Skip to playerSkip to main content
  • 7 months ago
During Wednesday's House Foreign Affairs Committee Wednesday, Rep. Mike Quigley (D-IL) questioned Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
Transcript
00:00Just in terms of Ukraine, my concern is that when you equate these two powers at the negotiating
00:14table, it does seem to diminish the fact that Russia was the aggressor and having been there
00:19five times since the war started, stood at the mass grave and heard accounts of rape
00:27and murder and the kidnapping of kids, I just don't hear the administration talking about
00:32holding Putin accountable for these things as part of these discussions.
00:37And finally, recognizing that Putin doesn't seem to have any reason to negotiate in good
00:42faith because he has, what, four to six times the manpower?
00:46He treats his troops like cannon fodder, and I think he probably recognized this is an administration
00:54that will do another supplemental.
00:56So what in the world are we doing to hold him accountable and to actually force him
01:01into negotiating in good faith and, again, not rewarding him with de facto land that he currently
01:08occupies?
01:09And what is it?
01:10We're punishing him that he can't have additional land?
01:13So what is it we are doing to actually hold him accountable and force him to negotiate in
01:18good faith beyond really stern tweets?
01:22Yeah.
01:22On the second point, those are the details that would have to be worked out in any negotiation.
01:26And as I said, he'll have to make concessions, and so will the Ukrainian side.
01:30I don't know what those are.
01:30We're not going to predetermine what those are.
01:32That's why we wanted to enter into direct negotiations.
01:35We honestly continue to believe.
01:37We're open to any peace deal, but we think it's very difficult to enter peace negotiations
01:40without a ceasefire because something blows up somewhere, some attack happens in the interim,
01:45and the negotiations fall apart.
01:47On your first question, listen, I sense, and I think we all do, what you're arguing here,
01:51okay, about the imbalance in the relationship, the invasion, things of that nature.
01:55But the bottom line is this war has been going on for three years, and there was no end in
01:59sight, and the only way you can end it is you've got to be able to bring both sides to the table,
02:03and we feel like the president, we know the president was in a unique position to be able
02:08to bring both sides to a table and be able to talk to both sides.
02:11It may ultimately not work out.
02:13It may ultimately not work out, but we have to at least try to make it work.
02:17And I think it's the same position, for example, the Vatican has adopted.
02:21There's a lot of pressure on the Vatican to condemn the Russians for their,
02:23but the way the Vatican has viewed it is unless we have both, unless we're able to talk to both sides,
02:27we have no hope whatsoever of trying to force a negotiation.
02:30There's no impetus on Putin to do anything.
02:33He won't do anything, and he will be rewarded.
02:35This is more like Chamberlain than someone who's trying to win a Nobel Peace Prize.
02:41Chamberlain didn't win a Nobel Peace Prize conceding this and saying,
02:44well, this war could be going on for a long time.
02:48FDR didn't say this war has been going on a long time.
02:50You know, we're not going to engage in a ball.
02:52We're just going to see if both sides can work this out.
02:54Aggressors like a tyrant, like Putin, aren't going to listen to goodwill.
03:00Well, I understand.
03:01I think the goal here is to reach a ceasefire so they can negotiate a broader deal that's fair and, frankly, sustainable.
03:07If it's an unsustainable peace, meaning if it's an unfair, unbalanced peace, it won't be sustainable.
03:11And our goal is to get them to that point.
03:13I hope we're successful because the alternative is more people will die.
03:16I agree.
03:17You
Be the first to comment
Add your comment

Recommended