美国国务院
发言人办公室
2022年1月20日
安东尼·布林肯国务卿发表讲话
德国柏林
柏林-勃兰登堡科学院（Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Sciences）
 
“俄罗斯进犯乌克兰及其他地区利害攸关”
 
布林肯国务卿：下午好。首先，请允许我表达不胜荣幸之情，在座的有如此众多来自德国各个不同社区的朋友、同仁和领袖，以及将我们两国联系在一起的伙伴关系的领导人。我感谢你们所有人的出席，感谢能有这次机会，并感谢能来到科学与人文学院（Academy of Sciences and Humanities）。我听西格马（Sigmar）介绍了一点有关历史，在门厅间大概走了走，而且我非常感谢这一盛情。
这是一座拥有卓越的学术传统的学院，其发明创新可以追溯到300多年前。据我了解，在众多名人中，阿尔伯特·爱因斯坦（Albert Einstein）曾是这里的成员，因此，我可能应当让你们知道我今天的讲话不会涉及天体物理学，这对大家都有好处。
我要感谢所有参与接待我们的机构，其中包括“大西洋之桥”（Atlantik-Brücke）。顺便提一下，我本人与“大西洋之桥”的联系可以追溯到20多年前。我非常清楚地记得在克林顿政府期间同从德国来访的同仁共度时光。很高兴和你们见面，德国马歇尔基金会（German Marshall Fund）、阿斯彭研究所（Aspen Institute）以及美国对德协会（American Council on Germany）。而且我不能不感谢一位很好的朋友，我在大学时代、在克林顿政府任内、在奥巴马政府任内的一位同事，丹·本杰明（Dan Benjamin）。见到你也非常高兴。
多年来，这些组织机构帮助建立、增强并深化了我们两国间的联系。一个强大的民主的标志之一是一个蓬勃、独立的公民社会，我感谢联合主办方对大西洋两岸的民主所做的贡献，并再次感谢他们今天让我们共聚一堂。
正如西格马所言，也正如你们所知，我在一个对于欧洲、美国乃至我认为对于全世界都极其紧迫的时刻来到了柏林。俄罗斯一直在继续加剧它对乌克兰的威胁；我们就在过去几天已经再次看到越来越好战的言论以及在乌克兰边境集结其军队，包括现在在白罗斯（白俄罗斯）。
它屡次背离了几十年来保障着整个欧洲的和平的各项协议。而且它继续针对北约组织——一个保护着整个欧洲和北美洲近10亿人民的防御性的自愿联盟，并且针对国际和平与安全的指导原则，而捍卫它们与我们所有人休戚相关。
这些原则——确立于两次世界大战及冷战之后——不允许一个国家有权以武力改变另一个国家的边界；不允许就另一个国家所推行的政策或做出的决定发号施令，其中包括与谁联合；也不允许施加势力范围以迫使主权邻国屈从于它的意志。
听任俄罗斯肆无忌惮地违反这些原则将把我们大家都拖回到一个更加危险、更不稳定的时代，当时这个大洲——这座城市——被一分为二，被无人区分隔，有士兵巡逻，战争全面爆发的风险深重地笼罩着每个人的生活。这还将向全世界其他人发出一个这些原则可有可无的信息，而这也将产生灾难性后果。
这正是美国以及我们在欧洲的伙伴如此关注乌克兰局势的原因。这不仅仅是两个国家之间的一场争端，也不仅仅事关俄罗斯和北约组织。这是一场造成全球性后果的危机，而且它需要全球性的关切和行动。
今天在这里，在局势迅速演变之时，我将争取直接切入事实真相。
首先，俄罗斯声称这场危机关系到它的国家防御、军事演习、武器系统以及安全协议。但是，如果真是这样，我们可以和平地以外交方式解决问题。我们可以采取有关步骤——美国、俄罗斯和欧洲各国——来提高透明度、减少风险、推进军备控制并建立信任。我们过去成功地这样做了，而且还能再次这样做。
事实上，这正是我们上周在美国与俄罗斯的战略稳定对话（Strategic Stability Dialogue）、在北约-俄罗斯理事会（NATO-Russia Council）以及在欧洲安全与合作组织（OSCE）发起的讨论上着手去做的。在这些会谈以及其他很多会谈中，美国和我们的欧洲盟友及伙伴本着对等的精神多次主动向俄罗斯提出了外交建议。
到目前为止，我们准备进行的善意接触都遭到回绝——因为，事实上，这场危机并不是主要关系到武器或军事基地。它关系到乌克兰及所有国家的主权和自决。而且其核心在于俄罗斯拒绝接受一个冷战之后的完整、自由、和平的欧洲。
鉴于我们对于俄罗斯的进犯、挑衅及政治干预——包括针对美国的有关行为——的所有深刻关切，拜登政府已明确表示我们愿意寻求一种更稳定、更可预测的关系；以谈判达成像新削减战略武器条约（New START）这样的军备控制协议，并启动我们的战略稳定对话；采取共同行动来解决气候危机，并为共同的事业而努力以恢复伊朗核协议。而且我们感谢俄罗斯在这些努力中与我们的接触往来。
尽管莫斯科针对乌克兰的肆意威胁及其危险的军事行动——尽管其混淆视听并散布虚假信息——美国协同我们的盟友和伙伴提出了一条走出这场人为危机的外交途径。正因为如此，我回到了欧洲——昨天在乌克兰，今天在德国这里，明天在瑞士并将在那里同俄罗斯外长拉夫罗夫见面，再次寻求外交解决方式。
美国非常希望事实的确如此，而且当然倾向于外交而不是其他方式。我们知道我们在欧洲的伙伴也有同感。欧洲各地的人民和家庭也是如此，因为他们知道如果俄罗斯拒绝外交方式，他们将背负最沉重的负担。而且我们希望欧洲以外的国家，希望整个国际社会能够阐明，俄罗斯如果挑起争端将会付出的代价，并挺身而出地捍卫保护我们所有人的各项原则。
让我们来客观地看一看现在的利害关系，谁将切实受到影响，以及谁要承担责任。1991年，千百万乌克兰人前往投票站，表明乌克兰将不再遭受独裁者的统治，并将实行自治。2014年，乌克兰人民奋起捍卫他们拥有一个民主的、属于欧洲的未来的选择。自那时以来，他们一直生活在俄罗斯占领克里米亚（Crimea）及其进犯顿巴斯（Donbas）的阴影之下。
俄罗斯协同由它指挥、训练、装备并资助的代理人所策划的在乌克兰东部的战争已造成超过14000名乌克兰人死亡。还有数以千计的人受伤。一座座城镇被整个摧毁。将近150万乌克兰人为逃离暴力而流离失所。克里米亚和顿巴斯的乌克兰人遭到了残酷镇压。俄罗斯阻止乌克兰人跨过接触线，切断了他们同该国其他地区的联系。数以百计的乌克兰人作为政治犯遭到俄罗斯及其代理人的关押。数以百计的家庭不知道他们的亲人是死是活。
人道主义需求也日益增加。将近300万乌克兰人，其中包括100万老年人和50万儿童，迫切需要食品、避难所及其他拯救生命的援助。而且当然就连远离战事的乌克兰人也受到了影响。这是他们的国家；那些人都是他们的一国同胞。乌克兰任何地方的人民都无法摆脱俄罗斯的恶意行径。莫斯科企图破坏乌克兰的民主机制，干预乌克兰的政治和选举，阻断能源和商贸以恐吓乌克兰领导人并对其公民施压，利用宣传和虚假信息散布不信任，并对该国的关键性基础设施发起网络攻击。破坏乌克兰稳定的行径无休无止。
而且现在俄罗斯还准备得寸进尺。俄罗斯再次进犯将造成的人员伤亡会比我们迄今为止所目睹的还要高出许多倍。俄罗斯声称乌克兰对其安全构成了某种威胁，并以此为其行径开脱。这颠倒了事实真相。是谁的军队包围了谁？是哪个国家以武力索取了另一个国家的领土？哪国军队的规模比另一方要大许多倍？哪个国家拥有核武器？乌克兰并非挑衅者。乌克兰只不过是在求生存。如果俄罗斯煽动一起挑衅或事件——然后企图以此为借口来进行军事干预，并指望当全世界识破这个诡计时已为时晚矣，任何人都不应当对此感到意外。
对于普京总统的真实意图有许多猜想，但我们实际上不需要猜测。他已经多次对我们说过。他正在为一场侵略做铺垫，因为他不相信乌克兰是一个主权国家。他在2008年直截了当地对布什总统说过，“乌克兰不是一个真正的国家”。他在2020年说过，“乌克兰人和俄罗斯人是同一个民族”。就在几天前，俄罗斯外交部还发布推文庆祝1654年乌克兰和俄罗斯统一的纪念日。本周这条讯息是各时候以来相当明确无误的一条讯息。
因此，与乌克兰攸关的重大利害更全面地呈现出来。这不仅仅是一场可能发生的侵略和战争。这关系到乌克兰是否有权作为一个主权国家而存在。这关系到乌克兰是否有权成为一个民主国家。
而这并不止于乌克兰。所有前苏联社会主义共和国都在1990年和1991年成为主权国家。格鲁吉亚是其中之一。俄罗斯在2008年入侵格鲁吉亚。13年后，仍然有将近30万格鲁吉亚人流离失所。另一个国家是摩尔多瓦。俄罗斯违背摩尔多瓦人民的意愿，在那里保留军队和军火。
如果俄罗斯入侵和占领乌克兰，下一步会怎样？无疑，俄罗斯会加紧将邻国变成傀儡国家，控制它们的活动，并压制任何民主之声的火花。主权和自决的原则一旦被抛弃，世界就会倒转，我们历经几十年共同确立的规则将被破坏，最后消失。
这将使一些政府可以更猖狂地为获得自己所需而为所欲为，哪怕这意味着封闭另一个国家的互联网，在深冬切断供暖油路，或者派坦克进驻——这一切都是俄罗斯近年对其他国家采用的手段。正因为如此，各地政府和公民都应关心正在乌克兰发生的情况。这看起来似乎是一个远方的地区性争执，或者是俄罗斯霸凌的又一事例。但是，与之利害攸关的再次是几十年来让世界变得更安全和更稳定的原则。
而俄罗斯的说法是，问题在北约。这显然是荒唐的。北约没有入侵格鲁吉亚；北约没有入侵乌克兰。北约是一个防御联盟，对俄罗斯毫无野心。相反，北约多年来在努力与俄罗斯接触交往，但遗憾的是这些努力遭到拒绝。例如，在旨在建立信任和增进磋商与合作的《北约-俄罗斯基本协定》（NATO Russia Founding Act）中，北约承诺大幅度减少在东欧的军事实力。它确实这样做了。
俄罗斯承诺对其在欧洲的常规军力部署予以同样限制。然而，它却又一次入侵两个国家。俄罗斯说北约正在包围俄罗斯。其实，只有6%的俄罗斯边界与北约国家接壤。相比之下，乌克兰如今真正是在俄罗斯军队的包围中。在波罗的海国家和波兰，有大约5000名来自其他国家的北约部队，而且他们的驻扎是轮流而不是永久性的。俄罗斯在乌克兰边境驻扎的军队数量至少20倍于此。
普京总统说，北约是“将导弹放在我们家的门廊上”。但是，是俄罗斯发展了能够达到德国和几乎所有北约欧洲领土的陆基中程导弹，尽管它是禁止这些导弹的《中导条约》（INF Treaty）的签约国。实际上，俄罗斯的违约导致了这项条约终止，减少了我们所有人的安全。
还值得指出的一点是，虽然俄罗斯不是北约成员，但它像其他许多非北约国家一样，其实得到了由于北约的帮助而成为可能的和平、稳定与繁荣所带来的好处。我们许多人都清晰地记得冷战时代的紧张和恐惧。苏联和西方在那些年里为建立理解和共同达成国家间如何行事的规则而彼此采取的举措受到各地人民的欢迎，因为这使局势降温，减少了发生军事冲突的可能。那些突破性举措是各方通过大量艰苦努力取得的成果。如今，我们正眼见艰苦的努力付诸东流。
例如，1975年，欧洲安全与合作组织的所有成员国，包括俄罗斯，签署了《赫尔辛基最后文件》（Helsinki Final Act），从中确立了十项国际行为指导原则，包括尊重国家主权，避免威胁或动用武力，边界不可侵犯，国家领土完整，和平解决分歧，以及不干涉内政。俄罗斯在乌克兰违背了上述每一项原则，并且一再表明它蔑视这些原则。
1990年，欧安组织成员国，包括俄罗斯，达成《维也纳文件》（Vienna Document），建立了一套信心与安全建设措施，旨在提高包括军演在内的军事活动的透明度和可预见性。现在，俄罗斯只是有选择地遵循那些条款。例如，它举行了大规模军事演习，声称因为这些军演是在未预先通知参演部队的情况下进行，所以不属于《维也纳文件》有关照会和观察的规范之列。去年秋天，俄罗斯在白罗斯进行了有10万多部队参加的军事演习，这些演习不可能没有预先通知。莫斯科没有提供有关它的部队在格鲁吉亚的信息，没有将去年春季在乌克兰周围的大规模军事集结通知欧安组织，没有回答乌克兰对其行动的提问，而这一切都是1990年协议的规定。
1994年，在被称为《布达佩斯备忘录》（Budapest Memorandum）的公约中，俄罗斯、美国和英国承诺“尊重乌克兰的独立与主权和现有边界线”，并对其“避免进行威胁或动用武力”。这些承诺帮助说服乌克兰放弃了苏联解体后所继承的当时规模位居世界第三的核武器。我们只需问问住在克里米亚和顿巴斯的人便知道那些承诺的结果如何。
我还可以举出更多例子。他们都证明同一个结论：一个国家一再违背自己的诺言，无视它自己同意的规则，尽管其他国家非常努力地让它加入每一步。这个国家就是俄罗斯。当然，俄罗斯有权利保护自己。美国和欧洲国家有准备讨论俄罗斯的安全担忧以及我们能够如何以对等的方式解决它们。俄罗斯担心它的安全，并且说美国和欧洲和北约采取的行动会威胁它的安全。我们对俄罗斯正在采取的行动给我们的安全带来威胁有着深切担忧。我们可以谈所有那些。但是，我们不会将《联合国宪章》中确定的，经联合国安理会批准的主权或领土完整原则视为谈判内容。
如果我能够同俄罗斯人民讲话，我会对他们说：你们应该享有安全和有尊严的生活，就像所有地方的人民一样，而且没有任何国家想危及这点——乌克兰不想，美国不想，北约或北约的成员国不想。但是，真正给你们的安全带来风险的，是与你们的乌克兰邻邦进行无谓的战争和随之而来的一切代价，其中最大的代价是，为之冒风险和甚至失去生命的年轻人。
在新冠疫情全球肆虐、我们面对气候危机、我们需要重建全球经济——一切都需要我们付出极大精力和资源——的时刻，一场很可能旷日持久的暴力冲突真是你们需要的吗？它真的会让你们的生活更安全、更繁荣、更充满机会吗？想想看，像俄罗斯这样的伟大国家如果把它的资源，尤其是了不起的人才资源，它的人民，投入到我们时代最重大挑战中将会取得何等成就。我们在美国，我们在欧洲的伙伴，都会欢迎那样。
明天，我将会晤拉夫罗夫外长，我将敦促俄罗斯找到途径，重返它在几十年中承诺的协议，并与美国和我们的盟国及伙伴一道努力，书写一个能够确保我们共同安全的未来，但同时也将表明，俄罗斯对乌克兰的进犯将断送这种可能，而且将恰恰形成俄罗斯所抱怨的局面：大大增强北约的防御联盟。
这些是我们面临的艰难问题。它们不会迅速解决。我当然不指望我们明天在日内瓦把它们解决。但是，我们可以增进相互理解，而这，连同俄罗斯把在乌克兰边界的军事集结降级，可以让我们在未来几周避免危机。与此同时，美国将继续与我们在北约、欧洲联盟、欧安组织、七国集团、联合国以及整个国际社会中的盟国和伙伴共同努力，明确指出俄罗斯面前的两条道路：走外交之路能够带来和平与安全；走侵犯之路将只能导致冲突、严重后果、国际谴责。美国和我们的盟国将继续站在乌克兰一边，随时准备在任何一条道路上与俄罗斯相会。
我在柏林这里谈这些想法并非偶然。世界上大概没有任何地方比这座城市更多地经历了冷战的分裂。在这里，肯尼迪总统宣告，所有自由的人民都是柏林公民。在这里，里根总统敦促戈尔巴乔夫先生拆掉那堵墙。此刻，似乎普京总统想要回到那个时代。我们希望不是。但是如果他选择这样做，他所面对的将是像数代领导人和公民展现出的致力在欧洲和世界各地促进和平、促进自由、促进人的尊严的同样决心与团结。
非常感谢聆听。（掌声）
 
欲查看原稿内容:  https://www.state.gov/the-stakes-of-russian-aggression-for-ukraine-and-beyond/

The Stakes of Russian Aggression for Ukraine and Beyond
SPEECH
ANTONY J. BLINKEN, SECRETARY OF STATE
BERLIN-BRANDENBURG ACADEMY OF SCIENCES
BERLIN, GERMANY
JANUARY 20, 2022

SECRETARY BLINKEN:  Good afternoon.  First, let me say how honored I am by the presence of so many friends, colleagues, leaders across different communities here in Germany, and also leaders in the partnership that links our two countries.  I’m grateful to all of you for being here, grateful for this opportunity as well to be at the Academy of Sciences and Humanities.  I heard a little bit from Sigmar about the history, briefly walked the hallways, and I very much appreciate this hospitality.
But it’s an institution with an extraordinary tradition of scholarship, discovery stretching back more than 300 years.  And I understand that, among other luminaries, Albert Einstein was a member here, so I should probably let you know that my remarks today will include very little about astrophysics, which will be to everyone’s benefit.
I want to thank all the institutions that are cohosting us, including Atlantik-Brücke.  By the way, my own history with the Brücke, the bridge, goes back well more than 20 years.  I remember very well spending time with visiting colleagues from Germany during the Clinton administration.  But it’s pleasure to be with you, the German Marshall Fund, the Aspen Institute, the American Council on Germany.  And I can’t not acknowledge a great friend, colleague going back to my university days, the Clinton administration, the Obama administration, Dan Benjamin.  It’s wonderful to see you as well.
Over the years, these organizations have helped build, strengthen, and deepen the ties between our countries.  One of the markers of a strong democracy is a robust, independent civil society, and I’m grateful to our cohosts for their contributions to democracy on both sides of the Atlantic and, again, for bringing us together today.
So as Sigmar said, and as all of you know, I have come to Berlin at a moment of great urgency for Europe, for the United States, and, I would argue, for the world.  Russia is continuing to escalate its threat toward Ukraine.  We’ve seen that again in just the last few days with increasingly bellicose rhetoric, building up its forces on Ukraine’s borders, including now in Belarus.
Russia has repeatedly turned away from agreements that have kept the peace across the continent for decades.  And it continues to take aim at NATO, a defensive, voluntary alliance that protects nearly a billion people across Europe and North America, and at the governing principles of international peace and security that we all have a stake in defending.
Those principles, established in the wake of two world wars and a cold war, reject the right of one country to change the borders of another by force; to dictate to another the policies it pursues or the choices it makes, including with whom to associate; or to exert a sphere of influence that would subjugate sovereign neighbors to its will.
To allow Russia to violate those principles with impunity would drag us all back to a much more dangerous and unstable time, when this continent and this city were divided in two, separated by no man’s lands, patrolled by soldiers, with the threat of all-out war hanging over everyone’s heads.  It would also send a message to others around the world that these principles are expendable, and that, too, would have catastrophic results.
That’s why the United States and our allies and partners in Europe have been so focused on what’s happening in Ukraine.  It’s bigger than a conflict between two countries.  It’s bigger than Russia and NATO.  It’s a crisis with global consequences, and it requires global attention and action.
Here today, among this rapidly unfolding situation, I’d like to try to cut through to the facts of the matter.
To begin, Russia claims that this crisis is about its national defense, about military exercises, weapons systems, and security agreements.  Now, if that’s true, we can resolve things peacefully and diplomatically.  There are steps we can take – the United States, Russia, the countries of Europe – to increase transparency, reduce risks, advance arms control, build trust.  We’ve done this successfully in the past and we can do it again.
And, indeed, it’s what we set out to do last week in the discussions that we put forward at the Strategic Stability Dialogue between the United States and Russia, at the NATO-Russia Council, and at the OSCE.  At those meetings and many others, the United States and our European allies and partners have repeatedly reached out to Russia with offers of diplomacy in a spirit of reciprocity.
So far, our readiness to engage in good faith has been rebuffed, because in truth this crisis is not primarily about weapons or military bases.  It’s about the sovereignty and self-determination of Ukraine and all states.  And at its core, it’s about Russia’s rejection of a post-Cold War Europe that is whole, free, and at peace.
For all our profound concerns with Russia’s aggression, provocations, political interference – including against the United States – the Biden administration has made clear our willingness to pursue a more stable, predictable relationship; to negotiate arms control agreements, like the renewal of New START, and launch our Strategic Stability Dialogue; to pursue common action to address the climate crisis and work in common cause to revive the Iran nuclear deal.  And we appreciate how Russia has engaged with us in these efforts.
And despite Moscow’s reckless threats against Ukraine and dangerous military mobilization – despite its obfuscation and disinformation – the United States, together with our allies and partners, have offered a diplomatic path out of this contrived crisis.  That’s why I’ve returned to Europe – Ukraine yesterday, Germany here today, Switzerland tomorrow, where I’ll meet with Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov and once again seek diplomatic solutions.
The United States would greatly prefer those to be the case, and certainly prefer diplomacy to the alternatives.  We know our partners in Europe feel the same way.  So do people and families across the continent, because they know that they will bear the greatest burden if Russia rejects diplomacy.  And we look to countries beyond Europe, to the international community as a whole to make clear the costs to Russia if it seeks conflict, and to stand up for all the principles that protect all of us.
So let’s look plainly at what’s at stake right now, who will actually be affected, and who is responsible.  In 1991, millions of Ukrainians went to the polls to say that Ukraine would no longer be ruled by autocrats but would govern itself.  In 2014, the Ukrainian people stood up to defend their choice for a democratic and European future.  They’ve been living under the shadow of Russian occupation in Crimea and aggression in Donbas ever since.
The war in eastern Ukraine, orchestrated by Russia with proxies that it leads, trains, supplies, and finances – well, that’s killed more than 14,000 Ukrainians.  Thousands more have been wounded.  Entire towns have been destroyed.  Nearly one and a half million Ukrainians have fled their homes to escape the violence.  For Ukrainians in Crimea and the Donbas, the repression is acute.  Russia blocks Ukrainians from crossing the line of contact, cutting them off from the rest of the country.  Hundreds of Ukrainians are being held as political prisoners by Russia and its proxies.  Hundreds of families don’t know if their loved ones are alive or dead.
And the humanitarian needs are growing.  Nearly 3 million Ukrainians, including a million elderly people and half a million children, urgently need food, shelter, and other life-saving assistance.  But of course, even Ukrainians who live far away from the fighting are affected by it. This is their country; these are their fellow citizens.  And nowhere in Ukraine are people free from Russia’s malign activities.  Moscow has sought to undermine Ukraine’s democratic institutions, interfered in Ukraine’s politics and elections, blocked energy and commerce to intimidate Ukraine’s leaders and pressure its citizens, used propaganda and disinformation to sow mistrust, launched cyber attacks on the country’s critical infrastructure.  The campaign to destabilize Ukraine has been relentless.
And now Russia is poised to go even further.  The human toll of renewed aggression by Russia would be by many magnitudes higher than what we’ve seen to date.  Russia justifies its actions by claiming that Ukraine somehow poses a threat to its security.  This turns reality on its head.  Whose troops are surrounding whom?  Which country has claimed another’s territory through force?  Which military is many times the size of the other?  Which country has nuclear weapons? Ukraine isn’t the aggressor here; Ukraine is just trying to survive.  No one should be surprised if Russia instigates a provocation or incident and then tries to use it to justify military intervention, hoping that by the time the world realizes the ruse it’ll be too late.
There’s been a lot of speculation about President Putin’s true intentions, but we don’t actually have to guess.  He’s told us repeatedly.  He’s laying the groundwork for an invasion because he doesn’t believe that Ukraine is a sovereign nation.  He said it flat out to President Bush in 2008, and I quote, “Ukraine isn’t a real country.”  He said in 2020, and I quote, “Ukrainians and Russians are one and the same people.”  Just a few days ago, the Russian ministry of foreign affairs tweeted in celebration of the anniversary of Ukraine and Russia’s unification in the year 1654.  That’s a pretty unmistakable message this week of all weeks.
And so the stakes for Ukraine come more fully into view.  This is not only about a possible invasion and war.  It’s about whether Ukraine has a right to exist as a sovereign nation.  It’s about whether Ukraine has a right to be a democracy.
This hasn’t stopped with Ukraine.  All the former Soviet socialist republics became sovereign nations in 1990 and 1991.  One of them is Georgia.  Russia invaded it in 2008.  Thirteen years later, nearly 300,000 Georgians are still displaced from their homes.  Another is Moldova.  Russia maintains troops and munitions there against the will of its people.  If Russia invades and occupies Ukraine, what’s next?  Certainly, Russia’s efforts to turn its neighbors into puppet states, to control their activities, to crack down on any spark of democratic expression will intensify.  Once the principles of sovereignty and self-determination are thrown out, you revert to a world in which the rules we shaped together over decades erode and then vanish.
And that emboldened some governments to do whatever it takes to get whatever they want, even if that means shutting down another country’s internet, cutting off heating oil in the dead of winter, or sending in tanks – all tactics Russia has used against other countries in recent years. That’s why governments and citizens everywhere should care about what’s happening in Ukraine.  It may seem like a distant regional dispute or yet another example of Russian bullying, but at stake, again, are principles that have made the world safer and more stable for decades.
Now alternatively, Russia says the problem is NATO.  On its face, that’s absurd.  NATO didn’t invade Georgia; NATO didn’t invade Ukraine.  Russia did.  NATO is a defensive Alliance with no aggressive intent toward Russia.  To the contrary, efforts by NATO to engage Russia have gone on for years, and unfortunately, been rejected.  For example, in the NATO Russia Founding Act, which was intended to build trust and increase consultations and cooperation, NATO pledged to significantly reduce its military strength in Eastern Europe.  And it’s done just that.
Russia pledged to exercise similar restraint in its conventional force deployments in Europe. Again, instead, it invaded two countries.  Russia says that NATO is encircling Russia.  In fact, only 6 percent of Russia’s borders touch NATO countries.  Compare that to Ukraine, which is now genuinely being encircled by Russian troops.  In the Baltic countries and Poland, there are around 5,000 NATO troops who aren’t from those countries, and their presence is rotational, not permanent.  Russia has put at least 20 times as many on Ukraine’s borders.
President Putin says that NATO is, and I quote, “parking missiles on the porch of our house.”  But it’s Russia that has developed ground-launched, intermediate-range missiles that can reach Germany and nearly all NATO European territory despite Russia being a party to the INF Treaty that prohibited these missiles.  In fact, Russia’s violation led to the termination of that treaty, which has left us all less safe.
It’s also worth noting that though Russia is not a member of NATO, it, like many non-NATO countries, has actually benefited from the peace, stability, and prosperity that NATO has helped make possible.  Many of us remember vividly the tensions and fears of the Cold War era.  The steps that the Soviet Union and the West took toward each other over those years to build understanding and establish agreed-upon rules for how our countries would act were welcomed by people everywhere because they turned down the heat and made military conflict less likely.  Those breakthroughs are the result of a great deal of hard work by people on all sides.  Now we’re seeing that hard work come undone.
For example, in 1975, all OSCE countries, including Russia, signed the Helsinki Final Act, which established 10 guiding principles for international behavior, including respect for national sovereignty, refraining from the threat or use of force, the inviolability of frontiers, the territorial integrity of states, the peaceful settlement of disputes, and non-intervention in internal affairs.  Russia has since violated every single one of those principles in Ukraine and has repeatedly made clear its disdain for them.
In 1990, the OSCE countries, including Russia, agreed to the Vienna Document, a set of confidence- and security-building measures to increase transparency and predictability about military activities, including military exercises.  Now, Russia selectively follows those provisions.  For example, it holds large-scale military exercises that it claims are exempt from the notification and observation requirements of the Vienna Document because they’re conducted without prior notice to the troops involved.  Last fall, Russia conducted military exercises in Belarus with more than 100,000 troops.  It’s impossible that those exercises were no notice.  And Moscow has failed to provide information on its military forces in Georgia, to notify the OSCE of its massive troop buildup around Ukraine last spring, to answer Ukraine’s questions about what it was doing, all of which are required under that 1990 agreement.
In 1994, in a pact known as the Budapest Memorandum, Russia, the United States and Britain committed to, and I quote, “respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine and to refrain from the threat or use of force against” the country.  Those promises helped persuade Ukraine to give up their nuclear arsenal inherited after the dissolution of the USSR and which was then the third largest nuclear arsenal in the world.  Well, we need only ask the people living in Crimea and Donbas what happened to those pledges.
There are many more examples I could cite.  They all support the same conclusion:  One country has repeatedly gone back on its commitments and ignored the very rules it agreed to despite others working hard to bring it along at every step.  That country is Russia.  Of course, Russia is entitled to protect itself, and the United States and Europe are prepared to discuss Russia’s security concerns and how we can address them in a reciprocal way.  Russia has concerns about its security and actions that it says the United States and Europe and NATO are taking that somehow threaten that security.  We have profound concerns about the actions that Russia is taking that threaten our security.  We can talk about all of that.  But we will not treat the principles of sovereignty or territorial integrity enshrined in the UN Charter, affirmed by the UN Security Council, as negotiable.
And if I could speak to the Russian people, I would say to them you deserve to live with security and dignity like all people everywhere, and no one – not Ukraine, not the United States, not NATO or its members – is seeking to jeopardize that.  But what really risks your security is a pointless war with your neighbors in Ukraine with all the costs that come with it, most of all for the young people who will risk or even give their lives to it.
At a time when COVID is running throughout the planet, we have a climate crisis, we need to rebuild the global economy, all of which demand so much of our attention and resources, is this really what you need – a violent conflict that will likely drag on?  Would that actually make your lives more secure, more prosperous, more full of opportunity?  And just think of what a great nation like Russia could achieve if it dedicated its resources, especially the remarkable talent of its human resources, its people, toward the most significant challenges of our time.  We in the United States, our partners in Europe, we would welcome that.
Tomorrow I’ll meet with Foreign Minister Lavrov and I’ll urge that Russia find its way back to the agreements it swore to over the decades and to working with the United States and our allies and partners in Europe to write a future that can ensure our mutual security but also make clear that that possibility will be extinguished by Russian aggression against Ukraine, which would also do the very thing Moscow complains about: bolster the NATO defensive alliance.
These are difficult issues we’re facing.  Resolving them won’t happen quickly.  I certainly don’t expect we’ll solve them in Geneva tomorrow.  But we can advance our mutual understanding.  And that, combined with de-escalation of Russia’s military buildup on Ukraine’s borders – that can turn us away from this crisis in the weeks ahead.  At the same time, the United States will continue to work with our allies and partners in NATO, the European Union, the OSCE, the G7, the United Nations, throughout the international community to make clear that there are two paths before Russia:  the path to diplomacy that can lead to peace and security; and the path of aggression that will lead only to conflict, severe consequences, international condemnation.  The United States and our allies will continue to stand with Ukraine and to stand ready to meet Russia on either path.
It’s no accident that I’m offering these thoughts here in Berlin.  Perhaps no place in the world experienced the divisions of the Cold War more than this city.  Here, President Kennedy declared all free people citizens of Berlin.  Here, President Reagan urged Mr. Gorbachev to tear down that wall.  It seems a time that President Putin wants to return to that era.  We hope not.  But if he chooses to do so, he’ll be met with the same determination, the same unity that past generations of leaders and citizens brought to bear to advance peace, to advance freedom, to advance human dignity across Europe and around the world.
Thanks so much for listening.  (Applause.)