Tell me about the first time you met Russian President Vladimir Putin. Can you talk about how your relationship changed over the years? The first time we met was in 2000. When I was prime minister and he was president. My job as prime minister was to give my president, Kuchma at the time, the new vision of energy relations between Russia and Ukraine. I remember, it was late at night when we finished our negotiations, and we finally had to present the documents. Putin, I would say, his position was rational, and we at least had some common ground. All our initiatives were supported by Russia. The way the president negotiated was without any arrogance. The real change in Putin, in how he behaves, in how he talks, in how he looks at other countries, I first noticed when he spoke in the Munich security conference in 2007. That speech was so undiplomatic and arrogant. Even how his voice sounded changed. He was trying to sound tough, like a thug, while lecturing the world on how he believes the world should be. How he thinks the security arrangements in Europe should be organized. I really felt ashamed when I watched him speaking. It was so striking. I remember sitting next to Chancellor [Angela] Merkel, and she kept turning to me, and she said, “I cannot believe he is saying all that.” How should pro-Democracy leaders, especially in Europe, diplomatically engage with countries like Russia? Putin has Putin-ized Europe. The highest level politicians in Europe serve on the board of his companies, and make money in Russia. We see how former chancellors, ministers, vice chancellors of different countries, become members of supervisory boards of Russian state companies. The political corruption, or as I call it, Punitization, has been so deep in all aspects of political and business life in prominent European countries. Europe, divided by Putin, failed to really build effective security systems and arrangements. We need to go back and reflect very thoroughly and seriously on what we did wrong to allow this fascist regime in the 21st century, after all the lessons that we were supposed to learn from the 20th century. I think additionally that political leaders of Russia, and the military leadership should be eventually brought to court and tried. For that we need to have a consolidated foreign policy related to these matters. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy seemed to welcome China’s “peace plan” despite Beijing's ties with Moscow. How do you expect the country to handle China going forward? Whatever happens with the current situation is pretty much dependent on two countries, China and the United States. Obviously, these are two countries with different views on the world. They also go through their own negotiations, exchanges, evolution of views, viewing of relations, so obviously those processes are very complicated, and Russia has nothing to do with those decisions. Russia now, is just the vessel, just a subordinate component to Chinese foreign policy. Russia has no say anymore in how to run the world. Of course, a lot of agreements need to be reached by China and the United States on many matters. But I think that every day, when we talk about the United States, senators and congressmen, more and more people are thinking in the following way: Russia is a gas station. You’ve talked about how Russia shouldn’t be a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council. Is there a path to remove Russia from that position? As of now, there is a team of lawyers from different countries looking for mechanisms. They are putting a list of all the instruments that could be used to take that right from Russia to be a permanent member of the council. Once that system is in place, by the end of the summer, we will come up with a list of people who will be contacted and who could be the voices of this initiative, who could actually influence, and bring this into the agenda of the United Nations. And at the same time, the litigation team will continue to come up with whatever meaningful legal precedents or specific tools they can find in order to make every step of this process legitimate and well grounded. Because we want every person, every member, every country, to ask why this happened, why is Russia still there? There have been several incidents in which opponents of the Kremlin have been victims of poisoning, including yourself. What can you share about who you believe gave the order? The manner the poisoning happened was not typical of the Ukrainian secret services. The investigations and prosecutors have a lot of answers to too many questions. I also have the answer. I know what happened. But it’s not up to me to say these things. The people who did that, on day three, after the poisoning, were already back in Russia. All the promises that the Russian side and president Putin personally made to help investigate this further, never happened. He promised me personally that Russia will assist in the prosecution, and it never happened. I strongly believe this should come from the prosecutors who have all the information and can pull out all the proof of how exactly this happened. I know we will get all the answers when Putin is no longer in his current position. Corruption remains a roadblock for Ukraine to enter the EU, according to Western officials. How has the issue changed since Russia’s full-scale invasion last year. With the war, the issue of corruption has become extremely sensitive. And now, we see so many people following it. When something happens, the whole country discusses it. This is why I would say it only expedited getting rid of corruption in Ukraine. And also, keep in mind that before the war, Russia was still a major trade partner. And they were the ones who were imposing and profiting and arranging these corruption schemes in the way they liked, in the dirtiest and most improper way. So this is why, with Russia no longer being a trade partner, a lot of sources of corruption have disappeared. Do you have any concerns over future Western assistance to Ukraine, considering the U.S. lawmakers that have questioned the prospect of more aid? What I see is that the people of the United States are more consolidated than ever when it comes to providing Ukraine with military and other assistance. Most of the people — I’m not saying 100 percent — but most people speak in support of Ukraine. President [Joe] Biden came to Ukraine, and I don’t remember a case when the president of the U.S. or any other important country would come into a war zone. That was the most important support, expressed in a very courageous way. And that meant so much to every citizen and soldier in Ukraine. Biden walked through downtown Kyiv, at the same time, there were air raid sirens going on, and the president was not being pulled into some shelter or basement. He behaved like every American with dignity, with a sense of freedom and respect to those who fight for freedom. Thanks to Nahal Toosi, editor Heidi Vogt and producer Andrew Howard. SUBSCRIBE to the POLITICO newsletter family: D.C. Playbook | Brussels Playbook | London Playbook | Paris Playbook |Ottawa Playbook | EU Confidential | | Digital Bridge | China Watcher | Berlin Bulletin | D.C. Influence | EU Influence | London Influence | Paris Influence
| 
