Transcripts For CSPAN Key Capitol Hill Hearings 20140416

We have to give meaning to the word unacceptable. If we say russian actions are unacceptable, what are we going to do as to not accept them . For a toughi argue hardhitting sanctions policy to pushback on this. The two rounds of sanctions were decent first steps. They happened weeks ago. It is past time in opposing additional, hardhitting putin and hisnst allies. We have to shift from a policy of reacting to events on the ground. We need to preempt the aggression. Theeed to continue implementation of the sanctions. The legislation that was passed in 2012 imposed sanctions for abuse of human rights inside russia, we have to do both at the same time. The putin regime is a thoroughly corrupt, authoritarian regime that will do anything to stay in power. That is what we are seeing play out in ukraine. This is an extension of domestic politics. Putins paranoia which was heightened the decade ago he ain when hequed ag saw hundreds of thousands of people turn out on the streets of ukraine. Inside ukraine is being played out inside russia as well. On human crackdown rights since the breakdown of the soviet union. We are seeing putin thinking he is winning. This is a dangerous mindset for us to be faced with. Ukraine to be moldova very soon. T could be latvia and estonia members of the European Union. How we in the west rise to the challenge says as much about us as it does about russia. That is why we need to respond. Are we going to place business interest at of principles, and had of what we stand for, against the false topo further engagement or efforts for Strategic Partnership . Expectlationship can we with a regime that does not give a dam about the human rights of its own citizens . Putin has fabricated the threats to russia and ukraine. It is time to state the truth and let people know what is going on. It is no longer time for wait and see. It is time for action. It is time for solidarity with ukraine, moldova, georgia. Putin is the leader in authoritarianism. We need to see containment of his efforts, we need to pushback against what he is trying to do. At the end of the day, this is about a fight for freedom and Vladimir Putin poses one of the greatest threats to it. Andrew will go now and he will talk about how the time is to engage russia as opposed to containing. Thank you. Here and oure all presence is to honor mccains service and talk about issues because they are very important, as david just laid out. No one in this room will want to sugarcoat or excuse what russia is doing in ukraine. There is no excuse for the violence. I do not think there is anyone in this room who is not angry and worried. There are fragmentary reports of Armed Conflict in ukraine. No one wants to see Vladimir Putin have his vision of more nationalistic Foreign Policy, where National Identity drives the goals of all. We have got a long history in the 20th century, a very bitter history. No one in this room wants to push thee tremendous ukrainian people have made for freedom. Thist think anyone in room does not want to see russia pay a price for its conduct, in terms of international isolation. The question is, what do you do . I hope in our discussions we can talk about the options and the policy choices. One of the things people have latched onto is the concept of containment to read if you go back to the early days of the cold war, 1947, president truman faced a difficult situation with the possibility of greece and turkey slipping into the soviet embrace. At that time, he created the truman doctrine and put us on a course to build the institution and security mechanisms that foster the cold war and helps againstestern europe soviet encroachment. That was a very different period in history. For anyone to look at a onesizefitsall view and to think that that will work today, they need to look at today. Desperate are printed zoomable he is weak willed presumably as weak willed as. Hey were in the 1940s there are parallels. The world today is very different. We have a globalized economy. Russia is a part of the globalized economy. We are not in the same position as we were in the 1940s to dictate the role of russia. Russia wants to defeat radical extremism, concerns about chinas rise. Ourssume that arent interests are inherently nonflicting maybe a bit of a overstatement. There is not a to camp world that is emerging two camp world that is emerging. For me, why did it work . Why did it work in the cold war era . Why might not at work today . Containment worked in the cold war area because there was deterrence. We had a credible military threat to defend. Today, im not sure if anyone alieves that unless we make threat to use our military, that we will be able to defend each and every country that russia is causing trouble for. It is a largescale, openended defense commitment we are talking about. Also requires strong allies and partners around the world. You look at the way other powers are responding. You have to ask yourself, where are the partners for the United States . Can our approach succeed if we do it on our own . I have my doubts. Containment works when there are strong domestics inside the United States. The American People were willing to defeat soviet expansionism and great cost at great cost. Im not sure after 13 years of for whether the American People, when they look at the situation that is unfolding in Eastern Europe today, are willing to make comparable sacrifices. For that, thanks again. Anders will offer the rebuttal. Each team will have three minutes. This is a debate we need to have. First of all, what kind of a power is russia today . You seem to suggest that we dont know what russia wants. Isis very clear that russia a revisionist power. President putin has said and that the end of the soviet union was the greatest geopolitical catastrophe in the last century. Article saying 1939,itler was good until when he gathered the lands of austria, the sudetenland peacefully. This is the most official newspaper we see in russia today. What has happened is that putin speech onde a grand the importance of a russian speaking people in that it must be brought together. , how can we stop putin . There are two answers. One is that we stop them with war, which inevitably is happening now. So little has been done to stop them. Or we really throw in everything, in terms of sanctions, in order to stop them. Can we stop them with sanctions . I am not sure. I would certainly try to do something, rather than talking. Let me talk about, how strong is russia . Russia is much weaker than the soviet union. If you think of natos gdp, numeral six percent. Russia, 3 . Expenditure is less than 1 10 of the nato expenditure. Russia is weak. Is it vulnerable . You bet. If you count out russia from the International System or if you simply sanction the big state banks, russia is done. This will hit russia very hard. The market fluctuations during march russia can easily be hit much more. Where does the relevant Russian Technology come from . The United States. How can they develop oil and gas in the future . Through cooperation with American Companies most importantly, exxon. Russia is much more bold durable than we think. Vulnerable than we think. Their military equipment is dependent on cooperation with ukraine. President putin is heavily overplaying his hand. Only the foolish would not stand up to him. Thank you. Tom will bring us home and then we will open it up. We are home already. Thank you for moderating this event. It really is an important topic. It has been an important topic for the past 40 years. It is nice to see it is important once again. The important question that we need to ask right up front is, what are we trying to achieve . What do we want for the future . What do we want for ukraine . About all very passionate the advancement of democracy in the world. We want to see ukraine have a chance to develop a fullblooded democracy in their own country. They need to develop a National Consensus about where the country is going. They need to be able to put together the foundation of a prosperous economy going forward. Extent, ata certain this point, poses a threat to all of those. Where ukraine is located, it is also a country that is going to be important to ukraine possibility to build a prosperous economy going forward. Oil and gas and a great deal of the trade is with russia. How are you going to build a prosperous economy unless russia is part of the solution at some point . How do we get russia to be part of the solution . That is the question we need to focus on right now. The second question we have to ask is, what are we prepared to do . In particular, what sacrifices are we prepared to make in order to achieve this vision for ukraine . My colleagues have argued for tougher sanctions. They have argued that it is going to be easy because the russian economy is weak, because russia is corrupt. I would argue that the sanctions when only bite there they bite here. Where does this rank in our priorities . What sacrifices are we prepared to make in order to see these goals achieved in ukraine . What our leaders prepared to ask us to do to advance the cause of democracy and freedom in ukraine . Finally, we need to take a hard look at the question of ukraine. What is ukraine at this point . The lack of authority, a country that we thought was unified is beginning to break down into its constituent parts. The debate over what ukraine is is one that ukrainians need to have and they have not had the answer to that yet. What we need to do with russia is to create the space in which the ukrainians can have that debate in a productive way. To do that come in the United States need to combine resistance to what the russians have done up to this point, but to find a way to accommodate their interest, so that the have a moreill peaceful environment in which to work out their differences. I will start with a few questions as moderators prerogative. We are on twitter. Anders, i will start with you. Does seem to be that russia is Still Holding a lot of cards. Economic sanctions, although fairly weak right now, did not seem to be deterring putin. Play, economic cards to with ukraine, with oil and gas to europe, with trade. As we kiss he is, he is keeping the west offbalance and the we as he is, he is keeping the west offbalance is with him. Ative he is cozying up to the brick countries. He is still a member of the permanent security council. Who is holding the cards . It is easy to confuse strength. Is that the argue foolishness of putin and the vacuum in the west, that the west does not act, when the west acts, it can act. Hussein invaded and annexed kuwait, that was the it took halfon and a year before the west woke up, but awoke up. It woke up. We are seeing Russian Troops moving into Eastern Ukraine. This is totally an acceptable. It is meaningless to try to seek a new agreement with to back. Putin. Ukraine was the main success in the nonproliferation. It signed the budapest agreement. That was a memorandum, not a treaty. Russia. , the u. K. , and assured ukraine that it would have its security, national integrity. Now we know those assurances were absolutely nothing. , i would say,ian let us get the nuclear arms as quickly as possible after this important lesson we have learned from ukraine. I think the cossacks are thinking the same thing. Just a few seconds left. Im going to start cracking the whip. Sanctions will only bite there when they birtte here. The iranian economy is about russian economy. Is anyone feel the sanctions in iran . Absolutely not. This is not a relevant argument. Tom wem andrew and will give you another 30 seconds. His president putin doing what he is doing from a position of strength or is the United States right, is he a week Regional Power . Can argue that everyone is doing this out of weakness . On all sides. Putin does have a problem of how he is going to maintain russia going forward. There are questions about how firmly he sits over this russian political system. We have seen the euphoria and russia over the past several weeks, the increased popularity for putin. You can hardly find a person in moscow that is not euphoric ,bout what has happened following up on a very good olympics one russia finished first and so forth. Situation in the Eastern Ukraine is not so much that putin is in control, as he may be forced by events on the ground to move in a direction that he does not want to and does not fear comfortable with at this point, because of the way he has postured himself domestically and russia. Second, if you look at the west, i think we would all agree that what we do not have his unity. Talk to the germans about finding sanctions. Talk to the english about london. Bikingson we do not have sanctions biting sanctions and we have gone against certain individuals is because we cannot agree that what is happening in ukraine demands sacrifices and equal sacrifices in the west in order to deal with the problems that russia might have created. There isnt a leader who has yet stood up and made a forceful case why their population should make a sacrifice for one specific goal. Since you finished in your 30 seconds, in 30 seconds, what do you think president putins end game is . What are his ultimate ambitions . Does he want to annex this territory . Can i jump in . I think thats probably one of the cardinal problems of this whole crisis, no one knows. You talk to people in the u. S. Government, they dont know. You talk to people in european governments, they dont know. Weve entered a world where there are no effective channels with the russian government, and were basically all either in our public and private discussions sort of trading or talking points, and its all sort of formulaic and predictable, but at the end of the day, putin is rolling out initiatives, and we all basically find ourselves, as weve seen this week with the situation in east ukraine, where were just struggling to understand whats going o. Theres a lot of subterfuge and attempts to sow confusion. Its deliberate on the russian part, and were all stuck in a highly reactive mode. The only tool people have been able to latch on to are the sanctions, because precisely as tom said, theres no agreement about other steps. David, in your opening remarks, you talked about possibly president putin wanted to annex some of the baltic states, members that are members of the e. U. What do you recommend we do here . Are you talking about a Permanent Military presence in the baltic . Should nato be recalibrated as an antirussian alliance . Theres talk about should the u. S. Be organizing some of the regions along russias periphery that will give reassurance to the allies and send a message to putin . Do you recommend a course like this, or is that going to just antagonize them further . To be clear, i did not say that putin would want you said it was questionable whether he could. No, what he wants to do is to destabilize them. He would like nothing more than to show the e. U. And nato, because estonia and latvia are both members, that he can play with with members of those organizations. Im not saying he wants to annex part of their territory, moldova, case of maybe. Andrew is right. Most of us dont know what he has mind. Thats why i dont want us to be in reactive mode. I want us to be proactive, to preempt and prevent what putin is trying to do and to hit him with hard sanctions. Tom is also right. There isnt unity among western allies, but thats why u. S. Leadership is so critical. Lets remember that capital flight in the First Quarter of this year was a little more than it was all of last year. The ruebels value is in decline. The stock market is in decline. The russian economy is stagnating and predictions for growth are turning into predictions of decline. Thats one of putins Biggest Challenges right now. Its why he wants to deflect the tension from his internal challenges and to rally the troops. I would argue, tom, the reason it was so popular is it was so easy. It was bloodless. If there were body bags going back to russia, i bet you there wouldnt have been 70 support. The few people who are speaking out are getting fired from universities. News agencies are getting shut down. Theyre being threatened. Theyre being outed, if you will. It takes an incredibly courageous soul these days in moscow to criticize what putin is doing, but thats reflective of the ugly environment that putin has created in the 14 years hes been in power. It is incumbent upon the west to stand with those people and to stand with others. I never said sanctions would be easy, but i dont see an alternative to toughhitting sanctions right now. In fact, they should have been done weeks ago. What do you think, tom . Were talking about sanctions, but some of these actions besides sanctions such as what nato is considering, these type of things, could really further antagonize president putin. Look, i am probably the odd person out here. We dont know what putin might plan in detail, but it isnt as if putin hasnt talked for the past 12 years about what his vision for russia is. It sent as if he hasnt talked in the past two years about what his vision is for the former soviet space. Hes talked about a creation of he eurasian union, and to some end, that is going to be dominated by russia. Its an entity that doesnt make sense without ukraine for commercial, economic, and strategic reasons. The ultimate goal i think for putin is to bring ukraine into russias orbit as part of this eurasian unit. I also believe that he understands that this is something that is hes incapable of doing at this point. The goal in the immediate term is to at least create some leverage over the formation of a government in kiev, so that the government that ultimately forms is, as a minimum, neutral and not hostile to russia. So the game here is for ukraine over the long term. We are in initial phases of that. Second point i would make is that there is a genuine pride in russia today, and its not only because of crimea. Crimea, ive been in moscow a couple of times over the past couple of months. What really disturbed russians across the political spectrum was the unrelenting criticism of russia in the runup to the olympics, that they felt was unjustified, that was directed against russia as a people, and not specifically at putin, that was followed by a spectacular olympics show. The russians, who they thought would finish themselves what they finished sixth, finished first in the medal count, and now theyve had a nearly flawless operation in crimea. Theyre on a roll. They feel good. Part of this is payback to the way they felt that theyve been treated by the west over the past at least couple of months and longer than that. Its not only putin, its russians that feel pride once again. I want to pick up on that. You guys, i know, want to respond, but maybe you could fold it into this. Do we have ourselves a little bit, the u. S. And the west, to blame a little bit for this russian insecurity . If you look at the years after the soviet clapt, the russians watched with alarm as outside powers, the United States, nato expansion, then you saw islamic groups moving in, and you dont have to be a quasi dictator like putin to feel nervous about what happened in kiev. A democratically elected leader, ousted by a mob, thats a bad president no matter how you slice it, especially when the u. S. Is cheering on the protesters and the assistant secretary is handing out bagels. I mean, do you think cookies. I thought it was bagels. But doesnt matter sandwiches. Do you think that the United States does provoke russia and play into those insecurities that, if you look at the region are a little bit legitimate . Well, lets look at the reality, which is russias most stable, secure borders are with those countries that are members of the e. U. And nato. So nato enlargement, in fact, has not posed a threat. It has bolstered russias security, and yet nato enlargement was cited in the 2010 military doctrine as the gravest danger to russia, which is utter nonsense. There may be a psychology about this. Maybe we havent sat down on the couch with them to understand this. But we actually have promoted greater security and stability in europe through nato enlargement. The issue about extremism, lets remember that russias attack and war against chechens in 1994, 1996, and again in 1999, and the suspicions of the chechens were behind the bombings in 1999, theyre the ones who created the extremist threat through the slaughter of chechens, indiscriminate slaughter through the bombs that were dropped. Russia has nobody else to blame for this extremist threat than russia itself, than the way yeltsin approached it both times and then putin took it over. Thats how putin came to power, lets not forget. The point tom made about ukraine, neutral, i really hope the days when russia and the United States decide the orientations and memberships in organizations for other countries are over. Lets let ukraine decide if temperatures to be neutral after things have settled down. Im going interrupt. The u. S. Wasnt exactly neutral about whether moldova or ukraine or any of those countries ill give you a little extra time would join the e. U. The u. S. Toughly campaigned on the e. U. Behalf. Was it really russias choice . I would actual zalgree. I think the u. S. Was asleep when the e. U. Was pushing to sign but after the protests started, you bet sure, sure. But, in fact, because what the people for the most part represented in mydon reflect our interests. We dont want ukraine to join the west and orient itself to the west to the exclusion of good relations with russia. Geography alone dictates that ukraine has to have good relations with russia. About f ukrainians were led to believe by their democratically elected president , by the way, who is not permanently endowed with legitimacy through an election in 2010, he forfeited it for many reasons. We can get into that. But what the people and protesters are representing reflected u. S. Interests, and so we did wake up belatedly and supported what they called for. They were lied and manipulated, and then yanukovych ordered the use of force against them on november 30, december 1. Thats when we should have hit yanukovych with tough, hardhitting sanctions, which i think would have brought his regime down like a house of cards, may have saved over 100 lives in february if we had acted more firmly then, and perhaps wouldnt have this whole crisis that we have right now. Can i jump in here . Sure, yeah. You have two minutes. Thank you very much. One of the questions we have to ask ourselves is who did the people many the people in mydon represent. What do we know about them . Was this all of ukraine . Even if its large, perhaps a million people, a country of 43 million, if you look at the demographics of the people who died in the last few days of the conflict, theyre almost all from zpral Eastern Ukraine excuse me, western and western ukraine, not from Eastern Ukraine. Ukraine has been a divided society for the past 25 years, if not longer. Simply to look at people in a square and to say that these are the representatives of the ukrainian people is not sufficient. You have to ask a broader question. Why werent the easterners there . Why are the eastern part of ukraine resisting at this point . The problem we have is we see Something Like this, and we refuse to ask ourselves the fundamental questions about what were really looking at, because we see something that is supportive of the values that we would like to see, the european orientation, for example. But if you look at the polling before the latest events, ukrainians were split on whether they wanted to be part of the e. U. Or wanted a closer association with the russians. You asked about nato. Theres a sharp divide between those in Eastern Ukraine and western ukraine. And finally, if you look at the composition of the government, this government, this interim government that were supporting as a legitimate representative of the ukrainian people is dominated by people from the center and the west. There are very few easterners involved. So the question we have to ask ourselves is, in fact, how do we create a situation in which the legitimate voice of the ukrainian people is heard and that they sort out their own interests . That, i would argue, is through elections, but not president ial elections, its other type of elections, where you relegitimize through a democrat is process the people were going to speak for the ukrainian people as a whole. Anders, ill give you a quick you said now what is straightforward, antidemocratic. You said that the problem with ukraine is divided. You have one Democratic Party and one republican party. Shouldnt you have one big United America party in line with if you putins russia . The problem from putins point of view is exactly what you say. Ukraine had a big democratic breakthrough, and they wanted to have freedom. They wanted to fight against corruption, and putin represents authoritarianists and corruption, and he understood it. He acted out of desperation and weakness. Is it that black and white, anders . Ere are many ukrainians, russianspeaking yourians, who feel theyre treated like secondclass citizens and their interests are not represented. Thats not true. Go to ukraine several times every year. Identify been to crimea every time for the last eight years. Theres no sense of any discrimination against so its just fabricated . The things that matter is that russia does not have a full status of official language, but the teaching in the schools is in russia, where you have a dominant russian population. They do watch russian television, so its smaller things, but its not significant discrimination. You can compare with how National Minorities are treated in russia. They have none of the religious can i just very quickly, please . Please. There was a survey on april 5 showing 74 of the russianspeaking population in eastern and south yourian said they were not under pressure of threat because of their language and identity. This underscores, putin has fabricated this. Its baloney. It doesnt exist. The divide is grossly overstated by tom. Ukrainians, even in crimea, dont want to live under the russian thumb. But when there are guns being bandied about and brandished, it changes the mood and the thinking, when people think that the government in kiev cant defend them and they dont have much choice. You know, we should put ourselves in their shoes. Why is it the goons who were reading buildings went to the theater instead of the city government, because they didnt live there. They werent from there. They were being sent in. All right, lets move on. Andrew, you talk about clapping for moving on . No, i think weve exhausted that point. Oh, go on. We could go on, but unfortunately, i want to get to the audience. One more question. Is russia we talk about we on russian Cooperation International issues s. Russia really a credible partner on the world stage in if you look at whats happened in syria, the kind of double game theyre playing with supporting a political solution, but at the same time continuing to arm the assad regime, there are other areas on the world stage. Can president putin really be trusted and are we getting such great cooperation that its worth kind of not giving them a pass certainly, but treating them a little bit more with kid gloves on this . The short answer is no. I think that what we need to do is step back and say whats the relationship about . As one of my colleagues and friends like to say, its a lot like the tv show seinfeld. Its a relationship about nothing. Its been that way for quite some time. And so we saw with the we saw some lowhanging fruit, some important achievements in the first couple of years in the obama administration, and then they ran out of gas. They ran out of gas in part because there wasnt a real clear agenda for u. S. Russia relations. There have been a bunch of intervening events, but its really been a relationship where we disengaged. We basically said were not interested, we dont see much value in this. I dont think thats an unwise calculation. I think the danger from that policy is that now were in a crisis. It would be nice to have access to our russian counterparts to try to deescalate, and we dont have it. So all the specific issues on iran, nuclear proliferation, on counterterrorism, its spotty. You cant point to any of those issues and say its not a success. The one where you could come closest to that is on the socalled process on iran, where so far we dont see russia being spoiler or wrecker, but that potential is there, and so theres talk and there are issues that are out there, and the discussions about possible barter deal where russia might end up marketing about half of Irans Crude Oil production to the tune of 500,000 barrels a day, things like that could be very damaging to the negotiation. But at the end of the day, even in the iran context, this is a negotiation between the United States and iran primarily, and russia will think about how to shore up its position. Its not a debate where the u. S. Has to bring russia on board. Its a question where russia can be an enabler and a facilitator of success, but its not the driver of success. But is it the spotty cooperation because of our lack of engagement, or is it because at the end of the day russian interests dont necessarily alza line with u. S. Interests . Well, i think weve seen since the cold war ended these ups and downs, and this is incredibly volatile. Weve all served in government and seen both ends of that dynamic, where the highs feel pretty high and the lows feel really low. This is the lowest it gets, and there is a question about what is putin doing . His speech, when he took the formal step in crimea, created a whole set of really serious questions about what the idea that russia is the most divided nation, the vision of ethnic identity. All these things are incredibly destabilizing, and youve seen in western european embrace of some of these ideological points by the far right. So again, this is a genie being let out of the box here. David . Until putin bailed us out on the chemical weapons issue, russias role was nothing but negative and destructive t. Wasnt blocking the resolutions, it was selling and providing arms and weapons for assad to slaughter syrians. Russia was guilty aiding and abetting that slaughter, that massacre. And so russia has, in my view, been so counter to our interests in syria, and the chemical weapons issue now isnt even going well because the weapons havent even been turned over on schedule the way they were on iran. Andrew has identified, i think, the problem there. Russia is also talking about building more Nuclear Reactors in iran, which also seems to run counter to the United Spirit that was supposed to present. Afghanistan was 5 now reliance on northern distribution network, and its just going to obviously keep going down and down as we withdraw from afghanistan. Russia is increasingly irrelevant to our interests. Russia used the phrase running out of gas. The reason is theyre an authoritarian, corrupt regime, and were a Democratic Society. By definition, were going to run out of gas. Our interests are just going to no longer coincide, so it shouldnt be a surprise that the way the putin regime treats its own people is indicative of how its going to be in Foreign Policy. They trample their own citizens human rights. They pretend to proceed force care about the human rights of ethnic russians in ukraine and elsewhere, when all theyre doing is using it as a pretext and cover to destabilize and even annex neighboring countries territory. Were going to open it up to questions from the audience. Im going to ask you, if you would keep your question concise, if you have an affiliation, please acknowledge it. Keep your questions to a question and not a comment. Im going start with a question from twitter, as you think bout your questions. Were supposed to define what that means . Its open to interpretation, but it plays into what you were just saying, david. Consider nato undermine putin domestically . The ukraine invasion, or i think this person means the crimea invasion, hasnt solved the human rights crisis in russia. Should nato be taking steps to maybe destabilize the russian regime or to work towards better human rights in russia . It goes to the question about whether this should become an antirussia alliance. Is that for me . Why dont we start with tom and andrew . A few minutes. Look, andrew will disagree with me on this, so we can take too two minutes each. Take one minute each, one minute each. Look, the question is, what are we trying to achieve, and how do you get there . I think we would all like to see russia be a fullblooded Democratic Society with western values. It isnt. It isnt going to get there for a long time. The sque what can outsiders do that is positive anden constructive in that process . We all know, at the end of the day, it has to be something the russians do themselves. We can position ourselves in a way that narrows the space for the types of development we like to see inside russia, where we can position ourselves and try to open that. You know, my sense is i love the pressure that we put in antirussia policy, explicitly putting pressure would, in fact, play into the fears that the kremlin has, create a much more repressive society inside, nd it would also cower not necessarily the few people, who do go out on a limb, but the broader mass of people that you actually need to create a Democratic Society who dont want to be seen as traitors to their own country, as agents of foreign influence. Theres a delect question here we have to answer of how we go about treating this country, how we position ourselves so that the people who are the heroes, but the people who actually make societys work over the long run have the courage in order to pursue the types of policies, the democratic types of practices that we would like to see. Its a generational type of thing. Its not something that were going to affect dramatic natural space of a few years. Can i disagree . Just really fast, the one thing we also need to remember is people have a pretty fixed in time monolithic view of what russias transformation is, and its largely about the disappointment a lot of us feel. I think all four of us feel, about the trajectory of it and then it petered out to a Democratic Society. So if you look now in russia, you have their european eyes, modern society in cities of more than a million, like moscow. You have a very different russia in the smaller urban centers, where the state is basically the deciding force and the Economic Vitality of those towns, largely through the defense industry. And then you have sort of huge parts of the country that are pretty atomized, where people are kind of disconnected. They dont have Running Water or the internet. We just need to remember that russia is ultimately a messy place, and for to us kind of sort of create a version of black and white, reform, all that has really served us poorly in the past. Ok, david or anders, one of you . Yeah, im not interested in destabilizing russia. Not destabilizing, but forcing Democratic Change there. I dont think we can force Democratic Change there. I am interested in going after people who abuse human rights and engage in antidemocratic behavior. Thats why i strongly support the legislation for people responsible for killing lawyers in jail. But lets remember that nato has an obligation to its Member States under article five, and nato has, over the past few years, done a decent job of contingency plan for the baltic and others, beefing up security for the baltic states, poland, other country in the region, absolutely essential. These countries are fearful, and they should be. In part, we dont know where this is going next. I think nato has an obligation to prepare and beef up and solidify the defenses of these countries. Lets also not forget that nato has engaged with russia for the past, what, 15 years, 1997 was the nato signing, and russia has been, you know, prancing through the halls of nato for years. Look at where its gotten us. What good has it done . I think the problem is the nature of the regime. I hate to repeat myself. It was the nature of the regime. Frankly, the term id rather use, tom, is not western values, but universal values. I dont expect russia to be like a western value country. I do expect it to live up to universal values, values that it signed up to in the universal declaration of human rights, but also values it signed up to in the council of europe. It doesnt live up to or abide by these values that it committed to, and it comes back to the point i tried to raise at the beginning, which is if we say their behavior is unacceptable, what are we going to do about it . Ok, anders, quickly. Very brief. If i understood tom rightly, you said in order to limit putins domestic repression, we should accept his international aggression. Needless to say, i dont think so. Ok. Circumstances right here, and then right here and right here, ok . Thank you very much. Im benjamin. I served as a Foreign Service officer in various parts of the former soviet union, including in the crimea. Given that there is no solution to the ukrainian crisis without western and russian agreement and cooperation, and two, that for russia, ukraine is in a category all by itself, is there a solution that is possible to this crisis that is not along the lines of a solution or the solution thats worked very well for finland, that is, a liberal democracy, dynamic, transparent, but with a Foreign Policy which is essentially neutral and very attentive to russian concerns. Very excellent question that weve been talking about a lot. Anders, do you want to kick it off . Two minutes. I think thats the democracy ideal on the finish line was a good idea when the big regime get in, but that was long ago. I think thats impossible now, because clearly putin is not prepared to accept any democracy in ukraine, because that means that if ukraine has explained to russia that his regime is not acceptable, and thats acceptable. So i dont think that this is in the cause. Thats why i want to contain russia. Ok. Tom or andrew, would you like to rebutt . Look, i think there is a solution to the ukrainian crisis,but it is going to be one that has to take into account the interest of the ukraines themselves in all their multitude and different opinions, but also its just the reality of the way the world operates. The big powers that have interest, russia is a neighbor. I think youre right. For whatever reason, they have a certain attitude towards ukraine. If its more salient than them for many people, i see nothing wrong with some type of agreement among the United States, russia, and the European Union that ukraine is not going to become part of any type of military alliance. Its something the ukrainians have talked about themselves that can be formalized in some sort of agreement. I also think if you look at the other things that have been proposed, the russians call it federalization. The ukrainian authorities in kiev are talking about decentralization. I really realize that the devil is in the detail in Something Like this, but it is something that one ought to talk about. Why are you opposed to broader regional autonomy . Go again, within limits, and in a country that is as diverse as ukraine. Language as well, there are certain rights that can be provided that dont undermine the right of the ukrainians themselves to determine their own future. This as an interim solution that provides a type of political space that ukraine needs in order to work out its own National Consensus of what it is in society, how it rebuilds its economy, i think its important, and zpweths that we ought to look at. I think at the end of the day, all crises like this are resolved diplomatically through diplomatic means. Its something along those lines, where were going to end up. I would hope sooner as opposed to later, but that will depend on attitudes and a number of key capitals and kiev as well. 10point second. Just a contradiction, tom, if i heard you right. Ukrainians determine their own future, but then you were talking about an agreement that would essentially make ukraine neutral. I didnt hear you say ukraine had a say in making itself neutral. Can i answer that . Ive heard this argument 100 times, that russia doesnt have a veto over what nato does. Nato needs to make its decisions in the context in which it operates. The russians have said this is a red line. So, yes, nato doesnt have to accept ukraine because a number of ukrainians say they want to come to nato. Nato has to look at its own interests in a broader spectrum. So, yes, i think an agreement among nato members in russia, that ukraine will be neutral, does provide the type of political space that they need in order to focus on their domestic problems. Nato at the bucharest summit in 2008 declared that ukraine and georgia will become members. Nato has already spoke onthis issue, number one. Number two, for the past several years, no one has been pushing ukraine membership in nato. This is a red herring. Yanukovych, oddly enough, actually increased cooperation with nato while he was president , but he made it clear that he wasnt going to pursue membership, which is fine. Nobodys pushing membership for ukraine in nato. Its not the issue right now. There are other things they need to resolve. But this is just a false issue thats being raised. Ok, were going to move on to this woman in the second row in the red. My name is anna, and im half russian, half ukrainian. I just want to make a comment as how people feel, because i feel like people i dont have much expertise on what americans have to do certainly. But i can say that both russians who are not supporters of putin and ukrainians feel hurt. For example, phil gramm said there is hardly one person in moscow who does not want aggression. Nine days ago, 50,000 people were on the streets of moscow. Many were arrested, and i do not wish it on anyone to be put in russian jail. Two days ago, huge and only people are very comfortable lives, st me, writers, actors intelligencia, as they used to be called, intellectually elite, they were demonstrating, and it was called march of truth for freedom of press. I may be as naive as many ukrainians and russians are, but i do believe that americans support freedom of press. Thank you. As for ukraine i cant say, one moment more, im sorry. Thats sorry. It is very, very insulting to hear mydon. It was the most delightful, the most admirable way of peoples selfexpression in ukraine. The only question i can ask is how often he travels to ukraine. Thank you so much. Thank you so much for sharing your insights, maam. Im just going to tom, if you just to want answer that question real quick, i think well move on to another question and just let the womans comments stand. No, nobody nobody wants to denigrate what the people in maidan did. Is toestion imf asking what extent are they representative of all of ukraine . We do not know the answer to that question. Said is that as opposed to a president ial election, i think ukraine needs to conduct a new rada election. They need to religion demise of the elites across the board, not simply the president. For the ukrainian people, is it just maidan . Do the people who did not maid n participate in maidan have a voice . Lets religion lets relegitimize through a new election. As opposed to us sitting here deciding which voices we have heard are the genuine voice of the ukrainian people. We do not know that. Thank you. [indiscernible] i was last in ukraine a year and a half ago. David embed this gentleman next to him. Fromod evening, david voice of america. I would like to ask tom and andrew about something david said. This is a question my polish friend asked me. Troops moved into ukraine, should the u. S. And the nato allies move more troops into the baltics . Has said he has the right to assert russian power in defense of russians who do not live in russia. There are a lot of russians in live in riga and lithuania. A lot of people are nervous. Do you favor more nato troops in the baltics in the event russians move into ukraine . I have no doubt we are heading in that direction. I think it is a question of what presents and what the modalities are. At this point, regardless of if the tragedy does not come to pass, which we all hope. In terms of no fullscale military intervention. There will be any number of baltico reassure the countries. As well, the romanians and bulgarians are the most exposed. Worry a little bit that we in the west are setting the bar so high for triggering a response from us. Fullscale invasion of ukraine. Is able to destabilize ukraine well short of sending tanks across the border we are seeing it right now. We cannot set the bar so high that we may say if he does this we will not do anything. He is already doing it. There are other means for him to do it. We absolutely have to protect these countries. The Nato Alliance is meaningless. Israel will question our reliability. Our allies around the world will question our credibility. And our enemies will also smile. And that makes me very wary. We are going to go right here and then to this gentleman here. Did you have a question . Then i think we may be out of time. My name is david jackson. A lot of the discussion has been about the cost or potential cost of resisting russia. I would like to ask what would resistingt of not russia . Not just of the message that it sends to iran, but to china, chinas neighbors, to north korea, and to democratizing former soviet republics. Who wants to start . Anders . This is my very point. The alternative to sanctions to stop putin is war. We are already seeing a worse starting in ukraine. There is no reaction in europe nor here. I find that extremely dangerous. We have a situation that is worse than after the summit between khrushchev and kennedy in june 1961, which to come to the conclusion that the u. S. Had no background. And decided to put Nuclear Missiles on cuba. This is worse for europe and for the u. S. Do you want to take a quick . To my mind, it is hard to say that the chinese and other major global powers are going to draw a media lessons from what is going on in ukraine. They all know this is very complicated. There is a lot of disunity and dore is a reluctance to something that leads to war. They kind of get that. There is a question about u. S. Leadership and u. S. Durability. And the security commitments we extend. The desire of people to whom we extend those commitments to see them are you sure. It is not surprising we see the south koreans, the japanese, and others turning to the u. S. And saying we see what is happening in ukraine, please assure us that you have our security. The security guarantees you have extended our meaningful. I would expect that process is going to be ongoing, regardless of who is in the white house . We have time for a couple more. My name is mike, i am from john hopkins sais. Saysars Prime Minister finland is not neutral. He made clear that if dte you would vote for sanctions, finland would go along with sanctions. He made it clear that if the eu would vote for sanctions, finland would go along with sanctions. Tom, you mentioned accommodating russias interests. Isnt a problem that rushs real interest would be a democratic ukraine with which it could trade and do all the normal things democratic countries do. We are talking about what putin considers to be his interest. As david said, his interest is realke it impossible for a democracy, much less a slavic democracy on his doorstep, to function. Is there a difference between what russias interest should be for the 21stcentury and what mr. Putins interest for his kleptocracy for his is . We often know what other people want more than for ourselves. Has to betin leaving that country. He enjoys a tremendous out of public support we know putin thatns to be leading country. He enjoys a tremendous amount of public support. It is not immediately obvious to me that putins Foreign Policy does not enjoy support within the russian political elite, middle classes that would pay so attention to, not to speak of rotter segments of russian society. That is what we have had to deal with. Maybe a Democratic Society on their borders, why should they be opposed to that . But that is not what they see when they look at ukraine at this point. The russian leadership and a broad segment of the russian coupical class sees a that was engineered by the west. And they asked about how legitimate this is. Is this what you are planning for russia itself . There are problems of perception we have to deal with. Whenever we go about our own policy, we have to think through others and the decide what we need to do to advance our interests. We are now where we wanted to be in ukraine . Is there something we overlooked that we should have dealt with wouldnned for so that we be prepared if we had known that some of these things are possible, should we have articulated our own interests in a different way and achieved a result that was more stable . Did not lead to the type of situation we are facing now. Ok. Two minutes. If you went to split it up. Tom, the problem in ukraine is the russian invasion. It started on the 27 of february, which was when the ukraine and the rent was appointed. This is the problem. What remains totally unclear is ask ukraine tod accept all kinds of conditions he does not allow at home. Such as freedom and democracy. As wonderful as everybody thinks in russia, why doesnt he allow them to speak for themselves and the for themselves . Want to add . I did, i forgot what i was going to say. [laughter] rare for me. [laughter] i am sorry we do not have time for a lot of questions. One more in the front and we will ask the debaters to offer policy recommendation i remember quickly. Announcedy 17, putin the loan from russia to ukraine. The next day the blood started flowing in kiev. Putin suggested to you and you suggested toghazi ukovych, you want this money, clear the streets. Dangerous to diminish the crisis between russia and a particular country. Is a crisis between the free world and the remnants of the empire of evil. Start judgingto or guessing what putin wants. The debate is about what we want. Defined by ambassador walker in the recent cnn interview, the free world stands behind. What should be the values we are prepared to defend while facing this brutal force . What are the consequences if we want to do it now . Andrew . I am not sure i hear the question. If you look at the steps the president is taking about where he stands and where his values are. The question is the american tople do people intend have the ultimate sacrifice on behalf of ukraine . So far, we have not seen too Many Americans who have said he is saying it should not be only about the behalf of ukraine. If the u. S. Stands for universal values of freedom and human rights, should we not put it in these small terms but be speaking on a larger, standing up for its universal values of freedom and human rights and democracy. Not just in europe but in the free world. My impression is that is what we do. That is the nature of being americans and any administration that is in power. I think what we are seeing right now is a really coveted situation. I think we are all very worried about a war. Strident and getting out there suggesting that there is a magic solution at hand would create expectations either among the ukrainian that there is a defense commitment that does not exist or that they will be cut loose. The administration is trying to, it is going to be hard, we will see what happens on thursday in geneva, can we get a diplomatic process going. Problems like this hopefully can be solved through diplomatic means. Im not sure they can be. The specific question is always what do you do in a specific case . I think andrew is right. The u. S. , for 240 years, has sought to promote democracy in world affairs. The argument for us has always been as a nation how do you go about doing that . Is the best way, how do you and sure that type of progress. There have been different ways and different thoughts about how we do that historically. Specifically with ukraine, the question is what are you prepared to do, how do you advance that question mark and more important, what sacrifices are all of you prepared to make so that you see freedom succeed in ukraine . Is not going to be without sacrifice. Over the long be term. It is not something we are going to see an end to in the next several weeks. David . And andrew brought up the talks in geneva on thursday. How do you think that should be approached . I cannot remember the last time i bought a finished russian product in the u. S. They do not make anything i want. I am not sure what sacrifices you are talking about. It is different for europeans but therey, are ways of addressing that. On thursday, here we get a geneva again. Syrias geneva negotiations worked really well. I have very hope this is going hope this iszero going to work out and to not hit the kremlin with more sanctions before thursday is a mistake. Putin thinks he is winning and he has no interest in showing compromise or negotiation. It will be a waste of time with the foreign minister who has demonstrated he has zero influence over what is happening. He has no decisionmaking authority, he cannot even get putin on the phone when he is meeting with john kerry. It is a delay in taking steps if i could, i would ban the phrase we are considering additional sanctions. You do not think it should be an incremental approach, shock and awe. Whack the hell out of them. Ok. [applause] david is saying there is no sacrifice on our part, that this is easy. The argument i am making at this is not easy. If you really believe in these things, it is long time and it is going to hit us. And it has to hit us. Thinks what we have to about. In this specific case, the question is if you are president of the United States, what sacrifices are you going to ask the American People to make and for what purpose . Going to wrap up. Sorry we could not get more questions. This is a debate that will continue and could continue midebaterussia. I will ask each participant to offer a one minute, we are running late, policy prescription. Summing up what we have talked about today. We have a few people that wrote in on twitter and you can think about some of these things. What action should the u. S. And eu take . What role does the Un Security Council play . Take off a couple things you think the u. S. And the west should be doing to manage this crisis. Anders . Ive already basically said it. I think the u. S. Should go for a very tough financial sanctions. The u. S. Dominates the Global Finance deal. Russia has less than 1 of u. S. Trade. It is a blip nobody will notice. You. Ank andrew . People have alluded to this. We are at the beginning of this trauma. Everybody needs to be praised for this to go on for a long time. We are at the beginning of this drama. Everyone needs to be braced for this to go on for a long time. We are not in 1989, this is mark obligated. More complicated. To shun dialogue and say there is nothing to talk about is a mistake. Thank you. Sanctions, sanctions, sanctions. State owned enterprises, banks, individuals, you name it. There is a long list. Ukrainians let decide their own future. When russia has taken over part of their territory and tens of thousands of troops are threatening further incursion. Lets not forget crimea. The whole debate these days is about eastern and southern ukraine. Crimea has been lost and forgotten, that is a huge mistake. As we did with the baltic states, we did not recognize that their absorption into the soviet union. We should not recognize the referendum in crimea. Push russia out of ukraine, i include crimea. [applause] tom . We need a clear statement by the president what our interests are. Is preparedces he to ask the American People to pay to pursue those. I agree with andrew that we need to open up channels that allow us to pursue the various ways we can resolve this diplomatically, threat of further violence continues. At the end of the day, the solution will be diplomatic. And we need to be creative in the way we do this so that we find a way of advancing our own interests. Wrap itsorry we have to up there. Thank you so much for coming. Thank you to the Mccain Institute and for our debaters. Andrew, tom, david, and anders. Thank you so much. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2014] one more round of applause for our fabulous moderator. [applause] the most recent in our series of debates, find it on Mccain Institute. Org, our youtube channel, our itunes page. Find out how you can support the institute. Thank you for coming. [applause] cspan is pleased to present our winning entries in this years student cam video documentary competition. Student can is a competition that encourages students to think critically about issues. The question we asked students to base their documentary on was what is the most important issue that u. S. Congress should consider in 2014 . Second prize winner matthew houmura is a junior at puna school in hawaii. He would Like Congress to consider a clean and Renewable Energy plan as its most important issue. Hereery day the sun rises in hawaii. Every day, the waves crash upon our shores. Every day, the wind blows in the mountains. Every day, the lawful flows beneath the earth. Even though my state has within its borders abundant Renewable Energy, we still rely on fossil fuels for over 80 of our needs. Recognized that our dependence on fossil fuels was threatening our most precious resources the land, the air, the water. Ar State Government set up clear plan to move away from Traditional Energy sources and to move towards a greener future. Ofies and gentlemen congress, this is something we need for our whole country. A National Clean energy plan is e tomost important issu consider in 2014. We need your action to break the clean energy gridlock. There is a growing consensus that the use of fossil fuels contributes to Climate Change. Especially by forming carbon dioxide. The evidence is overwhelming, the science is clear. The threat is real and urgent. The Science Behind Climate Change is simple. Carbon dioxide makes the earth warmer and we are emitting more and more of it into the atmosphere. This increase in Greenhouse Gases, above all, from the combustion of fossil fuels, is affecting the climate. 97 of climate scientists are convinced that human caused Climate Change is occurring. If our changing climate goes unchecked it will have a devastating impact on the u. S. And our planet. Year, the observatory on hawaiis big island measured 400 parts per million of carbon backside in the atmosphere. This level has not existed for thousands of years. The plan i put forth to protect our country from the effects of Climate Change is the path we need to take. We render what is at stake if we remember what is at stake the world we leave to our children this is a challenge we will meet. The job ofnot just the executive branch. It is the responsibility of congress as well. Clause of the constitution says congress should regulate interstate energy, whether traditional or renewable, is a form of interstate commerce. Met with the president of Hawaiian Electric industries to learn more about our countrys energy policies. The Energy System in america has become more and more federal in nature and more national in nature. There is not regulatory bodies that regulate the bulk power system. Oner can be generated in state but then exported across that states borders and interstate commerce. Today, Renewable Energy ies very from one state to the next. Some states regulate the amount of Greenhouse Gases they will permit, other states require a certain percentage of Renewable Energy be produced. Even more states have Energy Efficiency requirements for cars or buildings. A patchworkhere is of Renewable Energy policy across our country. Acrossuse of renewables the u. S. Really vary significantly. Because the Energy Picture across the u. S. Varies significantly. Parts of the United States that actually have very good wind resources, primarily through the middle of the country. To theen you get southwest you have excellent solar resources. Of course, in the pacific northwest, they have hydropower. Another reason for a federal plan is that the states might not be able to regulate Renewable Energy by themselves. Renewable supplies are in a minute Renewable Supplies have to be coordinated to meet nationwide demand. They have two feet into the National Grid along with Traditional Energy. Resources across the country have to be integrated with each other. A National Policy for Renewable Energy makes sense. Taking the states initiative. State action might be restricted by the Commerce Clause of the constitution. The Commerce Clause was to preclude individual states from actually impacting interstate commerce. The idea was even though we are comprised of 50 states, we are one nation and we should have open borders between our states. Commerce should flow freely across state batteries. Beeno there have challenges to some of the state laws that have sought to restrict production facilities that were within that particular state. The Commerce Clause may prevent states from acting on their own. I understand why congress has not been able to agree on anything yet. Is moree Energy Expensive than Traditional Energy, especially with all the natural gas we have available in our country. There is also concern about losing Traditional Energy jobs. And there is controversy about the role of fossil fuels in our energy future. These problems are not insurmountable. We have faced many of them on a smaller scale in hawaii. Itin 2008, hawaii decided really needed to reduce dependence on oil forever. Moveur goal is to actually 15 to renewable sources by 2015. It goes up to 40 in 2030. In addition, to reduce throughion by 30 Energy Efficiency. And that is a total of 70 clean energy by 2030. I am not saying congress should model its clean Energy Policy on the hawaii plan. Any not recommending specific lee Energy Policy for you to adopt. I am just asking you make this priority for 2014. Ladies and gentlemen of congress, this is my message to you. It is time for a National Clean energy plan. It is time to break the gridlock. To watch all the winning videos and learn more, go to cspan. Org and click on sui tudent cam. Post comments on facebook or tweet us