US Ambassador to Ukraine John F. Tefft gave his last interview to The Day before flying home after completing his posting not in his study, as previously, but in the conference room. Embassy officials later explained that a directive received from the White House half a year ago read that pictures in the ambassador’s study could be taken only by the staff photographer.
With his chunky appearance and more than 40 years of diplomatic career, Tefft has won the reputation of a warm and friendly diplomat. I had precisely this impression and many diplomats with whom I had met agreed with me. The same is true of lots of Ukrainians with whom he has communicated, including over drinks.
Before the interview I gave Tefft Den/The Day’s present, the photo album Live History published in conjunction with the 15th anniversary of the newspaper’s annual photo exhibit. The diplomat thanked me and started leafing through the album, commenting on some of the pictures: “This is great. Thank you. This is very nice. This picture reminds me of when I came here when there was presidential election in 2010 and the place that they picked for me to observe. They did not want me to go far out of town because if something happens, they would have to be there. So, in 2010 I went to Shchaslyve in Kyiv oblast and I told my staff that the title of the first chapter of my memoir about Ukraine is going to be ‘The road to happiness.’” [Shchaslyve literally means happy. – Ed.].
It is good, I like it. We are waiting for this book.
(Smiling) “These are great photographs. Arsenii Yatseniuk. And that is serious wedding. Actually, I enjoy photographs. One of my favorite photographs I have in a book from Poland. It was taken during the Solidarity period, when martial law was declared. A guy took a picture of two tanks in Warsaw. They were in front of this square parked on the sidewalk next to this movie theater, and movie theater has the classic American marquee with the name of the movie and stars of the movie. Do you know what’s the movie that was playing there?”
I do not know.
“Apocalypse now. You take the picture and it is priceless. The moment is captured properly: tanks – everybody knows what is happening – apocalypse now. It is my favorite picture... Thank you for the book. That is very nice. I’ll take it and I’ll treasure it.”
Mr. Ambassador, you probably remember that three years ago many European intellectuals have written a letter to US president saying that Obama Administration is paying less attention to Eastern Europe, including Ukraine, in favor of the “reset” of relations with Russia, which, according to many experts, turned out unjustified and did not bring the desired results. Has the White House realized this approach was a mistake and will it now pay more attention to this region?
“I do not accept the premise of the question. I do not think the Administration has ever stopped paying attention to Eastern Europe. I know that statements were made about pivoting – I think that’s the word that was used – towards Eastern Asia. And it was mainly the former Secretary of Defense who used it. I personally think it got a little bit blown out of proportion. If you look hard at what’s happened, America has never stopped engaging with Europe, and that’s not just because we love Europe and they are good friends, but it because so many of the world’s problems can only be resolved by a concerted effort between the United States and the European countries.
“For example, Syria. Just take a look. EU is very deeply engaged. The Russians – we hope to get this conference eventually. I would also say: take a look at, for example, John Kerry, our new Secretary of State. Where did he go first? Which countries did he go visit first? He went to Europe. Not just because, as I say, we love Europe, but he did it because he knows that together the United States and Europe can have a strong impact on resolving problems in the world and we need to work jointly to do that together. So I really think that people should not overblow the issue of Eastern Europe.
“It is certainly true that this Administration has had a huge number of issues to deal with. Not just Asia, but I would argue, winding down two wars, fighting terrorism, plus the biggest financial crisis in the history of the world for the past 70 years. It’s a lot of things to try to manage. But I think our attention on Europe is still there, I think our attention on Ukraine is there. People may sometimes get frustrated with a lack of change here or some particular issue. But I believe that America understands the centrality, the strategic importance of Ukraine today as much as it was 22 years ago. We work very closely with the EU. Why is EU working so hard to try to make Ukraine an associate member? Because it also understands its centrality. I don’t buy some of these things that America or Europe are just not as focused anymore.”
But, if we share this idea, the logical step to prove the importance of Ukraine should be a visit of State Secretary John Kerry or perhaps, in the future, President Obama.
“I cannot speculate on the visits and stuff. I would just say that Secretary Kerry made it a priority to see Foreign Minister Kozhara both in his capacity as the Foreign Minister of Ukraine and in his capacity as Chairman in Office of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. We think that’s an important job. It is a tough job, especially dealing with some of what they call frozen conflicts. We continue to engage. I can’t predict what the travel schedules are. But, you know, earlier this year Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs was here. We had the FBI director here. I can go on. We’ve had congressional delegation. I’d like to see more of them and I am hopeful that maybe this fall we will have some, but it’s still not finally determined yet.”
Some international media often write (as did recently The Economist) that Ukraine is choosing between the EU and the Eurasian Union. Do you have the same impression about this after talking with Ukrainian politicians and high officials?
“There is obviously a big debate in this country. We follow it. But I think the president has chosen what I consider to be the right policy which is to be a part of Europe, but also try to maintain good relations with Russia. The United States has no objection to that. We see Ukraine’s future in Europe, but we understand Russia is a big neighbor, all of the history and the traditions, and tight economic ties. You need to work those. But there’s going to be only one kind of union, and when it comes to customs and other economic issues, I think, the European Union holds out great prospects. My friend Ambassador Yelisseyev has written an article in a paper which I find to be very persuasive in terms of the long-term economic impact of the EU on Ukraine, and I think many Ukrainians who read that understand and agree with him.”
It is known that the US is an active supporter of Ukraine’s accession to the EU. What, in your opinion, should be done before Vilnius by Ukraine on the one hand and the EU on the other hand for this summit to be successful?
“I think that list that the EU has put out is a very good list. Many things that they have put on that list are things that we’ve been working on, working jointly with the EU. One of the things we are proud of here, we helped to develop the criminal procedure code. We think that new legislation on elections, on the judiciary and really fundamentally on Procuracy are critical for the future of Ukraine. So we very much support those and we work (just like the European Union does) with government officials who are working on these reforms that are fundamental for the country.
“I think getting all of the pieces of that to include release of Ms. Tymoshenko which is being made key part of this. I hope they all get done and in November we all will be able to congratulate each other and be proud of the fact that the deal was done. Ukraine is moving in the direction which we all want: the democratic market economy state ruled by law – the fundamental goal of the US and Europe for 22 years and I think the fundamental goal of many Ukrainians.”
Mr. Ambassador, you had served in Lithuania and Georgia. How would you assess the state of democracy in Ukraine, compared to abovementioned countries?
“I think every country moves at its own speed. We have this joke: one step forwards two steps back, two steps forward one step back.
“ Even in my country – you know America pretty well, you know the history of our country – it has not been a smooth easy ride to build the democracy that we are very proud of. Even today there are things that we, Americans, have still not figured out.
“Standing back and looking at each of these countries, one of the things that I always think about is the importance of developing a political culture, a political culture with what I call clear and observed rules of the game. And by that I mean a set of rules which everybody understands: some of them may be written down, some of them can be understood, but everybody observes those rules of the game and they play, they work with that set of rules. And I think that’s one of the hardest things to develop.
“I see it in my own country. We still are not totally happy with every single rule we have in democracy. The big debate today are filibusters in the US Senate. I think here in Ukraine, unfortunately, there still is no agreement what the limits are. I see the tushki and the pressures that are done. That isn’t right to do that. People should be allowed to join whatever party they want to join. I understand that politics is the art of governing the brutal world of political competition. But I think Ukraine still has a way to go. A lot of countries have a way to go to develop that. And I think one of the things, if we do a really close study of the countries of former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe: how far those countries have developed the political culture is a key. And I’d make one last point and that is if you look at elections here, it is still true what The Economist said back in 2010 – the people of Ukraine may not like the choice that they face, but the fact is that nobody knows who is actually going to win. And what that says is that there is fundamental pluralism here. I certainly hope as we move toward 2015, that there is free and fair election and that all of those people who want to compete are allowed to compete and that the final choice is the people of Ukraine’s choice.”
Mr. Ambassador, you have initiated the Ambassador’s Forum (we hope this tradition would be followed by your successor) and you gave many lectures on the subjects of democracy, judicial system, energy efficiency and energy independence of Ukraine. Do you see any impact of your initiative and your speeches for instance on the development of political culture in Ukraine?
“I think people actually read what I say, whether it is on the rule of law or economy or whatever. I remember last year when I together with EU Ambassador Tombinski went to visit Mr. Lutsenko when he was in prison, we were talking about variety of different things, and Lutsenko after about an hour or so said to me: ‘you know, I just read your speech on rule of law – it’s a really good speech.’ And I thought to myself: this is great, somebody have read my speech. Actually there are a lot of people who read the speech. People who pay attention to these issues. I got a lot of very positive feedback on that. And people who are in positions of responsibility in the Administration and in the Rada have also read these speeches. I can’t tell you that ‘X’ law came from my speech, but I know that particularly that helps people understand not just where America has come from but designing the future for Ukraine.”
We know the position of your country on Tymoshenko case, although this case is not so simple. Congressman Cohen, during a Senate hearing in May, which was attended by Ukrainian Foreign Minister Leonid Kozhara, brought up the most high-profile cases of the Kuchma era – Gongadze, Yeliashkevych, and Podolsky. It is known that prosecution in Ukraine initiated proceedings against those who ordered crimes against the aforementioned persons. Have you seen any progress in these cases and do you think that for Ukraine it is important to resolve those cases?
“Yes, I think it is. We welcomed the conviction of the killer in the Gongadze case. Sentencing of Oleksii Pukach was in our view overdue and a welcome development. We do believe that the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media Dunja Mijatovic, has called for further investigation in the circumstances of the murder.
“We also continue to support journalists and others everywhere who work to inform the public and expose corruption and injustice. We think this is a critical part of democracy. We do this in our country as well. So it’s important, I think, for the public good, for information of the public that these issues be addressed. I would say again that reforms are one of the obvious things that comes to mind when you start looking at these cases. Procuracy reform, reform in the way courts operate. These are critical for the feature of the country, for ordinary citizens as well as for foreigners who are here doing business or otherwise. It’s important for the integrity and the future of the country.”
What is your view of the recent developments in the Ukrainian government, in particular, appointment of Arbuzov to head efforts against raiding, and Lukash’s appointment as Minister of Justice?
“I’ve met with Ms. Lukash a number of times in three or four different positions that she has occupied. She is a very talented lady. I hope that as a Minister of Justice she will work hard, I assume, on election legislation and other issues, and that she will really support building the rule of law in this society. It’s not a coincidence that I keep talking about that. Because I think it is one of the lynchpins of the democracy. If you don’t have it, a lot of another things fall away. You can have great institutions, but if you don’t have these rules of a game, you have trouble.
“Mr. Arbusov is Acting Prime Minister now. I’ve met with him as the First Deputy Prime Minister. And we’ve talked about a whole range of issues. One of the things that we’ve urged is that they think very seriously about an IMF Agreement. I know that government has borrowed more money in Eurobond market. But at some point the rates for that may get too high, plus the IMF’s, if you will, seal of good approval, I think, is a critical piece to reassuring investors, reassuring businesses that want to work here. We have talked about those kinds of issues. I wish him well in managing the economy. And I wish him specifically well in fighting the scourge of raider attacks. I think it’s one of the things that undermines Ukraine’s economy and undermines the confidence people have in the system that they live and work in.”
I know that the expert of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Matthew Rojansky, has carried out special studies of this issue.
“I know, I haven’t seen the final results yet, but I will look carefully at that when it comes out. I’m sure, everybody in Ukraine will.”
Concerning investment climate, does it mean, that such big boys (as Bruce Jackson called Chevron) are coming to Ukraine signing an agreement. Does it mean that investment climate in Ukraine improved?
“I think yes and no. I think getting the big energy companies here is critical for the future independence of the energy sector for Ukraine. You know, the Shell deal is done, the Chevron deal is written but is in the process of final approval in the Ivano-Frankivsk and Lviv oblast councils. My understanding is that the agreement with Exxon Mobile is almost there. So I hope that they all will be signed and I hope they’ll get implemented soon. Because bringing more energy to Ukraine, I think, is critical. We’ve also tried to be helpful to Ukraine when it comes to importing gas from the West – we have our own contacts in the European Union. I’d love to be able to come back in five years and see shale gas coming out and being used in Ukraine or exported depending on the situation. And I’d like to see Ukraine that is very much energy independent, maintaining itself and drawing the benefits from that kind of situation.”
When, in your opinion, by following the US shale gas example, can Ukraine reach “energy immortality”?
“I think it is important. I think all countries want to be in a position where they are not totally dependent on one or several countries. You know, in our own country, it is pretty amazing what is happening right now. We now produce more gas than Russia does. And we have got so much that we are ready to export it. This is a huge change. As I have said in speeches around this country it’s going to give us a competitive advantage. Just today I have checked the latest prices: gas in the US is 140 dollars roughly per 1,000 cubic meters. I saw in papers that in the last quarter the average price for Ukraine was 407 dollars. And in Europe it is in the three hundreds. The same companies are using roughly the same inputs of energy and if you have those discrepancies on the amount for the energy input, it is pretty easy to see who can be the most competitive, if everything else is equal.”
Do you see increase of investment in Ukraine?
“I think there has been some small increase. But I think the amount that needs to come here is so much larger. Most of the big economists who I talk to and whose judgments I trust say that Ukraine could easily use 40 billion dollars of investment. And right now, I do not know figures exactly, but it is like 5 or 6 or 7, something like that. You need this foreign direct investment to be able to build business, to create jobs and that’s one of the reasons why I talk all the time about improvement of business climate. Because that climate also has a huge impact on people who are willing to invest here.”
What recommendations are you passing to your successor, who is considered a rising star of American diplomacy?
“I think Jeff will do fine job here. Today I’ve already sent him five e-mails to help him. He is working very hard in Washington to prepare himself. I think you’ll see him here in August. He’ll be ready to go full of energy and I think he will do wonderful job.”
By the way, has Mr. Pyatt been in Ukraine?
“I do not know that he has ever been here, but I never actually asked him. There is a lot of Americans who come through here as students. I should have asked him. Maybe it will be my 6th e-mail of the day asking him whether he has been here.”
What experiences or things will you carry back with you in memory of Ukraine?
“I have a lot of good memories of Ukraine. My wife and I tried to travel as much as we could. And I think that we saw many places. And I’m not just talking about the Crimean cost and the great UNESCO World Heritage sites. We met a lot of people in a lot of ordinary places. I don’t remember a case when faces of people weren’t so wonderfully hospitable to us. I’m not just talking about greeting us with bread and salt – that’s important, that’s a very nice symbol, and we appreciate it –but people would sit and talk to us, and tell us about their problems, their dreams, their kids and grandkids. The kind of normal human reaction or human interaction that you want. I have lots of wonderful memories of great music. I have some wonderful experiences. The one that I will never forget is not long after I got here we were able to sponsor, through our Ambassadors’ Fund for Cultural Preservation, the return of some papers of Taras Shevchenko. And although I have to say that one of my greatest regrets is not having learned Ukrainian better, I’ve read enough of Shevchenko’s poetry and the rest to have come really to appreciate what a great man he was. I went online that day we presented those papers and read the “Zapovit” of Shevchenko. (Pause) If I were Ukrainian I’d cry every time I read it because it just captures the essence of what it is to be a Ukrainian and what your dream is for this country.”
Maybe you can mention five or three reasons to love Ukraine?
“To love Ukraine? You get me in trouble. You know, I’ve said it before and I mean it, I feel a personal kind of tie. Because I grew up in United States in Wisconsin, the very agricultural place, the climate is very similar to this, the people are very nice. You know, you walk in and they’ll lay out a table of food for you, they’ll sit down and talk to you, they’ll give you a kiss and a hug, they’ll tell you about their kids. Very – what I call – down-to-earth people, and that’s the way the people of Wisconsin are. And I feel a comfort level here. Again, I don’t mean this to sound silly, I mean it quite sincerely, I feel almost at home as I travel around the country and see people, especially when you sit down and have dinner, have a glass of horilka or two with people, you feel that tie.
“I feel it with university students. I’ve spoken at a lot of universities, and they are really smart people. I get thrilled every time I go, I get encouraged, because I think I see the future of this great country. Because there are many brilliant students out there. And I have that same sense when I am back home and speak to people.”
Considering that you gave a lot of interviews to Den/The Day, why are you so generous to our daily?
“I think your paper is a good model for good journalism. You are straightforward, you don’t sensationalize things, you report the news. For me, it’s a publication that has credibility. Whenever I give an interview to you I can be reasonably confident that you will report it to your people, you’re not going to change the words or editorially doctor it. It is important. And that’s why I think people read your newspaper. Because it has the trust that is critical for a publication.”
And what are you going to do next in your career? I hope you’ll come to Ukraine very often.
“Oh yeah, I’ll be back. I can’t tell you exactly. I’m going to go back to Washington where I have a kind of retirement course that I take. I’ll talk to a lot of different people. There are other ideas out there. The one thing that is certain is that I’ll spend more time with my two daughters and with our granddaughter who is two years and nine months old and she is wonderful. My wife and I want to spend more time with her in our arms and not looking at her through Skype. Skype is great, it is wonderful. But it is not the same as having your little granddaughter talking to you and giving you a hug. That is the kind of things that you miss the most in the foreign service, the kind of your family ties. So we will do some of that. And as I said on the 4th of July a piece of my heart will stay here. So we’ll be back. Don’t worry. We won’t forget Ukraine ever.”
