Making Russia pay, hard challenges of Ukrainian diplomacy and the need to reform the UN

Brian Bonner: Good day, everybody. This is Brian Bonner, your host for Ukraine Calling. We have a lot of questions, and we have exactly the right guest for it today. Oleksandr Merezhko, Member of Parliament, Chair of the Foreign Relations Committee. Welcome to the program.

Oleksandr Merezhko: Thanks for inviting me. Pleasure to be here.

Brian Bonner: I’m honored to have you in our company. Oleksandr, so many questions, and I’ll just start. Is the international legal system broken? How disappointed should Ukraine be at not getting an invitation to join NATO? How worried should Ukrainians be about the upcoming US and French elections? Why does Ukraine only have 50 embassies when the world has 190 nations?

What should our foreign policy be towards refugees, particularly fighting-age men who are living abroad in different countries? Hopefully, you can enlighten us today. And, you know, by way of biography, I want to say that you are from Bobrinets (city in Kirovohrad Region of Ukraine – ed.).

Oleksandr Merezhko: Exactly.

Brian Bonner: And not the most famous son, as you pointed out. Leonid Trotsky was born there.

Oleksandr Merezhko: Yes. And the first Ukrainian theater, Tobylevich, for instance. It’s famous as the birthplace of Ukrainian theater.

Brian Bonner: Ah, great. So proud of his hometown. Now, you’re a lawyer, jurist, and you’ve got quite a stellar educational record as an academic. You graduated from Taras Shevchenko National University, but you also went on to the University of Denver. And you also studied at the Harriman Institute at Columbia University, the Kennan Institute, and the Woodrow Wilson Center. So, all the top-flight think tanks in America. And it’s true you speak four languages?

Oleksandr Merezhko: Yes, I’ve been teaching in four languages.

Brian Bonner: You actually speak five languages: English, Polish, French, Russian, and Ukrainian.

Oleksandr Merezhko: To tell the truth, French is at a very modest level.

Politician or an academic: who can do more good?

Brian Bonner: Okay, but still multilingual. And we’re happy to have you here. You rode the wave of Zelensky’s popularity in 2019 and got elected to be the Chairman of Foreign Relations committee, which is a very key post now during the time of war.

I have to ask before we dive into the substance, where can you do the most good? What have you learned about being a politician? Do you like it? More than liking it, can you be more useful as a politician or as an academic?

Oleksandr Merezhko: Well, it’s an extremely interesting question because I have a feeling that all my life I have been an academician, a pure academician, and I’ve been an international legal scholar. My life was about doing research in the field of international law and teaching international law, of course.

But, you know, being a theorist of international law is like knowing the rules of how to play chess but never actually playing. But this has changed. Being a politician means being able to play political games and apply the rules of international law.

So, to me, it’s a unique experience in terms of gaining material and experience, which I hope to use later in my life and career when I return to international legal science. It’s a unique experience. For instance, I’ve been teaching a course on international organizations, but I have never been directly involved, and I have never seen it from the inside, like, for example, the Council of Europe, how it works, or the Inter Parliamentary Union and other inter parliamentary organizations.

Brian Bonner: Well, I think you’re stuck with being a politician, because as long as a full-scale war goes on, we’re not going to have elections, justifiably. I know you’ve explained that, and I agree that we can’t have that. But that makes you a politician with no end date unless you resign. You’re going to stay with it?

Oleksandr Merezhko: Yes. On one hand, being a politician is a very interesting and unique life experience. On the other hand, it’s very different from the life I had before, which I miss, honestly. But at the same time, it’s a unique opportunity to try to change something, especially now in this crucial period. I want to be helpful to my country and my people. At least I’m trying to do whatever I can to defend Ukraine’s interests in inter-parliamentary communication.

Ukraine wants to be a part of NATO, but is this feeling mutual?

Brian Bonner: And diplomacy and foreign policy. This is great. Let’s maybe dive into the news. Today it broke in various news outlets about the NATO summit coming up July 9th through 11th in Washington, D.C., a big summit, 75th anniversary. We are not going to get an invitation. What we are going to get is a Ukraine headquarters at a U.S. military base in Germany reporting directly to a three-star general or probably a U.S. general. How is that for a consolation prize? Are you disappointed?

Oleksandr Merezhko: I cannot say that I’m disappointed. But I believe that we should continue our struggle to get an invitation to join NATO, because without being a full-fledged member state of NATO, it will be very hard for us to preserve our statehood. So, it’s a life and death matter.

Brian Bonner: That’s the only security guarantee that really matters. NATO Article 5.

Oleksandr Merezhko: Exactly, this is the only one. And we can see examples of small Estonia. Now it’s safe being a member state of NATO. Otherwise, it would also be under attack by Russia. NATO has proved to be the most reliable security guarantee. For us to survive, we need to join NATO sooner or later.

Brian Bonner: Jens Stoltenberg says, well, my goal, and he’s leaving, is that Ukraine is absolutely ready in every possible way to become a NATO member as soon as the political consensus is reached. Is that your goal too?

Oleksandr Merezhko: Absolutely. If Ukraine joins NATO right now, I’m sure it would stop Russian aggression against Ukraine. It’s a matter of political will on the side of the United States and other leading states within NATO, like Germany and France.

Brian Bonner: It’s good that you mentioned those, because they’re all very pivotal. The political will is changing, and we have some moving parts. Do you welcome Mark Rutte as Secretary General?

Also, it looks like one of the hardliners, Kaja Kallas, the Estonian prime minister, is going to be the new EU foreign policy chief. Those are pluses for Ukraine.

Oleksandr Merezhko: Absolutely. This is great news because both politicians you mentioned are true and reliable friends of Ukraine, and they have proved it many times. Kaja Kallas, for example, I’m really happy that she will become diplomat number one of the European Union. She’s from Estonia, and Estonia has proved to be one of our biggest supporters.

As for Prime Minister Rutte, he has always been consistently on the side of Ukraine. To give you just one example, F-16s—it was his decision too. So I’m absolutely certain they are our friends and will do everything they can to bring us into NATO.

Can Ukraine count on the support of other countries?

Brian Bonner: Let’s go with some potential political trouble spots. How worried are you about the U.S election in November and the French election this weekend? (The episode was recorded on June 27 – ed.)

Oleksandr Merezhko: Well, I’ll start with the French election because, yes, we are concerned that the far-right party, Marine Le Pen, can get a majority. But at the same time, you know, before they used to spread pro-Russian narratives, but it seems like in recent months they have become more careful and cautious. I’m not sure whether it’s sincere or not, but France remains a democratic country.

And I’m sure that we can rely on other political parties, like Macron’s party. It gives me hope that even if the far-right gets a majority, it will not drastically change the French political course and attitude towards supporting Ukraine.

As for the U.S. elections, our official position is that we believe in the wisdom of the American people, and we are ready to work with whoever becomes the next president, either Biden or Trump. For us, what really matters is bipartisan support. We see that among Republicans, a majority are supporters of Ukraine, and some are very active supporters. Most Democrats are also our friends.

So I want to believe that no matter who becomes president, we’ll see a continuation of support for Ukraine for a very simple reason: it is in the national interests of the United States.

Brian Bonner: Yes. And we’ve seen a lot of conversions. We were together in Odesa, and I was watching with horror and shock your panel because you were flanked by all pro-Trump Americans. I checked the moderator, Danube Institute, and it’s a very pro-(Victor) Orban, pro-(Donald) Trump organization. I asked the moderator afterward why he stacked the panel with pro-Trumpists. She said she wanted their views to be heard.

It was a surprise. I thought there’d be at least one (President Joe) Biden supporter there. But you handled it well, you said that it’s institutions that matter. And you were right about the Republicans: there’s a hardcore Reaganite wing of the Republican party that doesn’t believe Biden has done enough. I know you’re too diplomatic to criticize America because you’re grateful, but I’m an American, so I can. I agree with the Reagan wing. I also believe Trump would be a disaster. But people can change. Look at House Speaker Mike Johnson. He went from opposing aid to saying Ukraine has to win. Same thing with (French President) Emmanuel Macron.

Oleksandr Merezhko: Yes, absolutely. On our part it would be a smart policy to have dialogue even with Ukraine skeptics in the United States. You can persuade them. If you present persuasive arguments, there is a chance you can bring them to your side.

Brian Bonner: You raise this question: how do we deal with troublesome countries that are important, like China, Hungary, Austria, and Slovakia under Fico? What should be our approach?

Oleksandr Merezhko: I view this issue from the perspective of an international lawyer. I think there is only one thing that can unite all these countries and their interests, which is international law. We should play by the rules established long ago. It’s important because the war of aggression is a flagrant violation of such rules. Each country has a legal obligation to support and help the victim of aggression.

That’s why we need to have dialogue even with these countries. As for China, it’s a separate story. The 21st century will be a struggle between the free world and the authoritarian world headed by China. The United States is the leader of the free world in democracy.

Of course, I view Ukraine on the side of the free world. We are fighting not only for our territorial integrity but for democracy broadly speaking. China is the biggest danger to democracy now. China is helping Russia to survive and continue the war. China is not neutral. How can it be neutral if it is a strategic partner without limits with Russia? It has helped Russia to restore its military-industrial complex and is doing everything it can to help Russia.

Brian Bonner: It looks like they want to defeat the West more than they want global rule of law.

Oleksandr Merezhko: Yes, absolutely. For China, the defeat of Ukraine would be a defeat of the West and the United States. This is how they view the geopolitical situation. That’s why the situation in Ukraine, Russian aggression in Ukraine, it’s much bigger than just the war of one country against the other.

Is international law broken completely?

Brian Bonner: International law, you’re the scholar, but I see the international legal institutions as broken because they are unable to prevent war in any shape or fashion.

We have yet to see whether they are capable of punishing war crimes. We don’t know that yet. Ukraine is going to be a big test case on this issue. The whole architecture of the United Nations is a World War II creation, and it’s alienating a lot of nations. The world has changed completely, yet we have these same five nations that can block everything.

Maybe let’s talk about the latest news and how that applies to what I just said. As you know, the European Court of Human Rights has ruled that Russia violated human rights and committed war crimes during 10 years of occupation in Crimea. What did you think of the findings? Have you read them? Were you involved in their work?

Oleksandr Merezhko: No, I was not involved, but I am familiar with this decision. Of course, as a lawyer, I need to read it more carefully, but I just know the general information released by the press. It’s a victory for international law and creates a very powerful argument in support of Ukraine. But the problem with international law is its implementation.

For example, we might have a decision of the ICJ, International Court of Justice, or arrest warrants of the International Criminal Court, or a decision of the European Court of Human Rights, but the key question is how to get it implemented.

And this is the problem because so far international law is a very peculiar system, based on self-help principle. But at the same time it also relies on the legal culture of different countries. Russia doesn’t respect international law, even though it makes references, tries to hide its aggression in this territory.

Brian Bonner: It doesn’t respect any law. I mean, it seems broken. And you’re right. Individual nations just opt out, like Russia doesn’t respect the International Criminal Court, or international justice, or the European Court of Human Rights. They just say, okay, we’re taking our ball and going home. Is it even possible to have an international enforcement mechanism, or is that just too far off into the future to think about?

Oleksandr Merezhko: Interestingly enough, a good example of how it should be done can be found in the League of Nations Covenant. There is an article about aggressive war and what should be done in such cases, and the answer is very simple: total isolation of the aggressor.

Brian Bonner: Automatic.

Oleksandr Merezhko: Automatic, yes, to sever even private ties. Unfortunately, Russia remains not completely isolated economically and even diplomatically. Ideally, to implement international law against the aggressor, the West should sever all contacts with the aggressor, including economic ties. But unfortunately, some Western countries continue to buy Russian goods.

Is it time to remake the UN?

Brian Bonner: Yeah, Austria, Slovakia, and Hungary. Those are problematic allies in Central Europe. You’ve talked about Russia as an illegitimate member of the United Nations. That brings a lot of, and I know we talked about, I think we both read John Bolton’s book. Some people just want to remake the United Nations from the ground up. Are you in that camp?

Oleksandr Merezhko: Yes. To be more specific, with some hesitation, but I’m in that camp for a very simple reason: the whole geopolitical situation has dramatically changed. To give you an example, among the permanent members of the Security Council, there are no such countries as India, the biggest democracy. There is no African state. The Security Council was constructed many years ago as a result of the Second World War. But since that time, global politics has changed dramatically.

Ukraine should expand its diplomacy

Brian Bonner: Populations and politics. I had Ambassador-at-Large Alexander Shcherba here on the program. I’m surprised that we have embassies only in 50 or so nations out of 190. The war has shown us where our weak spots are in the Global South.

Is it important to have diplomatic missions everywhere in the world? When it comes to the budget during the war, the defense ministry gets the money, and diplomacy often gets the short shrift, not just in Ukraine but also in America. The State Department budget is much smaller. Is this a priority for you? Is it important to have diplomatic representation in almost all countries?

Oleksandr Merezhko: It is a priority. If we take the UN, there are 193 member states, so ideally it would be great to have our representation in each of these countries, except for the aggressor state and its allies, of course. So far we can afford to have 50, but we are trying to enlarge.

For instance, in Africa, recently we have opened, and are planning to open more embassies. Some ambassadors perform their functions in multiple states. For instance, an ambassador to the South African Republic is also simultaneously ambassador to around a dozen other African states, which is a huge burden. But we’re trying to create more new embassies, even though we are limited in terms of budget.

Additionally, a crucial factor in deciding to open an embassy in a particular country is whether we have strong economic ties. There are some distant countries with which we don’t have many intensive connections.

Brian Bonner: Can you name the top five countries where you think we need an embassy where we don’t have one now? Or have you not thought that far?

Oleksandr Merezhko: Mostly African countries and the Global sSuth.

Brian Bonner: Because of the population.

Oleksandr Merezhko: And Latin America. We are fighting for and trying to persuade our partners in the Global South to support us. That’s why we need to have our embassies.

Brian Bonner: Right. Interesting. For the budget, I think the foreign ministry does a pretty good job.

What to do with Ukrainian refugees abroad?

Brian Bonner: Let’s talk about refugees. It seems that Ukraine has, for practical reasons, decided to give up persuading refugees to come back because it’s useless until the war is over.

But there’s a particular category of fighting-age men, and it’s becoming an irritant in some of the countries of our friends like Poland. What do you think about that, and what should our message be to those countries that are hosting these men?

Oleksandr Merezhko: Well, yes, I heard from my Polish colleagues, for example, such complaints regarding young men of conscription age sitting in restaurants. It raises questions. But the truth is that these people came on different grounds, and it’s difficult to generalize. Another issue is that there are no legal mechanisms on the part of Ukraine to make some of these men come back.

So it’s a difficult issue. Some men came to other countries before the full-scale invasion and had families or jobs. I remember how the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine called upon Ukrainian men abroad to come back and fight. It’s a moral obligation for Ukrainian men. But we should try to create incentives within the country to persuade these people to return.

Brian Bonner: Okay. That’s good. Financial incentives, moral incentives, or just the power of persuasion, because we do need more soldiers. And they need weapons and training.

Oleksandr Merezhko: For example, professional incentives. If a person comes back and fights to defend the motherland, Ukraine, he should have better job prospects in Ukraine.

Brian Bonner: Veterans’ rights.

Oleksandr Merezhko: Exactly.

Anti-corruption reforms in Ukraine

Brian Bonner: Now, I’ve heard you say, and I agree with you, that we made a lot of progress in fighting corruption and bringing anti-corruption infrastructure. This country is nothing like it was under (Viktor) Yanukovych (Ukraine’s president from 2010-2014). That’s for sure, much better.

Yet I wonder how troubled you are by the current news and the big problems. We have the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine being suspected of leaking information on high-profile criminal investigations to the suspects.

And we had that problem with SAP, the special anti-corruption prosecutor. We have a civil society that is fundamentally opposed to the presence of Oleh Tatarov, as deputy head of the presidential administration, saying we’re not going to get rule of law as long as that man is in the presidential administration. He was under investigation and that investigation went nowhere. We have reports of investigative journalists after their exposés are being threatened with mobilization. Are you paying attention to that? And what’s your assessment?

Oleksandr Merezhko: Yes, absolutely. My colleagues and I, as members of the parliament, pay very close attention. And we discuss, sometimes very harshly, all these cases. We are interested in having a good image of Ukraine as a country which is conducting two battles: against Russia and against corruption, which is our biggest internal enemy.

In this battle, the outcome of this battle depends on whether we’ll be perceived by our partners and allies as a trustworthy partner and whether they will continue to provide us military aid. That’s why the struggle against corruption is a matter of our survival. But to me, the best indicator of success in the fight against corruption is that no one is immune from being brought to justice. We have examples, when members of the parliament were brought to justice.

Brian Bonner: But who is being convicted high-profile?

Oleksandr Merezhko: So far, I don’t have such information. I’m familiar with ongoing investigations.

Brian Bonner: I know. That’s one of our problems. Investigations dribble on for years and then go nowhere. Olexandr Martinenko, former deputy, is a case in point. Roman Nasirov, the former tax chief, is another.

You can go, Igor Kolomoisky. We’re still picking a Supreme Court. We’re still picking a Constitutional Court. And by the way, (Pavlo) Vovk, the head of the disbanded Kyiv Administrative Court, we’re picking a new court there. We are not even halfway on the journey in establishing the rule of law. Would you agree?

Oleksandr Merezhko: We need to continue to work in this direction, definitely. I agree with that. And we need to raise the level and trust towards our court system. This is the key.

Brian Bonner: Which is among the lowest in terms of public trust of any institution.

Oleksandr Merezhko: Unfortunately. You know, to tell you the truth, I lived in the United States for some time. And to me, the object of my admiration has always been your court system. And I would like to see something like that in Ukraine.

Brian Bonner: It is good. I understand it, and it’s good, but we have our own problems right now with the Supreme Court, if you’ve been following, and I know you follow the news. But it is frustrating and I see this with different administrations. Basically we still have an unreformed general prosecutor’s office, unreformed SBU, unreformed a lot. I mean, would you be – I know you’re an ally and you’re in the president’s party, and I understand your allegiances. But would you be willing to say, Mr. President, you’ve got to let Tatarov go because he’s just too much of an albatross around our neck?

Oleksandr Merezhko: Well, first of all, I trust the president, and I’m trying to remain a loyal member of our team. I believe in teamwork. I’m a team player. And I proceed from the presumption that it is up to the president to decide with whom it is comfortable to work with. Personally, no, I’m not. But at the same time, it’s not within my competence. We have a special committee dealing with anti-corruption. So I trust their point of view because they’re specialists.

Brian Bonner: They’re not happy either if you look at the news. But we had that, I remember (Petro) Poroshenko and (Arseniy) Yatsenyuk: “that’s not my job, that’s the prime minister’s job.” And it would go back and forth like that until as you know they completely lost the support of the Ukrainian public which is not stupid, which is quite smart. Were you surprised by the 2019 landslide or you saw it coming?

Oleksandr Merezhko: I was surprised. To me, it was a sign of democracy because we couldn’t predict who would win. I’m happy that the elections were not rigged.

Brian Bonner: I think Ukrainians won’t tolerate that, right? They showed that during the two, three revolutions.

Oleksandr Merezhko: Exactly.

Brian Bonner: The first one wasn’t about the election. The second one was, and the third one was largely about the monopolization of power under Yanukovych.

Oleksandr Merezhko: It’s true democracy when you have elections with unpredictable results.

Is Ukraine going to win the war?

Brian Bonner: Ours are unpredictable, but that doesn’t make Americans happy with their choices. Are we going to win this war?

Oleksandr Merezhko: Strategically, we have already won. I can explain why. As soon as Russian troops were defeated next to Kyiv, it meant the beginning of the end of Putin’s regime. Now it’s only a question of time because we managed to preserve our statehood, and we kept our capital, Kyiv. We are talking about 20% of our territory being occupied, and we are trying to liberate this 20%. But strategically, in the long term, I believe that we have already won. Sooner or later, we’ll manage to liberate the whole territory of Ukraine.

Brian Bonner: We’ll have to become a big Israel to do that.

Oleksandr Merezhko: Yes, yes, perhaps. And we need to continue to have a strong will for survival and defense, to have very high morale, which luckily we still have. There are many things we can learn from Israel and its experience.

Can there be any negotiations with Russia?

Brian Bonner: Right. So you’re firmly in the camp of no negotiations with Russia. Because you heard (Russian Foreign Minister Sergei) Lavrov say the other day, we’re not even going to talk until they agree to give up territory.

Oleksandr Merezhko: I would put it this way. I already have experience negotiating with Russians within the so-called Minsk process. I was deputy head of the Ukrainian delegation.

Brian Bonner: That must have been an exercise in futility and frustration.

Oleksandr Merezhko: It was easier to negotiate with a wall than with the Russians because they didn’t even consider themselves a party to negotiations. They officially proclaimed themselves to be a mediator, which was just ludicrous. How can you have any kind of negotiations with a party that doesn’t consider itself to be in negotiations? It’s a paradox, an absurdity. So I believe that negotiating with Russians is useless when you know that no matter what agreement you reach, it will be violated by them. They have violated everything: the peace treaty on friendship and cooperation of 1997, the Budapest Memorandum, and all kinds of bilateral treaties with Ukraine.

Brian Bonner: Oh, yeah. 91, 94, 97, as recently as a couple years before 2014, Putin said, Crimea is Ukraine. So you can’t trust them.

Closing remarks

Brian Bonner: I know you spent periods studying abroad, but were we asleep from 2014 to 2022? Should we have seen this coming? When I was the editor at the Kyiv Post, in hindsight, it seems pretty obvious that this is where they were going. Was it that obvious to you, or is it just human nature that we want to wish for the best?

Oleksandr Merezhko: To me it was not obvious. If you were to ask me in 2015 whether Russia is capable of attacking Ukraine, I wouldn’t have been able to imagine this for a very simple reason: as an international lawyer, I believed in the force of international law. I would say, no, how could it happen if there are lots of agreements, if there is a United Nations Security Council, basic principles of international law, the OSCE, the Council of Europe. But it turned out that Russians completely disregard international law.

Brian Bonner: Which has no enforcement mechanism.

Oleksandr Merezhko: Yes. I often ask my foreign colleagues how they view the situation because, you know, we are at the epicenter, we are biased by definition.

Brian Bonner: We’re in a bubble.

Oleksandr Merezhko: Yes, exactly. Sometimes this view from outside can be truly important and sobering. How do you view the situation right now in Ukraine? Do you have any prognosis on how it can develop, for example, next year? What will happen?

Brian Bonner: Well, I’m worried because I’m a legal permanent resident. I have deep roots here. This is my second home. America is my first home, but this is also my home. I chose not to be a refugee or go back to America. I chose to live here during the full-scale war. So I believe in this country. But I know not everybody cares about us, and that’s a big problem.

Another thing is there are so many violent spots in the world that aren’t even getting attention. We’re talking about the Middle East, the Uyghurs in China, Africa, Syria, Darfur in Sudan. There seems to be a lot of hatred in this world, and I don’t think we’ve really figured that out.

The world is heading for multi-trillion dollar increases in defense spending, and that makes me sad. While I agree with it because evil needs to be confronted, that money could go to education, roads, health care, and it’s not going to go there. We have to innovate our way out.

At the Kyiv Post, we were strong against corruption not because we were trying to run down Ukraine, but because we believe, and I know you believe, and Joe Biden and (U.S. Secretary of State) Antony Blinken believe, that corruption weakens the nation. Corruption weakened us in Ukraine to the point where it made this invasion more likely and more successful than it would have otherwise. So I really want to see that fight be won. It needs to be won. I just hope we get that going.

I also believe in Biden, I will vote for him. I’m a Democrat. I usually vote for Democrats, although I like John McCain and Mitt Romney and other people. We need to go further. The West plus Ukraine equals victory. No question about it. We are so much stronger united against Russia. You can put Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran together. They can’t touch us if we are behind Ukraine.

Oleksandr Merezhko: Yes, I completely agree with you. I can recall this famous phrase: “United we win, if we are separated, we fall.” That’s why we should keep being united.

Brian Bonner: Any more interview questions? I like being interviewed.

Oleksandr Merezhko: What would be your advice to Ukraine? How to work with the American audience? What arguments can we use to persuade them to be more supportive of Ukraine?

Brian Bonner: I think it’s happening. Activate the diaspora. I’ve known Oksana Markarova for more than a decade, even before she was a finance minister. And I hope that Ukraine gets its diplomacy going because it can’t just be inside the Beltway. It has to be in Chicago, Indiana, and different states.

I come from Minnesota, and there’s a small but very dynamic diaspora there. We need a constant education process because many Americans have not traveled abroad and still lump Ukraine and Russia together. It took a war for people to understand that these are really separate countries with separate ambitions and paths.

One is on the track we want to be allies with, and the other is something we want to go back to containment and isolation. Live in your world, but you’re not going to live in ours. That’s what I think, and I see evidence of that.

The best evidence is that America’s politics is 50/50, but on the issue of Ukraine, it’s bipartisan and a clear majority. Now, that majority fluctuates, but there’s still a clear majority. Why? Because Americans know right from wrong. Some people say, I don’t care about Ukraine. But even those people are a diplomatic opportunity. If Ukraine loses it will have serious consequences because it means the authoritarians are emboldened, and where are they going to strike next?

You guys are making those arguments, and you have very untraditional ways to reach people who aren’t into politics. When you say international rules-based order, that bores a lot of people. But Ukraine has the cultural strength, authors, singers, thinkers, entertainers to make a dent in a country that is really unbelievably split down the middle in terms of politics, that’s what I think.