continued coverage here on cnn continued coverage here on cnn with wolf. -- captions by vitac -- www.vitac.com this is cnn breaking news. hello, i'm wolf blitzer reporting from washington. we want to welcome our viewers in the united states and around the world. we have lots to cover this hour and the onrequesting crisis in ukraine, and there are major developments. the secretary of state, john kerry, was in kiev, ukraine, meeting with the government there and touring the site of last month's deadly pro it tests. a short time ago, he and president obama made clear their support for that new ukrainian government, contradicting the russian president, vladimir putin's claims that ukraine has no legitimate leaders. president obama dismissed that claim, adding that russian's invasion of crimea was a miscalculation. >> i actually think that this is not a sign of strength, but rather is a reflection that countries near russia have deep
concerns and suspicions about this kind of meddling. and if anything, will push many countries further away from russia. there is the ability for ukraine to be a friend of the west's, and a friend of russia's. >> secretary of state john kerry just left kiev for talks in paris, was even more forcefully, said all of putin's claims are false. >> not a single piece of credible evidence supports any one of these claims. none. >> adding to the tensions in crimea right now, it's occupied by thousands of russian troops. there are reports russian warships have blocked the kerr much strait. president putin denied there are any russian troops in crimea. he said 22,000 armed forces there are, quote, self defense teams. that's his words. let's bring in cnn's barbara starr, over at the pentagon for
us. we have new information, barbara, in how the u.s. sees the next few days. and these will be tense days unfolding. >> reporter: indeed they will, wolf. we have learned behind the scenes the obama administration believes some time in the next couple of days, two, three days or so, vladimir putin will make a decision on his next move. the big question is, will he put more military force into crimea or possibly into eastern ukraine. u.s. officials will tell you that if putin's intentions are quite opaque right now. anybody who knows what he's thinking probably doesn't really know. they're very concerned about it. but here's their calculation. they feel that putin has essentially consolidated his grip, if you will, on crimea. he doesn't have to put anymore into that area. but he may have to make a decision about the rest of eastern ukraine. he has 150,000 troops on the border that have been conducting that exercise. the exercise essentially over.
but not all of the troops have gone back to their bases. so there is plenty of russian troops out and about with their equipment, with their weapons. before they all go back to base, will putin order them to cross the border. that's why the next two days are so important. that's why we are told, you are seeing this heavy international, diplomatic push, led by the united states, trying to give vladimir putin that diplomatic off-ramp from this crisis in the next two to three days, wolf. >> let's see if he takes that off-ramp or not. thanks, barbara. let's go to elise labott right now, traveling with secretary of state john kerry. he just wrapped up a historic meeting in kiev. i take it you're still on the ground in kiev. is that right, elise? >> reporter: wolf, we're in the motorcade about to go to the -- to where secretary kerry will be attending a meeting, and also meeting with members of the
u.k., the foreign secretary, and also the ukrainian -- he invited sergey lavrov, to join them as part of this budapest amendment, what he was hoping would be part of a diplomatic way forward. but the russian foreign minister declined to attend the meeting, citing scheduling conflicts. even as the u.s. pushes for this diplomatic way forward, it's looking very rough, wolf. >> looking very rough indeed. so he has wrapped up his talks. the u.s., and correct me if i am wrong, it does formally recognize this new interim government in kiev, the government that replaced the ousted president as the legitimate government of ukraine, right? >> reporter: that's right. it doesn't recognize president yanukovych as the president of ukraine any longer, even though that's what the russians are recognizing. secretary kerry met with many members of the new government, members of the parliament and
said that the u.s. wants to help them move towards the elections they'll be having. in may, they'll be training, and they also announced a very robust aid package for ukraine to the tune of $1 billion loan guarantees as ukraine tries to wean itself off this dependence on russian oil and gas. >> elise labott, have a safe flight out of kiev on the way to paris with the secretary of state. thank you. despite all the evidence to the contrary, president putin made the extraordinary claim today, no russian troops have entered crimea. but he warned, he reserves the right to use military force if ethnic russians in crimea are threatened. >> no, i'm not worried. because we are not going to go to war with ukraine. but ukraine has the army. i want you to understand clearly. if we do this, it will only be
to protect local people. and for women and children. >> our phil black is joining us from moscow right now. so putin repeated his claim that the government in kiev is not legitimate, this is the government and the u.s. and so much of the rest of the world recognizing the legitimate government of ukraine. so how significant is right now there is basically such a huge difference of legitimacy of this current government in ukraine? >> reporter: well, it's pretty significant, wolf. because what it allows president putin to do is effectively ignore this government. although he says it is not -- he is not ignoring it in its entirety, there are some contacts between the russian government and the ukrainian government at some level, he wasn't specific. what he has said is that he does not see the new president, the acting president, as legitimate. this interim government of cabinet ministers and officials.
they are not legitimate either. he went further and said that because this is a new state emerging from a revolution, indeed, a revolution that he believes is illegal, then russia is not bound to any of the previous agreements that it had signed with ukraine. so by that logic, by that thinking, very much gives russia a free hand to do as it pleases. and vladimir putin says that he believes he has the right, if necessary, to take further military action, particularly in the east of the country, if he believes there is a threat to ethnic russians in that region. but as we have been talking about, the united states, the west and indeed our own reporting on the ground does not suggest that such a threat exists. wolf? >> and he's insisting, phil, no russian troops have entered crimea. although there are thousands of russian troops all of the time in crimea at that port there where they're permanently based, right? >> reporter: yeah, that's right. that is the other claim. that really, flies against not only what we and now teams are
seeing on the ground, but very much what the west, europe and the united states believe. and it seems to fit into what is a growing narrative from moscow, from president putin, where they are trying to paint all the events taking place on the ground in crimea as very much an organic, grass roots local rejection of what has been taking place in kiev and the new government there. they are trying to paint it as the local people essentially trying to determine their own future. and so as this region moves towards holding a referendum on breaking away from ukraine, vladimir putin is saying that ultimately, it is the wishes of the people that have to be respected. so in the event that referendum is held and the event a majority of people vote to break away from ukraine, you would think that under those circumstances, moscow will then push the world to accept that result. vladimir putin today said, this isn't a land grab. they're not annexing crimea as such. but what could be one possible scenario is where ukraine -- sorry, crimea does vote to move away from the rest of ukraine
and effectively become a client state heavily dependent on moscow. >> all right. let's see what happens. phil black in moscow, thank you. the united states and its allies are considering sanctions against russia. no sanctions have yet been imposed. but what would they look like? let's bring in cnn's tom foreman. is there some sort of competition of sanctions that actually might work? what do they have in mind? >> they don't have a military option in mind for a lot of different reasons, because it doesn't seem like it would work. when we talk about sanctions here, it becomes a very sketchy equation. look at the world economy right now. $16.7 trillion, gdp of the united states. europe, european union, $15.8 trillion. and russia, by comparison, kind of small. $2.6 trillion. so if they could bring this economic power against russia, isolated, or put pressure on it, could it have an impact? maybe. russia was hit hard in 2008 and
2009 by the recession. harder than most. so it might be somewhat vulnerable. but bear in mind, $2.6 trillion. this this is isn't syria, this isn't libya or iran or iraq or some other country that by comparison would feel the squeeze more. this is one of the great nations of the world, and it could with stand a lot. plus, there must be unity, specifically from the european -- not so much from the american part, from the european part, to make this stick. and this is why. if you look at russia, one of their biggest trading partners out there is germany. germany. $74 billion worth of trade with russia every year. beyond that, china. almost $88 billion worth of trade. germany is showing reluctance to go along with a big-time economic impact in russia. china would almost certainly not go along with such a thing. if none of that falls by the wayside, the impact becomes
blunt, and russia, with its gdp and trade might be able to withstand it, especially because of this. russia remains a big oil and natural gas producer for europe, and about 24% of the oil and natural gas, natural gas from russia, goes to germany right now. and another 24% goes to eastern european nations. so the bottom line is, if you hurt russia, this can be used for russia to hurt other nations back. and that's not even counting the general spillover effect, which could happen if you look at the whole impact of the region. if you hurt russia with its economy, the spillover is going to affect a lot of places out in here, some places here. and if that happens, those nations may squawk, saying they are hurt by the recession, not ready to hurt again. it makes a difficult job for the united states and european powers to really pull together all the political and economic
powers they would need to actually have an impact on russia. wolf? >> talking about sanctions clearly easier than actually imposing real payable sanctions on russia. good explanation, tom. thanks very much. up next, as the u.s. threatens vladimir putin with those sanctions, president obama may not be able to back up that support from some of his closest allies in europe. we're going to explain what's going on. and later, ukraine poses a tough policy challenge for president obama. but will it unite members of congress against russia? gloria borger standing by. wow, my headache is gone. excedrin really does work fast. not gonna happen. excedrin ends headaches fast. in fact for some, relief starts in just 15 minutes. excedrin. headache. gone. predibut, manufacturings a prettin the united states do. means advanced technology. we learned that technology allows us to be craft oriented.
calling on u.s. allies trying to drum up support. there appears to be a division among european countries on what to do about this crisis in ukraine. becky anderson is joining us, just outside number 10 downing street in london. becky, we got a peek, almost literally, with a photograph of a document being carried into the british prime minister's office. what did we learn from this picture? >> reporter: well, whether it was simple carelessness, wolf, on the part of a senior british official, or as some are suggesting here, by deliberate design, the display of that document which was a foreign office dropped document for the national security council here on russia. the display of it and what it said supports the notion that the u.k. would see long-term economic consequences which would be severe of any trade sanctions on russia. just before the break, talking about just how important individual e.u. countries are
with their bilateral relationships with russia and u.k., for example, investing $60 billion annually. coming back this way to the center, something like $40 billion. so you could understand the bilateral trade relations here are very, very important. listen, the official word from behind me at number 10 is that david cameron, the prime minister, is in lockstep with his international participants. but believe me when i say a cohesive e.u. policy on trade sanctions at this point will be very complicated and very costly. wolf? >> yeah, i totally agree. i think you're absolutely right. all right, becky, thanks very much. so if europe is so deeply divided over sanctions, where does that leave the united states? can the u.s. impose sanctions alone? let's bring in fareed zakari into this conversation, host of fareed zakari, gps.
what's the answer if the u.s. doesn't have support from critical european allies like germany for tough sanctions against russia, where does it leave all of us? >> reporter: it's very tough to do sanctions if you don't have the germans and the british on board. remember, europe imports almost 30% of its national gas -- of its energy from russia, from russian natural gas. sometimes it goes even higher than that. so they are going to be very reluctant to do the kind of comprehensive sanctions which would deprive them of that energy. and as you point out, london's role as a financial center is dependent upon other things, russia's capital. i think we should push for as comprehensive sanctions as we can get. you're never going to get totally comprehensive sanctions, but they do exact a price. and what we're trying to do here, as i see it, what the united states is trying to do with many members of the
international community, make russia pay some price, some significant price, isolate it, and send a signal that this is not how we want business to be conducted in the 21 s century. you're not going to be able to stop it in its tracks. you're not going to be able to send troops into crimea. but the fact that we can't get 100% leak proof sanctions doesn't mean we shouldn't try to raise the bar and exact some price. >> i would like you to listen, fareed, to what the secretary of state, john kerry, said in kiev today. he said this just before leaving the ukrainian capital. listen to this. >> russia, if you wanted to help deescalate the situation, could return its troops to the barracks, live by the 1997 base agreement, and deescalate. rather than expand their invasion. now, we would prefer that. i come here today at the instruction of president obama to make it absolutely clear, the
united states of america would prefer to see this deescalating. >> are you getting any indications that putin and the russians are about to deescalate this crisis? >> reporter: it doesn't appear to be. i think john kerry was in a sense hoping that what had worked perhaps en advertently in syria is going to work this time, where he put out a wish and the russians grabbed that wish. and said, fine, if that's what the plan is in syria, which is to get those chemical weapons out, we can try and make that happen. in this case, the russians are not trying to deescalate. what they're trying to do is lock in. lock in the gains they have made by making crimea essentially -- put it can outside of theel control of the ukrainian government. i think what we have to do is to deter russia from doing anything further in the ukraine, but also start recognizing that there has to be a political solution here, which will involve the russians. whether that involves some kind
of referendum on the status of crimea, special autonomous status -- remember, right now, crimea is essentially part of russia and has been taken over. we need to try to find a way to not let that stand as a fact of international life. and that involves dealing with the russians. so while i'm glad secretary of state went to kiev, he probably needs to go to moscow pretty soon. >> yeah, i suspect you're right on that. we'll see what happens. all right, fareed, thanks very much. up next, this escalating crisis in ukraine is certainly creating a foreign policy challenge for president obama, probably the most significant foreign policy challenge since taking office. so what will he do next? will he get support at home? will he get it around the world? our chief political analyst, gloria borger getting ready to weigh in. and later, vladimir putin has donned the u.s. and western allies for intervening in foreign countries in the past. how is he justifying his ukrainian intervention?
we're taking a closer look. [ male announcer ] she won't remember this, being carried in your arms... but after a morning spent in the caribbean, playing pirates with you in secret coves, an afternoon swimming with dolphins, finished with a movie watched against the setting sun... she won't exactly be short on memories. princess cruises, come back new. ♪
the escalating crisis in ukraine is raising more questions about president obama's foreign policy strategy. critics were quick to condemn the president's overall approach, options in this particular situation are limited. so how is the administration planning to respond to russia's actions in ukraine? our chief political analyst, gloria borger, is here with me. gloria, lots to discuss right now. sanctions. easier said than done. talk right now pretty cheap. getting everyone to impose sanctions, not that easy. >> this is a real leadership
challenge for the president. because the united states alone is not even among russia's top ten trading partners, okay? but when you look, we have $40 billion in exports. we looked at some of these numbers. in contrast, europe does about $460 billion of business with russia. russia is europe's biggest supplier of natural gas. and so when the president goes to our reluctant allies, some of whom include germany and great britain, he has to say, you've got to be in this with us and they say, well, that's easier for you to say than us because it's going to hurt us more. so he has to find some kind of balance, some kind of sanctions that everybody can sign on to that will actually do the damage they want to inflict on putin. >> some damage also for some of his critics, a lot in congress, republicans in particular, who say, you know what, he's to blame in effect for showing weakness over the first five
years of administration, encouraging someone like putin to make these bold moves in crimea. >> well, they say -- >> that's an accusation. >> they say as john mccain said the other day, that the president has been somewhat naive. remember when hillary clinton when she was secretary of state pushed the reset button with our relationship with russia. they would argue that the blurred red line in syria, where the united states vacillated, gave putin the opening to do what he wants to do in ukraine. having said all of that, you put it aside. and you look at the situation in congress right now, wolf, and ironically, the president has got a pretty united congress behind him, because there is nobody calling for troops on the ground. what they're calling for are force ohful sanctions. this loan guarantee is something that congress is going to support. they're having hearings this week. you could have legislation as early as next week. so while the president has trouble with our european
allies, he's not going to have a lot of trouble, ironically, here at home, because people want to do something forceful and strong, and so he's got congressional support. it's just a matter -- >> because you hear the argument. and i've heard it all day today, from some. why should the u.s. be more concerned about what's going on in ukraine than the rest of our nato and european allies? why is it always the united states? >> because we're the leader of the world, period. >> i know. but if the europeans and germany are not -- they're out rainfalled, but not ready to impose sanctions, why should the you see? >> they're outraged, because they believe this is going to hurt them more than it's going to hurt us. they believe we shouldn't be in a position of telling them what to do. because we're not going to bear most of the burden on this. these are domestic, political problems these leaders have to deal with at home. i think what obama has got to navigate is this very complex issue here of how much he can
get the germans to do. how much he can get the brits to do. and still make it hurt. and i would argue that's our role in the world. and for those who say the president is not a leader on the world stage, this is his opportunity to show whether he is or he isn't. >> see what happens. gloria, thanks very much. coming up, critics of president obama are piling on. lots of criticism over what's going on. so what are those creditics proposing to do? we'll take a closer look. and inside the hypocrisy of vladimir putin, condemning others what he's now doing himself in ukraine. stay with us. hey kevin...still eating chalk for heartburn? yeah... try new alka seltzer fruit chews. they work fast on heartburn and taste awesome. these are good. told ya! i'm feeling better already. [ male announcer ] new alka seltzer fruits chews. enjoy the relief!
defiance never grows old. citracal maximum. calcium citrate plus d. highly soluble, easily absorbed. he was a matted messiley in a small cage. ng day. so that was our first task, was getting him to wellness. without angie's list, i don't know if we could have found all the services we needed for our riley. from contractors and doctors to dog sitters and landscapers, you can find it all on angie's list. we found riley at the shelter, and found everything he needed at angie's list. join today at angieslist.com
here are the latest developments on the crisis in ukraine. the secretary of state, john kerry, is on his way to paris after meeting with the new ukrainian government in kiev, earlier today. both he and president obama made it clear in statements just a little while ago, they are united with the new government in ukraine and they're ready to stand with the ukrainian people against russia. adding to the tensions in crimea, now occupied by thousands of russian troops are reports russian warships have blocked the narrow kerch strait between crimea and russia. and president putin denied there are any russian troops in crimea. he said 22,000 armed forces there are, quote, self defense teams. with this action in ukraine's peninsula, vladimir putin appears to be displaying a
dangerous double standard, especially after lecturing the united states and its allies about the use of military force. brian todd is covering this part of the story for us. so what do you see? >> well, wolf, it wasn't that long ago he lectured the u.s. and its allies by using military force. a few months ago after the syrian chemical weapons attack and the u.s. considering a military strike on syria, vladimir putin was all over that. saying that the u.s. and his allies shouldn't be doing that. here's a quote from an op-ed piece he wrote in the "new york times" september 11th, 2013. quote, decisions affecting war and peace should happen only by consensus. we need to use the united nations security council. here we are, thousands of russian troops in crimea. he is threatening more. and the u. ncht security council certainly not part of his process there, wolf. he said today, if i take the decision to use military force, as if he hasn't already, it will be completely legitimate and correspond to international law. president obama coming on after that, saying i think president putin has a different set of
lawyers, interpreting things different ways. he is being prodded in different forms of hypocrisy, especially what he said about syria. >> that op-ed he wrote. he really lectured the united states. >> sure did. >> iraq and afghanistan, what nato air power did in line i can't. >> that's right. >> and so now people are saying, why were you lecturing them then if you go into crimea now. >> here's a quote from the op-ed, the quote alarming that military intervention didn't help conflicts in foreign countries, common place for the united states. fast forward to now. he's doing it in crimea also came five and a half years after he invaded georgia to try to focus forces in and assert his dominance over an internal dispute there. just when he was lecturing the u.s. not to do. so vladimir putin caught in various forms of hypocrisy now, last career and in georgia, this game we're playing constantly. >> brian todd reporting, thanks
president obama under fire for the administration crisis and some republicans saying the president gave russia a green light. senator john mccain here yesterday. >> in addition, incredible misreading of vladimir putin, his intentions and the world as we have it today. they keep denying, the president and the secretary of state, this is not east-west. this is not a return of the cold war. well, it isn't on our part, but
it certainly is on vladimir putin. this president, tell my famous overheard conversation, tell vladimir that i'll be more flexible when i'm re-elected. well, what is this flexibility gotten us? >> we're trusting them to do what they say. and that is a foolish, naive notion now. we are not modernizing our own capabilities, which creates more of a perception of weakness and it's encouraging even our allies to get into the nuclear business, because they're afraid we're no longer going to be capable of protecting them. >> look, people are looking at putin as one who wrestles bears and drills for oil. they look at our president as one who wears mom jeans and egive indicates and bloviates. >> commentator, michael smerconish, host of the new program here on cnn, starts this coming saturday, by the way, 9:00 a.m. eastern, saturday morning, smerconish.
that's the name of the show. michael, thanks very much. congratulations on the new show. >> thanks. >> let's talk about what we just heard. some of the president's supporters say these republicans have gone way too far in their criticism of the president. what say you? >> well, i agree that the criticism has gone too far, particularly where it's offered as far as i can discern, without any alternative. feckless is a word that i'm hearing. jimmy carter-esque is another word. take a look at the "new york post" lead editorial today, indicative of the criticism of the right of the president. what you don't find are specifics they think he should be pursuing. other than that saying vladimir putin is kicking sand in the face of the president, i really haven't heard anything substantive as to what he should do. they haven't wanted to play the military card, either. but the implication, wolf, is that militarily, we should be doing something, and i don't think the american people want that. >> yeah, well, i think in fairness to john mccain, he says, no boots on the ground, no military action, he was here
yesterday. but he does have three or four points that he says the u.s. could be doing right now, and maybe the administration will consider it. he talks about the magnitski act, so he has a few ideas. but for the most part, you're right. we're not hearing a whole lot of other proposals coming from the critics, other than the red line in syria, syrians used chemical warfare, killed hundreds of fellow citizens. the u.s. said it would take action and didn't. that's the argument you hear and that emboldened putin. >> i think that's a legitimate debate to have. whether the drawing of the red line in syria and then not acting on it has diminished our creditability. i think that's a fair subject of conversation. my own impression is that vladimir putin wouldn't have been impacted, regardless of what we had done in syria. he seems to march to the beat of his own drummer, particularly
where we're talking about territories that at one time were under the umbrella of the old soviet union. >> i think you're right. because you go back to august of 2008, when he saw that -- what he believed to be russian interests in play at georgia, a neighboring republic, republic of georgia. he moved troops into georgia at that time, as well, despite the criticism from the bush administration that poured out. he sees this as national interests. that's a lot more important than any kind of sanctions or political action that might be taken in retribution against them, right? >> it's hard tore me not to reflect on sochi and to think about the opening and the closing exercises, which seemed to be a real nostalgia play by putin, to ithe extent he had a hand in what messaging was. and i wonder if from a foreign policy perspective this too isn't a nostalgia play. that's how i interpret it. >> how do you think the criticism of the obama
administration's foreign policy over these past five years plays, for example, in other capitals, including moscow? >> well, i think probably in moscow, they wonder what happened to the days when we thumped our chests and we really were going to go into iraq or really were going to go into afghanistan. but we had two elections in this country now, and i think the message from those elections has been a message of restraint and diplomacy, and that's what the president has pursued. you know that some among us, regardless of what he says, regardless of what he does, if he's for it or against it -- if he's against it, they're for it. i don't know whether those tea leaves could be properly interpreted yoef overseas, but here at home that's what we reince the difference to be between obama and his predecessor. >> michael smerconish, thank you very much for joining us. >> thanks, wolf. and don't miss the debut of "smerconish," that's the name of the program, saturday morning, 9:00 a.m., eastern. michael, we will all be
watching. good luck with the new show. >> thank you. there was a big selloff of global markets yesterday as the ukraine crisis escalated. later i'll tell you if the sell offdeepens. up next, we hear glimmer of optimism about the peace threat in the middle today from israel. what the visiting israeli prime minister has said here in washington. [ male announcer ] this is kevin. to prove to you that aleve is the better choice for him, he's agreed to give it up. that's today? [ male announcer ] we'll be with him all day as he goes back to taking tylenol. i was okay, but after lunch my knee started to hurt again. and now i've got to take more pills. ♪ yup. another pill stop. can i get my aleve back yet? ♪ for my pain, i want my aleve. ♪ [ male announcer ] look for the easy-open red arthritis cap. ttdd# 1-800-345-2550 can take you in many directions. searching for trade ideas that spark your curiosity tdd# 1-800-345-2550 you read this. watch that.
tdd# 1-800-345-2550 you look for what's next. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 at schwab, we can help turn inspiration into action tdd# 1-800-345-2550 boost your trading iq with the help of tdd# 1-800-345-2550 our live online workshops tdd# 1-800-345-2550 like identifying market trends. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 now, earn 300 commission-free online trades. call 1-888-628-7118 or go to schwab.com/trading to learn how. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 sharpen your instincts with market insight from schwab tdd# 1-800-345-2550 experts like liz ann sonders and randy frederick. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 get support and talk through your ideas with our tdd# 1-800-345-2550 trading specialists. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 all with no trade minimum. and only $8.95 a trade. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 open an account and earn 300 commission-free online trades. call 1-888-628-7118 to learn more. so you can take charge of your trading. i've got a nice long life ahead. big plans. so when i found out
medicare doesn't pay all my medical expenses, i looked at my options. then i got a medicare supplement insurance plan. [ male announcer ] if you're eligible for medicare, you may know it only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. call now and find out about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans, it helps pick up some of what medicare doesn't pay. and could save you in out-of-pocket medical costs. to me, relationships matter. i've been with my doctor for 12 years. now i know i'll be able to stick with him. [ male announcer ] with these types of plans, you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. plus, there are no networks, and virtually no referrals needed. so don't wait. call now and request this free decision guide to help you better understand medicare...
and which aarp medicare supplement plan might be best for you. there's a wide range to choose from. we love to travel -- and there's so much more to see. so we found a plan that can travel with us. anywhere in the country. [ male announcer ] join the millions of people who have already enrolled in the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp, an organization serving the needs of people 50 and over for generations. remember, all medicare supplement insurance plans help cover what medicare doesn't pay. and could save you in out-of-pocket medical costs. call now to request your free decision guide. and learn more about the kinds of plans that will be here for you now -- and down the road. i have a lifetime of experience. so i know how important that is.
prime minister benjamin netanyahu urges caution when it comes to eairan. in a speech today here in washington, the prime minister warned about iran's nuclear ambitions. >> iran doesn't want a peaceful nuclear program. iran wants a military nuclear program. i said it here once. i'll say it here again. if it looks like a duck, if it walks like a duck, if it quacks like a duck, then what is it? well, it ain't a chicken. and it's certainly not a dove. it's still a nuclear duck. let's bring in jenny herman,
former congresswoman from california. he's making it abundantly clear, jane, that he disagrees with the president of the united states and the secretary of state on the effectiveness, if you will, of this interim nuclear deal with iran. >> sort of. i'm trying to figure out whether the metaphor of the duck is better or worse than the hot water bottle with the line across it that he showed at the u.n. but i think, i've heard him say and i just heard the israeli minister of intelligence, who's very closely aligned with him say that they are not against diplomacy, they just want the final deal to deter an arms race in the middle east and truly protect israel and u.s. interests. and, therefore, they think zero enrichment has to be part of the final deal. so i don't think he is against diplomacy. we could argue whether that's achievable and whether the u.s. will support that position, but i think that it does not put him against our strategy in iran.
>> is zero enrichment something the iranian would say agree to? >> they're saying of course not. but the point that they just made at the wilson center 30 minutes ago was if they have to choose between enriching on their soil, he's not against their having a civil nuclear program, he just doesn't want them to have the enrichment capability. if they have to choose between enriching on their soil and getting their economy back and actually building their economy, they're going to choose their economy. now, i don't know how they think, but certainly his point is no one is buying the charm offensive of the new iranian government in the middle east. no one in the middle east is buying it. he says the west is buying it and i have seen rouhani and talked at length to many in our government who are negotiating this. i can't tell you what the final deal could look like but i have to say i know a lot of people are listening to him since he's
come to washington. >> as far as the israeli-palestinian peace process, the prime minister actually sounded a bit optimistic today. i'll play a little clip. listen to this. >> peace is israel's highest aspiration. i'm prepared to make a historic peace with our palestinian neighbors. a peace that would end a century of conflict and bloodshed. this would be good for us, this would be good for the palestinians. but peace would also open up the possibility of establishing formal ties between israel and leading countries in the arab world. >> sort of sounds a little bit like john kerry. i've heard john kerry make those same points, and jeffrey goldbe goldberg, who was here on our program yesterday when he interviewed the president of the united states about the peace process yesterday, he tweeted
that netanyahu was selling the benefits of peace, hopeful move. are you hopeful? >> i am hopeful and i applaud the speech. his reference to a moral divide, you can be on the right side or the wrong side i thought was extremely powerful, and no one is missing, certainly i'm not missing this con gruence of interest on iran between israel and her sunni neighbors. and finally the possibilities, and netanyahu said this, of a regional economic powerhouse leveraging israel's strengths and the strengths of many arab countries is becoming something people are willing to entertain. there's been a saudi peace initiative on the table, you know this, wolf, for 12 years. no one has really moved toward it. but this was the first speech that netanyahu has given that gave me real hope. you can hear some of president
obama's words in his words but you can really feel the influence of john kerry, whom he called indom itable. i've got to say this, wolf, i saw kerry speak to apac last night, a long, thorough speech. then he got on an airplane and i saw him putting roses on the graves of the 82 opposition folks who died in kiev, ukraine. and all of this in one -- less than a news cycle. the guy is astonishingly impressive. >> he's got a lot of energy indeed. jane, thanks very much. up next, markets around the world in a big sell-off yesterday on the crisis in ukraine. we're going to the new york stock exchange. what a difference a day makes. why? predibut, manufacturings a prettin the united states do. means advanced technology. we learned that technology allows us to be craft oriented. no one's losing their job. there's no beer robot that has suddenly chased them out.
olympic winter games ever, with the most coverage of the most events on every device. and the most hours of streaming video on the nbc sports live extra app, including the x1 platform from xfinity. comcast was honored to bring every minute of every medal of nbcuniversal's coverage to every screen. so what's next? rio 2016. welcome to what's next. comcast nbcuniversal. president obama says his proposed 2015 budget will help low and middle income families
while also growing the economy and creating jobs. he outlined his plan in a speech just a little while ago. he said he wants to expand tax credits for lower income americans and says he'll do it by closing loopholes that ben fit wealthier individuals. >> right now our tax system provides benefits to wealthy individuals who save, even after they have amassed multimillion dollar retirement accounts. by closing that loophole, we can help create jobs and grow the economy and expand opportunity without adding a dime to the deficit. >> the president also wants to expand the earned income tax credit for the working poor without children. his budget would also expand the child and dependent care tax credit and create automatic iras to help workers save for retirement but it's unlikely those plans will get through congress. he needs legislation to enact all of that and that does not look likely. global markets are rebounding today as investors digest the situation in ukraine. even the dow jones flew out of
the gate this morning. alison kosik is over at the new york stock exchange. how much have we bounced back today? >> quite a bit. what a difference a day makes. even the s&p 500 at a record high. the dow up 200 points, 205 points. all 30 stocks in the dow are in the green. very different story yesterday. it was a sea of red. we also saw that turn-around happening overseas, all the way -- there were those down arrows we saw yesterday in europe, asia, russia, they all turned up today. analysts say investors today aren't on red alert. it's not such a dire situation. i think when putin spoke and said russia doesn't want to annex crimea, analysts said that the ukraine should fade as an issue. through these geopolitical events markets become volatile but wind up recovering after a week or two, but that volatility will continue. >> the roller coaster will continue, i suspect, for several
days, up and down, up and down. we'll see what happens tomorrow and the rest of today. allison, thanks very much. that's it for me. for our international viewers, am am am amanpour is next. "newsroom" starts right now. i'm brianna keilar in for brook baldwin. president obama and his secretary of state reject russia's reasoning for what's happening in ukraine. right now ukrainian ministry officials say at least 16,000 russian troops are in ukraine's heavily pro-russia state of cr if the m imea. but john kerry who visited the capitol of kiev and president obama insisted what vlad