tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN June 5, 2014 10:00am-12:01pm EDT
e-verification been around and no one is using it. guest: always nice to hear about port lucie. work there a any years ago. it was a little bit closer to 11 million. in the last couple of years that has reversed, and we are back close to 12 million. you mentioned something and little bit about criminals that has been released by the obama administration, by immigration enforcement apparatus. those numbers -- i think the numbers you said -- i will not dispute the numbers at all -- but what was going on in a lot of cases was these were people who served their time in the united states, finished their sentences, and they were in this deportation process where in a lot of cases it was difficult back to -- it was difficult to deport them back to the countries for a variety of
reasons. laces we cannot deport people to, like cuba, for example. and our job is not to house these people, to house people strictly for criminal violations. that is our role. so if they have completed their senses through the u.s. -- their sentences through the u.s. criminal justice system, there is not much we can do. they focused on people who committed recent crimes. unfortunately we are tight on time. we have been speaking with alan gomez from "usa today." that is all the time we have today on "washington journal." join us tomorrow at 7:00 a.m. eastern now we will head to the senate foreign relations committee taking a look at the recent elections in ukraine and its current impact on foreign relations in the country.
>> good morning. this hearing of the senate foreign relations committee will come to order. i want to welcome our panelists and thank them for taking time, for sharing their perspective on developments in the ukraine, which appear only slightly less ominous than they did in act one of this crisis. now we are in the beginning of successfulthe election of a president by the ukrainian people, in internationally certified elections, which is a victory
for ukrainian's struggle for freedom. divisions between east and west, significantly president petro poroshenko won districts from one end of ukraine to the other. it seems clear that with russia's violation of sovereignty, it unified ukrainians better than before. the challenges president poroshenko has are daunting. he must rebuild an economy weakened by the previous presidents corruption. while countering prudent in the east. we are committed to working with , tonew government consolidate ukraine's democracy and economy. and withstand possible attacks from these. president putin seeks to undermine the new government and east, discord with the
seeking a long-term ability to control and direct ukraine's politics and policies. catherine the great said, "i have no way to defend my borders extent -- except to extend them." that has renewed poignancy today. obama'se president announcement this week of a european reassurance initiatives that will increase our presence across europe and build the capacity of our friends such as georgia, moldova, ukraine, so they can better work alongside the united states and nato as well as provide for their own defense. in my view, there are three things that are crucial for ukraine's future -- president poroshenko must build the ukrainian government that is capable, transparent, accountable, and strong enough to meet foreign and domestic challenges. second, the ukrainian government will have to accommodate the rest of citizens in the east
while gaining control from foreign directed forces elsewhere. third, the ukrainian economy must be resurrected, including decreasing energy in dependency on russia. at the end of the day, the creation of a viable, successful ukraine capable of resuming its sovereignty is an unfinished legacy of the cold war and will take time. it is a necessary goal that requires the commitment and operation of the congress, the executive branch, and our allies working together. corkerturn to senator for his remarks. >> mr. chairman, thank you. thanks to our expert witnesses here who will be helpful to us. especially the last one, who just came in well-dressed and looking sharp. i do want to congratulate the people of ukraine for the election that just occurred. ,e had a lot of observers there including jane harman, who just
walked in, and many people, many of our colleagues. poroshenko, who many of us had the opportunity to meet over the course of time, is the person today. there are tremendous issues to forcome, and ukraine getting the external effect that russia has over the country. there are tremendous corruption issues, energy issues, democracy and human rights issues, all kinds of issues for any leader to have difficulty undertaking, not to speak of the external issues i just mentioned. there is no question that russia played a role in eastern ukraine. there is no question that they continue to play a role in eastern ukraine. obviously it looks like they are back and forth between trying to negotiate with this new government and create alliances there and at the same time continuing to destabilize the country in other ways.
i look forward to what our witnesses have to say relative to what our policy should be going ahead. i know there was an announcement today where cameron and our president announced the need for new sanctions in russia. i look forward to hearing what the witnesses have to say about that. numbers of us have joined together pushing for that kind of thing. but the fact is we have tremendous challenges there. just having come from eastern europe, the stability in that region, the concern for security is paramount right now. they have seen russia doing what it has done, so the fact is we have not only the issue of ukraine to contend with -- and again, i know there is a likeness in that regard -- but they need to show tremendous strength and perseverance relative to eastern europe in general. a very important issue of great geopolitical significance.
thank you all for being here, and i look forward to questions. >> let me introduce our panelists. harman, able jane former colleague of mine in the house. we welcome her back to the committee. we also have former ambassador pfeiffer, whoven is now with the brookings institution. our third panelist is former assistant to the panelist -- to nowpresident james jeffrey, the distinguished visiting fellow of the washington institute. next is mark green, former ambassador to canton neah and member of the house of representatives. someone who is no stranger to the committee. let me welcome you all to the committee. i will advise you that all of your full statement will be included in the record. without objection, we ask you to summarize in about five minutes or so, and we will proceed in
the order in which i introduced you. you are first. >> thank you, mr. chairman, and thank you, ranking member corker. both of you are dear friends of mine and former colleagues. also friends of the wilson center, and i appreciate being invited. everyone on the lineup is a close friend, and i was very proud to be a member of the ndi delegation in ukraine a week and a half ago. it is the eighth election i have observed. it matters to have them in countries and to have teams with them who can get around. in that connection on the day before the election in ukraine, my small group headed by former secretary of state madeleine albright met all the leading candidates, including petro poroshenko, who impressed me as a man capable of leading his country. it was impressive to see his in norma's victory that his
enormous -- his in norma's victory. wouldn't a lot of us like to see that kind of victory, 55% to 60%, avoiding a runoff. third chancene's to get it right. ukraine got it wrong after the orange revolution. a series of governments were andect and. -- were corrupt not competent. this is chance three, and it will either work or he will be three strikes and you are out. i don't think ukraine will get a chance like this again. second point -- the west obviously needs to help ukraine, and president obama announced that ukraine and -- ukraine has to help ukraine. this is the transfer ukrainians to take responsibility for their future. many ukrainians get that. i think there are five things that president poroshenko needs to do. ukraine and east
tell the folks there. he says he is going to do this. he favors some form of decentralization that is ukraine and he wants them to serve in his government. the current acting president turchynov was in east ukraine year the day, and i thought that was a good move. the crowd that demonstrated in newone so bravely in the government, some of them want to serve, some of the current government members, this has to be a different movie from egypt. the people who were brave and courageous and wanted to change their country have to be included in the government. third, and force the anticorruption laws. there are some on the books and if they need to be stronger make them stronger. it is true that poroshenko is himself an oligarch, as are most of the folks in senior
leadership positions in ukraine, but this is his chance to show that he is going to lead his country, not just had his bank account. -- not just pad his bank account. need to be taken to qualify for imf and eu loans. and fifth, welcome the ukrainian diaspora back. there are many who can help their country. then comes the tough issue, and you mentioned this, senator corker. what to do about the russians and the unrest in the eastern part of ukraine. i think it is time for a united europeans,the president obama, and others, on president prudent to stop this violence. i assume there are some crazies he cannot stop. given arms.ng the border has to be policed, the flow of arms has to be
stopped, and vladimir putin should tell the separatists to lay down their arms. second, we do need more sanctions. i would say that these sanctions against the banking industry and the economic industry -- and the energy -- the economic sector and the banking sector have to -- iposed, and i know rudy know europe is reluctant, but chancellor merkel has to be a board with this. thank you. mr. chairman, senator corker, distinct members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to talk to you today about the ukraine and russia crisis and the u.s. policy response. i have a written statement for the record, which i will summarize. ukrainians went to the polls in large numbers on may 25, in an
election that met international democratic standards. petro poroshenko won and historic victory. he now faces significant challenges. he must find a way to manage eastern ukraine. he must oversee implementation of the economic reforms in ukraine's program with the international monetary fund. he must address the budget of decentralization of power. mr. poroshenko also faces a major challenge is dealing with russia. unfortunately, by all appearances, vladimir putin remains i opposed to their desie to draw closer to the european union. russia seeks to destabilize the ukrainian government. there is no evidence that moscow has used its influence with the armed separatists in ukraine's east urge them to de-escalate the crisis. to the contrary, russia appears to support and encourage them. indicate thatts
arms and fighters and supplies flow. the interests do not mean it should resort to force, sees ukrainian territory, or support separatism. the u.s. policy response appears to have three vectors -- targeted assistance to help ukrainian reform. where washington should do more is military assistance. the ukrainian military needs help in strengthening its capabilities. using basic equipment such as tents. the decision for body armor and night vision goggles is welcome if it is overdue. it is also appropriate to consider providing light anti-armor weapons and manned portable air defense systems particularly since ukrainian military illuminated many of its stocks. aimed tod factor is
reassure nato allies in the baltic and european regions who are more nervous about moscow's intentions after seizing crimea. military forces have deployed with the objectives of reassuring allies of nato's commitment to their defense and they have underscored that commitment to moscow. on tuesday the president oppose a $1 billion program to increase the u.s. military presence in central europe. congress should approve expedited funding for that. the third sector has sought to penalize russia with the goal of effecting a change in moscow's course on ukraine. leaders, the u.s. -- theent has worked sanctions to date, although modest, appear to have an impact. projections of russian gdp growth for 2014 have been reduced, and bloomberg reports no russian company has been able
to sell foreign currency bonds since march. sanctions have failed thus far in their primary political purpose. russia has not significantly .ltered its course on ukraine these could include expanding the list of russians targeted for financial sanctions. beginning with the sanctioning of at least one major russian financial institution as opposed to smaller pocket banks and blocking new investments to develop oil and gas lines. ,ashington should be smart where possible it makes to zen's -- it makes sense to use a scalpel instead of a sledgehammer. a package should be pulled together for a settlement of internal divisions, dividing a basis for stabilizing ukraine. the big question is whether the kremlin would be prepared to support any settlement. mr. chairman, senator corker, members of the committee, the
ukrainian crisis will likely continue for some time. stabilization will not come easy, but we should remember -- mainaine has ukrainians recognize they have a precious second chance to turn their country around after the missed opportunity beyond its revolution. u.s. policy should aim to maximize the prospects that this time ukraine will succeed. this will be important for the people of ukraine and for a more sustainable and secure europe. seeow policy will be to ukraine look more like poland, a normal democratic rule of law and european state. much, mr.ou very chairman, senator corker, members of the committee. i very much appreciate being here today. the russian aggression against ukraine is the most serious challenge to the international
order since 9/11. such, this crisis requires action at three levels. the first of the immediate steps that have been taken and are being taken to do with the phenomenon itself -- as the acting national security advisor with president bush wearing the 2008 invasion of georgia, i believe the administration under similar circumstances had done all in all a good job dealing with the russian encourage and into crimea -- russian incursion into crimea and now eastern ukraine. not engaging russia on the ground is a wise decision given the stakes of employing ash of deploying u.s. troops. on the other hand it has used economic sanctions, and every diplomatic tool possible, and in particular brought along an initially recalcitrant europe. this will be a problem going forward as well. but the administration is trying
its best on that. efforts byoth these the international community and more importantly, as my colleagues have noted, the will of the ukrainian people represented in the elections and the willingness of people even in eastern ukraine to support a unified and sovereign ukraine, the russians have had to change their tactics somewhat -- less direct military aggression, more indirect forces, but nonetheless , as steve pfeiffer -- as steve pifer just said, the strategy remains the same, to ensure that ukraine can never be a sovereign country able to choose its own future, which is i believe what west -- and at the second level we need to look at additional steps. the administration has announced a number of good moves this week ofthe senate in the draft
preventing the russian aggression bill has come up with others. i will have my own and i will touch on a few. first of all, i would second ambassador pifer -- we would advise weapons and advisory teams to help the ukrainians do insurgency in the east. we have much experience in insurgency operations. they need to know how to use military force while reaching out to the population. verydly, we need to rapidly deploy significant, heavy -- that is, armor heavy -- rotationion stocks and of forces along the borders of nato's east. the president is moving forward on this. we should not wait for additional money. we have the equipment and we should deploy the troops. we should also ensure this becomes a nato mission and that
nato provides troops along with as we did several times during the cold war. we have mentioned economic support for ukraine. that is important. president poroshenko will have to do a lot of work himself because a lot of money has gone into ukraine without much result. as mentioned in your draft hill, we need to do more to wean gas and fromussian russian financial investments and other pressures that are stable to use thanks to its economy. there are ways to do this that would have immediate and long-term effects. the long-term issue i want to dwell on for a little bit because that is the third order of magnitude we have here. seen in thewe have last months is the next ordinary development in the history of europe, certainly in the history
of the post-cold war. i reject the notion that russia was pushed into this by nato's expansion east. i was involved on those decisions 20 years ago, and while perhaps that could have been done differently, while nato moved east, it stood down the vast majority of its conventional forces. russia did not do the same. eu, the, the international community tried for 20 years with tens of billions of dollars to integrate russia into the international community in every way possible. the result is a russia trying to expand using 18th-century models. we have to consider the stock -- the stark likelihood of not just russia but possible he china as russia,osely tied with motivated to challenge both the international order and american's guarantor of that system. we need to start thinking as a country, as an alliance, and as a global community about the implications of this. if we wish to avoid a strategic
shift as dramatic as 1989 but in the other direction, while maintaining the integrity of this international order, including if needed by force, must be in our vital interests. thank you very much, senators. >> thank you, mr. chairman, corker, menendez, mr. members of the committee. i will summarize my written testimony and try not to repeat what others have said. is to help democracy become more effective where it is in danger, and cheer best practices where democracy is flourishing. given that mission, it is only natural that ukraine has been at the central part of our programming for more than 20 years. in addition to our primary office, we have offices in odessa and until recently in crimea. all national elections in independent
ukraine's history, including the most recent on may 25. our high-level mission was in ayottewas led by senator , your colleague. we visited more than 100 polling places him at places like marquees and odessa. we trained more than 5000 observers from political parties . in the view of our observation team, these elections were free and fair and that international standards. of course, what makes there a couple shipments so remarkable is the wide range of challenge that they face while administering these elections. in many ways, the challenges remain and need urgent attention. and perhaps the help of the west. as others have noted, one very obvious challenge they face in recent months, russian sponsored violence in the south and east. separatists use high-grade cutting edge tactics and
equipment. there are widespread instances of these groups overtaking radio stations, and in one case shutting down an airport. bands of military side of forces sought to shut down the country, and in few places they succeeded. another challenge that was and is important but i don't think has received enough attention, is the plight and tragedy of the crimean qatar's -- the crimean tartar's. they were only able to return to their ancestral homeland at the end of the soviet union. they make up 15% of the crimean population. its results and the community has repeatedly alleged its continued support for a united and sovereign ukraine. obviously their courage might
not have the approval of moscow. since the beginning of our work in ukraine, we have sought to resist the democratic aspirations of the people. we have forked with them closely to build key medication exchanges and try to link them up with particularly young people from western europe and other parts of the ukraine. unfortunately we are unable to continue that programming in occupied crimea and we would very much like to return and find ways to help this population. all be cases, we should very watchful of how the tatars can live and work and hopefully prosper in the face of russian rule. the overwhelming force of russian propaganda is projected into that country. combined with the lack of ukrainian media and social media in certain areas. it is hard for any nation to
build a sense of national purpose and unity when there is a lack of indigenous media. it is nearly impossible when that void is filled with hostile, foreign-born again that bent on destabilizing communities and government bodies. foster independent ukraine centered media that should reach out to a report of the country. more and more especially young people get their news and information through social media platforms. again, there is a lack of social media platforms that are ukraine centered in that parts of the country, and i believe that we a social media platform that will help create a sense of unity and identity. one of the most subtle and yet serious challenges that ukraine has faced and will continue to i.t.is a weakened infrastructure. recent reports suggest that much of the government's i.t. has been compromised by a
foreign-sponsored viruses. on the day of the election, the iri delegation learned that russia had aimed a major cyber attack aimed at bringing down the election commission's main database. , the electionsd would have failed and perhaps given ukraine's opponents further pretense for aggression and destabilizing activities. in this day and age, effective i.t. is absolutely necessary for effective democracy and governance. it is too easy to focus on the challenges in ukraine. we should also focus on the hopeful signs. as my colleague jane harman has noted, president elect poroshenko has already taken significant steps going forward. he has indicated he will retain the current prime minister and some other members of the current government and has stated his top priorities are to maintain the unity of the country by reaching out to eastern regions, tackling corruption, and creating jobs.
mr. chairman, recent events in ukraine make clear both the challenges and possibilities that lie ahead. the fact that ukrainians in the span of a few short months were able to remove from office the corrupt, the powerful leader, and turn around and conduct a national elections that met international standards is remarkable. the fact that all of this was a compost in the face of the threats and violence is historic. to be clear, as my former colleague jane harman has said, the ukrainians -- not their friends in the west -- responsible for shaping their country's future. they have a unique history and a rich culture that is all their own. they want to chart a path that meets their own needs and aspirations, not anyone else's. it was said to us recently, we went to find europe and instead we found ukraine. this is a great moment for
ukraine and potentially a great moment for democracy. inc. you, mr. chairman. -- thank you, mr. chairman. corker,hairman, senator members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to comment on recent developments in ukraine. ndi has conducted democracy assistance programs in ukraine for the past two decades. most recently, we feel that an international server delegation for the election, which was led by ndi chairman madeleine albright and former spanish foreign minister ana palacios. have janertunate to harman as part of the leadership. ukraine has turned a corner onto a decisively democratic path. at the same time the country is facing a set of challenges, some new and some long-standing.
most dressing is the external threat from russia, which has illegal -- most pressing is the external threat from russia, which has illegally occupied crimea. it amounts to an undeclared war against ukrainian sovereignty. on the domestic front, the challenges are no less daunting. confidence in political institutions is low. where there have been overwhelming support in the east and the west, of the country for ukrainian unity, there are divisions over the distribution of governmental power. external forces are working andrd exploiting politicizing these divisions through a campaign of disinformation. wereuro demonstrations sparked by anger over the yellow coat which government's refusal to sign the european union treaty, but they were sustained for three months by a more basic demand for dignity. they introduced a count ability
-- accountability to citizens. however, the researcher bhushan -- the redistribution of power will only be sustainable if people are engaged in politics. the country now has the opportunity to translate the energy of this watershed moment into a sustainable democratic trajectory. hopefullyakes future -- future ones hopefully unnecessary. the may 25 presidential election -- by every measure, ukraine passed the test. mostwas perhaps the important election in ukraine's independent history. where they were allowed to cast ballots in the vast majority of the country, ukrainian voices came through loud and clear, voting for sovereignty and democracy, not the celebratory fanfare but with sober determination. ,n elections in 60 countries
rarely has ndi heard such positive almond terry about the process from political contestants and monitors alike. after president-elect's poroshenko inauguration this weekend, the government will track thisorporate is that incorporate the interest of ukrainians from all regions of the country. he and other leaders will need to focus as much on process as on policy outcomes. delivering on citizens expectations will be impossible without encouraging meaningful public participation or a b on the urgent need for economic reforms and the diversification of trade and energy supplies, these expectations include constitutional changes including decentralization, serious anticorruption measures, the number one current -- the number one priority through canadians
throughout the country. .nd judicial reform civil society organizations are helping to shape an ambitious agenda. i draw your attention to the reanimation package of reforms, an impressive civil society initiative to improve it election laws, procurement practices, education policy, and access to public information along with other issues. by listening to and consulting with citizens and communicating in clear terms how short-term sacrifices will lead to longer-term improvements, government leaders can help smooth the path to results. from political parties, the challenge will be to build support from the grassroots up and face policies and strategies on citizens concerns. this will require parties to embrace new ways of organizing. an movement shows that citizens can wield
considerable lyrical power, but by their very nature -- considerable political power. -- challenging the energy of euro maidan into the ofs exciting business performance is the external. the experts need to be -- the efforts need to be disseminated more widely across the country. it will be important for ensuring a natural dialogue on the rights of all ukrainians to be deepened. this process would benefit from broader and more active participation from civil society. the impact of past u.s. assistance to ukraine is more visible now than before great theof government -- sustained support from the u.s. helps democratic groups get established, expand, accumulate skills, and survived through political hardships.
also in the new political environment, partners of u.s. assistance projects can be found among the most active reformers in the government, parliament, political parties, and civil society. ukraine now needs help in all of its priority reform areas. ukrainian political and civic leaders have been unanimous in requesting such support. there are major financial needs, to be sure. in addition, ukrainians are eager for technical assistance, peer to peer contacts, and linkages to international counterparts. just as ukraine's problems will not be solved overnight, international engagement needs to expand and aim for the long-term. thank you very much. >> thank you all for your testimony. before i start a round of questioning, let me recognize that the ukrainian ambassador is here, and we welcome you, mr. ambassador, to this hearing.
statement says we stand ready to intensify targeted sanctions and to consider significant restrictive measures to impose further costs on russia should events so require. but as i listened to what i think was a majority of you, it would seem to me that the collective view here -- and correct me if i am wrong -- that that time is already here. heard,ong in what i have or is that basically what you are saying? your microphone to say yes or no, i am happy to hear it. >> yes, the time is here, senator. >> the russians are thoroughly involved in what is going on in eastern ukraine, and they have the power to stop that. >> and yes, our asymmetric strengths against russia is our economic power. their economy even before the
sanctions was in bad shape and it has gotten worse. by doing this quickly -- although it will be some short-term pain for europe in particular, it will be medium and long-term gain for europe and for us. we have an energy sector that could export a substantial amount of energy to europe. chairman, the position of western leaders previously was that if russia interfered in the conduct of the elections, the more sanctions would be coming. i think it is clear that they number ofct, take a steps to interfere with those elections, so i would argue the time has come most definitely. a cyber attack. how do we know that to be the case? >> that was brought to us by the u.s. ambassador and has been reported, although not as widely reported as i think it deserves.
but while they were able to fight it off, it laid bare what a number of people have been suggesting, and that is that so much of the infrastructure system, which was operated by russian supported government been infiltrated and weakened. >> and had it been successful, they could have undermined the veracity of the election and therefore pursue their goals. so your point is well taken. let me ask you this. 'sat do you think of europe experiences is prudent -- is pu tin's calculus? int will affect his calculus the way that it affects changes in russia's and his leadership? >> i would argue that the possibility of more intense western sanctions could affect
his calculus. if you look at the russian economy, it was in difficulty already in 2013, but the sanctions and threat of more robust sanctions have increased the problems for the russian economy. many russian economists say that vladimir putin has this implicit social contact with the russian people in which he says you are not going to have much in the way of political freedom, but in return you are going to get economic security, a growing economy, and high living standards. mr. putin delivered spectacularly on that between 2000 and 2000 eight. last year some economists were saying even projected growth at would not be enough to increase the bargain. so we should increase pressure. that it will play a different way, that mr. putin macy's on the sanctions and use that as an excuse to blame the on the may seize
sanctions and use that as an excuse to blame the west. the west should do it because of the degree she is nature of russian actions. say that it is the economy, stupid. bitetime, as sanctions further -- and i do think there should be some sectoral --ctions done very carefully people in russia will have a lower standard of living. hasnderstand that mr. putin employed the pottery barn rule -- if you break it, you buy the payments for state workers and crimea vomit that is another hit on the russian
budget. heator mccain is right when says russia's economy is a gas station, and russia is a gas station posing as a country. if that gas is turned off with respect to europe, that is a huge hit. he has made a deal with china, but i think that shows desperation, not long-term advantage. that iuld like to add very much am in favor of sanctions and i think we have seen particularly some secondary effects of them. we should continue and strengthen them, trying to keep the europeans on board because they will keep most of the pain. nonetheless, i am a little bit concerned if we think that, to sum it up briefly, 21st century values -- economic development, people power, and such -- triumphs over aggression, over nationalism, and over name t -- over 18th and 19th century values. i am not sure that is true, and
i really do not think it is true with mr. putin because he is very clear in his goals with the russian people are at his desire -- and it seems to have a lot or support -- a lot of support -- is to increase the old russian imperial power over much of the area around russia today, stretching into eurasia and into central europe. this is a very dangerous strategy. you ask how can we respond against it. he is facing the eu and the united states, with a $2 trillion economy. we have $30 trillion. we have six times the population, two or three times the number of forces under arms, better equipped. why is he doing this with seemingly some success? because we are divided, we are not sure what the threat is, and in particular we are reluctant. the u.s. to some degree and the
europeans even more, to meet force with force. that is why it is important to take military moves well strengthening the economic and political sanctions and strictures against him because he does not believe we are going to stand up for our values, where is he has proven -- >> so you would be supportive of military support with nato? >> absolutely. he has the equipment to do this tomorrow. >> i want to make one point about russia's role in the election. we should not lose sight of the fact that 70% of the electorate was disenfranchised, either because the occupation of crimea or the russian backed .eparatists i the question remains with the fighting still going on in these two blocks, where the russian goal is to make ukraine
actions toe -- the try to destabilize the country before, during, and after the elections continues. -- whatinal question can poroshenko do in eastern ukraine? some of you have talked about the centralization of government. i would like to hear what that means to you because the russians wanted a federated system so they could take ukraine apart. i assume you do not mean that. oftections for the use russian language, inclusion of more easterners and the government. do some of you have thoughts as to what poroshenko can do to try to consolidate the eastern part of ukraine as part of the national body politic? we do not want to dominate this at this end of the table, but i listed five things.
i think the border with russia is absolutely crucial. from all of the information i have seen on the public record, there are truckloads of people who may or may not be russian, but they are coming over the russian border, and we think mostly they are chechens or russian nationals. --sing that borders that closing the border to that traffic is critical. the russians have the capacity to do that. having an international call on them specifically to do that right now would at least expose the role they are playing. i think we are all united in understanding what that role is. it is tragic that some ukrainians who wanted to vote were prevented from doing that, as kenneth wallack just said. 70% -- 17% of the country could not vote, and there are the folks in crimea, which we feel is unoccupied part of ukraine, most of them could not vote
either. >> mr. chairman, i would make the comment that i think mr. poroshenko has said he wants to make his first trip as president to donetsk. he might find a receptive audience there. populationy of the in eastern ukraine is ethnic ukrainian. they may use russian as their language, but they are ethnic ukrainian. the polls show that while many people in eastern ukraine were uncomfortable with the change of power and keeping it to the end of february and that they acted the -- they regarded the acting government as illegitimate, 70% wanted to stay in ukraine and not join russia. criticizedajorities the seizures of the building by the separatists. there is an audience he can appeal to. the centralization of power to some extent makes sense. because the ukrainian government right now is over centralize. for example, making the regional governors elected as opposed to
appointed by the president, would be a positive step. also, mr. poroshenko has said there would be some status for the russian language. this seems to be a very touchy issue in eastern ukraine, and there are things that i think he can do that would in fact begin to make the majority of that population in eastern ukraine feel more comfortable. undercutting the support for the separatists being brought back by russia. green, last word. >> mr. chairman, first off, with respect to the polling, iri has done a great deal of polling. every part of the country, and even in those areas of the far east, which may have wanted more , they view themselves as ukrainian, did not see discrimination and very much wanted to remain part of ukraine.
argue that was the president elect needs to do is to take a look at what vladimir putin did in the lead up to these elections. w seeds ofto so stations,t down radio and destabilize. what mr. poroshenko needs to do that canld media communicate non-moscow messages, given accurate picture, divide challenge -- divide channels for all ukrainians to get together on social media platforms, to communicate with each other, exchange ideas. finally, i would argue that a significant exchange program which creates east-west, north-south understanding to build a new generation of leaders that think of themselves as entirely as ukrainians is regionally vitally important. based on what we have seen from president putin, that is what he
fears. senator corker? >> thank you, mr. chairman. i think it is good to note that we have people on both sides of the aisle that are pretty uniform in their thinking about both ukraine and russia. i think we have a lot of that on our committee. it seems to me -- and it was we have ant -- that country that has underperformed, with huge challenges within the country. then you have this other issue that is of major geopolitical significance to the world. they come together at ukraine on the border. they affect much of our policy over the last 60 or 70 years that europe would be whole, democratic, and free. ifwe have two issues --
ukraine moves to the west, it creates internal issues with russia. as the russian people see a country info -- see a country involving into a different country, and a threat to their leadership there. let me just start. is there anybody on this panel that does not believe that the newly elected leadership -- which is impressive, and he is -- it was not a aate-owned enterprise, different way than a lot of the oligarchs -- is there any difference of opinion that he is absolutely committed to making the transition that is necessary to be made within the country? does anybody feel like that is not the case? >> i hope he is committed. we will have to see what he does. you can go was
committed. we thought he was the new leadership for ukraine and he turned out to be in disappointed. some people thought tymoshenko was the new leadership. i think it really matters what he does. maybe onerker, suggestion for the way you frame iss -- i think that ukraine ukraine. ukraine is not part of europe, it is not part of russia. it is a country that is situated next to nato countries. many people in ukraine are very interested in and have a long europe,of connecting to but some are very interested in and have a long history of connecting to russia. i think the best outcome for ukraine is to have a somewhat decentralized government where ukraine can be both. -- it isinly last year in our interest and i also think it is in ukraine's interest. but i do not think that if
russia could only back off we could get this to change. i do not think it would be bad for ukraine also to choose, if he chooses, to have a robust russia. >> that is what the newly elected president plans to do. >> i was one of those who had a chance to meet with mr. poroshenko the day before the election. while i absolutely agree that the proof is in the pudding, he was impressive in laying out a clear agenda for what needed to be done, including constitutional reform, taking on corruption. so he certainly knows what to do. obviously i agree that we should gethere to try to help him there. i think everybody understands the challenges that lie ahead, and they are deeply committed to these issues and they realize there is a second chance for
meaningful reforms in the country. at the same time, we have to put our faith in institutions and not just individuals. the parliament will play an important role, civil society will play an important role. the question is whether all these various sectors of society can work constructively together in order to achieve the goals that we all share. >> i, too, was impressed. hopefully a team will be put together to move things ahead. since i am running out of time, i will stop here, what i was going to pursue -- are there anything -- is there anything that the western countries involved and care about ukraine -- is there anything other than -- i know you mentioned some military equipment and training that needs to take place. is there anything you see the west not doing that should be done now?
thats to be ukraine itself makes this happen and i could not agree more. it obviously assistance from us is going to be needed, and persistence will be needed. is there anything that you see right now, if one person to respond briefly, because i want to move onto something else. is there anything you see missing right now in the complement of efforts that would be helpful to help them move along? yes, sir? think theone, i commitments on financial assistance should not be caught up in bureaucratic hurdles here. a timelye to flow in way. as my chairman talks about, the market plan was not only about funding, it was also about active technical assistance. when we met with the government there, they welcomed large-scale infusion of human resources in the country on all the major
reform issues. they looked to the united states for expertise. they looked to the diaspora community for its expertise. they looked at the europeans, particularly poland, for its expertise. poland is engage in constitutional reform issues as well. service reform, after all of these issues, having technical assistance on a large scale embedded in ministries, and governments, offices, and civil civil society -- this is all welcome. we believe that international engagement is critical at this time. onto anothere topic, and that is russia. i had an executive in my office this morning -- i will not name the name or the company because i do not think he would like that to occur -- you have this issue, a major geopolitical issue, the day it has happened since 9/11. yet the tools that we are willing to use obviously are
very different than the tools we used on 9/11. i agree, especially having just come from poland, romania, and majora, this is a geopolitical event. how we respond will reverberate for generations. you mentioned sanctions, and many of us here have push for more robust sanctions. some people would say, the executive would say that we push on one hand for globalization around the world to try to create democracy because we think that our way of doing theness calls -- causes world to be a better place. i agree with that. time, these companies have all become intertwined. they all work through joint ventures. i could not agree more. i would like to see sectoral sanctions. we have crossed the red line and
sanctions ought to be in place for what happened in eastern ukraine. how do you respond to the folks who come in and have to say do not have an impact on me that way. how do you respond to people who say what you just said? and how do you respond to the president when he talks about we do not want ourselves to be split from europe? we do not want -- we want to go with them. is that an appropriate place to be, or should we be more forward than where we are today? >> in my view, you have to stay in a closely synced with europe. a closein many respects ally with respect to angela merkel with respect to the rest of europe and where it is. there has been some success. >> do you really see that? >> i would say compared to her population, she is tougher than most germans.
this is what we have to deal with. in terms of economic issues, it is not a question of cutting russia out of the global economy. aree cannot do that, they not iran, and that is not our argument with them. the problem is they are able to use blackmailing political some of based upon their economic activities, most notably selling gas to europe, and secondarily, the way russian i spent an hour with vladimir putin in 2007 where he harped on this theme with a very unpleasant conversation with president bush. they see this as political weapons, so you need to marketfy in the best economy tradition. there are seemingly minor things that are so important.
the european union is looking to take on the monopolistic aspects of the vertically integrated russian gas industry from production to transportation to actual marketing in many countries and to break that up. those are the kinds of things that will not only send a signal but will eventually rob russia -- so much strange capability to blackmail an entity, europe, that is made times larger in economy and power in every sense. >> now my time is up and hopefully you can response to someone else. i think the biggest fear that i by someone inssed poland last week, and that is that we end up accepting a bigger piece with russia -- a it peace with russia.
we are not willing to use the same tools. so we end up in a situation where they exude extremely bad behavior, we don't do much, and peace up in this bitter where they have this nation that has broken international norms and laws, reneged on agreements. and we continue to go along in createster peace that instability in eastern europe and causes people to question the united states. mr. chairman, thank you. chairman, thank you very much. let me thank all of our witnesses for their extraordinary work. i want to thank the iri for their participation in monitoring the ukrainian elections.
senator portman and i were there on the ground, had a chance to visit polling stations and had a chance to meet with the leadership of the country. we share your observations, and i thank you very much. similarmuch have observations. in your overall concern, the international order of dealing with these types of incursions is very much in jeopardy here, and this goes well beyond the ukraine. clearly what russia did in crimea, what they are doing in east ukraine, violates international commitments and agreements, etc. we go through all of them, including osce commitments. it is all being looked at in the china seas. i went from ukraine to vietnam. all i heard in vietnam was their concern about china in the south china seas. when i was in japan, i heard concerns about the east china
seas. order,ot engage a better we will see what happened in ukraine used by major powers elsewhere to solve territorial disagreements. i just want to come on strongly in support of your comments that we need to get nato involved in ukraine because it does involve our natoity of alliance. and we need to have an enforceable code of conduct in the china seas so that we can restore some semblance of withpline in how we deal territorial disputes. i just also want to underscore points that have been made of what we need to do in ukraine. , i agreeoman harman that the protesters in the maidan were much more fundamental than just taking sides on ethnic disputes. they want a country that
responds to the needs of their people, and a country free of corruption. that is not going to be easy in ukraine. it will take a long-term commitment to get the country to perform at the level that the protesters expect and will demand. so therefore, first and foremost, is our economic programs to help so that they have a performing economy. i think we all agree on that. the point that was raised about ourging europe, along with policies, that has to be essential. i think president obama deserves great credit for being able to mobilize europe in a more cohesive fashion that we have seen with previous problems in other places in europe. does require attention to the fundamental economics which deal also with energy, and we very much need to be aggressive in providing short-term and long-term alternatives to ukraine on their energy issues.
it also involves sanctions. there is total agreement here that we need to be tougher on sanctions. and that sanctions work, and that the threat of sanctions work. but the threat only works to a certain degree if you do not deliver. russia's actions and the words that were given before the election indicate it is time for us to move forward with additional sanctions. iny have to be strategic thought out and in coordination with europe. i want to get to another point that has been talked about, and effect whether we can the balance on the border between ukraine and russia. pointed out, you congressman harman, the people from russia who want to come into ukraine have no difficulty getting through that border. nice ifwould be president putin would do something about it. we have to be very firm about that. but resident putin does not do
what he says. so i don't want to take his word that he will maintain the border for ukrainians against russia. i think the united states and europe can play a pretty constructive role in strengthening the border security issues. the russians may make it difficult for osce to get that type of technical support, but it seems to me that we can find an effective way to help ukraine deal with its own defense of its borders. get your view as to whether that would be a priority, should be a priority, and whether that can be effectively carried out. >> well, you know i agree with you. how to do it does matter. what the process is does matter.
it needs to be a ukrainian response. international organizations to help is right. the osce has an interesting position in the country. osce convene roundtables, three held by a scholar at the wilson center, and those roundtables begin to achieve something that mark green is talking about, which is a conversation in the country to unite all the parts of the country -- a really good idea, and they will continue. but osce is interesting because it is a member organization that includes russia. followinge in vienna my trip to ukraine and was told that the way the procedures work at osce -- russia is kind of locked in for a six-month it seems to me it would be smart do whatosce mobilized to top
you are talking about -- >> the mission is in their. toit is in east ukraine, and mobilize resources after the border. putin responds to strength. reasonable controls, full of armed people who may or may not be -- >> they are going to need technical assistance, more than the international community is currently providing. >> ukraine has a very undercapitalized system. our strength against russia is our economic strength. that is where we can stop russia more effectively, and -- are our best weapon. we talk about terrorists attacking us asymmetrically.
everybody here supports sanctions done intelligently and quickly could get a very rapid response. russia to not trust stop the flow into ukraine. >> i agree we can do more to assist ukraine in terms of tightening their border. in the short term it will be the gold given the length of the border come and my guess is as long as the russians are determined to get across they will find ways. in the short term, to pressure additional sanctions on russia, we have got to get russia to be part of the solution, not the problem. oflet's remember the history brushfire battles. we also need to help the ukrainian government in that part of the country to deliver. we needed to help build capacity, help deliver basic
services and really provide the links to the government that those communities are looking for that have been taken apart by the destabilization activities when putin comes in, attempts to sponsor the separatist movements. success in building governing capacity should be part of the solution. tois also important i think create that sense of linkage to the national government and the kinds of successes that reinforce for all those communities why they want to be ukrainian in the first place. >> senator, i agree with everybody my colleagues have said, but you have laid out a military problem and it is not a military problem we are ignorant of. we see it in afghanistan where you have an insurgency supported and largely generated from
across the border. it is a tricky problem. there are ways to deal with it. first of all, all of the things stated to strengthen the ukrainian government am a to strengthen the support of the people, to strengthen the economy, that then leverages into a common insurgency's tragic of stabilization that puts a minimum of force and a maximum henri conciliation and slowly moving in picking the low-hanging fruit as you do in any organized stability operation so that the area controlled by the pro-russians does not expand. at the same time you are putting pressure through sanctions, diplomatic activities, to strengthening nato, which is something to do and does not like, watching american ground troops on his western borders, to send a signal that it is just going to get worse if you keep this up, and what are you gaining?
deepening ukraine is its sovereignty, its stability, and in the long run you're not going to win this insurgency. and then there can be a time to move this forward. you need the political, economic steps, you need to reach out to the population, but it is also a military activity. >> could i comment on what you said regarding the impact of ukraine on other places. be signing the association agreement later this month. it will be holding parliamentary elections in november. and i think we have to have a very watchful on on what is .appening what will happen following the signing of the association agreement in a very small and vulnerable country close by. >> thank you, mr. chairman. you used a business term which i frick.ow-hanging
my colleagues on republican side realize we try to address it in a strategic process. i would like to quickly growth through something like that. strategic planning process describes reality. you have to bow to reality. aced on the reality, set goals. i want to lay out my assumptions on reality. first assumption, it makes no sense to russia what putin is doing. number two, as result, this is all about putin's dego. number three, what gives him power is his oil and gas, the gas station. in his monopoly control over supply which is crazy. in business, customers should be in control, not supplier.
here is another reality. talk about sanctions, a contrary view. most of the harm caused to the russian economy occurred before any sanctions were imposed, because the world recognizes what he is doing and makes no economic sense. he has done his own economic harm. sanctionsy is because are a double edged sword, mutually harmful, i do not believe the west will have the will to affect his catalyst altogether. i do not believe they are going to be imposed. maybe not a bad thing. i would rather inflict pain on putin, make him pay a price without us having to pay a price. that sets me up with the assumption -- that is the reality situation. run that you establish goals. the number one short term goal,
obvious, is ukraine must gain control over the east. anybody disagree with that? ok. we need to help them, right? so we can talk about sanctions but they will not get imposed, but we can help them secure the east. so we need to do those things. when wewo, we certainly are on the ground heard about the incredible effect of the propaganda coming from russia. we need to counter that aggressively. we can do that, can't we? short-terme the two goals. medium term, having what was so hopeful about the protest in maidan, a coming together of the ukrainian people saying they are sick of the corruption. we need to do everything in terms of our actions. we have to tie aid or help to make sure that anticorruption laws are passed.
we should do that. that is the medium term because another part of the solution is we have to have a successful government in ukraine. long term, again, understanding what gives putin power is his oil and gas monopolies. we should be taking actions today to make sure that vladimir putin understands his monopoly ,ill not be in place, not two 3, 4 years from now. here is the assumption, the reality, and you have to hear the goals we can achieve. where am i wrong? what am i missing? i will start with you, congresswoman harman. >> i agree, and none of us mentioned russian television, but madeleine albright who headed the delegation on which i was a member, speaks russian, and she kept talking about the domination of this message from russian tv into ukraine
everywhere she went. do notot and ukrainians have an effect of counter. i commend you for putting that on the table. it is a very important short-term goal. we discussed the border. everybody agrees what needs to be done on the order. medium term, my understanding is there are now as part of this package of laws that can mentioned, the reanimation package, what has been passed to date, some strong anticorruption law. the problem is it is not enforced. that should be a huge early step of the poroshenko government. on the long-term, absolutely break up the gas monopoly. i am hoping for sectional sanctions. tom friedman, the writer for "the new york times," called it a grand bargain to buy into a package of safe to the limit of
energy, safe transportation of energy, and then export of energy, a variety of energy, not russia asto replace the gas station for europe. another point, senator mark d was going to be here, but i know he has a notion that we should help ukraine become perfect. i think we rehearsed this -- >> if you are going to talk renewable energies, that would rank pretty low on the -- we have to take a look on what is most effective. markey,ing for senator which i have done for many years, his point is that crane is the least efficient user of energy of any of the countries in that region. windows are open in the wintertime because it gets so hot. >> if we could help with efficiency, we could reduce their dependence on russia. there are steps like that we should be taking. >> i agree with most of your
comments. i think there is value in sanctions because -- >> do you honestly think they are going to be imposed where -- we could impose them. it might affect his catalyst at a cost to the west. because that cost of the west, do you think they can be imposed? vladimir putin has crossed the line. .e has done what we said we have not impose them yet. thatcan see sanctions would have a serious impact on russia. i cannot tell you politically that i am sure we can bring the europeans to do that. >> that is a real problem. what is achievable, what is possible. towe should still be trying push, because otherwise the egregious nature of what has happened, the first time since 1945 where a big country has used military force to take territory from a small country
in europe. there needs to be some penalty for this. on the gas question, i think we should be doing things, including looking at exporting itrican lng, to begin make more difficult for gas -- you're now gets about 30% of its gas from russia. europe only slowly should wean itself away, and we should find ways to encourage that. jane said about working with ukraine. ukraine has huge possibilities if they get more efficient use use for gasrgy to production. in five years to seven years, to produce huge oddities of unconventional gas within ukraine. if ukrainians make that happen, they could be in a situation by 2020, they could be importing gas not from russia, but from the west, and be in a position where they would not need gas
from russia. that would be an important change in the dynamic, because ukraine's biggest economic bane right now is it depends on 6% of its gas from russia. >> i would like to continue on this line on energy because we have any a number of discussions in this committee, and while there are disagreements on the committee about things like lng exports, there are strong agreements whether it is helping reverse flows of energy that to ukraine from some of its western or northern neighbors, working with ukraine to develop its own energy capacity. out year he is interested in more exports of energy -- algeria is more interested in exports of energy. i sense of the russian economy is it is a rust belt economy resources, and the toughest thing we could do for whatis to do just exactly senator johnson said, and breakup that monopoly. so we ought to be looking at all
those opportunities, even including potential resources like algeria that would like to ship more energy to europe, so it is not just we can do, although we can do a lot, but other partners who would want to help them wean away from the monopoly is critical. i want to ask just about one topic, and that is the polling sk andthe east, donest eastern area, and you talk about that earlier, ambassador green. the polling is pretty strong that huge numbers in the east did not want to be part of russia, do not want to be severed from ukraine. the polling is also strong that they have a great this trust of the government in kiev, and some of that has been because of the propaganda campaign from russia, but some of it was because steps like this effort to potentially strip away russian as an official language. the population of this part of ukraine speaks russian.
the president needs to address this immediately. you talked about the effort by the president to go to do netsk first. what can the president due to start winning over ukrainians that kiev will not be stiff arming us but will be including us and respecting our traditions, encoding russian language. >> you hate laid out -- you have laid out some of it yourself. some of the symbols are in port and, going to the east, but also capacity building so the government is seen as being able to deliver on some of the basic area.and wants in that i also would not separate out what we have been talking about in terms of corruption. one of the reasons why some of the far reach of the country is so angry with kiev is the
economy was plundered by the previous president and all rife with corruption, and was about.t maidan there were events that sparked it in terms of backing out of the movement towards the eu, but there was also this basic and ger toward a government riddled with corruption, unable to provide basic services. couple that with linking that part of the country to kiev in terms of a national dialogue through the media, exchanges that create a youth network of reform-minded ukrainians. those may seem like long-term activities. i would argue they are not. i would argue there are immediate steps that need to be taken. i think each one of those steps would send very important signals to that part of the problem in addition to all the other things we have been talking about. of what members of
the committee have been putting forward, my view is all of the above. if we are looking for simple solutions, i am not sure they are there. we need to take a very comprehensive approach that has both the security aspects to it, to the capacity holding, to the basic infrastructure that is necessary for delivering services for creating a sense of purpose and unity and having that dialogue. let me give you six pieces of what i think a package that could be used. first of all, the government would offer to de-escalate its use of force if the armed separatists lay down their weapons. decentralization, pushing authority out to the regions and at the local level. >> elections of governors. >> the big news about the may 25 collection is it looked at part of that legitimacy over the acting government because you now have's the money who has a
strong mandate. we give the parliament also a renewed democratic legitimacy and that would be important. agreement -- and poroshenko has talked about this -- some validation of official status for russian status. fifth element would be a strong and visible anticorruption campaign. tens of thousands of people were on the streets come about they were tired of corruption everywhere. i think another part would be his foreign-policy approach. you have had people, mr. pershing go, say they do not want to get too close to nato. six years ago i testified ukraine was ready for a membership action plan, which they were. nato is just a very controversial topic within ukraine. fore there will be some way ukraine not to say never, but to say not now in a way that i think would be useful in avoiding what could be otherwise a very controversial topic. >> how confrontational or provocative is a continued move
toward eu association in eastern ukraine? there has been a political agreement, but economic pacts are supposed to be signed in june. is that provocative in eastern ukraine? >> it looks provocative, and particularlylly -- among the younger ukrainians. you should go forward with the association with the european union. the problem they have is what i believe triggered the russian activity from crimea seizure on to what you see in eastern ukraine is that the russians do not want to see ukraine do that association agreement because ukraine moving in that direction is irretrievable -- >> [indiscernible] wanty have 30 seconds, i to ask one last question. one concern i had early was the ultrance of the nationalist parties.
i viewed it as a real positive that they are candidates of the two name parties that got 2.2% of the road. am i right to read that as a positive trend? >> i think is it a positive trend. they got clobbered. i think we have to allow free expression in the country. i abhor those views, but if we try to censor and bury those views we are doing egyp-- for those insty eastern ukraine as part of the bigger deal, and i would caution against early elections because there has to be enough political capacity for all of the new voices to be able to run campaigns. we saw that in egypt again, the elections were too early, and it cannot win. >> i would add one thing. i think the russian actions in crimea have had the unintended opposite effect that a majority of provinces in eastern and
southern part of the country. eagerness much more on the part, and election showed that, for ukrainian unity as a result of his actions. i think it has had a huge impact. i would add on the national dialogue, which is another -- to expand and deepen the national dialogue would be something the president could do as well. >> thank you. it is good to see some of you. i have not seen some of you in a while. i apologize for missing the oral testimony. a couple of issues, and i apologize if you have covered them. how do you believe, ms. harman, the russian and china deal on natural gas affects the ability for us to export lng in an effective way? is, of the attraction here although it would take a while
to get the infrastructure in place for it to make a real difference, price signals would have been sent immediately. to what extent is that nullified i this big russia-china deal? >> i said earlier i see it as a sign of desperation. russia was beginning to believe and i still believe it should be a reality that we, the u.s. and europe, are going to cut off their ability to sell gas to europe, so they desperately wanted another market. i do not know what the terms are effective. many people speculate they are not favorable to russia. until we know that i am not sure we can fully answer the question. but i think there is an enormous opportunity for the u.s. energy industry to get its act together to work with the europeans and to find new markets in the medium term, including the export of lng. i understand there are regional price lng.at ric
we need to be more strategic and if there are international opportunities for us to sell energy, not just lng to europe, we should explore those. >> thank you. with regard to sanctions, as we mentioned, russia has already tripped some of the measures. they passed the threshold where we said we would move forward with additional sanctions. europeans are not following. what in your view would it take for the europeans to come on board, mr. jeffrey? to russian all, over oteri action by conventional -- russian military action by conventional forces would be the red line for the europeans to take steps forward. i do not think putin will do
this. he is now using irregular forces rather than his own elite types as he used in crimea. this gets back to senator cardin's question, even this sanctions we are seeing, and long-term gas and oil and other energy decisions we are discussing here have as you mentioned, senator flake, tremendous future implications money andvement of economic decisions around the integrated world, and it is hurting russia in many ways when we are taking these steps, even if they are not bold or major, not like what we did against iran or we do not use the tools we use after 9/11. we will not going to russia that way. have very minor steps significant consequences, and the other thing is they are hard for us and particularly for europeans to do. putin does not think we will do
hard things. every time we do it harder halfway hard thing we are sending a signal to him that who knows what we are going to do tomorrow if he keeps this up, and that is a good thing. when ourador green, delegation was there just before the seizure of crimea, the acting prime minister said with regard to the ukrainian with military we have nothing that shoots flies. develop some of that capacity. what are the political invocations of using military force in the east? is ites that play, how played, and how will it play in the future in terms of the dynamics with the russian speakers and leanings of some people? what are the military implications of action? >> first off as we have been
talking about throughout this hearing it is essential that the ukrainian government show it is able to govern and actually to deliver, and a huge part of government's purpose is to deliver security along its borders. that is terrifically important. what you point to is that the infrastructure, security t.,rastructure, military, i. has been weakened, it is weakened, and it is currently no match for russians, whether -- >> military, police force, across-the-board? >> one of the things we heard from ukrainians is, look, we're worried the russians know exactly what we're going to do before we do it because they are the ones that helped set up the i.t. infrastructure in the first place. what the west can do, the west can help and respond to requests and helped ukrainians build
their capacity on all levels to be able to secure the borders, but also deliver the basic services that link those communities in those areas to the central government. right now with all the propaganda they are getting from thugs, with the armed going back and forth and destabilizing wherever they can and starting problems like tossing in molotov cocktails into polling places, it raises doubts in the minds of the communities along the borders. my view is we need to help them assuage those doubts. a big piece of it is basic capacity building, so there is some semblance of governing authority. if i can return to something you said in your remarks, checking is key -- which i think is key, we think in the west that symbols are only long-term. i could not disagree more. what you're talking about is so important because sending
signals, western support, and devotionation to not just ukraine, but to the entire region is essential. those communities that have historically weaker links to central governments, where they are being bombarded with all isse mixed signals, it important they know that the community of democracies is there and will be there. so i think it sends -- it is a long-term signal that has an immediate payoff. it is terrifically important strategically. >> thank you. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. i appreciate the discussion we are having on what our next path should be on sanctions, having spent the last several months in pretty close consultations with me european allies, color pessimistic that they are ready to take the next step.
merkel can be described as stuck in her current position regarding robust caution on sanctions. some european nations are not sitting still. they are moving the other way. senator johnson and i sent a letter to the french today asking them to halt their sale of warships to russians, the type of warships used in the invasion of crimea. i wanted to pin the five of you down on your exact recommendation for us on sanctions, as we have a good conversation about this. assuming the europeans are not willing to move with us on the next level of sanctions and to use ambassador jeffrey's and elegy, a move from kitty sanctions to tiger sanctions, would you recommend that the united states precipitously move forward unilaterally with
tions,al-based sanc regardless if the europeans are ready to move with us, if you could give us quick answers. >> it is nice to see all my former colleagues on the committee. i do not think that unilateral sanctions work well. we have seen this movie in iran. i would put maximum pressure on europe and hope that angela merkel could be helpful to do this. it is in their interest to do this. it would be cheaper in the long run to do this. but if europe will not go along i would move to larger, individual sanctions because getting at more of these folks does get at the energy section. a lot of them are major players inthe energy sectioor russia. a lot of the sanctions imposed to date have had a big fight on russia. >> i think we need to push and see if we can do sanctions with
europe, but if europe will not go along, i would agree more individual sanctions. i would also target families. there are ways to keep people who want to travel from coming here. -- sod look at it and much of the international commerce is denominated in dollars. maybe look at sanctioning one major russian bank. could the united states do that, that should have some russianions on the academy, and we would have to calculate what effect that would be against the u.s. economy. if welateral sanctions, cannot get concerted ones with european, but we have to be careful. they should be designed to persuade, not promote the europeans, because detaining solitary with these -- solid
guarantee -- solidarity with these guys is very important. >> speaking only for myself, i think one of the least reported stores in recent months is what has been happening in moscow, and the fact that putin has taken a number of steps to impose restrictions on his own people and to shut down dialog, which means he obviously fears the effects of sanctions. as you haveis that, heard here, that ratcheting up individual sanctions and family sanctions are important signals, and i think we should constantly be pushing our european allies and remind them of the lines that have already been crossed in an effort to try to get broader sectoral sanctions. >> i would just make the point and thehink ukrainians seernational community crimea as lost, at least for the short term.
i do not think we could afford to see effective occupation -- twoee de facto operation in inces inive provoin eastern ukraine. whatever can be done to find moscow accountable would be very important. >> my second question. in much broader question about the future of nato and the future of article five protections. i agree europe will certainly react if there is a movement of troops across the border. and the idea is is that they are protected under the mutual defense covenant in nato. russia is perfecting a new form of warfare in which they do not march troops across the border, in which they very slowly but methodically contested areas, gain control of areas with
tactics like bribery to provocations. this is a longer-term challenge for us. his article five still a sufficient protection for countries along russia's order? -- border? >> yes, it is, as long it is backed with a real hit ability. that is why the u.s. president has put light infantry alon g those borders. i would hope it would be heavier forces reinforced with native. the light green men were facilitated i the presence of 40,000 traditionalist forces along the border that scissors, paper, rock, blocked ukrainians effectiveg more military action. he has got a sophisticated set militaryry and paira steps.
a stronger military with u.s. forces there come as we had in berlin and other places, so we know there may be only a few americans, but there may be more tomorrow. >> a slightly different version of the question. that say tactics he mused in eastern ukraine were used in romania or bulgaria. let's say russia was actively funding separatist movements within those nations. does notsion is that trigger article five, but should we be having a discussion about whether that protection is sufficient? >> i think we should have a discussion about how to meet our nato obligations, article five is central to that. i think the other nato members have to put more into the fight, both in terms of resources and money, and final point on sanctions, which i forgot. a senior russian official recently suggested we yank their visas for russian duma members
to go to the south florida. that would really get their attention, and i think that is urope couldhat e go along with, even if south florida and the south of france would lose money. if 150 localns protesters seize a television station in eastern estonia? discussion have that in advance so nato has an answer ready. if that happens it will not be useful if nato debates whether that is an article five contingency. >> a good point. thank you. >> thank you for being here, and i would like to pursue that line of questioning and little bit, because it is my understanding that over the next few weeks the nato defense ministers are working to develop a readiness action plan. i wonder if you all could talk a little it about the kinds of
things that we ought to be thinking about, not with respect to ukraine, but with respect to some of the other countries in eastern europe that are potential targets for this kind of russian activity, and what kind of response we ought to be thinking about from nato. should we have a more assertive position, rhetorically, or in terms of other symbolic actions that we could be taking now that would help send a very strong signal, both to russia about taking further actions, but also to our allies about our support for them? so i do not know who -- if you would like to speak to that. 8097, nato haso tried to be nonproductive in terms of its military deployments in countries that joined the 1999 on.
there has not been permanent appointments in place -- deployments in place. the russians have fundamentally changed the rules. now it is time to consider something the pentagon uses the term persistence toward some kind of a permanent literary presence. i do not think these have to be large units or have significant -- but that triple arrow worked and kept -- free for 35 years. it bothers me a bit, and i have truck to talk to my european friends about this, when you look at permanent deployment now in the three baltic states and poland, you have one american airborne company, 152 troops in each place. it should not be just american. it would be great if we had four veryries, that would be good in two ways, in terms of
sending a signal to moscow that the article five commitment is shared by all nato allies and would send a good signal to capitol hill where at some point you may be asking question why this is just an american burden. >> i agree, and i wonder if any of you are willing to speculate on why they have been so reluctant to do that. is it because of the concerns about the relationship with russia and the trading opportunities and their dependence on energy, or is there something else going on? agreement, the 1997 and if you look at the language thet, it is clear, conditions, and it said explicitly, under the current and foreseeable conditions, we will not be making large permanent deployments. so it is clear that if the conditions have not changed under what we have seen in last few months, they will never change. about largealking
and permanent. we are talking about a few companies, from various countries am falling in what we would call battalion packages, with the other four companies on alert ready to be flown in immediately and falling on their equipment. that could happen very rapidly. i sought in kuwait. that could very rapidly and rate 5000 troops. the berlin brigade was a trip wire, but if you remember those pictures of checkpoint charlie, it was a trip wire with m-60 battle tanks. when you have a conventional military capability, you block the ability of putin to intimidate the reaction to the infiltration, the little green men, little seizures of things along the borders, because people can deal with those as police problems without having to worry about 10,000 russian troops coming across the border. i think that is worth exploring more. i want to change the subject. i am sorry i had another hearing so i was not able to get here to
hear your testimony. i wanted to explore the economic situation in ukraine, because early in this crisis one of the views that we heard economy if ukrainian does not improve, it creates a situation where the whole country could fall. i wonder if you could economy does not -- i do who wants to address this, but if you could speak to where we are in terms of economic assistance for ukraine, to what extent do we think that is having an impact there. is there more we should be and are we seeing the austerity measures that are being called for having a negative effect in a way that is challenging? and then corruption. are we seeing any potential who wants to address
this, but if you couldpositive s corruption in a way that we think will have long-term effects? said more we have all or less the same thing, but i think i am the only mother and grandmother on this panel. and we need tough love to hear. everyone cares about ukraine's economic future, but ukraine has to care about ukraine's economic future. piece is huge. if resources from the west go into mcmansions for a few accounts, or fat bank wherever, that is unacceptable, and we have already seen that. the poroshenko government which starts saturday has to move out smartly and he says he has to do that. there will be austerity easures ricard for imf -- measures required for imf loans.
when you tell somebody your gas bill will go up by 100% or more, that is hard to hear. this is the time, the third chance for ukraine for this government to say to folks, you have fought and died in maidan, you want a different kind of government, this is what it will take. afterward you this, the aid will, and we will build a non-corrupt country with a sensible jobs programs and your future will look brighter. ukraine has an offer in the next two years from the imf and other institutions and $35$25 billion billion. the other bit of good news, my understanding is when the imf team with ukraine in march to talk about the program, a set for the first time in dealing with ukrainians in 20 years from ukraine said here's the problem, here is our to do list.
they know technically what they have to do. they understand their ability to access that 25 billion dollars will be tied to implementation of reforms. the big question is can they sustain the support for the austerity measures. raised the price of heating. a great time, because nobody needs it. in december, when people see is whenlls up 60%, that the government says we have to do this for the next couple of years because this is key. >> my time is up. >> thank you. there has been polling in ukraine for a long time, and we have conducted two polls before the election and of course the polls in election. the hood news is the ukrainian people have eyes open. they understand the path ahead is not going to be an easy one.
the polling shows that they are prepared for tough measures and difficult steps. the poll also shows that the leash may be a short one. my own judgment is as long as the government sends clear signals that it is moving to take on corruption there is some hope they will take on these theyvating factors, then have a mandate, then they have the capacity. ukrainian people are well educated. ukrainian people know what they are up against. maidan is very much still front and center to them and close to their hearts, and those who tragically were killed in the madain. there is a sense of euphoria tempered by realism. as long as they take those clear steps the mandate is there. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman, very much. there is an old saying that if you give a person a fish you
feed them for a day. you teach them how to fish, you feed them for a lifetime. so that is what we are really talking about here. leaste is the second energy efficient country in the world. second from the bottom. if it just improved, level,st to poland's will put back all the natural gas it inputs. teach a country to fish. natural gasuntapped resources. vast, third in your ear it teach -- third in europe. teach a country to fish. that would scare russia. that would petrified russia.
i would be the ukrainian people banding to gather themselves and say we must do this. i introduced a bill this morning to deal with this -- of ukraine, that doubles of funding for the state department and usaid, export-import bank, development agencies, to deal with this issue, both the energy efficiency and natural gas development inside their own country. to leverage programs that are already there, but to bring in our expertise to help them tell us about the timeframe it takes for them to do it. that is without question where we have to be, as a nation. that is our opportunity. and exporting lng from our country? wet their homes for a day, can do that, but that is not where we should be. i will say parenthetically, for those who are criticizing president obama's plan on monday
that epa announced to reduce our greenhouse gases and decrying increase of electricity rate, they are the same republicans who are exporting our natural gas to increase our willomestic rates, that it dwarf any increase that comes from the announcement on monday is doing.e epa that is a concern. to this subject, which we should be able to work together on in a bipartisan basis, that that is where we should become and that is what we should be leveraging. you are an expert on this, congresswoman. can you talk about energy efficiency, about this whole area, and how dramatically people believe it can make as a difference, given your own experience with your lighting legislation here in america? you really do know this issue cold. >> thank you, senator markey.
it is interesting to see you at the bottom of the queue of the committee. this is new for me. >> humility is a good thing to have. >> you're very humble now. >> i am proud of my humid lity. >> you mentioned lightbulbs, which were a bipartisan initiative and pass on a bipartisan basis, and efficient lightbulbs seems like a little thing. it saves a huge amount of energy. we also did building standards and fuel efficiency and a number of other things. i cannot vote here any more, but i certainly support your initiative to help countries help themselves. it is a point we have made about tough love for ukraine. to take these steps,
but we could give them tools to help them take these steps. others may want to comment, but i think this is a very good angle. i said something about using our asymmetric strength to take the, but we could give them tools to help them against russia. our asymmetric strength is our economy, some of our good ideas, like these. and the aid we give ukraine could help with these ideas. that would go a lot further than some of the other ideas that are more kinetic. each one of the issues, on this question of russia. energy efficiency, natural gas. we have to help them with the reverse flow and other issues. the real issue -- do you agree this is an area we should really zero in on and that would make a digg or long-term difference than any change in the lng workplace? >> energy efficiency in ukraine and helping ukraine produce its natural gas is a big thing. in 2012, the price that household paid for their heating gas was 1/6 the price that
ukraine was paying to import that. by raising the prices, they're going to introduce a huge incentive for all those households to close the windows. >> >> thank you. ambassador? >> absolutely. i would encourage them to get it from other places as well. >> even if it does increase prices in the u.s. as well? congressman? energyke a position on legislation, but i will say that we believe in a comprehensive approach. it's almost all of the above in terms of building capacity in the ukraine. >> with regard to technical thertise, however, ukrainian government welcomes on energy diversification, a host of all the reform issues -- they have welcomed technical expertise and a major way as they go for