HERE'S JOY.
>> GOOD EVENING, EVERYONE.
WE BEGIN "THE REIDOUT" TONIGHT
WITH A UNIFIED DISPLAY OF
SOLIDARITY IF BRUSSELS, WHERE
WESTERN LEADERS STOOD SHOULDER
TO SHOULDER IN AN EXTRAORDINARY
SERIES OF SUMMITS HOSTED BY
NATO.
THE GROUP OF SEVEN
INDUSTRIALIZED NATIONS AND THE
EUROPEAN UNION.
>> WE GATHER AT THE CRITICAL
TIME FOR OUR SECURITY.
WE ARE UNITED IN CONDEMNING THE
KREMLIN'S UNPROVOKED AGGRESSION
AND UKRAINE'S SOVEREIGNTY.
>> WESTERN LEADERS CONTINUED TO
ROLL OUT A SERIES OF MEASURES TO
INCREASE PRESSURE ON RUSSIAN
PRESIDENT VLADAMIR PUTIN.
UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT VOLODYMYR
ZELENSKYY ADDRESSED THE 29
MEMBERS OF THE NATO ALLIANCE AND
PLEADED FOR A MORE ROBUST
RESPONSE.
>> Translator: THE UKRAINIAN
ARMY HAS BEEN RESISTING FOR A
MONTH.
AND I HAVE BEEN REPEATING THE
SAME THING FOR A MONTH NOW, TO
SAVE PEOPLE IN OUR CITIES,
UKRAINE NEEDS MILITARY
ASSISTANCE.
WITHOUT RESTRICTIONS.
WE HAVE SHOP WHAT OUR STANDARDS
ARE CAPABLE OF, AND HOW MUCH WE
CAN GIVE TO SECURITY TO EUROPE
AND THE WORLD.
HOW MUCH WE CAN DO TO PROTECT
AGAINST AGGRESSION, AGAINST
EVERYTHING WE VALUE, WHAT YOU
VALUE.
BUT NATO HAS YET TO SHOW WHAT
THE ALLIANCE CAN DO TO SAVE
PEOPLE.
>> THE UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT ALSO
ACCUSED RUSSIA OF USING
PHOSPHOROUS BOMBS, TARGETING
CIVILIANS AND CHILDREN.
U.S. DEFENSE OFFICIALS SAY THEY
CANNOT CONFIRM THOSE
ALLEGATIONS.
IT IS DIFFICULT TO VERIFY THE
REPORTS WITHOUT U.S. PERSONNEL
ON THE GROUND.
WHITE PHOSPHOROUS IS NOT BANNED
BY LAW.
THE CRIMINAL SPOKESMAN SAID
RUSSIA COULD CONSIDER USING
NUCLEAR WEAPONS IF IT FELT THERE
WAS AN EXISTENTIAL THREAT ON OUR
COUNTRY.
JOE BIDEN WARNED THAT THIS COULD
AND WOULD TRIGGER A RESPONSE.
>> WE WOULD RESPOND IF HE USES
IT.
THE NATURE OF THE RESPONSE WOULD
DEPEND ON THE NATURE OF THE USE.
>> ACCORDING TO "THE NEW YORK
TIMES," THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION
HAS ALSO ASSEMBLED A NATIONAL
SECURITY TEAM CALLED THE TIGER
TEAM TO ASSESS VARIOUS RESPONSES
IF RUSSIA WERE TO EXPAND ITS WAR
BEYOND UKRAINE OR USE WEAPONS OF
MASS DESTRUCTION.
IN A FIRST, NATO LEADERS AGREED
TO PROVIDE UKRAINE WITH EQUIPMENT TO PROTECT AGAINST
EQUIPMENT TO PROTECT AGAINST
CHEMICAL, BIOLOGICAL,
RADIOLOGICAL AND THOOUK THREATNU
AND DISCUSSING THE POSSIBILITY
OF PROVIDING ANTI-SHIP WEAPONS
AMID CONCERNS RUSSIA WILL LAUNCH
AMPHIBIOUS ASSAULTS.
THE NATO SECRETARY-GENERAL AND
JOE BIDEN WARNED CHINA,
MEANWHILE, AGAINST COMING TO
MOSCOW'S RESCUE.
THE LEADERS OF POLAND AND OTHER
COUNTRIES BORDERING UKRAINE
PRESSED THE U.S. AND FELLOW
EUROPEAN COUNTRIES TO STEP UP
ASSISTANCE WITH THE GROWING
REFUGEE CRISIS TO.
THAT POINT, JOE BIDEN ANNOUNCED
THAT THE UNITED STATES WOULD
WELCOME 100,000 UKRAINIAN
REFUGEES WITH THE GOAL OF
REUNITING FAMILIES.
MORE THAN 3.5 MILLION REFUGEES
FLED UKRAINE IN RECENT WEEKS,
INCLUDING MORE THAN 2 MILLION TO
POLAND.
WITH ME NOW, FORMER U.S.
AMBASSADOR TO NATO, THE
PRESIDENT OF THE CHICAGO COUNCIL
ON GLOBAL AFFAIRS, AND WE HAVE
THE CHIEF CORRESPONDENT FOR PBS
NEWS.
THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.
I FELT THAT IN WATCHING
PRESIDENT ZELENSKYY'S ADDRESS TO
NATO, HE POSED A QUESTION AND A
CHALLENGE THAT I THINK IS
LEGITIMATE TO ASK.
IF INDEED NATO IS THE STRONGEST
MILITARY ALLIANCE IN THE WORLD,
IN EFFECT, THEN WHY IS IT THAT
THEY SEEM COMPLETELY -- I WON'T
SAY IMPOTENT, BUT THEY SEEM SO
RELUCTANT TO ACT FOR FEAR OF,
YOU KNOW, PROVOKING VLADAMIR
PUTIN?
PUTIN SEEMS PRETTY WELL PROVOKED
AND UNPREDICTABLE.
AND THE FACT THAT THEY'RE EVEN
TALKING ABOUT THE FACT THAT HE
MIGHT LAUNCH UP TO NUCLEAR OR
CHEMICAL STRIKES AGAINST UKRAINE
SHOWS THAT THEY KNOW THAT HE'S
UNSTABLE AND UNPREDICTABLE.
IS IT CONTRADICTORY THEN THAT
NATO TAKES ALL OF THIS ACTION TO
AVOID PROVOCATION?
>> WELL, CLEARLY ON THE ONE
HAND, ZELENSKYY HAS EVERY RIGHT,
AND IF I WERE IN HIS SHOES,
WOULD DO THE SAME THING AND ASK
FOR EVERYTHING HE COULD TO HELP
HIS COUNTRY TO DEFEND ITSELF, UP
TO AND INCLUDING SENDING NATO
TROOPS FOR THAT PURPOSE.
NATO NEEDS TO MAKE A CALCULATION
ABOUT THE RELATIVE BALANCE
BETWEEN HELPING UKRAINE AND IT
IS DOING AN AWFUL LOT IN TERMS
OF SENDING EQUIPMENT OF ALL
KINDS, SOME OF WHICH WE KNOW
ABOUT, SOME OF WHICH WE DON'T
KNOW ABOUT.
PROVIDING INTELLIGENCE
INFORMATION TO HELP THE
UKRAINIANS DEFEND THEMSELVES,
AND THEY'RE DOING A VERY, VERY
GOOD JOB AT IT.
AND ON THE OTHER HAND, DO WE
WANT TO HAVE A DIRECT
CONFRONTATION BETWEEN RUSSIA AND
THE UNITED STATES AND NATO?
THIS IS SOMETHING SINCE 1945, WE
HAVE WORKED VERY, VERY HARD TO
AVOID HAVING NUCLEAR POWERS
DIRECTLY ENGAGED IN MILITARY
CONFRONTATION.
IT'S A BIG STEP.
I THINK JOE BIDEN INDICATED, I
THINK SECRETARY-GENERAL
STOLTENBERG INDICATED THE
DISCUSSIONS AT NATO SUGGEST
THERE ARE MORE SERIOUS THOUGHTS
ABOUT THAT STEP, PARTICULARLY IN
RESPONSE TO THE USE OF CHEMICAL
WEAPONS.
BUT IT'S NOT SOMETHING YOU DO
WILLY-NILLY.
THERE ARE MORE AND LARGER
INTERESTS AT STAKE.
INCLUDING THE VERY NATO MEMBERS
TODAY THAT ARE NOT AT WAR.
>> I TAKE YOUR POINT,
ABSOLUTELY.
BUT THIS IS THE NATO GENERAL
SECRETARY.
HE WAS ASKED IN TWO DIFFERENT
ARENAS ABOUT THE USE OF CHEMICAL
WEAPONS.
FIRST BY ANDREA MITCHELL AND
THEN BY LESTER HOLT.
SO TAKE A LISTEN.
>> ANY USE OF CHEMICAL WEAPONS
WOULD TOTALLY CHANGE THE NATURE
OF THE CONFLICT.
IT WILL BE A BLATANT VIOLATION
OF INTERNATIONAL LAW.
AND IT WILL HAVE WIDE RANGING,
SEVERE CONSEQUENCES.
>> DO YOU TAKE ANYTHING OFF THE
TABLE WHEN IT COMES TO
RESPONDING TO CHEMICAL WEAPONS?
>> WE ARE IN A VERY DANGEROUS
SITUATION.
IF I SPECULATED ABOUT DIFFERENT
OPTIONS, I WOULD ONLY MAKE IT
MORE DANGEROUS AND MORE
UNPREDICTABLE
UNPREDICTABLE.
MY MAIN MESSAGE IS WE ARE THERE
TO PROTECT AND DEFEND EVERY INCH
OF NATO TERRITORY.
>> I THINK THE CHALLENGE THAT A
LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE IN WATCHING
WHAT'S HAPPENING, IN THE CASE OF
THE U.S. INVASION OF IRAQ, THE
U.S. WENT TO THE UNITED NATIONS
AND SAID WE KNOW THEY HAVE
CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS
AND WE SUSPECT THEY HAVE NUCLEAR
WEAPONS.
WE HAVE TO ACT TO TOP THEM FROM
ACTING.
IN THE CASE OF SYRIA, WE KNOW
FOR SURE THEY USED CHEMICAL
WEAPONS AND USED THE MOST
VICIOUS TACTICS AGAINST THE
CITIZENS OF THAT COUNTRY IN
ORDER TO PRESERVE THE BASHAR AL
ASSAD REGIME.
10 WHEN THE WORLD SAYS IT NEEDS
TO TAKE MILITARY ACTION BECAUSE
WE KNOW THAT CHEMICAL OR NUCLEAR
WEAPONS ARE ON THE TABLE, BUT IN
THIS CASE, WITH E SAYWE SAY WE C
DO ANYTHING BECAUSE THEY HAVE
CHEMICAL OR NUCLEAR WEAPONS, IT
STRIKES A LOT OF PEOPLE AS
HYPOCRITICAL.
I WONDER IF THAT'S THE WAY
PEOPLE IN COUNTRIES THAT HAVE
FACED US OR INSTANCES OF RUSSIAN
AGGRESSION ARE SEEING IT.
>> I THINK YOU ARE CENTERING IN
ON THE QUESTION THAT WE WHO
COVER THE WHITE HOUSE AND HAVE
BEEN IN TOUCH WITH YOUR PEEP
OFFICIALS HAVE BEEN HONING IN
ON.
WHAT WOULD IT TAKE, WHERE IS THE
LINE?
IF THERE IS SO MUCH CONCERN
ABOUT THE USE OF CHEMICAL
WEAPONS AND ABOUT THE POTENTIAL
USE OF TACKYTICAL NUCLEAR WEAPON
WHERE IS THE LINE?
YOU HEARD THE SECRETARY-GENERAL
SAY, OF COURSE WE WILL RESPOND.
OUR FOLLOW UP QUESTION IS, AND
THEN WHAT?
HOW WILL YOU RESPOND?
THERE'S A COUPLE OF THINGS AT
PLAY HERE.
I'M SO GLAD YOU RAISED THE ISSUE
OF SERE YASHGS BECAUSE I DON'T
THINK WE TALK -- SYRIA, BECAUSE
I DON'T THINK WE TALK ENOUGH
ABOUT THE BRUTAL BOMBARDMENT
THAT PLAYED OUT THERE, AND THE
FACT THAT THE U.S. AND THE REST
OF THE WORLD FAILED TO RESPOND,
EVEN WHEN THE ASSAD REGIME
DEPLOYED THOSE WEAPONS.
MANY ARGUE THAT EMPOWERED PUTIN.
SO THE QUESTIONS WE ASK, WHERE
ARE SOME OF THOSE LINES?
WE'RE STARTING TO SEE ONLY
DETAILS COME OUT NOW.
THE LONGER THIS CONFLICT GOES
ON, AND THE MORE U.S. AND NATO
ALLIES ARE FORCED TO CONSIDER
THE POTENTIAL ACTIONS HERE, SOME
OF THOSE QUESTIONS WE CONTINUE
TO ASK ARE STARTING TO GET
DETAILS AROUND HEM.
THEN YOU ARE PROVIDING THOSE
DEFENSIVE WEAPONS, AND THEY DRAW
VERY CLEAR LINE BETWEEN
HUMANITARIAN AID AND DEFENSIVE
WEAPONS SYSTEMS, ANTI-TANK AND
ANTI-AIR SYSTEMS THEY'RE
PROVIDING, AND OFFENSIVE
WEAPONS, OR THE IMPLEMENTATION
AND ENFORCEMENT OF A NO-FLY ZONE
AS WE KNOW PRESIDENT ZELENSKYY
HAS CONTINUED TO ASK FOR.
WE SEE THOSE AS TWO DIFFERENT
THINGS, BRINGING THE U.S. IN
DIRECT CONFLICT WITH RUSSIA.
BUT WE'RE STARTING TO SEE SOME
OF THOSE DETAILS COME OUT.
WHAT HAPPEN IT IS THERE IS A
RUSSIAN STRIKE SPECIFICALLY ON A
NATO CONVOY MOVING TO SUPPLY
UKRAINIAN TROOPS?
WHAT HAPPEN IT IS THERE IS A
DEPLOYMENT OF A CHEMICAL WEAPON
AND A RADIOLOGICAL OR BIOLOGICAL
CHEMICAL CLOUD DRIFTS INTO NATO
TERRITORY, IS THAT A VIOLATION?
IS THAT AN ATTACK ON A NATO
TERRITORY, AND DOES THAT TRIGGER
A RESPONSE?
TO SOME DEGREE, THIS IS NEW
TERRITORY FOR MANY OF THESE
LEADERS, BECAUSE WE ARE NOW
SEEING WAR ON THE EUROPEAN
CONTINENT FOR THE FIRST TIME IN
70 YEARS.
AND THESE LEADERS WERE NOT IN