[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 159 (2013), Part 13]
[House]
[Pages 18400-18401]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




     URGING UKRAINE TO SETTLE ITS INTERNAL DISAGREEMENTS PEACEFULLY

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from 
Ohio (Ms. Kaptur) for 5 minutes.
  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, the political turmoil in Ukraine demands the 
world's attention.
  It is now 5 p.m. in Kiev where protesters in Independence Square are 
regrouping after a night of violent crashes with Ukrainian security 
forces. As of now, the security forces have begun to pull back from the 
crackdown; and despite intimidation and threats of violence, the 
opposition has retained control of Euromaiden, the name given to 
Independence Square in a clear sign of solidarity with Europe.
  The United States has sided unequivocally with those Ukrainians who 
are demonstrating for an independent Ukraine, for their rights to free 
assembly and free speech under provisions of international law, 
including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Our Secretary of 
State has called upon the Government of Ukraine to respect the rights 
of all people and expressed the disgust of the United States with the 
use of force against peaceful protesters as unbefitting a democracy.
  As Secretary Kerry noted, the right to free assembly is ``a universal 
value, not just an American one.''
  The House Ukrainian Caucus, which I cochair with Mr. Levin and Mr. 
Gerlach, has expressed its support for the rights of the Ukrainian 
people to exercise their rights to political speech and free assembly.
  Yes, these are difficult, yet hopeful, times for Ukraine, which is 
trying to find its rightful place among the community of nations 
despite daunting domestic challenges. The country is gripped by 
uncertainty, which is exacerbating an already difficult economic 
situation.
  The current crisis was triggered by the decision of the current 
political leadership to pursue free trade with Ukraine's eastern 
neighbor, Russia, rather than neighbors to the west, the European 
Union.
  Regardless of the political discord in Ukraine, this Congress should 
urge all parties to settle their internal disagreements peacefully and 
without violence.
  Ukraine's soils historically have been showered with the precious 
blood of their country men and women at a higher rate than most human 
beings could even imagine. The brilliantly recounted ``Bloodlands,'' 
written by Yale scholar Dr. Timothy Snyder, tells their story. Yes, 
though Ukraine's very name means borderland, she too often has been a 
bloodland. May this not happen now.
  Ukraine must adapt to embrace a world in which her own independence 
from interference surpasses any other priority. She should be free to 
engage all directions, east, west, south, and north, without fear of 
retaliation. She is a bridge to all nations, and therein will lie her 
prosperity.
  As Zbigniew Brzezinski, national security adviser to President Carter 
writes in today's Financial Times:

       Two decades of independence, of growing pride in 
     rediscovering Ukrainian history, and of observing the 
     country's western neighbors economically benefiting from 
     their European connections is creating a new mindset. That 
     mindset is not embracing anti-Russianism, but it is asserting 
     Ukraine's own historic identity as culturally an authentic 
     part of a larger Europe.

  Mr. Brzezinski believes the current political change in Ukraine is 
part of an historically significant, yet inevitable, political 
transformation. He believes Ukraine and Russia, too, will eventually 
orient to the west. I have ultimate respect in his opinion and pray he 
is correct.
  Those of us who love Ukraine have longed for the day when it is no 
longer a prisoner of geography, hemmed in between Germany and Russia, 
but a free and willing member of the community of democratic nations.
  Perhaps one day Ukraine will break free of the shackles of domination 
of the past. Perhaps one day Ukraine's geographic location will be an 
asset, not a liability, a day when Ukraine looks both east and west 
and, in fact, in all four directions.
  But as we can see from the images coming to us from Kiev, the road 
will not be smooth. We know the future lies with freedom and with 
democracy and with opportunity, not repression in isolation; but that 
is cold comfort in the streets of Ukraine today.
  The United States Congress must stand forthrightly with the liberty-
loving people of Ukraine during this difficult hour. At this time of 
testing, the people of Ukraine and the people of the United States 
should be inspired by the words of Ukraine's most famous poet, Taras 
Shevchenko:

       Then in your own house you will see true justice, strength 
     and liberty. There is no other such Ukraine.''

               [From the Financial Times, Dec. 10, 2013]

           Russia, like Ukraine, Will Become a Real Democracy

                        (By Zbigniew Brzezinski)

       Come what may, the events in Ukraine are historically 
     irreversible and geopolitically

[[Page 18401]]

     transformatory. Sooner rather than later, Ukraine will be 
     truly a part of democratic Europe; later rather than sooner, 
     Russia will follow unless it isolates itself and becomes a 
     semi-stagnant imperialistic relic.
       The spontaneous outburst of distinctive Ukrainian 
     patriotism--sparked by the mendacity of a corrupt and self-
     enriching leadership ready to seek Moscow's protection--
     signals that commitment to national independence is becoming 
     the dominant political reality. This is especially the case 
     among the younger Ukrainians who no longer feel that they are 
     linguistically or historically just a slightly deviant part 
     of ``Mother Russia''.
       Yes, linguistic divisions persist and some parts of Ukraine 
     still feel closer to Russia. But it is striking that even 
     some of the most outspoken espousers of a European vocation 
     have only recently embraced the Ukrainian language as their 
     own. Two decades of independence, of growing pride in 
     rediscovering Ukrainian history, and of observing the 
     country's western neighbours economically benefiting from 
     their European connections is creating a new mindset. That 
     mindset is not embracing anti-Russianism but it is asserting 
     Ukraine's own historic identity as culturally an authentic 
     part of a larger Europe.
       That is why, one way or another, Ukraine will unavoidably 
     come closer to Europe. It is striking that even in 
     neighbouring Belarus, ruled by the authoritarian Lukashenko 
     regime, a similar western orientation is beginning to 
     surface. Neither country is motivated by hostility towards 
     Russia, but each senses that its independence as well as its 
     cultural identity points increasingly in a westward 
     direction.
       In the next months some sort of a deal between the EU and 
     Ukraine can still be contrived. To facilitate it, the EU must 
     be more receptive to Kiev's need for economic and financial 
     support. Ukrainians have to realise that European taxpayers 
     are not enchanted by the prospect of paying for the misdeeds 
     and corruption of the current Kiev elite. Belt-tightening 
     will be the necessary precondition for an agreement as well 
     as a test of Ukraine's resolve in asserting its European 
     aspirations. Kiev will also need to show that the outcome of 
     elections is not determined by the imprisonment of political 
     rivals.
       The impact of this on Russia will be felt over the longer 
     run. Moscow's current geopolitical goal, shaped by President 
     Vladimir Putin's nostalgic obsession with the country's 
     imperial past, is to recreate in a new guise something akin 
     to the old Russian empire or the more recent Soviet 
     ``union''.
       Mr. Putin seems to harbour the naive notion that the 
     leaders of the post-Soviet states will genuinely accept a 
     subordinate role in a Kremlin-led entity. Some of the leaders 
     do pay occasional lip service to that formula--but out of 
     necessity, not conviction. All prefer independence: it is 
     more pleasant to be presidents, prime ministers, generals, 
     ambassadors and economic moneymakers at home rather than to 
     be the provincial equivalents thereof in a larger Russian 
     empire. The historically proven fact is that national 
     statehood, once attained, is infectious and almost impossible 
     to undo except through massive external force.
       Today's Russia is in no position to assert a violent 
     restoration of its old empire. It is too weak, too backward 
     and too poor. Its demographic crisis makes matters worse. The 
     fact that the newly independent Central Asian states favour 
     increasingly comprehensive arrangements with China is another 
     concern for Russia, reawakening long lingering territorial 
     nightmares.
       It is only a question of time before it becomes evident to 
     Russia's social elites that Mr. Putin's heavy-handed efforts 
     have very limited prospects of success. Sooner or later, he 
     will no longer be president. And not long thereafter Russia--
     and especially its emerging new middle class--will conclude 
     that the only path that makes sense is to become also a truly 
     modern, democratic, and maybe even a leading European state.

                          ____________________