Ambassador, how would you describe the Western allies' activities considering that it's two years since Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine?

Well, you know, there's a grouping of leaders who are meeting in Paris today to carry on the conversation. And I think it's clear that Western supporters of Ukraine need to do more. But to this point, there's been a lot done.

The U.S. has provided $75 billion of assistance in the last two years, and European countries have given over $100 billion. So I think the issue is we need to be able to give Ukraine the support it needs to win.

Support for Ukraine has dropped inside U.S. Congress. Could you explain why U.S. Congressmen do not understand the need to help Ukraine?

If there were a vote on the floor of the House, I'm convinced that three-quarters of the members of the House would vote for the bill, just like 70 out of 100 senators did last month.

I think what we're seeing here, unfortunately, is in an election year, certain individuals are playing party politics rather than looking at the national interests.

Last year in Estonia, the parliament – the Riigikogu – was blocked and the government had to find a way forward. This is what's happening now in the U.S. Looking for the path forward. I'm still confident that the support will be passed.

The Biden administration has repeatedly said that their ways to help have basically ended and U.S. Congress aid is permanently needed. So when will the votes take place?

I don't want to go in to give a parliamentary tutorial on our system. There's something called a discharge petition. The key is to get a vote to the floor of the House, at which time, I believe, a clear majority, an overwhelming majority, will support the bill.

Does it show that inside the Republican Party few politicians understand national interests and would put forward national interest instead of their political views?

Unfortunately, I think the answer is that this is an election year and this is election politics playing out.

So far we have seen quite a lot of messages from former President Donald Trump. Are they just part of the election campaign? Should we be worried about them?

First of all, I don't think Estonia should be worried. As President Biden has said, our commitments to our allies, including Estonia, are absolute. And what the former President Trump is doing is engaging in campaign rhetoric.

But treaties and obligations are passed by the U.S. Senate, and late last year the Senate reminded all U.S. politicians that it's the Senate's right to make and withdraw from treaties.

So our commitment to Estonia is the same commitment we've had to Europe for 75 years and that is the NATO alliance.

Presumably, Donald Trump will win the 2024 election...

I would not presume anything. Democracies are not preordained. It's not like what the process that's happening next door in Russia next month.

Will Trump take the U.S. out of NATO?

Well, first of all, that's a hypothetical. You're presuming that the former president will win. I think we leave it to the American people and our electoral process.

I believe that the U.S. has been and will continue to be a leading member in NATO, committed to its allies in the same way that here in Estonia, for the last year, we have had 650 troops in Võru, up at Tapa, in the west side by side with Estonian troops ready to defend Estonian territory.

You mentioned Russia's so-called elections next month. Will the U.S. Consider Vladimir Putin as a legitimate president of Russia, as there are no democratic elections inside that country?

It's very clear that Vladimir Putin is the leader of Russia and will continue to be the leader of Russia.

Will Russia be recognized as a terrorist state? I know there are discussions in Washington about this.

There is a legislative process and a definition. What administrations have said is that that would not help us in doing what we're trying to achieve, both holding Russia to account and supporting Ukraine. And we are looking at other mechanisms.

On Friday, we, the U.S. government, sanctioned over 500 individuals and Russian entities, both for the aggression in Ukraine, and the death of [Alexei] Navalny, and we will continue to seek measures to hold Russia to account.

But sanctions so far do not seem to work. Russia can still get different items necessary for their missiles, for example.

I think the issue of tightening up controls and also pursuing criminal cases against individuals who are trying to go around the sanctions is critically important. And the U.S. and Estonia have worked very closely on this regard.

People have been arrested. We're seeking their extradition to the United States.

We confiscated half a million dollars in funds and recently last week the U.S. and Estonia agreed to send those proceeds to help rebuild the Ukrainian electricity grid.

So there are ways of limiting both the people who are engaged in that trade and more importantly the sanctions are also on the energy sector, the financial sector, and it limits future Russian growth, it limits future use of Western technologies, for instance for oil and gas exploration in the Arctic.

So, it's not just a moment in time, we are limiting the potential of the Russian economy.

But when we talk about the sanctions, then let's say prison guards probably won't go to the West anyway...

Three of the people responsible for Navalny's death were put on the list on Friday.

So why is that even necessary? It's a symbolic act, not real, but it doesn't affect Russia's actions.

Well, I think it's reminding that Russia's leaders have constructed a prison, a nation of a prison, and some of the officials of that country are increasingly left to only be in that country.

There are many Russians who buy property in Western countries, send their kids to Western schools, and send their wives to go shopping. So limiting their access to travel, and seizing their assets is important.

Coming back to the U.S.-Estonian and NATO alliance, why should Estonia believe former President Barack Obama's words in Tallinn when the U.S. administration's support for Ukraine has become more verbal lately, not so much material.

It's a wonderful speech. I read it again recently, very eloquent. The U.S. In the last two years has provided $75 billion of assistance to Ukraine. I don't think anybody would have ever predicted that two years ago.

There's no country that the U.S. Has ever provided that much assistance in such a short period of time. We didn't do it to Iraq or Afghanistan. We haven't done it for Israel over the years. And people oftentimes talk about those examples of U.S. assistance in a two-year span. That is the most the U.S. has ever given a single country. And we will continue to support Ukraine.

But why did the U.S. Lend-Lease didn't work? Biden signed it in 2022 in March or April and it still wasn't used over that time. What was it?

So I think Lend-Lease was a program started in World War two and a way of getting around restrictions at the time that Congress put on assistance to allies fighting Germany, primarily the UK and the Soviet Union.

When the Lend-Lease Act of 2022 was passed, It was largely a symbolic act showing that the U.S. was politically supporting.

Lend-Lease, lease means signing a contract to pay back. The British government finished paying back World War II lend-lease in 2006, I believe.

What we did the last two years was give assistance to Ukraine. We didn't give them a loan.

We granted them the equipment without an obligation to return it or pay it back. And so I think it's been, It was a decision how to help Ukraine most effectively while not leaving them with debt in the future.

Perhaps now would be an appropriate time again to use that lending system?

So it was an authorization act that didn't come with money and it expired last year. If Congress passes that bill, I think it would also be possible to pass the $60 billion in assistance that the administration has proposed and the Senate has approved.

Let's talk about also the security conference in Munich. Our former president, Kersti Kaljulaid, was pretty critical of the U.S. delegation. She said the U.S. delegation spent a lot of energy and time talking about everything other than supporting Ukraine. It shows pretty much that the U.S. is not willing to support them anymore or are they just ashamed?

I wasn't at Munich, our vice president was. We had 40 members of Congress from both parties. Obviously, the two parties in general are supportive of Ukraine, but depends on which individuals anyone is speaking.

I think Estonia can be proud of its record of support, giving a higher percentage than any other country.

In total terms, the U.S. is given more than any country. And so I don't accept the accusation the U.S. hasn't done anything. We've done more than any other country, and I'm confident that we will continue to help Ukraine.

Well, I'm not saying that the U.S. has not done anything. I'm just saying that the delegation was talking about energy security and climate and everything else besides Ukraine. Perhaps because part of the delegation understands that it is a sensitive topic and they don't have clear answers considering what is happening inside U.S. Congress.

I would suggest people go back and read the statements of the dozens and dozens of Americans who were at Munich.

One of the senators was on the panel with the Estonian Prime Minister [Kaja] Kallas and the NATO Secretary General, and the conversation of that panel was Ukraine. 

We talked about Alexei Navalny's death a bit. I would like to know, is there any chance to hold Putin accountable?

I think it's clear that Russians involved in war crimes need to be held to account.

For the international community, the discussion, once you have countries that agree, is how to do so. And that's where I think different countries have different approaches. But clearly, the large-scale theft of Ukrainian children to Russia is a crime. The children need to be returned to Ukraine, and those involved need to be held to account. I think Estonian leaders have spoken also quite eloquently about the need to hold leaders involved in the crime of aggression to account.

The international system doesn't have easily supported mechanisms to make that happen.

Unfortunately, a special tribunal is quite far away and we have not seen a result yet.

I think if you look at what happened in the wars and crimes in the Balkans, the breakup of Yugoslavia, which happened in the mid-90s. The court proceedings lasted close to 20 years.

First, there's a matter of bringing those involved in detention, and then there's holding the legal proceedings. So justice sometimes takes a long time, but I think countries like Estonia and the United States are committed to seeing justice happen.

Considering what happened to Alexei Navalny, everybody's pointing fingers at Putin, but what do you think? When [Wagner boss] Yevgeny Prigozhin died, then people also blamed Putin, but later it turned out to be Russian Security Council Chief Nikolai Petrushev, who gave the order. Could that be the case now also? What do you think?

I think clearly Russia is a dangerous place for Russians and Americans. The United States for years has warned all of its citizens, do not go to Russia. Unfortunately, we have American citizens who are unjustly detained and who have been held by Russians baselessly for sometimes years. That includes two journalists. That includes a teacher. It includes a ballerina, most recently, and it includes a former U.S. serviceman. And I think as the list of Americans detained in Russia grows, it's a signal that Russia isn't safe, probably for anybody, whether it's foreigners or Russians.

Are there any kind of negotiations to release them?

I think as the U.S. State Department spokesperson has said several times, first in December and then in February when asked, there was an offer proposed that the Russians have not accepted. The safety and welfare of U.S. citizens is always one of the top priorities and concerns of U.S. ambassadors and U.S. officials. So those conversations will continue.

Considering Navalny's death, do you know if was it natural or unnatural?

I have no specific information. It happened in Russia while he was in Russian custody.

Russia has several political prisoners, one of them is Vladimir Kara-Murza. Is there any kind of negotiation to release or to swap prisoners between Western countries and the United States?

Vladimir Kara-Murza is an incredibly brave individual. I had the honor of talking to him multiple times in the United States and elsewhere at conferences. He is a Russian citizen. I believe he's a UK citizen. He has permanent residency status in the U.S. He returned to Russia even after being poisoned twice because he felt as a Russian opposition politician, he needed to set an example in Russia.

And so I think he's guilty of no crime and the Russian authorities should release Kara-Murza, of course.

Do you know what happened to Valery Gerasimov, the top general in Russia?

I think that's a question for Russian authorities to ask.

On Saturday, the prime minister of Canada said he would support Ukraine "until victory". Why can't the president of the USA also say that?

Well, I think different leaders choose different words on different occasions. It's clear that what we all want is for Ukraine to win on its own terms. It is Ukrainian territory on which this war is being fought. Ukrainians have every right to defend themselves and reclaim all of their territory, which includes Crimea and the Donbas parts that were seized in 2014.

Is there any kind of fear to say that out loud? So far the fear of escalation has not materialized in any way when we talk about the support. So why can't political leaders say that out loud?

I think sometimes, again, political leaders use different words on different occasions. I think, again, it's clear what we want, and that's Ukraine's victory.

Lack of ammunition is a major problem for Ukrainians. While Ukrainian factories increase production, Western ones do not. Why? They have had time.

I think this issue of our collective industrial base and our inability to produce the quantity of munitions that Ukraine needs and what we need, is clearly a challenge for all Western countries. This is an issue for the U.S. defense industry, it's an issue for the European defense industry. I mentioned the meeting that French President Macron is hosting in Paris today, I expect that this issue, munitions for Ukraine and the industrial base, will be one of the important topics discussed.

Estonia had a wonderful initiative last year, [to produce] 1,00,000 shells for Ukraine in a year, by European countries. But only 300,000 shells were produced. What happened to the other 700,000? Those shells are desperately needed in Ukraine. So it's a challenge for the U.S. to deliver more, and it's also a challenge for European countries to deliver more.

We all feel that we've done a lot. Estonia has done a lot, the U.S. has done a lot. We haven't collectively done enough.

During the coronavirus pandemic, some car makers quickly changed their systems and produced, for example, ventilators that were needed back at the time. Why can't governments give a similar order now?

You're exactly right. The reason why Ford Motor Company was producing ventilators is because the U.S. government used a World War II law to say, start making ventilators. I think that's a fair question, and I can't give you a direct answer.

But I do believe that U.S. munitions, artillery shell production, is ramping up. By the end of this year, it'll be much more than it is now. I think what we're facing is the critical gap here in 2024, again, to produce enough artillery shells for Ukraine to be able to be using on the battlefield this year.

The defense minister of Ukraine, Rustem Umerov, said yesterday that half of what was promised has not been delivered so far. Does this show the West's real attitude? It takes a lot longer to deliver promised aid and sometimes it never arrives at all.

 So I think the challenge here is that we're not dealing with state enterprises. These are private companies, both in Europe and the United States, and they are looking for multi-year guaranteed contracts from our governments before they expand their production lines.

There's a very successful Norwegian-Finnish company, Nammo, they're now producing much more ammunition, four times more than they did a year ago. Their factories are operating 24 hours a day, seven days a week, that's five shifts, and it's still not enough. So I think what we need collectively, again, is for the companies to add additional production lines. To do that, they're looking for guaranteed contracts from our government.

Will the U.S. recognize Vladimir Putin as a legitimate president?

Vladimir Putin is the clear leader of Russia regardless of the mechanism that will take place next month. So I think there's no question that he is the leader of Russia and we acknowledge him as such.

What about the Belarusian president or as we prefer to call him the leader of the Belarusian regime, Alexander Lukashenko, is he also a legitimate leader?

He's clearly the leader of the Belarusian regime, and I was in charge of our Belarusian policy in Washington during the 2020 election season. It's very clear he did not win the vote in the first round, and he used force to stay in office.

Will those two countries merge?

There have been discussions, I think, since 1999 and I think it's clear that Alexander Lukashenko prefers to remain the leader of Belarus.

What kind of cooperation was been carried out between the U.S. and Estonia during these last two years?

I think our cooperation has grown much deeper. The fact that we have 650 American troops in Estonia gives us many opportunities to train together, to work together.

In Tapa, last week I was at the awards ceremony for a High Mars battery. They are rotating out, a new one is coming in. And because Estonia is buying the HIMARS system for its own purposes, the presence of the U.S. HIMARS battery is accelerating the Estonian Armed Forces' understanding of how to use it, how to deploy it, how it works with other systems.

So I think there's an issue of awareness of U.S. soldiers now understanding the Estonian terrain because they've been here for two years, and also even deeper cooperation between our armies and our militaries.

So I think that is really the chance to train together, to live together, to work together every day is very valuable. And in Tapa you also have the British and the French. So it's not just bilateral, it's four NATO allies eating together, working together every day.

There is talk among Eastern European leaders that perhaps the Baltic states could be next, is this just warmongering? Do you see that this is not helpful for economic relations?

First of all, again, the U.S. guarantee as a member of NATO is that we are here to defend all NATO allies. Russia's rhetoric is Russia's rhetoric. We can't control what either leaders or talk show hosts say on TV.

What we can do is be prepared to send the signal of deterrence towards Russia and be here for the defense of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania to speak of the three Baltic countries.

Today [Feburary 26), hopefully, the Hungarian parliament will ratify Sweden's membership also. What do you think of that? How does it strengthen NATO?

It's a long-awaited step and it's a powerful message. Sweden has been neutral for over 200 years, and the fact that essentially the Swedish people sent the demand signal to its leadership, now was the time to join the premier alliance, NATO, as the Finnish people and the Finnish government also did last year, shows that countries that in the past saw a way in between are joining NATO because it is an alliance of democracies committed to defending each other.

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and Twitter and never miss an update!