HAVE ABOUT THE INCIDENT.
A LOT OF QUESTIONS.
STUART: THANKS VERY MUCH.
I WANT TO BRING IN GENERAL JACK
KEANE.
ARE YOU BUYING THE STORY THAT
IT WAS A UKRAINIAN MISSILE?
SEEMS LIKE TRYING TO CALM
THINGS DOWN A LITTLE BIT.
>> THERE’S A LOT OF TECHNOLOGY
THAT CAN PICK UP ANY MISSILE
THAT IS FIRED, WE HAVE GLOBAL
RADAR SYSTEMS, SYSTEMS IN THE
AREA THAT ARE CLASSIFIED AND AS
SOON AS WE PICK IT UP WE KNOW
IT’S ORIGIN.
BASED ON ITS ORIGIN, THAT IS
HOW TO DETERMINE IF IT DIDN’T
COME FROM RUSSIA, AND ITS PLACE
OF ORIGIN IS LIKELY A UKRAINIAN
DEFENSE BATTERY.
TO AVOID SOMETHING LIKE THIS
HAPPENING, OUR AIR DEFENSE
SYSTEMS WHEN FIRED AT A TARGET
IF IT MISSES THE TARGET IT
SELF-DESTRUCT SO IT IS NOT
GOING TO DAMAGE ANYBODY OTHER
THAN THE TARGET IT WAS INTENDED
TO DESTROY.
STUART: POLAND IS EXPECTED TO
INVOKE NATO’S ARTICLE 4.
WHAT DOES ARTICLE 4 DO?
>> THIS IS PRETTY SIMPLE, A LOT
OF PEOPLE TALKING ABOUT THE
PROCESS AND MISSING THE POINT.
ARTICLE 5 AS WE TALKED MANY
TIMES IF A COUNTRY ATTACKS A
NATO MEMBER ALL COUNTRIES WILL
RESPOND TO THAT ATTACK AND HOW
THEY RESPOND IS UP TO THEM.
THAT HAPPENED ON 9/11.
NATO COUNTRIES RESPONDED TO THE
ATTACK AGAINST THE UNITED
STATES FROM AL QAEDA IN
AFGHANISTAN.
ARTICLE 4 IS A THREAT TO
TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY.
A THREAT TO POLITICAL
STABILITY.
COUNTRIES TRY TO OVERTHROW SEE
THROUGH SUBVERSION A NATO
COUNTRY OR SOME KIND OF
SECURITY VIOLATION.
IT IS JUST A THREAT.
THEY GATHERED HERE BECAUSE THEY
WEREN’T SURE WHAT HAPPENED?
WAS THIS AN ATTACK OR SOMETHING
ELSE?
THAT IS WHY ARTICLE 4, THE MOST
OBVIOUS ARTICLE FOR WOULD BE IF
RUSSIA HAD MASSED TROOPS ON A
NATO MEMBER’S BORDER AS OPPOSED
TO UKRAINE BUT HADN’T ATTACKED
LIKE THEY DID IN MARCH 2021, IT
WAS A THREAT.
NATO COUNTRIES FIGURE OUT WHAT
TO DO.
STUART: WE ARE STANDING DOWN ON
THAT KIND OF THING.
THE ADMINISTRATION SEEMS SPLIT
BETWEEN NEGOTIATING FOR PEACE
NOW OR PRESSING ON TO WIN IN
UKRAINE.
WHERE DO YOU STAND ON THIS?
>> THIS WAS AN ISSUE FROM THE
OUTSET.
WHEN THE ADMINISTRATION FLIPS
BACK-AND-FORTH, WHERE WE SHOULD
BE IS WHERE PRESIDENT ZELENSKYY
IS.
HE’S ON THE OFFENSE, THE ONLY
PROVINCIAL CAPITAL THE RUSSIA
CAPTURED IN THIS ENTIRE WAR,
WHICH IS KHERSON CITY, WE DON’T
KNOW IF HE WILL RETAKE THE REST
OF THE TERRITORY RUSSIA IS
OCCUPYING, BUT WHEN LIBERATING
HIS TERRITORY THIS IS WHY IT
MEANS SO MUCH, ZELENSKYY AND
THE PEOPLE WHO ARE IN THESE
OCCUPIED TERRITORIES, WOMEN WHO
ARE RAPED ROUTINELY, MEN ARE
TORTURED AND KILLED, HUNDREDS
OF THOUSANDS OF UKRAINIAN
CITIZENS MOVE TO RUSSIA WITH
THOUSANDS OF CHILDREN, THAT’S
WHY THE CELEBRATION IS SO
EMOTIONAL.
WE SHOULD KEEP THE WIND AT
ZELENSKYY’S BACK, GIVE HIM WHAT
HE NEEDS, TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE BACK AS MUCH TERRITORY
TO TAKE BACK AS MUCH TERRITORY
AS POSSIBLE AND LIBERATE AND
STOP TALKING ABOUT
NEGOTIATIONS, SHUT IT DOWN
UNTIL ZELENSKYY IS READY FOR
NEGOTIATIONS.
WHAT DRIVES ZELENSKYY TO
NEGOTIATIONS?
HE GETS A POINT WHERE HE CAN’T
TAKE TERRITORY ANYMORE, DOESN’T
HAVE ENOUGH POWER.
THE RUSSIANS HAVE REINFORCED
THOSE TERRITORIES TO THE POINT
WHERE HIS CASUALTIES ARE TOO
HIGH TO RETAKE THE TERRITORY
AND WOULD LIKELY BE WILLING TO
NEGOTIATE. WE ARE NOT AT THE POINT,
WE ARE NOT AT THE POINT,
PUSHING TOWARD THE POINT.