>> Martha: ALEX, THANK YOU
VERY MUCH.
REPORTING FROM THE WHITE HOUSE.
JOINING US NOW, NATIONAL
SECURITY ADVISOR JAKE SULLIVAN.
WELCOME BACK TO
"FOX NEWS SUNDAY," GOOD TO HAVE
YOU HERE TODAY.
I’D LIKE TO START WITH THIS.
SOURCES ARE TELLING US THAT
RUSSIA IS NOW "70% READY" TO
LAUNCH AN INVASION IN UKRAINE.
BECAUSE THEY ARE NOW OR WILL
SOON BE UPWARDS OF 130,000
TROOPS AND SIGNIFICANT NEW
PRESENCE OF JETS, MISSILES,
ANTIAIRCRAFT EQUIPMENT IN RUSSIA
AND IN BELARUS, NORTH OF
UKRAINE.
BUT THE U.S. AND UKRAINE HAVE
SENT MIXED SIGNALS ON WHETHER OR
NOT THEY THINK AND INVASION WILL
ACTUALLY HAPPEN, SO WHAT CAN YOU
TELL US THIS MORNING?
IS AN INVASION IMMINENT?
>> Jake: WELL, WHAT I CAN TELL
YOU, MARTHA, IS THAT WE ARE IN
THE WINDOW.
ANY DAY NOW RUSSIA COULD TAKE
MILITARY ACTION AGAINST UKRAINE
OR IT COULD BE A COUPLE OF WEEKS
FROM NOW, OR RUSSIA COULD CHOOSE
TO TAKE THE DIPLOMATIC PATH
INSTEAD.
THE KEY THING IS THAT THE
UNITED STATES NEEDS TO BE, AND
IS PREPARED FOR ANY OF THOSE
CONTINGENCIES IN LOCKSTEP WITH
OUR ALLIES AND PARTNERS.
WE HAVE REINFORCED AND REASSURED
OUR ALLIES ON THE EASTERN FLANK,
WE HAVE UNITED THE WEST, WE HAVE
PROVIDED MATERIAL SUPPORT TO
UKRAINE, ALL OF
PRESIDENT BIDEN’S DIRECTION, WE
HAVE ALSO OFFERED RUSSIA A
DIPLOMATIC PATH IF THEY CHOOSE
TO TAKE IT.
IF WAR BREAKS OUT, IT WILL COME
AT AN AND NORMA’S HUMAN COST TO
UKRAINE, BUT WE BELIEVE THAT
BASED ON OUR PREPARATIONS AND
OUR RESPONSE, IT WILL COME AT A
STRATEGIC COST TO RUSSIA AS
WELL.
>> Martha: THAT’S WHAT WE ARE
LEARNING.
ACCORDING TO CHAIRMAN OF THE
JOINT CHIEFS MARK MILLEY, THEY
ARE SAYING THAT KIEV COULD FALL
WITHIN 72 HOURS IF THERE IS AN
INVASION, THAT 50,000 PEOPLE
COULD BE KILLED.
WHAT DO YOU THINK IS THE
LIKELIHOOD THAT THERE IS A
SURPRISING QUICK FALL OF KIEV?
>> Jake: LOOK, MY JOB HERE IS
NOT TO PREDICT WHAT EXACTLY WILL
HAPPEN DAY TODAY.
IT IS TO PREPARE FOR ANY
CONTINGENCY, INCLUDING A
CONTINGENCY WHERE RUSSIAN FORCES
DRIVE ON THE UKRAINIAN CAPITAL.
WE ARE WORKING HARD WITH OUR
ALLIES AND PARTNERS ON THAT, WE
ARE PROVIDING, AS I SAID BEFORE,
MATERIAL SUPPORT TO THE
UKRAINIANS, AND TRYING TO GET
THEM TO MAKE SURE THEY ARE IN
THE BEST POSITION POSSIBLE TO
DEFEND THEMSELVES.
SO THE RUSSIANS HAVE A LOT OF
OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO THEM, BUT
OF COURSE WE HAVE OPTIONS
AVAILABLE TO US IN TERMS OF THE
SWIFT AND SEVERE ECONOMIC
CONSEQUENCES THAT WE CAN IMPOSE,
THE WAYS IN WHICH WE CAN
STRENGTHEN AND FORTIFY OUR
PRESENCE ON NATO TERRITORY AND
NATO COUNTRIES AND OF COURSE THE
GLOBAL DIPLOMATIC ISOLATION THAT
RUSSIA WOULD FACE SHOULD IT
CHOOSE TO PROCEED.
>> Martha: I THINK IT’S FRESH
IN EVERYONE’S MEMORY, THE
QUICKER THAN EXPECTED FALL OF
KABUL IN AFGHANISTAN, SO I GUESS
MY QUESTION IS, WHEN YOU’VE GOT
TROOPS, U.S. TROOPS, THAT ARE
SENT TO NATO STATES BUT NONE
SENT TO UKRAINE, I MEAN, THAT’S
A REAL POSSIBILITY THAT WE COULD
BE SITTING HERE TALKING IN A FEW
WEEKS AND SAYING THAT WAS FASTER
THAN WE EXPECTED, BUT WE DON’T
HAVE ANYBODY IN THE COUNTRY AND
TOO BAD.
>> Jake: THE PRESIDENT HAS
BEEN CLEAR FOR MONTHS NOW THAT
THE UNITED STATES IS NOT SENDING
FORCES TO START A WAR OR FIGHT A
WAR WITH RUSSIA IN UKRAINE.
WE HAVE SENT FORCES TO EUROPE TO
DEFEND NATO TERRITORY.
WE HAVE A SACRED OBLIGATION
UNDER ARTICLE FIVE TO DEFEND OUR
NATO ALLIES, POLAND AND ROMANIA,
AND THE BALTIC STATES.
WE HAVE MADE THAT COMMITMENT TO
THEM, WE WILL KEEP THAT
COMMITMENT TO THEM.
BUT WE CAN DO FOR THE UKRAINIANS
IS NOT SEND AMERICAN TROOPS TO
FIGHT IN A WAR IN UKRAINE, BUT
WE CAN SEND DEFENSIVE ASSISTANCE
WHICH WE HAVE DONE TO THE TUNE
OF MORE THAN HALF A BILLION
DOLLARS OVER THE COURSE OF THE
PAST YEAR.
AND WE CAN PROVIDE OTHER FORMS
OF SUPPORT ALONGSIDE OUR ALLIES
AND PARTNERS, WE HAVE DONE THAT
AS WELL.
WE HAVE BEEN CLEAR FROM THE
START ABOUT THE STEPS THAT WE
ARE PREPARED TO TAKE AND
WHATEVER ACTION RUSSIA
UNDERTAKES NEXT, THE
UNITED STATES IS READY.
>> Martha: IS IT LIKELY THAT
WHAT COMES OUT OF THIS, THE
DIPLOMATIC ANGLE IS BEING
PURSUED OBVIOUSLY, IS IT LIKELY
WE’RE GOING TO SEE AN ARMS
TREATY SITUATION WHERE RUSSIA
STARTS NEGOTIATING WITH US?
WE HEARD THERE ARE ALREADY TALKS
ABOUT MOVING SOME OF OUR
TOMAHAWK MISSILES AND A
RECIPROCAL MOVE FROM THEIR SIDE.
IS THAT THE LIKELY OUTCOME HERE,
AND WOULD IT BE A SCENARIO WHERE
VLADIMIR PUTIN COULD SAY I GOT
WHAT I WANTED?
>> Jake: WELL, WE’VE BEEN VERY
CLEAR, PRESIDENT BUYING DIRECTLY
TO PRESIDENT PUTIN, SECRETARY
BLINKEN AND MEETINGS WITH HIS
COUNTERPART CELESTE COUPLE OF
WEEKS THAT WE ARE PREPARED
ALONGSIDE OUR ALLIES AND
PARTNERS TO NEGOTIATE ISSUES OF
MUTUAL CONCERN WHEN IT COMES TO
EUROPEAN SECURITY, AND YES, THAT
WOULD INCLUDE RECIPROCAL
LIMITATIONS ON THE PLACEMENT OF
OFFENSIVE MISSILES.
IT WOULD INCLUDE GREATER
TRANSPARENCY MEASURES, IT WOULD
INCLUDE MECHANISMS TO REDUCE THE
POSSIBILITY OF MISTAKE OR
ESCALATION IF THERE WERE
INCIDENTS AT SEA OR IN THE AIR,
WE ARE PREPARED TO DO ALL OF
THAT, JUST AS WE HAVE BEEN OVER
THE COURSE OF THE PAST DECADES
IN THE COLD WAR AND AFTER.
IF RUSSIA WANTS TO SIT AT THE
TABLE INTO THAT, WE ARE PREPARED
TO COME FLANKED BY ALLIES AND
PARTNERS AND NEGOTIATE AN
OUTCOME ALONG THOSE LINES.
IF RUSSIA CHOOSES TO GO A
DIFFERENT PRESS, WE ARE READY TO
DO THAT TOO.
>> Martha: WHY NOT REMOVE MORE
TROOPS FROM GERMANY?
GERMANY HAS BEEN ON THE
SIDELINES, THEY HAVE LARGE
ENERGY DEALS WITH RUSSIA, THEY
ARE NOT GIVING ANY LETHAL AID TO
UKRAINE, SO WE HAVE 30-50,000
TROOPS IN GERMANY.
I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE LOOK AT
THE SITUATION AND THERE REMEMBER
SOME OF THE PROPOSALS IN THE
PRIOR IN ADMINISTRATION AND
SAYING WHY ARE WE DOING THAT,
WHY ARE WE MOVING THOSE TROOPS
TO NATO TO OUR STRONGER ALLIES
THAN GERMANY AT THIS MOMENT?
>> Jake: WELL, FIRST OF ALL,
WE HAVE BEEN COORDINATING
CLOSELY WITH GERMANY IN ADVANCE
OF THE CHANCELLOR’S VISIT TO
WASHINGTON TOMORROW ON A SWIFT
AND SEVERE PACKAGE OF SANCTIONS
THAT THE UNITED STATES AND
EUROPE WOULD BOTH IMPOSE ON
RUSSIA IN THE EVENT OF AN
INVASION OF UKRAINE, AND GERMANY
HAS BEEN WORKING WITH US ON
THAT.
SECOND, WHILE IT’S TRUE THAT
GERMANY HAS NOT SENT ARMS TO
UKRAINE, AFTER THE UNITED STATES
THEY ARE THE SECOND LARGEST
DONOR TO UKRAINE AND EUROPE.
THE GREAT THING, MARTHA, ABOUT
HAVING THE KIND OF ALLIANCE WE
HAVE WITH 30 NATO ALLIES IS THAT
DIFFERENT ALLIES STEP UP TO TAKE
DIFFERENT PIECES OF THIS, SO WE
AND THE U.K. AND SOME OF THE
OTHER COUNTRIES ARE SUPPLYING
WEAPONS, AND THEN THERE ARE
OTHER ALLIES WHO ARE PROVIDING
DIFFERENT FORMS OF SUPPORT TO
UKRAINE.
BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS THIS: THE
REASON THAT WE ARE ABLE TO
SWIFTLY MOVE A BATTALION INTO
ROMANIA TO REINFORCE AND
REINSURE OUR ALLY ROMANIA IS
BECAUSE THOSE FORCES WERE
STATIONED IN GERMANY.
HAVING FORCES STATIONED IN
GERMANY IS IN FACT A STRATEGIC
ASSET TO THE UNITED STATES
BECAUSE NOT ONLY CAN THEY HELP
DEFEND GERMAN TERRITORY, BUT
THEY CAN BE MOVED TO OUR ALLIES
IN THE EAST TO REINFORCE,
REASSURE, AND DETER RUSSIA AND
THAT PUTS THE UNITED STATES AND
A STRONGER POSITION TO STAND UP
TO RUSSIAN MILITARY AGGRESSION.
>> Martha: I KNOW YOU SAID
THAT THE LARGER GOAL IS THAT THE
UNITED STATES AND OUR ALLIES ARE
STRONGER ON THE WORLD STAGE AND
IT RUSSIA AND OF COURSE CHINA AS
WELL ARE WEAKER ON THE WORLD
STAGE, BUT HOW DID IT SERVE THAT
GOAL TO REMOVE OPPOSITION TO
NORDSTROM TOO BECAUSE NOW WE’RE
IN A POSITION WHERE WE ARE
HOPING IT CAN BE TURNED OFF AN
INVASION HAPPENS BUT WE HAD HELD
FAST IN OPPOSITION TO
NORD STREAM TWO, WOULDN’T WE
HAVE DENIED SOME OF THE LEVERAGE
THAT VLADIMIR PUTIN SAYS HE HAS?
>> Jake: NORD STREAM TWO IS
LEVERAGE FOR US, NOT LEVERAGE
FOR VLADIMIR PUTIN.
YOU SAID TURN OFF
NORD STREAM TWO.
NORD STREAM TWO HASN’T BEEN
TURNED ON.
IF THERE NO GAS FLOWING RIGHT
NOW AND THERE WON’T BE FOR
MONTHS IN PART BECAUSE OF THE
DIPLOMACY OF THE UNITED STATES.
WE HAVE BEEN ABSOLUTELY CLEAR
THAT IF RUSSIA INVADES UKRAINE
ONE WAY OR THE OTHER NORD STREAM
FORWARD.
THAT’S LEVERAGE FOR US THAT WE
HAVE RIGHT NOW, SO WE INTEND TO
USE THAT LEVERAGE AND BOTTOM
REPORT AND HAS A CHOICE TO MAKE.
IF HE CHOOSES TO MOVE ON UKRAINE
HE WILL NOT BE GETTING THE
BENEFITS OF NORD STREAM 2 BURIED
>> Martha: AND GERMANY HAS
AGREED TO THAT?
I KNOW THEY’VE GIVEN AN
EXTENSION FOR A FEW MONTHS, BUT
DO YOU REALLY THINK THAT GERMANY
WILL NOT TURN THAT PIPELINE ON
IF RUSSIA INVADES FOR THE
FORESEEABLE FUTURE?
>> Jake: WHAT I BELIEVE IS
THAT WE WILL FOLLOW THROUGH ON
THE CLEAR AND DEFINITIVE
STATEMENT WE HAVE MADE AS THE
BIDEN ADMINISTRATION.
ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, IF RUSSIA
INVADES UKRAINE, NORD STREAM 2
WILL NOT MOVE FORWARD.
>> Martha: WHY NOT REOPEN THE
KEYSTONE PIPELINE AND REOPEN
FEDERAL LEASES ON U.S. LAND?
BECAUSE WE HAD ENERGY
INDEPENDENCE AND THAT WAS LARGE
LEVERAGE FOR THE UNITED STATES
OVER RUSSIA.
NOW WE DON’T HAVE THAT ANYMORE.
IN FACT WE NOW BUY MORE FUEL
FROM RUSSIA THAN WE HAVE IN THE
PAST, SO HOW -- WHY WOULDN’T YOU
WANT TO REVISIT THOSE IN ORDER
TO INCREASE OUR LEVERAGE OVER
RUSSIA?
>> Jake: WELL, FIRST, MARTHA,
THE UNITED STATES IS STILL A
SUBSTANTIAL PRODUCER OF ENERGY.
SECOND, WE HAVE WORKED WITH
PARTNERS AROUND THE WORLD TO
TAKE STEPS TO ENSURE THAT
RUSSIA’S ATTEMPTS TO USE ENERGY
AS A WEAPON GET FRUSTRATED.
ONE OF THE THINGS
PRESIDENT BIDEN HAS BEEN FOCUSED
ON IS MAKING SURE THAT IF PUTIN
TURNS DOWN THE SUPPLY OF GAS TO
EUROPE, THAT WE CAN FIND CARGOES
OF LIQUEFIED NATURAL GAS GOING
ELSEWHERE IN THE WORLD AND
REDIRECT THEM TO EUROPE.
SO THE UNITED STATES IS PREPARED
FOR A CONTINGENCY --
>> Martha: BUT YOU CAN SEE
THAT WE ARE NO LONG TISSUE DO
CONCEDE WE ARE NO LONGER ENERGY
INDEPENDENT MEJIA?
AND WE WERE BEFORE.
>> Jake: WHAT I WOULD SAY IS
THAT THE UNITED STATES IS
INVESTING MASSIVELY IN BEING A
LEADER IN ENERGY TRANSITION IN
WHICH, YES, FOR NOW, WE CONTINUE
TO USE FOSSIL FUELS BUT OVER THE
COURSE OF YEARS AND DECADES, WE
BECOME A CLEAN ENERGY
SUPERPOWER, BECAUSE THAT
ULTIMATELY IS NOT JUST WHERE THE
JOBS ARE.
IT’S WHERE THE STRATEGIC
ADVANTAGE WILL LIE, BECAUSE WE
CAN’T JUST LOOK AT NEXT YEAR OR
THE YEAR AFTER.
THAT’S NOT WHAT CHINA IS DOING.
WE HAVE TO LOOK OUT TEN, 20, 30
YEARS AND OVER THOSE YEARS,
PRESIDENT BIDEN’S INVESTMENTS
AND HIS VISIONS FOR HOW TO MAKE
THE UNITED STATES THE WORLD’S
CLEAN ENERGY SUPERPOWER, THAT’S
WHAT’S GOING TO PUT US IN THE
BEST STRATEGIC POSITION
ALONGSIDE DEMOCRATIC LIKE MINDED
ALLIES PARTNERS.
>> Martha: SOME MIGHT SAY THAT
RUSSIA AND CHINA WOULD LOOK AT
THAT ANSWER AND FEEL THAT THEY
ARE IN A PRETTY GOOD POSITION.
THEY CAME OUT AND SAID YOU KNOW
WE HAVE A DEEP FRIENDSHIP, WE
HAVE AN UNSHAKABLE ALLIANCE NOW,
THE TWO OF US ARE IN LOCKSTEP.
WHAT’S THE WHITE HOUSE REACTION
TO THAT STATEMENT FROM THEM ON
FRIDAY?
>> Jake: WELL, FIRST, MARTHA,
THEY DIDN’T USE THE WORD
"ALLIANCE," THEY USED SOME OTHER
PHRASES, BUT DID NOT ACTUALLY GO
SO FAR AS TO CALL THEMSELVES
ALLIES.
>> Martha: LET ME PUT THIS UP
ON THE SCREEN.
IT SAYS A FRIENDSHIP BETWEEN
THESE TWO STATES HAS NO LIMITS,
THERE ARE NO PROVEN AREAS OF
COOPERATION AND THEY ALSO
SUGGESTED CHINA WOULD HAVE
RUSHES BACK ON THEIR DECISIONS
WITH REGARD TO UKRAINE IN THE
SAME WOULD BE TRUE FOR RUSSIA OF
CHINA’S DECISIONS WITH REGARD TO
TAIWAN.
THAT SOUNDS LIKE AN ALLIANCE.
>> Jake: 5,000 WORDS OF THAT
STATEMENT AND 5,000 WORDS THAT
THE TWO LEADERS PUT DOWN ON THAT
PAPER, THE WORD UKRAINE DOES NOT
APPEAR, WHICH SUGGESTS THAT
CHINA IS NOT SO EXCITED ABOUT
CHEERLEADING RUSSIA ON UKRAINE
BUT THERE’S A MORE IMPORTANT
POINT HERE, WHICH IS THAT THE
UNITED STATES, THE WEST, THE
FREE WORLD, WE NEED TO BELIEVE
IN OURSELVES, WE NEED TO HAVE
CONFIDENCE IN OURSELVES.
THE U.S. AND THE WEST
COLLECTIVELY COMPRISE MORE THAN
HALF THE WORLD’S GDP.
RUSSIA AND CHINA COMPRISE LESS
THAN 20%.
WE’VE GOT INNOVATION, WE GOT
ENTREPRENEURSHIP, WE’VE GOT
IMMENSE CAPACITY AND HUMAN
POTENTIAL, AND ONE THING THAT
PRESIDENT BIDEN HAS DONE OVER
THE COURSE OF THE LAST YEAR IS
RALLY OUR ALLIES IN EUROPE, IN
ASIA, AND OTHER PARTS OF THE
WORLD, TO STAND TOGETHER FOR A
VISION IN WHICH DEMOCRACIES WILL
WIN THE DAY OVER THE YEARS
AHEAD, NOT AUTOCRACIES, AND WE
FEEL VERY GOOD ABOUT THE FACT
THAT WE HAVE THAT KIND OF
STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT AND
CONVERGENCE WITH CLOSE FRIENDS
AND PARTNERS IN THE G7, IN THE
QUAD, IN NATO WITH THE
EUROPEAN UNION, AND WE’VE
ALREADY PUT POINTS ON THE BOARD
AND WE ARE READY FOR THE
CHALLENGES THAT LIE AHEAD.
>> Martha: WE WILL SEE WITH
THOSE CHALLENGES ARE AND
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.