Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 15
019 my , My sole day to provi tees” inquiry. rrategic ation about ppear 10% the Commit bout the st \dditional inform: Mr. Chairman, I appre perspective on the eve purpose is to provide the Jmportance of Ukraine to 1 the incidents in question. have dedicated my life to serving U.S. interest ary and civilian roles. My background and expe have been honored to serve under every administratio cadet at West Point, then as an Democratic, since 1985. For 50 years, J have served the country, starting 26 5 © st Point, infantry officer for six years, including with the 101% Airborne Division in Vietnam; then at the Department of Energy: then as amember of a Senate staff then at NATO; then with the State Department here and abroad—in Afghanistan, ly, as Executive Vice President of Iraq, Jerusalem, and Ukraine; and more recent the nonpartisan United States Institute of Peace. Thave a particular ved in many places and in different capacities, country’s relationship with wciate the opportunity to 4] nts that are the subject of t ‘Committees with my ¥! he United States as well a 3 ¢ at home and abroad in both ‘ience are nonpartisan and I wn, Republican and While I have set interest in and respect for the importance of out Ukraine. Our national security demands that this relationship rem However, in August and September of this year, I became increas that our relationship with Ukraine was being fundamentally unde imegular, informal channel of U.S. policy-making and by the withl security assistance for domestic political reasons. I hope my remau help the Committees understand why I believed that to be the c At the outset, I would like to convey several key poi ii ¢ joints. Fi strategic partner of the United States, pe for the ae well as Europe. Second, Ukraine: at this n i at Jed to my jde the CO™ Let me now provide the concern, On May 28 of return to Kyiv t0 100 TUivaine relations: VOlOdTT, "asthe Sut rai ined at war wit lian ee heer would be seat Pg set for the via the Ukrainian political trajectory and the aving eee 4 with 1 Ukrainian form. Across and hi rom 2006 (0 7 ave stayed Thad served as 0 by George W. oe aa sakes Co Nae 2013 2 a ces mmentel organization supporting goed LS the responsibilities Ihave had in public sere Secretary Pompeo’s offer to return as a oo eto the secur convinced of the profound importance of Ukrai States and Europe for two related reasons: Russian influence, it is possible for In contrast, if Russia oppressing its people, First, if Ukraine succeeds in breaking free of Europe to be whole, free, democratic, and at peace. In dominates Ukraine, Russia will again become an empire, and threatening its neighbors and the rest of the we Second, with the annexation of the Crimea Donbas, Russia violated countless treaties, i; dismissed all the principles that have kept the in Europe since World War II. To restore leave Ukraine. This has been and should conti policy goal. When I was serving outside of government after the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 20 ambassadors to Ukraine in urging Obama adf Department, Defense Department, and other weapons to Ukraine in order to deter further much stronger sanctions against Russia. ortant U.S. interests there. _, | wanted to say “yes.” Allto say, I cared about Ukraine's future and the impo sked me to go back to Ky! So, when Secretary Pompeo as} lasha Yovanovitch, utit was not an easy decision. The former Ambassador: ‘Mas novitch ra eet treated poorly, caught in a web of political ‘machinations both in Kyiv and in Washington. T feared that those problems were still present. en I talked to in Npgut accepting the offer, however, she urged me tO Br oth for policy reasons and for the morale of the embassy. ing the Secretary, I consulted both my wife and a respected former senior Republican official who bas been @ mentor to me J will tell you that my wife, in no uncertain terms, strongly opposed the idea. ‘The mentor counseled: if your country asks you to do something, you do tif you can be effective. T could be effective only if the U.S. policy of strong suport for Ukraine—strong uity, diplomatic support along with robust security, economic. and technical assistance—were to continue and if I had the backing of the Secretary of State to implement that policy. I worried about what I had heard concerning the role of Rudolph Giuliani, who had made several high-profile statemen’s about Ukraine and U.S. policy toward the country. So during my meeting with Secretary Pompeo ‘on May 28, I made clear to him and the others present that if U.S. policy toward Ukraine changed, he would not want me posted there and I could not stay. He assured me that the policy of strong support for ‘Ukraine would continue and that he would support me in defending that policy. Before answel Kyiv. Because I was appointed by iny official position was Chargé With that understanding, I agreed to go back to the Secretary but not reconfirmed by the Senate, d’Affaires ad interim. I returned to Kyiv on June 17, carrying the or Trump signed the day after I met with the Seon Trump congratulated President Zelenskyy on to a meeting in the Oval Office. I also brou; Secretary’s declaration that the United State: Russian annexation of Crimea. SV But once I arrived in Kyiv, I discovered a confusing, and ultimately alarming cir . Ukraine in an was taking over >in ahuny, jdent Zelens ey orted Jong-stalled anti-corrupti : «: President : 2 en Tecainels ta - irs, the encouras Pree ministers arfion, including opening Ukraine's High a Ite had appointed rele executive M yished under the previous presidential ai 100k aT hich Was © ‘led snap parliamentary Ieaislation. He" _which ate. He called sn ry Anti-Corruption con allowed 10 ae representation in the Rada—and later administration ee so new it et ag, 60 percent of the seats. With his new elections Ping mandates Ls changed the Ukrainian constitution to major which had been the source of raw jtement in Kyiv that this time E a jeat Zelenskyy, won an OV presi ae da deputies, miamentary MAjOCEY: «Eom Femove absolute immunity Se was much exe! v 1 two decades: iw Ukraine might finally be breaking from its corruption for two things vould be different —* 7 Soviet past. corrupt, post-S sf sment for making U.S. policy sual arrange} And yet, [Sound a contsing <7 junipe rwo channels of US. policy-making and towards Ukraine. There Pe one highly irregular. As the Chief of Mission, I implementation, of regular, formal diplomatic processes, including the bulk of ba ae er suppor sfomagainst the Russian invasion and to help it defeat ta, i aa eg ance sroney meting ee strong, bipartisan support both in Congress and in all administrations since Ukraine’s independence from Russia in 1991. ing and there was an irregular, i informal channel of U.S. At the same time, however, policy-making with respect to e Envoy Kurt Volker, Ambassador Sondland n subsequently learned, Mr. Giuli also in the irregular one to the ext included me in certain conversati connected in Washington, it oper channels. This irregular channel | Sondland, Secretary Perry, and S May 23 upon their return from P returned to Washington enthusi President Trump to meet with hime relationship. But from what 1 d enthusiasm for a meeting with When I first arrived in Kyiy, the irregular channels of forei; Ukraine i 2 diverged ine ee it became clear to me by August that the channels had ir objectives. As this occurred, I became increasingly concerned. ills Tune, one the goals of both channels was o facilitate a visi by President Presid: ‘yy to the White House for a meeting with President Trump, which resident Trump had promised in his congratulatory letter of May 29. The Ukrainians were clearly eager for the meeting to happen. During @ conference call with Ambassador Volker, Acting Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Phil Reker, Secretary Perry, Ambassador Sondland. and Counselor of the U.S. Department of State Ulrich Brechbubl on June 18, it was clear that a meeting between the two presidents was an agreed-upon goal. Ambassadors Volker and when President ZelenskyY was on a train from Paris to recommended to President Zelensk: unturned” with regard to “jnvestigations’ ring which he a pawn ina President Trump. th Mr. Danyliuk, du Volker and Also on July 20, I had a phone conversation wit conveyed to me that President Zelenskyy did not want to be used as US. re-election campaign. The next day I texted both Ambassadors Sondland about President Zelenskyy’s concern. On July 25, President Trump and President Zelenskyy had the long-awaited phone conversation. Strangely, even though I was Chief of Mission and was scheduled to meet with President Zelenskyy along with Ambassador Volker the following day, 1 received no readout of the call from the White House. The Ukrainian government issued a short, cryptic summary. 26 meeting, President Zelenskyy told ‘ot elaborate. During a previously planned July ‘Ambassador Volker and me that he was/happy with the call but did n« President Zelenskyy then asked about 2 Oval Office as promised in the May 29 letter from After our meeting with President the front line in northern Donbas forces on the line of contact. Arti the commander thanked us for secu assistance was on hold, which Ambassador Volker and I could'se the other side of the damaged brit Ukrainians had been killed in the s) undoubtedly die without the U.S: Ulrainian ofa tte mori n offic ing o : N BFicials, the first ot MY 26 with President Zelenskyy and other samaty OF the Trump-Zelenskyy call that I heard rom body ingj lorris Y inside the U; me that es Dr. Hill's recent . songrament was during a phone call | had with Tim © Call “could have ie ‘@cement at the NSC, on July 28. Mr. Morrison told ‘een better” and that President Trump had suggested that Presi, ident Zel ‘ll lens! : illiam Barr. | dig ies his staff meet with Mr. Giuliani and Attorney General Teleased on September n° © Official readout of the call until it was publicly On Au, learned thar tia Se caieed text messages with Ambassador Volker in which I for an investigation wee 24 asked that the United States submit an official request what the Unite, FS? Butisma’s alleged violations of Ukrainian law, if that is an investiga, States desired. A formal U.S. request to the Ukrainians to conduct hn tgation based on violations of their own law struck me as improper, and I ommended to Ambassador Volker that we “stay clear.” To find out the legal “pects of the question, however, I gave him the name of a Deputy Assistant Attomey General whom I thought would be the proper point of contact for seeking a US. referral for a foreign investigation. By mid-August, because the security assistance had been held for over a month for no reason that I could discern, I was beginning to fear that the longstanding U.S. policy of strong support for Ukraine was shifting. I called Counselor Brechbuhl to discuss this on August 21. He said that he was not aware of a change of U.S. policy but would check on the status of the security assistance. My concems deepened the next day, on August 22, during a phone conversation with Mr. Morrison. I asked him if there had been a change in policy of strong support for Ukraine, to which he responded, “it remains to be seen.” He also told me during this call that the “President doesn’t want to provit stance atall.”, That was extremely troubling to me. As I had i policy of strong support for Ukraine were on my call with Mr. Morrison, I was p Just days later, on August 27, Ambassa President Zelenskyy. During their discussed—amazingly, news of the other hand, was all too aware'of and Ambassador Bolton’s visit, 1 asked expressed to him my serious concert to Ukraine while the Ukrainians aggression. Ambassador Bolton: ving my cable on August 29, Sor silities were still active in the €05 9 vail Ukraine at a time Wie the level of American support for « efend such 2 watching closely to °<¢ cretary that I could not and evould not def oe fer, the yment. I a received nO specific response, I heard that soo! use! don A ae ‘able with him to a meeting at the white Hous for Ukraine. govern policy. Secretary carrie’ security assistance fe to the Secretary, August 29, Mr- x ermak pase a very concerned, asking about the withheld security | Spence The hold that the ‘White House had placed on the assistance hat z de: ae been made public that day ina Politico story. At that point, I was embarras T could give him no explanation for why it was withheld. int my cabl the hold on security assistance could be related Ithad still not occurred to me that to the “investigations.” That, however, Would soon change. e days after my cable to Secretary Pompeo, President Zelenskyy met Vice President Pence at a bilateral meeting in Warsaw. President Trump had planned to travel to Warsaw but at the last minute had cancelled because of Hurricane Dorian. Just hours before the Pence-Zelenskyy meeting, at of U.S. security assistance contacted Mr. Danyliuk to let him know that the del: was an “all or nothing” proposition, in the sense that if the White House did not lift On September 1, just thre the hold prior to the end of the fiscal year (September 30), the funds would expire and Ukraine would receive nothing. Lw: eful that at the bilateral meeting or shortly thereafter, the White House! hold, bu sn Indeed, I received a readout of ‘Mr. Morrison, during which he told President did not respond subst Trump that night. The Vice Pres Europeans to do more to suppo' During this same phone call [ h conversation Ambassador Sondle Ambassador Sondland told Mr. not come until President Zelen I was alarmed by what Mr. Mo conversation, This w, JUst the White Hose > the first time 1 had heard that the secu louse meet ing—w. ah 'S—Was conditioned on the investigations. Very concemed, asking if “we eae same day I sent Ambassador Sondland a text message Conditioned on inven yee ing that security assistance and [a] WH mesting 2 call him, whieh (yest ations?” Ambassador Sondland responded asking = President Trump had. During that phone call, Ambassador Sondland told me that that Ukraine will eee him that he wants President Zelenskyy sea! cary 2O1GUSS. election stigate Burisma and alleged Ukrainian interferen Ambassador Sondland also told me that he now recognized that he had made @ mistake by eatlier telling the Ukrainian officials to whom he spoke that a White House meeting with President Zelenskyy was dependent on a public announcement of investigations—in fact, Ambassador Sondland said, “everything” was dependent on such an announcement, including security assistance. He said that President Tramp wanted President Zelenskyy “in a public box” by making @ public statement about ordering such investigations. dland that President Trump In the same September 1 call, I told Ambassador Son: e should have more respect for another head of state and that what he described was not in the interest of either President Trump or President Zelenskyy. At that point! asked Ambassador Sondland to push back on President Trump’s demand. Ambassador Sondland pledged to try. We also discussed the possibility that the Ukrainian Prosecutor General, rather than President Zelenskyy, would make a statement about investigations, potentially in coordination with Attomey General Barr’s probe into the investigation of interference in the 2016 elections. The next day, September 2, Mr. Mortis had asked him to come to his hote expressed concern about the possib particular, Mr. Morrison relayed respond to the Ukrainians’ explic troubling them. I was experienc Ukrainians; including during am visi eae on to the hy fe s per 5,1 hosted Senators Johnson and Murphy on Sea visit, we met with President Zelensk His ee the fhe withheld security assistance. My TO 7 5 caine im feta President During senators was about tl si n Senators 1p path senators stressed that bipartisan SUPPO™ meeting is "yas Ukraine’s most important strategic asse\ 2 $Washingso? ld not jeopardize that bipartisan support by domestic politics. jan official (and continue to make) this point to all of ™: Ukeaini fh to make President Zelenskyy publicly commit and alleged interference in the 2016 election showed f the United States was undercut by the irregular Thad been making contacts. But the pus! investigations of Burisma how the official foreign policy o efforts led by Mr. Giuliani. Jater, on September 7, Thad a conversation with Mr. conversation earlier that day between Amb: Mr. Morrison said that he had a “sinking feeling” after caring about this conversation from Ambassador Sondland. According to Mt Morrison, President Trump told Ambassador Sondland that he wes not asking =e wid pro quo.” But President Trump did insist that President Zelenskyy 80% 2 mfcrophone and say he is opening investigations of Biden and 2016 election interference, and that President Zelenskyy should want to do this himself. Mr. ador Bolton and the NSC lawyers of this phone Morrison said that he told Ambassi call between President Trump and Ambassador Sondland. The following day, on September 8, Ambassador Sondiand and I spoke on the talked to President Trump as I had suggested a week i Trump was adamant that President Zelenskyy. himself, President Trump said it was not a that he had talked to President at,.2 g as nota quid pro Morrison in which sador Sondlané Two days he described a phone c and President Trump. phone. He said he had earlier, but that President had to “clear things up and do it in public. “quid pro quo.” Ambassador Sondland said Zelenskyy and Mr. Yermak and tol quo, if President Zelenskyy did not ‘ “stalemate.” [ understood a the much-needed military assi: conversation concluded with P: After the cal with Ambassador reservations ina text message The next d; lay, I said the 5 et ud to Amb: rece: (and Pasian Sondland and Volker that “t]he message to the hold, we have alres send with the decision on security assistance is iready shaken their faith in us.” 1 also said, “1 think it’s crazy to wi '0 withhold security assi ecurity assistance for help with a political campaign. Ambassador Sond! President eae ine responded about five hours later that I wes “incorrect about quolelofanp Eiger oe The President has been crystal clear no quid pro Before eae ee during our call on September 8, Ambassador Sonéland isaBohtbcenaces ig resident Trump is a businessman. When a businessman Fae 0 someone who owes him something, he said, the eae that person to pay up before signing the check. Ambassador used the same terms several days later while we were together atthe Yalta European Strategy Conference. I argued to both that the explanation made no sense: the Ukrainians did not “owe” President Trump anything, and holding up security assistance for domestic political gain was “crazy,” as 1 had said in my text message to Ambassadors Sondland and Volker on September 9. arned on September 11 that the hold had been lifted and that the Finally, I le stance would be provided. security assi ance was teleased on September 11,1 dent Zelenskyy and Foreign Minister ‘Afier I learned that the security assist of the high strategic value of personally conveyed the news to Presi Prystaiko. And I again reminded Mr. Yermak bipartisan support for Ukraine and the importance of not getting involved in other countries’ elections. ‘My fear at the time was that since Ambassador Sondland had told me President Zelenskyy a 19 do a CNN interview, President Zelenskyy would make a st tions” that would have played into domestic U.S. p President Zelenskyy was not While Mr. Danyliuk initially meetingon the moming of Yermak looked uncomfo Danyliuk to confirm that < jon in 25 at the UN General Assembly sessi©! Is On September 252 reste! Zelensiyy facewte-face, HEME yi i ‘july 25 call. The United States gave the eed rei ab 2 Angst OS notice of jis of President Trump's July 25 call with President clone ore whic ‘Vice President Biden, I had come to understane "sg user ions” was a term that Ambassadors Volker and SOP’ tT and which he mentioned it “investigati t Iker roe erated to the 2016 elections, and to investigations ©: to mean matters relate’ the Bidens. Goa ty OES RS 5 a rather lengthy recitation of the events of the past few oint in Kyiv. But I also recognize the importance T recognize that this i stigating, and I hope that this chronology months told from my vantage point i of the matters your Committees are investiga will provide some framework for your questions. I wish to conclude by returning to the points I made at the outset. ‘Ukraine is of the United States. It has been attacked by Russia, important to the security which continues its aggression against Ukraine. If we believe in the principle of sovereignty of nations on which our security and the security of our friends and allies depends, we must support Ukraine in its fight against its bullying neighbor. Russian aggression cannot stand. There are two Ukraine stories today. The first is the one we are discussing this morning and that you have been hearing for the past two weeks. It is a rancorous story about whistleblowers, Mr. Giuliani, side channels, quid pro quos, corruption, and interference in elections. In this story Ukraine is an object. But there is another Ukraine story—a po: Ukraine is the subject. This one is struggling to break free of its past, he usherin a new Ukraine, proud of it Western institutions and enjoy. a m what we in America, in our best concerned about what language we our parents and grandparents came country. Because of the strategic j Europe, we, eons eae of Ukraine in our effort to create a whole, free decades, have supported tay and Democratic administrations over three . assistance funding, both ci taine. Congress has been generous over the years wit ere ag, boll civilian and military, and political support. With vhelming bipartisan majorities, Congress has supported Ukraine with harsh sanctions on Russia for invading and occupying Ukraine. We can be proud of support and that we have stood up to a dictator's aggression against @ democrati neighbor. It is this second story that I would like to leave you with today. And I am glad to answer your questions.

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi