ms. psaki: the u.s. is leading the global effort to -- we have been engaged with ukrainians on a daily basis and have provided more assistance than any country in the world. there would not be the unity in financial actions without the u.s. we are putting the ukrainians in a position of increasing strength in their negotiations. >> does the u.s. play any concrete role in facilitating talks? ms. psaki: we are supporting efforts by a range of features including president erdogan, our turkish air israelis, the french and others who are engaging directly with president putin over this. >> we talked about a lot of work. long-term strategy. supporting manufacturing in the u.s., semi conductors. is there something you want to point to that the white house is doing to provide short-term relief, immediate relief? ms. psaki: i would say a huge part of what we have done has had an impact already. one is inflationary pressures have been caused by the pandemic and getting the pandemic under control. we have seen hosp

ms. psaki: sure. as has been set in the past, long as they choose to put dissipate in them, of course. we tried to boost them by providing not just economic and humanitarian assistance, but military assistance. we believe it strengthens their position in these talks. our view continues to be that despite words that are 70 stocks coming out of the stocks, diplomacy requires engaging in good faith to de-escalate, and what we are really looking for is evidence of that. we are not seeing any evidence at this point that president putin is doing anything to stop the onslaught for de-escalate. that is really what we would be looking for. >> what are the consequences for china if they do aid russia? ms. psaki: i am not going to get into specific consequences, i think what we have conveyed and what was conveyed by our national security this meeting is that should they provide military or other assistance, that would of course violate sanctions or support the war effort there would be significant consequent is

ms. psaki: to wait to what? >> not providing migs, you said that is a high risk. why is that a higher risk than not providing them? ms. psaki: what our assessment is based on is how to prevent a world war here, which is a significant weight that the intelligence community, the defense department, and the president of the united states weighs at every moment. host: your message to congress on the invasion in ukraine. cindy, your first up. caller: good morning. i really do not know what the answer is. i feel like we should have shown strength before this happened. and i feel like the horse is out of the barn now. i do think we have to be careful about the aid, because even my own kids, who do not really follow politics, not especially religious, they are really fearful, and my heart breaks for the younger generation. they are getting slammed here. they are losing hope for our country and our future. and it is very sad. i think really, they already know we are weak. so i feel like what we should really do, and i am going to go back to the oil, let's pump our own oil

ms. psaki: best -- pres. levits: yes. our opinion is that we should give to ukraine all what ukraine needs in order to defend for their selfdefense against russian aggression. but we don't have plans. it is up to the nations which could make the planes. there are different opinions. but we're considering each day how it is possible to help ukraine. we discussed at the moment the most effective military help to ukraine is to give antitank missiles and antiaircraft missiles. and ukraine is getting this and we will increase our military help and i think this would considerably strengthen the ukrainian side in this war. missy: well, unfortunately, we are going to have to leave it there. president levits, thank you so much for joining us for "washington post live." and thank you for joining us here today. remember, you can go to washingtonpostlive.com for information about our future programming, and i hope you can tune in again soon. thanks, again, and have a great day. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2022]

ms. psaki: to wait to what? >> not providing migs, you said that is a high risk. why is that a higher risk than not providing them? ms. psaki: what our assessment is based on is how to prevent a world war here, which is a significant weight that the intelligence community, the defense department, and the president of the united states weighs at every moment. host: your message to congress on the invasion in ukraine. cindy, your first up. caller: good morning. i really do not know what the answer is. i feel like we should have shown strength before this happened. and i feel like the horse is out of the barn now. i do think we have to be careful about the aid, because even my own kids, who do not really follow politics, not especially religious, they are really fearful, and my heart breaks for the younger generation. they are getting slammed here. they are losing hope for our country and our future. and it is very sad. i think really, they already know we are weak. so i feel like what we should really do, and i am going to go back to the oil, let's pump our own oil

ms. sherman: you heard jen psaki say this morning -- everything is on the table. mrs. wagner: with all due respect, madam secretary, we are importing the -- mr. meeks: the gentlelady's time has expired. ms. waler in: $ -- mrs. wagner: six million barrels a day. mr. meeks: i represent dina titus for five minutes. ms. titus: i want to get back to this topic at hand, the 2001 aumf. throughout the course of the war, both democrats and the republicans and the administration have used pretty creative interpretations of the aumf to justify the use of force to eliminate terrorists and their associates. in many of these instances, areas that are densely populated and often are on occasions people gathered for weddings or funerals or meals, you have had civilians who have been the result of an attack and there have been casualties. you saw that in syria. you saw it just recently when the kabul strike last year. i wonder what we are doing to try to protect against the civilian casualties when we go after people using this authority in the aumf? and i could ask ms. krass or whoeve

. >> i'm aware of what jen psaki said that my question to ms. sherman -- [inaudible] >> i think we need to consider all of the options here given the aggression of vladimir putin. >> i agree with you that a follow-up do you think we should not importing russian oil to finance their war machine? >> i think congressman and considering this we need to thinkhr through what this will mean for the american consumer as well. the president said last night he wants to understand the americans are facing high gas prices at the pump when they go to fill their cars as some of your colleagues have said this morning as well so as we make our choices here about the sanctions against russia and the consequences that could and has to pay the president said last night he wanted to make sure that we mitigate as much as possible the cost to the american public into and to american citizens in their day delay -- day-to-day lives. they are decisions that we are making carefully on behalf of american consumers and american citizens. >> what is more important cost of g