Transcripts For CSPAN Former Vice President Biden On U.S.-Russia Relations 20180123

Ast. Something i know intimately for my time in Northern Island northern ireland, but this feels like countries in africa and the United States given our own kabul gated legacy. I urge our own complicated legacy. Subject today is another article in the magazine. I should probably introduce myself. Ime is richard hoss work here at the council on foreign relations. By thejoined today gentleman on my right, joe biden who served as the 47 Vice President of these United States and now leads the biden center. It is based here in our nations capital. It will officially opens its doors february 8. Them mission of the center is to develop an influence the National Debate on how america can continue to lead in the century and that is cofounded on the principle that a democratic open secure or an interconnected world benefits all americans. Full disclosure, the former Vice President and i go back more than four decades. Senator wly minted i was a wet behind the ears young staffer on the senate side of the hill. Over the last 40 plus years, we have had continuing conversation about the world and arc country and our place in it. The only thing output as a caveat is im not sure we distributed the time equally our conversation. This is maybe the only audience that will think it was you. [laughter] never go up against a pro. President sice writes is michael carpenter. He is our senior director at the pennbiden center. Bass the form your secretary for russia and eurasia and the two of them are the coauthors of the recent article in the same issue how to stand up for the kremlin stand up to the kremlin . Their piece addresses many of the same issues. Bob blackwell on how to respond to russias intervention in the 2016 election and how to respond to the geopolitical challenge that russia poses to u. S. Interests around the world. I returned from moscow a few days ago and i was struck by how limited this relationship is. It is less substantively than it was during the four decades of the cold war. I am struck by how different our views of the world are but also how it comes out in the article by the case for exploring the possibility of limited cooperation and meeting the challenges posed by north Koreas Nuclear Missile Program or trying to reduce conflict in Eastern Ukraine or syria. With that, let me thank both of you for being with us today. Thank you for writing for our magazine. Lets start. I will ask questions for a few minutes and then we will open it up to you, our members. Let me start with the basic question. Useful torate or describe where we are with russia as a Second Nuclear cold war . It would be a little bit of an exaggeration. Was based on a conflict of two profound ideological motions on how the world should function. This is about a kleptocracy protecting itself. That is a vast over some publication. This is about a crypt talker tin in particular doing everything he can to dismantle the structures that were set up and russia that were trending towardor squinting democracy. There is an overwhelming judgment that has been reached that in order for russia with all of its profound structural difficulties to be able to sustain itself and for your this ocracy to continue, it is much easier to deal with 28 different nations nine union and not a western economy that is coordinated. It gives them more room to wander. And engage in the activities they have engaged in which is essentially when the wall came down, everything that was part governmente soviet was by apparatchiks. I am vastly oversimplifying. Decision that they cannot compete against the unified west. Putins judgment. Everything he can do to dismantle the postworld war ii liberal world order including nato and the eu is in their immediate selfinterest. Richard let me ask you the same question. If you had to describe an elevator, what do you think of the essence of Russian National Security Strategy is and how they would define success for themselves, what would you . Russia has three principal goals. It is to weaken democracy internally and another is to divide the countrys in nato and the eu to deal individually with those nations as opposed with a united front. And to undermine the rules of International Order which in moscows perspective, is slanted towards the United States other normsromotes in the and National Sovereignty that russia feels can trend west when it wants to. It has taken the fight from a to originally just contained europe and to the United States by subverting our institutions internally. Power hard to underminetion these Democratic Institutions internally. One might describe u. S. Russia ties, they are not good. It is always anticipating what history will grapple was this inevitable. Something about russian political culture that essentially despite the optimism 25 years ago when president bush talked about a new world order, was it an inevitable or was to some extent, western policy bear responsibility . Did we have to get to where we are could have been avoided . It is hard to to say it could have been avoided but it is easily able to identify why did not happen. It was not because of the expansion of nato. That was my primary responsibility on the senate and the only time i had a real serious and elong dated disagreement and debate with pat moynihan was on the expansion of nato. His argument was that vastly much mored articulate than im about to state, but this is not the time to worry and that they are about to be surrounded and overtaken and etc. I asked the reverse question. What happened if we did not have nato . The anybody think that expansion of nato did not occur that somehow the fact that a kgb thug ended up in control of that country would have been altered . I do not see any evidence to suggest that would be the case. I would argue that you would likely see more use of military power and force. One of the things we talked about and i will not go on any further comment is that as all these Eastern Central european , they allere freed had their own agenda and their own concerts. Concerns. They were all engaging in activities that could have been destabilizing to the entire region. The whole region. Part of what we did is to stabilize and give some assurance to each of those countries. Considered re some of them were considering going. I do not think the expansion of nato will continue. I do not think it was the reason instability was. Nevitable i do think there were a number of things when you think about about you have written and many of you have richard you are not going to mention the name of the book . [laughter] mr. Biden you just made me forget the name of the book but is a very good book. I strongly urge you to buy two copies. Think about it. Look at all the countries in the from that are coming out under what is essentially been even decades if not an entire history of corruption and dictatorships or oligarchs running those countries. I spentot of time more time than any member of our administration trying to deal with making sure that this revolution of dignity did not plop in the face of what is a great opportunity for ukraine. Did not blowup up in the face of what is a great opportunity for ukraine. It is really, really, really hard to get out of the system. I think there are at least 100 years of history and beyond in russia that made it difficult to actually set up these institutions. Everyone in this room i assume knows last month, this administration published its first National Security strategy. Among other things, it calls for the United States to rethink the policies of the past two decades when it came to several countries, china and russia. But focus on russia. Policies ande based on the assumption that engagement with russia and Global Governance would turn into a benign actor and a trustworthy party. The National Security strategy said that this premise has turned out to be false. Do you agree with the National Security strategy . Think that the premise of engagement with russia is destined to fail. Especially if you look over the long run. Increaseave seen is an of russia acting out. Think we could also see that there were some missed opportunities. The goal of integrating russia into both international and , the imf,nstitutions the world bank after the fall of the collapse of the soviet union, but also institutions like the council of europe i think that was the right choice to make then. Going back to your question about, was this inevitable. There was a certain original sin the capture of russia and you cannot get around that. You saw that prior to the last administration. He saw in georgia in 2008 with the cyberattack in estonia on 2007 and yet, there were contingent events that shaped the flow of russian leadership and how it responded. One was a massive protests in russian cities in 2011 and 2012. The putin regime had been writing these riding th ese high oil prices. There is one event where putin shows up at a martial arts event and they arene jeering and boog him. Ended the result of that up being confrontation. I do not think that was inevitable. There is still history ahead of us. We need to have that play out. You are both a single we should not give up. Mr. Biden i do not think we can give up on the possibility. I do not think we should be naive. We have to do a number of things. To make it clear to russia that they are going to pay a price for many of the things they have done in addition to making sure to the russianse population in all of western europe what they actually are doing. Are talking we about russian interference in the United States and whether there was collusion between the Trump Administration and russia. That is obscured on a much larger discussion that should be taking place about whether or not what russia is doing and the rest of the world in the rest of the world right now. Part of it is pulling the bandaid off. Recommend in the International Commission and immediately we got a response from a number of european leaders wanting to set up an International Commission, an independent commission made up of all parties in europe to actually spend time and do what we have not done here. Look at what russia is doing in europe right now that they their public does not know. Is there is not much discussion and our leadership has been advocating. Your point is, there are three ways you lose power. One is to advocate. Well, that is what we are doing. Part of it is going out and telling the truth. Lay out what is happening out there and get the International Community to join in in terms of providing the hard data after some serious looks as to what is going on. The second thing, if you are when myhere and grandchildren are writing their senior thesis to some Great University about what happened wasussia and 2018, what the consensus in america about what russia was going to look like in 2030 . I would not want to be in the want to i would not be in a position no matter what approach i took of having to leave russia. Look at the state of russia now. There is a norm is that klein. Decline. Is enormous military a second rate power, they have significant advantages geographically where they are engaged, they have a blowar arsenal that could up the whole world, but in terms of their efficacy, their capacity it is the minimus compared to ours. It going from a market value of 350 billion to 300 billion in the last 10 years. What do you do if you are a democratic leader of russia . What do you do . How do you provide jobs for your people . Where do you go . How do you build that country . Unless you engage the west. Happens. Know how that i have not given up hope, i am not naive about it i have been a very strident voice in the last administration about putin in russia as i am now, but that does not mean that this is how things are going to be. Make, whenint i will my dad had the expression, never backed a man into a corner where his only way out is over top of you. Take a look at russia now. Where do they go, they are incredibly dangerous. The Life Expectancy is changing, be 20 e expecting to smaller population by 2050, i can go on. It is really going to be a tough, tough time to get them to the place where their citizens think they have any future. New phonyoint, this nationalism and populism that is being used by charlatans all across the world, the only thing keeping putin where he is is they can demonstrate they are powerful again. Eventually, he is going to have to produce something. I do not see where it gets produced. In the piece, the two of you say there is no truth of the United States and what putin seems to believe, that they are seeking regime change. Seeking to regime change and if we should not, what should we be thinking in political change inside russia . What is an appropriate agenda for the United States. There is a lot of Brilliant Minds sitting in front of me. I have an opinion. [laughter] richard you are sitting here and they are not. Mr. Biden look, folks. We cannot make this about a conflict between russia and United States. We have got to make this about a conflict between the russia oligarchy and the people. Worldis no country in the that in fact is comfortable with wholesale corruption. Wholesale corruption. Not based on any ideological rationale why the concentration the fact of the matter is, the lot of the things that we to do and should be doing make it clear that russia has violated these norms and still be willing on strategic matters to talk to them and cooperate. Could one of them be publishing what we network . Putins mr. Macgregor mr. Biden yes. Im all for publishing. Especially when i had a no money. [laughter] i did my when financial disclosure, the headline is no assets for joe biden. Seek toing aside, i expose the truth and we should theriends with what is underground portion of Civil Society and russia. We should not be silent. Part of that is laying out in stark relief what russia is doing, how they have turned corruption into a foreignpolicy tool and a weapon that is being used in extremely well in western europe and other parts of the world. Upis a matter of us speaking and speaking the truth. We do not have to make any of this up. Article, it will be the last time you do that. [laughter] in the article, washington needs to spell out clear consequences for interfering with a u. S. Democratic process or tampering with critical u. S. Infrastructure. What should we be doing . Not in terms of protecting our infrastructure or voting machines, but what should we be doing . What should be and it look like in terms of our retaliatory dimension to u. S. Policy . And what is the were to happen again. My sense is that we need to look at this more broadly than the narrow scope of election meddling. The strategy of strengthening our alliances, helping our partners in europe by investing energy security, reducing vulnerabilities at home i think this is key. Terms of financial transactions, money laundering, real estate deals, we need to es i harder target for russia. We need to impose costs. They need to be able to look back on what they are doing now in five or 10 years and realize that the cost outweighs the benefits. Not stop. They will they will stop if they see that costbenefit ratio is different. Richard what is wrong with the notion of a centrally telling them what the costs will be . One of the things we say in the article is that we need to expand our communication. We need to have a more robust dialogue. Consider to be on acceptable in our democracy. When to telegraph very clearly the last of administration did during the campaign this is unacceptable and there will be consequences. Anddialogue is very thin needs to be expanded. Mr. Biden we should be very clear about it and just not compare buttons in public. This is about communicating specifically. Specific actions we are willing to take relative to their interests. He are not something going the president should call out and call a press conference. It should be made very clear to russia and russian authorities what this means. I think it should be initially in private. If it continues to occur, pull the trigger. Look at the Republicancontrolled Congress did. They overwhelmingly supported giving the president this very andd authority to censor take action against russia for their behavior. We have not said a thing. Imagine if any of you were heading up the state apartment or the cia or president or Vice President , can you imagine not having called together all major agencies that have something to do with our began to in russia and put together a game plan . To the best of my knowledge, i may be mistaken, the staff i have at penn includes my National Security advisers and a number of very serious folks who play major roles. When i am told, i keep asking they must be having some conversations. There must be a discussion going on as to how to better coordinate Law Enforcement efforts. There must be some discussion. To the best of my knowledge, unless you all know and you may very well i do not know of any systemwide analysis being going on within this administration. So what the hell are we doing . We got to do something out there but lets keep moving. I do not get it. I dont get it. That, should on the Obama Administration have done more once it was learned that the russians were up to no good . In interfering in our politics. Before the election or during the transition, if the Obama Administration had a mulligan should it have done more. . This was a moving target. Told, weere originally inw they were engaging trying to delegitimize our electoral process. The hard data we had was not very detailed. Point, we went, this is the only engagement with the house and senate that i was not asked to lead. Anyway. I always was being sent to the hill to settle things. The gang of 12 were called together. Theaid out to them, Intelligence Community, exactly what we saw was happening. We didnt know the extent either. So that we would not be in a position the president and i would sit there after the pbd, everyone would walk out of the room and say what are we going to do . Mr. President you unilaterally say this was happening, you will be accused in this environment of trying to tip the election. Unless you can give harder data than we have now, you will be in a terrible position and it will play into the delegitimizing of our electoral process, which was initially what the Intelligence Community, correct me if im wrong, thought, what this was all about. T is we got, we went up mitch mcconnell, smart guy, who i get on with, wanted no part of having a bipartisan commitment that we would say, russia is doing this and stop. Bipartisan. It couldnt be used as a weapon against the democratic nominee, or the president trying to use the Intelligence Community at the time, people would say, no, do that. Look what they did. On thestant attack Intelligence Community as a Political Organization run by barack obama to take on political enemies. As a friend of mine would say, who would have thunk it . There was a constant tightrope. The second play, we said here is the data. Here is what we know. Why dont we put out a bipartisan warning to russia . Hands off or there will be a problem. Republicans would have no part of it. Hanging around that body up there for a longer than any of you were around doing it, meant about thes was all political play. The moment the president at that time came out and said, by the way, the russians are doing this in hacking the dnc, it would have turned into the president is trying to make a play. Then we learn more. Immediately after the election was over. We did have a conclusion. There was a consensus in the Intelligence Community, that when the president gave a facetoface warning to Vladimir Putin overseas at a conference, we saw no evidence which worried me, and everybody, of actually going into the voting itself. Cyber to go, using into and strip the rolls of democrats and republicans, we had no evidence of that. When the march was made, it didnt move further. Im sure i am leaving stuff out. The bottom line was, it was tricky as hell. It was easy now to say, maybe we should have said more. A rhetorical question. Can you imagine if the president of the United States called a press conference in october with this fella, bannon and company, tell you what, the russians are trying to interfere with our elections and we have to do something about it . What do you think would have happened . Rhetorical. I generally mean it. Ask yourselves, what do you think would have happened . Would it have gotten better or have further looked like we were attempting to delegitimize the electoral process because of our opponent . That was a constant battle. Had we known at what we knew three weeks later we may have done something more. One other thing, in addition. Especially in the fall of 2016, the focus in the administration was on the cyberattack. We knew they had intruded into 21 States Election infrastructures, and were very focused on not allowing the russians to be able to go in and change votes or invent people through sample addresses. That was a preoccupation. In theonly learning now, past 12 months or you learn so much in the propaganda campaign, the disinformation on twitter and facebook. We both feel that, that warrants an additional response. The countering american adversaries act provides the right authorities to amp up the cost even further. Helpful in getting that on the record. I will show restraint. Time for our members to ask questions. Wait for the microphone and introduce yourself, please keep it short. I know you are all dying to hear about the latest challenges facing amtrak. [laughter] the best we can is to keep the focus on the and u. S. Russia relations. Mr. Biden hello margaret. My question is, should we be going on offense in the information war . In the cyber war . Noterms of delegitimizing, just exposing corruption by playing offense the way they are playing offense . Mr. Biden the answer is yes, but not necessarily in the cyberspace. Most of what happens in cyberspace is altering information or preventing information from being able to come forward. To bek we should be able on the offense and make it clear, what we know russia and Vladimir Putin is doing and we should be working much more closely with our european allies and our allies around the world in exposing and getting them to stand up and acknowledge, with us, this is what is happening here. That message gets through. When i got here, the last vestige of the cold war was regular through europe, it was an attempt to broadcast the truth into russia. Havenk somehow, we have to , the democracies of the world have to be better coordinated at every level in every place doing just that. Broadcasting to the russian people, what is happening, to make it clear this is designed to protect vast amounts of wealth and vast amounts of corruption. Yes, maam, all the way in the back . Remind everybody, this meeting continues to be on the record. You have just been read your miranda rights. [laughter] next to last row. Thank you, rachel, congressional quarterly. Vice president biden, be more specific. There is Bipartisan Legislation from senators right now that would put in place engines that would snap in place on russia, if in the future a determination is made up for election election manipulation happened. These are sweeping in the financial sector. Do you think this is an appropriate step and that consequences have been thought through . Mr. Biden i think it is appropriate. Im sure there are consequences that could flow that we did not anticipate. The failureieve, doing that equals the failure to take the steps in terms of our interests. I would be supporting that legislation. Right here in the front . Thanks. Mr. Biden i will try to be as short as i can. Pleasure to see you, Vice President biden. I would argue that russias attitude toward the United States change not because of nato expansion but because of the iraq invasion. I wonder if you agree . The middle east is the one area russia seems to be doing well. It has excellent relations with all parties in the region, unlike the United States. I would like your device on how we deal with russia in the middle east, particularly syria . War, butve the 2003 you also had libya. Russia was bitterly presented, they thought it was a bait and switch. They thought they were signing onto something more limited, and obviously it grew beyond that. Looking back, those 2 cases, iraq and libya. And if you want to get into the question how do we deal with russia and the middle east now . Mr. Biden i will try to be brief. Totally legitimate. There will be a lot written about libya and why some one of us thought it was a tragic mistake, the policy we understood. Im serious. It is now public. I dont think that is the total cause but it is added to the perception, on the part of moscow as to what our intentions were. Number one. Number two. Our, i do think russia concluded two things. One, there was a danger in not engaging in an opportunity if they did, but very limited. If you take a look, you will see, moscow reducing presence in the region, not expanding. Theyhave found themselves, have a tiger by the tail. If they want to own that issue, have at it. They will be in an enormous difficulty in a very short amount of time. Initially, their notion was to get back some physical control of the Eastern Mediterranean with the ports and airports. That made sense in their perspective. What doesnt make sense in their perspective is how do they rebuild a country that is so fundamentally fractured . How does that happen . Where do they get the help to do that . I think they have a real problem. We have a problem as well. At, we talkg i look thet this a lot, my team, one place the administration essentially maintained the policy we had begun, with the same people that we had doing it, was the antiisis campaign. That has been successful. There is not the daytoday handholding and badgering that is required on a daily basis i mean, not a joke, there was not a week that went by, i was not on the phone with anybody, literally both cajoling and threatening, negotiating, among them and in between them, etc. Really ally, really, difficult circumstance to think about being able to establish a stable iraq, in the absence of al qaeda, in the absence of isis. It is still incredibly we are talking about a milky dollar avestment multibilliondollar investment to rebuild cities. One of the things were not doing much about we have lost, and there are experts in this room we have lost the notion among european friends that we know what we are doing. That we have a plan. That sounds like i am just time to criticize, im not. Anre was, we were building overarching consensus whether they would have ponied up is a different question. Unless you want isis three, you ll move and figure out how you stabilize in syria and mosul. There are ways that require significant investment. We took the lid off with our saudi friends when we said, anything you want, man, we are with you. And our israeli friends. There is not much of a coherent plan right now. The idea that this is some great benefit, the biggest beneficiary in the short term is not russia but iran. That is another story. I wish i could say it more succinctly. Any that . In the middle. Thank you. Scott from the world bank. Believeioned, you russias interest will eventually live more in terms of engagement with the west. Im curious about your assessment of the relationship between russia and china and the direction that might head . Mr. Biden i dont think it goes anywhere good for russia, or for china. Ive spent a lot of time, i was told by the folks who stayed, i spent more time with xi jinping than any world leader. Just he and i and one interpreter. I dont think xi jinping looks to russia then anything other than an occasional foil. The idea that there is some motive that fundamentally benefits, access to the west, china i dont see where that goes. Im not worried. It reminds me of when i got here as a kid. I was 29 years old running for the senate. At the time there was this great thing, this, connection, running from moscow to beijing. It was going to overtake the road, the world. I dont get that. It is one of the most guarded borders in the world. I dont understand where the mutual interest lies. I dont see it here either. There are places where each will use the other for their benefit relative to us. I can see that happening. The idea of there being a partnership, alliance, between moscow and beijing in the near term, i dont think it is in the stars at all. Mr. Vice president , i wonder if you might expand on the earlier question about syria . Certainly, ais great foreignpolicy success in the inverse, is the great policy failure of the United States. Looking forward, especially with the delicate balance between the players and especially iran, is there a way forward for u. S. Russian cooperation and how does that play these are the iran how does that play via i ran . Mr. Biden let me organize my thoughts. Think, might would be in these meeting sometimes, the president , you know when our kids are writing their doctoral thesis and asked the question, what did they do with the arab spring . Whathen the kid says, would make them think they could do anything about the arab spring . What you have in syria is a classic example of the biggest conundrum that we have to deal with. Russia, theer for idea that assad stays in power and continues to control, means there is a guarantee that there will never be peace or security in that country. So many bottles have been broken. There is no way he can put that together. There seems to be no willingness on the part of the russians at and wement, to work out, have tried 15 different ways, how we could have a transition of power and so on. Were are ways in which, could in fact, work with russia to essentially take parts of the country it will be a divided country a long time. You think we had a problem in iraq . There is no uniting principle in syria. In my view, there is none. I could see where you could work out a place that was essentially a safe harbor for certain parts of the country. You could drastically reduce the number of people being displaced and killed. We tried that as well. They did not play fair. With regard to, whether or not, they can influence iran or iran influences them . Iran if you notice got upset recently with some of the actions russia was taking in syria. They made it clear they were and well imrt of went, ok not sure where we are going to be. It know enough now will conclude this way. People ask me, what was the hardest part of leaving the vice presidency . 2 things. And notir force 2, getting up every morning and having a detailed National Security brief on what is happening around the world. Curve, in what may or may not be, some of the opportunities existing. Turkey adjusted in the Northwestern Province and what they are attempting to do in light of the distance that is being further created between the United States and turkey dontve to the kurds, i have enough granular data to be able to give you a better answer than i have now. Factt think russia can in dictate to iran what happens in syria. I dont think russia has the capacity to do the things almost everyone would agree, even if it is, the continued leadership stays in place to make the kind of multibilliondollar investment needed to stabilize the country. I cant help you with the airplane but cfr. Org. [laughter] but i dont want to acknowledge you guys are spying. One other issue on the floor. Ukraine. This administration unlike the administration, deciding to provide limited defense articles to ukraine. Do you think that was wise . Do you see any scope for a deal on Eastern Ukraine . Mr. Biden yes it was a wise decision. I was pushing that for two years before we left. Themore you up the ante, cost to russia for their aggression. As you all know, the one big lie going on about ukraine, and the rest of russia is, no russian soldiers are engaged. Nobody bags are coming home, etc. There is overwhelming opposition on the body politic in russia for the engagement in ukraine in the military sense. I think it has the potential to be able to be solved but it takes two things. One of those things is missing. Im desperately concerned the , kieviding on the part of in terms of corruption. I will give you one example. That was the assignment i got. I got all the good ones. I got ukraine. I remember going, convincing our team, that we should be providing for loan guarantees. Time, io guess the 13th was supposed to announce in kiev that there was another billiondollar loan guaranty. That theycommitment would take action against the state prosecutor and they did not. They were walking out of the press conference, we are not going to give you the billion dollars. They said you have no authority. You are not the president. I said, call him. [laughter] you are not getting the billion dollars. Im leaving in six hours. The prosecutor is not fired, you are not getting the money. Son of a bitch, he got fired. [laughter] they made some genuine, substantial changes institutionally and with people but one of the three institutions, there is now backsliding. They had made that commitment that they would not do that, when we left, i spent a lot of time as did mike because this was his territory as well. People like charlie and victoria, anyway, there was a lot of good people working on this. We spent a lot of time with Vice President mike pence. I was worried they would make a mistake there would be an omission rather than commission. Failing to do certain things or say certain things. That was at the time when there was a great concern among the Foreign Policy league that maybe a deal was made with no sanctions. Whether that was true or not that was the atmosphere after the election. They did goodwas, things, what is his name . They have over there . Solid guy, kurt, to the best of my knowledge does not have the authority or the ability to go in and say, you dont straighten this up and you are out of here. It all gets down to a simple proposition. We spent so much time, as you advice,went to you for we spent so much time on the phone making sure that everyone, at the time, wouldnt walk away. They wanted no part of the sanctions on russia. It was basically, you have to do this. Was strongerkel enough at the time, reluctantly, she did not like it either, to stand with us. Always worked in kiev. If in fact, you do not continue to show progress in terms of corruption, we are not going to be able to hold the rest of europe on the sanctions. Russia is not going to roll across the inner line and take over the rest of the country with tanks. They will take your economy down. You will be absolutely buried. You will be done. That is when it all goes to hell. The best of my knowledge, it is a very difficult spot to be in now when foreign leaders call me. They do. Ever, wouldever, say anything negative to a foreign leader and i mean this sincerely, about a sitting president not matter how much i disagree with him. It is not my role to make Foreign Policy. The questions across the board range from, what the hell is going on . To what advice do you have for me . I give them names of individuals in the administration who i think to be knowledgeable and committed. I say you should talk to so and so. What i do in every one of those times, i first called the Vice President , and tell him i received the call. , if he hashether objection to my returning the call, and what is the administrations position and what they want me to communicate to that country. The point is there is no pressure i am aware of correct me if im wrong, no pressure i am aware of on the present leadership in ukraine to hold them together, to be able to continue what looked like was a itl possibility of turning into something doable by being much tougher than germany wanted us to be. We were moving in that direction. Now it looks like the pressure is off. It requires day to day today. This may be my only chance. [laughter] you will get something you didnt expect. The last word. I completely agree with everything the Vice President said. That is the major issue right now, helping ukraine succeed. If they dont succeed internally, in terms of fighting corruption and establishing rule of law, it is a lost cause. s,hink Vladimir Putin he would be happy with the resolution, as long as it is turned into Something Like bosnia, we will see the fighting continued. More importantly, the dirty toey flowing into kiev affect policy and they have elections coming up in 2019. One of the things that came up was the refrain along those lines. In order for russia to lead the one thing Vladimir Putin could never countenance would be on russian tv, reprisals against aggression on the ukrainian side, that would put him in a difficult situation. Not to defend russia policy but to explain it. I think there is a way serious sanctions on our part against ukraine if that occurred. I dont think that israel. I want to thank mr. Biden take the last word will you . [laughter] mr. Biden i will not live this down. I want to thank the vice doing the article on Foreign Affairs. For being with us today and i and ao thank him for four half decades for Extraordinary Service to this country. [applause] [no audio] [applause] [indiscernible] announcer former Vice President joe biden has coauthored an article which appears in the januaryfebruary issue of Foreign Affairs magazine. suse speaker paul ryan, office this morning tweeting out a picture of a congressional delegation he is leading, as they pose during a refueling stop in spain. The delegation will focus on , the campaignlity against isis and terrorism and iranian aggression. The Armed Services Committee Chair and representative buchanan, Stephanie Murphy and scott taylor are also along. Our live coverage continuing this afternoon, we will be at the white house at 3 30 p. M. For the briefing with sarah sanders. Live coverage at that time. Overseas, another trip to the middle east, Vice President mike pence on a trip yesterday in israelthe knesset highlighting the longstanding relationship between the u. S. And israel and president trumps decision to move the u. S. Embassy to jerusalem announcing it will open at the end of 2019. [applause]