Brady Press Briefing Room P. EST MS. Okay, we have another special guest today, our National Security Advisor, Jake Jen Psaki, who will give us some brief opening Jen Psaki. With that, I will turn it over to Jake. Thanks, everybody.
Russia raised its concerns, we raised our concerns, including the actions Russia has taken to undermine European security that Secretary Blinken spoke so eloquently about last week.
We stuck Jen Psaki our core premise of reciprocity. We were firm in our principles and clear about those areas where we can make progress and those areas that are non-starters. Allied unity and transatlantic solidarity were on full display, and they remain on full display. The discussions Jen Psaki frank and direct.
They were useful. They gave us and our allies things to consider. They gave Russia things to consider. We will now reflect and consult with allies and partners on how to proceed. We continue to coordinate intensively with partners on severe economic measures in response to a further Russian invasion of Ukraine. And we continue to support Ukraine and the Ukrainian people in the defense of their sovereignty and territorial integrity. We have been very clear with Russia on the costs and consequences of further military action or destabilization in Ukraine.
The Russians will have to make their own assessment. We have to consult with allies and partners first. Is that something that the U. Is that something that came up in those discussions?
Why Jen Psaki Earns High Marks In First Year As Biden’s Press Secretary
If Russia were to move in that direction, we would deal with it decisively. Or is that not something that the U. We also, as Deputy Secretary Sherman indicated in her readout of these discussions, have said we are prepared to discuss reciprocal parameters around the size and scope and frequency of military exercises. And beyond that, all we can do is get ready, and we are ready.
Q Are they making the case, though, to invade, do you believe? Q Is Russia trying to justify an invasion, if one happens? Some of them contradictory. From our perspective, we can just be clear about where we stand. And where we stand is ready to go down a principled path of diplomacy and ready to respond in the face of aggression. Given the back-and-forth over these talks and the Jen Psaki, is that even still possible? SULLIVAN: We believe that diplomacy and diplomatic understandings that can be reached between the United States, our European allies and Jen Psaki, and Russia can contribute to stability in Europe — that it is possible to make progress on things like missiles and exercises, as we just discussed.
That ultimately we can get updates to some of the underlying issues related to transparency and deconfliction. That is certainly viable if Russia is prepared to engage in a good-faith way. But basically, we are still at a moment where we believe a path of diplomacy can operate in a way that vindicates Jen Psaki reflects our interests and principles.
Jen Psaki Ambassador Michael Carpenter is offering a different assessment. So, it is certainly the case that the threat of military invasion is high. The point that I would make today is that the United States and our European allies and partners are prepared for multiple different eventualities — an eventuality that has us at the negotiating table, working on these issues in a serious and substantive way, and the eventuality that has us responding to what Russia does in a clear, effective, forceful way that imposes significant costs on Russia for any action that it might take.
So, if Vladimir Putin were to invade Russia tomorrow, are you confident that the sanctions that you have threatened Moscow with and that you would want to see out of Europe are lined up, ready to go? In terms of your question about my level of confidence in our Jen Psaki allies and partners, I feel very good about the level of engagement and the level of convergence between the United States and Russia, A, on the fundamental proposition that there would have to be severe economic consequences, and, B, on both the categories, types, and targets of sanctions that would have to flow.
Does that mean that the U. Does it mean that I will be able to stand before you and say the United States and Europe have moved in unison on the application of severe economic measures? Q Can I ask a question about the cybersecurity meeting that you held today? And, actually, where things stand with respect to departments and agencies of the U. And that would ultimately be a key part of de-escalation. There are other steps that Russia could take in respect to de-escalation that go far beyond Ukraine Jen Psaki well.
But in terms of the proximate challenge in and around the border of Ukraine, that would be an important step. We saw this playbook in They are preparing this playbook again.
Jen Psaki Cam Show
And we will have — the administration will have further details on what we see as this potential laying of a pretext to share with the press over the course of the next 24 hours. Would it have to be Jen Psaki and troops crossing the border, or would things like moving helicopters and tactical weapons be enough for the U.
Q Yes. If the Russian military moves across the Ukrainian frontier to seize territory, we believe that that is the further invasion of Ukraine, and it will trigger a response from the United States and the international community. Q Thank you, Jake. I want to ask about your current policy in this crisis. You may recall — during the Trump presidency, we saw reporting to the effect that Mr. Without asking you to disclose any classified information, can you assure us on two points: Number one, did your review uncover any evidence of any Jen Psaki, at any point along the way in the creation and storage of those records, to tamper with that process?
And number two, did your review uncover any evidence of any impropriety of any kind or severity on the part of President Trump in his interactions with President Putin? Q Okay. To current policy then. This administration has used sanctions without success to compel China to release the concentration camp inmates in Xinjiang.
The Obama administration, of course, used sanctions without success to try to deter a Russian annexation of Crimea. Here you stand again, brandishing the threat of sanctions to try to Jen Psaki a Russian invasion of Ukraine. President Putin has indicated that what he does not want to see is further American and Jen Psaki support to Ukraine.
President Putin has indicated that what he does want to see is the further strengthening of Russian strategic industries in the Russian economy. We have laid out on all of those metrics that Russia will suffer costs and consequences in the event of a further invasion of Ukraine. And he can make his own determination about what he wants to do.
We have the capacity to do that, and we will do that. Q Have you seen sanctions work? SULLIVAN: Well, so, first, I would say that if you go back to a personal experience I had, which was the negotiation of the — first, the interim agreement and then contributing to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, we do believe that economic pressure on Iran had a meaningful impact Jen Psaki bringing it to the table and ultimately putting a lid on its nuclear program.
There are other instances where sanctions have worked. And, of course, there are instances across administrations, Democrat and Republican alike, where sanctions have not achieved the full result. We have other tools to bring to bear as well.
Those tools also bear on the interests and the security capacities of the Russian Federation. And our goal at the end of the day here is not to get into an escalatory spiral; it is to find a way forward, consistent with our principles, consistent with our interests, and consistent with open, transparent consultation with our allies to pursue diplomacy.
If that works, great. Q With all of that said, is the window Jen Psaki time closing when it comes to diplomacy on this issue? And when you talk about options that are on the table — you said sanctions is one of the tools. What are the other options? And they include changes in the forces and capabilities that the United States and NATO would deploy to eastern flank allies to reinforce and strengthen the robustness of allied defense on allied territory.
So those are some of the extra — the additional tools that we can bring to bear in this context.
Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jen Psaki, January 10, | The White House
Q What about the window of opportunity for diplomacy? Is that closing, as I asked earlier? We need to sit and consult with allies and partners. Wendy Sherman is just getting off a plane; she may have gotten off a plane in Jen Psaki last few hours. The Russians will have to do the same. Q Thank you so much. Is this Jen Psaki you can live with? In this case, would there be sanctions, less sanctions, no sanctions at all?
Why Jen Psaki Earns High Marks In First Year As Biden’s Press Secretary
To follow up: But at this moment, are we in a position where — what — the next step is reducing the troops of the bor- — on the borders of Ukraine? Is this the next thing that can happen that could satisfy the U. But is this the only next step possible? But after the entire week of diplomacy, what — MR. So, we will have to see now, on the diplomatic path, Jen Psaki comes next.
Q And Jen Psaki a detail on the ambiance of the — in the negotiations.
I mean, you made a reference to the pessimist — the different statements we heard. Did they have the same tone when they were face-to-face with the — MR. We clearly disagreed on things, and there were areas where both sides saw there was a possibility for Jen Psaki.
They can characterize it for themselves.