WASHINGTON — Politicians of both the Republican and Democratic parties along with a group of political analysts, think-tankers, scholars and diplomats crowded into a large room under the iconic dome of the U.S. Capitol building in a united demonstration of support for Ukraine on Dec. 4.
The ongoing American impeachment inquiry centers on whether U.S. President Donald Trump abused his power through efforts to pressure Ukraine to provide dirt on a political rival in return for nearly $400 million in U.S. military aid and a White House invitation for Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
A White House visit for Zelensky would have sent a powerful signal to Moscow reiterating U.S. support for Ukraine in its war against Russian aggression. Though military aid was suspended for 55 days, it was eventually released after bipartisan pressure on Trump. But the White House visit never transpired.
That, on top of Trump’s repeated praise for Russian President Vladimir Putin, led many observers to fear Moscow would conclude Washington’s support for Kyiv was wavering and ratchet up its aggression against Ukraine.
While the numerous depositions provided in the impeachment inquiry from senior State Department and national security personnel maintained that unequivocal support for Ukraine was in U.S. interests, Republican members of the House of Representatives Intelligence and Judiciary committees justified Trump’s withholding of military aid by saying he wanted to ensure it was not going to be snatched by corrupt Ukrainian politicians.
Trump’s supporters have repeatedly referred to widespread corruption in Ukraine and
the discredited “Ukraine interference” narrative, which continues to be a talking point for Republican leaders despite the unanimous conclusion by U.S. intelligence agencies that Russia, not Ukraine, interfered in the 2016 election in Trump’s favor.
Meanwhile, Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, continues efforts to dig up dirt on former Vice President Joseph Biden and to sustain the “Ukraine interference” narrative that mimics Kremlin talking points.
The Kyiv Post chronicled Giuliani’s trip to Ukraine last week, where he enlisted corrupt collaborators to bolster the allegations and package them for a right-wing American TV channel.
The Dec. 4 event at the U.S. Capitol was conceived as a riposte to the torrent of distortions and lies aimed at Ukraine, scheduled ahead of the Dec. 9 Normandy format talks between Zelensky and Putin in Paris.
Bipartisan antidote to Russian aggression
The event was organized by the Atlantic Council think tank in conjunction with the bipartisan Congressional Ukraine Caucus and nine other analytical and scholarly organizations spanning the political spectrum.
“The best antidote to Russian aggression is bipartisanship here in the United States,” said Heather Conley of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a participant in the event.
Other groups involved included the American Enterprise Institute, American Foreign Policy Council, Brookings Institution, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Center for European Policy Analysis, Center for Strategic and International Studies, German Marshall Fund of the United States and Jamestown Foundation. There was only standing room in the space, and the event was heavily attended by American journalists.
The conference was opened by three members of Congress, representing both parties. Marcy Kaptur, a Democratic representative from Ohio, said that Ukraine’s stand against Russia was not only for its own defense. “Ukraine is the skirmish line for liberty on the European continent.”
She added that the Ukrainian people made their voices known during the elections earlier this year and “want to live among the community of democracies free from Russian invasions and aggression.”
It is critical, she said, for U.S. assistance to Ukraine to remain “robust” to deter Russian aggression and to support Zelensky’s democratic agenda. “Congress must speak with one voice to make that clear,” said Kaptur.
Republican Congressman Andy Harris of Maryland said he was proud that his mother was a Ukrainian born in lands that are now part of Poland and also emphasized the importance of continued bipartisan support for Ukraine.
“This is an issue where Republicans and Democrats, conservatives and liberals, stand together… to show the strategic importance of Ukraine, a flashpoint in the world,” said Harris. “The United States must take a leadership position to ensure that permanent liberty and democracy are established and preserved in Ukraine.”
Republican Brian Fitzpatrick, a representative from Pennsylvania, told the audience that he had previously worked as an FBI agent and had spent much time in Kyiv helping Ukrainian law-enforcement agencies develop methods to fight corruption. His experience there, he said, showed him that, although Ukraine indeed suffered from pervasive corruption, serious efforts are being made to tackle the scourge.
Russia’s sinister midwifing
Democratic Senator Chris Murphy from Connecticut and Republican Senator Ron Johnson from Wisconsin also addressed the event and voiced strong support for Ukraine.
Murphy, who sits on the Senate’s foreign relations committee, warned that if Ukraine fails because of a lack of U.S. support, it would greatly harm America’s own national security.
“From the beginning, the reason that we have cared so deeply on pushing back on the Russian invasion of Crimea, Luhansk and Donetsk is because we know that if Russia gets away with it there, not only will they be more likely to press out into the periphery and other places, but other nations who have similar designs will do the same,” he told the crowd.
Murphy did aim some criticism at the White House, saying it had taken steps to weaken the Zelensky administration. But despite that, he said he was heartened by indications that bipartisan backing for Ukraine is still largely holding firm.
Murphy accused Russia of “midwifing” or introducing and testing methods for propaganda and cyberattacks in Ukraine that could be subsequently used in America. He said that it was in U.S. interests to confront those tools in Ukraine to better learn how to protect the U.S. from similar assaults.
Republican Johnson said that he had met Zelensky on a trip to Ukraine last September and felt he was “the real deal” and genuinely wanted to keep his promises to root out corruption and continue reforms to deepen Ukraine’s pro-Western course.
“Russia offers nothing to other countries except destabilization and disruption. [A better] economic future lies with the West and a free market system,” Johnson said.
While voicing support for Ukraine, Johnson also said he regretted that the issues about Trump and Ukraine had come out into the public. “I think it is very unfortunate that the unpleasant sausage-making process of forging foreign policy was fully exposed.”
He believed that this exposure was not helpful and that he and other supporters of Ukraine could have reinstated the military aid Trump had suspended behind the scenes.
Ostrich realists
Ambassador John Herbst, Director of the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center, said America’s moral obligation to assist Ukraine rests on the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, in which Washington gave Ukraine assurances of territorial protection after Kyiv gave up the nuclear arsenal it inherited from the USSR.
He said it was true that “assurances” as opposed to guarantees did not require the United States to intervene in the current war, but he labeled that as lawyer’s quibbling to avoid a moral obligation.
He also criticized those he called “ostrich realists” who tried to blame Western support for Ukraine or NATO expansion for Russian aggression instead of putting the blame where it belonged — Russia’s bullying and “revisionist” foreign policy agenda. Herbst maintained that it is imperative to counter Putin, lest he become emboldened further.
“Stopping Putin in Donbas makes it certain that we will not have to stop him in Estonia… This is the smart policy, this is the prudent policy, he said.
Donald Jensen, senior fellow at the Center for European Policy Analysis, believes that Russia is a power in decline. “But that will make it more, not less, aggressive,” he said. “In Ukraine, Syria, Central Africa they get a lot of bang for their relatively few bucks, and this is going to continue… Her appetite will not be satisfied.”
Trump and Ukraine
However, bipartisan support for Ukraine has undoubtedly come under strain because of the impeachment inquiry. On Dec. 10, Democratic leaders from the House of Representatives formally called for Trump to be removed from office, citing two articles of impeachment and accusing him of abusing his power and obstructing Congress.
The full House will be asked to vote on whether to impeach Trump as soon as this week.
As the Democratic Party dominates the House, the vote will likely be in favor of impeachment. But then the House hands the matter over to the Republican-controlled Senate, and most observers think it extremely unlikely that the necessary two-thirds majority can be found there to impeach Trump.
Trump has denied all the charges against him and called the impeachment process a “hoax” and a “joke.” After Congress announced the articles of impeachment, a White House spokesperson said that: “The president will address these false charges in the Senate and expects to be fully exonerated, because he did nothing wrong.”
And there are few signs that anyone in the Republican Party will break ranks.
The hope of those attending last week’s event at the Capitol is that Republican politicians will not be put into a position where supporting Ukraine might open them to accusations of disloyalty to Trump.
Yet while Trump seems intent on signaling support for Russia at every turn, many were nevertheless astonished that Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov was invited to the White House on the same day the impeachment articles against Trump were announced.
The Washington Post quoted the former U.S. ambassador to Moscow, Michael McFaul, as hoping that the “horrible symbolism” of Lavrov’s invitation to the White House instead of Zelensky the day after the Normandy Format meeting in Paris was “just a mistake.”
However, not everything went well for Lavrov. Prior to departing the White House, Lavrov clashed with U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo at a press conference when Lavrov tried to dispute that Russia had meddled in the 2016 U.S. election.
Pompeo, one of Trump’s closest appointees who has remained in the administration longer than most, told him the evidence was not in doubt and America would not tolerate Russian intrusion.
