Kay Bailey Hutchison on the Russia-Ukraine Crisis

CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR: And next, NATO membership has become a focal point in tensions between Russia and the West as we have been discussing. Kay bailey Hutchison served as the U.S. ambassador to NATO during the Trump administration. And she now analyzes the situation with Walter Isaacson.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WALTER ISAACSON: Thank you, Christiane. And Ambassador Kay Bailey Hutchison, welcome to the show.

KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO NATO AND FORMER U.S. SENATOR: Thank you, Walter. Great to be with you.

ISAACSON: So, you have been ambassador to NATO. You know all about how diplomacy works. As a Republican leader on foreign policy, how well do you think the Biden administration is handling this?

HUTCHISON: I think that he is doing the right thing to keep the door open on diplomacy because we’re not sure how serious President Putin has been, but we have taken him at his word. And we have put our allies on notice. We have worked with our allies to stay united. And I think that if in fact the de-escalation occurs, then I think it has certainly been the right thing. I do think that this is also a signal for something that we ought to start working on together in a bipartisan way, and that is creating more natural gas capabilities for America to go into Europe with LNG. We have lagged too long in helping our allies and working with our allies to provide natural gas at reasonable prices. Now, we can do it. And I think that is something we should focus on and can in a bipartisan way, to make sure that Europe is never under Russia’s thumb for its basic safety and security of being warm in the winter.

ISAACSON: Secretary of State Tony Blinken and National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan have decided to be very public, step by step, day by day, about what’s happening, what Russia’s intentions are, where their troops are, what they’re saying, as if that could help resolve the situation. Do you — it seems like a new strategy to me, to almost sort of flag what you think Putin’s next move is going to be, to explain everything hour by hour. Do you think that makes sense in this new digital age?

HUTCHISON: Actually, I do. I think that that has been a new way of dealing with all of the cyber and hybrid that we have out there, to just call it what it is, and call out Russia, and say, this is — and I think also, this administration has been very clear that we want our people to leave. We want to make sure that we are preparing for the worst, even while we are having diplomacy to try to avoid any kind of takeover or entrance into Ukraine on the part of Russia. And I do think that it has been good that we have shared what our intelligence is, what we are hearing, that it is imminent, that it could happen. And I think that has caused a pause. And maybe it is a new strategy, but I think if it works, that we should declare that, OK, we’re going to call out when we see the possibility of something like this happening. Because clearly, in Afghanistan, people were not prepared. Our people were not prepared. And maybe we have learned the lesson from that, which would be very helpful.

ISAACSON: The Trump administration and President Trump himself were rather friendly at times, in a confusing way, with Vladimir Putin and some of Russia. Do you think that muddied the situation so it was unclear what America’s interests were vis-a-vis Russia?

HUTCHISON: Well, you know, I thought it was a dynamic that I didn’t understand. But everything that the administration did was being very tough on Russia. Certainly, the sanctions on Nord Stream 2. But I didn’t understand the dynamics, which I don’t think others did as well, but when you look at the policies, the policies were tough and right, and showed that we would do what we said we were going to do.

ISAACSON: One possible resolution of this is rather simple, although maybe hard to get to, which is for Ukraine to say that it’s not planning to join NATO and for NATO to say, no, we’re not going to have Ukraine as a member. It’s not something that probably could be said outright and signed into a treaty, but if everybody could make it clear that Ukraine was not joining NATO, wouldn’t that resolve the problem? And should that be a possible resolution?

HUTCHISON: Walter, I think that would be a sign of weakness. And I don’t think NATO will ever say, we’re not going to take in a country that qualifies, and Ukraine has not qualified for NATO. They’re not close to qualifying. Everyone knows that because they have a corruption issue. But President Zelensky was elected on a reform platform. He is trying to solve that issue. And we want him to be able to have a good economy, a solid resilient democracy, and a rule of law, and a place where people can live in freedom. But I have to say, he should never say, we’re not going to join NATO, under the thumb of Russia demanding it. And NATO will never do that, either. Even though, at this point and in the near future, they would not meet the qualifications of a resilient democracy, but they’re working toward it, and we’re going to encourage them to do that.

ISAACSON: Well, explain to me why NATO should have what’s called the open- door policy where former Soviet states like Georgia or Ukraine could be invited in in a way that threatens Russia, you know, if you want to see it from their perspective, that really puts a hostile alliance right on their border. Why is it that we should be sending our troops to have an open-door to allow these countries to be part of an alliance when historically they have been part of a seer of influence that the Russians have had?

HUTCHISON: First of all, NATO is a defense alliance. It has never been aggressive. It is not going to be aggressive. Secondly, the open-door has immensely solidified Europe, both economically and in security, because of the former Soviet republics that are now in NATO because they have met the qualifications. We want every country to have the solid capability to defend itself and to have allies that will stand with it. That’s what NATO is. It’s never been aggressive. And I think that that’s a false premise that Putin puts out that we feel threatened by Europe being on our edge and more of our former Soviet participants would be able to have freedom, to have real democracy, to have rule of law, and that’s a Putin front. It was one of the things that he’s saying for why he’s in Donbas, taking part of Ukraine right now, that I’m protecting my citizens from this Western corruption. What? I mean, that doesn’t make sense. So, I think that we will have an open-door for NATO. It is the right thing. It has strengthened the security of Europe and most certainly strengthened our alliance.

ISAACSON: Five major liquefied natural gas ships heading to Europe now from your State of Texas and mine of Louisiana. Do you think we should be producing more liquefied natural gas, more gas and sending it over to Europe and then, trying to stop the Nord Stream pipeline where Europe is going to be getting a lot of its gas if we don’t?

HUTCHISON: Oh, I definitely do. I think that is a foreign policy and a security issue that we should be producing more natural gas, this administration should welcome natural gas. It is safe. It is secure. But it is also clean. And I think they have made a mistake in painting natural gas with the broad brush of carbon emissions. It is a clean energy. That and nuclear, I have to say, have been ignored in the energy security field, and I think we need to bring that back. I think that deserves a big discussion in Washington. I hope the administration will see this as a security issue, and I think producing more of our own capabilities most certainly for us to be energy independent, but also to make our European allies’ energy independent.

ISAACSON: What should we do with the Nord Stream pipeline bringing gas from Russia to Europe?

HUTCHISON: Well, I think that we should have kept sanctions on because it was working. The second pipeline has not opened. And of course, Germany has come around to saying, if Russia invades Ukraine, that it won’t. That’s very important. And I have to say President Biden worked very hard on that. But I do think the first mistake was lifting the sanctions in the first place. Because we should never, A, let Russia have a stranglehold on European natural gas and warmth in the winter. But secondly, we don’t want to prop up his economy so that he can do more malware, which we know has been happening all over our NATO alliance, as well as America and Canada.

ISAACSON: One of the strategies of Henry Kissinger when he was running American diplomacy was that he saw linkages all over. He could figure out that if you touch something here and this part of Russia, it would be like a web and it would reverberate in Vietnam or Cambodia or China. To what extent do you think what’s happening right now reverberates in the Taiwan/China issue, and are you worried about China forming an alliance with Russia if we impose too many sanctions?

HUTCHISON: Well, on your first point, I think Henry Kissinger was a genius at that. And I think the basic principle is that you want your adversaries to fear you. You want your allies to trust you. And if your allies trust you and your adversaries know you’re going to do what you say you’re going to do, that is our best security posture. And that was a Kissinger/Nixon policy, and it was followed through in successive administrations. But I do think now that we are looking at both China and Russia testing us, I think they have seen the weakness in both Afghanistan but also in thinking that maybe the alliance would be split off because you do have Europeans who like dialogue. They like to have diplomacy. And I think we are being tested. But on your point of will Russia and China have an alliance, I think that they will have an alliance in the enemy of my enemy is my friend, and if they can use to their separate advantages that we are diverted, say, in one place then China could take advantage of that because we’re doing, of course, Ukraine, to start pinging on Taiwan, because we know that that is a long-term goal for China. And I think that in that instance they are allies, but I don’t see, at this point, that they will be allies on an equal-to-equal basis. I think their cultures are different. I think their tactics are different. I think their capabilities are different. China has a much larger economy and a much stronger capability in every respect than Russia. Although, Russia certainly plays a bad hand well. They do a lot with what they have. And I think they will work together to torment the West. But would they ever become allies in the sense that they would be equals? I don’t see that.

ISAACSON: If China starts to use this Ukraine crisis to encircle Taiwan, but more pressure on Taiwan, perhaps even threaten to invade Taiwan, what should we do?

HUTCHISON: Oh, Walter, that is such a tough question. And I think that we need to stand with Taiwan in every possible way. And I think we have a lot of dialogue and a lot of honesty about what China is doing, what — they have broken their word with Hong Kong. They made an agreement with U.K. that Hong Kong would have an autonomy. And if they do the same thing with Taiwan, which you have to say as a realist that that is a possibility, and you have to see it the way China has built those islands in the South China Sea. They said they wouldn’t be militarized, but we know now that they have submarine bases under those islands. So, they are not keeping their word, just like Russia isn’t. And we have to deal with people who are not going to make an agreement and keep it. I think we have got to stand for these Western democracies that have free people and it’s important for allies, for Western allies to stand together.

ISAACSON: Ambassador Kay Bailey Hutchison, thanks so much for joining us.

HUTCHISON: Hey, thank you.