[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 160 (2014), Part 3]
[Senate]
[Pages 3664-3666]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                             UKRAINE CRISIS

  Mr. COATS. Mr. President, I have been discussing the Ukraine crisis 
with my constituents and a number of Indiana media outlets for the last 
few days. Virtually every interview or conversation on the subject 
includes this question: What difference does this make to us here in 
Indiana? What American interests are at stake? These are legitimate 
questions, and they deserve an answer because before we commit America 
to address potential conflicts, we need to describe and define just 
what our interest is and why we should be engaged.
  In this conflict we are not talking about the use of military force, 
but we are thinking about and talking about and should be examining 
other measures that can influence the outcome of a crisis situation 
that could have significant consequences for the American people.
  If we can't answer that question and we can't address that with a 
compelling answer, then we should not get engaged. But if we can 
determine a compelling answer and reason why we should engage in some 
form, then we need to make sure the American people know why it is we 
are renewing this and why this is important.
  Ukraine is 5,000 miles away. The trade between our two countries is 
minuscule and shrinking. Only 30 percent of the Ukrainian population 
shares our Christian faith or identifies with any faith. Ukraine is the 
source of no energy or crucial materials. Indeed, the country is a 
source of instability and corruption. So why should Americans and 
Hoosiers care about what is happening to a country 5,000 miles away? 
Well, let me suggest some reasons and then perhaps some suggestions as 
to what would be the best way for us to help influence this crisis 
situation in a way that is positive for our country and, frankly, for 
Western democracy and for the world.
  The first and most obvious reason we should take this seriously is 
the central lesson of history: Conflicts--even catastrophes--sometimes 
grow from small beginnings. Most know that the assassination of an 
imperial relative in a Balkan town in 1914 led to the death by violence 
of 37 million people--World War I. We also know that the cataclysm of 
World War II began with the stealth invasion of Austria and 
Czechoslovakia in 1938. Despite warnings as to what this might lead to, 
we saw a tragic loss of tens of millions of people in World War II. 
This is eerily reminiscent of Russia's moves on Crimea last week.
  A history lesson closer in time is taught by the Balkan wars of the 
1990s. When Serb gunboats shelled Dubrovnik, a Croatian city, in 1992, 
the world--and most especially Croatia's European neighbors--did 
exactly nothing. Our own Secretary of State said repeatedly that there 
were no American interests at stake. Before that view was changed and 
NATO eventually intervened 3 years later, more than 100,000 people had 
been slaughtered.

[[Page 3665]]

  If the international community had had the collective wisdom and 
leadership--and, frankly, courage and guts--to simply tell Belgrade 
that civilian European population centers are no longer shelled in 
modern Europe, all of that suffering could have been prevented and our 
own Armed Forces could have stayed in their barracks and in their 
homes.
  We should draw from such lessons so that we need not confront later 
the question of whether we should intervene militarily in a Ukrainian 
civil war or a war between Ukraine and Russia. Instead, we must 
confront now the choice we have of doing nothing and letting Putin have 
his way or leading an American and an international response to impose 
penalties on Putin's Russia so that he comes to his senses.
  A second and related American interest is in the stability of the 
European continent itself. Ukraine is not an obscure sideshow. It is 
comprised of remnants of two European empires and deeply embedded in 
the integrated structure, identity, economy, and culture of Europe as a 
whole. Disaster there threatens a very great deal in Europe, a 
continent we have spent 100 years, trillions of dollars, and hundreds 
of thousands of lives to stabilize. European security and stability 
have been at the very heart of our foreign and defense policy for an 
entire century. If American foreign policy and American strategic 
interests in the world have any permanent core, it is that interest in 
Europe's well-being.
  Ukraine's conflict with the remnants of Soviet-style aggression 
portends serious threats to the rest of Russia's border lands, nearly 
all of which were long dominated by Red Army presence and force. The 
Baltic states must be alarmed right now. If we do nothing, they could 
panic.
  Poland has already summoned NATO councils to consider consequences 
for its own security and therefore for the security of the alliance. 
Georgia painfully reflects that the paltry international response to 
its own war with Russia five years ago surely emboldened Putin in this 
latest adventure.
  In other words, we could be looking at a Sudetenland moment. We hope 
that is not the case.
  It is no secret that Putin has imperial ambitions motivated by his 
pathological insecurities and a quest to restore lost glories. These 
are dangerous delusions that, if not confronted firmly, could come to 
threaten us all.
  Beyond history and beyond the threats to continental security 
instability, I am even more concerned about America's place in the 
world and how inaction will further harm it. Abroad, we are 
increasingly seen as a spent force, exhausted by interminable wars, 
politically divided and inert, financially strained, and floundering 
without firm, articulate, determined leadership. This is a bleak, 
incomplete picture of my country that more than anything else makes me 
determined to be part of an effort to correct this perception of 
America.
  In many ways, we can potentially look at the Ukrainian crisis as an 
opportunity. We have a chance now to summon our collective will and 
impose costs for Putin's irresponsible behavior. We have many robust 
capabilities to reward those who join us in responsible, mutually 
productive cooperation in managing world affairs and in punishing those 
who do not.
  This is the moment to demonstrate our return to the leadership role 
that the realities of this harsh world have long imposed upon us. This 
situation, this crisis which we now face in Ukraine, can be a moment to 
demonstrate our return to a leadership role desperately needed by this 
tortured world where the realities of this harsh world have long 
imposed upon us.
  It is in our national interest, in my opinion, to lead the world 
toward solutions that we know are best for us all. No other country can 
manage it. We have seen that. Without that management, we risk things 
that could harm us in many ways and continue to undermine our role in 
this world in providing for peace and stability.
  For these reasons, tomorrow I will introduce a sense-of-the-Senate 
resolution articulating some of the steps I think we and the President 
should consider together. None of these steps involve military force or 
the preparation for using such force. Now is not the time to add to the 
violence but, rather, to remove the use of force by all parties as an 
option.
  I hope the resolution will contribute to the search for both a 
bipartisan, unified government approach to problem-solving and an 
international consensus on firm actions that will change Russia's 
behavior. I am saying that we should stand united as Americans with a 
single message and a single voice led by our leader which shows we are 
resolute in standing together--hopefully with our European allies and 
others who want to join us--in condemning the actions taken by Putin 
and Russia and in offering and proposing meaningful sanctions and 
measures that will bring the reality of Russia's actions straight to 
Putin's desk and hopefully cause him to rethink his strategy.
  The resolution will commit the Senate to work urgently with the 
President to identify a package of economic sanctions and other 
measures to compel Putin to remove armed forces from Ukrainian 
territory and return that territory to full Ukrainian sovereign 
control.
  Further, I will suggest that we construct a complete comprehensive 
plan to isolate Putin's Russia from the community of nations. We seek a 
consensus on such a plan with our friends and allies--everyone who 
wants to see a sovereign Ukraine, secure within its own border, able to 
seek its own destiny on its own terms. That is the right of every 
sovereign nation.
  My resolution will also call upon the President to consider a number 
of measures to isolate and sanction Russia.
  We could reschedule a meeting of the G-8 nations to take place as 
soon as possible, at which meeting the participating nations should 
seriously consider a U.S. proposal to formally expel Russia.
  The United States should propose to NATO that the alliance 
immediately suspend operation of the Russian-NATO council. The Russian 
military and diplomatic representation at NATO should be expelled. A 
close relationship with Russian's defense officials during a time when 
that country has invaded and occupied a neighbor contravenes the 
founding purpose of NATO. How could we possibly meet on a Russian-NATO 
council basis when Russia has invaded and occupied a neighbor?
  The President should ask the leadership of FIFA to reconsider its 
decision to place World Cup 2018 matches in Russia and instead award 
these games to a more worthy alternative country. Russia has just 
celebrated the Sochi Olympics. I think we got the real measure of 
President Putin, a former KGB lieutenant colonel, as to what his real 
intentions are--it is not to bring more good will and more confidence 
in that country.
  The United States could work with other members of the Organization 
for Security and Cooperation in Europe--the OSCE--to deploy monitors in 
Ukraine to help confirm that the security of the Russian-speaking 
population is not threatened. This pretext for Russian aggression must 
be removed to international satisfaction.
  Senate leadership could dispatch a congressional delegation led by 
OSCE Commissioners to visit Ukraine and bolster OSCE's involvement in 
addressing this crisis. Another option would be the United States 
working with OSCE and German Chancellor Angela Merkel to support her 
proposal to create an OSCE contact group to pursue dispute resolution 
and mediate direct negotiations between the Ukrainian and Russian 
Governments.
  The United States should not maintain the current status of 
diplomatic relations with Russia at current levels. We could downgrade 
our diplomatic representation while retaining its efficacy by 
announcing that we will not send our new Ambassador to Moscow. Instead, 
we could dispatch an experienced professional diplomat to Ukraine to 
serve as charge d'affaires to handle the crisis. We could also reduce 
the diplomatic presence to focus exclusively

[[Page 3666]]

on crisis management, not business as usual. We could close consulates 
general and require Russia to make reciprocal steps to close their 
consulates in the United States.
  I believe we in Congress should expand the Magnitsky Rule of Law 
Accountability Act to sanction the Ministry of Defense officials in the 
chain of command responsible for this invasion, the Duma leadership 
responsible for rubberstamping it, and Crimean officials complicit in 
its execution.
  The United States should also consider sanctions that might serve to 
convince more segments of the Russian population that their government 
is taking irresponsible steps contrary to the people's interests. To 
this end, we should suspend and could suspend Russia's eligibility for 
H-2B temporary or seasonal work visas.
  This is just a menu of suggestions of actions we can take, actions 
that I think would impose upon Russia a cost for their brazen attempt 
to intercede in the affairs of a sovereign nation to, under the most 
flimsiest of pretenses, invade a country under the pretext that its 
citizens there, or those who favor support for Russia, are under some 
type of lethal threat. That is not the case. It has not been 
demonstrated, and it has not been proven.
  Now is the time to act--to act quickly and act together. Our leverage 
is our leadership. We need to take up that powerful tool and show Putin 
that he has misjudged us. Now is the time for the United States to 
reassert its leadership in the world by taking direct action--not 
through military action but through a menu of measures designed to 
bring Russia to its senses and designed to protect the sovereign 
interests of those nations that are seeking to align with the West in a 
Democratic way. We need that leadership from the President. We need 
that support from this Congress in a bipartisan measure. And we need to 
speak with a united voice, hopefully with our European partners and 
others throughout the Western world and the free world, to send a 
message that Russia cannot ignore and to impose a measure of costs that 
will impact that country's economy and impact the decision that has to 
be made by their President.
  Mr. President, with that, I yield the floor and suggest the absence 
of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Merkley). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.

                          ____________________