Congressman Panetta: Іf we don’t support Ukraine now, it will get a lot worse, maybe with our troops on the ground

Voting on aid for Ukraine in the US Congress gets a bipartisan majority when it is put on the agenda. There are always those who make this majority possible – those who lead others and shape the opinions of their fellow Congress members.

One of these is Jimmy Panetta, a member of the US House of Representatives from California.

Panetta is a retired naval intelligence officer. He became an active supporter of Ukraine only after Russia's full-scale invasion. As a result, he is less well-known in Ukraine than other pro-Ukrainian representatives. But there is good reason to pay special attention to him: Panetta is believed to be close to Kamala Harris. Both are from California and both are lawyers, so it’s no coincidence.

We met in Kyiv on the sidelines of the annual Yalta European Strategy (YES) meeting, where the Congressman was one of the attendees and speakers.

In this interview with European Pravda, Panetta shared his expectations regarding US support for Ukraine after the elections, the lifting of US restrictions on strikes deep inside Russia, and more.

"People feel that aid for Ukraine could be taking away from remedies that could occur in their life"

Congressman, you are a frequent traveller here. The last time you were in Kyiv was only a month ago.

That's right, early August, I came here with the Center for Strategic and International Studies, otherwise known as CSIS. We really had an excellent on-the-ground, boots-on-the-ground trip. We came in through Moldova, went to Odesa, stayed the night there and then made our way up to Kyiv and were able to stay on the ground for about five nights, which is unusual for most congressional trips.

When you do a trip through the US Congress, the State Department is not allowing us to stay overnight here, which I think is to our detriment, because on our trip when we were able to get on the ground, we weren't just able to have meetings with high-level military leaders and government leaders.

We actually talked to the civilians.

We actually talked to the workers.

We actually talked to the military members.

We actually talked to the victims of the bombings. We developed a great, not just understanding, but an empathy for what's going on here on the ground.

For example, it wasn't just the leaders in the government who were thanking us for the F-16, it was the people on the street that were saying thank you to us. To me, that demonstrates to me how important it is not just strategically to have the type of appropriate weaponry, but the morale booster that it does for people.

As someone who wears his pin proudly as a representative of the 19th Congressional District in California, what I've heard from my constituents is that it is important that the USA maintains its support for this fledgling democracy fighting against an autocracy that invaded unjustly back in February of 2022.

Not every constituency in the United States is as pro-Ukrainian as yours.

Absolutely.

Ukraine is gradually losing support among ordinary Americans. Why is this happening?

It's not just about Ukraine.

It's sort of about American society. Obviously, as you saw early on, when the unjust and unprovoked invasion occurred, there was an overwhelming amount of bipartisan support.

But it's not just about support. It's about the sustained support.

Obviously, we’re not going through what you're going through, but the fact is that we are the number one supporter, and therefore people feel that it could be taking away from any sort of remedies that could occur in their life.

That being said, it's incumbent upon us as representatives to ensure

that people fully understand why we need to continue to support Ukraine.

Not just now when they're pushed back on this invasion, but basically having a full comprehension that if it doesn't happen now, it will be a lot worse, and a lot more support [will be needed], not just here in Ukraine, but maybe Poland, maybe in Eastern Europe…

You mean they could be attacked by Russia?

You really don't know what Vladimir Putin intends, but I think you can make the appropriate supposition based on what he did, what he's thinking here in Ukraine, and where he will continue to go. And then it will be incumbent upon the US not just to provide financial support, but to provide military support and provide our troops on the ground.

A good indication of how things develop is Speaker Mike Johnson.

Speaker Mike Johnson, prior to him being speaker, was a Congress member from Northwest Louisiana. It’s clearly a very conservative district. A district that was pro-President Trump. A district that was leaning towards stopping support for Ukraine.

He became elevated to Speaker, and he had to have a learning experience.

In addition, his son is now in one of the military academies in the United States.

So he not only looked at it and learned intelligently about the issue, but he also took it personally about what could happen if we don't stop Vladimir Putin now, what could happen in the future, not just to Ukraine, not just to the United States, but to his own family.

"Our policy comes around and gets to "yes". And it will continue to get to "yes""

Let's talk about the US after the elections. For Ukraine, this brings uncertainty. We don't know how US support will change, including if Kamala Harris wins.

I think you do know, and we know exactly what the US policy is now, thanks to the leadership of President Biden, thanks to the leadership of this administration: continue to support our ally and our fellow democracy, Ukraine.

That will continue to be the policy of the Biden administration.

Going forward, you obviously have two presidential candidates.

One who made it clear where she is when it comes to support for Ukraine. One who clearly hesitated and couldn't answer the question just this week when it came to whether or not Ukraine should win.

We do know what could happen if there is a President Harris and if there is a President Trump.

President Trump, as he said, will try to cut a deal despite the negatives that could happen here in Ukraine.

President Harris has made clear she will continue to support Ukraine in its efforts to succeed.

Let me be frank: "continuing Biden's policies" doesn’t sound that positive, considering the indecision of the current US administration.

The United States policy for support for Ukraine is more than just one person. It's the United States Congress.

What we've seen is that the Congress has consistently and overwhelmingly on a bipartisan basis agreed on supporting our ally here in Ukraine.

And I believe that when we get the opportunity to vote on that type of supplemental support, it will pass.

Now, will the politics be difficult? Absolutely!

Not just because of the politics, but because we need to make sure that it's not just support but sustained support.

That's why it's incumbent on me as a US representative to continue to talk about the benefits and why it's important that we continue to support Ukraine in its efforts to push back on Vladimir Putin.

That's exactly why I'm here for a second time in less than two months.

For example, Ukraine is very vocal in asking to lift restrictions on airstrikes deep into Russia. Will there be changes in this regard?

We have seen it change. So clearly the answer is yes.

What is the process of getting to "yes"? It can be a little slow, I'll be the first to admit it.

Early on, I said we should provide Ukraine with the armaments it needs. They’re the ones on the ground. They're the ones who understand what capabilities it takes to punch back when it comes to defending themselves.

There are those who are tentative and like to work through each and every equation in order to get to "yes". But I think despite some resistance early on, you see our policy come around and get to "yes".

And I believe it will continue to get to "yes" and be a "yes" when it comes to supporting Ukraine with the appropriate armaments.

You talk to people who are expected to be in the Kamala Harris administration starting from January. Are they ready to take brave steps?

I would look at Kamala Harris being in the Biden administration right now and how the Biden administration is acting.

I agree with you, early on it takes some learning process, but they are going through the appropriate iterations to get to "yes", and I believe that's exactly where Kamala Harris will be.

A perfect example are the permissions.

The two things that I heard last month that are still relevant today are making sure that they have permission to use Western-donated equipment and technology to go beyond the border and ensure that Russia isn't allowed sanctuary on its land for its weapons and carrying out these attacks, which clearly it was doing.

I think you’re starting to see, especially [if] you look at the reaction to the incursion by Ukraine into Russia recently and how we responded.

And I think you’re going to see similar non-reactions or positive reactions when it comes to these types of permissions going forward.

"Ukraine has to ensure that Americans support its definition of victory"

You deal with foreign affairs and understand how crucial it is for the US to maintain a dominant role in the world. But do the American people understand this too?

I believe they do, absolutely.

Obviously we have our politics, we have our divisions, and we have our dysfunction because of those divisions.

But the fact is, when it came down to providing the supplemental to Ukraine, to our democratic partners throughout the world, you saw members of Congress step up and vote "yes".

Not just for Ukraine, but for Taiwan and other democratic partners throughout the world.

Even despite the chaos of the 118th Congress, despite it being an election year, you still had the US Congress – 435 of us – do the right thing when it comes to supporting Ukraine.

I mean ordinary Americans. 

It’s just like in the United States Congress. The United States has a lot going on domestically and internationally.

But we’re a country that's capable of, as we say, walking and chewing gum at the same time. We can do both!

It obviously takes a political will, but if you look at the history of the United States and despite the difficulties that we’ve been through, we've always done the right thing. It just takes – as Winston Churchill said – doing everything else before we get to do the right thing.

I think going forward, it's incumbent upon our nation's leaders in the United States to continue to remind people why it is important that we have sustained support for Ukraine.

Do you believe in Ukraine's victory?

I do believe in Ukraine’s victory, but it's going to be up to the Ukrainians to define that victory and ensure that the Americans support that definition.

When we win, how can it be guaranteed that Russia will not attack us again?

This is something that we have to think very deeply about when it comes to Vladimir Putin and what his intentions are.

And it's going to probably rely not just on Americans, not just on Ukrainians, but the Russians as well. What will they do in regards to this type of leader, who basically puts them on a brink of going bankrupt, and basically makes them vulnerable when it comes to expending all of these resources on this unjust and unprovoked attack of Ukraine?

So hopefully, they can step up and do the right thing as well.

I also believe that this war cannot be stopped with Putin. You're right that it’s up to the Russians to get rid of Putin. But let’s not fool ourselves: it’s not only him. A significant number of Russians hate Ukrainians, and unless certain mechanisms are created, this war is bound to flare up again. We've seen this plenty of times in our history.

And beyond that, too, it’s watching the countries who are supporting Russia at this time: China, Iran, North Korea.

What type of steps can we do to prevent that type of support going forward?

"Hopefully, this administration uses what has been allocated to them"

Let me tell you what I expected to hear from you when I asked about a post-war mechanism. I expected to hear the word "NATO", about Ukraine’s membership in NATO. But you didn’t mention it.

As Antony Blinken said this week, Ukraine is on an irreversible path to NATO membership.

Ukraine can continue to go down that path and continue to ultimately obtain NATO membership, but that's going to take some time.

First things first, and that’s obviously defeating Russia and succeeding in this war.

Some people say the reason why many American politicians hesitate to be exact about Ukraine’s NATO membership, and other matters, is Russia's nuclear weapons. Is that true?

It's something you have to consider. But I also think you have to look at where it has gone when it comes to any sort of escalation over these last couple of years.

So taking that into account, in addition to the fact that they have nuclear weapons and can use nuclear weapons, it’s all part of the calculus going forward.

But do you believe that they would do that? I don't.

I can't answer that. I don't know that.

But the fact is that it's something you must consider in regards to the challenges that we face here in Ukraine.

One last question. Right now, there is a lot of focus in Ukraine on the PDA, the US aid tool worth about $6 billion. Will this money be lost if Biden doesn't use it by 30 September?

This year's PDA (Presidential Drawdown Authority) was $7.4 billion.

Normally as it's written into law it's $100 million. If the remainder of that PDA is not used, it goes down to $100 million.

So first and foremost, hopefully, this administration uses what has been allocated to them.

That's not possible by the end of September.

Hopefully, they’ll find ways to make it happen.

And if not, then we'll look at ways. When it comes to the continuing resolution that we have to do in Congress in the next couple of weeks – including that in there will be my efforts – I have every intention to make sure that that occurs.

So we’re counting on the fact that these billions for the Ukrainian Armed Forces won’t be lost?

My intention is to make sure that we give the administration the ability to use what we allocated it to use.

Sergiy Sydorenko

European Pravda, Editor