announced today that it will
send another package of arms and
military aid to Ukraine.
This one worth $400 million.
We will have a debate with
experts on whether the U.S.
Should be emphasizing diplomacy.
To find an end to the war.
Nick schifrin reports that Kyiv
has seized territory across the
south as Russia begins its
withdrawal from the only
regional capital it captured.
>> The Kremlin vowed this
territory would be Russia
forever.
Just five weeks later, Ukrainian
soldiers proved Putin's promise
hollow.
Residents welcomed there
liberators.
Ukrainian troops today flew the
blue and yellow over more than
40 villages that Russia occupied
on the wars first day and they
walked through abandoned Russian
camps.
U.S. Officials called the
Russian retreat orderly.
The Russian soldiers left behind
their patches and ids.
Russia seized regional capital
in late February and annexed the
entire region in late September,
but now, U.S. Officials say
Ukrainian soldiers are advancing
along three axes towards the
city and river.
20,000 to 30,000 professional
Russian troops already withdrew
across the river and have been
replaced by conscripts who
maintain defensive positions.
Yesterday on Russian TV, a
commander told the defense
minister they would soon
retreat.
>> Proceed with the withdrawal
of troops and take all measures
to ensure the safe transfer of
personnel, weapons, and
equipment across the upper
river.
Nick: Ukrainian officials feared
the Russians booby-trapped the
city and do not trust any
Russian claim.
>> We move very carefully
without emotions, without
unnecessary risk.
This is how people secure the
liberation of the city.
>> The Russian military is
withdrawing across the upper
river and is trying to maximally
pull out its forces to the
extent it can use them in the
following campaign.
Nick: Michael Kaufman is a
director.
Earlier this month, he visited
the city with other researchers.
>> The real challenge for the
Russian military was logistics.
They have been running low on
ammunition and it's something
made it untenable to sustain so
many troops across the river.
Nick: Now, Ukrainians must
reckon with what Russia left
behind, liberated residents are
relieved after months of Russian
occupation.
In the city, pbs newshour spoke
to residents who would only talk
anonymously.
One wrote that they took away
the businesses of many of my
friends.
Russian soldiers told them they
had three minutes to leave.
We spoke with another resident
on the phone who described acts
of torture.
>> A lot of men were detained
and thrown into basements.
They beat them so severely, they
could not walk for several days.
They splashed them with boiling
water during interrogations.
I want all the people to hear
and know the truth.
The things they are doing here
are horrific.
We need to stop it as soon as
possible.
Nick: But how to stop the war?
Last Friday, national security
advisor Jake Sullivan met
volodymyr zelenskyy.
Officials still pbs newshour
that Sullivan asked him to
reduce his public skepticism
about diplomacy and detail what
peace might mean.
As Sullivan suggested in the
Kyiv press conference.
>> The conversation that we need
to have with the international
community in support of Ukraine
is what are the terms of a just
and lasting peace for Ukraine?
Nick: He dropped his previous
refusal to talk with Putin but
maintained Ukraine's demands
include re-seizing all territory
lost since 2014.
>> Restoration of territorial
integrity, compensation for all
damage, punishment of every war
terminal guarantees that this
will not happen again.
Nick: In a talk last might, the
chairman of the joint chief
suggested he did not believe
either side could achieve their
military goals.
>> There has to be recognition
that military victory is
probably in the true sense of
the word -- maybe not achievable
through military means.
Nick: He cited World War I when
he said commanders who they
could not win kept fighting,
leading to 20 million killed.
>> When there is an opportunity
to negotiate, when peace can be
achieved, sees it, sees --
seize it, the moment.
Nick: They insist they are not
telling Ukraine what to do.
>> The United States is not
pressuring Ukraine paid we
are consulting as partners.
Nick: For more on what the
American role should be to find
an end to the war, we get
two opposing views.
Charles is a senior fellow at
the council on foreign relations
.
He was a senior director on the
Obama national security council
staff.
And Evelyn Farkas is the
executive director of the McCain
institute at Arizona used --
Arizona state diversity.
She served as deputy secretary
of defense during the Obama
administration.
Welcome, both of you.
Let me start with you.
We showed what the general said.
He said when there is an
opportunity to negotiate, seize
the moment.
Do you believe the U.S. Should
push Ukraine to seize the moment
and today start negotiations?
Charles: I think the united
States needs to elevate
diplomacy, not necessarily say
we need to go today to push Kyiv
to start talking to the
Russians, but we need to begin
to elevate this issue and that's
because I think we have to make
a judgment call here about the
nature of U.S. And western
interests that are at stake, and
Biden made a judgment early on
that the U.S. Would support
Ukraine but that Ukraine would
do the fighting.
We are not ready to go to war
with Russia over eastern Ukraine
and I think that is the right
call.
We are now in a situation in
which the chances of escalation
are rising.
It is conceivable to me that if
the Ukrainians continue to make
progress on the battlefield,
which I think they will, the
Russians might respond by using
a nuclear weapon.
If they feel pressed against the
wall.
If they feel they might lose all
of don -- donbas and
crimea.
We ought to put into the mix a
conversation about how to end
the war sooner rather than later
because for me, running a risk
of war between nato and Russia,
including the use of nuclear
weapons, is too high a risk.
>> Is there a risk of escalation
toward the elevation of
diplomacy?
Evelyn: What time is not ripe.
Ukraine is winning and our
objective is to have Ukraine win
to defeat Russia in Ukraine
militarily so that Russia does
not turn to Georgia, to Moldova,
and then to nato countries
had Vladimir Putin is rational.
The people around him are
rational.
They know that if they use a
nuclear device, even if they
just detonate a nuclear device
in a demonstration that they can
do it, the world will look very
different the next day.
President Biden himself has said
he warned the Russians anytime
that there will be consequences.
They will take conventional
military action directly against
whatever military unit conducted
that mission and the
international community will
resolve that no government that
would use the military weapon
that would explode a military
device in the context of a war
in any context should remain in
power.
And then the international
community will act to pressure
the Russian government
essentially to remove Vladimir
Putin.
The stakes are too high.
Let's remember that time and
time again, Vladimir Putin has
threatened to use nuclear power,
has talked about redlines, and
every time we or the Ukrainians
crossed one of those lines,
whether it is attacking crimea,
whether it's sending javelin
missiles, the Russian government
has not escalated.
In fact, it has backed down.
We have to remain firm.
>> Might the Russians back down
and what is wrong with that
point that Evelyn Farkas just
made, which is helping Ukraine
win and defeating Russia?
>> I'm all for helping Ukraine
continue to make progress on the
battlefield.
Our policy so far has been the
right one.
I do not agree with Evelyn that
if Putin comes away with crimea
or with any chunk of donbas,
that he is suddenly going to
attack nato so the question
really is, is it worth running
the risk of a direct war between
nato and Russia, including a
possible use of nuclear weapons,
to ensure his utter and total
defeat, the liberation of
every inch of Ukrainian
territory?
My judgment is it is not worth
running that race because it
could lead to World War III.
>> Risk of World War III?
Evelyn: The greater risk
is if Vladimir Putin succeeds in
Ukraine because he will turn to
Moldova.
He already told us that he
outlined what he wants, a
neo-imperial Russia, and he does
not want nato at his doorstep.
He wants nato destroyed and that
is why I think the risk actually
increases if Vladimir Putin gets
his way in Ukraine.
>> What do you think the main
elements of an agreement between
Ukraine and Russia might be?
Charles: I think there are
probably two main components.
One is a Ukrainian agreement to
stick to neutrality, and
secondly, I think there needs to
be a conversation about
territory where a
might be drawn is very difficult
to say.
I think it might make sense to
start the conversation by going
back to the borders of phibro
24th, when we saw the initial
Russian invasion of more of
Ukraine and then that
conversation begins about
crimea, about the future of the
eastern sections of donbas, but
at least let's have that
dialogue.
>> Should the U.S. Support some
kind of negotiation in which
Ukraine agrees to neutrality and
does not necessarily re-achieve
the territories seized by Russia
in 2014 in crimea and the
donbas?
Evelyn: That is not what they
said they want so we need to
support the Ukrainian government
in their effort to regain their
territory.
If president zelenskyy decides
that enough is enough, which
would only happen if his people
decide that they are done
fighting, then we will support
them in achievng peace.
At this point in time, the
Ukrainian military is winning.
The Russian military is weak.
The Russian government is
looking for a pause.
It's clear that the Russians are
back on their heels right now.
We have an opportunity.
The Ukrainians understand that.
We should help Ukraine.
We are not providing them with
the maximum assistance we should
give them to end this work
quickly.
>> Thank you very much to you
both.
Charles: Thank you.