Secretary of State nominee Rex Tillerson refused to call Russian President Vladimir Putin “a war criminal” on Wednesday, but did say it’s possible he could agree that Russia’s actions in Syria could constitute war crimes if he were presented with enough evidence.
“I would not use that term,” Tillerson said after Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., asked during his Senate Foreign Relations Committee confirmation hearing whether Putin is a war criminal.
“It should not be hard to say that Vladimir Putin’s military has conducted war crimes in Aleppo because it is never acceptable, you would agree, for a military to specifically target civilians — which is what’s happened there, through the Russian military,” Rubio said in reply. “I find it discouraging, your inability to cite that, which I think is globally accepted.”
When pressed later in the hearing, Tillerson agreed that he could reach the conclusion that Putin had ordered war crimes in Syria.
“I would not want to rely solely upon what has been reported in the public realm,” Tillerson said in response to a question from Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J. “I would want confirmation from agencies who would be able to present me with indisputable facts.”
And when asked if he could agree that Russia’s actions in Syria amount to war crimes if he had sufficient evidence, Tillerson said, “yes, sir.”
Those exchanges came during a tense sequence of questions about Tillerson’s policy views regarding how the United States should confront Russian aggression. Tillerson was aggressive in some areas; the Exxon Mobil CEO faulted President Obama for failing to deter Russia’s invasion of eastern Ukraine, following the annexation of Crimea, and outlined the moves he would have made to do so.
But when asked about how to respond to cyber attacks against the United States, Tillerson was once again at odds with Rubio. “If someone is conducting cyber attacks against the United States, and we pass a law . . . [that] imposes these sanctions as mandatory, would you advise the president to sign it?” Rubio asked.
Tillerson indicated he would suggest Trump veto such a bill, following the precedent set by other recent administrations that have insisted on flexibility and waivers as a condition of new sanctions legislation. “Giving the executive the tool is one thing, requiring the executive to use it without any other considerations I would have concerns about,” he said.
