TRANSCRIPT: State Department Daily Press Briefing (excerpt re Ukraine)

US Department of State
Jen Psaki
Spokesperson
Daily Press Briefing
Washington, DC
May 27, 2014

(excerpt re Ukraine)

QUESTION: Ukraine. You have seen reports, I presume, of the fighting that’s going on in Donetsk. I’m wondering if you have anything to say about that.

MS. PSAKI: Mm-hmm. Well, first, let me of course – I know we put out a statement from the Secretary yesterday about the successful elections this weekend, so I would point everyone to that. We look forward to, of course, working with President-elect Poroshenko and the people of Ukraine to build on this victory for democracy.

In terms of the events over the weekend or the reports of violence, we certainly have been watching those events closely. We remain concerned about the actions of Russian separatists against civilians in eastern Ukraine. We support the efforts of the Government of Ukraine to maintain calm and take steps to maintain order in their own country, and we remain in close contact with them as well.

QUESTION: Well, so you believe that this violence is the responsibility entirely of pro-Russian separatists? Is that – I mean, do you have any words of caution or advice of restraint to the Ukrainian Government?

MS. PSAKI: Well, certainly to all parties. But I would remind you – and obviously there are a range of reports out there about events that have happened over the course of the past couple of days. There are some involving the airport.

QUESTION: Right.

MS. PSAKI: There are some involving the fact that a special monitoring mission is missing. So there are a range of different reports, different – and I guess I could speak to all of those. But my point I was making is that the Ukrainian Government and the Ukrainian authorities have every right to certainly take steps to maintain calm and order where they see fit.

QUESTION: Right. But you don’t have any concerns about whether they are acting – that they’re going too far? You don’t have any concern that – do you believe that everything the Ukrainian authorities have done to this point in trying to maintain law and order has been reasonable and appropriate?

MS. PSAKI: Well, if we have concerns we will express them. But certainly —

QUESTION: But as of this moment, you don’t have any concerns?

MS. PSAKI: I’m not expressing a concern about the events over the course of the weekend, no, in terms of the Ukrainian authorities, no.

QUESTION: Okay. So in the view of the State Department, view of the Administration, is that what is happening on the ground in the east right now, in Donetsk and other places where there are clashes, where there’s fighting, that is all the fault of the separatists?

MS. PSAKI: Well, again, Matt, obviously —

QUESTION: They are the instigators?

MS. PSAKI: Obvious – they are – certainly, we believe they’re the instigators, yes. And we believe – and I think there’s broad reporting on their involvement in what’s happening at the airport or what happened at the airport over the course of the weekend.

QUESTION: Okay.

MS. PSAKI: I think there’s a – much question about that.

QUESTION: Well, but there are a lot of reports from my news organization, from others as well, that this isn’t entirely one-sided, that – and I mean, the separatists – some of the separatists leaders say that they’ve been – that the Ukrainian authorities have been shooting at civilians. But you don’t – you haven’t seen that?

MS. PSAKI: Well, if we have concerns, we’ll express them.

QUESTION: Okay.

MS. PSAKI: But that’s not where we are at this moment —

QUESTION: All right.

MS. PSAKI: Do we —

QUESTION: And then do you have —

MS. PSAKI: Oh, go ahead.

QUESTION: Just on the OSCE monitors.

MS. PSAKI: Sure.

QUESTION: Do you have anything more to say about that?

MS. PSAKI: We don’t have a new update, unfortunately, for all of you. The OSCE reports that it has lost contact – that it lost contact Monday evening with one of its special monitoring mission teams in the Donetsk region. The four-person team was last heard from as they approached a separatist checkpoint near the city of Torez. We condemn this abduction and call for Russia to use its influence with the militants to secure the team’s immediate release.

This team, this particular team, has been observing the situation across Ukraine since March to reduce tensions and promote security, so they weren’t kind of a new election monitoring —

QUESTION: Okay. But you’re convinced, again, that this is – that they have been abducted by the separatists? That that’s the – I mean, do you know that for certain, or is that just the most plausible explanation you have?

MS. PSAKI: That is the most plausible explanation, yes, Matt.

QUESTION: Is there any —

MS. PSAKI: Go ahead.

QUESTION: Staying on Ukraine, is there any evidence that Russia’s hand is still in – is part of any of this fighting that’s going on from the separatists’ side?

MS. PSAKI: Well, I think there’s been evidence all along that there has been a Russian hand in the activities that have been happening on the ground, whether it’s the – how equipped the militants have been, what their equipped with, kind of a trend that we’ve seen from Crimea that has carried forth to parts of eastern Ukraine. So we’ve seen a great deal of evidence on the ground of their engagement.

QUESTION: And today Russian President Putin called for an immediate halt to the Ukraine’s military operations, and he expressed this to the Italians. And he said that he called for Ukraine to talk to the Russian separatist leaders. Would you support that kind of dialogue to try to resolve this? Or I mean, there’s a possibility this could just escalate, so how is the U.S. seeing this being resolved?

MS. PSAKI: Well, as you know, our primary goal here has been de-escalation from the beginning. But I would remind you that there are a range of calls that President Putin and others have been made that have not been backed up by action in terms of taking their own de-escalatory steps. And we certainly feel there are a range of steps that they could take in order to show they’re going to back their words with action. We eagerly await that.

I would also point you to the fact that President-elect Poroshenko made clear that his number one priority after taking office will be to restore order in eastern Ukraine by increasing dialogue with citizens of that region, traveling to the area soon after his inauguration, increasing transparency of the ongoing constitutional reform process. And so we believe that’s a positive step and the right approach to return stability to the area.

QUESTION: Jen, real quick on the monitors, do you know their nationalities?

MS. PSAKI: I do not have that information, no.

QUESTION: I mean, sorry if you just went over this while I was walking in.

MS. PSAKI: It’s okay. Go ahead.

QUESTION: But I mean, have you urged the Ukrainians to use restraint in their military operations? I mean —

MS. PSAKI: Certainly, Elise, we’ve urged that across the board. But let’s not forget we’re talking about a group of armed militants, armed Russian militants, who have been aggressively engaging in, whether it’s taking over of buildings or going – attacking airports. The Ukrainians have every right to defend and maintain stability and order in their own country, and that’s our belief.

QUESTION: But I mean, there has been a concern that they’ve – that perhaps the Ukrainians would use, like, disproportional force against these militants.

MS. PSAKI: Well again, Elise, as we have concerns, we’ll express them. But I think there’s no question in our view that they have every right to maintain stability or take steps to maintain stability within their own country.

QUESTION: Following up on —

QUESTION: Jen, you’re not bothered by —

MS. PSAKI: Oh, go ahead, Michael. Let’s – go ahead, Michael.

QUESTION: Following up on Lesley’s question and your assertion of a Russian hand in previous activities in eastern Ukraine, as you know, it was not possible for all the people in eastern Ukraine to vote, that some of the polling places were not open. Is your assessment that Russia had a hand in encouraging separatists to close some of those polling places and thus obstruct voting in eastern Ukraine? Is that your assessment or is that not your assessment?

MS. PSAKI: Well, there’s no question that we feel there’s a strong tie and there’s a Russian hand in the actions of the armed militants in eastern Ukraine. And to the degree they took steps to hinder or prevent voting, we feel there’s a connection.

I would also note, though, that despite all of that, more than 60 percent of eligible voters in Ukraine voted on May 25th, which is a significant turnout, and one we have noted and the OSCE has noted. But this is a discussion we’ll continue to have internally about – based on the evidence on the ground about what steps were taken, what the involvement of Russia was, and we’ll make decisions accordingly.

QUESTION: But are – I’m sorry.

MS. PSAKI: It’s okay.

QUESTION: Are you asserting that Russia played a role in obstructing the voting in eastern Ukraine? Because it sort of sounds like you are.

MS. PSAKI: Well, what I’m asserting is that there is no question that armed militants played a role, as we’ve seen evidence of across the board. We’ve long believed and stated that there is a connection between Russia and these militants. We’ll continue to evaluate what specific role they played. That’s an ongoing discussion in the Administration now.

More on Ukraine?

QUESTION: Yeah, on Ukraine.

MS. PSAKI: Go ahead.

QUESTION: Jen, previously, elections were a sort of trigger for sectoral sanctions against Russia in terms of if Russia – you were saying that if Russia disrupts elections, there will be sectoral sanctions. So the elections are held. Are sanctions – sectoral sanctions still on the table? And if they are, are there any new triggers or —

MS. PSAKI: Well, they remain on the table. They’ve been on the table since the President signed the executive order several weeks ago. There’s – I have no decisions or announcements to discuss today.

QUESTION: But you did – but the President, and when he was with Chancellor Merkel, did say that interfering in the election would be the trigger for the sanctions. So the question I think Michael was getting at and —

MS. PSAKI: Sure.

QUESTION: — Lesley is getting at is: Was Russia’s involvement – you talk about that there’s these strong ties between the Russian militants, but did Russia specifically take enough steps to disrupt the election to incur these sanctions? And I don’t remember if you said whether that an effort to disrupt the election was a trigger or whether they actually disrupt the election, which it doesn’t seem that they did if you’re acknowledging the results.

MS. PSAKI: Well, what I would say and what I was trying to address to Michael is that that’s a discussion that – we have these tools and we have the ability to put in place additional sanctions. We’ll be coordinating with the EU, as we have been all along, but we’ll evaluate over the coming days whether there are additional steps that need to be taken.

QUESTION: But it doesn’t – it seems to me like you’re saying that through their ties to these separatists, that Russia might have attempted to disrupt the election. But given the fact that you’ve acknowledged as – you’ve praised these elections and accepted them and recognized them and are moving ahead, it doesn’t seem like they actually did disrupt them.

MS. PSAKI: Well, but I also noted, and it’s important to note again, that there – despite the strong turnout across Ukraine, there was chaos and violence perpetrated by pro-Russian militants in certain areas, as you know. So we’ll take a close look at that, and again, I have nothing to outline today, but we’ll continue that discussion internally.

QUESTION: So when you’re looking at specifically that, are you looking at if there was a deliberate attempt by Russia to – I mean, I’m just trying to figure, when you’re looking and evaluating that, what is it that you’re looking for? Because these just could be the rebels that are causing mischief, right? It doesn’t mean that Russia’s deliberately in there and stoking it up. I mean, is that the kind of evaluation you would look at?

MS. PSAKI: Well, again, these were pro-Russian militants who were the perpetrators of the chaos and violence in some parts – limited parts – of Ukraine. We’ll look at that. We’ll look at any of the connections. But I don’t have kind of a five-point checklist to lay out for you because it’s all part of the discussion that will happen internally.

QUESTION: Can I – now I’m a little bit confused.

MS. PSAKI: Okay. Sorry. Go ahead.

QUESTION: Well, I’m just – I mean, are – sectoral sanctions for alleged attempts to disrupt the election are still a possibility? Is that —

MS. PSAKI: We said that, and if they cross the border; there are a range of factors that we’re looking at.

QUESTION: No, no, no, but specifically about the election, those sanctions are still on the table? I mean, it seems to me if you call the election a victory for democracy, any attempt to disrupt it was unsuccessful, no?

MS. PSAKI: Well, Matt, we will continue to have these discussions internally. There were attempts to disrupt in parts of Ukraine. We will look at what that means and if it means anything in terms of a next round of sanctions.

QUESTION: In other words, you’re saying that attempts to disrupt, even if they are unsuccessful, could be a trigger for sanctions?

MS. PSAKI: Well, there were successful attempts to disrupt in some parts of Ukraine, whether —

QUESTION: Yet you still acknowledge the elections?

MS. PSAKI: Of course, because there was a high turnout nationwide, and we feel this was a successful election. But we’ll look at a range of factors. I don’t have anything to announce or outline for all of you today.

QUESTION: Are you aware of any truce that may have just taken place in Donetsk between the militants and the Ukrainian Government?

MS. PSAKI: Any true? I’m sorry.

QUESTION: Any truce? There —

MS. PSAKI: Truce?

QUESTION: Truce, a truce in the fighting?

MS. PSAKI: I have not seen those reports.

QUESTION: Okay. Are you aware of the numbers that were killed as a result of the bombardment of the Ukrainian air force?

MS. PSAKI: We have seen a range of numbers. Yes, we’ve seen a range of numbers.

QUESTION: Okay. Can you share with us these numbers?

MS. PSAKI: I don’t have any to confirm for you. There’s a range of reports out there, Said. Do we have any – Ukraine or – okay. Go ahead, both of you on Ukraine.

QUESTION: President Obama soon goes to Poland, and as I understand, the newly elected president of Ukraine also. Is there a meeting planning – planned between them, do you know?

MS. PSAKI: I would point you to the White House for the President’s schedule. I don’t think they’ve outlined that quite yet.

QUESTION: Okay.

QUESTION: Yes, please.

MS. PSAKI: Go ahead.

QUESTION: Now we have a newly elected president to Ukraine – for Ukraine. What you are expecting in the coming days and weeks? What is going to be changed in the relation between United States and Ukraine? Is there any different from what was before Saturday?

MS. PSAKI: Well, as you know, we’ve long been supportive of not just the interim government, which we felt was the legitimate Government of Ukraine, but also the process leading up to an election and all of the steps that were taken by the OSCE, by the Ukrainian Government to ensure as many people could vote as who were interested in voting.

But I would point you to what President-elect Poroshenko stated about his priorities, about moving things forward, and I would also point you to the readout of President Obama’s call that he did with President-elect Poroshenko over the weekend, where he stressed the importance of quickly implementing the reforms necessary for Ukraine to bring the country together and to develop a sustainable economy, attractive investment climate, and a transparent and accountable government that is responsive to the concerns and aspirations of all Ukrainians. So we will continue to work with them in the coming weeks on all of those areas of —

QUESTION: One of the reasons that I’m asking this question, because for a while you were raising the issue of the necessity of constitutional reform —

MS. PSAKI: Mm-hmm.

QUESTION: — is – are there steps taken in that regard? Or it’s like —

MS. PSAKI: They’ve been ongoing and we anticipate they will continue.

QUESTION: There is another – my last question is regarding in the last 24 hours, once again it was raised the issue of the necessity or the importance to support or provide Ukrainian with the lethal weapons to face the reality, the so-called – whether you call them separatists or terrorists, do you have any intention or reviewing going on regarding this point?

MS. PSAKI: Well, the President has approved three tranches of nonlethal security assistance to the Ukrainian military and border services so far. We continue to review additional Ukrainian requests. Our main focus continues to be on supporting economic and diplomatic efforts. We don’t see a military solution as the outcome to this crisis, but we – and we’re not considering lethal assistance, but we’ll continue to review their requests.

QUESTION: Wait a second. You don’t consider a military solution? You don’t believe there’s a military – why are you saying that the Ukrainian Government has – is doing the right thing in going after the authorities of —

MS. PSAKI: Because we believe, Matt, that maintaining stability and order in their own country —

QUESTION: Right.

MS. PSAKI: — they have every right to do that.

QUESTION: Right. But isn’t that a military solution?

MS. PSAKI: That is not a military solution.

QUESTION: No? Okay.

MS. PSAKI: We still believe this will be resolved through dialogue between the parties —

QUESTION: Okay.