You're reading: Transcript of July 28 press briefing by Tombinski, Pyatt

Editor's Note: The following is a transcript of the press briefing on July 28 by European Union Ambassador to Ukraine Jan Tombinski and U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey R. Pyatt. The event was hosted by the Brussels Media Hub.

Moderator: Thanks so much, Zach. Greetings to everybody from the U.S. Department of State. I would like to welcome all of our participants who are dialing in from across Europe this morning and thank all of you for joining in this discussion.

Today we are pleased to be joined from Kyiv by two very distinguished diplomats, EU Ambassador to Ukraine Jan Tombiński and U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt. They are going to be offering you their assessment of the situation in Ukraine, and as you know from their bios they have a wealth of experience so we’re quite grateful for their time today.

We’re going to begin today’s call with opening remarks from Ambassador Tombiński and then from Ambassador Pyatt, and then we will turn it over to your questions.

Today’s call is on the record and it is being recorded. With that, I will turn it over to you, Ambassador Tombiński. Please go ahead.

Ambassador Tombiński: Good morning and welcome to this discussion on where we are in Ukraine and how are the relations between Ukraine and the European Union. Thank you very much for the invitation to join this panel and this discussion with media.

For almost one year the European Union and Ukraine are bound by the formal agreement of the association which is the driving engine for reform and is the driving document for our relations. But it did not start a year ago. It always has a history.

This association, response to the Ukrainian request stated to the European Union 10 years ago under President Viktor Yushchenko at the time, being followed under President Viktor Yanukovych and is now in the implementation in new circumstances with President Petro Poroshenko and the Ukrainian government. So I wish to emphasize this continuity in the work and this continuity in the work that has been done in full transparency to all partners.

Negotiations over the association agreement were run over four years. Documents were exchanged and clarified, signed, disclosed to the media so the European institutions and Ukraine, so nothing has been hidden. Therefore this document was, in our opinion, a kind of a win/win situation. The objective of this association was to help Ukraine to overcome the systemic weaknesses from the past, to give a boost to reform. Administration, economy, the way of how the country works, without any obligation to cut off relations with Eastern partners, with Russia or with other third partners. It was a solution that proposed to add to existing contacts another one of an evolutionist nature, expected to bring results over 10 years. We never expected that we will be implementing this document under such dramatic circumstances as now and under such dramatic pressure from Russia against this association.

I still remember President Vladimir Putin saying in 2005 that he has nothing against Ukraine joining the European Union, but suddenly with other ideas that subsequently pop up, this direction has been questioned and already in 2013, well before the EuroMaidan Revolution, Ukraine was under huge economical pressure from Russia to try to impose the commercial ban on different Ukrainian goods with the aim to force Ukrainian leadership still under President Yanukovych to change opinion and not to sign this agreement, as well as other ways of pressure — gas talks, gas negotiations and pricing was part of this negotiation as well as financial flows. It ended up with all these known events that started in November as a response to a sudden call by President Yanukovych to postpone the signing of the association agreement, but the society hadn’t been taken into account in it and the society said no. We were prepared for it, we were told it was good, we were told by the leadership that we should embark on this direction and therefore we wish to stay on track.

These are my preliminary remarks only to frame what is going on between the European Union and Ukraine now.

Ambassador Pyatt: This is Geoff. First of all let me say what a pleasure it is to be doing this jointly with Ambassador Tombiński. Certainly for the United States the defining principle of our policy towards Ukraine has been partnership with Europe and coordination with our European partners.

One of the very first things I did upon arrival in Ukraine two years ago was sitting down with Ambassador Tombiński. I will always remember when I think back on this dramatic two years the twin bookends of Jan and I traveling together to Kharkiv in October of 2013 to go see Yulia Tymoshenko in her hospital jail cell, and then three months later on the 23rd of February, Ambassador Tombiński and I on an early Sunday morning going to meet with Yulia Tymoshenko in her office hours after President Yanukovych fleeing the country and the political transformation that began therein.

So this is a critically important partnership for us. Our policy has been successful to the extent we have remained united. We have exactly the same strategic objectives vis-à-vis Ukraine — a country which is free, whose territorial integrity is upheld, and a country which is moving towards closer alignment with European values and European institutions.

At the level of principles, I have said publicly that Ukraine is fighting two wars. One is the war against Russian aggression and the second one is the war for reform that Ambassador Tombiński described so well.

Let me talk a little bit about the first one because it’s important to understand sitting in Brussels or elsewhere in Europe that there is a war still going on here. Russian drones are operating over Ukrainian territory every single day. Russian cruise surface-to-air missile systems are operating on Ukrainian territory. And as we were reminded by the capture of a Russian soldier and Russian origin ammunition this weekend, Russia continues to fuel the conflict here with the military equipment that it is sending across Ukraine’s sovereign international border.

Just in the past 24-36 hours there has been continued fighting in Uglegorsk which knocked out a thermal power plant, in Avdiivka targeting a main industrial coke facility, and in Shyrokyne, a clash which injured a monitor of the OSCE. And I want to underline our deep appreciation and respect for the courageous work that SMM and its monitors are doing on the ground.

The road map to a solution of this terrible war lies in full implementation of the Minsk Agreement. Ukraine is implementing Minsk. Russia and its proxies are not. That’s very clear from our standpoint.

In this context we strongly support President Poroshenko’s initiative for a 15 kilometer withdrawal of heavy weapons all up and down the contact line. We hope that that will be executed as quickly as possible. We also welcome, the United States strongly welcomes the move over the past 24 hours by the Ukrainian government to redeploy the Azov and Donbas battalions out of the flash point town of Shyrokyne and to move towards military disengagement from that town, all the while reinforcing the defenses of Mariupol. And it’s important to recognize all of this territory that we’re talking about along the Azov Sea is Ukrainian territory. This is Ukrainian sovereign territory. Everything up to the international border and that’s not going to change.

I would also note for the European audience the critical humanitarian crisis that is also a consequence of Russia’s aggression in the East. It is totally unacceptable for the separatists to be blocking access to Ukrainian territory, to territory controlled by Russia and the separatists, by humanitarian shipments. In this regard I would note that we are now on day 11 of the so-called DNR blocking shipments from Rinat Akhmetov’s humanitarian convoys intended to relieve the greatest victims of this war. Rinat Akhmetov and others like him from Ukrainian civil society and Ukrainian volunteer groups who have tried to support displaced people and the victims of this war. It’s one of the untold stories of Ukrainian resilience during this conflict. The strength of Ukrainian civil society organizations.

We do not believe there is a military solution to this conflict, but we do believe that Ukraine has a sovereign right to defend its own territory and that is the logic of our security sector assistance which has now reached 245 million U.S. dollars; that is the logic of our continued training programs at Yavoriv. And in this regard I would note both the important European partnerships we have with countries like the UK, Lithuania, Poland, who are working with us to help enhance the capabilities and professionalism of Ukrainian forces, but also the 18 NATO countries and partner countries that are part of our ongoing Rapid Trident Exercises at Yavoriv.

A second front of the war is the war for reform. It’s important to remember that the conflict area is only three percent of Ukrainian territory. In the rest of Ukraine the process of reform and modernization is moving ahead. The association agreement that Ambassador Tombiński spoke of provides the critical road map in that regard.

There is real progress being made. Whether it is cleaning up the financial sector, implementing a new police law and standing up new police forces, advancing reform on the area of anti-corruption, prosecutorial reform, cleaning up the energy sector, reducing the unsustainable seven percent of GDP that Ukraine was investing in subsidies to Naftogaz. These are all challenging and we understand that it’s taken great political courage by the Ukrainian government to move on these multiple fronts simultaneously. But we all, and on this issue I think I can speak for both Ambassador Tombiński and myself, we all are impressed by what Ukraine has done so far. We encourage Ukraine to continue moving forward. And we believe that this formula of reform is the right one to build the kind of modern democratic state that the Ukrainian people deserve and which the Ukrainian people have unequivocally chosen through multiple elections.

The last point, then we’ll open it to questions. I would just underline the stakes for what’s happening here. Our principles and shared transatlantic values are at stake in the conflict underway today in Ukraine. The cardinal principle of respect for international borders and territorial integrity has been jeopardized. Ukraine is the front line of freedom in Europe. Our policies and efforts have been successful over the past year and a half because we have stayed united in our efforts and coordinated in our analysis, and certainly speaking for the U.S. team in Ukraine, we are deeply committed to maintaining that European partnership.

Moderator: Thank you, and thanks to both of you for that overview.

We are now going to begin the question and answer portion of today’s call. Our first question today is coming to us from Jane’s Defence Weekly, Brooks Tigner.

Jane’s: To Ambassador Tombiński, the EU has new train and equip flexibility to provide non-lethal weaponry to partner countries. This was designed originally for Africa but it can apply to Ukraine. Is the EU considering that?

And to Ambassador Pyatt, could you please bring us up to date on where reform of the armed forces go beyond your general statement? What lies ahead?

Thank you.

Ambassador Tombiński: Thank you, and thank you also Ambassador Pyatt, Geoff, for making this point of the common endeavor, joint action in order to protect international law and international principles.

Getting back to your question about the export of non-lethal weapons to Ukraine. There is no embargo of exporting military-related equipment to Ukraine. Therefore, it is in the hands of member states. European Union does not operate as a subject in this field, however the member states are free in doing so if it is not in a breach of international obligations.

I may only leave it to the discussion of the member states to do so, we see representatives of different countries participating in the military drills that Ambassador Pyatt just referred to in Yavoriv and equipment in order to protect Ukrainian soldiers and Ukrainian citizens. It’s also coming from different states, Ukrainian authorities advance a figure of nine different European states supplying some non-lethal equipment to Ukrainian armed forces. But we don’t do on the level of European institutions a record of collection of all this information.

Ambassador Pyatt: On the reform side, the first point I would make, of course, is that upon Yanukovych’s departure the Defense Ministry and the Ukrainian military were afflicted by the same problems of corruption and Soviet era bureaucracy that afflicted much of the Ukrainian administration.

So this government for the past year and a half, since the war with Russia began with the invasion of Crimea, has had to walk and chew gum at the same time. It’s been important to continue the process of defense reform while at the same time defending the country’s sovereign territory.

It’s very clear that the Ukrainian military today is a different and more capable force than that which encountered the little green men of Russia in Crimea in early March of 2014. They have been tested by battle.

You can see, for instance, in the Ukrainian military’s successful defense of Marinka in June in response to a Russian and separatist-led land grab in that town, west of Donetsk city, that the Ukrainians have become much better at integrating intelligence, at defending their lines. It’s important to underline everything Ukraine has done since the beginning of this conflict has been on Ukrainian sovereign territory, trying to repulse Russian aggression. There is a victim and an aggressor here very clearly.

We have at the invitation of the Ukrainian government sought to support this process of defense transformation, working towards what President Poroshenko has defined as his goal of a NATO standard Ukrainian military. This is Ukraine’s choice. We have a Joint Commission on Defense and Security Cooperation chaired by Ukraine’s Deputy Minister of Defense which has been a very effective forum with some of our key European partners, again including Lithuanian, Canada, the UK to hear Ukrainian priorities and to answer those priorities and requirements to the best of our ability and resources.

But again, what I want to emphasize in this area is that in all of these cooperative endeavors we are acting at the invitation and at the request of the Ukrainian government. Our policy is about responding to the sovereign choices of Ukraine’s elected authorities.

Moderator: Thank you.

For our next question we’re going to move over to Hungary and take a question from Poór Csaba who is with the outlet Népszabadság.

Népszabadság: Good morning. I’ve got a few questions to both of the ambassadors if you don’t mind.

The first concerns the Transcarpathia region. How do you think, can some kind of process of destabilization go on in this region after the Mukacheve incident two weeks ago which has actually not been resolved still.

The second question is, how do you evaluate the role of the far right Pravy Sektor, its activity lead to opening a new front this time in the West for the Ukrainian government?

The third one is, do you think the position of the government and Mr. Poroshenko is firm enough to conclude and implement real reforms to end the Donbas war?

Ambassador Pyatt: Let me start and I’ll ask Ambassador Tombiński to speak to some of this as well.

First, on your last question about the commitment to reform, there is no doubt in my mind of the Ukrainian government’s resolve to carry forward the process of reform and implement the Minsk Agreement. What is in great question is Russia’s willingness to do what it undertook as part of the Minsk Agreement.

As regards the situation in Transcarpathia, I of course was there last week. I was honored to spend some time with Governor Moskal. The United States fully endorses the view of Governor Moskal, Interior Minister Avakov and President Poroshenko that the use of force must be the exclusive domain of the Ukrainian government.

In this regard I would argue that the whole phenomenon of Pravy Sektor has been vastly exaggerated by Russian propaganda outlets. The right wing in Ukraine — Pravy Sektor, Svoboda, other groups, clearly have not found political resonance. The violence that took place in Mukacheve, which I assess to be resolved, and I was in Mukacheve and in Uzhgorod, was much better understood as a criminal activity by groups and gangs which had appropriated the political symbols of Pravy Sektor.

I found, driving the length and breadth of Zakarpatska, and I drove in from Ivano-Frankivsk and then followed the Tisza River along the Romanian border and drove all the way to Mukacheve and then Uzhgorod. I found no evidence of separatism. What I found was a region that is looking for unity with Ukraine and is looking to take part in the process of national transformation that the government in Kyiv has begun.

Zakarpatska, because of its geography with a border on four EU member states, has enormous potential to be a driver of Ukraine’s economic relationship with Europe. I was impressed to visit with an American technology company called Jabil which produces advanced electronics. Their whole business model hinges on the fact that they are a three hour drive from Budapest and they are producing high technology products using skilled Ukrainian workers for the entire European market. That’s the kind of thing that Zakarpatska is well positioned to do much more of, and I think the United States has confidence that Governor Moskal is focused on exactly the same priority.

But as far as I can tell, the phenomenon of separatism in Transcarpathia is a product of Russian propaganda and the imaginations of producers at Russia Today.

Ambassador Tombiński: Let me join Ambassador Pyatt in this political description of the landscape. We’ve measured how popular the far right might be throughout elections have been organized last year, and the potential of parties, of leaders of this party is probably to mobilize up to two percent population for combined different parties and movements from what we call far right or nationalistic movements. So we should not over-exaggerate this phenomenon, although we should not neglect it and neglect the need of action of state structures to reinstall the monopoly for use of arms and for all sanctions related with the establishment of law and order by authorized state structures.

This event that happened in Mukacheve illustrates certain weaknesses of this country and the weaknesses of structures in charge of assuring the security. It is well illustrated how much these different groups are intertwined with criminal smuggling operations.

I draw from it also one additional comment and lesson. Smuggling needs two partners. If it is so highlighted in this region of Zakarpatska and Governor Moskal and other people who are in charge of the region are now unveiling more and more facts about smuggling and even specializations on different border checking points for different kind of goods to be smuggled. This is also that we have to signal to our EU partners on the other side of the border because for smuggling you need a supplier and a receiver of it. So it is also something that my colleagues in different European bordering countries have to take seriously into account and try to remedy it.

The issue of the capacity of the government to carry out reforms is a determination, is a clear result to what has been already said on the address of different, non-governmental organizations, civil society in defending the country. This is true for non-governmental organizations and civil society in pushing for reforms. The civil society is perhaps one of the not yet well integrated in the general picture of Ukraine phenomenon. But we have dozens, a full planet of those who are engaging in talking, working, proposing for the future of the country, a solution for the future of the country. This is a huge strength behind the administration. Although very often we see weaknesses in the administration. There was no change of whole state apparatus after the change that we observed since March last year, so the big issue is how to change the country with a big part of people who still are children and products of the past system. The European Union puts a lot of emphasis on reform of public administration, of civil service, in order to have tools, how to implement laws. On the level of top political elite of Ukraine we have all understanding for what is to be done but then the devil lies with the implementation. And for the implementation we try to help Ukraine in finding new people who are not mentally formed during the past period where absence of action was the model, and not taking risks and implementing the laws.

So a result on the top level, yes. We have now to build bottom up new layers of administration in order to help Ukraine implement the laws.

Moderator: Thank you.

For our next question, we’ve got a few journalists who have come together to listen to this call in Bratislava, so we’re going to go over to Embassy Bratislava and take a question, one question from Pravda. Go ahead, Andrej.

Pravda: Good morning, my name is Andrej Matisak. I’m from Daily Pravda, Slovakia.

My one question for Ambassador Tombiński. Mr. Ambassador, have you had any discussion with Ukraine about the letter Ukraine has sent regarding big reverse gas flow from Slovakia? Ukraine has sent this letter to the European Commission and Ukraine claims that Slovakia is breaching EU legislation by not allowing the big reverse gas flow. So have you had any discussion with Ukraine? Because Slovakia was quite furious about this letter as we are giving Ukraine a small reverse gas flow.

And one question for Ambassador Pyatt. So with the Iran deal, do you think there is a chance to open some new diplomatic channels with Russia regarding Ukraine? Thank you.

Ambassador Tombiński: Gas talks are mostly commercial ones between operators with the Vice President of the European Commission, by the way, a Slovak member of the European Commission, Maros Sefcovic, being the pivotal person in trying to assure that the new binding agreement between Naftogaz and Gazprom is signed as between commercial entities. The big question for Ukraine is to liberate Ukraine from the dependency on Russian gas and dependency on political decisions with regard to supplies, volumes, pricing, entry points and all conditionality for gas supply.

The reverse works for modern [inaudible] and it has been treated as big reverse gas flows allowing for transporting through the Slovakia grid of pipelines more than ten billion cubic meters a year to Ukraine. However, due to the fact that there were, for a certain period until the end of June, shipments from Russia to Ukraine, this capacity of gas flow from Slovakia hasn’t been used in full extent because it was not much needed. If Russia stops supplying Ukraine from the first of July, in absence of an agreement the European Commission and Ukraine so much wished in the last days of June, now Ukraine is calling for more volume to be shipped from Slovakia to Ukraine in order to fill the gas storages.

I’ve seen on my way to this meeting that there will be an increase in daily shipments from the first of August, which I guess is partially the answer to this demand in order to assure that it’s enough volume of gas stored before the winter season comes and in order to avoid a major crisis.

So this goes mostly between operators and the European Commission level, who is in charge of talks between operators with involvement in the European Commission, set response to the demand of both governments. The European Commission has been asked to engage in these talks already a year ago with Commissioner Ettinger, and now Commissioner Sefcovic has taken the lead.

So I did not see on my level major complaints about how it goes.

Ambassador Pyatt: Just to jump on Ambassador Tombiński’s question first. If you look on my Twitter you will see that last week when I was in Uzhgorod I actually went to the border gas transmission station with Slovakia and was able to feel the gas moving through the reverse flow pipeline. I was there joined by Mr. Kobolev, the CEO of Naftogaz. All I heard was deep appreciation for the cooperation and partnership with the Slovak government. I know that Prime Minister Yatsenyuk places high priority on his partnership with his counterpart in Bratislava and the work that the two governments have done together to make this reverse flow channel so effective.

So I have exactly the same impression as Ambassador Tombiński and as I said, I tested it on the real world level last week.

On Iran, it’s very simple. There is zero linkage between our policy in Iran and our policy in Ukraine. Russia acted in its own self-interest to cooperate with us in striking a very important agreement on the Iran matter. In Ukraine we continue to have profound differences over Russia’s continued violation of Ukraine’s territorial integrity. And under no circumstances are we going to dilute those concerns in furtherance of some unrelated policy issue.

Moderator: Thank you. I believe we only have time for one last question and that question is coming to us from Poland. We have on the line Jedrzej Bielecki from Rzeczpospolita.

Rzeczpospolita: Good morning. Jedrzej Bielecki from Rzeczpospolita, Polish daily. I have two questions.

One concerning the military situation in the eastern part of Ukraine. How big is the risk that there will be a new offensive from Russia maybe towards the strategic port of Mariupol? According to U.S. sources as I understand, there are at least 9,000 Russian soldiers there already with heavy equipment. So maybe they will use this holiday period in August to start this.

The second question concerns the economic situation of Ukraine and the risk of bankruptcy. Because as I understand, the GDP of Ukraine is going down very quickly, maybe by ten percent this year. On the other side there is still no agreement after many many months of negotiations with creditors, especially American ones, like the Franklin Templeton Fund. So is this a real risk, the bankruptcy of Ukraine?

Thank you so much.

Ambassador Tombiński: I visited Mariupol exactly two months ago and talked to people, walked through the streets, and looked at the city through the eyes of citizens. This is a huge psychological burden on the city since it might be a target of military affiliations that no one wishes.

This is a more than 400,000 inhabitant city. This is not a small village. And this city is a big city on the Ukrainian territory and has shown already quite a high level of determination in defending itself.

What are the risks for the other side? I don’t have access to inside information on the other side. But we have seen that since September 19 last year, the Minsk declarations about the so-called Line of Contact, the separatists backed by Russia have won more than 580 square kilometers on the Ukrainian territory, more to what already has been taken in parts of Donetsk and Luhansk regions. So it is also very much to imagine where we are with the fulfillment of obligation in bringing about a peace solution. Any further military move should be considered as a dramatic breach of all obligations to deliver in order the political solution to the crisis and that we try to return a normal peaceful life to this area.

Ambassador Pyatt: Let me start, since Ambassador Tombiński is too modest and too much of a good European official to single it out, by saying how impressive Poland’s leadership in Ukraine has been. Poland is a critical partner for the Ukrainian people and also of course for the United States. It is probably the single most important model of successful economic and governance reform, and it demonstrates that it’s possible.

I will always think back two years ago to President Kaczyński at the last Yalta Conference in Yalta declaring the importance of Ukraine sticking to its European path and not being derailed by the obstacles that the Kremlin was trying to place in its way. So Poland has been a critically important partner across the full spectrum of defense and economic reform issues. Poland was represented by your Defense Minister at the Rapid Trident Exercise on Friday, and I must say I was very impressed by how strong and capable the Polish forces that I saw out on the exercise field appeared.

On your question of separatist and Russian intentions, I have long ago sworn off making any predictions because the Kremlin’s behavior has been so unpredictable and irresponsible.

In this regard it’s important not just to focus on one town, Mariupol. As I noted in my opening remarks, the violence, the effort to grab territory that Ambassador Tombiński referred to has occurred all up and down 180 degrees of the Contact Line. From Schastye‎ and the Russian border in Luhansk all the way down to Mariupol. And everything that we see including hybrid separatist Russian exercises, equipping, training, suggests that the Kremlin and its proxies are maintaining the capability to continue seeking to grab territory at a time and place of the Kremlin’s choosing. That is why it is so important that we stay united on our principles.

And on your question about the financial situation, I would just underline here the very important legislation that the Rada passed about a week and a half ago. The importance of strong, positive signals from the IMF including the IMF’s announcement of a board meeting later this week to approve the release of the next tranche of budgetary support.

I do not believe that the difficult negotiations with the private bond holders are going to derail Ukraine’s further economic progress. I think there is a sense of confidence now among Ukrainian economic decision-makers that they can, that the worst is past and that they can manage a process of sustainable reform and macro financial recovery.

I know you said last question but my team tells me the next question is from a German journalist, and I must say given the central importance of Chancellor Merkel here, I would be happy to take that question as well.

Moderator: Great. Thank you so much for that.

So our next question is actually coming to us from Thomas Nehls of WDR Radio in Germany.

WDR: Hello. I just have a brief question coming back to the Munich Security Conference which I attended and witnessed Senator McCain demand German support for heavy weapons delivery to the Ukraine. Is that dispute over between America and some of the other NATO countries, Ambassador Pyatt? Or is it still going on a little bit covered maybe?

Ambassador Tombiński: If I may jump one step back, because this question about possible bankruptcy of the country, default of the country should be repeated more in detail. Joining what Ambassador Pyatt has said about this result action of the government and the Rada to adopt all needed legislation in order to introduce more transparency to the public finance management, to stick to sustainability of the budget revenues and spendings in the mid- and long-term goal.

We also have to go to certain details. The coupons for the debtors have been paid off some days ago, so it’s not — There was a lot of speculation that Ukraine will not pay back $120 million to cover its obligation. It hasn’t been paid.

European Union, knowing how these negotiations will go, decided to step in with further financial, macro financial, assistance. We disbursed to the Ukrainian budget 600 million euro last Wednesday.

On top of it the IMF on the level of the board also approved disbursement of a further tranche to the Ukrainian budget in the amount of 1.3 billion U.S. dollars, which is all done with the sense that commitments, engagements, and resolute action of the government and Rada should be supported by our financial assistance in order to bridge the most dramatic short-term period as the country is under such economical strains and also under the pressure of financing military expenses, which is a huge burden on the state budget, and security goes first.

Ambassador Pyatt: Thomas, on your question about Munich, let me just say I was at the Munich Security Conference also. I was part of President Poroshenko’s meetings with Vice President Biden and other U.S. officials, also his meetings with Senator McCain’s delegation. I must say I have a different sense of where we are. There is no daylight between the United States and Germany in terms of our shared objectives in Ukraine. Ambassador Tombiński and I think it’s fair to say we both coordinate with Ambassador Weil about as much as we coordinate with any of our other counterparts.

I was in Berlin in April for consultations with Ambassador Emerson but also with the chancellery and with Foreign Ministry counterparts. We, the United States, have deep appreciation for the exceptional leadership that Chancellor Merkel and the German government has played throughout this crisis, including that exceptional ten days that the Chancellor spent flying between Berlin and Kyiv and Minsk and Washington. It was a remarkable demonstration of German diplomatic leadership but also political courage on behalf of the Chancellor.

What we all want to see is the same. What we want to see Minsk implemented. That requires among other things the withdrawal of Russian troops and equipment, the release of all hostages including Nadia Savchenko, the restoration of Ukrainian control over the international border. These are all steps that are laid out in great detail in the Minsk Agreement and have not yet been accomplished.

So I think it is appropriate between allies like the United States and Germany that we have frank conversations about how best to pursue our shared objectives, but I see absolutely no difference between our objectives, and I see a very healthy and constructive dialogue between Washington and Berlin that I’ve been proud to play my own small part of here on the ground in Ukraine.

And I would also note in this regard, when I meet with President Poroshenko or Prime Minister Yatsenyuk, there is nothing more important to Ukrainian leaders than unity between Europe and the United States.

Ambassador Tombiński: Thank you. If I may in this concluding mode stress also the exemplary cooperation that we have here with Ambassador Pyatt, because this is our common obligation to assure peace and to see stability and observation of all international obligations including the question of Crimea as well as the military aggression against Ukraine. This is also the basis for European policy as it is enshrined in European decisions of the European Council and other European bodies.

One element to add to the understanding of Minsk. Minsk, February 12 Declaration, is aimed to support the peace plan of President Poroshenko as it has been tabled at the beginning of July 2014. And this, what has been written in Minsk in February should be seen in a context of previous two Minsk agreements on the 5th and 19th of September last year, that the security points are always first and it is not by pure chance that questions related to ceasefire, withdrawal of arms, withdrawal of mercenaries go first because they are a prerequisite for political dialogue, for a possibility to allow for elections that would allow to emerge leaders in the region with a mandate, not only leaders with a weapon. This is the main purpose of the exercise. Thank you.

Moderator: With that, I would like to sincerely thank you Ambassador Tombiński and Ambassador Pyatt. We really appreciate you taking the time to join this call today. And I’d like to thank all of our participants from around Europe who have dialed in, and thank you for your questions.

We are going to prepare a transcript of today’s call, and we will send it to you as soon as it is ready, and a digital recording is going to be available through AT&T for the next 24 hours.

With that, I will say goodbye and I will turn it back over to AT&T to give you those instructions. Thanks so much.