Let me be clear.
Certain principles
of our international system
are sacrosanct sovereignty,
territorial integrity, human rights.
These are the core tenets
of the UN Charter,
the pillars
for peaceful relations among nations
without which
we cannot achieve any of our goals.
That has not changed,
and that must not change.
Yet, for the second year in a row,
this gathering
dedicated to peaceful
resolution of conflicts is darkened
by the shadow of war.
An illegal war of conquest
brought
without provocation
by Russia against its neighbor, Ukraine.
Like every nation in the world,
the United States wants this war to end.
No nation wants this war to end
more than Ukraine.
And we strongly support
Ukraine in its efforts
to bring about diplomatic resolution
that delivers just and lasting peace.
Russia alone,
Russia alone
bears responsibility for this war.
Russia alone
has the power to end
this war immediately.
And it's Russia alone
that stands in the way of peace
because the Russia's price for peace
is Ukraine's capitulation.
Ukraine's territory
and Ukraine's children.
Russia believes the world will grow weary
and allow it to brutalize
Ukraine without consequence.
But I ask you this.
If we abandon the core principles
and not on stage to appease an aggressor,
Can any member state in this body
feel confident that they are protected?
If we allow Ukraine to be carved up,
is the independence of any nation secure?
I respectfully suggest the answer is no.
We have to stand up to this
naked aggression today
and deter other would
be aggressors tomorrow.
That's why the
United States, together
with our allies
and partners around the world,
will continue to stand with the brave
people, Ukraine,
as they defend their sovereignty
and territorial integrity
and their freedom
President Biden
addressing the United Nations
General Assembly.
And you may have seen
the Ukrainian
president, Volodymyr Zelensky
in the hall listening so poignant.
President Biden
said,
we are at an inflection
point in world history.
And he said, what is at stake?
Sovereignty, territorial integrity,
human rights.
Of course, what he was talking about most
there was Ukraine,
Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
And he made the case
that it cannot be allowed to stand.
It was about a 27 28 minute address.
He waited until 20 minutes in
to bring up Russia
for the very first time.
But once he did,
it was clear
where the direction of this address
was going.
And the point
that he wanted to make to bolster world
support for Ukraine's effort
to try to sustain the world's support
for that
effort here
outside the United Nations,
walking along,
watching alongside
beside me,
CNN chief
national security
analyst Jim Sciutto
and our senior White House correspondent
Jill tells you, Jim,
what did you hear there?
Listen, that was his key message.
There's a reason he ended on that point
about Ukraine
in the message to the world.
And I think you could read it
as an appeal for the sake of Ukraine,
but also a challenge
to the members of this body,
perhaps even some prodding.
He said it's essential to the UN
charter three principles sovereignty,
territorial integrity, and human rights,
all of which are being violated
right now in Ukraine by an invasion
of choice by Russia.
And he notes,
for the second year in a row,
he said they were darkened
by the shadow of war
in Ukraine,
in effect, saying and he goes on to say,
we'll be judged by
whether we stand up to this.
You know, the U.N.
was founded
in the wake of
in the
destruction post-World War Two to prevent
another devastating war.
Right. And here we are.
70 80 years later,
with the largest war
in Europe since World War Two.
And it persists for a second year.
And his message is, in effect,
we cannot,
as members of this body,
committed to what
we're committed to Let it go on.
And by the way,
if we members of this body
don't stand up to this,
none of us are safe
and it will come to your doorstep.
And, of course, he is addressing
the issue of Russia, a permanent member
of the United Nations Security Council.
So obviously a very sensitive matter.
And he said Russia alone, alone,
bears responsibility for this.
One of the lines that stood out to me
where he laid the blame for the invasion
squarely at the feet of Russia,
whose foreign minister
is expected to be in attendance
at the General Assembly this week.
But notable
considering that up
until this point,
all of the draft
resolutions of the Security Council
to end the war in Ukraine for,
you know,
various allies around the world
to condemn the war in Ukraine
have failed
because of Russia's
membership on the UN Security Council.
And so is an important distinction
that the president was making there.
And also to
our earlier conversation
about the shades of domestic politics
that are,
if not overtly present in today's speech
at least, were
seen as allusions by the president
to domestic politics, one in particular
where he said history need
not dictate our future.
He then went on to talk about the U.S.
rejoining UNESCO's,
which is the educational
and cultural body
that President Trump
withdrew from in 2017
and President Biden rejoin
and just this summer
he then went on to talk about the World
Bank, the International Monetary Fund,
the World
Trade Organization,
the G-20,
all multilateral organizations
that if the former president
did not threaten to withdraw from
he maligned in some way.
So President Biden trying to reestablish
the U.S.
position of leadership on the world
stage and, you know,
sort of obliquely
referencing those domestic politics.
But you're right,
the fact that he ended
on Russia
and Ukraine
with about 10 minutes of his speech
shows that that's
where he really wanted the viewer
and the audience
to come away with a lasting impression.
I kept on looking in the audience,
looking at the face of the Ukrainian
president, Volodymyr Zelensky,
to see if I could gauge
and your reaction.
How did he feel
about what President Biden was saying?
It was impossible
to read anything from his face.
Jim,
what word was there enough
for Zelensky in that? We'll see.
I mean, that that line
that he had about protecting
Ukraine was the one applause line. Right.
And this body,
it's failed in a number of ways,
preventing and stopping this war.
But the vast
majority of members have voted
to condemn the war. Right.
There was some relative unity in that
in that room.
They're against Russia's invasion,
but that has not managed
the essential task.
Right. Of ending that war.
And you watched Zelensky there
he, of course, applauded at the end.
But but I think we could be
fairly certain
that his private meetings with U.S.
officials continue to be quite pressing.
We need more help
where others F-16's, right?
Yes.
We're doing our best
in this counteroffensive.
But why did you hold us back?
Why don't you tie
our hands on these weapons systems?
That's their view of it.
So I am certain in private rooms around
here, he's pushing for more
and saying this is a crucial time.
Kill it.
Not here today.
And we haven't had a chance
to address this yet.
There are several world leaders
who were almost always here who were not.
The prime
minister of the United Kingdom
is not here.
President of France is not here.
Prime Minister of India. Is not here.
And then two leaders
who haven't been here for a few years,
Vladimir Putin, and he's jumping.
How do you think that hangs over
what we're watching?
Well, I think that the White House
would say that
President Biden
has very robust
open lines of communication
with the UK and France.
They speak often. They speak frequently.
And to be sure,
many of those world
leaders weren't
just in India together for the G20.
And then, of course,
there was the BRICS
summit of emerging market nations
in South Africa
that took place earlier in August.
Later this fall.
You have AfPak,
which is an Indo-Pacific focused
economic summit
that's going to be taking place
in San Francisco.
And that's really where
administration officials
are expecting President
Biden and President Xi of China
to possibly meet
on the sidelines
of that visit in a bilateral format.
And then you have COP 28,
which is the climate focused summit
which is taking place in Dubai.
So there are all of these various fora
for leaders to be meeting.
When you talk to foreign policy experts,
they say that
some leaders go forum shopping
if they feel like
they can't get from the U.N.,
for instance, or the G20,
what they're trying to get,
then they'll go somewhere else.
And by the way,
some of those fora
are directly competitive
to to this institute and also to the U.S.
view of the world.
BRICS is expanding
because you have a meeting
the minds
of quite a disparate
group of nations
there, but a meeting of the minds
to say
we want to stand up
to what they perceive as
an overbearing U.S. power.
So some of it is competitive as well.