ALSO WITH US IN JUST A MOMENT,
U.S. NATIONAL EDITOR OF
"FINANCIAL TIMES" ED LUCE.
>> SO, MR. AMBASSADOR, LET'S
TALK ABOUT THE SPEECH, THE
HISTORIC NATURE OF THE SPEECH. AND, YES, YES, THE AD LIBBED
AND, YES, YES, THE AD LIBBED
LINES WHICH ACTUALLY AS FAR AS
PSY OPS GOES THE IMPORTANT.
IS IT NOT NICE FOR ONCE VLADIMIR
PUTIN DEFINING THE DEBATE AND
KEEPING US GUESSING, BUT INSTEAD
IT IS VLADIMIR PUTIN WONDERING
WHETHER HE HAS TO SLEEP WITH ONE
EYE OPEN.
>> FIRST, JOE, I THOUGHT IT WAS
A FANTASTIC SPEECH.
IT WAS A VERY IMPORTANT SPEECH.
IT LAID OUT THE DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN DEMOCRACY AND
DICTATORSHIP, BETWEEN GOOD AND
EVIL.
HE WAS CLEAR AS DAY WHERE HE
STOOD AND WHERE THE WESTERN
WORLD NEEDED TO STAND.
I HOPE IT WILL BE FOLLOWED UP
WITH MORE ACTION.
THAT'S WHAT KYIV WANTS.
THAT'S WHAT PRESIDENT ZELENSKYY
WANTS.
BUT I THINK IT WAS A VERY
HISTORIC SPEECH AND THE RIGHT
SPEECH.
THE LAST PART, I WOULD SAY A
COUPLE OF THINGS.
FIRST OF ALL, IT IS NOT THE
FIRST TIME PRESIDENT BIDEN HAS
SAID THIS.
I TRAVELED WITH HIM IN MOSCOW
WHEN HE WAS THE VICE PRESIDENT,
AND IN MARCH OF 2011 HE SAID
PRESIDENT PUTIN, PRIME MINISTER
PUTIN BACK THEN, SHOULD NOT RUN
FOR A THIRD TERM.
HE SAID IT BACK THEN.
THIS IS NOTHING NEW.
>> NO.
>> AND HE SPOKE OUT LOUD WHEN I
THINK HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF
PEOPLE AROUND THE WORLD,
INCLUDING, BY THE WAY, MILLIONS
OF RUSSIANS, ALSO THINK.
THIRD, LET'S BE VERY CLEAR,
PEOPLE JUMP FROM HE SHOULD NOT
REMAIN IN POWER TO SAYING THAT
HE CALLED FOR REGIME CHANGE?
THAT IS NOT TRUE.
HE DID NOT SAY WE SHOULD HAVE A
REGIME CHANGE.
HE SAID THIS ONE PERSON SHOULD
NOT REMAIN IN POWER, AND MOST
CERTAINLY HE WASN'T CHANGING
SUPERINTENDENT POLICY BY
ADVOCATING A POLICY OF REGIME
CHANGE.
ALL IN ALL, YOU KNOW, IT WASN'T
IN HIS SPEECH, HE IS KNOWN TO DO
THIS, SOMETIMES SAYING THESE
THINGS HAS A PURPOSE AS YOU JUST
RIGHTLY POINTED OUT WHEN RONALD
REAGAN CALLED THE SOVIET UNION
THE EVIL EMPIRE BACK IN 1983 AND
EVERYBODY SAID, "OH, MY
GOODNESS, THIS IS SHOCKING WHAT
HE SAID."
NOW WE ALL REMEMBER THAT AS A
VERY CLEAR STATEMENT OF THE
TRUTH BACK THEN.
>> AND IT SENT A VERY STRONG
MESSAGE, ADMIRAL STAVRIDIS, TO
DISS
DISSIDENTS IN RUSSIA.
YOU HEARD AFTER THE FALL OF THE
SOVIET UNION, YOU HEARD
DISSIDENTS SAY WHEN REAGAN AND
OTHER WESTERN LEADERS WOULD SAY
SOMETHING LIKE THAT IT SHOULDN'T
A STRONG MESSAGE.
BY THE WAY AS FAR AS JOE BIDEN
SAYING SOMETHING LIKE THIS YOU
DON'T HAVE TO GO BACK TO 2011 OR
2012, HE SAID IT AT THE END OF
HIS STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS
AND IT WAS CLEARLY PLANNED AS HE
IS WALKING AWAY FROM THE MIC HE
SAYS, "LET'S GO GET HIM."
A CLEAR PSY OPS MESSAGE TO
VLADIMIR PUTIN.
>> JOE, FIRST AND FOREMOST, AS
YOU POINT OUT, THERE ARE
DIFFERENT AUDIENCES HERE.
YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.
THERE'S A RUSSIAN AUDIENCE,
WHICH, LET'S FACE IT, IS KIND OF
SPLIT BETWEEN THOSE WHO SUPPORT
PUTIN BUT MANY -- AND THEIR
NUMBERS ARE GROWING -- WHO DO
NOT SUPPORT PUTIN. SO I THINK THAT'S A STRONG PART
SO I THINK THAT'S A STRONG PART
OF THIS.
SECONDLY, IT IS THE YEERNSEUROPE
WHO COME AWAY REASSURED.
IT WILL BE AN IMMENSE
REASSURANCE TO OUR ALLIES.
FINALLY, I THINK IT WAS A GOOD
EXPLANATORY SPEECH TO THE
AMERICAN PUBLIC, ONE THAT SOARED
INTO THE RHETORIC OF WHY THIS
MATTERS, HOPE AND LIGHT,
DEMOCRACY.
I THINK HE LAID IT OUT STRONGLY
AND HE DELIVERED IT STRONGLY.
AND THEN, FINALLY, WHEN I THINK
BACK ON THIS SPEECH I'M NOT
GOING TO BE THINKING ABOUT, YOU
KNOW, DID HE CALL FOR REGIME
CHANGE OR NOT.
I THINK MIKE McFAUL DESCRIBES
THAT ONE VERY WELL.
TO ME THIS SPEECH IS CALLED "THE
SACRED OBLIGATION" SPEECH.
HE TALKED ABOUT OUR SACRED
OBLIGATION TO NATO, AND IT WILL
ALSO BE THE
DON'T-EVEN-THINK-ABOUT-IT
SPEECH.
KIND OF THE AMERICAN VERNACULAR,
DON'T EVEN THINK ABOUT IT
VLADIMIR.
I THINK A STRONG SPEECH
DELIVERED IN CONTEXT IN WARSAW,
A CITY DESTROYED IN THE SECOND
WORLD WAR AND REBUILT.
WE DON'T WANT THAT AGAIN.
I THINK IT WAS A STRONG SPEECH
AND SENT THE RIGHT MESSAGES.
>> DAVID, YOU WROTE SOME
BEAUTIFUL WORDS ABOUT THIS
SPEECH AFTERWARDS, BUT THE CLEAR
LINES THAT IT DREW.
IT IS SO INTERESTING THOUGH.
A LOT OF THE BAD-FAITH ACTORS ON
THE TRUMP RIGHT WHO HAVE BEEN
CRITICIZING JOE BIDEN FOR BEING
TOO WEAK NOW CRITICIZING JOE
BIDEN FOR BEING TOO STRONG AND
REALLY REVEALED THEMSELVES AFTER
THAT SPEECH FOR JUST HOW
PATHETIC AND HOW UNAMERICAN THEY
ARE IN ATTACKING THE AMERICAN
PRESIDENT IN A TIME LIKE THIS.
LET'S TALK ABOUT, THOUGH, YOUR
REACTION TO IT AND HOW YOU
BELIEVE THAT JOE BIDEN FINALLY
DID DIVIDE THE WORLD AGAIN
AGAINST DEMOCRACY AGAINST THE
FORCES OF AUTOCRACY.
>> JOE BIDEN HAS BEEN SPEAKING
SINCE THE CAMPAIGN ABOUT A WORLD
DIVIDED BETWEEN THE FORCES OF
DEMOCRACY AND THE FORCES OF
AUTOCRACY, AND, OF COURSE, WHAT
WE'VE SEEN IN UKRAINE IS A
FLARE-UP IN THAT CONFLICT.
I THINK IT WAS EXTREMELY
IMPORTANT THAT HE WENT RIGHT UP
TO THE EDGE OF THE DIVIDING LINE
THAT NOW SITS ACROSS EUROPE AND
HE SAID, WE'RE GOING TO STAND UP
TO THIS, WE ARE GOING TO FIGHT
FOR THIS, WE HAVE GOING TO
SUPPORT UKRAINE, WE ARE NOT
GOING TO BE COWED.
YOU KNOW, PAST ADMINISTRATIONS
HAVE BEEN HESITANT TO STAND UP
TO PUTIN.
HE WAS NOT HESITANT TO STAND UP
TO PUTIN.
I THINK THE MESSAGE OF THE
SPEECH FROM BEGINNING TO END WAS
OF STRENGTH, AND I ALSO THINK
THAT IT WAS A SPEECH THAT
RESONATED NOT JUST IN THE
CONTEXT OF UKRAINE BUT IN THE
CONTEXT OF A SHIFT.
THE UNITED STATES AND EUROPE AND
OUR ALLIES ARE LOOKING AT RUSSIA
IN TERMS OF A LONG-TERM THREAT.
THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE
SATISFIED SIMPLY TO END THIS
WAR, HOPEFULLY TO WIN THIS WAR,
BUT THEY'RE GOING TO REQUIRE
THAT RUSSIA STAYS WHERE IT IS,
THAT IT STOPS ITS TALK OF
AGGRESSION.
AND I THINK, FINALLY AS TO YOUR
FIRST POINT ABOUT THE INCREDIBLE
HYPOCRISY OF THE REPUBLICANS WHO
HAVE TAKEN BOTH SIDES OF THIS
ISSUE, AS THEY HAD SO MANY
OTHERS, THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS
DIVIDING LINE BETWEEN AUTOCRACY
AND DEMOCRACY IS NOT A REMOTE
FOREIGN ISSUE.
WE ARE FIGHTING THAT WAR RIGHT
HERE, RIGHT NOW WITH PEOPLE --
>> THAT'S RIGHT.
>> -- LIKE DONALD TRUMP AND
OTHERS IN HIS PARTY SEEKING TO
UNDERMINE AMERICAN DEMOCRACY AND
EMBRACE HALLMARKS OF
AUTHORITARIAN GOVERNMENTS.