U.S. officials are moving at “Formula One speed” to upgrade the Ukrainian military and prepare international sanctions against a looming Russian invasion as weeks of “high diplomacy” approach a potentially violent outcome.
“The speed and the dynamic of our relations between Ukraine and the United States, which was started by our presidents, President Zelensky and President Biden, actually was towards Formula One speed,” Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba said Wednesday in a press conference alongside Secretary of State Antony Blinken. “And we know that the United States stand with us not only in the area of security, but also in supporting our internal strength, and for that, I am very grateful.”
Blinken raced to Kyiv amid reports that Russian forces are deploying to Belarus, raising the specter of conflict on the doorstep of the Ukrainian capital. President Joe Biden’s administration “approved the provision of $200 million in additional defensive security assistance to our Ukrainian partners” last month, according to a senior State Department official, and Blinken pledged that this aid would continue to flow throughout a new conflict.
“We have given more security assistance to Ukraine in the last year than at any point since 2014,” Blinken told reporters. “The deliveries are ongoing, again, as recently as the last few weeks, and more are scheduled in the coming weeks. Should Russia carry through with any aggressive intent and renew its aggression and invade Ukraine, we’ll provide additional material beyond that that is already in the pipeline and that will further aid in defending Ukraine.”
US WARNS BELARUS: WAR AGAINST UKRAINE COULD END LUKASHENKO REGIME
Blinken’s diplomatic tour this week will continue through Berlin and end in Geneva, where he will hold a last-minute meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov. U.S. officials and Senate Democrats hope that the threat of new economic sanctions, far more intense than any imposed following the Russian annexation of Crimea in 2014, will discourage Putin from carrying out the attack.
“I can tell you the consequences would be severe,” Blinken told Voice of America’s Ukrainian service, in a separate interview. “But again, I want to insist on the fact that it would be far preferable not to have to go down that path. We’re fully prepared to do it, but the preference is to see if we can resolve differences, address concerns in both directions through diplomacy.”
Kuleba urged U.S. and European Union officials to agree quickly on the sanctions that they would impose.
“Our main expectation right here from the United States, from our European partners, is to make sure that they are successful in agreeing on very strong sanctions that would be applied towards Russia,” he told reporters. “We understand that right now, they are still negotiating, and Tony informed me and briefed me about this process. But the Russian Federation has to receive a very strong message every single day that this very heavy burden and cost that our partners mentioned about sanctions is a reality, not just a threat.”
The Russian diplomatic corps has maintained that the threat of further conflict in Ukraine can be alleviated only if the U.S. agrees to a treaty that would ban NATO from admitting any new members and require the U.S. and Western European countries to withdraw forces from any NATO member-states that joined the alliance after 1997.
“We need a direct and clear answer, in writing, article-by-article, to the proposals that we put on the table,” Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov said Wednesday in Moscow, per state media. “The ball is now certainly in the U.S. court.”
Blinken, who confirmed that he will not present the desired written response, said that because some of the Russian demands “are clearly absolute nonstarters, like closing NATO’s door to new members,” it’s not obvious what the Kremlin really wants.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
“It’s not clear what Russia’s central demand is or is not,” Blinken said. “I think, through these conversations that we’ve already had, it’s a way of refining what’s really at the heart of this and seeing if there are grounds for dealing with those things through diplomacy, through dialogue, and through agreement. We still don’t know.”
