[Joint House and Senate Hearing, 119 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
DETERRENCE ON NATO'S EASTERN FLANK
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND
COOPERATION IN EUROPE
U.S. HELSINKI COMMISSION
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
November 17, 2025
__________
Printed for the use of the Commission on Security and Cooperation in
Europe
[CSCE119-3]
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via www.csce.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
62-220 WASHINGTON : 2026
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE
U.S. HELSINKI COMMISSION
U.S. SENATE U.S. HOUSE
ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi JOE WILSON, South Carolina Co-
Chairman Chairman
SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island STEVE COHEN, Tennessee Ranking
Ranking Member Member
JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas ROBERT B. ADERHOLT, Alabama
KATIE BRITT, Alabama EMANUEL CLEAVER II, Missouri
JOHN FETTERMAN, Pennsylvania RUBEN GALLEGO, Arizona
JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire RICHARD HUDSON, North Carolina
TINA SMITH, Minnesota MICHAEL LAWLER, New York
THOM TILLIS, North Carolina VICTORIA SPARTZ, Indiana
MIKE ROUNDS, South Dakota MARC VEASEY, Texas
EXECUTIVE BRANCH
Department of State - to be appointed
Department of Defense - to be appointed
Department of Commerce - to be appointed
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
COMMISSIONERS
Hon. Roger Wicker, Chairman, from Mississippi.................... 1
Hon. Joe Wilson, Co-Chairman from South Carolina................. 2
Hon. Steve Cohen, Ranking Member, from Tennessee................. 13
Hon. John Boozman, from Arizona.................................. 14
Hon. Greg Murphy, from North Carolina............................ 16
WITNESSES
Margus Tsahkna, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Republic of Estonia. 4
Seth Jones, President, Defense and Security Department, Center
for Strategic and International Studies........................ 6
Peter Rough, Director, Center on Europe and Eurasia, Hudson
Institute...................................................... 8
DETERRENCE ON NATO'S EASTERN FLANK
----------
COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN
EUROPE,
U.S. HELSINKI COMMISSION,
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
Monday, November 17, 2025.
The hearing was held from 3:35 p.m. to 5:06 p.m., Room 222,
Russell Senate Office Building, Senator Roger Wicker [R-MS],
Chairman, Commission for Security and Cooperation in Europe,
presiding.
Committee Members Present: Senator Roger Wicker [R-MS],
Chairman; Representative Joe Wilson [R-SC], Co-Chairman;
Representative Steve Cohen [D-TN], Ranking Member;
Representative Greg Murphy [R-NC]; Representative Jake Ellzey
[R-TX]; Senator John Boozman [R-AR].
Witnesses: Margus Tsahkna, Minister of Foreign Affairs,
Republic of Estonia; Seth Jones, President, Defense and
Security Department, Center for Strategic and International
Studies; Peter Rough, Director, Center on Europe and Eurasia,
Hudson Institute.
OPENING STATEMENT OF ROGER WICKER, CHAIRMAN, U.S. SENATE, FROM
MISSISSIPPI
Chairman Wicker: This hearing of the Helsinki Commission
will come to order. We convene today to discuss a timely and
important matter, deterrence on the eastern flank of NATO.
This fall, Russia violated the sovereign airspace of four
countries on NATO's eastern flank in quick succession. Putin's
drones crossed into the airspace of Poland, Romania, Estonia,
and Lithuania. These provocations are not accidents, and they
are not isolated. They are part of a coordinated campaign to
probe NATO's defenses, gauge allied reactions, and test how far
Moscow can push before meeting a firm response.
This is a taste of Russia's shadow war, a war that extends
far beyond airspace, across Europe. Russia has executed
cyberattacks and engaged in sabotage and arson. The dictator
Vladimir Putin has attacked critical infrastructure and ordered
targeted assassinations. He has interfered in elections and
weaponized migration. Moscow hopes the West will treat each of
these crimes as a separate incident instead of seeing the
broader pattern. Today, we hear about the broader pattern.
Ukraine stands at the center of the confrontation between
Russia and the West. Valiant Ukrainians are holding back the
very forces that would otherwise be at NATO's doorstep. The
Kremlin is very interested in how we and our allies support
Ukraine's defense.
In September, I joined Senator and Commissioner Jeanne
Shaheen to introduce the Eastern Flank Strategic Partnership
Act. That legislation would formalize the United States
commitment to our frontline allies and ensure U.S. security
assistance is directed where the threat is greatest. It is
worth noting that the bill would prioritize assistance for
countries that are already investing in their own defense.
Ultimately, we want our allies to have the tools they need to
deter Russian aggression.
Just three weeks ago, the Pentagon announced plans to
reduce the U.S. rotational presence in Romania at the very
moment when Russian drones are crossing into NATO airspace.
House Armed Services Chairman Rogers and I made it clear that
such a move sends a strong signal and sends the wrong signal.
Rather than withdrawing troops from Europe, we should seek to
impose costs on Vladimir Putin. If we do not, we invite further
acts of aggression. We risk undermining deterrence in Europe.
Credible deterrence ultimately depends on effective and
decisive responses. On NATO's eastern front, Moscow must be
shown that any violation of allied territory by drone,
aircraft, or other means will meet a unified, rapid, and, if
necessary, lethal reaction. In this, the United States must
continue to lead with strength.
I would also like to note that tomorrow, the people of
Latvia will celebrate their independence day. The festivities
are a powerful reminder that the freedom of many of the
countries we will discuss today was hard-won and must be
steadfastly defended.
We are highly honored to begin today's panel with Margus
Tsahkna, the Estonian Minister of Foreign Affairs. We are also
joined by two American experts. Seth Jones is the president of
the Defense and Security Department at the Center for Strategic
and International Studies, CSIS. Peter Rough is the director of
the Center on Europe and Eurasia at the Hudson Institute. I
thank these distinguished witnesses for appearing before the
Commission today, and I look forward to their testimony.
Now I turn to a longtime friend, my colleague from the
House of Representatives and a steadfast supporter of the free
people of Eastern Europe, as well as those who wish to be free,
Joe Wilson.
STATEMENT OF JOE WILSON, CO-CHAIRMAN, U.S. HOUSE, FROM SOUTH
CAROLINA
Co-Chairman Wilson: Thank you very much, Chairman Roger
Wicker. Thank you for your leadership and thank you for the
extraordinary staff of CSCE who are so effective in working
together as we work together--bipartisan, too, and House,
Senate, bicameral and bipartisan. This is such a meaningful
organization.
With that in mind, I am grateful to appreciate Foreign
Minister of Estonia Margus Tsahkna, as well as our
distinguished witnesses.
We are in a war we did not chose, a war between dictators
with rule of gun, invading democracies with rule of law.
Ukrainian soldiers are bravely holding the line on the front,
but this war is not confined to Ukrainian trenches. Its
consequences are felt across the democratic world, including
and especially our NATO eastern flank, where the memory of
brutal occupation by the totalitarian Soviet Union is still
recent and threatens to return with planning by war criminal
Putin to restore the failed Soviet Union.
Strong and secure borders are a cornerstone of democracy
and a preserver of peace. It should always be appreciated the
United States never recognized the occupation of Estonia,
Latvia, and Lithuania as Soviet republics. America has always
recognized that Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania are sovereign
states, not Soviet republics. Despite being small countries by
population and geographical size, the will of the people to
live in prosperity and freedom is demonstrated by their
tangible commitments to defense and investments in security
technologies to protect their borders.
President Trump made the decision to deploy troops to
Poland, bolster defense of the eastern flank, because the
reality is clear. War criminal Putin has consistently stated
his designs on sovereign eastern flank territory. These are
countries that have the strongest voice for America
internationally, have invested the most in their defense
proportionate to GDP [Gross Domestic Product]. There is no
substitute for U.S. presence to maintain credible deterrence,
and these rotational deployments provide critical readiness
training in countries eager to host American troops.
I have visited firsthand at Novo Selo base in Bulgaria,
MK[Mihail Kogalniceanu] Airbase in Romania, additionally the
bases of Lithuania and Poland. I am so grateful that it has
always been true that President Trump understands the threats,
in that he was the first to put American troops, for the first
time in history, in Poland to stop war criminal Putin. He sent
Javelin missiles to the people of Ukraine to stop war criminal
Putin's tanks. To stop the funding of war criminal Putin, he
stopped Nord Stream 2, which was so significant, as we have a
president who understands peace through strength.
War criminal Vladimir Putin is driven by an imperial
ambition and a desire to recreate the failed Soviet empire. Our
eastern flank allies know better than anyone, deterrence is the
first and best line of defense against an enemy with an
insatiable appetite for invasion. Airspace and maritime
violations are only part of his effort to probe NATO defenses,
test our unity, and undermine the institutions he despises.
Russia's not acting alone. The Kremlin is sustained by a
coalition of hostile dictatorships, from the regime in Tehran,
which supplies drones and weapons, to the Chinese Communist
Party, which fuels Russia's rearmament, to the Democratic
People's Republic of North Korea, which provides artillery and
manpower. These dictatorships share one goal, infiltrating and
weaken free countries.
Last year, I chaired a Helsinki Commission hearing on,
``Russia's Shadow War on NATO,'' where we examined the spectrum
of Moscow's overt and covert attacks on the Western world.
These tactics have only grown more brazen and more coordinated
and more insulting and more mocking, especially along the
eastern flank. Reasserting deterrence and countering these
capabilities is costly and requires serious challenges to be
made in areas of production and procurement, but will make us
more prepared and efficient.
The bottom line: Free countries and the free world cannot
wait until a full-scale invasion is at its borders. Last month,
Ranking Member Steve Cohen and I introduced the Eastern Flank
Strategic Partnership Act in the House. The companion is the
bipartisan bill led by Chairman Roger Wicker and Senator Jeanne
Shaheen. The legislation ensures the United States treats the
eastern flank as a priority theater and that allies investing
in their own defense receive the support they need. We want to
make it unmistakably clear America stands with the dynamic
frontline partners. Their security is American security.
The people of Estonia and all of Central and Eastern Europe
know the price of freedom, and they understand the stakes.
Putin's imperialist agenda does not stop at Ukraine--by
occupying Transnistria of Moldova, by occupying and invading
Georgia, and then rigging elections in the Republic of
Georgia--and neither can our resolve. The sick symbiotic
relationship between war criminal Putin, the Chinese Communist
Party, and the murderous dictatorship of North Korea, and the
regime in Tehran, requires deterrence in American and European
theaters to prevent aggression in the Indo-Pacific as a warning
to the Chinese Communist Party that there is resolve.
There is broad bipartisan support to continue programs like
the Baltic Security Initiative, which supplements the
significant financial contributions made by Baltic allies. This
initiative puts money back into American defense companies and
is a great return on investment. These are model allies as--are
the foundation of the defense of American families and against
U.S. adversaries.
Thank you to the witnesses, and I look forward to your
insight.
I yield back.
Chairman Wicker: Thank you very much, Congressman--Co-
Chairman Wilson, for your very fine statement.
At this point, we will hear testimony from our three
distinguished witnesses. We will begin, of course, with the
Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Estonia, Margus
Tsahkna. Sir, did I say your name somewhere near correctly?
Mr. Tsahkna: Thank you, Chairman. You said it more
correctly than normal in Estonia. Thank you for that.
Chairman Wicker: You are recognized, and we appreciate you
coming and sharing your knowledge with us.
TESTIMONY OF MARGUS TSAHKNA, MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS,
REPUBLIC OF ESTONIA
Mr. Tsahkna: Mr. Chairman, distinguished commissioners,
Members of Congress, first of all, thank you for the
opportunity to testify before you today. Let me begin by
expressing my gratitude to you, and to the entire U.S. Congress
and to the American people, for your steadfast and longstanding
political and military support to Estonia. The United States
never recognized the Soviet annexation of the Baltic states of
Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania after the Second World War. You
have been there with us every step of the way since 1991. Your
unwavering support of us informs our unwavering support of
Ukraine.
Russia's full-scale war against Ukraine is about to enter
its fourth year. President Putin's maximalist objectives have
not changed: To conquer Ukraine, to dominate its near abroad,
to divide the West, and to push the U.S. out of Europe.
Russia's attempts to weaken the West follow this old Soviet
playbook, fostering division and fear. Russia remains convinced
that it can outlast both Ukraine and the West, but President
Putin has miscalculated. Ukraine has not fallen, the West has
not crumbled, and our unity endures.
Commissioners, Russia's war is not just about Ukraine. It
is a threat to and an attack on the entire transatlantic
security architecture. Estonia, like many other NATO allies,
has witnessed Russia ramping up its shadow war against the West
over the last couple of years. I would like to bring a couple
of examples.
First, on September 19 of this year, three Russian MiG-31
fighter jets, armed with air-to-air missiles, violated Estonian
and NATO airspace. The aircraft remained in our airspace for 12
minutes, flew a depth of six miles and across a distance of 60
miles, and were as close as 10 miles from the Estonian capital
of Tallinn. Ten miles is the distance from this meeting room to
Tysons Corner in Virginia. The incursion in September was the
fourth violation of our airspace this year alone, and 83rd
violation since 2003--yes, 83rd violation since 2003.
Second, in August, we expelled the first secretary from the
Russian embassy in Estonia for deliberately undermining our
constitutional order and for sanctions violations.
Third, we have seen Russian naval ships and Russian fighter
aircraft escorting its shadow fleet vessels in the Baltic Sea.
A very concrete incident took place on May 13 when, again,
Russia's fighter jet violated Estonian airspace, escorting the
shadow fleet vessel.
Fourth, in late 2023, Russian intelligence executed a
sabotage operation in Estonia that targeted individuals and
private and public property.
Fifth, starting in late 2023, Russia started sending waves
of migrants to Estonia and Finnish borders, and we stopped
them.
Sixth, in April 2024, Russian GPS jamming of civilian air
traffic forced the Finnish airline, Finnair, to suspend flights
between the Finnish capital of Helsinki and the Estonian city
of Tartu.
Seventh, in May 2024, the Russian border guard unilaterally
removed from the Narva River the buoys that demarcate the
border between Estonia and Russian. I know that several of the
few esteemed commissioners have seen the Narva River firsthand.
None of these acts occurred in isolation. Similar incidents
have occurred across Europe, unfortunately.
Dear commissioners, the Russian threat is real, and Russian
aggression knows no border or limits. We expect Russia's hybrid
campaign to increase and intensify. Russia's goal is to divide
the West socially and politically and to disrupt our
willingness and ability to support Ukraine. Our response must
be clear. Every Russian provocation will mean a NATO more
united, a West more resolute, and Ukraine more tightly
interlinked with the Euro-Atlantic family.
While conquering Ukraine remains Russia's top priority,
Russia is successfully conducting a massive reform of its armed
forces. Despite all the Russian casualties in Ukraine, the size
of the Russian military is growing. One consequence of this
reform will be more Russian personnel and more Russian military
assets deployed to Baltic and Finnish borders. In 2016, there
were some 125,000 Russian troops as close as 25 miles from the
Estonian border. Our population is 1.3 million people. For
scale, imagine having some 35 million hostile troops, 25 miles
into Canada or Mexico.
Our intelligence suggests that within the next two to three
years or less, Russia will return to Baltic borders with even
more troops and military equipment than they had before full-
scale invasion to Ukraine. Russia has also already demonstrated
the ability to rapidly generate large combat-ready forces, but
NATO is not standing idly by. Baltic skies are protected by a
NATO air policing mission, NATO launched the Eastern Sentry and
Baltic Sentry operations to better protect NATO's eastern
flank. Politically, as a response to our airspace violation,
NATO and United Nations Security Council sent a clear message
to Russia: Its aggression against Ukraine and its provocations
against the West will not succeed.
Thanks to U.S. leadership, NATO recently agreed to a
historic increase of its defense spending. Estonia's core
defense spending will hit 5.4 percent of GDP next year. Europe
is expected to invest some 7 trillion [dollars] in defense by
2033, including in co-production opportunities. In Estonia, we
continue enhancing our border security and our military
deterrence, and we continue sending at least 0.25 percent of
GDP to Ukraine in military aid.
Here, I wish to thank the U.S. Congress, specifically. For
the last several years, you have supported the Baltic Security
Initiative. This program has accelerated the development of
military capabilities such as air defense and long-range fires
across the Baltic states. In 2025, for every dollar in security
assistance from U.S., we put $21 into our defense budget, and
most of it is going back to the U.S. economy. The presence of
U.S. troops on NATO's eastern front is likewise invaluable.
Estonia is honored to provide your troops with top-of-the-class
military housing and unique training opportunities. All this
makes NATO's deterrence credible. A stronger Europe is a
stronger NATO, a stronger America.
To conclude, we will not let Ukraine surrender to Russian
aggression or let Russia dictate the terms of peace and
security in Europe. Mr. Chairman, commissioners, Members of
Congress, I thank you for the privilege of testifying here
today. I look forward to your questions.
Thank you.
Chairman Wicker: Thank you very much.
Mr. Seth Jones, we are delighted to have CSIS back with us.
You are now recognized for your testimony, sir.
TESTIMONY OF SETH JONES, PRESIDENT, DEFENSE AND SECURITY
DEPARTMENT, CENTER FOR STRATEGIC AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
Mr. Jones: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thanks, Mr. Wilson, Dr.
Murphy, Mr. Ellzey, and other distinguished members of the
Commission. Honored to share my views on this subject,
particularly returning from NATO headquarters last week, and
also our allies in the U.K.
I would like to reflect on three main points in my
testimony here. Happy to get to other issues in the discussion.
First is that the Russian government has conducted and
continues to conduct a growing campaign of sabotage and
subversion against the U.S. and Europe, designed in part to
target countries, companies, and individuals that have provided
support to Ukraine. What else did we need to see than, within
the last 24 hours, the active sabotage on the Polish rail line
that brings materiel, and has brought Members of Congress, into
Ukraine from Poland. Just the latest example of sabotage
operations likely perpetrated by the Russian State.
Second, much of this campaign has been led by the main
intelligence directorate of the GRU [Glavnoye Razvedyvatelnoye
Upravleniye]. These attacks generally across Europe, but we
have also seen the targeting of U.S. bases, collection--
generally been intelligence collection. They have included
bombings, some of which I will go into detail on, drone
incursions, sabotage against undersea cables and pipelines,
electronic attack, cyber operations, as well as other incidents
and intelligence collection against U.S. bases in Europe.
Then, third, a subject that I hope we get into in some more
detail, is I do think the U.S. and Europe need to develop a
more effective strategy that includes both defensive but also
offensive measures to strengthen deterrence on NATO's eastern
flank, including with our Estonian allies. Also, to raise the
costs on Moscow of its continuing aggression, which is a
component of what it is doing in its full-scale invasion of
Ukraine and its nuclear saber-rattling. Actually, we see a
Russian campaign that goes from irregular or sabotage
operations through to a conventional, full-scale invasion and
nuclear saber rattling across the conflict continuum. My
government time has been in U.S. Special Operations, but it has
been much more than those kinds of acts.
I think what is interesting is not that the Russians and
the Soviets before them have been involved in these activities.
Much of that during the cold war we referred to, and the
Soviets referred to, as ``active measures.'' What is new is the
full-scale invasion of Ukraine, but also the sheer number of
activities. The minister remarked about several of them.
According to our data set of Russian activity, between 2022 and
2023, the number of Russian sabotage and subversive acts in
Europe quadrupled during that one-year time period, and then
tripled again between 2023 and 2024.
Those Russian activities, some of which we assess were
Russian government, some of them were leveraging partner forces
including elements of Russian criminal organizations or other
actors in Europe, included things like explosives against
companies that were housing or building materiel sent to
Ukraine. The use of blunt instruments against undersea fiber
optic cables, including as part of the shadow fleet, and then a
range of other activities including targeting transportation
links with both cyber, but as we have seen recently, also
kinetic activity--bombings against key rail links.
The range of reasons we assess the Russians are likely to
do it--have been doing this. Let me just briefly note that I
think there are a number of measures that--there have been some
helpful steps, but I would just add a few things to consider.
One is, I think, we have to be very careful about a decrease in
the U.S. conventional footprint in Europe now. We have
advocated in research of U.S. force posture, we call it 4+2
force posture, with four brigade combat teams in Europe. I
think it is important to send a message to the Russians,
particularly with U.S. Army capabilities, that we are serious
and we--and those would be important for deterrence.
On offense, I will say, just very briefly, I think the
Russians are vulnerable on the economic sanctions, both primary
and secondary, that are worth thinking about escalating. I
think the Russians are also vulnerable on a much more targeted
activity against their shadow fleet, of which there is
intelligence about. Then finally, a need to continue providing
assistance to Ukraine. For a range of these reasons, I think
Russia can be deterred. I do think the U.S. needs to play an
important role.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I would turn it back.
Chairman Wicker: Well, thank you--thank you very, very
much.
We now recognize Mr. Peter Rough. Do I have that
pronunciation correct?
Mr. Rough: You can call me whatever you like, Senator
Wicker. Peter Rough is the conventional pronunciation.
Chairman Wicker: Rough, Okay. Very good. Sometimes, if I
get it right 50 percent of the time, I feel like I am batting
.500. You are recognized, and we are thrilled to have you here.
Mr. Jones: You got my name right, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Wicker: All right, yes. [Laughs.] I struggled, and
I did practice all evening last night.
TESTIMONY OF PETER ROUGH, DIRECTOR, CENTER ON EUROPE AND
EURASIA, HUDSON INSTITUTE
Mr. Rough: Chairman Wicker, Co-chairman Wilson, and
distinguished members of the Commission, thank you for this
opportunity. The views I express in my testimony, which I will
now summarize, are my own and should not be construed as
representing an official position of Hudson Institute.
As the minister pointed out, and as Dr. Jones elucidated,
Russia is prosecuting a campaign of hybrid warfare against
NATO. Putin has complemented this campaign with nuclear threats
to gradually tilt the security environment between Russia and
NATO in Moscow's favor. Russia's intention is to stress the
alliance and exacerbate divisions between allies and within
nations. The Kremlin brackets these actions with persistent
information operations. To put it directly, Russia is
undertaking a comprehensive campaign of political warfare
designed to weaken the West.
There is near consensus in the analytical community that as
long as Russia struggles to take territory in Ukraine, it
cannot afford a broader war with NATO. While this judgment is
almost certainly correct, it risks lulling the West into a
false sense of security. Because Russia is an offensive and
revisionist power, while NATO is a defensive alliance, Moscow
has the advantage of choosing both the time and place of any
potential confrontation. The salient point is that while the
overall military balance favors NATO by a significant margin,
the balance of forces in some parts of Eastern Europe may favor
Russia in a blitz scenario.
What is to be done? U.S. forces are the backbone of
deterrence in Europe. U.S. commanders have testified that
permanently stationed troops are invaluable for learning the
local terrain and improving interoperability with allies. Yet,
until it established U.S. Land Forces 5th Corps Forward Command
at Poznan, Poland, in 2023, the U.S. had no permanent force
presence in the new member states of NATO, in deference to the
NATO-Russia Founding Act of 1997. That political agreement with
Russia lost all meaning with Putin's full-scale invasion of
Ukraine.
To counter whatever misperceptions may arise from the
recent U.S. decision to pull an infantry brigade back to Fort
Campbell, U.S. planners may wish to consider turning a
rotational presence into a permanent force in Eastern Europe.
Given its strategic location near the Port of Constanta on the
Black Sea, Romania is transforming Mihail Kogalniceanu into one
of the largest NATO bases in Europe. As a keynote in Europe's
security architecture, the base could serve as the ideal host
for a modestly sized permanent U.S. garrison.
Even so, adopting a purely defensive posture against Russia
is unwise, as Seth Jones elucidated. For the Kremlin, bribing
the captains of cargo ships to drag their rusty anchors across
the Baltic seabed to cut critical cables would cost a mere
pittance. The total cost to Russia of launching its recent
drone salvo into Poland totaled no more than a few hundred
thousand dollars. As a first step, therefore, NATO's political
leaders may wish to change the Kremlin's cost-benefit calculus
by tasking commanders to reassess the rules of engagement for
the alliance's Baltic air policing mission. Such a directive
would, at the very least, get Moscow's attention.
NATO could also tie Russian violations of allied airspace
to Russian positions abroad. Ukrainian special forces have
already targeted Wagner Group operators in Africa, from Mali to
Sudan. The West could make clear to Moscow that it would
encourage and facilitate similar operations against Russia's
Africa corps, jeopardizing a lucrative Russian market, should
the violations of allied airspace continue. Alternatively,
every violation of allied territory by a Russian UAV [Unmanned
Aerial Vehicles] could be met with the transfer of a
commensurate number of cruise or ballistic missiles to Ukraine,
whether it is the Swedish-German Taurus or the U.S. Army
Tactical Missile System.
Furthermore, while the U.S. and Europe cannot order Moscow
to repair damaged infrastructure at the bottom of the Baltic
Sea, it can make clear that it will exact a commensurate cost
for Russian sabotage. Moscow still earns hundreds of millions
of dollars every day in oil sales. The U.S. is eminently
capable of metering its sanctions to mirror Russian actions
against critical infrastructure. At the conventional level, to
ensure that NATO can execute the family of plans ratified at
the Vilnius summit in 2023, NATO's political leadership may
wish to empower and encourage SACEUR to test the force through
regular snap exercises, in addition to the alliance's pre-
planned exercises.
This would simulate high-pressure conditions and could
identify shortcomings and capabilities, while training the
alliance to move quickly in an emergency setting. It is far
better to strain the NATO force model in peacetime than it
would be in wartime. Finally, this past week has proven very
difficult for Ukraine, from military setbacks in Pokrovsk to
corruption allegations in Kyiv. I would like to close by
reiterating that it remains in the American-European interest
to empower Ukraine in its fight for survival. Thankfully, the
first billions of dollars in European commitments have served
as proof of concept for the PURL [Prioritized Ukraine
Requirements List] system. As more European countries
participate in this arrangement, the program is only likely to
grow.
It is an honor to testify before you today. Thank you for
this opportunity. I look forward to your questions.
Chairman Wicker: Well, thank you very much. The fact that
my phone rang gives me an opportunity to remind everyone to
silence all electronic devices.
Let me begin by you, Mr. Minister. How long have you been
in various public offices in your country?
Mr. Tsahkna: I have been serving on the government level,
the Cabinet member, as a minister of social affairs, minister
of defense, and now minister of foreign affairs. Altogether, I
can say, maybe, like, 6 years. I have been in the public sector
as a representative as well since 2007, so it has been a pretty
long time.
Chairman Wicker: You know--you know your people pretty
well. Is there any sentimentality in Estonia to go back to the
days of Soviet rule?
Mr. Tsahkna: That is zero sentimentality, because of our
history. During the Soviet occupation, we lost every fifth
Estonian. All these stories are still in our families. We know
exactly what happened with killings, with deportations, with
escaping from the country. Unfortunately, we see exactly the
same things happening in 21st century by Russia in Ukraine.
Chairman Wicker: You are very close to your neighbors in
Latvia and Lithuania, both physically and also philosophically.
Would that be correct to say?
Mr. Tsahkna: It is correct.
Chairman Wicker: How many--what percentage of the
population in Estonia are principally Russian speaking?
Mr. Tsahkna: We have close to 30 percent of Russian-
speaking minority.
Chairman Wicker: About the same in Latvia. Would that be
correct?
Mr. Tsahkna: In Latvia, a bit more, but the scale is the
same.
Chairman Wicker: Russian speakers, high percentage also in
Lithuania, is that correct?
Mr. Tsahkna: Historically, Lithuania had less forced
immigration during the Soviet times, so they have less than 10
percent.
Chairman Wicker: I will ask you a leading question. What is
your opinion of the absurd assertion of some people in the
United States that, because residents of other countries speak
Russian, they identify themselves more as people desiring to be
ruled by Russia?
Mr. Tsahkna: Our experience is that these people, Russian-
speaking people who are living in Estonia, know even better
than we how the life in Russia looks like. Without freedom,
under the terror, and also the threat. I can say that most of
these people, they do not want to have Russia back to Estonia,
Latvia, and Lithuania. Of course, it depends on the generations
as well. Because older people normally remember the good old
times when they had their special rights during the Soviet
occupation. I can say that, based on our study and also
experience, we have had cases when Russian citizens were living
in Estonia, they are traveling to Russia, and also some of them
have sent to Ukraine, and they are dead. They know exactly what
Russia means.
Chairman Wicker: Mr. Rough and Mr. Jones, imagine, if you
will, a young couple in their thirties sitting around in
Camden, South Carolina, or perhaps in Corinth, Mississippi,
just starting out. A couple of kids. Working hard. Both of them
in jobs trying to make ends meet and deal with the challenges
of youth and a family. What is it to them whether Ukraine or
the Baltic nations are overtaken by a Russian dictator? What
does it matter to them? What is their stake?
Mr. Rough: Well, Senator, thank you for that question. I
would argue that the peace and stability of Europe have long
been directly connected to peace and prosperity in the United
States. Some two-thirds of global foreign direct investment is
transatlantic. Something like 46 of 50 U.S. states trade more
with Europe than they do with China. This is by far the most
intense and closely knit economic environment you will find
anywhere in the world. I interpret Russia's attack on Ukraine,
including all of the hybrid operations in Ukraine's near
abroad, as Russia's, if not opening, now I would say almost
decades-long attack on the European security order. This
impacts thousands of jobs. It impacts huge amounts of
investment. If European security begins to crumble, so will
some of the economic well-being we have here in the United
States.
Chairman Wicker: Mr. Jones, same question. I might add to
that, what is that couple's stake, or those couples' stake, in
the validity and sanctity of our country's solemn word when we
give a promise?
Mr. Jones: Well, I think we have committed, as part of a
NATO member, to protect democracy in our own country, but also
certainly in others as well that we have formal alliances with.
You know, it was interesting, on trips to Japan, Korea, and
Taiwan recently, all three of them, senior leadership of all
three countries, said: What happens in Ukraine and on the
eastern front has a significant effect on our security. How do
we trust the U.S. going forward if they were to abandon allies
in other places?
I would also highlight something that is much bigger than
just Russia itself, which is, as we have seen, since the full-
scale invasion of Ukraine started. There has been significant
Chinese assistance into Russia, North Korean assistance,
including North Korean soldiers, and Iranian assistance,
including Shahed industrial capacity in areas like Yelabuga.
Americans in 1939 wondered, why should we care about a Nazi
Germany that was invading Poland, and then continued into
Belgium, and then eventually into France? I think we have got a
revanchist Russia and others as well. I think there is a lot to
be concerned about.
Chairman Wicker: If I am 100 percent, in my little
household, America first, I still have a stake in what is going
on in the Baltic nations?
Mr. Jones: Absolutely. I think I am America first, but not
America only.
Chairman Wicker: So am I. Thank you very much.
Chairman Wilson,
Co-Chairman Wilson: Thank you very much, Chairman Wicker.
Indeed, it is an honor to be with each of you. Foreign
Minister Tsahkna, it is just--it is so encouraging, the success
of Estonia. My visit there, as I mentioned to you, to be on the
banks of the Narva River. The chairman, again, was ahead of the
curve. People may speak Russian, but they do not want to be
part of Russia. They want to be part of Estonia. We have
already heard, 1939, what German-speaking people, the
recognition of Sudetenland, that Hitler had the same plan, and
that is why we need to be strong.
With that in mind, indeed, Foreign Minister, I want you to
know that unity is--has indeed not crumbled. It is been really
reaffirmed, and I am associate member of the NATO Parliamentary
Assembly. It is just so exciting to me to see NATO standing
together, and no wavering. It is just incredible. Then I am
also grateful to be the co-founder and co-chair of the European
Union Caucus. Again, who would imagine the unity there? The
consequence of that is that one of the most recent studies I
have seen is that, in terms of per-capita investments to assist
the people of Ukraine, the United States has come in 17th per
capita GDP.
It is really clear with, indeed, the excess over our
providing of aid to our European allies, and so it is just so
positive. Then I am really grateful that, indeed, President
Trump has recognized this in the past by putting American
troops for the first time in Poland, by providing the Javelin
missiles to the people of Ukraine to try to avoid this war in
the first place, and then to stop Nord Stream 2, the funding of
war criminal Putin. With that in mind, where we are is at what
point should NATO shift to default air defense rules of
engagement, including pre-delegated authority to shoot down
hostile drones immediately? What are the operational risks of
remaining under peacetime rules?
Mr. Tsahkna: Thank you. Thank you for this question. This
is not only, like, practical question. It is actually going
back to history. Also, I see it unfortunately today. This is
something that President Putin is using very, very well. It is
a fear. Is a fear of escalation, which is actually isolating
sometimes our way of thinking what is really happening.
President Putin is using fear against us, and every time Russia
has more pressure, he is going to talk about escalation. He is
still going to talk about nuclear deterrence. Then the Western
part of the world will be frozen. I can say to you that, in our
region, we do not believe in that. That is why we say as well
that the red lines policy and the meaning of NATO must be very
clear.
If there is a violation of the airspace, and we see the
direct military threat to the NATO member State, we should use
force. As well, it was asked after we called the United Nations
Security Council meeting about this, it was in September when
this high-level United Nations General Assembly week started.
Later on, as well, the same question was asked from President
Trump. He said very clearly that, on the question if we need to
shoot the planes down, it was correct. We need to shoot them
down if there is a threat.
I think that we have everything in place. We just need to
understand that Putin understands exactly this language. He is
pushing us. He is pushing us. We are hesitating. If we are
based on fear then he is pushing forward again and again. We
seen it since 2007, when President Putin actually published his
plan to the Munich Security Conference. He was very clear that
his goal is to eliminate the root causes, and root causes for
him are a collapse of Soviet Union. In 2008, we saw invasion to
Georgia, and 20 percent of the territory is still occupied.
2014, Ukraine war started, and response was not there. 2022, as
well, we have full-scale war in Europe.
In that regard, why I am too long? What I want to say is
that we see, very close to Russia, that we must be very clear.
No fear. If there is need to use force, we will need to do it,
and then the red lines are settled.
Thank you.
Co-Chairman Wilson: Again, thank you. My time is up.
Actually, I just want to commend President Jones. We are so
grateful for the Center for Strategic and International
Studies, what that means. As we have people around our Eastern
European allies observing what we are saying today, they know
to call on President Jones.
Then, Director Rough, thank you so much. The Hudson
Institute, how fantastic it is, and a point I want to make, you
mention Constanta. I was 28 years ago visiting Cluj-Napoca in
Romania to recognize a sister city relationship with Columbia,
South Carolina. At that time, somebody said, hey, one day we
dream that American ships will bank at--will be coming to and
docking at Constanta. Well, it came true 10 years later. Not
some far off.
Additionally, 28 years ago I visited Chelyabinsk in Russia,
where it was a sister city program put together. It was so
impressive to me see our shared culture of art, literature,
architecture, arts in every way, music. My hopes for a free and
independent Russia have been doomed by war criminal Putin. The
people of Russia, I am just hoping one day they too will have
the opportunities the people have of the eastern flank of NATO.
I yield back.
Chairman Wicker: Thank you.
Now the chair recognizes Representative Steve Cohen.
STATEMENT OF STEVE COHEN, U.S. HOUSE, FROM TENNESSEE
Representative Cohen: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank the
witnesses. I apologize for being a little late. This is most
important subject.
I visited Narva. You can visually see the city of Narva,
the area, and it is so Russian in terms of stark architecture
that is typical Soviet. The expressions on the people's faces
are those of people who do not seem to be happy campers, unlike
in the rest of Estonia. I am happy to see you, sir. You have
one of the most attractive leadership groups in the world, and
nice that they chose a minority to send here. I enjoyed my
visit to Estonia. Always have. [Laughs.] There is nothing
changed--
Chairman Wicker: I think the minister is a very handsome
man. [Laughter.]
Representative Cohen: I concur with the chair. [Laughter.]
He is in a league of his own. [Laughs.] 1939 and today are no
different. The attitudes of Putin and Stalin are no different.
It is Russia, Russia, Russia, Soviet Union, Soviet Union,
Soviet Union, and that has not stopped. That is what drives
Putin. It has driven him since he was KGB Komitent in Germany
and saw the fall of the Berlin Wall, which was awful to him. He
has never forgotten that. Politicians who sometimes forget old
problems and go on to new problems. Sometimes they cannot get
over old problems, and they get into repeating errors of the
past.
We are going to have--Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia are
going to have problems with Russia. They would love to have you
back in the Soviet Union. We need to act strongly. I know
President Trump has mixed postures toward Russia. What he did
in Helsinki was sinful. What he did in Alaska was almost as
sinful to welcome him to our country, to roll out the red
carpet, to have our troops honor him when he just come as a
charade. He never came to Alaska with any idea of working
toward a peace agreement. He does not want peace. He wants to
take over Ukraine. He would like to kill Zelensky. He would
like to go into the other countries in Eastern Europe, and he
will do that.
Russia has a lot of significant and lethal military
equipment on a scale comparable to ours and China's, and maybe
in some cases surpassing it. They did not do that to win the
science fair. They wanted to come after us and our Eastern
European friends. Our president must understand that, and
strengthen our resolve to help our Eastern European allies,
because that is being America first. They will come after us
eventually. They want world domination. The planes that they
have--missiles that they have got that can stay in flight for
interminable amounts of time are not necessarily intended for
the Baltic countries. It is intended for the United States.
There is no need for those missiles if they were just
interested in Poland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, and other
countries in Eastern Europe. They are after us.
We need to be prepared for it. We need to fight--know that
Ukraine is fighting the war for us now. They need more
defensive weapons, and they need more authority to attack
Russia and bring the fight to the Russians. That is the only
way we can stop them. Putin only knows power. To retreat from
him, as we did in Helsinki and as we did in Alaska, was wrong.
It only strengthens him. I hope that we get bolder and we
understand the importance of what is happening in Ukraine and
what would happen in the Baltic states if Ukraine is not
successful in fending off the Russians. Thank you for your
country's strength and for its desire for democracy, which all
people should yearn for.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Chairman Wicker: Thank you very much, Representative Cohen.
Senator Boozman, I am going to give you a minute to collect
your thoughts here and recognize Mr. Jake Ellzey of Amarillo,
Texas. Representative Ellzey is a Navy veteran, fighter pilot,
and a veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan, and we welcome him to
the Commission.
You are recognized for questions, sir.
STATEMENT OF JOHN BOOZMAN, U.S. SENATE, FROM ARIZONA
Senator Ellzey: Thank you, Senator. Appreciate being here.
It is actually the thrill of a lifetime, as I studied growing
up about the Helsinki Commission and the work that they do for
world peace. I am just privileged to be a part of this now with
so many friends, and to see you all here today.
Vladimir Putin is not a president. He is a dictator, and he
is a czar. What we have to understand is these four dictators
that very much reflect what occurred in 1939 are now stronger
because of the invasion of Ukraine, not weaker. They have
gotten together on economic, industrial, and defense
cooperation, and that has increased amongst all four. If
anybody is deluding themselves into thinking this is about
Russia and the Baltics or Russia and the Nordics, it is not.
What troubles me about some of the discussions that we have in
the media, not here today, but the discussion, and I guess it
is the accepted term now, is hybrid warfare. Hybrid warfare is
one of those terms that really makes it antiseptic. It is as if
there are no victims, as if there is no damage, there is no
deaths, there is no destruction.
We, in 1999, learned that the Chinese are using
unrestricted warfare in their aims for the South China Sea and
beyond. We need to call this for what it is, as it is
unrestricted warfare in all the ways that they are doing it, to
include killing people in foreign nations. That is an act of
war, so many ways that they are doing that. I think we should
start calling it unrestricted. I am pleased with what I am
seeing from NATO, the responses that we have had. From time to
time, we have kind of tried to find our way on this. I think we
need to continue to send the signal that we are going to send
permanent troops into Europe to defend them, because Vladimir
Putin is the orc. He is the ultimate orc, as a fan of ``Lord of
the Rings.''
John 10:10 says the enemy kills, steals, and destroys. Tell
me what Russia builds, what they improve? They improve nothing.
They build nothing. They kill, steal, and destroy, and they are
probing the Baltics. They are probing the Nordics right now to
see if there is going to be a response, and till now--up until
now, there has been no cost for anything they have done. I am
proud to say that President Trump said, shoot them down, and I
am a proponent of that myself. Peter, I am going to ask you a
question, put you on the spot. In 1994, we had the Budapest
Memorandum, which said Russia is not going to invade, and we
would be there to protect Ukraine. Different president. In
1997, we had the Founding Act. Different president, different
czar in Russia. Can we just count those as not being in effect
anymore?
Mr. Rough: First of all, Congressman, thank you for your
service and thank you for your leadership on national security
issues since the moment you entered Congress. It has been a
pleasure getting to know you and watching you at work.
I think the NATO-Russia Founding Act is totally obsolete. I
do not think the United States should feel bound by it at all.
It has essentially been torn up by the Russians. If one reads
the language of the act, it has been totally violated by the
Russian Federation. I agree 100 percent that the Russians
understand strength, and strength alone. To connect it to
Chairman Wilson's remarks, you know, remember in 2015 in
November the Turks shot down a Sukhoi SU-24, and ever since,
the Russians have not violated Turkish airspace once.
Now, we should not, I think, act brazenly. These are MiG-
31s that violated Estonian airspace, certified with dual-use
and nuclear-capable Kinzhal missiles. Nonetheless, at least
looking at rules of engagement, I think, is a way to flip that
cost-benefit calculus for the Russians and make them think
twice about violating airspace for 10 minutes, which is a level
of audacity that has to go challenged.
Representative Ellzey: Thank you. When we talk about these
nations, the Baltics and the Nordics, we are talking about 10
million people total, 1.3 million people in Estonia. They are
not that big. They are--as they are in Taiwan and as they are
in Israel, they are surrounded by enemies that are only minutes
away. Do you have the capacity right now? Do you have
everything you need to defend yourself in case this incursion
comes again? Through Article Four, we have now said it is time
to knock one down.
Mr. Tsahkna: First of all, the Nordic-Baltics economy
together belongs to the G-10 economies, and, actually, Nordic-
Baltics economies together exactly the same size as Russia. If
you are adding Poland, it is 150 percent of Russian economy.
Economically, we are very powerful. Now, if you are asking the
question about military capabilities, of course, we have our
own capabilities, but we are committed to NATO. Also, we have
agreed the NATO defense plans regionally, and they are good
plans, actually, since two years ago in Vilnius we agreed the
new defense plans. There are gaps we need to fulfill. That is
the reason why we are now increasing heavily the investments to
defense. Of course, we have capabilities to fight back. If we
are talking about a full-scale invasion from Russia, so we need
full NATO. We need, as well, the U.S. commitment there, and
that is why the NATO unity is most important.
Thank you.
Representative Ellzey: Senator, my time is up. It is an
honor to be sitting at this table with you and these other
distinguished members.
Thank you.
Chairman Wicker: Thank you very much.
Now I recognize Representative Murphy of North Carolina. In
addition to being a representative, Dr. Murphy is a urologist
and has been a missionary in both India and Haiti. We welcome
you to the committee, Commission.
STATEMENT OF GREG MURPHY, U.S. HOUSE, FROM NORTH CAROLINA
Representative Murphy: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I
appreciate it. As with Representative Ellzey, I am honored to
be part of this group.
We sat together as a unified body, House and Senate, a few
years ago, before this monstrosity ever occurred. We were with
the armed forces chiefs of staff. We were with defense
secretaries, and we sat, and we looked on the wall, and we saw
how Ukraine was bordered by three sides by Russian troops, and
we did nothing. We did not arm Ukraine. We did not want to,
``poke the bear.'' I pray that if the same thing happens with
the Baltics, we will have the fortitude that we do not wait for
an action, that we prevent the action by arming the people, by
coming up and not fighting a defensive war. It is so much that
inaction led to a lot of action by Putin. I pray we do not make
that same mistake again. I think a lot of the things that,
sadly enough, occurred in Afghanistan have led to the debacle
today, led to the loss of a million lives that should have
never happened. If that ever happens, God forbid, I pray that
who is ever in the administration to this point--to that point,
prevents that from happening.
I will ask this. Is there any public campaign within
Estonia now, or any of the Latvian states, that is anti-Putin?
Is it all just fear of what is going to occur? Or is there any
anti-Putin campaign?
Mr. Tsahkna: Thank you. Thank you for these remarks. First
of all, I would like to commend the first part, is that we
agreed in Vilnius two years ago the new NATO defense plans.
They were exactly based on the experience what we see now in
Ukraine. Of course, you can imagine that, for Estonia, Latvia,
and Lithuania, we have a territorial depth, like 200
kilometers. The idea before was that, of course, if Russia will
be aggressive and invade NATO and the Baltic states, then
finally, of course, NATO would win the war victoriously. The
sad thing is that, taking back the territories, there will be
no Estonians, no Latvians, no Lithuanians left. That is why we
changed this strategy and also the plans. They are very good
plans.
Russia must know as well. Then they know, of course, that
if deterrence is not working--and I do hope that it will work.
If it is not working in the future, we will be ready from the
first second to hit into the heart of Russia and take down all
the targets that are supporting this kind of aggression. This
is exactly why we are now investing heavily to our defense
capabilities regionally, but of course, together with NATO and
also with allies as U.S., so this is the understanding.
Why I am talking about this is that actually, people of
Estonia, we are not afraid of Russia. We do not fear. We have
no fear. We have been living there 10,000 years, and we have
planned to continue for the same long time. We just know what
may come. This is a big difference. If you know what may come,
then you are not afraid. You are just preparing for that. We
are very practical. That is why we decided in the beginning of
1991, after regaining our independence, two things.
First, we fight back this time. We did not do it in 1940
and 1939. The second, that we never be alone again, because at
this time we declare that we are neutral, peace-loving country.
Actually, Stalin and Hitler did not, you know, care about that,
so we did not fight back, and we were alone. We wanted to get
good relations with Moscow, with Berlin, with Paris, London,
and Washington at this time. Now we made our choice, never be
alone again, and we definitely fight back, and Russia should
know that. Whatever it costs, and it is not based on fear.
Thank you.
Representative Murphy: Thank you.
Mr. Rough, let me ask a question. You know, getting into
the mind of Putin, getting into the mind of Stalin, the other
despots that we have seen in the world, how do you change that
man's mind? Because I would submit that while many criticize
the president for trying to do what he did, he tried to give
him an out. I do not know. That is not my understanding. I
would just love to know, how do we give Putin an out to back
out, because he is seemingly, not going to do it on its own.
Interested in your thoughts.
Mr. Rough: There was a wonderful description of Putin in
the early days after the full-scale invasion, reported in, I
think it was, The Financial Times, where a reporter asked a
senior Kremlin source close to the president who President
Putin was relying on to go to war, who he was listening to. He
said he had two primary advisors, Ivan the Terrible and
Catherine the Great. There is, I think, an imperial quality to
President Putin. We have seen it on display in the now-famous/
infamous interview he did with Tucker Carlson, where he went
off on a long historical soliloquy. The reports out of the
meeting in Alaska are similar, where apparently President Putin
began with a lengthy historical excursion, talking about
Yaroslav the Wise and other figures of Russian imperial past.
There is sort of a grandiloquence, a sense of historical
boasting that is, I think, at the core of Putin.
Beyond that kind of ideological tenor, I do think he
responds to basic cost-benefit analysis, and if the pain and
suffering imposed on the Russian people is sufficient to
threaten the political foundations of his rule, he may be
forced to reconsider and come to the table. I think both the
PURL system of weapons support financed by the Europeans to
Ukraine and the recently announced Rosneft and Lukoil
sanctions, which take effect on the 21st of this month--so just
in a few days--are both the military and economic prongs of an
attempt to change the Russian calculus.
Because to date, the president has sought to engage
President Putin and President Zelensky. He has sought to act as
a mediator, bending in his kind of neutrality in the mediation
toward the Ukrainians, but nonetheless to mediate. Since I
think he has been frustrated by Russian obstruction, by Russian
inflexibility, he is now trying to change the calculations of
the Russians by applying some pressure.
We will see--as President Trump put it when President
Putin--or maybe it was Lavrov, the Kremlin spokesperson--
scoffed at the sanctions announcement, we will see if he is
still laughing in six months.
Representative Murphy: Thank you.
I will yield back.
Chairman Wicker: Senator Boozman can also be called Dr.
Boozman. He is not only a foreign policy expert, having
actually lived in Europe for a time when his father was
assigned over there, but also he is in charge of agriculture
policy over on this side of the Capitol, and he is mighty busy.
John, we appreciate you showing up today and lending your
expertise to this important subject.
Senator John Boozman?
Senator Boozman: Well, thank you so much, and it is so good
to be with you all and to have such a distinguished panel to
come and tell us what we need to be doing, and I thought it was
interesting, the--I think we all know that the airspace
incursions are a method of destabilizing our countries and
collecting intelligence. The list goes on and on.
Congressman Ellzey suggested that we shoot them down.
President Trump has. I think if you polled the panel here, you
would probably find a bunch of people that would be in that
camp. The reality is, besides doing that, you have all the
other stuff that is going on--the cyber war that is taking
place, the disrupting our elections, arsons, assassinations.
You know, the list goes on and on.
If you do, you know, take out one, you still have the
others to deal with. You mentioned sanctions, and I guess what
I am asking is, what do we feel like is the best, most
comprehensive way to deal with this? How do you make it such
that the Russians actually feel, you know, a response from a
unified West that actually does help them--help us hurt them?
Mr. Tsahkna: Thank you.
First of all, I would like to thank Senator Boozman. I was
two years ago in Arkansas, and this is a good example that we
actually bought the HIMARS systems from Arkansas.
Senator Boozman: Yes, canned in Arkansas.
Mr. Tsahkna: Also this is a good example how the Baltic
Security Initiative added, as well value from Estonia, is going
back to U.S. industry, and now these HIMARSes are working well
in Estonia already. Thank you for that cooperation.
Yes, what we need to do, we need to do what we need to do.
It means as well what we--we need to increase our capabilities.
We need to actually be committed to our plans. First of all,
invest money in military capabilities.
The problem is aggressor. The problem is Putin, and the
only way out is peace through strength. It means as well
increasing heavily the pressure on Russia. We have already put
on the 19 packages of sanctions from European Union side. The
twentieth is already preparing.
We are ready, very close to make a decision to use the
Russian frozen assets. We are talking about more than 200
billion euros, which is frozen in Europe, and Estonia has been
pushing this process already close to three years. Now we see
the political willingness to do it in Europe.
I do hope that it will happen in December. As well, the
European Union has leverage and opportunity to put tariffs on
exports from Russia and Belorussia to Europe, mainly about
energy, which does not need consensus.
You know, probably our complexity about European Union,
about sanctions, we need consensus, 27 countries. About tariffs
we need the qualified majority and it is proposed by European
Commission. It will hit heavily.
As well we are very much welcoming President Trump's
decisions on putting sanctions onto the largest energy
companies as well the secondary sanctions. I do hope that the
Senate will and also Congress will support these sanctions
regime--the secondary sanctions--mainly because they are
hitting these countries and governments which are dealing with
Russia.
I was in a visit to China just last week. It was very
interesting. Of course, I probably could not change the global
foreign policy goals of China. That was very clear as well, and
I asked the question that China is the main enabler for Russia
to wage the war. Main economical supporter but as well we are
talking about at least the dual-use technologies which have
been given to Russia.
What we need to do together with U.S. and so on, together
with Europe, is to improve and also to increase the pressure to
China to buy less gas and oil from Russia because Putin's and
Russian economy are not doing well. They are not doing well.
As well, Russia has not had any kind of strategic
breakthrough on the battlefield in Ukraine. Whatever Putin
wants to tell, instead of six days of special operation, he is
waging more than three years of full-scale war without any
strategic breakthrough.
That is why we need to act to support Ukraine, but at the
same time put more pressure on Russia. This is the only way,
and I hope that we are going together on that direction.
Thank you.
Senator Boozman: Mr. Jones?
Mr. Jones: Just to add, on the Russian challenges it is not
just that the Russians surpassed a million casualties over the
course of the summer, which is extraordinary. It is not just
that the Russians--the average rate of advance is slower than
during the Somme during World War I. It is also that if you
start the Soviet campaign at Operation Barbarossa when the
Germans invaded and you fast forward three years and nine
months, they were in Berlin.
Today, if you fast forward that same amount of time from
the beginning of the full-scale invasion they are in Pokrovsk.
It is a shell of the Soviet Union.
I would add that the Russians are vulnerable on the economy
and I think that is an area where--that we can exploit. I agree
they are grappling with inflation, labor shortages, brain
drain. I think increased sanctions would be very difficult for
President Putin.
I also think, and I would just add one other area, is a
much more targeted effort at identifying and then trying to
shut down elements of a shadow fleet, including sanctions
against some of the flag vessels that are illegally shipping
Russian oil and gas.
There are other elements of that, including listing and
sanctioning insurers that are providing insurance to the shadow
fleet ecosystem. Sanctions and I think a couple of other steps,
including the shadow fleet, will start to put a dent in the
Russian economy, which is not doing anywhere near as well as
Vladimir Putin would hope and certainly not as well as he is
telling his own population.
Chairman Wicker: Thank you. Further questions, Senator
Boozman?
Senator Boozman: Do you want to--
Mr. Rough: Sure. I am happy to add to that.
I would just say that there are, I think, symmetrical
responses available to the United States and to NATO when it
comes to cyber aggression. President Trump has shown in 2018 by
shutting down the--reportedly, the Internet Research Agency in
St. Petersburg that we can punch back in that domain. Maybe it
is time for the lights to go off in the Moscow metro for a
warning, for them to get the message that they cannot undertake
similar attacks in the West.
Maybe it is time to facilitate, encourage, support
Ukrainian special operations against Russian positions in
Africa if they sabotage us in Europe. Maybe it is time to dial
up the sanctions in certain areas to essentially fund or pay
for or force the Russians to feel the pain from their own
critical infrastructure attacks in the Baltic Sea.
I would add on the economic sanctions front, while I am not
an economic determinist--I am not a Marxist--I do think that
the pain is real. On Friday, the Russian statistical agency
reported essentially stagnant growth, 0.6 percent GDP growth in
the third quarter over a year ago.
Their inflation has decreased a little bit, still hovering
around 8 percent, and I think on October 24, the last rate cut
was to 16.5 percent in the key base rate in the Russian system,
which makes borrowing costs incredibly painful for Russian
businesses. Inflation's a problem. Economic growth is stagnant.
High borrowing costs.
Now there is talk, according to the Russian finance
ministry, of a VAT [Value Added Tax] increase from 20 [percent]
to 22 percent next year, which shows that the National Wealth
Fund is beginning--the liquid portion is beginning to run dry,
and they have a big budget deficit that is yawning and on the
horizon.
I think the Rosneft and Lukoil sanctions, which takes about
half of Russian crude oil production into attack, will begin to
really shape at the end of this week and beyond. Already, just
to take one example where this has positive follow-on effects
for the United States, the port of Burgas in Bulgaria, which
processes about 140,000 barrels of crude oil per day, is now
being taken in receivership by the Bulgarian government. It is
a Lukoil asset.
Instead, the U.S. is forging through the 3+1 ministerial. I
think just this week in Athens a new vertical corridor energy
partnership where American LNG [Liquefied Natural Gas] from
Athens through Bulgaria up through Romania, Moldova, can go to
Ukraine to help deal with some of their natural gas shortages.
We are pushing out in some respects the Russians' energy
dominance of this part of the world, and we will be able to
replace it, I think, with the U.S. system, and that is in our
national interest.
Senator Boozman: Good.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Wicker: We will take another round if you
gentlemen can stay with us.
To what extent does the average person in Moscow or St.
Petersburg--the population centers--hear our point of view?
What are their sources? We have testimony that the economy is
in the tank, and people realize the economy is bad there.
To what extent do they blame the war and Putin for getting
us--getting them into the war? Then if you--if anybody would
also like to talk about the legislation that would sanction
Russia in terms of actually being an international terrorist
nation because of the abduction of children.
Who would like to start first? Mr. Tsahkna? Yes. Tsahkna.
Mr. Tsahkna: Tsahkna. Yes. This is--it took a couple of
years in Estonia to study my language and my family, and thank
you.
We do not know in adequate ways what Russian people are
thinking because it is not even the question about the surveys,
which is pretty impossible to make in Russia, in Moscow and St.
Petersburg. People are under constant terror, and they are not
able to answer the questions in honest ways.
We are talking about the society which is living under
constant terror, and if you think about that Russian war
against Ukraine is a bad thing, there will be punishments.
People are sitting in prison. It is hard to say what Russian
people are thinking in scientific ways but it is as a
consequence of a terror regime.
The second point is that we have declared as Estonia that
Russia is a terroristic country, and also for us no problem to
follow the legislation as well, based on these criteria so and
as well accountability is at the same time a very important
topic.
We are talking mainly about what is happening on the
battlefield and what is happening with territories but as well
under the Council of Europe, we have called the initiative,
which is the special tribunal about the aggression crimes of
Russia, and this tribunal must be put in force and Estonia will
join one of the first countries with this.
We sent this legislation already to our Estonia parliament
to join that. It was exactly--the last time we did something
like this in the world was Nuremberg special tribunal about the
Nazi crimes.
Unfortunately, communistic crimes have never had this kind
of tribunal, and this is actually, I think, one of the core
reasons why Russia continuously repeatingly violating
everything and acting as an imperialistic nation because this
kind of tribunal has never happened from the past, and now is
the time to commit that.
Thank you.
Chairman Wicker: Mr. Jones?
Mr. Jones: Every week, every month, and certainly every
year since the Russian full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the
Russian State has become even more authoritarian, even more
concerned about stability, and even more concerned about the
views of its population.
No, I think the answer is clear. Russian citizens do not
have access to information. It is a state-controlled media,
state-controlled internet. I do not think, in general, the
population understands what has gone on. I do not think there
is a general sense of the sheer casualties that the Russian
State has--that Russian soldiers have suffered.
Chairman Wicker: Let me interrupt you there.
President Zelensky, in a conversation that I was part of
just a few days ago, said there were over 50,000 Russian
fatalities in the month of September this year. Not just--not
casualties, but 50,000 fatalities in their military force.
Surely that word is getting back to the mothers and fathers and
husbands and wives.
Mr. Jones: Well, I think, Mr. Chairman, one of the
challenges has been that most of the individuals recruited into
the Russian military have not been serving--they have not been
the sons, certainly not the daughters, but not the sons of
politically important people in Moscow or St. Petersburg.
They are from Central Asia or Siberia or other locations
and, clearly, Vladimir Putin does not care about casualties
from huge chunks of his population.
Chairman Wicker: Does public opinion matter in Russia?
Mr. Jones: I think as long as there is a significant
element of fear among the population, people are not going to
rise up against the government that Vladimir Putin has right
now, and there is tremendous fear right now.
Chairman Wicker: Well, I did interrupt your train of
thought there. If you would like to complete your statement I
would be happy to do that with you.
Mr. Jones: No, just that the Russian State under Vladimir
Putin, since the war--the full-scale war began--it was already
going in this direction anyway--has become increasingly
repressive. His population is not getting accurate information
about the State of the war. They continue to blame NATO for A,
how it started, and B, NATO assistance, and that--I think that
is an interesting question about whether we have effectively
penetrated Russian news media.
I will just remind everyone that it was President Reagan,
for example, in Poland during the cold war that authorized an
incredible program to provide assistance to Poles and support
solidarity. Are we doing the same right now?
Chairman Wicker: Mr. Rough?
Mr. Rough: I would just note that in the 2010's President
Putin built up a pretty significant domestic repression
apparatus after Russians took to the streets following a
questionable Presidential election. I think that very effective
repressive mechanism mingles with a certain apathy of
Muscovites who look at, as Seth Jones put it, sort of
Dagestanis dying in Ukraine and think to themselves. Long as it
does not affect me and my immediate kin I am okay with this.
I do not detect the same sort of churn, the writhing and
chafing that we saw in Berlin in 1953, Budapest 1956, Prague
1968, right now in Russia. I do think, though, that the--
returning to the United States, the issue of the abducted
children, which is just a horrific and cruel and terrible act
of aggression against the Ukrainian peoples, has seized the
attention of a lot of Americans, and when advocates for the
Ukrainian cause tend to travel outside of the Beltway and speak
about this many Americans that are unaware of it are really
gripped by it.
To connect to your opening question, Senator, about what
does someone in Corinth, Mississippi, care about what happens
in Ukraine. I think this really does offend the conscience of
Americans even if Ukraine is considered a place far away, not
to mention that they are backed by some of the most odious
dictatorships in the world. Whether it be the People's Republic
of China, the autarkic, essentially, concentration camp that is
modern-day North Korea, and then the Islamic Republic of Iran.
From the First Lady down to the average American, this is
an issue that I think has gripped them, and it is an
opportunity to demonstrate the stakes for the American public.
Chairman Wicker: It is my understanding that Pope Leo will
be addressing this issue in Rome within a matter of days.
Mr. Rough: That would not surprise me, Senator. If I could
just add one more point.
I think the threat to Putin comes not from sort of the
cosmopolitan artist class of St. Petersburg but really from his
hardened fascist right flank, which will argue you were correct
to go to war, Mr. President, but you have been weak in how you
have executed it because it has been such a bungling effort for
the Russian armed forces.
To the extent that there is opposition, we see some of it
in these social media Telegram channels where there has been
criticism of the leadership.
Chairman Wicker: To what extent do we need to be worried
about what is happening in Pokrovsk?
Mr. Rough: I think the situation in Pokrovsk is difficult
if not dire. I think it is very important that the Ukrainians
learn the lessons of Bakhmut and Avdiivka and ensure that their
personnel is able to leave pockets that seem to be, according
to the public reporting, an open source intelligence closing.
I would note that the Pokrovsk is not the final gate of
protecting Ukraine proper. There are other very important
fortified cities as part of this fortress belt that Ukraine's
established in Donetsk, and so it is one very important battle.
I think it matters as much at the political sort of symbolic
level as it does at the actual military tactical level, and for
that reason it is garnered a lot of attention. I would not say
it is determinative.
Chairman Wicker: Mr. Wilson?
Co-Chairman Wilson: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Indeed, thank all of you for being here today, and, indeed,
Foreign Minister, I think you are so correct to hear the
resolve of the people of Estonia to resist whatever may occur,
and it is ironic that we are here with the Helsinki Commission.
Okay.
We can think back to the Finnish population, the bravery of
the Winter War of 1939. A tiny little former Russian province
comes back and defeats and resists the Soviet Union
successfully.
Then as we were talking about the resolve of NATO, I cannot
believe I forgot to point out the ultimate resolve, and that is
now Finland is a member of NATO. Now, Sweden is a member of
NATO. Who would ever imagine? Two hundred years of neutrality.
I think they were inspired, too, by the Baltic republic so
working together. I am just so encouraged of what can be done.
Putting that together too, what more can we do to advance the
capabilities of our Baltic allies in terms of technology, such
as drone technology and counter-drone technology?
Mr. Tsahkna: Thank you.
Really, the Winter War you mentioned that Finnish people
fought, actually this is something we as Estonians are
following, and also this is our mistake that our democracy did
not work so well in 1939. It worked better in Finland because
Finnish people had an opportunity to decide, and then they
started to fight back.
Estonians, I think, we are ready. We were ready at the
time, but finally there was an agreement and then it was too
late. Also, we fought our freedom in 1918 to 1920, and we
were--we were actually victorious against Soviet Russia at this
time.
What we can do, of course, the understanding that we are
doing our part, but U.S. presence militarily in our region is
very important, and this decision has been made right now that
U.S. troops will remain in the Baltic states and Poland. Any
message that U.S. is withdrawing troops from Europe is a bad
thing because Russia definitely will use it.
I am not talking only about the military capabilities but I
am talking as well the messages, the messages to our people, to
European people, because Russia and Putin will definitely use
that as a sign that U.S. is weak and withdrawing the troops
because of them, because of Putin, and this is a very, very
wrong way to go.
As well, on a practical level, it is very important, and I
am grateful for the Congress support for the Baltic Security
Initiative, as I mentioned before. These are practical things,
but as well to understand the main principle that aggressive
Russia is not a problem for Ukraine only. Aggressive Russia is
a problem for all of us, and we are ready to do our part. We
are ready to stand there. We are ready to--as well to support
Ukraine, and also what is the clear thing is about security
guarantees for the future if the just and lasting peace will
come.
We in Europe must understand, and I think that we are
ready, that we must put the skin in the game to secure Ukraine,
to give the relevant security guarantees, not the guarantees
which are written on paper and which are not costing anything
in the near future, as it happened with the Minsk agreements.
Of course, the Estonian position is clear that we cannot
take down the opportunity for Ukraine in the future to join
NATO because this is the most efficient security guarantee. As
well, we, as--we, as a bordering country of Russia, may be a
good example that if the coalition of the willing will go and
decide together with Ukraine that security guarantees needs
boots on the ground--we decided this March as Estonian
government we will be part and participate in boots-on-the-
ground military capabilities, even we are the member--
neighboring country of Russia, if there is need for that.
Because if we give the solid security guarantees for Ukraine,
then these guarantees are for Europe as well.
Thank you.
Co-Chairman Wilson: Thank you.
Indeed, Director Rough, I appreciate you bringing up about
Burgas. That is--I want to know more about that. You also
identified, indeed, the political composition, sadly, of the
Russian Federation is fascism. It is fascism with a combination
of mafia.
As I told you, I had wonderful visits to Russia, and it is
just heartbreaking to me to see a country that could have had
such opportunity now have an economy smaller than Italy, and
then to find out it is smaller than the Baltic republics and
Poland together.
Over and over again, what could be a great country. Putting
that in mind, there is also good news, and that is about Burgas
and then, indeed, the incredible opportunities that President
Trump has achieved for the Black Sea region and Caucasus with
Azerbaijan and Armenia. A tragedy, truly, is the rigged
elections in the Republic of Georgia.
What do you recommend that can be done with the Georgian
Dream dictatorship, which is now working very closely with the
Chinese Communist Party to give away the only Black Sea port
that Georgia has to the Chinese Communist Party, which
facilitates their ability to impact the importation of rare
earths and the liberation and economic progress of Central
Asia?
Chairman Wicker: We are told that the minister has to leave
in about five minutes, and we want to be--
Co-Chairman Wilson: Hear, hear.
Chairman Wicker: --mindful of his time.
But thank you, Representative Wilson, for mentioning the
steadfast, brave people of the Republic of Georgia who have
stood out in the cold and in the summer heat for one full year
protesting the illegal and rigged election, which has been
recognized as such by the European Union and by a number of
Americans.
Who would like to respond about that particular issue?
Mr. Tsahkna: About Georgia?
Chairman Wicker: Yes.
Mr. Tsahkna: I was in Georgia just a year ago or a bit
more, and I was there together with the Baltic foreign
ministers and Iceland foreign minister at this time. It was
before the elections happened.
I saw as well, Mr. Chairman, the great willingness of
Georgian people, and they believed at this time that actually
the leadership is keeping the promises about the integration to
the Western part of the world and European Union and so on.
It was heavily violated. Also we are very close to Georgian
people. We have been very supportive all the decades about
reforms, and what we see now I do not call this government a
government, but this is a regime which is not following the
Georgian people will.
What we see now is the beginning of the same developments
what we saw years ago in Belorussia. This is a very dangerous
thing. This is a very dangerous thing, and I--the Estonian
people, I can say to you, will--continue to support and
Georgian people's will for freedom.
Thank you.
Chairman Wicker: Mr. Cohen says he can limit his remarks to
two minutes. Can you stay that long?
Mr. Tsahkna: I will stay.
Representative Cohen: Thank you, sir. Just a little history
lesson, if you do not mind, Mr. Minister. I believe you said
something--
Mr. Tsahkna: We have time.
Representative Cohen: I believe you said something about
Russia taking all the children in Estonia during the 1939-1940
period. Is that accurate? Did I hear that right?
Mr. Tsahkna: I was talking about Ukraine children.
Representative Cohen: Okay. Well, I know about Ukraine
children. I misunderstood you then.
Mr. Tsahkna: Okay.
Representative Cohen: I thought you said they took--the
population in Estonia was not as great because they took all
the kids.
Mr. Tsahkna: No, no. The problem was that at the end of
1930's our parliament ran out of these democratic rules, and we
had a very good president at the time who wanted the best for
the Nation. We had no democratic system as it was in Finland to
respond to these proposals, so-called, from Russian side--
Soviet side. The Finnish people decided to fight, and Estonian
people, we had no democratic system.
Representative Cohen: I got you. I just misunderstood what
you said, and I wanted to clarify.
Thank you very much.
Mr. Tsahkna: Thank you.
Representative Cohen: I appreciate you.
Chairman Wicker: We are going to conclude the hearing. We
want to very much thank our witnesses, particularly you, Mr.
Minister, and the representatives, also of the think tanks that
we rely so much on hearing the ground truth.
Also, thank you to our audience who have been very patient
and attentive and have filled this room with supporters of what
you believe in, Mr. Minister, and I can assure you that the
words that have been spoken today by our three witnesses will
reverberate around Europe and be heard worldwide.
Thank you very much, and with that, we conclude the
hearing.
[Whereupon, at 5:06 p.m., the hearing ended.]
[all]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The United States Helsinki Commission, an independent
federal agency, by law monitors and encourages progress in
implementing provisions of the Helsinki Accords.
The Commission, Created in 1976, is composed of nine
Senators, nine Representatives and one official each from the
Department of State, Defense, and Commerce.
All Commission publications may be freely reproduced,
in any form, with appropriate credit. The Commission
encourages the widest possible dissemination of its publications.
WWW.CSCE.GOV
youtube.com/HelsinkiCommission
facebook.com/helsinkicommission
flickr.com/photos/helsinkicommission
x.com/HelsinkiComm