Excerpts:
Throughout
my career, I have stayed true to the oath that Foreign Service
Officers take and observe every day: “that I will support and
defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies,
foreign and domestic;” and “that I will bear true faith and
allegiance to the same.” Like all foreign service officers with
whom I have been privileged to serve, I have understood that oath
as a commitment to serve on a strictly nonpartisan basis, to
advance the foreign policy determined by the incumbent
President, and to work at all times to strengthen our national
security and promote our national interests.
[...]
I have proudly
promoted and served American interests as the representative of
the American people and six different presidents over the last
three decades. Throughout that time, I—like my colleagues at the
State Department—have always believed that we enjoyed a
sacred trust with our government.
We make a difference every day on issues that matter to the
American people—whether it is war and peace, trade and
investment, or simply helping with a lost passport. We repeatedly
uproot our lives, and we frequently put ourselves in harm’s way
to serve this nation. And we do that willingly, because we believe
in America and its special role in the world. We also believe that,
in return, our government will have our backs and protect us if we
come under attack from foreign interests.
That basic understanding no longer holds true. Today, we see
the State Department attacked and hollowed out from within. [...] at institution, and its thousands of loyal and
effective employees.
[...]
My parents fled Communist and Nazi regimes.
Having seen, first hand, the war, poverty and displacement
common to totalitarian regimes, they valued the freedom and
democracy the U.S. represents.
[...]
From August 2016 until May 2019, I served as the U.S.
Ambassador to Ukraine. Our policy, fully embraced by
Democrats and Republicans alike, was to help Ukraine become a
stable and independent democratic state, with a market economy
integrated into Europe.
[...]
[I]t is critical to the security of the United States
that Ukraine remain free and democratic and that it continue to
resist Russian expansionism.
Russia’s purported annexation of Crimea, its invasion of
Eastern Ukraine, and its de facto control over the Sea of Azov,
make clear Russia’s malign intentions towards Ukraine.
[...]
Supporting Ukraine’s integration into Europe and
combatting Russia’s efforts to destabilize Ukraine have anchored
US policy since the Ukrainian people protested on the Maidan in
2014 and demanded to be a part of Europe and live according to
the rule of law. That was US policy when I was appointed
Ambassador in August 2016, and it was reaffirmed as the policy
of the current administration in early 2017.
Before Trump realized he could use Ukraine's help to win reelection.
We
have long understood that strong anti-corruption efforts must
form an essential part of our policy in Ukraine.
[...]
Put simply: anti-corruption efforts
serve Ukraine’s interests. They serve ours as well. Corrupt
leaders are inherently less trustworthy, while an honest and
accountable Ukrainian leadership makes a U.S.-Ukraine
partnership more reliable and more valuable to the U.S. A level
playing field in this strategically located country—one with a
European landmass exceeded only by Russia and with one of the
largest populations in Europe—creates an environment in which
U.S. business can more easily trade, invest and profit.
Which, let's be honest, is the point that matters to the powers that be in the US.
Corruption
is a security issue as well, because corrupt officials are vulnerable
to Moscow.
Yes, we know. We have one.
Angered by insufficient
progress in the fight against corruption, Ukrainian voters
overwhelmingly elected a man who said that ending corruption
would be his number one priority. The transition, however,
created fear among the political elite, setting the stage for some
of the issues I expect we will be discussing today.
Understanding Ukraine’s recent history, including the
significant tension between those who seek to transform the
country and those who wish to continue profiting from the old
ways, is of critical importance to understanding the events you
asked me here today to describe. Many of those events—and the
false narratives that emerged from them—resulted from an
unfortunate alliance between Ukrainians who continue to operate
within a corrupt system, and Americans who either did not understand that corrupt system, or who may have chosen, for their
own purposes, to ignore it.
She's being generous by leaving off "or take advantage of it."
Several of the events with which
you may be concerned occurred before I was even in country.
Here are just a few:
- the release of the so-called “Black Ledger” and Mr.
Manafort’s subsequent resignation from the Trump
campaign;
- the Embassy’s April 2016 letter to the Prosecutor General’s
Office about the investigation into the Anti-Corruption
Action Center or AntAC; and
- the departure from office of former Prosecutor General
Viktor Shokin.
Several other events occurred after I was recalled from Ukraine.
These include:
- President Trump’s July 25 call with President Zelenskiy;
- All of the discussions surrounding that phone call; and
- Any discussions surrounding the reported delay of security assistance to Ukraine in Summer 2019.
As for events
during my tenure in Ukraine, I want to categorically state that I have never myself or through others, directly or indirectly, ever directed, suggested, or in any other way asked for any government or government official in Ukraine (or elsewhere) to refrain from investigating or prosecuting actual corruption. As Mr. Lutsenko, the former Ukrainian Prosecutor General has recently acknowledged, the notion that I created or disseminated a “do not prosecute” list is completely false—a story that Mr. Lutsenko, himself, has since retracted.
Equally fictitious is the notion that I am disloyal to President Trump. I have heard the allegation in the media that I supposedly told the Embassy team to ignore the President’s orders “since he was going to be impeached.” That allegation is false. I have never said such a thing, to my Embassy colleagues or to anyone else.
[...]
[T]he Obama administration did not ask me to help the Clinton campaign or harm the Trump campaign, nor would I have taken any such steps if they had.
I have never met Hunter Biden, nor have I had any direct or indirect conversations with him. And although I have met former Vice President Biden several times over the course of our many years in government, neither he nor the previous Administration ever, directly or indirectly, raised the issue of either Burisma or Hunter Biden with me.
With respect to Mayor Giuliani, I have had only minimal contacts with him—a total of three that I recall. None related to the events at issue. I do not know Mr. Giuliani’s motives for attacking me. But individuals who have been named in the press as contacts of Mr. Giuliani may well have believed that their personal financial ambitions were stymied by our anti-corruption policy in Ukraine.
Finally, after being asked by the Department in early March to extend my tour until 2020, I was then abruptly told in late April to come back to Washington from Ukraine “on the next plane.” You will understandably want to ask why my posting ended so suddenly. I wanted to learn that too, and I tried to find out. [...] [The Deputy Secretary of State] said that the President had lost confidence in me and no longer wished me to serve as his ambassador. He added that there had been a concerted campaign against me, and that the Department had been under pressure from the President to remove me since the Summer of 2018. He also said that I had done nothing wrong and that this was not like other situations where he had recalled ambassadors for cause.
I had to look that one up: the Deputy Secretary of State at that time (and currently, for now) was John Sullivan.
Although I understand that I served at the pleasure of the
President, I was nevertheless incredulous that the U.S.
government chose to remove an Ambassador based, as best
as I can tell, on unfounded and false claims by people with
clearly questionable motives. To make matters worse, all of
this occurred during an especially challenging time in
bilateral relations with a newly elected Ukrainian president.
This was precisely the time when continuity in the Embassy
in Ukraine was most needed.
[...]
We need to rebuild diplomacy as the first
resort to advance America’s interests and the front line of
America’s defense. I fear that not doing so will harm our nation’s
interest, perhaps irreparably.
That harm will come not just through the inevitable and
continuing resignation and loss of many of this nation’s most
loyal and talented public servants. It also will come when those
diplomats who soldier on and do their best to represent our nation
face partners abroad who question whether the ambassador truly
speaks for the President and can be counted upon as a reliable
partner. The harm will come when private interests circumvent
professional diplomats for their own gain, not the public good.
The harm will come when bad actors in countries beyond Ukraine
see how easy it is to use fiction and innuendo to manipulate our
system.
Full statement.
UPDATE:
UPDATE:
Technically, it's not lying. Trump planned it one day, and they carried it out.
