Source: United States Senator for Delaware Christopher Coons
WILMINGTON, Del. — Today, U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.), Chairman of the State and Foreign Operations Subcommittee of the Senate Appropriations Committee and member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, participated in the fourth annual University of Michigan Vandenberg lecture. He discussed the war in Ukraine and the domestic and international policy implications, along with the need for broader bipartisanship in Congress to tackle pressing global challenges.
Below are selected quotes from the lecture. The full discussion can be viewed here:
Senator Coons on Ukrainian security assistance:
“We are coming right up against a Cuban missile crisis moment in terms of a direct confrontation between NATO, the United States, the West, and Russia… This is a 1939 moment and so as we watch night after night, as our news shares with us graphic details of horrific assaults that are killing tens of thousands of civilians, and decimating ancient cities throughout Ukraine, we have to ask ourselves that very question: ‘How far are we willing to go? What is the line we’re willing to push’, and to hear President Zelensky’s plea that we need to make sure that freedom is armed better than tyranny.”
“… I think the question that we have to ask ourselves and the Europeans are asking us, is, first, will we actually heed that commitment [to NATO’s Article V]? Will the United States, across electoral cycles, reliably come to the aid of Lithuania or of a Balkan or Baltic state, if invaded by neighboring country…Will we come to the aid of a country like Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine, that has sought NATO membership, is trying to get into NATO, is trying to align with the West, but is not currently covered by that NATO treaty? And then last, and this is a point President Zelensky of Ukraine has made repeatedly, pointedly, and at least in my case, effectively, that really troubles my conscience. In 1994, Ukraine had the third largest nuclear arsenal in the world. And they willingly gave it up in exchange for a written commitment from the United States, the United Kingdom and Russia to respect Ukraine’s territorial integrity.
On the refugee crisis and our obligation to support Ukraine:
“This is the worst refugee crisis a country has faced since the Second World War. Syria, Yemen, other countries in the Middle East and North Africa have also endured horrific internal civil wars and displacement, but 10% of the population of Ukraine has fled in just a few weeks, and overwhelmingly the refugees of Ukraine are women and children. First, we have a profound moral obligation to come to their aid and to provide a financial support, food, temporary shelter, and other assistance to the 4.7 million Ukrainians who have already left their country and the 7 million or more who are already displaced within Ukraine…I think we have an obligation to provide every possible weapons system to the Ukrainian defenders. The challenge there is how far do we go up the technology scale and what is militarily most useful….
“…At some point, we are going to have to confront the reality that Putin may be willing to escalate beyond our willing to take risks. And if we allow Ukraine to become the Syria of Eastern Europe, I think we will have failed both the Ukrainian people, and this moment in history….The entire West is allied and organized in a way they haven’t been in decades, even the Swiss have imposed banking sanctions, and even the Swedes, who sat out the Second World War have sent material aid. In fact, Vladimir Putin’s violence and aggression, his barbarism towards the Ukrainian people, may have finally expanded NATO by having Finland and Sweden seek admission, something they’ve considered for years, but they’ve never actually sought. So, our obligation to the Ukrainian people is that their sacrifice be worth it. What is happening here is being watched by other autocrats around the world, from the DPRK and Iran to obviously, the PRC and Xi Jinping, leadership of the Chinese Communist Party. I think the future of the 21st century is going to be written in the next few weeks or months in how fiercely we are willing to defend freedom in Ukraine.”
On Congress’ role in foreign policy:
“We are in a tragically broken a period in terms of the Senate and policy setting… We are going to have to do another Ukrainian supplemental both to fund the war effort and to providing humanitarian assistance and reinforcements to the Eastern Flank of NATO… But we should not be doing this through emergency supplementals. We should not have last minute deals being cut between the leadership of the two parties with very little consultation and transparency…I think we need to be building in more robust support for the ongoing humanitarian crises and for the security needs that we are now going to see. NATO has a new focus, a new purpose. It was initially formed to resist Soviet aggression. It is now being re-strengthened and reformed, in some ways in direct opposition to Putin’s aggression. I do think we’re going to need to look at, over the long term, providing more investment in security and in development, diplomacy, and the softer sides of national security.”
###