James MACDOUGALL: “We have every reason to believe that Ukraine will remain a reliable and important partner of the US”

James MacDougall, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Eurasia, is responsible for questions concerning military-political cooperation with the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). He is frequently in this region and conducts consultations with state officials in these countries. He recently visited Ukraine, where he held talks with Ukrainian officials. The main subject of the consultations was the planned deployment of elements of American anti-missile defense systems in Poland and the Czech Republic.

This question and others are discussed in the following interview with James MACDOUGALL.

Is there really a threat to the US coming from Iran, which would justify the deployment of elements of anti-missile defense systems on the territory of Poland and the Czech Republic?

I think the threat is high enough to justify the deployment. The US public is very concerned about the potential that Iran will develop nuclear weapons. We supported a very active diplomatic campaign to discourage them from doing that, from developing nuclear weapons, both in support of the EU3 and the United Nations Security Council. We still support a very active diplomatic campaign with Iran. At the same time we believe it is prudent to pursue defensive measures. As you have probably heard, we announced the beginning of discussions with Poland and the Czech Republic about potential missile defense assets in these countries. This gives some measure of defense against the nuclear threat emanating from the Middle East.

Did you succeed in convincing your Ukrainian colleagues about the advisability of deploying anti-missile defense systems in Poland and the Czech Republic?

Ambassador Taylor and I have discussed on a very general policy level our plans and our concerns with Ukrainian officials. We are arranging a team of technical experts to come from the United States to Ukraine to discuss some of the details of what we are planning or what we are proposing with the Ministry of Defense, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Presidential Secretariat, the Prime Minister’s office, and others who may be interested or have a more detailed interest. We expect that this visit will take place in the next several weeks.

The goal of the visit will be to inform Ukrainian officials about some of the more technical parameters of our plans. The locations that we are considering are the optimal locations for the tracking and potential intercepting of small numbers of missiles or a single missile coming from the Middle East, targeted at the United Sates or Europe. So the locations are certainly not considered at random, but are based on geography and physics. The technical team of experts will be able to explain these details with better arguments than I can because I am a political generalist.

What is your assessment of Ukraine’s reaction to this question? Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych has said that as a result of the plans to deploy elements of American anti-missile defense systems in Europe, Ukraine is in a difficult spot and that this may pose a threat.

We have no intentions of taking steps that will make things more difficult for Ukraine. Ukraine has been a very strong partner of the United States on a number of key security issues, and we have reason to believe that we remain partners on these issues. As for Ukraine’s reaction and perception of this particular problem, I would leave this up to Ukrainian experts because I don’t have any particular information.

What do you expect from the Ukrainian side regarding the situation with the deployment of anti-missile defense systems? Do you perhaps expect that Ukraine will express the understanding of the American position?

I think it’s important that the countries of this region understand that the proposal, this program is designed to defend against the threat coming from the Middle East. And we have certainly begun consultations with our friends and partners to convey this information, details, so that our partners will have an accurate understanding of what we are intending to do. I think as we move from this consulting process at some point, as the partners say, “Yes, we understand what you are doing,” we will have succeeded at what we are trying to do.

You mean that it will be enough for you that Ukraine says that it understands the reasons behind these plans?

Well, I don’t want to move all the way to the end of the process. Let’s just say we have begun consultations to try and ensure that our partners and other countries in the region understand the rationale behind the proposal. This is the immediate objective, and we will see how the process goes.

If there is understanding on the Ukrainian side, can a situation arise in which the US will invite Ukraine, which has huge experience in developing anti-missile defense systems, and perhaps together with Russia, which has even more experience in this sphere, to join the work of developing American anti-missile defense systems?

At the moment I have no grounds for considering this matter. At this time there is no plan to request anything specifically.

Did you expect a stormy reaction from Russia, which is sharply criticizing the plans to deploy American anti-missile defense elements in Europe?

As we developed this plan, in the past few years we have repeatedly consulted with Russian officials on this plan. The idea was to be transparent, to make clear to the Russians our concerns and threats that we perceive. We had meetings on levels ranging from experts, technical experts, right up to the Minister of Defense. Our objective has been to demonstrate to our Russian colleagues that these systems are not a physical threat to Russia. So, in answer to your question, we are surprised by the Russian reaction because this is something that we have been discussing for quite some time. Russian statements seem to be somewhat inconsistent with our dialogue that we have had for quite some time. This system is a defensive system, and I think that Russian experts understand that it is based on detailed discussions.

General Yurii Baluevsky, the head of the General Headquarters of the Russian Army can also be regarded as an expert, but for some reason he calls the deployment of American anti-missile defense systems nothing more than a reconfiguration of the American presence in Europe?

I think that this question should be addressed to him.

The Russian expert at the Carnegie Center, Dmitry Trenin, also says that this deployment is connected to the balance of forces in Europe, as it was during the Cold War. Can you disprove this?

I have not seen this comment by Dmitry Trenin, but let me just say that we don’t consider that this plan upsets any balance in Europe. I consider it a plan that is designed to defend against the threat emanating from the Middle East.

Could this plan be affected by the fact that public opinion in Poland and the Czech Republic is against the deployment of the anti-missile defense elements on their territory?

I am not going to comment on the situation in these countries.

Formal statements have been made that Russia could be invited by the US to join the development of anti-missile defense systems, but the Russians have never shown any sign that they would like to consider this as an invitation. Why, in your opinion, does Moscow not want to cooperate in this sphere? Is it because of the lack of trust between the two countries, as some experts say? Or are there some other reasons?

Well, over the years we have worked on trying to increase the areas of cooperation between Russia and the United States, between NATO and Russia, and I think there’s certainly a possibility of free cooperation on anti-missile defense. There have been some discussions over the years about this and I assume they will continue.

What else have you discussed in Ukraine? Did you discuss cooperation between Ukraine and the US in the sphere of military-political and military-technical cooperation?

Over the last couple of days I discussed our bilateral cooperation in the military and defense spheres with senior representatives of Ukraine’s Ministry of Defense. We are quite pleased by the level of progress among our military people. We have a number of exchange programs with the Ukrainian military, as well as a number of programs that are being implemented here, helping to transform the Ukrainian Armed Forces towards a new system and a new organization. In particular, I want to mention the state partnership program between the California National Guard and Ukraine - this is a very active program, and it is bringing good results for both sides. In terms of practical cooperation, we have some cooperation on the technical, tactical level, which is benefiting both Ukraine and the West, but particularly Ukraine. Some of our programs are middle-term or long-term; for example, we are helping to develop a non-commissioned officers’ core.

Touching on American-Ukrainian military cooperation, I would like to make one point in addition to all these programs, seminars, and conferences. We also have yearly joint military exercises. As far as I understand the Ukrainian system, every year the Verkhovna Rada has to confirm the list of military exercises with the participation of military men who are supposed to arrive on the territory of Ukraine. As far as I understand, relevant draft laws are being considered by the Verkhovna Rada. I would like to note that we would be very pleased if this legislation were passed because military exercises like these are very important for both sides. They improve the ability to cooperate on the part of our military. In turn, this allows us to act effectively in multilateral operations all over the world. I would like to thank Ukraine for its contribution to such multilateral operations. I believe Ukraine is engaged in nearly 10 different operations in the world, including the ones under UN aegis and the KFOR forces in Kosovo. Ukrainian experts remain in Iraq, providing support to the coalition and the NATO Training Mission — Iraq. I underline once more that these exercises, which allow us to improve the ability to cooperate, are very important for our bilateral and multilateral missions all over the world.

Ukraine is interested in military-industrial cooperation with the US. This could entail, for example, taking advantage of Ukraine’s aviation know-how to create military transport planes, which are required by American land forces. Why there is no progress in this direction and why hasn’t such cooperation been organized?

First of all, the idea of military- industrial cooperation is very important, and we certainly support it. But in the US and generally in the West this type of cooperation is carried out by private corporations, the private sector. So, discussions have to be channeled into that area because the US government does not take part in such partnerships. In this branch, which is regulated by market principles, it is precisely competitive advantages that determine which projects are implemented and which are not. Therefore, these must be market mechanisms.