David E. Sanger, a White House and national security correspondent for The New York Times, dives into the alarming breach of the U.S. telephone network by Chinese hackers. He reveals how outdated infrastructure was exploited, leading to serious national security concerns. Sanger discusses China's evolving cyber capabilities under Xi Jinping, marking a shift in power dynamics. The conversation also touches on the urgency of encrypted communications and the wider implications of these incidents for global cybersecurity strategies.

For months, President Biden has been wrestling with one of the most vexing questions in the war in Ukraine: whether to risk letting Ukrainian forces run out of the artillery rounds they desperately need to fight Russia, or agree to ship them cluster munitions — widely banned weapons known to cause grievous injury to civilians, especially children. On Friday, the Biden administration announced that it would send the weapons, which have been outlawed by many of Washington's closest allies.David E. Sanger, a White House and national security correspondent for The New York Times, tells the story behind the president’s contentious decision.Guest: David E. Sanger, a White House and national security correspondent for The New York Times.Background reading: With Ukraine burning through stockpiles of conventional artillery, Mr. Biden concluded that he had little choice but to provide the weapons.Read The New York Times Editorial Board’s piece on “the flawed moral logic of sending cluster munitions to Ukraine.”For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday.  Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.

For decades, the U.S. has walked a careful line when it comes to Taiwan — vowing to protect the island from China, without saying exactly how far it would go to do that.On Monday, that appeared to change.Guest: David E. Sanger, a White House and national security correspondent for The New York Times.Want more from The Daily? For one big idea on the news each week from our team, subscribe to our newsletter. Background reading: President Biden’s seemingly offhand remarks about Taiwan, made during his visit to Asia, caught some of his staff by surprise.The Russian invasion of Ukraine has been closely watched by those in Taiwan who feel that their island faces a similar threat from Beijing.For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday.  Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.

David E. Sanger, a White House and national security correspondent for The New York Times, discusses the alarming first major cyberattack of the 2024 election cycle. He breaks down how Iranian hackers targeted both Donald Trump's and Joe Biden's campaigns, revealing the geopolitical tensions and ethical dilemmas surrounding news coverage of such incidents. Sanger emphasizes the vital importance of maintaining election integrity amidst these threats, while shedding light on the broader implications of foreign interference as the election approaches.

A week ago, the world discovered that dozens of classified documents from the American government had been leaked online, including highly sensitive information about Russia’s war in Ukraine and damaging revelations on American spying abroad.David E. Sanger, a national security correspondent for The Times, explains the contents of the leak and what it might mean for the war.Guest: David E. Sanger, a White House and national security correspondent for The New York Times.Background reading: How the latest leaked documents are different from past breaches.A quick guide to what the leaked U.S. intelligence documents say.For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday. Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.

It has been three weeks since the war in Ukraine began. The fighting grinds on and there is no clear end in sight. But what are the potential paths forward in the coming days and weeks?On Wednesday, President Volodymyr Zelensky, in an address to Congress, proposed one such path, though it is an incredibly unlikely one: a no-fly zone over Ukraine.Elsewhere, Times reporting has suggested four other potential scenarios — a diplomatic end to the conflict; protracted monthslong fighting; China coming to Russia’s rescue; and President Vladimir V. Putin expanding the conflict beyond Ukraine’s borders.We explore these scenarios and consider which of them is most likely to occur.Guest: David E. Sanger, a White House and national security correspondent for The New York Times.Have you lost a loved one during the pandemic? The Daily is working on a special episode memorializing those we have lost to the coronavirus. If you would like to share their name on the episode, please RECORD A VOICE MEMO and send it to us at thedaily@nytimes.com. You can find more information and specific instructions here.Background reading: The United States accurately predicted the start of the war in Ukraine, sounding the alarm that an invasion was imminent despite Moscow’s denials and Europe’s skepticism. Predicting how it might end is proving far more difficult.In a speech to Congress, President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine called for a no-fly zone and more weapons to combat Russia’s assault and implored President Biden to be “the leader of peace.”Want more from The Daily? For one big idea on the news each week from our team, subscribe to our newsletter. For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday.  Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.

For decades, nuclear weapons did not figure prominently in China’s military planning. However, recent satellite images suggest that the country may be looking to quintuple its nuclear arsenal. Why is China changing strategy now?Guest: David E. Sanger, a White House and national security correspondent for The New York Times.  Sign up here to get The Daily in your inbox each morning. And for an exclusive look at how the biggest stories on our show come together, subscribe to our newsletter. Background reading: Is China scrapping its “minimum deterrent” strategy and joining an arms race? Or is it merely looking to create a negotiating card?For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday.  Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.

As the horrors of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine have became clearer, the Biden administration has pivoted to a more aggressive stance, with officials talking about constraining Moscow as a global power.But that is an escalation, and escalations can go wrong.Guest: David E. Sanger, a White House and national security correspondent for The New York Times. Want more from The Daily? For one big idea on the news each week from our team, subscribe to our newsletter. Background reading: The United States toughened its messaging on the Ukraine war, saying that the American aim was not just to thwart the Russian invasion but also to weaken Russia so it could no longer carry out such military aggression anywhere.The change in stance could signal a situation that pits Washington more directly against Moscow.For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday. Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.

The last few days in Afghanistan have been chaotic as the Taliban retake control of the country.The debacle can be traced to a number of assumptions that guided the execution of the U.S. withdrawal from the country after two decades of war.How could those assumptions have proved so wrong, so quickly?Guest: David E. Sanger, a White House and national security correspondent for The New York Times.Sign up here to get The Daily in your inbox each morning. And for an exclusive look at how the biggest stories on our show come together, subscribe to our newsletter. Background reading: An Afghan military that did not believe in itself and a U.S. effort that President Biden, and most Americans, no longer believed in brought an ignoble end to the United States’ longest war.A takeover of the whole of Afghanistan was all but absolute as the government collapsed and the U.S. rushed through a frenzied evacuation.For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday.  Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.

The diplomatic talks in Geneva this week are of a kind not seen in a long time: an effort to defuse the possibility of a major war in Europe.President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia has amassed military equipment and personnel on the border with Ukraine.President Biden has warned that there will be consequences if Mr. Putin decides to invade, but what can Washington do to impel the Kremlin to back down?Guest: David E. Sanger, a White House and national security correspondent for The New York Times.Sign up here to get The Daily in your inbox each morning. And for an exclusive look at how the biggest stories on our show come together, subscribe to our newsletter. Background reading: Russia and the United States expressed some optimism after negotiations in Geneva, but they did not break an impasse over Moscow’s demand that Ukraine never become a member of NATO.Can the West stop Russia from invading Ukraine? Here’s a guide to what’s at stake.For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedailyTranscripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday. Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.