In the new episode of “Rada Natsbezpeky” [State Security Council] (Islnd.tv), on the eve of the New Year, Tatiana Popova interviewed the press-attaché of the U.S. Embassy in Ukraine, Daniel Langenkamp. The English version is exclusively for Kyiv Post.
The Ukrainian video version is available here.
Nato Membership Action Plan (MAP)
Popova: When might Ukraine receive a MAP?
Langenkamp: To me, it’s always been an ambition of Ukraine’s to join NATO. It’s been natural for us to see that, as with other eastern European countries. We’ve always said we support Ukraine’s efforts to join NATO. We provided a lot of assistance, although many people don’t know about it. We’ve provided $2.5 billion in military or security assistance alone to Ukraine since 2015. $2.5 billion is a lot of money, so let me put that in terms that Ukrainians can understand: that’s about 1,500 hryvnia per citizen of Ukraine. That’s money that does a lot of things. It helps make the native forces more intra-interoperable, it provides training and equipment. It really helped Ukraine move forward in its reform path in security matters as well.
So going back to your question about when MAP will come. I mean, really, that’s a question that you have to ask the 30 NATO allies, because it’s a decision not just for the United States, but for all of them. And they will make that determination about a MAP or any other status for Ukraine when they see that Ukraine is able to be a contributor to NATO and also able to uphold the commitments of NATO membership.
If I were Ukraine I would advise — or this is what the US embassy and the United States government advises: focus not on MAP or the status, focus on the reforms that are necessary to join NATO. One thing that Ukraine can take advantage of is the Enhanced Opportunity Partnership status that was granted to Ukraine one year ago. It is a status that gives Ukraine a lot of opportunities to cooperate with NATO. They should take as much advantage of that as possible. There’s also the NATO annual national plan for Ukraine which also lays out a whole range of reforms that Ukraine should take advantage of now. So, when the question of MAP really does become active for Ukraine – hopefully in the near future – then Ukraine will be that much further down the line in its path towards NATO membership.
I would focus on the reforms, focus on getting ready, and then the NATO membership can happen that much faster. This then will also demonstrate to NATO members, the 30 members, that Ukraine is that much more ready. If it does all of that it’ll actually make a persuasive case for Ukraine with the NATO members.
Popova: As an alternative to MAP, there’s MNNA (Major Non-NATO Ally). What is better?
Langenkamp: I think it’s a very good question because this discussion of major non-NATO ally status, has come up a lot in the recent past. If I were Ukraine, I would focus on NATO membership itself, not some other kind of status that would distract Ukraine from its real goal of integration into NATO. So, the reforms necessary for NATO membership are more important. I would focus first on the MAP over the long and medium term, instead of MNNA. I agree with that.
Military cooperation real and fake
Popova: Further military cooperation with the United States?
Langenkamp: Our military cooperation will continue as it has over the last eight years. We stand with Ukraine and its efforts, as we say all the time. We support its efforts to assert its sovereignty and territorial integrity, including its territorial waters, by the way.
We have no plans to change the cooperation that we have with Ukraine. So, we look forward to continuing to cooperate as we have because Ukraine is an important strategic partner for the United States. We have a strategic partnership commission with Ukraine that will continue. We also have a defense framework with Ukraine that will continue. We are constantly reviewing those frameworks to see how we can help further cooperation. So, I would say that if Russia has concerns about US – Ukraine cooperation they can raise them. We will raise with Russia our concerns about Russia’s aggression and threats. We’re seeking a dialogue with Russia but that certainly does not mean that we’re going to allow Russia to determine what security relationships Ukraine can have. That is a decision that only Ukraine should make, not Russia.
Popova: Recently, several fake stories have appeared about “American instructors in Avdeevka” or some “American chemical weapons” close to the front line. For me it sounds really strange, because I’ve been to Avdeevka. It’s a very small town. Any foreigner would be noticed there. What can you say about these pieces of Russian fakes news?
Langenkamp: We are aware of those allegations by the Russian defense minister. And when we saw them, we immediately responded. Yesterday, Secretary Blinken commented. We had our spokesperson issue a tweet about it yesterday, saying that those allegations were false. Our Secretary of Defense’s spokesperson also said that they’re absolutely false. Russia needs to focus on de-escalation and such comments don’t help de-escalation.
They need to return to diplomacy, and we need to actually talk about what concerns they have if they put them in a diplomatic fashion. First of all, Russia needs to de-escalate. It needs to bring its troops away from the border and refrain from making statements like that which don’t help at all.
Energy security
Popova: In the event of a major energy crisis in Europe, will the USA be ready to help?
Langenkamp: We can’t tell US companies what to do in terms of signing contracts to provide extra energy. We have been working very hard to facilitate the supply of liquid natural gas to Ukraine and to other European countries to help, and also with other energy sources as well. We are using our diplomatic resources, of course, to ensure that Russia abides by the contracts to provide energy to Europe that it has agreed to with Ukraine and other countries. This is a complex question and it’s something that we will continue to pay very close attention to.
One thing that we’ve made certain to emphasize, is that Russia should not use gas as a weapon against Ukraine or any other country. This is a reason that the discussions over Nordstrom 2 are so important. Nordstrom 2 is not operating now which means it is not leverage for Russia. It is actually leverage for Europe and the other countries that are involved in receiving that gas. If Russia wants it to be operational, then it should not be thinking about aggression against Ukraine.
Due process in the courts
Popova: The embassy’s website has reported that they are following the case against former President Poroshenko and that it is critical that the process be based on the rule of law rather than politics. What does that mean?
Langenkamp: It means that Ukraine is seeking European Union membership and NATO membership, and the rule of law is really a critical part of that — abiding by it as it remains on the path to European Union membership and NATO membership. I should take a step back. I can’t really speak to European Union membership because we’re not European Union members. But following the rule of law means making sure that any case is carefully conducted, so that any defendant receives full due process, so that any process is not politicized in any way.
We have no commentary on the merits of that case against the former president. But what we would say is that we believe that President Poroshenko and any other defendants need to be accorded all the rights with which they should be accorded, in line with due process. It’s very important especially in cases like this one.
By Tetiana Poopva – journalist, TV-host “Rada Natsbezpeky” at Islnd.tv, ex-Deputy Minister of Information policy of Ukraine (2015-2016), ex-Advisor to the Minister of Defense of Ukraine (2014-2015)
