i think that there is a war of genocide being made against a country, and it brings home why the alliance was built, which is to keep europe whole, free and at peace. there is a silverlining to this horrific war. it's really a stronger sense of purpose. host: with the current summit going on with president biden there, one of the story to come out of that is the strengthening of nato's presence in europe.can you describe what will happen and what it does for the region? guest: yes, right now there will be about 40,000 nato troops under direct nato command in eastern europe. that number is going to go up to 300,000 at the conclusion at the summit. and there will be a new permanent u.s.-base in poland, with a rotation of troops in romania and the baltic states. and and all of these countries you will have a wider coalition of nato countries stationed to fend off russian aggression. so i think for a number of years, people in that part of the world had been aware of the risks of potential russian aggression, yet nato, until recently, did not plan seriously for the possibility of confrontation with russia. the u.k. defense secretary ben wallace said last week that nato should plan for a land war with russia. not that he wishes at that to take place but the best way to prevent it is to be ready in addition to the russians at that nato is indeed ready to defend its member states. so, all of that is underway. it also comes on the back of strong rhetoric coming out of the g7 summit, in which of the leaders of the seven countries felt committed to ukraine's future and national self-determination, free of russian aggression. and it comes on the back of the eu summit last week, which extended the prospect of membership to ukraine and moldova. so they are not candidates for e.u. membership. these are important steps for things that had been unthinkable only a few months ago without the russian aggression happening. host: let's invite the audience. if you want to call and ask questions about the nato summit, you can call us, republicans at 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000. independents, 202-748-8002. or you can text us at 202-748-8003. the upgrades for nato, and few are looking for if vladimir putin is looking at this, what will be the response from russia? guest: people say that to prevent disclosure terry moves we should avoid provoking russia, but in reality in those places of industry for the kremlin, the reality is if anything is provocative or escalatory, it's a sign of weakness and hesitation on the part of the west. wherever there has been pushback against russia, russia has retreated. and whenever there were doubts about what the west would do, including in ukraine or georgia, the president of russia pressed ahead, sometimes very aggressively, and with escalatory moves. we should not be afraid of strengthening nato's presence. it's really something that makes it more likely to deter russia. and russia is waging a war against ukraine, which is not an eu member. and it was creating unrest in moldova. i think it is good news that finland and sweden are joining. finland has one of the largest reserves in the entire world, close to one million people that are well trained. they have been rehearsing for a potential russian aggression for decades. so this really is an addition to the strength of the alliance and something to be welcomed. host: finland and sweden, one of the roadblocks from that happening was turkey. why do you think turkey changed its position? guest: and memorandum was signed between sweden, finland and turkey on their support or lack thereof for kurdish groups. so, sweden has a history of housing kurdish refugees and those groups in south from turkey. but says it will not do that anymore. likewise, it has distanced itself. but in the background of this, there was a more transactional deal made between the administration and president erdogan, specifically over the delivery of some airplanes, that the turks always wanted, but essentially was scrapped from the program with and purchase of and that your systems from the u.s. years ago. host: what you think president biden's influence has been over this process? guest: i think u.s. leadership is essential. and there are some people in europe who say that a crisis like this should lead to a greater sense of strategic tommy and european solidarity, but in reality i do not think we will have the kind of response to the ukraine crisis without the u.s. leadership. so, you have a significant divide between european countries, germany, france taking a much more relaxed, maybe not relaxed but cautious position with russia than those other countries that feel this is an existential threat for them. and for the u.s. and the u.k., if it was not for them building these coalitions and filling in the gaps, i think that it would be much weaker. so u.s. is not obsolete. host: the american enterprise institute's dalibor rohac dalibor rohac joining us for the conversation. the phone numbers are on the screen. we will start with charles on our independent line in colorado. you are on, go ahead with your question. caller: first with a comment, then a question. i think that we should tie all the nato countries into take any country in that works with the west under nato, and then tie that to the tpp, and really put the economic screws on all of these misbehaving countries out there in the world to get in line. and i also want you to comment on jon huntsman, who you probably know who he is -- he said that there is no way russia can leave out of this without the removal of putin. he said this as body bags from russia was coming back. it was really upsetting to russians. i cannot see where the russian people are going to keep this up with all of these sanctions and not oust this guy, your opinion? guest: great questions and a lot to unpack. i certainly agree that the united states and west should make greater use of economic tools. one of the striking elements of this situation is you have so many countries which normally would be in the west led alliances, brazil, indonesia, india -- they are on the fence and trying not to get involved. and i think that is partly a result of a lack of a really focused trade agenda, which could bring tangible benefits to these countries per security arrangements. so i certainly agree with that. would put a question mark to any country should be able to join nato. it was created to protect its own members, and i think the members should be beneficial to the existing structures of the alliance. i think that that test is passed by finland, i do not think they will be a drag on the alliance's functioning. they will really strengthen the alliance. should a country like hungary or turkey be in the alliance? it really goes so frequently again, finding common positions -- i would not rush into enlargement. but this really is a sort of big decision, thinking at the highest multilateral technical exercise. and then, who has, defenses. -- common defenses. with russia and putin, i certainly share the sentiment that this war of aggression is one for which there's an overwhelming responsibility. but at the same time i fear that we really have more than just a putin problem. there is no guarantee that russia after putin would be a less aggressive russia. putin is exploiting grievances and sensibilities that have existed in russia for a very long time. and he is also relying on, if not explicit consent, but license from many of other countrymen, and that is particularly true of the russian elite. host: stephen in connecticut, hello. caller: i am going to focus on ukraine. there's -- even though joseph stalin said -- has a quality of its own, there is a lot of stuff from russia still coming in. and even though they are slowly pushing forward, they are being ground down. and just recently -- i mean, this is probably the most documented war in history. but there has been a change in some of the numbers, like the spikes in russian tanks that have been knocked off in just the last few days. i think it is because of more western weapons getting onto the field, but it is just not enough. i'm glad to see that they are putting in this area defense for ukraine. after that mall thing that was just outrageous -- i'm outraged. but the high mars, i think for the modern military, nothing is reall as impressive. if you put like 50 or 100 of those out there, it will really change that war. host: ok. guest: i think that is exactly right. to paraphrase, it is also the case that the quality has a quantity of its own. the more high nato grade weaponry being provided to ukraine, the easier it will be for them to match or outmatched russian forces. i was in kyiv last week and at the recurrent thing from all of the parliamentarians and policymakers was they needed more weaponry, particularly artillery in the donbass, because they have been outnumbered 10-1 in some areas, using old russian artillery. there's been small advances made at a very high price, with equipment and lives on the russian side. but the advantages still on the russian side. and i welcome very much the supplements offered by congress some time ago, but it looks like the weapons are being brought in relatively slow. that's true for artillery, anti-air missiles and really it is worth remembering that there is no way out of this situation without ukrainians winning on the battlefield. host: what would be game changers that the u.s. and other countries could contribute that would make that happen? guest: more artillery, that is the number one priority for the ukrainians. and right now there is a blockade on the way of essentially ships coming out of a major ukrainian poor, which could easily lead to a famine in africa and in asia. which is the point of this whole thing. i mean, i spoke to a retired ukrainian who said that with the right equipment, ukrainians could take out the black sea fleet. and i think that is something that should be seriously on the table, seriously being considered in washington. host: let's hear from kristi in oregon on the republican line. caller: good morning. i do not think most americans realize the importance of nato, why it was created after world war ii. a united, democratic country -- there has not been one square inch in nato that's been taken over. it's a very good idea. but no one is going to take on europe, canada and in the united states. and -- and the united states. and my biggest regret is we did not put ukraine in nato. if you look at what putin wants, you will not be satisfied, even if he wins the war in ukraine. if putin somehow became a dictator over the whole world, he's the kind of personality if he saw the moon, he would want that to. he will never be satisfied. he is a horrible person. i do not see how anybody who lives in the u.s. and believes in democracy could support him in anyway. host: thank you. guest: you could almost say that the origin of -- the origin behind the war in ukraine and behind the earlier attempts to annex the donbass is real decision-making at the 2008 nato summit, where the administration push for native enlargement to go east. and for giving an action plan to countries like moldova, ukraine and georgia. and it was met with resistance on the part of western europeans, in particular germans, and than that plan was scrapped. very soon after, russia responded by attacking georgia. in the summer of 2008. so it is very much the case of having this common security umbrella makes everybody safer, the question whether going forward there will be a workable arrangement for ukraine that would give ukrainians credible security guarantees -- as we know the 1994 memorandum in which the u.k., u.s. and russia guaranteed its borders was really not worth the piece of paper it was written on. host: dalibor rohac joining us for this conversation. >> but to be subjugated to this russian empire. -- should resonate very strongly. announcer: national and >> principles internationalism. i'm delighted to be cohosting today's event with the diversity in leadership program. and with the support of our employee resource group on the topic. it is wonderful to see so many of you here in person at csis. i >> we host today's event for lgbtqai plus -- lgbtq