News

On March 29, the Institute of World Policy held a public debate “The USA for UKRAINE: Partner, Patron or Ally?” and presented the research “Foreign Policy Audit: Ukraine-U.S.”Alyona GETMANCHUK, Director of the IWP, told about main findings of her research “Foreign Policy Audit: Ukraine-U.S.”

Vadym PRYSTAYKO, Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs of Ukraine, Geoffrey R. PYATT, U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine, and Andy HUNDER, President, American Chamber of Commerce in Ukraine, presented their remarks on the US-Ukraine relations.

To download the publication, please, click here.
{17}
{20}
Remarks by Ambassador Pyatt at the Institute of World Policy Debate on U.S.-Ukraine Relations
Aloyna, first of all, let me start by saying thank you for putting together this terrific panel. If I had to think of two other people who I would like to appear with, who encapsulate where we are going in our strategic relationship, it would be Andy and Deputy Minister Prystayko. Andy, because the trade and economic relationship will be so important to the long-term and Vadym because there are few people in the Ukrainian Diplomatic Corps who have invested so much of their careers and energy in our bilateral partnership – so you’ve got the right people here. The timing is also perfect as the President gets on the plane tomorrow to go to Washington, D.C. But I also really want to single out the work that you and the Institute of World Policy have done here, because it doesn’t happen enough in Ukraine. That is to say, certainly in the United States, we have found that a vibrant and skeptical and well-informed think tank culture is essential to the functioning of civil society, and essential to the functioning of our democracy. And I really commend the professionalism, the “not-in-anybody’s-pocketism” that the Institute of World Policy has brought to this task. So please keep it up.

I will try to be very brief in my substantive remarks because I really want to have a dialogue. I would make just a few points at the top. One, as someone who has lived and breathed, for the past two and a half years, this exceptional period in Ukraine’s history – I have to say, I don’t think it can get any better than this in terms of the level of commitment you have seen from President Obama, Vice President Biden, Secretary Kerry, Assistant Secretary Nuland, dozens of members of the U.S. House and Senate. I know sometimes we disappoint you because we can’t do more, but this, as I said, this is just about as good as it gets. And I am extremely proud of the degree to which the United States has been able to make good on President Obama’s commitment to stand with the Ukrainian people in the face of this trying period of aggression from your neighbor.

As I thought about my remarks today, I tried to put on my political science hat and think back to university – to offer something that was intelligent and sophisticated. And one of the things that I remember was a lecture at one point, on the different kinds of foreign policy relationships and the question of transactional relationships versus values-based relationships. And I thought that was a good framework for thinking about your report because I think one of the concepts of your report suggests, perhaps implicitly, is that now is the moment for Ukraine to move into that relatively small universe of international partners with whom the United States has a relationship that is fundamentally grounded on values. That is to say, we have done a lot together over the past 25 years but often times it has been very transactional – you do this, I’ll do that.

If the Revolution of Dignity can consolidate itself, if President Poroshenko can achieve what he says he seeks in terms of dramatic progress in the war against corruption, dramatic progress in moving Ukraine towards European values, European standards of governance, in the context of the Association Agreement, it has the prospect of really putting our relationship on a fundamentally different plane. And so, from that standpoint, I was very glad as I read the report to see the strong focus on the war against corruption, the strong focus on building democratic, accountable institutions in Ukraine, and your very clear indication of the priority attached to Ukraine’s European choice. And I have said many times, I think if you look back at the crisis that began in November of 2013, the root of the crisis was the Kremlin’s refusal to accept Ukraine’s European choice. That is an act of defiance which the United States, our G7, and European partners have signaled will not stand. That is to say, only Ukraine and only the Ukrainian people get to choose your future course. And there will certainly be no U.S. Administration that I think, will question that fundamental assumption of U.S. policy.

This was a report written for a Ukrainian audience, but I think it’s also a good lever to ask, “How does it look from the U.S. side?” Of course, we are having a little debate in the United States right now in conjunction with our presidential elections and there will be a lot more between now and January, as our own think tanks begin to generate recommendations for the next president, whoever she or he is, and policy options. One thing that is very clear is that Ukraine will be part of that conversation, probably the first time since independence, when there will be an active debate about what to do with our Ukraine relationship in conjunction with a presidential transition in the United States.

There are skeptics who will say that no matter how much support the international community provides for Ukraine, no matter how much money and technical support Ukraine receives, Ukraine is not up to the challenge of defeating corruption. That is why today’s action in the Rada, which we strongly welcome, to fire a discredited Prosecutor General is so important. That is why it is so important to find a new Prosecutor General, a successor who enjoys the support of Ukrainian civil society, who is viewed as professional, independent, committed to the values and principles that so many have sacrificed so much to achieve on the Maidan, and in the war with Russia. That is why Ukrainian civil society must remain vigilant in continuing to work to build this new society that you have done so much already to achieve.

I should say also, I think one of the risks, and I talked about this at greater length last week in Odesa so I won’t dwell on it now, but I really do think that it is a huge mistake to overlook how much progress Ukraine has made over the past two years. Whether it’s the IMF agreement, the achievement of energy independence, the cleaning up of your financial sector, the work that the Central Bank has done, the renovation of your defense and security institutions, the reform of the police, there is a great deal of progress that has already happened and it’s important not to lose track of that. And I say that as somebody who is part of the conversation in terms of assessing both the glass half-full and also what remains to be done.

In that regard, one area that has not gotten enough attention, I think, is defense reform. I am extremely proud of what we have achieved as a partner of Ukraine in the defense and security area. Our Special Forces training at Khmelnitsky, our training for the National Guard, and now the Army at Yavoriv. We have more than 500 NATO soldiers on the ground at Yavoriv now from the United States, Canada, Lithuania. I see Ambassador Marius Janukonis here, and other partners as well, working to increase the capacity of the Ukrainian military to defend your own sovereign territory. In this regard, it’s important to recognize that our goal, as NATO, as Ukraine’s partners, is to help Ukraine to develop a more capable military, not just a better-armed military. And from that perspective, the agenda of defense reform that Minister Poltorak and his team, Dmytro Shymkiv at Bankova, have worked so hard on, is extremely important. We are strong supporters of the reform agenda that is laid out in the RAND Corporation report that President Poroshenko commissioned. We hope very much that the general staff will endorse these principles. We have worked very successfully with the Rada, our work with the Marshall Center in Germany, to help build the capacity in the Rada for defense oversight – moving towards European standards of parliamentary and democratic, civilian control of the military. These are all very important principles that will be even more important over the next couple of weeks as we head towards the first week of July and the NATO summit in Warsaw. Where I am sure there will be some stock taking on all of these questions.

We have already committed $266 million in security sector assistance since the beginning of the war with Russia. That sum will grow significantly in 2016. But, again, the question is not so much how much are we able to bring to the table, as it is how much are we able to support those who are seeking to reform the system. And that is as true in the defense sector as it is on energy where, again, Naftogaz reform hasn’t gotten enough attention – enormous importance of the corporate governance reform in Naftogaz. There’s more work to be done, you mentioned privatization, and I’m sure that Andy will address that as well.

Last point I would like to refer to. And this, I think, if I were to criticize your report at all, I was struck that it is relatively light on the nonproliferation and disarmament agenda. This is an issue that is of transcendent importance for President Obama. It is also an area where Ukraine has been an international leader for more than two decades now. And of course, the focus of President Poroshenko’s trip to Washington this week will be President Obama’s fourth, and final, Nuclear Security Summit. So I would just underline, from a U.S. perspective, the importance of Ukraine continuing to uphold the highest standards of nuclear nonproliferation and disarmament, its nuclear security, the importance of Ukraine being, as Vadym knows, a strong partner in the United Nations in Geneva, the IAEA, in working to secure a world that is safe from the threat of nuclear proliferation and nuclear weapons use. In that regard, it’s very important to recognize both the decisions that Ukraine has made in the past on nuclear disarmament, the decision on removal of HEU at the beginning of the Obama administration, but also what we have been able to do together including the spectacular new state-of-the-art Neutron Source Facility that President Poroshenko and I were able to see last week in Kharkiv, which is a physical manifestation of our commitment to continue building on what has historically been a very strong and proactive partnership between your scientists and the United States.

So let me stop with that. As I said, I have given short shrift in these remarks to the economic and business relationship which is also of fundamental importance. We’ve got the $100 million Cargill contract recently, and I think there will be much more of that coming down the road. But I know that’s the bread and butter for Andy, so I will turn it over to my friend and colleague in that regard.

{18}
{19}

Photo: US Embassy in Kyiv
{4}
{6}
{7}
{8}
{10}
{12}
{13}
{16}

See the previous paper “Ukraine-Germany Relations: How to Turn Situational Partnership into Priority One”.

The initiative is supported by the Black Sea Trust for Regional Cooperation of German Marshall Fund, and the UNITER project implemented in Ukraine by Pact and supported by the US Agency for International Development (USAID). On top of that, IWP expresses their gratitude to the International Renaissance Foundation, the Think Tank Fund and the Embassy of Sweden (SIDA).