[tapping glass] mr. Burt okay, were going to get underway. I am richard burt, and my day job is i am a managing partner at mclarty and associates, but im also a member of the board of the center for the National Interest and i might add, a member of the board of the atlantic council. In both these capacities and having spent time at both think tanks, i can tell you quite sincerely that the lunches at the center for the National Interests are far better than the atlantic council. [laughing] [laughter] and to top off this excellent lunch we have a great dessert. That is ambassador john herbst, who is with us today to talk about the future of ukraine and ukrainerussia relations. We really couldnt have a better speaker to address this issue. John has not only served as the u. S. Ambassador to ukraine, but has followed ukraine, the ukraine related issue for many years in his current capacity running his program, his European Program at the atlantic council. And having a real indepth understanding for, lets call it Eastern European and Central Asian affairs, having that only served in ukraine but also uzbekistan, if im not mistaken. And he told me i think one of his first jobs after leaving the state department was running a program called dealing with complex problems at the National Defense university. And actually the u. S. State department trained you for dealing with complex problems, and creating them. [laughter] mr. Bert so without further ado im going to ask john to begin. And as is traditionally the case, you should know that this is being filmed by cspan, so we are not following Chatham House rules we are on the record. Fmr. Amb. Herbst rick, thank you very much and richard, thank you for the invitation to come here. Also will talk about zelensky, what that means for ukraine and russianukrainian relations. The first thing to understand about president zelensky is that he won for reasons having nothing to do with Foreign Policy. The people of ukraine were demonstrating in polls 18 months ago, maybe 24 months ago that they wanted a new face in political leadership. Polls regularly showed in early 2018 that over 40 of the population, in fact, a plurality wanted none of the above. The above being all wellknown political figures. Thats because of a general dissatisfaction with the state of affairs, not so much of the russian war in donbass, but the state of domestic affairs, which is i say a consequence of two things. First, of course, is the static socioeconomic system that characterized ukraine for the 30 years since independence. And especially the problem of corruption. But also, this qualifies the first point i just made, which is that some serious changes were made, positive changes, and as people who know more about transitions from command economies can tell you that i, when you do the right things, visavis with the standard of living takes a hit. So the vote in ukraine which zelensky was a harvester of, reflected a sentiment that has been existing for several years. Zelensky did not win an outright victory in the president ial elections. But he did pick up at large, very large rally in the mid40s and, of course, he won 72, 73 actually in the second round. More importantly, and this is, this is critical fronts and what where what may or may not be possible Going Forward in ukraine. Domestically. He won a resounding victory last month. And so the first time in ukraines postindependence history you have one party which has an outright majority. He can rule with that party by himself, and my guess thats whats going to happen. There are at least at least one other party which should be a natural partner. Its not clear if zelensky will want to make that partnership. He can probably get the support even without the partnership. But the point is hes got 53, 54, four, maybe more than that, and thats very, very important. What that says to him when looking at ukraine, including ukrainian public which just voted these guys in, the changes they want are within his grasp if he seeks to make those changes. Okay. So who is zelensky . Anyone who does politics knows if youre trying to figure out where the country is going, to start with the leadership. He is a highly successful comedian and businessman. Hes quite smart. Ive only met him once. I met him in february before he had turned his attention to understand the issues he used to face as president. And i can mention that ambassadors, western ambassadors who saw him at the time and were underwhelmed about his command of issues saw him six weeks later and they were deeply impressed. The guy is smart. The guy is smart. I think its safe to say that up until the time, actually up until some point after he decided to run for the presidency he wasnt paying great detailed attention to Major Political and economic issues. But, of course, he was a smart ukrainian growing up in ukraine and he was absorbing this. And i think probably most of you know he came from eastern ukraine. We all know about the differences in parts of the population in ukraine between east and west. I think those differences are often exaggerated and the differences are closing that they are nonetheless not irrelevant. And hes jewish dissent. Ukrainian and he speaks russian. In fact, he has had to brush up ukrainian. Once it became clear he had a shot at becoming president. But coming from the east he observed certain attitudes which have prompted some in moscow to think he might be a friendly voice in ukraine for them to deal with. And i dont think he has the passion for a couple of issues, which are somewhat controversial in ukraine, the passion that for example, president poroshenko had. One of those being the language question and the other being the question of the orthodox church. But another important part of his biography which we need to understand to figure out who he is and where hes going is hes a young man. And poroshenko isnt an old guy. Poroshenko might be 50 but zelensky is what, 41 . So essentially the soviet experience is not something he truly felt. Whereas poroshenko, he went to college in soviet ukraine or moldova in fact. Not so much zelensky. And that means some things which might have seemed reasonable for poroshenko and things which are not necessarily positive, about turning over, to reform in ukraine, are not normal, not natural for zelensky. Part of his growing up in the east, i think makes explain why i think may explain why we have seen some talk from him as a candidate, as president elect, and as president about ending the war in donbass via negotiations with moscow. Not that poroshenko was against that, but zelensky fully put more emphasis on it. And that i think reflects his background. And its also something, but its not something he highlighted as a candidate. But he talked about it. And weve seen him as president take steps consistent with such statements. But before i get to that, let me just digress a little bit to talk about ukraine and Foreign Policy more broadly. So you put zelensky in the contest which will help explain where he and the country are going. You might say, this this is a bit of a simplification that ukraines Foreign Policy orientation over the past 30 years has two options. On the one hand, theres a concept of multivector concept where ukraine is somewhere in between russia on the one side, the eu and the United States on the other. And they used to talk about multivectorism and that was certainly the alternative. The alternative to that has been a prowestern orientation, and we saw that with poroshenko. Zelenskys background would put him i would say somewhere in between those two alternatives. As i said, his background. And you can argue that as a wouldbe leader, and as the leader, he has taken some steps which also put him some were in the middle of those two possibilities, albeit more on the westward orientation side. He has offered the kremlin three concessions in his brief period on the public stage. He talked about two referenda, one on relations with russia, the other on joining nato. Which could be seen as something positive from the standpoint of the kremlin. Those two referenda were not considered positively you might say by ukrainian political society. And zelensky, the comedian, the businessman, whose success is based substantially on the ability to feel his relevance, as a comedian you have to reach d your audience, as a politician he read his country. He saw that reaction. And those two referendum just faded. But its important to recognize that before they faded, there was nothing out of moscow would suggest, this is interesting. So those are two things he did. The third is more recent, and actually more important. In the war in the east, theres largely been a hardening separation between the russian occupied territories and the rest of ukraine. And on the ukrainian side, this was the result of the activity of people who are associated with a tougher line with russia. So the party which Self Destruct they were quite active , in hardening the contacts across the line of contact in donbass, was it Three Springs ago . I think the spring of 2017 or 2016. There was talk in the diplomatic gyrations around donbass for over a year about somehow improving access across the line of contact, and poroshenko did not want to go there. Zelensky already has. He said yes, im open to making the Border Crossing a line of contact crossing work. Zero reaction from the kremlin. Zero reaction from the kremlin. Also, also you had the two two important facts that to this day putin has not congratulated zelensky on his victory, and more important than that, putin sends a little provocation zelenskys way when he is president elect with the passport game in donbass, the same game the kremlin has played in all the frozen conflicts. So zelensky has extended a hand and he has gotten nothing back. And zelensky again, hes a guy who learns from his experience. Last point here, which is off this specific theme, which is this, some people, more than some people, were concerned as president zelensky was emerging as this juggernaut destined to win the presidency, that it would be putins patsy, right . Longterm kgb versus the naive. Well, zelensky showed in the passport thing that he was not going to be an easy guy for putin to manage. Because zelensky said, hey, guys, take the passport. Thats a passport to life of repression, repressive society. We have no control over leadership. And putin who loves to have the last word, he loves those colorful phrases, putin has been silent. Zelensky had won that battle. Because thats zelenskys strength. Ukraine class comic. Thats actually unfair. Hes not going to be so easy for the kremlin to manage. And let me make one more point. This caught my attention big time. Actually two weeks ago. That the ukraine seized the russian tanker involved in the kremlin attacking ships. That was a gutsy move. That was a gutsy move. But gutsy but not stupid. Because he kept the tanker. He released the sailors, and i think the kremlin doesnt know what to make of this guy. And my own interactions with russians on various tv programs i think underscore that. And, in fact, the criminal kremlin reaction to the ship seized has been pretty mild, pretty mild. Ok now, so thats zelensky. What happens with the war, right . For me to address this i need to explain to you my own peculiarities. So you can read what i say in context. I think that ukraine has the upper hand in donbass. The reason for that is the following. This is a war of the kremlin against the ukrainian people. I put it that way because the ukrainian people by a large majority understand that moscow is conducting a war in donbass, and they support their countries ys policy, their governments policy of resisting kremlin aggression. We know the russian people want no part of this, numerous polls have said that. We know that putin continues saying russian officers are not in ukraine, that this war is not ginned up by kremlin operatives. He hides russian casualties from the russian people. This is a major vulnerability for the kremlin. Ukraine has the upper hand. They have gotten adequate. Upport from the west the sanctions are in place and have held for five years. The extension of sanctions moved from six months to a year. The extension is a bigger deal. What i expect will be a coming hit from washington will be a bigger deal still. That is very much in play. As long as that support remains, this is a major problem for the kremlin. Sanctions cost of the russian economy and their Economic Growth is limited. There is a third point. President trump breached the supply of lethal weapons back in december 2017, and you will see more stuff heading that way. To use an old marxist phrase, the correlation of forces is on the side of the ukrainians. Carefully, kremlin activities and the moscow political conversation about the war over the past several years, you see the following. Osifiedtiations are an largely irrelevant process. Hasone interesting idea come from the russian side in those talks. More than some interesting ideas from the ukrainian side. Negotiationsen two , both went about six months. The first was from january 2016 until june of that year. It is worth recalling what is going on. Been engaged in ds troublesassa emerged in 2011. It went big in the fall of 2015, which was the First Time Since the crisis and seizure of crimea that ukraine was bumped off the first line in russian media. Thoughtful people in moscow had recognized what i just explained about the correlation of forces in ukraine. Talkou begin to see some in the think take community in ,ussia reflecting flexibility then these negotiations began. Interesting things were set on both sides in those top. Why did it stop in june 2016 . I think for two reasons. Comfortable with this. More importantly for the timing was the emergence at that time of donald trump as the republican nominee. , the wholeell you question of trump in russia has been discussed in generally hyperbolic terms, but my interaction with russian think tankers in 2015 and watching the russian media, clearly they like trump. There is no question the russian leadership was hoping trump would win. They were hoping for a better deal visavis the United States in regards to the ukraine. Once again the negotiations switched back to minsk and nothing happens. Trump wins. Will give you one of my secrets for understanding what is going on in moscow, that is to follow the writings of dmitri, and adjusting guy. I digress on this. Ill just leave it for now. I will to you this. He always wants to be within the bubble, the acceptable to kremlin bubble but always towards the edge of that bubble pushing moscow interactions which are probably good for russia and for better relations between the west and russia. Thats how i would characterize him. He wrote an article right after trump won basically saying russia can do whatever he wants in ukraine. Which demonstrate what the russian stock they would get with trump, it didnt turn out the way as we all know. And again for thoughtful russians pondering u. S. Sanctions policy, pondering what happened in helsinki in the summit and post helsinki developments, recognized that trump was not the panacea they had hoped. And so then we began the second round of negotiations. And by the way, by late fall of 2017, really interesting thing s were being written by russian think tanks. Russia can live with ukraine and nato. Other think tankers began to offer very serious ideas about an International Presence in donbass as a vehicle for ending the war. And, in fact, if you can establish a mechanism in which russians lose control of the border and the ability to send in soldiers, officers, weapons and such and six to 12 months for an International Force to be in charge, you could have real elections and i could be a face safer to get the hell out of donbass. So these negotiations resumed rather different form, but it only lasted until the summer of 2018, the summer of 2018. And my sense is, i cant prove this, that mr. Putin got nervous about some of the ideas being floated and said lets wait to see what happens with the ukraine elections. So we have now had the ukraine elections. Zelensky has not turned out to be a more acceptable form. He has been a political operative in ukraine for 20 plus years. Putin is also the godfather of one of his children which is very important relationship in the Orthodox Christian world and i think its safe to call victor the kremlin favorite in ukraine, that guy they would love to see truly enforcing ukraine policy and is also one of the most odious figures in ukraine. Ok, heres the bottom line. They have had the election. Putin was hoping it would lead to serious ukraine concessions on Foreign Policy. Hasnt happened. Instead the east voted for guy is essentially endorsing a westward policy. Zelenskys victory is a disaster for the imperialists in moscow. Smart people in moscow understand that. Some of those smart people in putins inner circle but they dont include the great man himself. So at some point the kremlin will make the hard decision to get out. At some point could be 12 to 14 months from now or eight to ten years. I dont know. Thank you. Well, theres a difference. [laughter] thank you, you gave us a lot to chew on. About, as people think what they would like to raise with you in terms of questions and comments, let me get the ball rolling. You are describing, or at least commenting on how you depicted this emerging relationship zelens putin and ky. You said putin has not congratulated zelensky, and zelensky has made overtures that putin has not responded to. I know they have had two conversations, and have heard through wellinformed american sources that zelensky has adicated that he is prepared different approach to these ossified minsk agreements, and look hard at this idea of Holding Elections in the east. Step, ife to take that he were to say, begin to implement the ukrainian requirements under minsk, what would be in your judgment a russian reaction there . Or would they pocket that concession and stand back . Seen nor, we have Russian Movement under the minsk agreement. Weve seen some although not a great deal of ukrainian movement. The key point is the way the two sides interpret the most controversial provisions of the minsk two agreement, which relates not just to the elections but the influence, or lack of influence, that local authorities in those territories would have over Ukrainian National security policy. The kremlin insists that whoever wins those elections can veto ukraines National Security policy. And no one in ukraine with exception of sort of medvedchuk crowd agrees with that and for that matter neither to germany or france or the United States. I think if the kremlin were willing to accept, and i can see this as a face safer once mr. Putin realizes he cannot get ukraine to change its Foreign Policy by this method, that could be the face saver were you have real elections, with a certain kind of autonomy although that is controversial within ukraine. And i cant be sure how ukraine would ultimately resolved that through parliament. But i think if zelensky were to push on this and you have a real peace and ukraine is able to pursue its relationship with the eu, this could be a deal but thats not for me to determine. Thats for the ukrainians. Jacob. Please introduce yourself. I will. Im jacob, editor of the National Interest, which is published by the center itself. In listening to your remarks my mind goes back to 1955, the year of the austrian state treaty when the four powers signed an agreement to make, to return sovereignty to austria. And it became a neutral country. And it seems to me improbable that there would be an agreement that would allow ukraine quickly to enter nato. Would the austrian state treaty provide some kind of model which germany, not just the United States but also germany was involved in a negotiation that would return full sovereignty to ukraine . I understand whence the question. I think that there are two relevant points here. Your question is i would say written from the standpoint of great power, thinking in great power politics. The great powers decide things for these little people. And the greatest strategic thinker in ukraine, who i commit end to all of you, he is about 80 years old. The former guy from the soviet rocket industry. He said to me more than once, the only way russia will leave us alone is if we are in nato. I am not telling you that is the last word of ukraine, but i can tell you as a result of moscows aggressive steps over the last five years, a majority of ukrainians want nato membership. We should recognize the aspirations of people, which is not to say we endorse them. Is this war,int moscows aggression in ukraine was not about nato. It was not even about membership in the eu. It was about a trade agreement between ukraine and the eu. Russian policy on ukraines westward relations had always been clear until spring or early summer of 2013. They said no way can ukraine join nato. But they also wanted to join the eu. Againststrongly adjoining the eu. Suddenly in the summer of 2013, you had russian trade embargoes because of this emerging agreement. Nato. S not just about i will leave the question at that. You know, jacobs question, the austrian state treaty did succeed in getting the russians out of austria. And i have to say i have never had a single austrian complained to me about you great powers doing deals above our heads. I think they are all delighted by how that all turned out. But george, youve got the floor. Thank you. Im Vice President of the center for the National Interest. Thank you, john, for your remarks, very enlightening and i think somewhat controversial. It want to ask you a question about one point in your argument. And that is that russia basically has the lower hand as opposed to the upper hand when it comes to developments in ukraines east and the war. And that for a variety of reasons russia is under a lot of pressure to try to find a facesaving way out. I can understand the argument as you presented it, but i think theres probably a Strong School of thought that just the opposite, that, in fact, whats happened in ukraine as expressed in zelenskys election and the victory in the election is the ukrainian people saying enough. We want peace. We are tired of war here. That theres actually pressure within ukraine to find some way to regain control of the east but to do so in a way that brings peace and a settlement to all this. Thats one question. The other thing on the russian side, one of the things that impressed me as a russian observer is the degree of political will that has existed in moscow and in russia towards ukraine. Ukraine is i think arguably the most important Foreign Policy matter, Foreign Policy interest that russia has, has been explicitly identified as russias top priority for many years, going back into the yeltsin period. And the question of ukraines geopolitical orientation as part of that nato membership is a critical issue in moscow. It is one where the war itself demonstrates that russia regards this as a vital issue, something they are willing to fight over. I think they are ability to endure Economic Hardship and their ability militarily to escalate as they see fit to ensure that the forces in donbosse are not defeated is very impressive so i wonder whether or not theres a great deal of political will on russias part to make sure that there is not a defeat in some way. I would just like your reaction to that. I almost completely disagree with you. [laughter] i think ukraines one piece but we see no indication they believe they should let russia dictate or i shouldnt even say russia, ill come back to that on your second point. They dont want to let the kremlin dictate their security and thats what this is all about. So yes, if they can buy negotiations or recover donbas and end the war without giving moscow of the show over its giving moscow the veto over its Foreign Policy, the ukrainian people go for it. Thats not where the kremlin is. And i see your second point, i think its flatout wrong. If the russian people understood that yes, ukraine cannot go to the west, ukraine cannot join nato, putin would tell the russian people whats going on in donbas but hes hiding it from them and hes hiding the casualties in these hiding because poll after poll says the russian people say we dont want our soldiers fighting there. The political will in moscow is this wide on ukraine. There are people who understand this is a disaster for russia and its part of a whole complex of policies which are a disaster for russia. Andrew knows more about russian economy than anyone in this town , and he can tell you that the economy is going nowhere. And sanctions are only part of the reason, not the most important parts but the point is his growing state crony capitalist corrupt control of the economy is keeping very, very talented people in for all. Thrall. And ukraine is part of that. Ukraine is part of it. If youre right, if youre right and russia stays and holds onto the ukraine and putin follows him, whatever he decides to leave, russia is doomed to become a fourthgrade economy and a third great power. Third rate power. Not in a year, not in 20 years but in 25 or 30 and they will become chinas little how which pal, which is already developing. John, youre right that anders knows a great deal about russia but we have another guy in this room who also knows a great deal about russia. His name is Dimitri Symes and he now has the floor. Thank you very much for accepting our invitation. Thank you for what i consider truly a brilliant presentation. There a lot of things you said that i entirely agree with. If i disagree with you somewhat on the russian position, i will say it without any sense of because i dont know what the russian position is. Its very clear that we know we must be prepared. Its not very clear what they want. If they want to recognize the independent republic, the course could do it and you can say well, there would be new sanctions. I dont think thats the reason because they are not prepared to pay for it. As you described, the russian opinion on that conflict quite adequately, there was an element of pride. Its now not as strong as before but russia is going through a period of government hardship and their willingness to pay for how to put it, is minimal at best. They also have military power to go further, to take over the whole regions. My impression is this is not even being discussed. Regarding zelensky, i met zelensky in moscow. I was not aware that i was meeting the future ukrainian president. A couple of years ago, but believe it or not, he was an increment of channel one, helping them with one of their comedian shows. So i talked to several people who knew him. And their description of him was exactly like yours. That he would not have the same sense of, how to put it, in intense Ukrainian Nationalism which you would say in the case of poroshenko and some others , but there was no question in their mind that whereas he spoke perfect russian, not only he was ukrainian but he was ukrainian interested in the west orientation. So people who knew zelensky in moscow, my impression is that there was no expectation he would become someone who represents the east of ukraine and has a very strong russian official connection. Where the problem is and where i dont know whether we agree or disagree is what to do with this situation. I think that you said quite correctly that most ukrainians today want to be in nato. And i agree that the United States should not take a position that russia would have veto power. For me, when you say that somebody should not have veto power, for this to be of great importance you want to complete the sentence and to say that nato wants to invite ukraine. Ukraine is in the practice of ukraine is in the track to join nato, and accordingly there is something the russians should not be allowed to dictate. I remember somebody had a problem on russian tv saying that they did not think that nato was quite ready for ukraine , and talking about you. And thats one reason you were so popular on those shows because while you were not pulling punches, you were openly talking about russian aggression and always intellectually honest. If nato is not quite ready for ukraine, i understand why we would not allow newly elected authorities even as they were democratically elected, we have veto power over the whole ukrainian Nation Security policy. It would take nothing or very little for the ukrainian practical ability to make National Security decisions but still would provide russia with some reassurances that ukraine would not be in nato anytime soon. I certainly dont rule out that possibility. This is an evolving situation. And the ukrainians themselves will make that decision. Certainly there will be an american role in all this and thats hard to predict how this would play out but what you describe is certainly a possibility and not necessarily a terrible possibility. Wayne. Thank you. American Foreign Policy council, thank you for your presentation. This is very informative. I may not be the only one who detected an element of your experience in jerusalem and the subtlety of your analysis because the more i look at middle east issues and ukrainian russian issues, i think you can learn from the two. Id like to shift the focus a bit to a third country in its relations with ukraine, namely our own. I carry no water for mr. Zelensky. I was as astonished as any foreign observer as and his achievements but the fact is he has achieved three times the democratic legitimacy, in both rounds of the president ial election and in the parliamentary election. Hes done something we americans claim is important. He has achieved true electoral legitimacy. When is he going to get an invitation to come to washington . If poroshenko had been reelected he would have had an oval office visit by now. He would have addressed a joint session of congress by now maybe. Why is the problem here in washington in dealing with somebody who whatever else he may or may not be, and i think you described his strengths and his limitations correctly in the complexity of the ukrainian position, what is our problem with zelensky as a new, legitimate force in the history of postsoviet ukraine . Two short remarks. This is a case where having a camera means it will be a lot less interesting. The second is youve got statements coming out of the ukrainian white house that there will be a summit sometime in the next four to six weeks. I think thats true. Thats all i can say. Thank you. I am from georgetown university. I know you want to keep the focus on elites and leadership. Your point about demand for change in ukraine is fascinating , and in 2011 the polling data in russia showed that two thirds of the people wanted either total or massive change in the legislature. Dimitri and his colleagues predicted if they didnt get it, there would be real problems and there were protests on a pretty wide scale. The Public Opinion data where ere getting in russia that you alluded to especially dimitri off again with the surveys, it is showing that russians are no longer so supportive of the aggressive foreignpolicy. Right after zelensky was elected we saw some indication that russian commentators were mentioning some a how come ukrainians get change . Do you have any sense of whether thats going to be a factor in these discussions . It is usually ukrainians who say things, not russians but ukraine is not russia. So im not sure that the data that you referred to suggests theyre going to see ukrainian developments in russia anytime soon. Thats the first point but the second is, russia is also not russia the way some spokesman claim it to be. What i mean is this area you often hear in discussions about Russia Ukraine about the ability of the russian people to suffer endlessly and do what their masters want. Thats true until suddenly it isnt. So theres a great history of rebellions in russia. Ive been watching whats happening in russia. This thing in moscow, these constant demonstrations going on for three weeks, the demonstrations you had which were successful about the journalist and about the cathedral, all very interesting. Whether that means were on the verge of some major shift in russian politics, i hesitate to make that prediction. I just say watch closely. Youre just going to tantalize us. Fran, and then down at the end. John, youre right to point to the shifting russian initudes towards the eu 20142015 as being key. But my concern is that new eu attitudes have continued to shift towards ukraine and there is what i would say is a growing sense of ukrainian fatigue because of the lack of reforms under the previous government so i wish you would take a bit speak a bit towards mr. Zelenskys likelihood of the level of reform in ukraine because i think thats key to whether ukraine can continue to advance, to the west. You pointed to him as being postsoviet but that doesnt necessarily mean that hes eu either. Greatave to say that is a question, and i am not mistaken. I dont think i heard the word corruption mentioned by you in your presentation. I said he ran on anticorruption. How is he doing . First, i think your description of ukrainian fatigue in europe is overstated. We start from a different point of view but to answer your question, zelensky has talked a very good talk on reform issues overall including corruption. His appointments have largely been very good thus far. The appointments are his economic advisor, a clear reformer. The guy is now in charge of a behemoth Defense Industry state company did major reform work as minister of economy in the early poroshenko year. S. Another great source of corruption is customs. The new head of customs his isa serious reformer. The guy whose name is the likely appropriate or general, also a reformer. The one appointment which has raised eyebrows, in a less friendly way is then his chief of staff. Foras been a lawyer , but also a lawyer for ukraines third richest man. President zelensky has taken knocks on this appointment from friends in the west and he has said i am president , im making policy. He win a decent majority, and there are other reform parties. He owns the reform issue and hell have to produce. Will he . I mean, we dont know. Early indications in terms of personnel are good. We know that i have not gone down his parliamentary list with a microscope. But theres some excellent names on this list and less than excellent names on that list. Its also true if the president of the country who has 73 popularity rating once even wants even those less than positive names to vote the right way. He has a certain amount of influence. Last point. It looks like the acting minister of finance is staying on, shes excellent. I have talked to all these folks, ive known them for years. They all believe that president zelensky is going to give them the opportunity to do what they want to do, to make major changes, otherwise they would not accept this. So we will have to wait and see, we will have a better idea in six or 12 months but the early augurys are not bad. Down here. Stephanie lawrence from the washington examiner, you mentioned that zelensky hadnt paid a lot of attention to political and economic issues. Im wondering if theres a sense of what he will do. This is a very poor country. I was in an official election observer for this last parliamentary election and talk to many regular ukraines as i could and one of the number one complaints was their sons, their daughters, other relatives had to go abroad to work and i will say asking about zelensky, people tend to broadly fall into two camps on the whole and one was that they did not really know what he was going to do, but he was a patriot and they felt good about him and the other, people didnt know what he was going to do but they were resigned and felt like he was going to end up like every other would be reformer. So i was wondering if you have a sense of what hes going to do about some of the other issues that face ukraine and making it i think, making it much more prosperous while also giving security a lot more strength. I think its safe to say that certainly a plurality of ukrainians think that theyre in a lucy and the football situation. In other words, they want to feign disappointment because thats what happened in the case of you should go and poroshenko. But i am cautiously optimistic about zelensky and reform. My read is that he means it, that explains his appointments, what hes told people hes appointed. And i think there may be a he may be a competent man, whether he can be a successful president is another order of questions. But i believe hes in a position to do it. And i think were going to see some good things but again, we will know in eight or 10 months and if we see very little change, then his current 70 popularity rating will be 50 a year from now it will be 37. If he doesnt know in the right go in the right direction. I think i see bob urich down there. Bob urich, atlantic council. Thank you for ierting presentation. I want to follow up on issues and your exchange with fran. I agree with you a large number of the personnel appointments that ive seen at least the ones that i know about are very encouraging. But i have to say i just saw a worrisome article last night in the kiev post about judicial reform. Ill read the headline. Zelensky employs officials who will receive judicial reform, this is an article about the commission and is put together and supervise on this process and the gist of the article is theres reform minded people but an awful lot of people are corrupt and a lot of people very unfortunate political connections and so on. There are a few names i recognized, most i dont know anything about so i cant judge whether this is overstated or not, but im wondering whether you heard anything from your friends and contacts in ukraine about the judicial reform issue in particular . I have not seen this article, i have to get a look at it but i can say ive had many conversations specifically on. N that. As president of ukraine, zelensky has special authority in the justice system, both on the courts and on the Generals Office so there is his impact would be direct, you. I need to look into this. I saw someone with their hand up, right here. Mark david miller, trade advisor. Ambassador herbst, i raised this issue of the Morgan Williams group before the election. What effect has the maneuvering between russia and ukraine as or has or had on russian belarusian relations, both on the Lukashenko Putin level and what is the future of belarus s sovereignty looking through the prism of whats going on in the ukraine today . Ukraine has been a complicating factor because he understands that ukraine not knuckle under to the kremlin and therefore he has not been as receptive to kremlin ideas as for example bacing more troops especially along ukraines northern border with belarus. Theres also been what i would call indirect impact which is this. I mean, for sure since the rose revolution in november 2003 and then the orange revolution in the fall of 2004, putin has been really, really focused on the notion of these revolutions from below. And so in the very occasional periods in belarus where there are domestic disturbances. Moscow watches carefully and lukashenko understands that. Lukashenko before putin emerged as an authoritarian was correctly called the last dictator in europe, so he had his own reasons for wanting to repress civil society. But he also wants better relationship with the west for whatever economic advantage and regime legitimacy advantage may come from it, but also to give him something to use to again, enable him not to knuckle under to the kremlin. So the kremlin concern about revolutions which comes first and foremost from ukraine becomes a factor in encouraging lukashenko to be more authoritarian in dealing with his own domestic problems. Its interesting also we reimpose sanctions on the Senior Leadership in belarus for the last few months considering again there may be an opportunity to guide them to the west. I agree. Thank you very much, and im delighted to see two graduates sitting right at the top of the table for an excellent presentation. John, could you elaborate a little bit on your remarks about russian casualties and putins desire to keep this fact from the russian people. What is the rough number of russians who been killed in ukraine and how many are there , there now . Is this something that happens on a daily basis . How do the russian people find out about these casualties . I dont have good numbers on the number of russian casualties. Certainly its in the hundreds, beyond that i would not say and i just dont know. We know that theyre called cargo something, the special cargo to bring the remains on home to russia. We know theyre bied in secret. We know that in the summer of 2014, one of the most popular organizations in russia was the mothers of russian soldiers because some of those mothers were talking about russian soldiers dying in donbas. They were made an illegal organization, they were outlawed. We know that family members who talk about their sons or brothers or whatever it is dying as onduty soldiers in ukraine are threatened. We know the reporters who have written about this face unpleasant circumstances. So its real. Its real. We also know that first of all, the fighting in donbas has not gone away. There are scores of fire incidents every day. There are ukrainian casualties most weeks and certainly every month there are several more ukrainian deaths including very recently. We dont have good information on the deaths on the other side for reasons that are obvious. But it is true that there have been no major offenses. The last major offense is when the kremlin after the incident was signed in 2015. We know that offensive as well as the offensive at the airport in the fall of 2014 were spearheaded by such loss. We also know that largely the order of battle, the way russians have done things more recently the last several years is they are all over the place but generally speaking theyre not russian soldiers at the point likely to get incoming. So they tried to minimize casualties that way. John, to carry on your last statement we also know youve done a terrific job today. Just speaking to this group and the only thing i regret is we really didnt get a chance to spend more time talking about us. S. Policy towards ukraine, of course are subject was really ukraine and russia so that means we need to invite you back. Maybe that should happen after the next six to eight weeks when the potential meeting between these two television personalities, ukrainian and american have an opportunity to meet and see where that relationship is headed. Rick, thank you and ill be happy to do that. In case none of you have seen zelenskys program, see it. Its on netflix. It is at least solid. Ive seen two or three episodes. Some people think it is brilliant, worth watching and it will entertain you. John. Nk you, please join me in giving you a round of applause. [chatter] the film communists on campus. The violent overthrow of the democratic system. And yet our nation is unconcerned. Detailsoodstock creator how the festival came together. People, about 50,000. I said no, there have to be 100,000. Thanfe said there are more 200,000. I swear to god, i looked off that terrorists and i saw that field. Was spaced out. It was if i had a dream that came true. At 6 00 in american artifacts, their exhibit on 400 years of afton American History. They were not content with their lot. They wanted to resist enslavement and they try to run away. Unfortunately, they were not successful. They were captured. As punishment for their attempt to escape, Robert Carter got permission from the court in 1708 to have their toes cut off. Explore our nations past in American History tv. Senate easing aging committee on ways to combat postal fraud. Fraud. Robo call this is one hour and 45 minutes