‘Kyiv Stands’: Sullivan says U.S. role in defending Ukraine defines Biden’s legacy

President Biden is making his final international summit appearance at the G20 in Brazil. It comes as he authorized Ukraine to fire long-range U.S. weapons into Russia. Nick Schifrin sat down with National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan for an exclusive interview to discuss the Middle East, Biden’s legacy and that new authorization.
Geoff Bennett:
President Biden is making his final appearance at an international summit today, the G20 in Rio de Janeiro. And this weekend, PBS News learned the president authorized Ukraine to fire long-range American weapons into Russia focused on the region of Kursk, which Ukraine seized and Moscow is trying to recapture.
Our Nick Schifrin sat down with National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan for an exclusive interview this morning to discuss that authorization for Ukraine, as well as the Middle East and President Biden’s legacy on the world stage.
Nick Schifrin:
Jake Sullivan, thanks very much. Welcome to the “News Hour.”
Jake Sullivan, U.S. National Security Adviser:
Thanks for having me.
Nick Schifrin:
Two U.S. officials confirmed to me that the administration has given Ukraine authorization to use ATACMS, the longest U.S. weapon — longest range U.S. weapon that Ukraine has in its arsenal. Why have you made that decision?
Jake Sullivan:
Well, we don’t have anything to announce or confirm on that today. So those remain unconfirmed reports.
One thing I would point out, though, for context is that Russia has just engaged in a massive escalation in this war. They have brought in a foreign army, North Korea, North Korean troops, to the front lines of the battle, and that represents a sea change in the nature of this conflict.
Nick Schifrin:
The Kremlin spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, today has responded saying that, yes, there is no official confirmation. And if there were, it would mean that there was direct involvement of the United States in the war.

Jake Sullivan:
If the U.S. were to authorize the use of any weapon system, including this weapon system, it wouldn’t mean direct U.S. participation in the war.
It would mean a continuation of the policy we have had since the war began, which is that we supply the means to Ukraine to defend its sovereignty on territorial integrity, and they fight the war.
Nick Schifrin:
In and around Kursk, there are tens of thousands of troops being massed to try and retake this territory that Ukraine has seized earlier this year. Inside Russia. There are Russian command-and-control sites, there are air defense, rocket launchers. Are those good ATACMS targets?
Jake Sullivan:
Look, I will obviously defer to the Ukrainians about how they choose to prosecute the war. From our perspective right now, the major escalation that we have seen is not about a particular geography or about a particular part of the front.
It’s about the fact that Russia has gone to another country from another part of the world, North Korea, brought in thousands of their troops to the front lines, and have added them to this war. That is a change, a significant change, a change that in fact we warned the Russians about before they did it and said, if they did it, we would respond.
And, of course, we will respond.
Nick Schifrin:
In the past, you have tried to avoid provoking the Russians from escalating at times. You didn’t provide tanks and then you did decide to make that decision to provide tanks. You didn’t provide F-16s. Then you did provide those F-16s.
Do you believe, at this point, looking back, if you had provided any of those authorizations earlier, it would have made a difference to Ukraine in the war?
Jake Sullivan:
Have we seen a marked difference since we have provided tanks to Ukraine in terms of the battlefield? Similarly, on F-16s, have we seen a marked difference?
Our view has been that there’s not one weapon system that makes a difference in this battle. It’s about manpower, and Ukraine needs to do more, in our view, to firm up its lines in terms of the number of forces it has on the front lines. It’s about munitions and it’s about all of the other things that go to a country’s national strength, their morale, their cohesion, their industrial base.
Nick Schifrin:
But I ask because Ukraine is losing more territory today than at any point this year. So do you really believe that nothing the U.S. could have done earlier would have changed that?
Jake Sullivan:
We have provided the tanks. We have provided the F-16s. We have provided the HIMARS. We have provided the Patriots. We have provided many of the things that you said earlier we wouldn’t provide.
And it’s not back then. It’s, rather, today that Ukraine finds itself in a more challenged position on the battlefield, suggesting that there’s not a straight line between those weapons systems and how it does on the battlefield.
Where is the straightest line between Ukrainian performance and inputs? It’s on mobilization and manpower.
Nick Schifrin:
Let’s switch to the Middle East, to the latest draft that you guys have been working on in terms of a cease-fire in Lebanon. Has Hezbollah agreed to the draft?
Jake Sullivan:
We don’t have agreement. If we did, we’d be out announcing it and trumpeting it from the rooftops.
But we believe that we’re seeing progress and we think both sides, both the Lebanese side and the Israeli side, have indicated a willingness to get this done and to get it done on a short time frame. So we will continue working at this until we can get both sides to sign on the proverbial dotted line.
Nick Schifrin:
You have said that you have extracted further commitments from the Israeli side in the last week about increasing humanitarian aid into Gaza. What are those commitments?
Jake Sullivan:
What the Israelis have agreed to do is to create a new route, a new road to move aid on a daily basis into the humanitarian zone known as Mawasi, where a huge number of Palestinian civilians are currently living.
And so we have seen a significant uptick in the amount of aid going day by day into that humanitarian zone.
Nick Schifrin:
Those steps that you say Israel has taken have come in response to a letter sent by Secretaries Blinken and Austin a little over a month ago.
A consortium of NGOs judged 19 demands in that letter. They say that Israel has substantially complied with none of them, partially complied with four and not complied with 14. Given that, how can you really say that Israel has made substantial progress since that letter was sent?
Jake Sullivan:
Well, first, as you noted, this is a letter from our secretary of state and our secretary of defense. They will work through a process to make their own judgments, the State Department and the Defense Department, about compliance.
What we have seen — and I think this is very difficult to argue — is that, since that letter was sent, there has been a change in the approach that Israel has taken on these issues. It’s not enough, not even close to enough. So, we expect more aid in both Northern Gaza and Southern Gaza.
But the exercise of sending this letter, of laying out the terms of what we expect in very — a very detailed way, that has generated a change. And that is what American diplomacy should be about. And so we will keep pushing on it until we achieve an outcome in which there is a sufficient degree of sustained humanitarian aid for all of the civilians of Gaza.
Nick Schifrin:
You have said you’re prepared to work with the incoming administration to try and release the hostages that are still being held by Hamas in Gaza.
But can you do that until the Trump team signs a memorandum of understanding that actually officially allows you to share classified information with that team?
Jake Sullivan:
So, we can’t engage in a normal transition until the incoming team signs the memorandum of understanding.
But we can have informal conversations with the folks who are coming into our positions. Those informal conversations can help shape a common message that says both the outgoing team and the incoming team are committed to bringing the hostages home.
Nick Schifrin:
Last week, the FBI and the Cybersecurity Agency acknowledged a Chinese cyber espionage campaign compromised multiple telecommunications networks and including information given to U.S. law enforcement under court orders from those telecommunications companies.
Does China still today have access to those telecommunications companies and that information?
Jake Sullivan:
Well, as you noted, this is an active investigation between the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Department of Homeland Security.
But what I will tell you is, this is a significant event, the intrusion into these private telecommunications networks that also involve communications on an unclassified level by government officials. So it’s something we take deeply seriously.
Nick Schifrin:
You say the investigation is ongoing, but is the intrusion ongoing as well?
Jake Sullivan:
Well, I’m saying the investigation covers both the question of what’s happened in the past and what’s happening right now.
Nick Schifrin:
Let me ask a question about legacy.
Are you concerned that one of your legacies will be facilitating the way Israel has fought in Gaza that has killed tens of thousands of women and children?
Jake Sullivan:
The U.S. has taken a very clear position since this war began, which is that Israel had a right to defend itself after the worst slaughter of Jews since the Holocaust.
The U.S. also, over the course of the past year, has made a massive difference, in terms of whether there would be widespread famine in Gaza or not widespread famine, in terms of working with the Israelis to try to minimize civilian harm over the course of the months of the conflict.
I do believe that us standing up for Israel in its hour of need at a moment when its enemies were descending upon it has made a major difference for the good, from the perspective of the United States.
Nick Schifrin:
Do you think the withdrawal from Afghanistan is part of your legacy and would you have done every — anything differently looking back?
Jake Sullivan:
I believe that ending America’s longest war, and not passing it on to yet another president, is a significant part of President Biden’s legacy and, therefore, as someone who works for him, as part of my legacy.
I would further point out that, to date, despite the warnings, we have not seen a deadly terrorist attack on the U.S. homeland while President Biden was president. In addition, we are able to stand up to and push back against Russian aggression in Ukraine to keep Kyiv from falling without having them have sitting ducks of U.S. forces in Afghanistan to go after by, for example, arming up the Taliban.
So I think it’s a good thing that the United States is no longer fighting in that war, and I believe that that is an important part of President Biden’s legacy.
Nick Schifrin:
And, on Ukraine, do you think your legacy will be defined, in fact, in the end by your successor?
Jake Sullivan:
I believe that our legacy has already been substantially defined on Ukraine.
And it can be defined in two words: Kyiv stands. The country was at risk of being wiped off the map. And thanks to the brave Ukrainian people and their resourcefulness and their courage, but also thanks to President Joe Biden rallying countries from around the world, we defended Kyiv, we defended Ukraine, and Ukraine will continue to be a thriving democracy anchored in Western institutions in the future.
And I do not believe that anything that comes next is going to change that.
Nick Schifrin:
Jake Sullivan, thank you very much.
Jake Sullivan:
Thank you.