[Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 43 (Thursday, March 6, 2025)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1593-S1594]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Ukraine
Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I was glad to see President Zelenskyy
clearly express his gratitude to President Trump and the American
taxpayer for our support for the country of Ukraine over the last 3
years.
There has been much discussion in international communities and here
at home on the war between Russia and Ukraine, which has now been going
on for 3 long years. It has cost hundreds of thousands of lives on both
sides, with millions of people displaced as a result
[[Page S1594]]
of the war. Through it all, the Ukrainian people have demonstrated
extraordinary courage and resilience.
But one thing is clear: It is time for the war in Ukraine to end.
President Trump is right. But the more difficult question is, How?
Years ago, I recall GEN David Petraeus, the leader of our military
and Central Command, heading up our efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan,
was asked the question: How does the war end?
He said: You tell me how the war ends. Wars are easy to start and
hard to conclude.
This is the most difficult question of all--how does it end?
We should all be grateful to President Trump for taking on the
difficult but essential task of brokering a peace agreement to end this
devastating war. During the contentious meeting at the Oval Office last
week, President Trump commented that he hoped to ``be known and
recognized as a peacemaker.'' Well, this would be no small feat, but it
is the right position to take.
It is not hard to look at this incredible devastation--the massive
casualties, the human misery and suffering of the last 3 years--and
understand that it is time for the bloodshed to end. But it will take
both sides, Ukraine and Russia, to accomplish this goal. Ukraine cannot
do it on its own.
President Trump was correct to point out to President Zelenskyy last
week during this high-intensity meeting in the Oval Office--he said: I
have to align myself with both of you in order to make a deal.
President Trump's skill at making deals is famous, but this would be
the crowning achievement of his life if he is able to make this happen.
But the point is, in order to achieve a lasting peace, both sides of
the conflict must be willing to sit down and negotiate and make
concessions no matter how hard that is.
I am glad to see that President Zelenskyy has indicated a willingness
for Ukraine to do so in part through a critical minerals arrangement
with the U.S. Government. Such a deal would compensate the United
States and its taxpayers for our many years of military and economic
support for Ukraine. It would actually be a vested interest that the
United States would have every reason to want to protect in the future.
Some have called that an implicit security arrangement.
Perhaps most importantly, though, in order to ensure a lasting peace,
there must be some real and tangible and enforceable security
assurances for Ukraine. To put this in the proper context, we have to
consider history, the events that led us up to this point.
In 1994, the United States, Russia, and Britain signed something
called the Budapest Memorandum. This was shortly after the fall of the
Soviet Union. As the Soviet Union broke up, it turned out that Ukraine,
which was formerly part of the Soviet Union, had the third largest
nuclear weapons stockpile in the world.
The Budapest Memorandum was an agreement between the United States,
the United Kingdom, and Russia that if Ukraine would give up its
nuclear weapons, its territorial integrity and independence would be
preserved and respected.
This was a historic point in world history. It was an important step
toward nuclear nonproliferation and prevented the rise of a major third
nuclear power in Eastern Europe. But, unfortunately, Russia proceeded
to violate that same agreement in 2014 with the annexation of the
Crimean Peninsula, and then, as we know, the Russian Government, led by
Mr. Putin, violated that agreement a second time in February of 2022
with its invasion of Ukraine.
If Russia was unwilling to honor the commitments it made in the
Budapest Memorandum in 1994 by its invasion of Crimea in 2014 and its
invasion of Ukraine as a nation in 2022, how can Ukraine be assured
that Russia will honor a peace agreement brokered in 2025? That,
perhaps, is the single most important question that we need to ask.
Given the history and pattern of behavior by Russia, if Zelenskyy
does not receive adequate security assurances, will this incentivize
him to do other things to protect and preserve his nation--for example,
to reacquire a nuclear weapons program against an existential threat?
We know that President Zelenskyy himself has floated this as a
possibility, and more recently, the newly elected Chancellor of Germany
had suggested that both Germany and the United Kingdom would share,
perhaps, their nuclear weapons capabilities with Ukraine, which would
be a dramatic and dangerous development.
But that is not all. We have to keep in mind that both President
Zelenskyy and President Putin are not fighting this war in some sort of
vacuum. Allies of the United States and adversaries alike around the
world are watching.
Will our actions in Ukraine suggest to allies in South Korea, for
example, that they should pursue their own nuclear weapon capability,
especially in light of the North Korean nuclear program, which receives
Russian assistance?
Will more citizens of Taiwan cast their vote for representatives
pushing closer alignment with the People's Republic of China as the
most prudent way for their people to maintain a guarantee against a
catastrophic war in the Indo-Pacific?
Seeing that unanswered aggression is awarded, would President Xi be
emboldened to seize Taiwan, as he has made clear he intends to do one
way or the other?
These are just a few of the unintended consequences that could play
out depending on how these peace negotiations transpire and how they
develop.
We, the duly-elected representatives of the American people, must ask
ourselves: Will a world of unreliable security assurances, of greater
prospects of nuclear proliferation, of insufficient deterrence in the
face of unprovoked aggression, result in a safer world for our children
and grandchildren?
Well, given these difficult but necessary questions, I would once
again applaud President Trump for taking the initiative of embracing
peace through strength. His approach is the correct one, and he is
right that an important piece of this is that our NATO allies--who, in
fact, live in Europe, where Ukraine is located--need to increase their
contribution to our collective security under the North Atlantic Treaty
alliance. It is through strength we can guarantee peace both in Europe
and around the world.
The suffering resulting from the Russian invasion of Ukraine on two
occasions--2014 and 2022--has been devastating not only for Ukrainians
but also for Russians as well, who have lost hundreds of thousands of
casualties in the process.
President Trump pointed out during the meeting with President
Zelenskyy that both sides are losing ``1,000, 2,000`` soldiers a week.
``As we sit here and talk, people are being shot and dying on the
battlefield.''
What President Trump is doing to secure peace in this dangerous world
is an act of moral leadership and I believe divinely inspired.
Jesus said in the Beatitudes:
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons
of God.
If President Trump is successful in securing a lasting peace, I, for
one, think he will have earned the Nobel Peace Prize.
As President Zelenskyy himself said in the Oval Office--he said:
If President Trump [can] bring peace to our country, I
think he will be on this wall.
He was, of course, referring to the walls of the Oval Office. They
have pictures of historic American Presidents who have done great and
important things.
It is my sincere hope that President Zelenskyy and President Putin
will both accept the olive branch offered by President Trump by coming
to the table and by making the necessary, enforceable concessions to
ensure a lasting peace.
I yield the floor.
Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
(Mr. CORNYN assumed the Chair.)
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Hagerty). Without objection, it is so
ordered.