On April 29 the U.S. Senate confirmed Victoria Nuland as Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, which has been described as the fourth most important position in the State Department. Though as the first three are filled by political appointees and the other by a career foreign service officer, the Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs is the highest-ranking member of the U.S. Foreign Service.
In an appearance before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in April as part of her confirmation process, she reflected on her thirty-two years in the Foreign Service working for five presidents of both parties and nine secretaries of state. She retailed some of her “historic moments” in that career, among them “working on tough arms control problems and conflicts from Rwanda to Haiti to Bosnia and Kosovo.” But what she expressed as her last-listed and perhaps proudest moment was, while she served as Deputy Chief of Mission at NATO, the military bloc for the first time activating its Article 5 collective defense clause, which contributed to the now twenty-year-old war in Afghanistan, a comprehensive naval interdiction mission in the Mediterranean Sea (Operation Active Endeavor) and European AWACS flights over the U.S. along with several other missions.
A major part of her career has been spent at NATO headquarters: she was Deputy Permanent Representative (ambassador) to NATO from 2000-2003 and Permanent Representative from 2005-2008. In both positions she was instrumental in recruiting military forces from NATO allies and partners for the war in Afghanistan, with NATO military personnel also stationed in Kyrgyzstan, Pakistan, Tajikistan and Pakistan. At one point 130,000 of the 150,000 foreign troops in the country served under NATO command in the International Security Assistance Force: service members from 54 countries. Never before or since have troops from so many nations fought in a war, much less in one theater of war or one country.
She also worked on promoting seven nations to NATO membership at the historic Istanbul, Turkey summit in 2004: Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovenia and Slovakia. All are in Eastern Europe; all but Slovenia were members of the defunct Warsaw Pact; three – Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania – were Soviet republics. Bulgaria and Romania provided the U.S. and NATO with eight military bases in the following two years. NATO has flown fighter jets from air bases in Latvia and Lithuania for years, in the case of the second nation since 2004.
Her State Department biography states she also served as Deputy to the Ambassador-at-Large for the Newly Independent States of the former Soviet Union in the 1990s (That was likely under Strobe Talbott, later president of the Brookings Institution.) She had a brief stint as a faculty member at the National War College. And she was Principal Deputy National Security Advisor for Vice President Dick Cheney from 2003 to 2005; that is, during and immediately after the invasion of Iraq.
During the transition period in Russia immediately following the dissolution of the Soviet Union she worked at what is described as covering Russian internal politics at the American embassy in Moscow and served on what the State Department termed the Soviet Desk in Washington. She is, in short, a seasoned Russia hand. She is reported to speak Russian and “a smattering” of Chinese, having worked in Guangzhou, China (1985-86) and at the State Department’s Bureaus of East Asian and Pacific Affairs the following year. She was in Mongolia in 1988 where she has been credited with assisting in setting up the first American embassy in the nation that is wedged between Russia and China.
She was a visiting fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations twice, and the second time, as a State Department fellow, she directed a Council on Foreign Relations task force on “Russia, its Neighbors and an Expanding NATO.” She has also been a nonresident senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, and a senior counselor at the Albright Stonebridge Group of former U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright. And she is on the board of the National Endowment for Democracy. (Her husband, Robert Kagan, is a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and member of the Council on Foreign Relations and was a member of the defunct Project for the New American Century, of which he was a key founder along with Bruce P. Jackson, also past president the U.S. Committee on NATO/Expand NATO. Both Nuland and Kagan are now Democrats.)
But the world would likely never have heard of her until now except for her role in engineering the overthrow of the government of Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych in 2014. Her face was first revealed to viewers outside the State Department, the National War College and major think tanks as she was handing out food to anti-government rioters in Kiev at the beginning of that year.
Having been appointed Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs the preceding year, she became the major American official assigned to Ukraine during the crisis of late 2013 and early 2014. In a leaked phone conversation of January 28, 2014 between her and American ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt, the two provided future historians with a textbook-perfect specimen of engineering a coup, replete with the exact people who would lead the post-coup “transitional government.” Three and a half weeks before President Yanukovych was deposed.
When the tape appeared on YouTube it created an international furor, not because of what it revealed about plotting the overthrow of a government which shares a 1,200-mile border with the U.S.’s nuclear rival Russia, not because it exposed the most naked form of interference in the internal affairs of a sovereign nation, not because shortly afterward the plot resulted in a what is now a seven-year war with the ever-worsening prospect of a direct military confrontation between the U.S. and NATO on one side and Russia on the other – no, but because the diplomat with decades of diverse experience said, when the ambassador raised the issue of the European Union’s role in the transition, “F-ck the EU.” That made the conversation noteworthy. The only outrage in the West was over the fact that the contents of a private conversation has been divulged. Russia was blamed of course. Three years later Hillary Clinton denounced the leak as an example of Russia “weaponizing” intelligence information. She had no objection to overthrowing a friendly government and plunging Europe into a new war.
Yesterday no doubt there was rejoicing and exultation in Kiev. There should have been weeping and gnashing of teeth in the Donbass and Crimea. And grave concern in Moscow. Nuland like her boss Joe Biden may have unfinished business in Ukraine.
Rick Rozoff is a contributing editor at Antiwar.com. He has been involved in anti-war and anti-interventionist work in various capacities for forty years. He lives in Chicago, Illinois. He is the manager of Stop NATO. This originally appeared at Anti-Bellum.
What makes her tick is always one of the unponderables of her history. The people who support her seem to think it would be real swell if there would be a hot war with Russia. She of course is mum on where she would like to see her belicosity lead. One thing that needs to be said is that losing Crimea in exchange
for placing a more Yankee friendly leader in Ukraine was not a good deal for anyone but Russia and probably Crimea. Leaders come and go, but the home of the Russian fleet has much more of a notion of permentance. It was a pryic victor if anything. Gave Russia rent free. It’s home base. Many Thanks “Toria”
Sure great to have Rick here at aw.com giving us his long and studied time as a NATO critic. 1000 of thanks to Rick for his long and tireless journalism.
Thanks in return. I wouldn’t write anything if I didn’t know there were people capable of comprehending it and sharing in a dialogue with.
She might be the woman most hated by the Kremlin, perhaps even surpassing Hillary Clinton.
She is so vile, Lavrov famously could not force himself to touch or even look at her in a diplomatic meeting.
https://russia-insider.com/en/politics/lavrov-warmly-greets-kerry-zurich-snubs-blood-soaked-witch-nuland-video/ri12381
Interesting that your link does is no longer available nor is it available same video link) in this link to article with additional detail; bottom line is that lavrov loathes nuland, justifiably so:
http://johnhelmer.net/cold-war-cold-shoulder-sergei-lavrovs-passing-hand-leaves-victoria-nulands-mouth-gaping-signals-dire-distress-and-much-more/
The woman is a vile and rabid neo con zionist: she has no place in any position of power. But she fits in with rice, power, haines, blink.
and dont forget Secretary of State Clinton, who had in mind to make Nuland Secretary of State if she was made President. Ukraine Syria, Iraq, in fact every major military calamity in the last 30 years Nuland has been involved in, in some way or another!
It’s hard to call who of the two would win. Their presence reminds me of The Devil’s Advocate.
If ever there was a US / Russian conflict Europe would capitulate within hours of the first bombs hitting the major cities of Europe they think they can take on Russia without concequences but they are mistaken.
We’re not likely to know the results. With “minutes to midnight,” I doubt either side would hesitate to select the nuclear option in fear the other side would live through it. If a nuclear holocaust starts, we would either die or be back to the stone ages without electricity or internet in a hell of a “Climate Crisis,” only this time it would be for real.
So you’re a climate change denier? If that’s the case I don’t give much credibility to anything you say.
I am antiwar and an environmentalist/scientist who helped close a hazardous waste burning facility. I know how to interpret scientific climate data and do not need Al Gore’s “help.” Antiwar is the most important subject we should be teaching our children. We should not teach them to fear people who question propaganda instead. Labeling people to stop scientific debates is wrong. I love people of all colors and don’t want them to die whether from war or pollution. “Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” Voltaire.
“F…ck the Eu” reveals this women’s mindset. If it were to come to outright war with Russia, Europe will be destroyed. She is thinking of a new Marshal Plan which would be extremely beneficial for America’s economy.
Makes you think what the hell are the Europeans thinking about ? , are they really prepeared to sacrifice Europe and all it`s 500,000,000 citizens on the alter of American hegemony ?.
…….and the alter of the Ukrainazis?
Keep in mind which power structure has risen to the top in Europe, UK or US? The power structure that is now at or near the top carry historical grievances towards Russia. Both Nuland and Blinken hail from the family backgrounds that are replete with historic prejudices against anything Russian.
The weakness of European snd US statecraft is the obliviousness to the damage that individuals with passion for their caused brings to the national interest of countries as a whole.
You can be assured that Victoria Nuland can give you exact dates and explanations from the founding of Russian state in 862, to Russian destruction of Khazar empire in nine hundreds to Russian ruler accepting Christianity on Crimea in 988. Or Mongol empire crushing both Chinese and Russian empires, and their Tatar vassals, followed by vassalage to Ottoman Empire, and all the centuries of profitable slave trade from Crimea that enriched slave merchants whose loot was deposited in Venice, creating one of the naval, trade and financial powers of Mediterranean . She knows it all. And Russia again interfered with freedom of slave trade by freeing Crimea from Tatar vassalage and finally abolishing slavery in Crimea, and ended profitable slave trade by dispatching traders throughout Europe.
Yes, Blinken and Nukand have their own version of Russian history, and would like to fix it and rewrite it to their liking.
The dangerous moment is upon us. The agenda of those fanatics that want to rewrite Russian history — is in danger. As US is losing ground globally due to tremendous pressure on its finances for domestic use -/ cannot just crank up money machine to meddle in various hot spots. This is why having top officials with specific ethnic ax to grind is not good. They will prioritize all foreign policy tools into one direction — Russia. Unless cooler heads that will prevail, and limit the damage.
Russia did outmaneuver them in the latest round of saber rattling. But it will not stop there.
At present, Russia and China are net gainers in US Afghanistan withdrawal deal. The agreement just inked with US is favorable to regional stability, and favorable to Iran and Pakistan as well. It calls for military neutrality — so not likely any residual force will remain. Since Afghanistan has been for years member of Eurasian SCO, it is expected that economic development will come from the region. US may continue funding some NGOs but has no money to be a factor in redevelopment.
All this is a warning sign that Blinken-Nuland team will dig their heels in on Russia, blinded to the consequences,
I very much appreciate Rick Rozoff making these valuable contributions.
An serious aspect about these rabid neo cons such as nuland is whether they even recognize the risk and danger to the world when pushing their delusional programs. Allegedly, they are not stupid but their track record would argue against that allegation. Delusional to the extreme does not quite seem accurate, it is worse than that.
Now it is clear that nuland has plans to continue to confront and challenge Russia and Putin and it also seems clear that Putin is not about to ignore these challenges any further. He does not threaten and he does not bluff.
In an important speech last week, he stated:
Those behind provocations that threaten the core interests of our security will regret what they have done in a way they have not regretted anything for a long time.”
It can not be any more clear than that but the world will continue to be at serious risk if nuland et al do not take heed.
this is the one i never got this woman poison pilled the us russian relation irrevocably. i know hrc has an outsized influence on the democrats and biden need to play ball to get things done and as such needs to appoint some neocons but to appoint nuland just doesn’t make sense
I am sorry to have to share this with you but suspect you would probably agree in whole or in part. Biden likely never had or made much sense.
Even with all his faults he’s a heck of a lot better than the alternative would have been. And at least he’s sane.
As Biden cranks up dual Cold Wars and more friction with Iran and N. Korea, I wonder if he really is sane. As horrible as Trump was, I didn’t get a sense of impending danger of the world going up in smoke.
I did not feel less impending danger with Trump. In fact, I felt Trump was about to trigger a war with Iran to stay in office. I would say they are both terrible choices and we were again forced to vote for one. However, I was a bit* thankful that we did not have the same exact choice from 2016. P.S. I debated using “a bit” vs. “very slightly.”
She is personally responsible for the Ukraine fighting, just as was Hillary and Samantha Powers for the destruction of Libya.
These are evil people. Their return under Biden shows he is not what he pretends to be.
I agree that Biden is not what he pretends to be, but he’s still a lot better than the alternative would have been.
Hers is only one more of the classic face of US power, –Jeanne Kirkpatrick, Madelaine Albright, Hillary, Samantha Power, Condi Rice, Susan Rice, Gina Haspel. Se fits the job to perfection. As with Edward Teller, Allen Dulles, Kissinger, Brzezinski, Cheney, …, the principal requirement is a humaneness deficiency, the ability to kill wholesale, immiserate vastness’s, and experience nothing but pleasure (“We came, we saw, he died.”).
From its colonial roots Anglo-America has shown itself as little more than an engine of expansion and acquisition. Politicians come and go, but the engine (call it “the deep state”) churns on, brutally destroying any opposition (JFK & DJT). Grown so immense and articulated so comprehensively the culture and economy as to appear unstoppable, it seems primed for Armageddon.
Superb comments.
robert scheetz,
to your list of humaneness deficiency, you need to add – total loyalty to the apartheid state of Israel.
But one day, justice will prevail. The evil ones will die… I gaurantee and I promise.
Thank you, Anthony, for trying to make us feel better. The evil ones are plenty, they keep multiplying, and are not leaving us fast enough.
Nuland is poison in US diplomacy.
I will never understand how this vitriolic imposter is allowed to publicly speak her hostile, prejudiced mind in front of the media. She is an insult to US diplomatic discourse. Let her go!!
“I will never understand how this vitriolic imposter is allowed to publicly speak her hostile, prejudiced mind in front of the media.”
Never? Not even if you read the First Amendment?
I think he means speaking her poisonous vitriol as a professional “diplomat”. Some of her worst comments were on behalf of the US, not as a private citizen where she does have 1st Amendment rights.
She has First Amendment rights regardless of what capacity she’s speaking in. That doesn’t mean she can’t be fired, though.
Really a great operation. Got rid of the Euro theif and no WWIII. & Oh WOOPS… The Russians just grabbed Crimea… Yikes how are we going to play this as a win… It’s one more irritant to motivate the loosers to up their game…. Oh, yeah sure!
The Russians didn’t “grab” Crimea. The Crimean people held a referendum and asked to be taken back into Russia.
Actually, both of those things happened. First the Russians “grabbed” Crimea, then they held a “referendum” which did not include remaining part of Ukraine as an option (and which boasted turnout of 123% in Sevastapol). Given that a majority of Crimeans are ethnic Russians, the referendum probably would have passed even if the Russian regime hadn’t flooded the place with troops and stuffed ballots to produce a fake 97% vote for returning to Russia. It’s a rare election that makes New York City council elections look free and fair.
I hope we can agree that the Transfer of Crimea from Soviet Russia to Soviet Ukraine in 1954 was not a good move for Russia. By the way, it was intended to reflect, “…the boundless trust and love the Russian people feel toward the Ukrainian people.” LMAO. How can the Russians be so wrong?!
So Russia used a trick from the west’s book for cooking elections to help correct the huge mistake. Can we blame them for learning from us?
https://www.wilsoncenter.org/publication/why-did-russia-give-away-crimea-sixty-years-ago
I have no opinion on whether the changing statuses of Crimea have been good or bad ideas. I don’t like or trust any regimes (including that of the US), and the best that can be hoped for is that whatever status Crimea is in at any particular moment reflects the desires of the people living there.