Obama and Kerry Fact-Check Putin and Russia

In contemporaneous statements, the president and the secretary of State pushed back on Putin’s claims about what his country is doing in Ukraine.

Secretary of State John Kerry gestures as he speaks in the US Embassy in Kiev on March 4, 2014.
National Journal
Marina Koren Brian Resnick Matt Berman
See more stories about...
Marina Koren Brian Resnick Matt Berman
March 4, 2014, 7:32 a.m.

“There is a bet­ter way for Rus­sia to pur­sue its le­git­im­ate in­terests in Ukraine.”

John Kerry says it’s “time to set the re­cord straight” in East­ern Europe.

The sec­ret­ary of State’s re­marks at a press con­fer­ence in Kiev on Tues­day came hours after Rus­si­an Pres­id­ent Vladi­mir Putin spoke to the press on his coun­try’s re­cent in­cur­sion in­to Crimea, a sov­er­eign re­gion of Ukraine. The two politi­cians’ re­marks, as Ger­man Chan­cel­lor An­gela Merkel might put it, were truly from dif­fer­ent worlds.

“Not a single piece of cred­ible evid­ence sup­ports any one of these claims,” said Kerry of Putin’s jus­ti­fic­a­tions for en­ter­ing Crimea. “None.”

The sec­ret­ary said the U.S. is not seek­ing con­front­a­tion. “There is a bet­ter way for Rus­sia to pur­sue its le­git­im­ate in­terests in Ukraine.” Kerry spoke harshly and clearly when he said, “There are count­less out­lets that an or­gan­ized, struc­tured, de­cent world has struggled to put to­geth­er to re­solve these dif­fer­ences so we don’t see a na­tion uni­lat­er­ally in­vade an­oth­er na­tion.”

One of the end goals of dip­lomacy, Kerry said, is “to al­low Rus­sia to be prop­erly listened to.” He ac­know­ledged that the coun­try has “le­git­im­ate in­terests in Ukraine.”

In a brief state­ment Tues­day, Pres­id­ent Obama echoed Kerry’s state­ment. Obama said that the U.S. stands “on the side of his­tory,” and sup­ports the prin­ciple that Ukrain­i­ans, “an in­de­pend­ent people,” should be able to “make their own de­cisions about their lives.” Rus­sia is cur­rently resid­ing on a los­ing side of his­tory, Obama sug­ges­ted. “Mr. Putin can throw a lot of words out there. But the facts on the ground in­dic­ate that, right now, he’s not abid­ing by that prin­ciple.”

In­ter­est­ingly enough, Putin echoed this self-de­term­in­a­tion sen­ti­ment in his own speech: “Most im­port­antly, people should have the right to de­term­ine their own fu­ture, that of their fam­il­ies and of their re­gion, and to have equal par­ti­cip­a­tion in it.”

Still, Obama said, “what’s hap­pen­ing there is not based on ac­tu­al con­cern for Rus­si­an na­tion­als or Rus­si­an speak­ers in­side of Ukraine, but is based on Rus­sia seek­ing through force to ex­ert in­flu­ence on the neigh­bor­ing coun­try.”

But words from the U.S. are un­likely to shake Putin, whose rhet­or­ic re­flects an en­tirely dif­fer­ent lo­gic. Ac­cord­ing to Putin, eth­nic Rus­si­ans are un­der threat from the in­ter­im Ukraine gov­ern­ment, there are no of­fi­cial Rus­si­an troops sta­tioned in Crimea, and “Amer­ic­an polit­ic­al tech­no­lo­gists” are fan­ning the un­rest. All de­tails that Kerry and the U.S. would con­test out­right.

Here are some more spe­cif­ic ex­amples of dis­agree­ment between the two coun­tries.

{{ BIZOBJ (video: 4779) }}

On last month’s peace agree­ment:

Putin: [Pres­id­ent Vikt­or Ya­nukovych] agreed to all the op­pos­i­tion’s de­mands: He agreed to early par­lia­ment­ary elec­tions, to early pres­id­en­tial elec­tions, and to re­turn to the 2004 Con­sti­tu­tion, as de­man­ded by the op­pos­i­tion…. And as soon as he left, in­stead of re­leas­ing the oc­cu­pied ad­min­is­trat­ive build­ings, they im­me­di­ately oc­cu­pied the pres­id­ent’s res­id­ence and the gov­ern­ment build­ing — all that in­stead of act­ing on the agree­ment.

Kerry: The Rus­si­an gov­ern­ment would have you be­lieve it was the op­pos­i­tion who failed to im­ple­ment the Feb. 21 agree­ment that called for a peace­ful trans­ition, ig­nor­ing the real­ity that it was Ya­nukovych, when his­tory came call­ing, when his coun­try was in need, when this city was the place where the ac­tion was, where the lead­ers of the na­tion were gathered in or­der to de­cide the fu­ture — he broke his ob­lig­a­tion to sign that agree­ment, and he fled in­to the night with his pos­ses­sions, des­troy­ing pa­pers be­hind him.

On the le­git­im­acy of the newly formed Ukrain­i­an gov­ern­ment:

Putin: Are the cur­rent au­thor­it­ies le­git­im­ate? The par­lia­ment is par­tially, but all the oth­ers are not. The cur­rent act­ing pres­id­ent is def­in­itely not le­git­im­ate. There is only one le­git­im­ate pres­id­ent, from a leg­al stand­point. Clearly, he has no power. However, as I have already said, and will re­peat: Ya­nukovych is the only un­doubtedly le­git­im­ate pres­id­ent.

Kerry: The Rus­si­an gov­ern­ment would have you be­lieve that the Ukraine gov­ern­ment is il­le­git­im­ate or led by ex­trem­ists, ig­nor­ing the real­ity that the [Ukrain­i­an par­lia­ment] rep­res­ent­ing the people of Ukraine, the elec­ted rep­res­ent­at­ives of the people of Ukraine, they over­whelm­ingly im­prove the new gov­ern­ment, even with mem­bers of Ya­nukovych’s party desert­ing him and vot­ing over­whelm­ingly in or­der to ap­prove this new gov­ern­ment.

On con­di­tions with­in Kiev:

Putin: Armed and masked mil­it­ants are still roam­ing the streets of Kiev.

Kerry: The Rus­si­an gov­ern­ment would also have you be­lieve that the calm and friendly streets, one of which I walked down, but many of which I just drove through, that some­how these streets of Kiev are ac­tu­ally dan­ger­ous, ig­nor­ing the real­ity that there has been no surge in crime, no surge in loot­ing. No polit­ic­al re­tri­bu­tion here.

On last month's peace agreement:

Putin: [Pres­id­ent Vikt­or Ya­nukovych] agreed to all the op­pos­i­tion’s de­mands: He agreed to early par­lia­ment­ary elec­tions, to early pres­id­en­tial elec­tions, and to re­turn to the 2004 Con­sti­tu­tion, as de­man­ded by the op­pos­i­tion…. And as soon as he left, in­stead of re­leas­ing the oc­cu­pied ad­min­is­trat­ive build­ings, they im­me­di­ately oc­cu­pied the pres­id­ent’s res­id­ence and the gov­ern­ment build­ing — all that in­stead of act­ing on the agree­ment.

Kerry: The Rus­si­an gov­ern­ment would have you be­lieve it was the op­pos­i­tion who failed to im­ple­ment the Feb. 21 agree­ment that called for a peace­ful trans­ition, ig­nor­ing the real­ity that it was Ya­nukovych, when his­tory came call­ing, when his coun­try was in need, when this city was the place where the ac­tion was, where the lead­ers of the na­tion were gathered in or­der to de­cide the fu­ture — he broke his ob­lig­a­tion to sign that agree­ment, and he fled in­to the night with his pos­ses­sions, des­troy­ing pa­pers be­hind him.

On the legitimacy of the newly formed Ukrainian government:

Putin: Are the cur­rent au­thor­it­ies le­git­im­ate? The par­lia­ment is par­tially, but all the oth­ers are not. The cur­rent act­ing pres­id­ent is def­in­itely not le­git­im­ate. There is only one le­git­im­ate pres­id­ent, from a leg­al stand­point. Clearly, he has no power. However, as I have already said, and will re­peat: Ya­nukovych is the only un­doubtedly le­git­im­ate pres­id­ent.

Kerry: The Rus­si­an gov­ern­ment would have you be­lieve that the Ukraine gov­ern­ment is il­le­git­im­ate or led by ex­trem­ists, ig­nor­ing the real­ity that the [Ukrain­i­an par­lia­ment] rep­res­ent­ing the people of Ukraine, the elec­ted rep­res­ent­at­ives of the people of Ukraine, they over­whelm­ingly im­prove the new gov­ern­ment, even with mem­bers of Ya­nukovych’s party desert­ing him and vot­ing over­whelm­ingly in or­der to ap­prove this new gov­ern­ment.

On conditions within Kiev:

Putin: Armed and masked mil­it­ants are still roam­ing the streets of Kiev.

Kerry: The Rus­si­an gov­ern­ment would also have you be­lieve that the calm and friendly streets, one of which I walked down, but many of which I just drove through, that some­how these streets of Kiev are ac­tu­ally dan­ger­ous, ig­nor­ing the real­ity that there has been no surge in crime, no surge in loot­ing. No polit­ic­al re­tri­bu­tion here.

What We're Following See More »
TAKING A LONG VIEW TO SOUTHERN STATES
In Dropout Speech, Santorum Endorses Rubio
1 days ago
THE DETAILS

As expected after earlier reports on Wednesday, Rick Santorum ended his presidential bid. But less expected: he threw his support to Marco Rubio. After noting he spoke with Rubio the day before for an hour, he said, “Someone who has a real understanding of the threat of ISIS, real understanding of the threat of fundamentalist Islam, and has experience, one of the things I wanted was someone who has experience in this area, and that’s why we decided to support Marco Rubio.” It doesn’t figure to help Rubio much in New Hampshire, but the Santorum nod could pay dividends down the road in southern states.

Source:
‘PITTING PEOPLE AGAINST EACH OTHER’
Rubio, Trump Question Obama’s Mosque Visit
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

President Obama’s decision to visit a mosque in Baltimore today was never going to be completely uncontroversial. And Donald Trump and Marco Rubio proved it. “Maybe he feels comfortable there,” Trump told interviewer Greta van Susteren on Fox News. “There are a lot of places he can go, and he chose a mosque.” And in New Hampshire, Rubio said of Obama, “Always pitting people against each other. Always. Look at today – he gave a speech at a mosque. Oh, you know, basically implying that America is discriminating against Muslims.”

Source:
THE TIME IS NOW, TED
Cruz Must Max Out on Evangelical Support through Early March
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

For Ted Cruz, a strong showing in New Hampshire would be nice, but not necessary. That’s because evangelical voters only make up 21% of the Granite State’s population. “But from the February 20 South Carolina primary through March 15, there are nine states (South Carolina, Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Kentucky, Mississippi, and North Carolina) with an estimated white-Evangelical percentage of the GOP electorate over 60 percent, and another four (Texas, Kansas, Louisiana, and Missouri) that come in over 50 percent.” But after that, he better be in the catbird’s seat, because only four smaller states remain with evangelical voter majorities.

Source:
CHRISTIE, BUSH TRYING TO TAKE HIM DOWN
Rubio Now Winning the ‘Endorsement Primary’
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Since his strong third-place finish in Iowa, Marco Rubio has won endorsement by two sitting senators and two congressmen, putting him in the lead for the first time of FiveThirtyEight‘s Endorsement Tracker. “Some politicians had put early support behind Jeb Bush — he had led [their] list since August — but since January the only new endorsement he has received was from former presidential candidate Sen. Lindsey Graham.” Meanwhile, the New York Times reports that fueled by resentment, “members of the Bush and Christie campaigns have communicated about their mutual desire to halt … Rubio’s rise in the polls.”

Source:
ARE YOU THE GATEKEEPER?
Sanders: Obama Is a Progressive
1 days ago
THE LATEST

“Do I think President Obama is a progressive? Yeah, I do,” said Bernie Sanders, in response to a direct question in tonight’s debate. “I think they’ve done a great job.” But Hillary Clinton wasn’t content to sit out the latest chapter in the great debate over the definition of progressivism. “In your definition, with you being the gatekeeper of progressivism, I don’t think anyone else fits that definition,” she told Sanders.

×