You're reading: US State Department spokeswoman fields question on Ukrainian ‘fascist’ Yarosh, insists on end to Russia’s military activity in Crimea

 Editor's Note: The Russian invasion of Ukraine's Crimean peninsula dominated the U.S. State Department's public briefing on March 10.

Here is the link to the entire transcript

 TRANSCRIPT:

1:23 p.m. EDT

MS. PSAKI: Hi, everyone. All right. I don’t have anything at the top, so Matt, let’s get to what’s on your mind.

QUESTION: You have nothing at the top?

MS. PSAKI: I don’t have anything at the top.

QUESTION: All right. Well, let’s start with —

MS. PSAKI: I’m sure you all saw, we just put out a statement, though —

QUESTION: Yes.

MS. PSAKI: — which I’m happy to reiterate. But I just wanted to make sure you’d seen that as well.

QUESTION: Are there any plans – on Ukraine. Are there any plans for any kind of communication between the Secretary and Foreign Minister Lavrov, or anyone else for that matter, on Ukraine? And – well, I’ll let you answer that first before I ask the next one.

MS. PSAKI: Sure. Well, as you know, Secretary Kerry has been in close contact with Foreign Minister Lavrov over the course of the last couple of weeks. He spoke with them as recently as Saturday and he – we put out a readout of that. I don’t have any calls to predict, but I expect they will be in close contact in the coming 24 to 48 hours.

QUESTION: Okay. One of the things in this rather extraordinary transcript of a – of the meeting between President Putin and Foreign Minister Lavrov that has appeared on Russian – the Russian websites, it talks about how – that Lavrov invited the Secretary to visit Russia – I don’t know if it was Moscow or Sochi – today, or as early as today, and that the Secretary was kind of ambivalent, but then on Saturday called – in the call – Lavrov called and said he basically couldn’t make it today. Is that still a possibility?

MS. PSAKI: That we will go to Russia today? (Laughter.)

QUESTION: No. No, no. That there will be some kind of – that there will be a face-to-face meeting between the Secretary and Foreign Minister Lavrov before Sunday when the referendum is supposed to happen in Crimea.

MS. PSAKI: Well, there is always a possibility. We evaluate day to day. And this was in the statement but just let me reiterate because I know we just put it out. When Secretary Kerry spoke with Foreign Minister Lavrov this weekend, he made clear that he would welcome further discussions focused on how to de-escalate the crisis in Ukraine if and when we see concrete evidence that Russia is prepared to engage on these proposals. You’ve traveled – all of you have traveled with the Secretary quite a bit. He never shies away from hopping on a plane or having an in-person meeting, but we want to ensure that that is undertaken with seriousness on the other end as well.

QUESTION: Fair enough. So your caveat there is if and when Russia is prepared to engage. Have you seen any willingness on the part of the Russians to engage on these ideas, either the initial ideas that were presented or any amended follow-up briefs?

MS. PSAKI: Well, there have been, as you know because there have been kind of a range of reports here – some from Foreign Minister Lavrov, some in the statement we put out – about there’s been an ongoing dialogue, whether that’s been on the phone or in person, through paper, not through paper, verbal ideas, about ideas. And they address all of the issues that we have been talking about, so: letting OSCE monitors in, international observers; the mechanism for a meeting through a contact group. So we’re having that discussion day by day. Obviously, the Russians continue to be engaged in that discussion, but we haven’t, of course, agreed on – we’re waiting for a response to the recent questions that we sent over.

QUESTION: Okay, so I’m going to take that as the answer to my question is no, you have not yet seen any movement from the Russians that they’re willing to engage on what – your proposals.

MS. PSAKI: Well, we’re engaging, but no, we have not decided – right.

QUESTION: Thank you.

QUESTION: Can I follow up with Ukraine?

MS. PSAKI: Let’s – Ukraine, okay. And then we’ll go to Michael, Said.

QUESTION: Yeah, on the Ukraine. You said you have international monitors. To monitor what? To do what?

MS. PSAKI: Well, there has been an ongoing focus – we’ve called for it many times, as have many of our international partners —

QUESTION: Right.

MS. PSAKI: — to let OSCE monitors in – because the Russians have conveyed concerns about how minorities are treated. If they feel very – as strongly about that as they say they do, they should let these monitors in. The monitors have attempted many times and haven’t had the ability to get in.

QUESTION: Okay, so lest then be any confusion, the monitor is just to see how the minorities are faring – not, let’s say, some sort of an endorsement for the referendum in any way, to look at the referendum or the possible referendum next week. Is it?

MS. PSAKI: No, I think we’ve spoken to the referendum pretty extensively. The OSCE monitors is specifically for the reasons I laid out.

Michael.

QUESTION: Hi, Jen. The Russians announced today that Secretary Kerry had presented a one – a paper, a document of some kind, to their side last week in Europe. What are the main elements of the paper? Since they’ve deemed it to be insufficient, and they’ve said it’s not a basis for going forward, it’d be helpful to know what the main elements of your document are.

MS. PSAKI: Well, as I just mentioned, but let me —

QUESTION: Or just tell us what’s in the paper.

MS. PSAKI: Sure. Well, I’m not going to provide all the details of the paper, but you are also —

QUESTION: Did the —

QUESTION: What are the elements of the paper?

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MS. PSAKI: Let me – I’m just going to answer Michael’s question. Obviously, the discussion, whether that’s the paper or whether it’s verbal discussions, whether it’s meetings we’re having, is all about what the mechanism can be for the Russians and the Ukrainians to meet to engage person to person. There are other issues as well as letting monitors in, as well as mechanisms for the meeting that we’re discussing. But I think it’s important to note here there is paper exchanged all the time, as you all know, through diplomatic processes. It doesn’t mean – this is not a treaty document that was given.

QUESTION: Jen, I didn’t say it was a treaty document.

MS. PSAKI: I know that. But some people —

QUESTION: The Russians are —

MS. PSAKI: — are over-emphasizing the importance of the paper.

QUESTION: Excuse me. I’m trying to —

MS. PSAKI: Go ahead.

QUESTION: I’m giving you an opportunity —

MS. PSAKI: Okay.

QUESTION: — which you’re not taking —

MS. PSAKI: Okay.

QUESTION: — to explain what your document is, which the Russians have announced they’ve received a document. They’ve commented on this document. They’ve put down this document. And I didn’t say it was a treaty. What I’m asking you is: What is the main elements of the document, and also what are the Saturday questions that you felt compelled to ask following – after giving them this document?

MS. PSAKI: I understand what you’re asking. What I’m conveying is that I’m not going to outline every specific of what’s being discussed through diplomatic channels. You know what the issues are. The issues are: How can we come up – come to agreement on a mechanism for the Ukrainians and the Russians to talk? What’s the format? Is it through an international contact group?

Obviously, the Russians haven’t agreed to that; otherwise, that would be happening now. So that’s the big focus of any of these ideas that are being tossed back and forth between our sides. But I’m not going to outline every element of the document.

QUESTION: Jen, Jen –

MS. PSAKI: I understand.

QUESTION: — just to be fair —

MS. PSAKI: Okay.

QUESTION: — I didn’t ask you to outline every element.

MS. PSAKI: Sure.

QUESTION: So it’s not really fair, I don’t think, to take my words and —

MS. PSAKI: That wasn’t my intention.

QUESTION: — distort them.

MS. PSAKI: Wasn’t my intention.

QUESTION: I didn’t ask you for every element. What I asked you was if you could explain what the main elements or main thoughts in the paper and the questions were. You don’t want to do that. Okay, I accept that.

MS. PSAKI: Okay.

QUESTION: But I didn’t ask you – I didn’t say it was a treaty and I didn’t ask you to present every element.

MS. PSAKI: I understand. I did not mean to distort your words in any way. I would not do that. I know people are asking a range of questions about it.

QUESTION: Well —

MS. PSAKI: Go ahead, Elise.

QUESTION: I mean, it looks as if the Russians are putting the onus back on you. Instead of you kind of explaining what you’re trying to do with the Russians, the Russians are saying that Secretary Kerry is refusing to negotiate, they’re disparaging the proposal that you supposedly made to the Russians.

MS. PSAKI: Okay.

QUESTION: So I mean, they’re – basically, you’re allowing them to create the narrative by —

MS. PSAKI: I don’t think – I think – let me just state where we stand. We want to see a cessation of Russian military activities in Ukraine, including in Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula. We want to see a halt in the drive for annexation of Crimea, an end of provocative steps to provide space, of course, as you all know. We’ve all been talking about – Secretary Kerry was there – many of you were with him – all of last week, talking about a mechanism and a format for bringing the Ukrainians and the Russians together to engage in a conversation. That’s a big – that is the focus of what we’re having discussions about, whether that was when he was talking to Foreign Minister Lavrov this weekend, if they engage in the next 24 to 48 hours. I don’t think there’s a secret about what we would like to see here, what we’re proposing —

QUESTION: So if there’s no secret, why can’t you tell us?

MS. PSAKI: I’m just telling you exactly what there’s a discussion about. And as I mentioned, obviously there have been a series of questions we have posed back addressing all of those issues. We’re waiting to hear a response back to those. But that’s exactly where we want to see things move.

QUESTION: What other questions could there be about these things – other will you do these things or not?

MS. PSAKI: Well, again —

QUESTION: I mean, what types of questions?

MS. PSAKI: Elise, I think a big part of the discussion is the mechanism for how we’re going to have a format for the two sides to get together. There’s a range of questions that can be posed about that, and also about the issue writ large. So that’s what we’re waiting to hear back on. The Secretary is always happy to have a diplomatic engagement, whether that’s in person or on the phone, and I expect he’ll be in touch in the coming 24 to 48 hours.

QUESTION: So can I just check —

QUESTION: Also on Ukraine —

MS. PSAKI: Let’s just do one at a time. Go ahead, Jo.

QUESTION: I think you addressed this as I was running from the bullpen to the —

MS. PSAKI: Sure.

QUESTION: — to here. But so Foreign Minister Lavrov did invite the Secretary to come to Moscow today, correct?

MS. PSAKI: I think there was a discussion about when he might visit. But again, as I said, we have clear steps we think the Russians need to take in order for that to take place.

QUESTION: So in other words, the reason for not going today, or tomorrow, was that you don’t feel that the Russians have taken the steps needed?

MS. PSAKI: Well, as I – I think as I said earlier, we think there needs to be concrete evidence that Russia is prepared to engage on these proposals and in these discussions in a serious way.

QUESTION: And so what would constitute concrete evidence in your view?

MS. PSAKI: I don’t know if I can define that for you too easily. Obviously, a big —

QUESTION: Well, yeah, but you are defining it.

MS. PSAKI: Okay. Obviously, a big part of this is taking the process seriously in terms of a discussion about how the two sides can meet and about that diplomatic step, which I think the international community agrees is a really important part in terms of where we are in the process at this stage.

QUESTION: So are you saying that behind this there’s a problem with the contact group that you want to set up? Is that – when you say there’s a problem about how the two sides meet —

MS. PSAKI: There’s not —

QUESTION: — you’re talking about Ukrainians and the Russians?

MS. PSAKI: — a problem. There’s not a problem. But obviously, we need to determine when there is an appropriate seriousness on the Russian side about engaging on discussions about steps forward. That is not a scientifically easy thing to answer in terms of when we’ll know. We’ll know when we know that it’s the appropriate time to engage in person.

QUESTION: Sorry, just to close this out.

MS. PSAKI: Mm-hmm.

QUESTION: So you say the Russians are not prepared to meet with the Ukrainians?

MS. PSAKI: Right. The new government. Right.

QUESTION: Okay.

MS. PSAKI: Ukraine. Go ahead in the back.

QUESTION: It’s reported that Mr. Yarosh now has a position in this new government in a national security role. Is the United States concerned that the head of a fascist organization is representing in a government that we are supporting, in fact, that we have really kind of put together? Are there concerns about this and will this be taken up when President Yats comes here on Wednesday, meeting with the President?

MS. PSAKI: Well, I think the White House has pretty clearly outlined what the purpose of that meeting is. Obviously, it’s continued engagement, given the situation on the ground. The new government was – we certainly recognize the legitimacy of that, but it was put together with the support of the parliament on the ground. So I don’t think I have any further comment for you.

Go ahead, Elise.

QUESTION: Can I —

QUESTION: Can you say on Secretary Lavrov – Foreign Minister Lavrov put forward a proposal that he wants an OSCE investigation of the people behind the shootings in the Maidan. There were a lot of reports. We know about the phone call with the Estonian foreign minister, that there were reports that the people – the groups on the Maidan had put this thing together. There were reported military – security – private security companies which were on the ground in the Maidan, perhaps even Blackwater has been mooted. Isn’t this worth an investigation to find out one of the decisive elements of this so-called revolt that led to this new government? Is the U.S. not interested in —

MS. PSAKI: Again, I think the OSCE monitors are not even being let into Crimea right now, so perhaps that can be a first step.

Elise.

QUESTION: No, I just want to put a fine point on it.

MS. PSAKI: Sure. Go ahead.

QUESTION: When you talk about that one of the reasons that the Secretary didn’t go was because you didn’t sense an appropriate seriousness by the Russians in terms of engaging. So basically, the fact that they’re not prepared to meet with the new government is your indicator of whether they’re serious or not?

MS. PSAKI: Well, it’s about their willingness to engage and how to de-escalate the crisis in Ukraine. Obviously, they say that’s their focus. We want to see the evidence.

QUESTION: Have they given you any ideas on how they feel that you —

MS. PSAKI: There is an ongoing discussion about it, Elise. But we need – that is a key proponent. It’s not about requiring they meet with the – I’m not saying you’re saying this, but just to be clear – requiring they agree to meet with the new government. But it needs to be a discussion about the mechanisms for moving forward. It’s not that we are never going. We may go. It’s always possible. We evaluate day by day. But that is why we’re not there this moment.

QUESTION: Well, I mean, I understand that you don’t agree with the premise, but the Russian Government does not recognize this new government. So that’s why they don’t want to meet with them; isn’t that right?

MS. PSAKI: Well, the Ukraine parliament recognizes the new government. The international community recognizes the new government. So the issue here is: How do we move forward and engage the Russians with the new government that is broadly supported across the country?

QUESTION: Iraq?

MS. PSAKI: Ukraine? Any more on Ukraine? Okay, Iraq. Okay. Did you – are you – okay.

QUESTION: Until now I just —

MS. PSAKI: Go ahead, in the back. Go ahead.

QUESTION: Yes, yes, yes. I don’t understand yet what is your interpretation that the Secretary of State canceled his visit to Moscow regarding —

MS. PSAKI: There wasn’t a visit planned.

QUESTION: — regarding —

MS. PSAKI: There wasn’t a visit planned, so nothing’s canceled. We travel all the time. Secretary Kerry saw Foreign Minister Lavrov just last week. We still keep the option open, of course, of traveling at any point in time.

QUESTION: To Moscow, not to the other places.

MS. PSAKI: It could be a range of locations. It hasn’t been determined because we don’t have a trip planned at this moment.

QUESTION: And what else you have in your diplomacy arsenal now to deal with the Ukraine crisis?

MS. PSAKI: What else do we have in our diplomat – what are the other options, or —

QUESTION: Yes, diplomacy options.

MS. PSAKI: Well, again, I think as I said in the beginning, that I expect the Secretary will be in touch with Foreign Minister Lavrov in the coming 24 to 48 hours. As you’ve seen over the weekend, President Obama has been closely engaged with a range of partners around the world from a broad list of countries. And so we continue to have discussions. Our focus is on coordinating with the international community about everything from sanctions and steps we will take to put the appropriate pressure on, while also leaving the off-ramp opportunity for the Russians and laying out clearly what they could do at this point. So those conversations are ongoing on a daily basis.

QUESTION: Iraq?

MS. PSAKI: Do we have any more on Ukraine? Okay.

QUESTION: Yeah, very quickly —

MS. PSAKI: On Ukraine. Go ahead.

QUESTION: A follow up on the phone call – I know President Obama spoke with the Chinese President Xi Jinping.

MS. PSAKI: Mm-hmm.

QUESTION: What’s your expectation from China on Ukraine? And given the close tie between China and Russia, are you concerned China may go further to support Russia?

MS. PSAKI: Well, our hope continues to be that many members of the international community, including China, are in coordination and cooperation about the illegal steps that Russia took in this case and the pressure that needs to be exerted from not just the United States, but countries around the world.

QUESTION: But where do you see China stands now?

MS. PSAKI: I think I just addressed it.

Said?

QUESTION: Does China – a follow up. Does China really accept that premise that this was an illegal operation, or is it simply concerned over the uncertainty that they would like to resolve that’s the basis of their cooperation? Have they really accepted the U.S. attitude towards —

MS. PSAKI: I will let China speak to that.