At a hearing of the Helsinki Commission on Thursday, Rep. Chrissy Houlihan (D-PA) spoke to RAND Corporation Defense Researcher Michael Cecire about Russia's "maximalist" demands to Ukraine.
00:00Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you very much to all of you for your testimony today.
00:07I think that my biggest question is to answer the topic of the cost of a bad deal in Ukraine.
00:14Mr. Kapila, you spoke a little bit about a good deal, a bad deal, a good piece, a bad piece.
00:20You spoke also about un-peace, and you spoke in, relatively speaking, strategic and broad terms about what that looks like.
00:29What I was wondering is if each of you could kind of put on your more tactical hat and more of your diplomatic or even a general officer hat.
00:41What does a good piece look like coming out of Ukraine?
00:45What markers are we looking for as members of Congress to indicate that this might be a good and lasting piece for the region and for the world?
00:54And I'll start with you, sir, because you started this whole un-peace concept.
01:00Thank you for the question.
01:02So when we look at what's known as liberal or illiberal peace building, good or bad peace building, a bad peace building is simply not peace.
01:10It's a model that allows for authoritarian conflict management.
01:15This is what Russia excels at.
01:17So if we look at any situation in post-Soviet space that Russia has been involved in peace negotiations, it's always led to frozen conflicts that have also led to more instability.
01:26So bad peace is designed to basically, down the line, allow for reinitiation of conflict.
01:33So the first metric we need to pay attention to is that if you look at the deal, what is the propensity of that deal to collapse and lead to more conflict?
01:41And so whatever Russia proposes, currently, for example, hypothetically, you know, them absorbing the territories that they have conquered so far, or them being able to absorb Crimea into Russia, so on and so forth, these are stipulations that could never be acceptable to the Ukrainian people.
01:59And so in that context, even through pressure, let's say there's an agreement to hold those precepts down the line that is not sustainable.
02:07This is why we speak of sustainable peace.
02:09So anything that does not appear to be sustainable, that seems to be forced, is simply a form of bad peace, and it's not tenable.
02:17There are a lot of examples of successful peace that have been negotiated, you know, in the post-Cold War period.
02:26For that to work, we need to look at a few things.
02:29One, the extent to which both sides have a full agreement on development.
02:33Not under coercion, right, not under pressure, but that they understand that this is something that they could continue to sustain.
02:39That's the first metric.
02:41Second, to pay attention to is that, is it commensurate with the will of the people, right?
02:46The government, for example, may be pressured to signing something, but that's not going to be sustainable a few years from that point that people rise up against what is, in essence, a form of injustice, right?
02:57So there has to be elements of equity and fairness in the notion of peace.
03:01And third, there have to be enforcement mechanisms, right?
03:07When we talk about peace for Ukraine, for example, are there international security guarantees?
03:12What will happen if Russia reneges on their commitments and invades a week, a month, or a year later?
03:17So international mechanisms of making sure that peace holds, that agreement sustains itself, is also another important metric.
03:26So these are kind of the main characteristics that members of Congress should pay attention to to understand if it's on the trajectory of achieving good peace, a good deal.
03:34Anybody else?
03:35So I would say, just to add to my colleague's, I think, terrific statement here, Russia has made it very clear that its intentions in Ukraine are quite maximalist and has not really rolled back any of those demands since it began the war in 2022, the full-scale invasion in February 2022.
03:56Those demands remain maximalist, and they seek to create an environment in Ukraine where Ukraine is functionally unable to subsist as a sovereign, independent state.
04:10So I think that kind of firmly would fit the definition of what one might call a bad peace.
04:16And so far in the negotiations in which Russia has taken part, they have renewed those maximalist demands.
04:22And so that, I think, is a showstopper for the Ukrainians, and strategically, perhaps, ought to be one for the United States as well.
04:34I think, looking at it more generally, in terms of the war and Russian aggression in Ukraine and throughout the region, fundamentally, Russia cannot be seen as having benefited from launching this illegal war.
04:47So a final piece or a deal cannot be seen as giving concessions to Russia, which is engaged in a war that is illegal, and it cannot be seen as being able to create an edifice upon which Russia can later somehow benefit into further aggression or other kinds of illegality.
05:09I know I've run out of time, and so I don't know the procedures here.
05:14Do I yield back, or is there more time to—
05:16Well, why don't you ask one more question, and then we'll turn to Senator Shahid, who has joined us.
05:21To Ms. Lubakova.
05:25Same kind of question, but you mentioned a permanent withdrawal of troops from Belarus.
05:29Would that be part of the parameters of a permanent peace for you?
05:33Thank you so much for giving me a chance to add.
05:36I actually wanted to mention that when it comes to Belarus, the status quo would be also a bad deal for Ukraine, because if Russia—if Belarus stays under control of Russia, if Lukashenko stays as the dictator leader of Belarus, that would also mean that Putin, in the future, might use Belarus for attacks, both of Ukraine but also of NATO countries, and Belarus, as you know, borders this.
06:01Russian troops must leave Belarus, Russian nukes must not be deployed in Belarus.
06:08I think what is also crucial is that democratic forces should be present, democratic forces of Belarus should be present when it comes to negotiations of peace, because nothing about Belarus without Belarusians, and I think what is also important is transition to democracy in my country.
06:26Thank you, Mr. Chair, for indulging me on a yieldback.
