A rush transcript of "This Week with George Stephanopoulos" airing on Sunday, April 24, 2022 on ABC News is below. This copy may not be in its final form, may be updated and may contain minor transcription errors. For previous show transcripts, visit the "This Week" transcript archive.

       MARTHA RADDATZ, ABC HOST: And we are joined now by Yevheniia Kravchuk, a member of Ukraine’s parliament and close ally to President Zelenskyy. Good morning.

       I want to ask you first, President Zelenskyy announced a visit of Defense Secretary Austin and Secretary Blinken, what do you want from that visit? How significant is it?

       KRAVCHUK: Thank you for having me and good morning.

       I think that visit of Blinken and Austin is really, really symbolical. And probable (ph) signal to Russia that Ukraine will not be left alone with this war. America is clearly the leader of free world and, of course, we expect three main things with our close ally and close partner with (inaudible) -- the United States, is having -- it’s have weapons, it’s sanctions on Russia, and, of course, financial aid.

       This is three core issues that have to be dealt with right now. Why do we need heavy (ph) weapons? Because part of Ukraine is still occupied and it was occupied since February 24, when the full-scale invasions (ph) target. We need to liberate our people who are in the Southern and Eastern Ukraine. And that’s why we need these defensive weapons.

       Also, why it is important that United States gives the offensive heavy weapons, until we (inaudible). Because it’s sort of a green light to other countries in Europe, for example, to give these weapons as well.

       RADDATZ: If you get all the weapons you need and President Zelenskyy has seemed pretty satisfied of late saying we will be able to show the occupiers that the day when they will be forced to leave Ukraine is approaching. Are you confident the Russians won’t take the Donbas?

       KRAVCHUK: You see it’s a matter of time when we get these heavy (ph) weapons to the South and to Eastern Ukraine. And also what is crucial is the -- we need more weapons that would burn (ph) everything. Because right now Russians are putting artillery, tanks, everything they have and also they bombed civilians to terrorize the whole country. I mean, they bombed Odessa which is a southern city on the Black Sea yesterday with missiles and the missile clearly targeted the house -- the building where civilians were at, killing 3-months-old child.

       So as -- one, as we’re getting more than we burden (ph) everyday, we are capable of winning and we’re capable of kicking Russians out because that’s the way how to end this -- to end this war.

       RADDATZ: There are still reports of 120,000 civilians in Mariupol, is there any chance for humanitarian corridor at this point?

       KRAVCHUK: Yesterday Russians did not let the humanitarian corridor to work, this green (ph) corridor. Hundreds of people were gathered at one point to go out of Mariupol and Russian soldiers just came and said no, we’re not allowing this to happen. And what they’re trying to do, they’re trying to make the forcible duplications (ph) to Russian territory from Mariupol.

       They take people, they even take children that lost their parents, and they sent them to (inaudible). (Inaudible) is like thousands of miles from Mariupol. And we do not know how to bring them back to Ukraine. They have pulled these people from Mariupol -- they are put to filtration camps. Man taken -- trying to be forcibly taken to Russian Army to find Ukrainian soldiers, you know, it’s sort of something that can’t be happening in the 21st Century.

       And we really hope that maybe with help of other Western leaders, other leaders of similar worlds (ph), we will be able to take out the kids and women who are still in the basements of the (inaudible) in Mariupol.

       RADDATZ: We are all hoping for the same and we appreciate you joining us this morning. Please stay safe.

       KRAVCHUK: Thank you for having me.

       RADDATZ: Now let's bring in ABC News contributor and former U.S. ambassador to NATO, Doug Lute.

       Good morning, Ambassador.

       You were there with us in Ukraine. Just before the invasion, you've watched this conflict play out. We saw Russian failures in Kyiv but now they’re regrouping, trying to take the Donbas region. Can they do that?

       LT GEN DOUG LUTE, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO NATO, U.S. ARMY (RET) & ABC NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: Well, you know, Martha, the problems that the Russian army demonstrated in phase one of this fight, in and around Kyiv, where they failed, Ukrainians outmatched them. Those same shortfalls by the Russian military, I think, will be on display again in the Donbas.

       You can't reform an army in a matter of a couple of weeks. This is the same Russian army, so I expect many of the same failures.

       RADDATZ: And yet they have a shorter supply line, correct, because they're closer to their own territory?

       LUTE: That helps. There's no question that one of the challenges they had in phase one in and around Kyiv were these long, exposed supply lines where the Russian resupply assets were largely road-bound and vulnerable.

       So that's an advantage in phase two for the Russians. But if they're still fighting on Ukrainian territory, and I give the qualitative edge, the moral factors, the plus to the Ukrainians.

       RADDATZ: And you're fighting for your own cities and towns. That's a motivator.

       LUTE: Absolutely. There's nothing, there's nothing that surmounts that. The Ukrainians are fighting for their live, they're fighting for their own country and the Russians can't match that.

       RADDATZ: And you saw, of course, this week the $800 million package with more heavy artillery, those tactical drones. Can that make a real difference? That really does help.

       LUTE: That can make a real difference because this begins to close the quantitative gap between the Ukrainians and the Russians. In fact, some estimates are now that the Ukrainians have as many tanks on the battlefield as the Russians.

       RADDATZ: If not more, right?

       LUTE: If not more.

       Now, the reality here is that many of the tanks the Ukrainians now have are the ones deserted or abandoned by the Russians. So this imbalance in quantitative factors like tanks and artillery and so forth is beginning to get righted in the favor of the Ukrainians.

       RADDATZ: I know you're optimistic that the Ukrainians can hold this territory. If they don't, if -- if they don't hold the Donbas, what about that land bridge? That is a hugely significant area.

       LUTE: Well, the Russians largely have a land bridge now between mainland Russia and the Crimea peninsula, which is important because after the Russians seized Crimea in 2014, Crimea was largely isolated, very difficult to resupply and so forth. In fact, the Russians had to build a bridge to Crimea just to resupply it. Now they have a land bridge. So they have the roads, they have the railroads and so forth.

       But seizing that territory in the south is not the same as holding it. And the Russians now face the remnants of the -- the Ukrainian military in that area, but also the Ukrainian population. They're still in for a fight in the south.

       RADDATZ: What do you think Russia's ultimate goal is here? Have they given up on Kyiv?

       LUTE: And so I think Kyiv is beyond their means. They simply can't -- they can't seize Kyiv, they can't replace the Zelenskyy government.

       I think they're still looking for opportunities to figure out what their goals are. They're sort of making it up as they go along.

       Putin is trying to -- trying to access what might be possible. He's looking for opportunities. And he'll grab the first good one available. Right now there don’t seem to be many good opportunities for Vladimir Putin.

       RADDATZ: President Zelenskyy recently said the Russian invasion of Ukraine was intended only as a beginning. They want to capture other countries. Do you agree with that? And is it possible?

       LUTE: Well, I -- I think he would like to do that. President Putin would like to do that. He would like to expand the power of Russia in his neighborhood. He would like to recreate something like the old Russian empire. But it's not within his means. There's a big gap here between his -- his aims and his means.

       RADDATZ: Does it surprise you how little we seem to know about how bad the Russian army was. I mean we -- our intelligence was good about they're going in, they're going to try to do this, they're going to try and do that. But -- but we seem flat-footed on knowing how bad they were (ph).

       LUTE: Well, we're quite good at -- at counting and accessing those things which are quantifiable, those things that we can see. So, numbers of tanks or numbers of troops amassed on the Ukrainian border pre-invasion. So we're quite good at that. And we got the call right with regard to the Russian intent to invade.

       Where we're less good and -- and, frankly, it's much harder to -- to qualify the -- the intangibles. So, the morale of the Russian forces, the morale of the Ukrainian forces, leadership, unit cohesion, discipline, trainings. And we -- here is where we have a gap in our intelligence, I think. It's very difficult to judge those factors.

       RADDATZ: And -- and you're a former NATO ambassador. Do you think NATO has done enough and were they quick enough and will it hold together?

       LUTE: So, the key thing that NATO has achieved is solidarity. So, NATO today stands as 30 -- all 30 members shoulder by shoulder. And that's enormously important.

       The heavy equipment that you mentioned earlier, it is beginning to flow. And that's coming largely from NATO -- NATO member states. That's hugely important.

       The key going forward though, especially as we look towards the late June summit, NATO summit in Madrid, is that President Biden, Secretary-General Stoltenberg, keeps this alliance glued together at 30 so that they speak as one.

       RADDATZ: And -- and just very quickly if you could, Ambassador, does diplomacy have a chance between Ukraine and Russia?

       LUTE: Not yet. I don't think that the situation on the battlefield yet lends itself to some sort of diplomatic, compromise solution. Both sides still imagine that they can win this.

       RADDATZ: OK, thanks for joining us this morning. Always good to see you.

       LUTE: You're welcome.

       (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

       DR. ANTHONY FAUCI, DIRECTOR, NIAID: It was perfectly logical for the CDC to say, wait a minute, we were planning on ending this mandate on a certain date. Let’s wait a period of time until May 3rd. So, for a court to come in and interfere in that is really unfortunate.

       (END VIDEO CLIP)

       MARTHA RADDATZ, ABC “THIS WEEK” CO-ANCHOR: Dr. Anthony Fauci criticizing the ruling from a federal judge in Florida that struck down a CDC’s travel mask mandate. The Biden administration is now appealing the decision.

       Let’s discuss with Dr. Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota.

       Good morning, Doctor.

       Let’s go straight to that issue. If that is not overturn, what does that do to the CDC’s authority going forward in any other health crisis?

       DR. MICHAEL OSTERHOLM, DIRECTOR, CENTER FOR INFECTIOUS DISEASE RESEARCH & POLICY: Well, I think it is a real challenge because this is not going to be the last of the need for public health measures we’ve taken for any crisis. And what could be the crisis of tomorrow?

       So, on precedence, this case is very, very important. I think the confusion around the mask mandate itself and how effective it is, is a secondary issue, but one that is still important, too.

       RADDATZ: And let’s go to that. The overall mask mandate is totally confusing, especially this week. Mandates lifted. Mandates returned, reinstated, lifted again.

       You told “The New York Times” this week -- public health advice has been way off the mark all along about mask protection.

       So, what do you see is the best guidance?

       OSTERHOLM: Well, it is off. First of all, let me be really clear, I am very, very strongly in support of a respiratory protection. Someone can do a great deal to protect themselves and protect others if they’re using an N95 respirator.

       But this virus is transferred by what we call aerosols. It’s very fine particles that float into the air. It’s like smoke. It’s like perfume. And you have to have a high quality respiratory protection device to protect yourself.

       What happens is airplanes today is really more just check a box. It is not effective. Why? Because first of all, you have most people not wearing N95. They’re wearing a face cloth covering or even a surgical mask, which is not effective in reducing transmission.

       And then when you got on board, if you’re eating or drinking, you don’t have to have something on your face.

       And then, finally, about a quarter of all people wear it underneath their nose, which is likely closing only three to five screen doors on your submarine. And so, that from that perspective, it really isn’t all that effective.

       And so, I think that what we want to do is stop talking about mask and talking about effective respirator protection.

       RADDATZ: And how do you that? You talked about flying -- I flew across the country this week. About a fifth of the people maybe had a mask on. The others seemed jubilant that they didn’t have to wear a mask.

       So, how do you really return to that, or advise people whether -- they seemed done with it.

       OSTERHOLM: Well, first of all, the U.S. public is done with the pandemic, even though the virus is not done with us. And we have to recognize that in public health. You know, you can’t swim against a tide this magnitude.

       So, what is it that we can do? Well, we have to have credibility. And again, what has happened is this has become a really a philosophical and political issue, not a science issue.

       So, I -- the media at the very outset is one of the problems. They keep talking about masks. That’s like talking about a difference between a condom that’s intact and a condom that has a hundred holes in it. But it’s a condom.

       No, there’s very different effectiveness as using these different approaches.

       And so, from my perspective, I would say particularly if you’re an immune-compromised individual, someone who’s at serious risked of illness and serious illness, you need to wear that N95 respirator. If everybody can do that, they would keep in on to the duration of a flight, not wear it underneath their nose, then that would be a very effective way to have a mandate.

       What we’re doing is now is we are literally just basically addressing a political issue, not a science issue.

       RADDATZ: And let’s talk about the big picture about the state of the pandemic right now. Here’s what health experts wrote in “The Washington Post” this week: The United States has experienced a concerning rise in cases in recent weeks because of the spread of new omicron subvariant. Failing to take this seriously could put vulnerable Americans at risk. We fear that Americans don’t have a good sense of a true state of the pandemic.

       So, what is the true state of the pandemic right now? I know people who are vaccinated, boosted who got seriously ill. But are most people who get this, just common cold symptoms?

       OSTERHOLM: You know, Martha, every day is a brand new day with this pandemic, relative to the variants.

       You know, three weeks ago, we would not be talking about the variants. We’re now talking about it. And any one of them has the ability to evade immune protection, meaning previous vaccine protection or previous protection you got from having had COVID maybe in jeopardy.

       We know that we have strains that are much more infectious, so that, you know, you can’t come up with an answer today to say this is where we’re at because tomorrow, it could change.

       Having said that, we are in a very difficult place in terms of interpreting for the public the fact that we’re at all time lows for hospitalizations in this country. We’re at all time lows for a number of people in ICU beds. That’s all good news.

       But, yes, the case numbers are increasing. But they’re increasing also at levels of, you know, basically doubling -- 10 to 20 is very different than doubling 20,000 to 40,000. And so, the numbers are still relatively low.

       But I want to emphasize that could all change tomorrow, and that’s what the public is not willing to hear. They want this to be over.

       And we have to just say with humility and honesty -- I don’t know what this next 210-mile-an-hour curveball is going to be throwing at us by these variants.

       RADDATZ: Thank you for explaining that so carefully and efficiently. Thanks for joining us this morning.