STATEMENTS BY FOREIGN MISSIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS_1-13 April 2014
13 April 2014 – NATO – NATO Secretary General concerned about escalation in eastern Ukraine
I am extremely concerned about the further escalation of tension in Eastern Ukraine. We see a concerted campaign of violence by pro-Russian separatists, aiming to destabilise Ukraine as a sovereign state. The reappearance of men with specialised Russian weapons and identical uniforms without insignia, as previously worn by Russian troops during Russia`s illegal and illegitimate seizure of Crimea, is a grave development.
I call on Russia to de-escalate the crisis and pull back its large number of troops, including special forces, from the area around Ukraine`s border.
Any further Russian military interference, under any pretext, will only deepen Russia`s international isolation.
Details:
13 April 2014 – NATO – “De-escalation starts on the ground” Article by the NATO Secretary General, Anders Fogh Rasmussen
My first speech as NATO Secretary General in 2009 was called "NATO and Russia: A New Beginning." My aim was to develop a true strategic partnership with Russia, extending practical cooperation in areas where we share security interests, while insisting that Russia should fully comply with its international obligations, including respecting the territorial integrity and political freedom of its neighbours.
Through the years, we made significant progress, working together on areas such as counter-terrorism, counter-piracy and security in Afghanistan. But Russia’s annexation of Crimea ended that new beginning, and undermined the very basis of the partnership we had built with such great efforts.
Today, Russia is speaking and behaving not as a partner, but as an adversary.
While tens of thousands of combat-ready Russian troops stand poised on Ukraine`s border, Russia is also waging a propaganda war the like of which we have not seen since the end of the Cold War. Its purpose is to pervert the truth, divert attention from Russia`s illegal actions, and subvert the authorities in Ukraine.
In recent weeks, Russian officials have accused NATO of breaking its promises, interfering in Ukraine’s internal affairs, and escalating the crisis. It is time to see these claims for what they are: a smokescreen designed to cover up Russia`s own broken promises, interference and escalation.
Broken promises
Russia accuses NATO of breaking a 1990 promise that it would never expand into Central and Eastern Europe. At different times, Russian leaders have attributed the promise to private statements by Germany’s former Chancellor Helmut Kohl and Foreign Minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher, and then-U.S. Secretary of State James Baker.
But in 1990, the only discussion was about the reunification of Germany. NATO enlargement was not on the agenda, as the Warsaw Pact only dissolved a year later. Moreover, any such pledge would have had to lead to a change of NATO`s founding treaty made by consensus of all Allies.
The reality is that no such pledge was ever made, and Russia’s leaders have failed to produce a single document to back up this oft-repeated claim. Since it was founded, NATO has embraced sovereign states who made their free choice to join the Alliance. That is the spirit of democracy.
Over the past seventy years, Russia has repeatedly promised to respect the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of all states. It did so, for example, when it signed the United Nations Charter of 1945, the Helsinki Final Act of 1975 and the NATO-Russia Founding Act of 1997.
Russia is now violating Ukraine’s territorial integrity by occupying Crimea, and violating Ukraine’s sovereignty by trying to impose a federal system. Russia has broken its word. It has done damage to its reputation that will take years to heal. Blaming NATO will not make that better; it will make it worse.
Interference
Russian leaders also claim that NATO has interfered in Ukraine’s internal affairs by pushing the country towards membership.
NATO’s track record shows how false that is. When Ukraine expressed the aspiration to join the Alliance ten years ago, we welcomed Ukraine`s aspiration. When Ukraine opted for non-bloc status, five years ago, we respected Ukraine`s decision. When Prime Minister Yatseniuk recently visited Brussels, he made clear that membership “is not on the radar.” That is Ukraine`s sovereign choice - and NATO fully respects it.
Meanwhile, Russia has repeatedly tried to define, even dictate, Ukraine’s course. Top officials have demanded that the constitution be rewritten to create a federal state. They have demanded that Ukraine declare itself neutral, to safeguard Russia’s security.
This contradicts one of the fundamental principles of Euro-Atlantic security: that each state is free to choose its own alliances. The Soviet Union accepted that principle when it signed the Helsinki Accords in 1975; Russia inherited the obligation.
Only Ukraine can decide what is best for Ukraine - in full respect for all the people of Ukraine, whatever language they speak. Other countries may help to facilitate dialogue, but they cannot decide on Ukraine’s behalf.
If Russia is sincere about a dialogue, the first step should be to pull back the tens of thousands of troops it has deployed on Ukraine`s border without any justification. Otherwise, any talks would not be a dialogue, but diktat.
Escalation
Russian officials allege that NATO has escalated the crisis by moving military forces to Central and Eastern Europe and publicly condemning Russia’s actions. Foreign Minister Lavrov even wrote that “de-escalation starts with rhetoric.”
The reality is that actions speak louder than words: escalation and de-escalation both start on the ground.
Since the crisis began, Russia has occupied Crimea with thousands of troops and staged a rigged referendum That is clearly escalation. NATO has offered to support the Ukrainian government’s defence reforms and boost the transparency and democratic control of the armed forces. That is clearly not escalation.
Russian forces have seized Ukrainian military bases and warships. That is escalation. NATO has sent civilian experts to advise Ukraine on the security of critical infrastructure. That is not escalation.
Russia has moved some 40,000 troops to Ukraine’s border, backed up by tanks, fighters, artillery and attack helicopters: escalation. NATO has launched AWACS radar aircraft flights over Poland and Romania and sent six extra aircraft to the Baltic States to protect Allied airspace: not escalation.
Dispelling the smokescreen
The Russian propaganda against NATO and the West is nothing but smokescreen to cover up its own illegal actions. Dispel the smokescreen, and the truth on the ground is clear: Russia has annexed Crimea at the barrel of a gun, in breach of all its international commitments..
Russia is now isolated in the world, its international credibility in tatters. This is not in Russia’s interest.
Russia faces a choice: to stop blaming others for its own actions, pull back its troops, step back into line with its international obligations and start rebuilding trust.
Otherwise, Russia will only face deeper international isolation. That is in nobody’s interest, and will make our world only more dangerous and unpredictable.
I call on Russia to de-escalate. There are concrete steps to be taken.
Details:
11 April 2014 - The United States – Treasury Announces New Sanctions Related to Ukraine
The U.S. Department of the Treasury`s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) April 11 designated Crimean separatist leaders Pyotr Zima, Aleksei Chaliy, Rustam Temirgaliev, Yuriy Zherebtsov, Mikhail Malyshev, and Valery Medvedev, former Ukrainian official Sergey Tsekov, and Crimea-based gas company Chernomorneftegaz pursuant to Executive Order (E.O.) 13660. These individuals and this entity are being sanctioned for being responsible for or complicit in, or having engaged in, actions or policies that undermine democratic processes or institutions in Ukraine, actions or policies that threaten the peace, security, stability, sovereignty, or territorial integrity of Ukraine, or misappropriation of state assets of Ukraine or of an economically significant entity in Ukraine; or having asserted governmental authority over any part or region of Ukraine without the authorization of the government of Ukraine.
“Crimea is occupied territory. We will continue to impose costs on those involved in ongoing violations of Ukraine`s sovereignty and territorial integrity,” said Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence David S. Cohen.
Details:
11 April 2014 - The United States – Ukraine in the White House Daily Press Briefing
MR. CARNEY: Well, as you know, the President spoke with Chancellor Merkel yesterday from Air Force One about the concerning situation in eastern Ukraine. We continue to see there that pro-Russian separatists, apparently with support from Moscow, continue an orchestrated campaign of incitement and sabotage to undermine and destabilize the Ukrainian state. And we remain concerned about increased Russian pressure on Ukraine overall. And we saw similar protest activities in Crimea before the Russian intervention and illegal annexation, so this of course if cause for concern.
The President and the Chancellor talked about the need for Russia to move its troops back from the border region. In Crimea, we also continue to call for Russia to withdraw its forces, which are violating Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. As we have said, we will hold Russia accountable for its actions in Ukraine, whether overt or covert.
We call on President Putin and his government to cease all efforts to destabilize Ukraine, and we caution against further military intervention. We remain prepared to impose further costs on Russia for its actions or further provocations.
When it comes to NATO and the important work underway to reassure NATO allies, the United States has urgently been stepping up on a bilateral basis to reassure our NATO allies who are most concerned by the Russian intervention in Ukraine and Russia’s buildup of military forces. To date, those efforts have been mostly taken advantage -- have mostly taken advantage of existing missions, such as deploying 12 additional F-16s to our aviation training detachment to Poland, and augmenting our contribution to the NATO-Baltic Air Policing Mission with six additional F-16s.
As you know, while in Europe, the President asked those NATO allies who are capable of making similar contributions to do so as quickly as possible. This was done with a view to moving this discussion more formally into NATO channels by tasking NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander, General Breedlove, at the NATO Foreign Ministerial to develop additional measures to enhance our collective defense and ensure a coordinated and continuous additional land, air, and sea presence in the region from now through at least the end of the year. In other words, moving from an ad-hoc “coalition of the ready” approach to a more concerted and strategic look at what NATO can and should do to bolster its Article 5 obligations and assurances.
In other words, we’ve taken a lot of steps to reassure our NATO allies. We have had discussions with, when the President was in Europe and since, our partners on other contributions that our NATO allies can make in the effort to reassure the alliance and those nations that are understandably most concerned by Russia’s actions in Ukraine.
Details:
11 April 2014 - The European Union – EU pays €19 million in Budget Support for environment and border management
The European Commission has executed three payments today in favour of the Ukrainian Government for a total of €19.075 million, of which €14.775 million for meeting agreed targets in border management and €4.3 million for environmental protection.
The payments were made on the basis of progress achieved in the Ukrainian national policies in these fields, as assessed by the European Commission, in line with the conditions agreed between the EU and the Ukrainian Government in the Financing Agreement (FA) signed in 2011.
The Commission`s assessment showed that Ukraine fulfilled five conditions (performance indicators) out of total nine in implementing the Environment Sector Budget Support Programme, for example the development of regional programmes on environmental protection or simplification of the environmental authorisation system. Some indicators like modernisation of the waste management infrastructure or stabilising the emissions of pollutants and greenhouse emissions in the air did not meet the targets agreed in the FA. Therefore €4.3 million out of a potential €10 million was paid.
Assessment of the eleven specific conditions foreseen in the FA for the Border Management Sector Policy showed that Ukraine partially or fully fulfilled seven conditions out of total eleven including the establishment of the eCustoms system and decrease by 20% waiting time at state border. Some indicators such as decreasing the level of corruption, progress in border demarcation or creating telecommunication and online networks between the border guard and the customs were not achieved. Therefore €9.75 million out of a potential €17 million was paid as a first variable tranche in addition to a fixed tranche of €5 million.
Mr Andrew Rasbash, the Head of Co-operations in the EU Delegation to Ukraine, said, "These very timely payments are part of the ongoing cooperation between Ukraine and the EU. The precise amounts reflect reform "performance" in previous years… The relatively limited amount paid (€13 million was "lost") reflects the fact that agreed targets for sectorial reform were not met to a very significant extent..."
Background: How does the European Commission provide budget support?
The Commission generally provides budget support using a combination of fixed (general) tranches linked to eligibility criteria, and variable (specific) tranches that are also linked to progress in meeting agreed targets in for example health, education, or public financial management. Budget support involves policy dialogue, financial transfers to the national treasury of the partner country, performance assessment and capacity-building, based on partnership and mutual accountability. It should not be seen as an end in itself, but as a means of delivering better aid and achieving sustainable development objectives by fostering partner countries` ownership of development policies and reforms. It addresses the source, not just the symptoms, of under-development, and provides the platform on which to engage in a broad policy dialogue with partner country on key development issues.
Details::0
10 April 2014 - The United States – Readout of the President’s Call with Chancellor Merkel of Germany
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
President Obama spoke today with Chancellor Merkel about the concerning situation in eastern Ukraine, where pro-Russian separatists, apparently with support from Moscow, continue an orchestrated campaign of incitement and sabotage to undermine and destabilize the Ukrainian state. The leaders again called for Russia to move its troops back from the border region. They also discussed issues relating to the forthcoming meeting of the Ukrainian, Russian, and U.S. foreign ministers and EU High Representative. The two leaders commended the Ukrainian government’s efforts to move forward on constitutional reform, decentralization, and democratic elections and emphasized the importance of the international community’s strong financial support for Ukraine. The President underscored the need for the United States, European Union, and other global partners to be prepared to meet further Russian escalation with additional sanctions. The President and the Chancellor look forward to continuing their discussion during her forthcoming visit to Washington.
Details:
10 April 2014 - The United States – Transatlantic Security Challenges: Central and Eastern Europe
Testimony
Victoria Nuland
Assistant Secretary,Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs
Statement Before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee
As prepared
Chairman Murphy and Ranking Member Johnson – I am honored to be here today to testify on the security challenges facing the Transatlantic community in Central and Eastern Europe. Let me begin by thanking you for your leadership in the passage of the Support for the Sovereignty, Integrity, Democracy and Economic Stability of Ukraine Act. This legislation, which was supported by every member of this subcommittee, will enable the United States to provide needed help to Ukraine as the country undertakes its difficult transition.
I would also like to thank you for your visits to the region. I know that Chairman Murphy and Senator McCain have traveled to Kyiv twice in the past 5 months, and that Senator McCain -- along with Ranking Member Johnson, Senator Barrasso, and others -- will travel to the Baltic states and Moldova this weekend. This engagement demonstrates America’s continuing bipartisan support for a Europe whole, free and at peace.
For over 20 years, the United States and our European Allies have worked to integrate Russia more closely into the Euro-Atlantic community through our bilateral engagement and organizations like the OSCE, the WTO and the NATO-Russia Council. Russia’s actions in Ukraine are an affront to this effort and fundamentally change the security landscape of Eastern and Central Europe. Today I appreciate the opportunity to discuss the impact of Russia’s actions on Ukraine, our policy response to their actions and other challenges in the region.