[inaudible conversations] >> this morning, the senate health education, labor and pensions committee continues with a series of hearings on healthcare. how to improve the individual insurance market. witnesses include doctors, executives from hospitals and insurance providers. live coverage begins at 10:00 eastern on c-spanfree come online at c-span.org and the c-span radio apps. next a look at us/ukraine relations, the center for strategic and international studies hosted ukrainian prime minister for european and euro atlantic integration. this is an hour and 25 minutes.

>> in the start of a week we have, starting this week, very interesting program. so pleased the vice prime minister has joined us, thank you for covering, we were talking briefly, my first opportunity here. ukraine has fallen off the charts in washington, we are so busy with hurricanes or eights or something that we don't focus on big fundamental underlying issues. that is why i am so grateful the vice prime minister has come. this is sophisticated with foreign policy but such a narrow attention span chasing after dead rabbits all the time. we are here to lead a

conversation where together we can keep a fresh perspective of what is happening in ukraine. just because we don't know about it doesn't mean it isn't dynamic and we have an opportunity to learn more the vice prime minister's message to us. i forgot to say when we have events like this, responsible for your safety so follow her directions and go through this door, if you have to leave the stores take us around the corner and we will take two left-hand turns and go to the courtyard for national geographic where we have a mutual support agreement, they have ice cream for everybody. i want you to be prepared.

i will be very brief because ivanna klympush-tsintsadze is very talented, deep experience in government, in our world and the policy world, heads of the east-west center for a number of years, has -- an active commentator for the bbc, always grateful for and i went to say how pleased we are that she could be here. she was pulled up, came in fairly recently and was lifted up very quickly and it is because of her enormous talents and i think we should -- we were all going to be lucky and grateful to have her here. please welcome and thank the

vice prime minister. [applause] >> thank you for the warm welcome. i'm extremely grateful and honored to be speaking today at csi us. it is a privilege to be here, a place that is home to so many intellectuals and influential opinion leaders especially, extremely symbolic that i am speaking on september 11th when we are commemorating victims of the attack on the united states, the terrorist attack on the united states. i did happen to live here with my husband and a very personal

story so this opportunity to once again reiterate our condolences to the american people for the losses on the 9/11 terror attack and this is exactly one of the reasons why we can speak today with more power, more strength, fight against terrorism, common fight against aggression, the attempt to change the international order by use of force. that is why we are standing together these days. one of the most prominent personalities and statesmen who is part of the family, as you

might have recalled in his book, at some point said without ukraine russia ceased to be the eurasian empire and today is the notion that can be repeated and the notion that is underlying the unique role ukraine is playing. in my opening remarks i would like to concentrate a little bit on ukraine/us relationship and specific things happening in the ukraine and i would be happy to take your questions and go into those things during our q and a period. i will not open any secrets or

news if i say that ukraine today by paying a high price, then eastern democratic frontier of europe past the point of no return in the cost of freedom and democracy. we are happy notwithstanding very difficult way we have to go through, finally 1 september, none of the countries that have signed to the cessation agreement, you had to go through such a difficult path, and

finally in ukraine into full force, not only for ukraine but all the european union member states giving us visibility and impetus for deep transformation in the country and these changes show economic nature, democratic changes in ukraine and efforts in our attempt to conduct a deep and comprehensive sector before nato standards to the atlantic community. on this path we are facing a few serious challenges and fighting several wars at the same time, when is the war inside

transformation of the country, the old bureaucratic system, the war with examining the soviet empire inside the country and the other is an external war fighting against russia in the east and also by diplomatic and political means for turning back our territorial integrity. in crimea and aggression against ukraine continues to challenge not only ukrainians and atlantic security and international order and leadership of the united states in this process of determining's challenge is extremely important and remains

critical for the security in the region and our country and we are thankful for the strategic -- being a strategic partner for the support for the country. we have all been watching closely, a positive dynamic in the dialogue on political levels. the meeting with donald trump, vice president pens, visits of secretary of state rex tillerson and secretary of defense to ukraine anticipated the secretary for ukraine in the months, demonstrating we are

getting to a practical thing, reaffirming support but at the same time a very specific positive agenda for those in cooperation with each other, but the us administration showing a strong stance, strong position in terms of the occupation of crimea, and we are welcoming what had been done by the administration in terms of appointing high-caliber investor courts to be us representative in negotiations on ukraine. we are hoping all of this

getting taken together will create additional pressure and will ensure we will get closer to the solution of the international conflicts we find ourselves part of. i hope the us will be considering the possibility and support ukraine in deploying the occupied border between ukraine and russian federation in 2015, early 2016, the recent suggestion by vladimir putin will be of interest for you. we are valuing the bipartisan

support that we are enjoying, this is the signal of the support of the american people for ukraine and democracy and human rights on the character of ukraine and happy congress is ensuring the us is maintaining this level of security assistance important for ukraine but not only security assistance but reforms in the country. we are happy and grateful for the circumstance policy toward russia and we believe it is important to carry on this role for the united states in terms of coordination and leading the european nation in this endeavor. the russian federation isn't defending only the language of

pressure and power as opposed to dialogue. over the next few years ukraine received security assistance and that was extremely important for the capacity and our increase in defense in programs that are going on. the provision of equipment and support of defense reform on different levels and really saved lives of ukrainians and i am sure this made us more resilient and capable in defending ourselves and in

defending the eastern european western civilization and i also know the experience of engagement, instructors with ukrainian soldiers also extremely instructive for american military as well because they have been getting direct access to the most recent experience fighting the hybrid war of ukrainians against russia, our territory so with its military might, it is a bold message from the western world that it will be expansive for russia and a high price to

continue this aggression. we believe what is provided to ukraine is a matter of conscious decision of the us administration and very much hoping this will finally come into being. a really serious and devoted contributor for for the whole world not only the region. nobody needs reminding but we have given up the arsenal in exchange for the document, the best memorandum attacked by those nations that were supposed to guarantee our security

according to this memorandum. we really contributed to nonproliferation regime and ability to withhold challenges we are seeing today but at the same time we learned russia is using that weakness as an invitation to attack and therefore we know by our own experience, unified and united stance will make sure we can deter the aggression altogether. once again, there was this sociological paul in situations,

and the people are the greatest men and number 2 according to the russian people. i am sorry, number 2 and number 4 and number 16 after that and thinking of having a dialogue with that. thinking of having a dialogue with the nation with different twisted understanding of the reality. where einstein is inferior to stalin and vladimir putin. the crises the world faces are growing and dangerous and a nuclear threat, hybrid warfare,

really strong alliances and partnerships, and common goals, it supported and reintegrated and developed economically, with unique experience in combating aggression, with geopolitical potential, it is serious with the security of the region and the euro atlantic space and it is in common interest, to stand beside ukraine with orderly international order that has been giving us the possibility to prosper and develop the latest point of view. i will be happy to take your questions.

>> thank you so much. an excellent overview, we are so pleased at the sis -- csis to have this conversation. by russia against ukraine at the center of european security, no resolution about no way forward, with the question of ukraine without ukraine, and the country here at the center of this. because of it i got want to come back to ukraine, your title is vice prime minister for europe

integration. the question of integration reshapes tremendous variation with european countries on how they approach things with european values, but they don't feel them to necessarily be fully shared about social change, immigration, diversity and these things are different looking from poland or norway or france. how does ukraine see its future and policy integration, to follow, that is the model that we are following? >> there is no one model to follow.

in a very positive thing can change from the perspective to a perspective that experience what gathers, that is what we are trying to do going further. with atlantic integration, very seriously overlapping in what we carry out, what we have to achieve, to be compatible. when we are talking about integration, first and foremost, severity on the military attacks and the instability of this

procedure also the values. and they are going through a challenging time, when we are trying to figure out for ourselves or your self and european nation figuring out for themselves what they stand for and the fight between different internal forces, what we see right now in europe is the fact that europeans have forgotten their grandfathers fought for various values. they have forgotten something they have taken for granted had to be defended at some point.

through this challenging time, what is happening in different european and american nations we are going to come with a much more solidified and concrete understanding of what the values are. coming into focus at the same time, for us ukrainians, when we -- when our people come our people are dying right now in the east of the country trying to defend our country it is sad to see how those values we believe in are going through this time in the european countries.

i hope the challenge and what do you call it, in the nation of this value, to make sure europeans will -- around the integration of values. >> on the integration theme, even as the larger european community in ukraine, i wonder what planning exists about unifying the country and very specifically, one thing that has struck me, ukraine is fighting a war to regain control of territory, doesn't control, what happens when it succeeds, how does ukraine plan to ensure

those parts that have been controlled by russian backed separatists can be fully ukrainian, can feel ukrainian? >> when i think we have to understand so-called divisions in ukraine, reality exists on the basis of any political divisions or ethnic, national, religious or other decisions. the decisions everybody has been talking about created by politicians has been created by active internal gains for 23 years, this division as a notion

has been created by inactivity of the ukrainian authorities and allowing for a very insufficient economic model, criminal economic model developing in those regions. and inability to actively engage with the people of the region of ukraine, moreover where there is a survey conducted in ukraine. if i'm not mistaken, what is actually showing directly values

in that region, people of the next region, everybody knows that region, basically identical. and speaking about divisions. therefore i think in the last couple years it has been more poisoned by the aggression propaganda. and with access to noncontrolled territories nationwide to project the media to be part of this what people are listening to. and there will need to be

serious detox time, to think critically 2-way safe, look at these from different perspectives to assess things for themselves and it is time available which is a serious commodity and time available for information on those people and with economic integration, structural development with economic progress and investment, ability for every single system for the integration policy.

>> one more question, i think our audience for being here. you mentioned from the very start in 2014, at the time and since, categorically opposed, now the kremlin is proposing un peacekeepers but only along the line of contacts with very narrow mission of protecting monitors and interested in a much more expanded presence. do you think the russian change of position provides an opening? is there room to get a good peacekeeping force in with the negotiation worth pursuing? >> first and foremost, un

peacekeeping missions with access to the noncentral territory of the ukraine and the border between the russian federation and ukraine, possibility to break the stalemate of the minsk agreement. and ukraine has been pushing this on the agenda for quite a while, the un security council and secretary-general by the ukrainian president off of the decision of the ukrainian parliament in early april 2015 and the ukraine is looking for a real objective, and equipped mission, un peacekeeping mission. what we see is the russian

reaction. first, probably a positive thing there is an opening in the discussion. my feeling is it is the attempt whether there is an english phrase. >> hybrid means everything to everybody now. >> it is an attempt to twist the idea and present something from the russian federation that is not necessarily corresponding to sorting out -- not necessarily leading to any possible solutions because what we hear from the directors side, they want the peacekeeping mission on the same pipeline where we have a special monitoring mission, i just want to remind everybody

who exactly is the party attacking, not the ukrainian military on that pipeline. they are suggesting we have to agree with this so-called authority and basically only puppets, administration, of the occupied territories with the russian federation, something ukraine cannot agree to and they do not want to see the border between ukraine and the division and why they wanted to have the peacekeeping. it was impossible for the oic monitors to monitor the 400 km bolster in the russian federation with access to four:matters on the central

border and the flow of the western mission of the regular forces of the russian federation and trainers of the russian federation have not been controlled so interested in a genuine peacekeeping mission that would ensure withdrawal of this substance for regular troops and what was part of this attack on the ukraine and not protected but monitor the border between ukraine and the russian federation, tried to get back to normal and reintegrate and without getting the political message. it is a very narrow opening i would say but we are trying to

use every single possibility to find a solution by political and diplomatic means and that is why we are ready to take this into discussion but very serious red line that ukraine is not going to cross. >> i have many more questions but i imagine you do too. before i open it up, before you speak introduce yourself with your name and affiliation if any. ask a question, i will cut you off if you start developing a thesis. and try to keep it short so we have time for as many questions as possible.

way in the back. >> i represent georgia television station in washington dc. my question about the ukraine, the president of georgia, ukrainian citizenship a couple months ago and ukraine yesterday against the will of the ukrainian government, i would like your reaction on that. >> our president has reacted already to that situation and insists has to be dealt with the legal realm in the legal sphere, violation of the international border of ukraine. i hope our agency is responsible for such action to illegal action, i also want to remind

george and steward they are doing well, and also addressed ukrainian authorities and former governor of ukraine and former president of georgia, after sorting out, breaking the ukrainian law, necessity to sort out breaking georgia for that. >> up in front. >> i use to be with csis, ukraine has a lot of friends in washington in the united states, more than they know about, but i

came back from europe, the europeans have the same questions about ukraine that we have, the pace of economic reform. the fear that reform is going backwards rather than forward if you look at the privatization taking place, minuscule compared to the government policy, grossman put out a nice fancy thing about reforms that would take place. it hasn't taken place in most cases. the question is without imf pushing on it with the pace of reforms go backwards? how do you see the next six months as far as pushing reforms? it is important here and in europe. >> thank you. i am happy to be here.

okay. thank you very much for that question. it is extremely important, unfortunately what we are trying to deal with is a system we would immediately measure. my personal experience, came to the parliament, civil society, for me it was always i knew the answer, barely knew what to do. it was easy when we were out of the system and becoming part of the system, when you see the system, as the result oriented, gets much more effort to get to the result, then you understand

the difficulties of what is going on but at the same time, i disagree with you that reforms are going backwards because we managed a very serious step in ukraine, which are gradually taking us to the level of regulation and another level of regulation, understandable sphere of rules and procedures for that matter comparable and a few areas, and we have been working hard on closing the loop holes in our legislation which

were calling for corruption and activity. i would name several examples of those activities. for example electronic procurements that have been used and become regulatory a year ago in ukraine. what it allows for for, to save up to 15% of the money in the state budget for public procurement, we have quite a lot of loopholes where the money was staying, and part of the reform. part of the reform agenda and the results are clear and tangible. also i wouldn't have imagined,

we can say the slowness of reforms, there is no precedent in the world, when the country was fighting a war, at the same time changing, going through such a transition, deep transition from the first moments of 2014, march 2014 when we had in our treasury 10,000 donors and $5 billion in the reserves that have been lowered and the whole country, everybody was sure we were moving. directly to a default. it didn't happen.

unless reserves, $18 billion because of engagement of the imf and what ukraine has been doing and we are going -- economy is not waiting for a cease-fire. we have to understand more than 5% paying for security. would have been beneficial, this is -- moreover no one is thinking about 1.5% gdp, the budget is going to take care of

the care that we have to provide a free state for the internally displaced people. a huge number of resources taken from the developmental strategy, 20% of gdp because of loss of territory on control of ukraine, trading partners focused on the russian federation before this and almost 550 going through without buying anything from the russian federation. this was incredible to imagine. 's and that a reform, clear agenda equalizing process for the enterprises for gas we have closed the biggest loophole, the

biggest area where most of the money was made in ukraine for decades. for the first time, beneficial in 2016, for the first time over a decade doesn't allow me to speak about any rollback of the reform and right now we have on the table for consideration of the parliament several packs of documents that have been prepared by the government and the education reform and pension reform. all of these very painful, to go through the support of

parliament. it has been on the table and i am very hopeful before the end of the year we have privatization but we see already that part of the system that is not reformed for the judiciary, problematic for the privatization, that portion we are much better off for privatization and the decentralization. that is a huge reform in ukraine, always centered where the money was coming from the center and now we have 50% of the taxes staying on the local

level, the local communities providing services. we started huge infrastructure programs. we had 100 km of roads repaired in ukraine and this year 3000 kilometers, this is big, not enough but in the same -- allowing for additional emphasis of economic development and 50% of growth by the end of the last year is not something we would wish for. but definitely getting healthier. we are not there yet but in the direction we have chosen.

>> since you mentioned gas from the russian federation how optimistic are you that ukraine will boost its domestic natural gas production because the reserves are there and are you concerned about 2017? >> we are concerned about two or three days. and we understand very well the difficult concentration from the russian federation for for left behind on the territory, on

ukraine for capability for the european union for preparations of action that nato has taken for this development. and we have to be looking attentively, to counteract. the good thing is over this year, we have managed to re-create from ashes consciously destroyed forces in ukraine, from the idea that is capable to

withhold aggression for counteracting this with regard to natural gas production and we had already the first shipment to ukraine already coming in which is also verifying our ability to provide energy security in ukraine and in terms of natural gas production and adopted the development of robust capabilities in terms of natural gas production. the increase is not huge but

almost 700 million -- cubic meters in comparison to 2016 with that production and by 2020 really by several billion which will allow us to almost exclusively depend on our own internal resources. ..

and their outdated and nobody really cares and nobody has make any investment in order to drop both equipment and the quantities for our use. so, therefore, that's exactly one of the focuses that we are right now focusing our attention on the government. >> in the back, second from the back. green shirt. >> thank you. center for international security and politics, university of maryland. could you please highlight what has been done by ukrainian government in terms of ensuring

european and atlantic security and ensuring advancement? >> i was hoping we were talking about this most of this time. okay, i'll try. having the agreement between ukraine and the eu, it gives us the very clear map of actions in terms of what has to be changed to where, and which year and how. and that is the fact for basically ten years, approximation, of the european legislation into ukraine in one here and it has to happen in the same time while getting rid of -- quite a few soviet functions

which is necessary as regulation pictures a couple of months ago we had one of the cabinet ministers speaking at one sitting, well, for a long time prepared, but we decided to cut off basically 600 of the existing regulatory documents. we had to make sure that everything will not be ruined after we do that. but this is very important. they have all been coming from 80s, from 70s, from the soviet union and making it much more difficult for businesses, of the enterprises and so on. so we can talk about every single area, what exactly we are doing. we could start from security of, not security, safety of the product we are eating and

creating cell system of control of the safety of the food that we are getting to our stores, and going on to specific, both military and command standards that we're trying to introduce in the military. so i think it's a discussion a bit longer than this topic is allowed for. happy maybe to send you some information on this. [inaudible] >> thank you. it's huge endeavor. [inaudible] -- about the lopez in ukraine. before he came to study a university of maryland and i know it's hard and i just wanted you to mention big achievements that what is been done and short

period of time. >> remember only about banks, for example. i cannot imagine any other country that was an basically two years would close one half of banks. that happened, and that means that we have cleared up the whole system of banking, which is returning the trust of people to the banks. this is not easy. it's not a popular move when you're closing the bank where people have entrusted both are debits and credits, right? this is extremely difficult. and again, as i said about energy, as i said, and we also have started their asus programs on energy efficiency as well which has not been paid attention to over soviet times. energy was never a scarce commodity. and as it was their expensive. people in ukraine have not been taught to pay high prices for anything. they are not happy for that.

that's a big mental changes well well. we have to understand that. that wants you have to, i think maybe you close the window or when it's heated inside or you don't want to turn on the heat, or we finally are introducing a metering system. it has not been there. so for the separate houses, households, it was very but not for the apartment building. and so then the losses were somehow calculated, and somehow someone has to be paid for the period all of this was just money and resources sinking through the hands of people basically, and not working for the country, not working for the state. so in every single area we are

just locking the loopholes and trying to provide for other opportunities. we see already, very slowly but credit and rating for ukraine have been coming up gradually to positive ones. and i think all of this is about macroeconomic stabilization but it does not immediately translate into well-being of the people. what you have gdp growth of 2.2%, it doesn't mean that tomorrow you are able to provide everybody to the best of their ability. unfortunately not. unfortunately not, but that doesn't mean we are not on this road, and we can see that what we could'v could of done and wee done, we have also raised the

minimum wage for ukrainian people. we are hoping that pension reform will come soon, and that will provide, not an easy step, but that will provide for overtime for us closing, you wouldn't even think of that because the system is different here in the u.s., of pensions, but we have about 50% of the deficit of the pension fund in ukraine. so if we do not do the reform, and our ability to pay pensions and a couple of years will depend on whether we do it or not. so it's about our survival. it's about very practical things. so we are the major stakeholders of reforms. we just cannot allow not to do this. it's not only our imf. if it was only imf, we wouldn't do it. we wouldn't be able to do it if it wasn't for the ability of the

people inside the authorities in the parliament, in the government, and the presidents administration, and for the organizations, for the sum society. that estate engaged after maidan. that wasn't the case before. and engagement of international partners. that's how we're moving forward. without any of these components it wouldn't be possible. >> and health care reform. >> and healthcare reform. again, that's huge. only one of the steps that has been that as a temporary matter, and again, we have come in 2015 we took the decision, temporary decision, to transfer some of the procurement of the medicine in ukraine to international organizations. because medicine procurement, for basic needs of the, that we

providing to the people, we have saved up to 40% of the money that was forcing for the public procurement of medicine. which we understand that was corruption. right now we are creating an integral agency that will be graded by totally new rules with a totally new selective people to work with there in order to take it over again, back to the state but doing it according to the standard, procedures that are done by the international organizations. and that i hope will ensure that further on we doing the same work in the country is by our own means, but we will do it as efficiently and effectively as international organizations do.

so all of this, it is happening in all the entries so that's what is very difficult. >> all right. upfront, second row. >> thank you. sam kramer from georgetown university, and i would like to ask you about how you feel ukrainian public opinion stands regarding the civil war and the donbos and agree with the willingness of the public to continue reforms. it's been after all almost three years and public opinion seems to be wavering, at least as far as can be entertained from the u.s. >> first and foremost, there is no civil war in donbos. no. there is a russian aggression of the territory of ukraine with russian regular forces which are about 5000 today, these these days on the territory of bonbass

with about 35,000 of mercenari mercenaries, and yes, people altogether from ukrainians trains controlled by the russian army, managed by the russian army, being part of two military court of the russian army that a function of the territory of done bass. the number of equipment starting from comfort civil war than 670 tanks on the territory does not i hope for everybody, does not allow for assault that they have this equipment somewhere from the minds and donbass. that was one of the arguments by the way of the russian federation somehow in the core,

on the u.n. court. so that's extremely important. with regard peace talks are definitely emotionally and morally and economically drained. drained. there's a question about that, but that doesn't mean there has been a damaging support for european choice of ukraine. people would like to see the fast results of the reforms. and i think that we are all, it's only natural for all of us to expect that action will provide the results very soon. since we are all functioning in our lifespan, in our expectations from life. however, the results, some of the results of the actions that

are taken are being taken today will be solved in a couple of years, and if you look at the experience of reform of the other countries, that's the same thing. the results of the reforms have been felt within like five, seven, 12, eight years in different countries for different, but we were actually indifferent. of time but we were looking at like slovakia, we were looking at poland, we were looking at georgia for that matter as well as we saw there needs to be a time when the actions are made in order to see the results. so i think the choice is there for people, most of the people, again, more than 60% are also supporting the need to reintegrate bonbass by

diplomatic and political means to regain it and then to work with those territories. we have the majority in all the areas. also we've never had this before but we right now have more than 50% of the ukrainian population willing, supporting nato membership as a goal of ukraine. i just think we have to work for the with the public opinion in ukraine as well explaining very seriously what are the next steps, what exactly has to be done. that's hard work and it's much easier, you know, to fall into populist slogans. and here we are very european. we have lots of populous, and this is the trends we are fully

following. >> thank you. jeff with csis. actually i had two quick questions for you. the first has to do with the implementation of the free trade agreement with the eu. now that that has come into effect, what is the next milepost in terms of ukraine integration, what is the next all your pursuing? the second question has to do with crimea. we talked about don basket whenever we talk about crimea. what are the prospects for reintegration of crimea and what steps is ukraine taking to promote it? >> thank you. it has been in the temporary regime as of the beginning of 2016. and, therefore, we already have some first results of it. we have 41% of our trade that is

now part of our ukraine, the eu trade portfolio. and december 7 grown immensely over the last three years. this is also the result of the possibilities and access of ukrainian product and ukraine companies to the european markets as well. and the result also a quite a few different transformations with done in order to make sure that our companies can be licensed and certified coach of access to the eu market. for example, it was not even thought of that are milk products we have access to the eu markets and that's a big step forward, for example. so, it's a very routine and very

sometimes boring, it's not a sexy type of work, unfortunate unfortunately, you know? it's something we have to change the regulation, something has to provide for a system of control come something that you have to provide for, testing for example, in some areas in making sure that all of this working alone, so it's really boring stuff. it's not as easy to sell to people. we have been doing the really very serie serious transformati, really very serious changes in ukraine because of the requirements of the liberalization actions planning in ukraine. and finally this was the decision by eu, even that's one that doesn't have the intention to travel today but all of them have started to line up to get

the by metrical passport in order to have this opportunity to travel. that creates another part of self dignity and self-respect that it think is also part of the achievement as such. so nothing is that exciting that you would feel immediately for every single citizen. so that's why we are setting an ambitious additional goals for ourselves when we are talking about at some point being associated with zone, casting union with the eu, with open air agreement of the eu. so with the energy union of the european union, with the digital

community of the eu which is right nothing basically form so we're trying to be part of already thinking of the agenda for that. but all of this is immediately having appealing understanding for every single citizen, and that's why it's more difficult to communicate, more difficult to again sell. and crimea, it's a really tough call, and i don't know if you're following these things, just basically today there was another conviction of the head of the chairman of the crimean tartare is that was sentenced to eight years in prison on the territory of the russian federation for what russian federation is calling the -- how

do they call this? referendum when crimea decided safe to become part of the russian federation. this person is sentenced to eight years of prison, russian prison today because he disagreed, because he called on crimean tatar to come out to the streets so it's not the volunteer decision of the crimean people to become part of the russian federation. i always what is a soviet union because it is real concentration camp of the soviet union. that's what they turned crimea into from the tourist resort to a military base that is heavily armed right now. so i do understand that it's a long, i think all of us we

resent this is a long road to go, and i'll be probably not hoping wearily at the expense, for example, both the states which had unfortunately very long. when they came back to being independent and being, and governing themselves the way they wanted to hear i want to believe that it won't take 50 years as it did in case of baltic states, but we are happy that there is resilience, a resistance still in the territory of occupied illegally and x crimea butter fortunately rush is doing everything -- but, unfortunately, russians doing everything to spread fear, attacks and tortures on those people who are trying to show even slight disagreement with

the russian regime of the occupied illegally annexed territory of crimea so it would not be an easy call. we're kind use all the opportunities in the international area as well. >> we are running low on time so what i will do if it's all right with you is take three questions and then give a chance to respond to them. so here in the front. >> my question has to do with misinformation because we've all come to understand misinformation coming out of moscow. what is the support you feel that ukraine needs at this point to counter this information, and how would you see that support coming? >> thank you. could you focus for a minute on ukraine's upcoming elections? and if you were, of course you

have ukraine's health and strength in mind. if you were to imagine all the threats with the exception of territorial integrity threat that you already spoke about, what other threats do you think could potentially be a serious problem when the election environment becomes heated? hanky. and how to avoid them, how would you prepare for that? thank you. >> simple questions you are getting. >> for one minute. [laughing] >> i with the canadian embassy in washington. over the last couple of what he was military has come out in favor of providing defense of legal aid which you mention your speech to ukraine. my question is, although you're not in the u.s. administration, could you perhaps talk about your views of may be the motivation for this change in u.s. policy? is it just for the action against russia for its election meddling?

do believe that this output russia, pushe push russia back a little bit? could you maybe talk about the potential risks, is at the risk for escalation by russia? thank you very much. >> i think secretary mattis was very careful, and i think we just, you know, i read the policy has been remarkably consistent with the obama administration policy, which is we are thinking about it. we are still thinking. such is the kind of clarify the u.s., i'm also not in the administration obviously but i do follow this specifically. >> well, thank you. thank you for raising the issue of misinformation. after all, the most in a way to put it, because much stronger than just misinforming. it's deliberately creating allies. it's about deliberate manipulation, the facts and

narratives that we are saying working from russia both in ukraine and in the european countries, and, unfortunately, here. that starts from very simple things as we heard today like quote-unquote civil war in ukraine which is not the case, but once you repeat and repeat and repeat some of the titles that russia has come up with, then you think that this, your starting already from not truth when you're trying to analyze the situation, and that's scary and that's exactly what is happening with a lot of misinformation, with a lot of stuff that is being brought by russian federation upon our nation. and we all i think have been --

it's not about ukraine being in need for support in this matter. i think we, we can be together much more efficient if we work together. here ukraine can be a contributor with the knowledge that we have received already. the only thing is that we are running the marathon with the strength of speed. we do not really have enough time and human resources to stand and reflect on things and package them in a positive way, and transfer them as knowledge to our partners. so working together and basically forming the groups that would be analyzing the trans-together that would be producing some hints and analyzing instruments that has worked in ukraine or any of the countries and producing this as come if you want a template for others to use and to work for.

that would be something i think very useful. so here i would see ukraine as being a real serious partner and able and capable to provide a serious input. and not falling into traps of misinformation, i think that would be the biggest support for ukraine for that matter. the upcoming elections, i hope they are coming on time, that is done in 2019. so we do still have a way but there are quite a few forces back in ukraine to want to make sure that they are coming as soon as possible. and we can see this with all the fuss about the crossing of, the attempt of crossing of the border by former governor, former president of georgia.

we can see how all of the political forces have become really, especially those ones that are eager to increase their presence, how they've all decided to become educated and hoping that okay, maybe this isn't the case where we will get these actions which will not be a positive thing right now for ukraine, i think. because i think any country before elections is falling into education and populism mode, and are quite a few attempts already to do this in ukraine already now. but if think we have the least idea of possibilities to work before election mode will fully switch on to work with parliament, to work with the government, and to deliver the necessary actions that would be

producing results for people. so what are the risks? well, starting from the gandy, starting from information -- from propaganda, from information to populous to eagerness to get quick answers to simple answers to difficult questions, and falling into this trap of readiness, also for advanced or i think that's another scary tendency that might be by ukraine, and that's why it's important for us to make sure that we're making all the changes that we are making, that they are set in stone. and i think this is a major answer to any of the challenges during election time. defensively for weapons, i think

that part of the rhetoric about being afraid of escalation with russian federation at beginning of ukrainian lethal weapons, that's a remnant of this narrative of the appeasement. and some malware forgetting the experiences that we had long ago, that we had back in early, in late 30s and early '40s as your and such. and i would just like to mention one number. after we have received meeting range radars as defensive equipment -- medium -- the death toll from the mortar fire has

dropped from 43% to 17. this is about saving life. so we're talking about long-range radars in order to be able to protect ourselves and in order to make sure that there is an understanding on the other side, which is not getting any other language besides the language of force and power and pressure and strength, that the price for attacking is high, that the price of attacking ukraine is unbearable for that country. and then it means that we have never asked for any foreign military presence to defend ourselves on our territory. we didn't ask for boost in military as force.

we're asking for the support which will make us more capable in defending ourselves and for that matter defending your. we can close eyes on the fact that ukraine is part of your today. ukraine is a frontier. ukraine is a stronghold, and the fact that ukraine is holding that fire their is giving the possibility to europe and the west to consolidate itself, to actually reflect to planned actions, to arrange for unity, which is very important for i think for the survival and development of the globe. >> do you have enough radars? >> no. and i hope, just it may be counter a bit, our conversation with the american administration

right now are actually leaving us to hope that the decision is very close. so it's not only along the lines of the obama administration that okay, we are considering this, but i think discussions are coming too much more technical issues that are hopefully going to translate in this decision. >> my own experience with this program is there are some very useful pieces of u.s. aid but there's not enough of them. i would focus on more radars and more communications equipment more of the things troops on the field need to save their lives than on the shiny antitank weaponry that kind of blocks the signals but doesn't necessarily -- >> both are needed. >> we could go on for a very long time. i think, you know, i am so grateful and want to thank the prime minister for joining us today because i think it is so

critical as i said at the start to hear the ukraine view on this. this is about ukraine, and we cannot understand ukraine and we can't make decisions about ukraine without listening to ukraine. >> and please do not make any decisions about ukraine without ukraine. >> absolutely. on that -- [applause] [inaudible conversations] >> this morning the seventh health, education, labor and

pensions committee continues with a series of hearings on health care. the focus today is how to improve the individual insurance market. witnesses will include doctors, executives from hospitals and insurance providers. live coverage begins at 10 a.m. eastern on c-span3 come online at c-span.org or on the free c-span radio app. >> kentucky senator rand paul introduced an amendment repealing the 2001 and 2002 authorization for use of military force in iraq and afghanistan. next, the debate on the amendment from the senate floor afterwards, center devoted 61-36 to table the imminent. this is 50 minutes. >> center for marilyn. >> thank you, mr. president. earlier this week we comm