresident to become the sole president of the firm. previous copresident, harvey schwartz, will be leaving. we are joined to discuss it all by allison williams, bloomberg intelligence senior analyst. where does this leave us in succession talks on wall street? where does goldman stand now that it has wh

when the cold war came to an end they defended it then you became i can eat you specialise on arms control specialist but not know a hardcore russian one and now i see people in western media talking about russian they have no idea really what they're talking about that it's all. exaggerations or character churches and i p's are the people that are influencing policy this is scares me because the russians don't bluff when it comes to existence go ahead mary . no i agree with you that russia doesn't bluff and i also agree with the other two contributors that. there is a sense in which the situation today is more dangerous on the ground in conflict areas such as syria such as ukraine because of the absence of the sort of rules that existed during the cold war. but i think in two respects things are slightly different one of them is that the scale is so different and the feel in the two in the two capitals is so different even in washington you have this incredible frenzy against russia but it's against russian interference in all sorts of things in a sort of cyber dimension in a propaganda d

i was actually his chief of staff when he was undersecretary of state for arms control and he has a brilliant strategic mind, fully supportive of the president's agenda but he is not a yes man. you know what, the advise is not going to leak to the press. but most important, lou, he's a nice guy. he was a pleasure to work for and i can tell you the people who work for him are intensely loyal and they are all celebrating tonight. lou: i think anyone who knows john bolton is celebrating, because of his, his intellect, capacity, his experience, talent. and i said here last night, one of the things that i think is incumbent upon any national security adviser is to take responsibility for his team, for their loyalty, for their integrity, their discretion. and i think anyone -- the national security team has been leaking like a sieve from that white house. and mcmaster could never control it. and john bolton, will he be able to control it? >> i think so. i mean, john really does understand government bureaucracy. he understands how to get the job done. and i don't want to speak for how he's going to