STATEMENT OF THE FRIENDS OF UKRAINE NETWORK TASK FORCE ON NATIONAL SECURITY TO House Committee on AppropriationsSubcommittee on Defense

STATEMENT OF THE FRIENDS OF UKRAINE NETWORK

TASK FORCE ON NATIONAL SECURITY

TO

House Committee on Appropriations

Subcommittee on Defense

March 23, 2023

TheFriends of Ukraine Network (FOUN) is a non-partisan coalition of former ambassadors, leading policy and international security professionals including two formerSupreme Allied Commanders Europe and a former U.S. Army Commander Europe. It also includes other experts who have dealt with key aspects of Ukraine’s relations with the United States and the international community.

Mr.Chairman, members of the Subcommittee, FOUN submits this statement to your hearing on the Fiscal Year 2024 Request for The Department of Defense not to suggest exact funding levels of weapons systems to Ukraine, but to call for clarity in the United States’ mission in Ukraine and for long-range precision strike capability.

TheUnited States has a critical national security interest in defending the post-World War II order that is based upon respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity of all states and the peaceful settlement of disputes –no changing of national borders by force or coercion.  

TheUnited States also has a critical national security interest in ensuring peaceand stability in Europe and a commitment to defend its NATO allies.

If Vladimir Putin is allowed to get awaywith violating these principles in the case of Ukraine, he will not stop –other states in the region, including NATO members, could be the next targetsof Putin’s goal of restoring the Russian empire. Other autocrats, including XiJinping, well may be emboldened to follow the Russian Federation’s example,returning the world to the days of spheres of influence and “might makesright.”

The United States needs to take an unequivocalstand in Ukraine, where the courageous people of Ukraine are on the front linesfighting for their own freedom but also critically defending the post-World WarII order. Otherwise, we will face the need for direct and much more costlyUnited States intervention down the road.

Inthis context what is lacking most in the United States’ support for Ukraine isclarity as to our strategic endgame and a commitment to Ukraine’s winning. Andwinning means all Russian forces leave Ukraine, abducted and missing arereturned or accounted for, reparations are paid, and war criminals areidentified and brought to justice.  AKorean War-type armistice is not sufficient.

Onlywhen this commitment is clarified and stated as official United States policycan the other critical details in getting Ukraine what it needs to win begenuinely addressed.  “We are withUkraine for as long as it takes” is not a strategic goal.  As long as it takes to do what?

Suchamorphous terminology frankly seems inappropriate in the circumstance.  Innocent lives are being lost, war crimescommitted, and in the case of Russia’s kidnapping Ukrainian children, changingtheir names, birth certificates, putting through indoctrination programs andthen having them adopted as Russians by Russian families.  Genocide is being committed in the full viewof the world.  

TheUnited States’ policy goal should be that it will make sure Ukraine has what itneeds, when it needs it and where it needs it so that Ukraine can win this warsecuring its sovereignty and – critically – the post-World War II order, whichis in the United States’ own vital national security interests.

“Aslong as it takes” suggests, among other things, that time is on Ukraine’s andour side. That is not so; it is in our interest and Ukraine’s to finish thiswar promptly, before Russia can bring its superior manpower and other sourcesof material to bear.

Inreviewing the United States military’s support for Ukraine, one mustacknowledge the comparatively unprecedented support in arms, logistics,intelligence and training the United States military has provided.  No nation has done more.  No military has been and is more invested insupporting Ukraine.

Thatsupport has been critical to Ukraine’s being able to stay on the battlefieldand counter the Russian Federation’s totally unprovoked and malevolent waragainst Ukraine.

Butthe United States has not done enough and has not committed to making sureUkraine has what it needs now to win this war.

Sincethe very beginning of this war in 2014 Ukraine has needed weapons and supportthe United States – through Administrations -- has, at best, been slow toprovide.  

Initiallythere was the whole back-and-forth about whether Ukraine should be provided anyweapons, then what kind of weapons.  

Therewas the whole drawn-out issue about what might be called “lethal” weapons.

To itsgreat credit Congress started including specific language in the annualNational Defense Authorizations Acts and Defense Department Appropriationsbills stating that specific amounts were for lethal weapons for Ukraine.

Thefact is that essentially every request from Ukraine for specific capability wasinitially met with a “no”.  And, eventhough most such weapons eventually were provided to Ukraine, they were notprovided at the optimum time for them to have made the greatest impact on thewar.

Andthere are critical weapons capabilities Ukraine has been requesting and we havebeen urging that the Administration continues to deny Ukraine but that must beagreed to and delivered.  

WhatUkraine needs most right now is long-range precision strike capability.

Such acapability has been and is being denied Ukraine and what is the consequence ofthat denial?  The United States hasessentially guaranteed Russia sanctuaries from which Russian can with impunityslaughter civilians and destroy Ukraine’s infrastructure including hospitals,schools, residential living quarters.

Whatis the explanation for denying Ukraine the ability to strike these sanctuaries?

TheUnited States does not want Ukraine striking targets inside Russia because thatcould escalate the war.

Setaside the disconnect with reality regarding the entire subject of escalation.The United States has given Ukraine some weapons capable of hitting targetsinside Russia and, because the United States has said not to do so, Ukraine hasnot used them to hit targets inside Russia.

So whyis the United States not trusting Ukraine when it comes to long-range precisionstrike capability?

Whyalso does the United States agree that (a) the Crimean peninsula is Ukrainianterritory and (b) that Ukraine should be able to hit any target in its ownterritory and yet it continues to deny Ukraine long-range missiles?  Some of Russia’s most damaging attacks comefrom sanctuaries in Crimea.

Crimeais essential.

TheUnited States must get to Ukraine what it needs to take out the Russiansanctuaries and cut off Russian supply routes to Crimea.  Russian control of Crimea cannot stand.  Without Crimea, Ukraine has no securitybecause of the continuous threat of Russian attack and the Black Sea fleet’sability to control and stop Ukraine’s international commerce.

Weurge that Congress specifically fund long-range precision strike capability forUkraine in the FY24 Defense Appropriations Bill and provide that such moniesare to be spent and weapons provided as soon as the bill is signed into law.

Likewise,we urge that the bill call for absolute clarity in the United States’ objectiveas to the Russian Federation’s war against Ukraine, and that it be to ensurethat Ukraine wins and defeats Russia.

Thetime has long since passed when “standing with Ukraine” is enough while itspeople are slaughtered and Ukraine’s neighbors – and our NATO allies – shudderat what comes next if the United States does not see that Ukraine has what ittakes to win this war.

Rightnow, the Russian military is almost fully committed and weak. If it is notstopped now and is given several years to regroup it likely will be muchstronger through sanctions evasion, material assistance from Iran, North Koreaand China and its forces still positioned in Crimean sanctuaries.

OnceUkraine has the weapons it needs, it will dominate the battlefield and whenthis becomes clear on the battlefield, it will be in the strongest position tonegotiate Russia’s withdrawal from all of Ukraine. But negotiations will onlysucceed if Ukraine has the military potential to win, as we define it.

Mr.Chairman, members of the Subcommittee the time to get Ukraine what it needs isnow. While urging the administration provide such assistance today, your FY24appropriations must direct that these capabilities be sent to Ukraine as soonas possible.

If youhave any questions or would like additional information please contact:

RobertMcConnell

Co-Founderof the U.S.-Ukraine Foundation

Director,External Relations, Network of Ukraine

robert@robertamcconnell.com

FOUNis an outgrowth of the U.S.-Ukraine Foundation (USUF) and U.S. Department ofState-sponsored U.S.-Ukraine Policy Dialogue programs of 2005 and 2011, thatbrought together government officials and non-government policy experts fromboth countries to discuss and make recommendations on numerous issues of mutualconcern.

FOUN’s Task Force on National Securityincludes, among others::

General Philp Breedlove USAF (Ret.) -Former Supreme Allied Commander European

Ian Brzezinski – Former Deputy AssistantSecretary of Defense for Europe and NATO Policy

DebraCagan – Former Department of State and Department of Defense official and nowSenior Advisor Eurasia Center Atlantic Council 

GeneralWesley Clark USA (Ret.) - FormerSupreme Allied Commander Europe

Luke Coffey–Senior fellow at Hudson Institute.

Ambassador Paula J. Dobriansky,former Under Secretary of State for Global Affairs

Ambassador John Herbst – formerU.S.-Ambassador to Ukraine 

General BenHodges USA (Ret.) – Former U.S. Army Commander Europe, now with Human RightsFirst

David Kramer– Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, Executive Director, George W.Bush Institute

RobertMcConnell – Former Assistant Attorney General 

Herman Pirchner,Jr. - President of the American Foreign Policy Council (AFPC) 

Peter Rough –Seniorfellow and director of the Center on Europe and Eurasia at HudsonInstitute. 

AmbassadorAlexander “Sandy” Vershbow – former U.S.-Ambassador to Russia, former DeputySecretary General NATO

Ambassador Kurt Volker-  Former U.S. Ambassador to NATO, former U.S.Special Representative for Ukraine

‍