[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 91 (Wednesday, May 25, 2022)]
[Senate]
[Page S2703]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                    CONFIRMATION OF BRIDGET A. BRINK

  Mr. PAUL. Mr. President, I opposed the confirmation of Bridget Brink 
to be U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine because of her support for the 
expansion of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, NATO. Ambassador 
Brink believes in expanding NATO to any country who would like to join, 
including Ukraine.
  An important part of diplomacy is understanding your adversary. When 
I questioned Ambassador Brink about the eastern expansion of NATO, 
however, she expressed her belief that Russian President Vladimir Putin 
merely uses the NATO question as a pretext for actions he would take 
anyway. I strongly disagree. We must evaluate our leaders' actions, as 
well as the actions of our adversaries, on the world stage.
  Putin is an aggressor and must be condemned, but we cannot allow our 
revulsion for his invasions to blind us to the fact that our 
adversaries react to the actions of the West. For years, Putin stated 
that any attempt to expand NATO to Russia's borders would be perceived 
as a direct threat. Fifteen years ago, Putin asked, ``Against whom is 
this expansion intended?'' Yet, a year later in 2008, NATO promised 
that Ukraine and Georgia would one day join the alliance. Russia's 
invasions of Georgia and Ukraine are not a coincidence, but I left my 
meeting with Ambassador Brink believing that she is not willing to 
reflect upon the actions of the West and how they would be viewed by 
Russian eyes.
  Putin has no justification for embarking on a war and invading 
another country. I fully support the Ukrainians in their fight against 
Russia. Russia's brutal use of its military to achieve its objectives 
is unacceptable. But we must understand the reasons why he chose to 
invade in the first place.
  When the Cold War ended, the United States had the benefit of the 
wisdom of foreign policy officials who took Russia seriously. George 
Kennan warned that NATO expansion would ignite a new cold war. Henry 
Kissinger proposed a peaceful coexistence in which Ukraine pursued a 
policy of neutrality, with one foot in the West and one foot in the 
East. Jack Matlock, our Ambassador to the Soviet Union from 1987 to 
1991, called the current crisis ``predictable'' and, in 1997, warned 
Congress that he believed that NATO expansion ``could well encourage a 
chain of events that could produce the most serious security threat to 
this nation since the Soviet Union collapsed.''
  Those wise voices are either gone or retired. Had we listened to 
their warnings, today's crisis might have been averted. But the State 
Department is now filled with officials who refuse to listen to 
adversaries or consider how our actions may make peace more difficult 
to obtain.
  Although I opposed the confirmation of Bridget Brink to be Ambassador 
to Ukraine, I wish her luck in representing the United States and 
finding a path to a peaceful end to the conflict.

                          ____________________