When
Hypotheticals become Reality
Thanks to a social media follower, Oleg Kotsour, I was reminded of
an incident that occurred years ago when I was a young journalist, relatively speaking,
and I had the opportunity to ask President Bill Clinton a question about
US-Ukraine relations.
The event is meaningful because of the history that has transpired
before and since that press conference and how hypotheticals can become reality
and like the shark in “Jaws” it swims up and bites you on the ass.
The setting: A presidential press conference on March 4, 1994, at
the White House with President Clinton and President Leonid Kravchuk. I was a correspondent
with The National Tribune, a Ukrainian American newspaper based in New York
City.
It was taking place amid the euphoria of Ukraine’s agreement to eliminate
its nuclear arsenal, sadly in favor of Russia. Earlier that year, the Verkhovna
Rada approved the trilateral agreement and unconditionally ratified the START
Treaty and the Lisbon Protocol. Then, Ukraine joined the NATO Partnership for
Peace. Ironically, Ukraine’s accession to NATO continues to be stuck in the mud
despite fulfilling all requirements and Russia’s ongoing war against Ukraine.
Boris Yeltsin at the time was president of Russia, some six years before
Vladimir Putin was to assume the corner office in the Kremlin.
“In our meeting today I strongly reaffirmed American support for
Ukraine’s independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity. I urged
President Kravchuk to continue to work to achieve Ukraine’s accession to the
Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty,” Clinton assured.
The two presidents shared views on developments in Russia and
their impact on Ukraine. “We discussed ways to expand cooperation between our two
nations. At the core of our agenda is developing a closer economic
relationship. While Ukraine is going through a difficult period of transition,
it remains a nation with enormous economic potential, endowed with abundant
natural resources and human talent,” Clinton observed three decades ago.
Clinton expressed his view that the best way to develop the full
measure of these resources, Ukraine’s most promising future clearly lies with
market reform. “That’s why I was pleased that President Kravchuk today
expressed his determination to move forward toward comprehensive market reform,”
he added.
Clinton also said, “As Ukraine proceeds with reform, the United
States is prepared to mobilize support from the G-7 nations and from
international financial institutions. We’re also prepared to increase our
bilateral economic assistance to $350 million this year for privatization,
small business creation, and other priorities, and to help Ukraine dismantle
nuclear weapons we've committed $350 million in Nunn-Lugar funds. Total US assistance
available to Ukraine this year will therefore be $700 million. This represents
a major increased commitment to an important friend in the region.”
Life for newly independent Ukraine then was not worry free. In
addition to centuries of Russian invasions, war and subjugation, Moscow was not
pleased that on August 24, 1991, Ukraine finally declared its independence and
broke loose from its yoke.
Not being pleased with the course of the questions and answers, I
posed two of my own which dealt with American support for the territorial integrity
and sovereignty of Ukraine in case Russia seizes Crimea and will the reemergence
of Russian imperialism, which was previously cited in the bilateral
discussions, harm Ukraine?
President Clinton observed: “Well, the United States supports the
territorial integrity of Ukraine, and I personally have been very impressed
that all the parties involved in the Crimean issue seem to be very
responsible in their comments and their policies recently, so I think you are
asking me a hypothetical which doesn’t seem too probable in light of the
policies and the statements which have been made.”
Watch the C-Span link that I included at the conclusion of this
post.
Since then that hypothetical in the minds of American officials but
not historical records became an ironic reality. In early 2014 Russia invaded
Ukraine and occupied Crimea and later than spring it invaded and occupied the
Ukrainian oblasts of Luhansk and Donetsk. Eight years later Moscow invaded
Ukraine and sparked the first war in Europe since the end of World War Two that
rages until today.
This scenario, that plagues the world affairs, harkens back to a
question posed during the recent XXIII Congress of Ukrainian Americans – the Ukrainian
Congress Committee of America – that was held in Philadelphia. Michael Sawkiw
Jr., director of the Ukrainian National Information Service (UNIS) who would be
elected UCCA president at that conclave, posed a question to a group of panelists
discussing the war about what should be done to prevent Russia from ever
invading Ukraine again.
Outside of giving Ukraine NATO membership and continually raising awareness
about the never ending Russian desire to invade and subjugate all independent
countries in its so-called near abroad, the international community should never
allow the free world to forget about Russian imperialism and its individual and
collective victims.
It has been an intellectual discussion about why were the allies successful
in defeating Hitler’s Nazi war machine in 1945? On the surface, there’s no
difference. A saber-rattling dictator threatens his near abroad, invades weak Poland
and triggers a bloody European war that ends in victory for the allies some six
years later.
However, World War Two became everyone’s war. Everyone had a stake
in it so everyone anted up. Everyone equally wanted to end the war with an
allied victory, Nazi defeat in order to restore peace, stability and harmony,
and bring home the boys.
The stakes aren’t identical. Ukrainian allies, especially its near
aboard that know the meaning of Russian imperialism, subjugation and repression,
broadly support Ukraine and actively strive for Russia’s defeat and Ukraine’s
victory. But still something is missing from this puzzle that keeps the free
world from vigorously committing itself to ending this war. Is it local boys’
blood? Is it accession to NATO? Right now its Ukraine’s war but it must become
the world’s war like it did eight decades ago. Everyone should have a stake in
its conclusion. The farther the allies are from Ukraine, the more passive is
their support, and the more they or some of their citizens need to be convinced
that what is happening in Ukraine could happen on the streets of New York.
The Washington cannot afford to be gullible and naive in its
relations with Moscow. The New York Post wrote in its October 19 edition that
Putin outsmarted three US presidents. That was kind. Moscow has been outwitting
America for decades.
Russians have always lived up to our worst expectations of their behavior.
Ukrainian towns, farms, infrastructure and industries have been destroyed.
Civilian men, women and children have been targeted for death. Dead bodies,
burned out, rusting tanks, trucks and jeeps, unexploded ordnance and missiles pollute
wheat fields and threaten the lives of farmers and their children, while unknown
chemicals, petroleum and other liquid contaminants will seep deep into the underground
aquifers.
Ukraine is not isolated on the map of Europe. The hypothetical
that Bill Clinton discounted has become a reality. Now Europe’s health and
existence are threatened. So for the good of mankind, it’s time for Europe and
the free world to ante up and change reality on the planet. Supplying weapons
that merely give Ukraine time to persevere and survive is insufficient. It’s
time to destroy Russia’s evil.
