STEVE INSKEEP, HOST:
Richard Haass has been listening with us to Joanna's interview with Ukraine's president. Richard is president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations and was a principal adviser to the secretary of state during the George W. Bush administration. Mr. Haass, welcome back.
RICHARD HAASS: Good to be with you, Steve.
INSKEEP: What do you make of that revelation that the U.S. at least seems to have blocked some intelligence-sharing with Ukraine?
HAASS: What I make of it is it's all too consistent with the pattern of U.S. foreign policy towards this war over the last year and a half. We have consistently done things for Russia, and we have consistently done things to Ukraine. And that is a - and this is simply the latest shoe to drop.
INSKEEP: And how does this fit in with the president's effort to get diesel fuel out of Russia?
HAASS: Well, the president made this deal to get a small amount of diesel fuel out of Russia. It will have negligible, if any, impact on the price of diesel, which is over $6.50 a gallon nationwide. It's up - what? - 70% since the Iran war began. And that's the bottom line. Diesel is sky-high. The price has spiked because of the president's war in Iran. But what he's doing instead is blaming the Ukrainians, who are attacking Russian energy infrastructure. It's one of the few things they can do to put any pressure on Russia in retaliation for their attacks. And what we've done is weakened economic sanctions and any pressure against Vladimir Putin. So again, it will have no impact on prices here, but it will have an impact on this war.
INSKEEP: Why do you think it will have no impact on prices here?
HAASS: As the cliche goes, it's a drop in the bucket. The amount of fuel that would come from Russia is less than a day's supply. It's just - you know, worldwide. It's just not going to make a difference. It will, however, make a difference to the Russian economy. And it does, once again, break sanctions, by the way, just days after the U.S. Congress finally passed a sanctions bill named for former Senator Lindsey Graham meant to increase pressure on Russia.
INSKEEP: How striking is it that the president has been telling Ukraine or urging Ukraine not to go after Russian energy facilities, which is a tactic that seemed to have given Ukraine some success?
HAASS: Well, it is quite striking. What is Ukraine meant to do? We've taken away their ability to defend themselves. We're not providing them Patriot air defense missiles and other systems. We've kind of burned through them in the Middle East. And we had stopped providing them directly, in any case, even before the Iran war. So Ukraine is increasingly defenseless.
You added what seems to have happened last night - that we've stopped providing them some of the tactical intelligence about incoming missiles, so they can't ready their air defense systems. We seem to have also interrupted some of their ability to access Starlink, which interferes now then with their ability to send drones against Russia. So again, what we're doing is we're tying the hands of the victim here.
Again, let's not forget, Steve, this is a war of Russian aggression. This is the second war of Russian aggression against Ukraine. There was 2014, where they took Crimea. There's this war, which is going on for - what? - four-plus years now. And yet this war is inconsistent with the most basic norm, the most basic principle of international relations - that territory is not to be acquired by force. Russia is violating it by the day, by the hour. And the United States, for reasons that are inexplicable to me, continues to embrace the aggressor and blame the victim.
INSKEEP: OK. You said inexplicable, and yet I'm going to invite you to try to explain.
HAASS: (Laughter).
INSKEEP: Help me do a little reverse-engineering here. We've identified these various things the United States is doing to pressure Ukraine. When you look at the U.S. using its tools in that way and try to work backward as to what the rationale would be, what the motivation would be, what the reason would be, what do you think?
HAASS: Well, you're old enough, like me, to understand my reference. This is the $64,000 question or maybe, better yet, the 64,000-ruble question.
INSKEEP: OK.
HAASS: Why would the United States help? Is it a - is it - yeah. We're in the land of speculation here. We have no evidence 'cause it makes no strategic sense. It makes no ethical or moral sense. Maybe he's still mad at President Zelenskyy of Ukraine for not dishing him dirt on President Biden during the - their election campaign. Who knows about the, you know, economic ties to Russia or any other ties? Maybe he's just - finds himself liking or admiring the strongman that is Vladimir Putin. I don't know. We're in the land of speculation. What I do know, what you know, what we all know - anyone listening to this knows - is the United States is tilting towards Russia, away from Ukraine. And that is morally and strategically bankrupt for this country.
INSKEEP: Richard Haass, longtime diplomat and former president of the Council on Foreign Relations. Thanks so much.
HAASS: Thanks for having me. Transcript provided by NPR, Copyright NPR.
NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.
