Ukraine is receiving significant aid from the United States because of the full-scale war. As Oksana Markarova, Ambassador of Ukraine to the United States, said in an interview with 
, its amount has reached $111 billion (in the third part of the interview, we spoke of how Ukraine can attract investment after the war and become an economic miracle).
Russia does everything it can to undermine support for Ukraine: Russia’s information war against Ukraine and the world is also evident in the United States. This is why debunking the myths and fakes of post-Soviet propaganda is a priority challenge for Kyiv.
talked with Oksana Markarova, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Ukraine to the United States, about fighting Russian propagandistic clichés, the way the United States sees Russia after the war and the world after Ukraine’s victory, and the chances that Americans would designate Russia as a state sponsor of terrorism.
How the United States saw Ukraine before the full-fledged war
Oksana Markarova: How the United States saw Ukraine before the full-fledged war. Photo: Getty Images
The war is waged not only with missiles but also informationally. How much is the information war evident in the United States?
This is a very important question, and we are increasingly collaborating with our key ally on this question. Russia wages an information war not only against us but also against Europe and the United States. The echo and the results of this war are very evident in the United States.
Before we start talking about the 16 months of the full-scale war, we must understand the background we start from, that is, the situation when Russian and Soviet propaganda was dominant worldwide. Most countries, not excluding the United States, saw Ukraine through the lens of the Soviet paradigm.
Russia’s role and capabilities were overestimated, while those of Ukraine were underestimated. Instead, our flaws, corruption, and other problems we had were also overestimated.
Thus, a narrative has been formed that only one country in our region, the Russian Federation, should be spoken with, and it will take care of everything around it. Meanwhile, we are an obscure country. It’s been a century of this narrative and a century of aggressive promotion of "Russian opera and ballet."
How Ukraine debunks Russian fakes for the United States
Oksana Markarova: How the United States debunks Russian fakes about Ukraine. Photo: Getty Images
It is very important now to refute the fakes Russia spreads and to counter their informational campaigns launched in parallel or sometimes before military operations, as are cyberattacks. But we also need to engage in a proactive awareness-raising program because it lays the right groundwork for relations:
"Who are we? Why does Ukraine fight? What are we fighting for? Who are the Russians? Why is our Independence not a matter of the past 31 years?"
Since my first day as Ambassador, my team and I have been actively promoting Ukrainian narratives and refuting Russian fakes through cultural and educational diplomacy events.
Each play or opera we brought, each performance of a Ukrainian artist, and each art exhibition or fashion show in the Embassy, the Ukrainian House, or other places created a very important impression. We’ve been showing that our culture is not inferior to Russian culture; it’s even older and richer in some aspects and has impacted Russian culture, which has been exported for centuries. For today’s world, it was a revelation.
Oksana Markarova: How the world rediscovers Ukraine. Photo: Getty Images
There were, and still are, too many biased ideas about Ukraine that have to be dealt with. Many were surprised at the fact that we were independent in 1918, since this period in our history has gone largely unnoticed by the world. Spreading the truth about Ukraine’s history is very important, and it’s our basic narrative.
It helps the world understand that the Russian aggression and atrocities, as well as our heroic struggle, represent our civilizational choice, which the Ukrainians repeatedly made in past centuries. Albeit losing to Russia all the previous times, now we have a historical chance and the longest period of Independence in our history.
How the United States changed its position on Ukraine during the full-scale war
In the United States, as in any democracy, expert opinion is very important because the Administration, Congress, and other policymakers take it into account. In these 16 months, we’ve seen a drastic evolution of expert opinion from "What we need to do to not anger Russia" and "What we need to do to find a solution to this war that will be acceptable for Russia" to "Ukraine must not lose" and, eventually, "Ukraine must win".
When we talk about values, principles, the rule of law, and the architecture of the world order/international law, the situation looks utterly black and white: Russia has attacked us, and we are defending ourselves. Russia violated everything, from the UN Charter to all international treaties and undertakings. The question is, what needs to be done not only for Ukraine to defend itself but also for this precedent not to become a precedent of success?
Are we already at the point where all experts on TV have stopped discussing topics like "When will Kyiv fall?" or "What must be given up to end the war?" — no, unfortunately, we are not there yet. But it is very good that such opinions are no longer mainstream in expert circles, and this is a great achievement of the past 16 months. Even if such editorials/articles are published, I don't need to react to each one since there are already a lot of people in the expert community who respond to them and say that this is unacceptable.
And what is even better, there has been no such rhetoric in the U.S. President’s Administration, and we have not heard such rhetoric from Congress (speaking about the vast majority of both parties).
Oksana Markarova: We have a bipartisan consensus on Ukraine in the United States. Photo: Getty Images
We have a bipartisan and bicameral consensus, and this is very powerful support for Ukraine. It may vary; there may be different opinions; resolutions may be introduced; or there may be calls to increase or reduce something. However, there’s overall support for Ukraine’s cause in Congress, and the support is quite powerful. At the same time, it doesn’t mean that we don’t need to constantly work to have it.
How Ukraine counters Russian propaganda in the United States
Even before the full-scale invasion, when it was clear that Putin was preparing to attack, I was privately asked: "What is Ukraine ready to give up? Kyiv or Donetsk?"
Opinions on this matter have evolved drastically in the United States. This is, to a large extent, thanks to the heroic work of journalists, both ours and foreign ones. Unfortunately, we have lost many, and we will probably lose more because Russia specifically targets journalists. But thanks to them, the world sees what is really happening, and that is why we receive help and it does not decrease.
Ukraine counters Russian propaganda systematically, both by responding promptly to all fakes and lies and by proactively spreading the truth. What gives us strength is that virtually all millions of Ukrainians, both in Ukraine and abroad, are volunteers on this front. They react and correct the information as quickly as possible, sometimes even ahead of governmental agencies. This applies to maps, museum exhibits, signatures at concerts, etc.
However, Russia acts very cunningly and shovels fakes constantly (such as improper use of weapons). Some of these fakes worked in 2014, but now such direct propaganda no longer sells. However, this does not mean that they have laid down information arms and are not trying to make mischief between us Ukrainians, between us and the U.S. and other allies, or between the allies.
Wherever Russia sees the opportunity to drive a wedge between us and somehow undermine or affect the provision of assistance, it does, and it will do so. So, we have to refute fakes, misrepresentations, and propaganda all the time. This is a separate battlefield of no less importance than the frontline. And we need to understand that it won’t go away after our victory in the war.
Can the United States imagine the world without Russia?
Are there debates about the relations between the United States and Russia after our victory? Can the United States imagine the world without Russia?
It’s hard to imagine the world without Russia, for it won’t likely evaporate. We have to understand that this unhinged neighbor won’t move anywhere, and the border we share with Russia is very long.
Thus, as countries sharing this planet, members of the UN, and international organizations, we need to answer the question: in what way should we further coexist so as to prevent this constant threat from Russia even after our victory?
We and the United States are democracies, so we don’t interfere in how other countries arrange their lives. It’s up to the Russians to decide how they want to live. However, there are challenges for us all, both direct challenges of military aggression and other challenges involving energy, food, etc.
How Ukraine and the world will look after the victory
I don’t think anyone has formed a comprehensive vision of the world after our victory yet. It’s obviously an extremely multifaceted picture.
The first picture is Ukraine itself. It’s clearer, and the peace formula offered by President Zelenskyy back in mid-2022 answers this question thoroughly. This ten-step action plan doesn’t only mean that we have to win, but it talks about establishing justice, reconstruction, and the way that in many aspects, from environment protection to energy, Ukraine can become not just something new and innovative but an answer to many global questions.
The second part is about international organizations. What do we have to do to secure Ukraine and other countries from a future attack? The League of Nations once failed to prevent the Second World War, which resulted in a complete rearrangement of the global architecture of international relations and, eventually, the creation of the UN. Today, 153 to 151 countries vote against what Russia is doing, repudiate it, and condemn it.
But we must admit that the global system has no leverage to stop Russia since it’s a nuclear power. Therefore, this future vision must also be visualized by the international community. However, there’s still no specific vision as to what has to be done to make it work.
The third part is Russia and what should happen to it; what we as the global community should attain to prevent this country from being a "cancer"; and what we need to do so that this country ceases to be a terrorist. We initiated private discussions on this topic at the embassy with the expert community back in March 2022. This is a matter of great discussion.
Why it’s important to visualize Ukraine’s victory
Back when there were discussions on TV as to how fast the Russians would capture this or that, we were talking about what Ukraine’s victory and Russia’s defeat should look like, and it was taken with a healthy degree of skepticism. However, it was obvious to us that without visualization of this victory and defeat, the visualization of where we as the world need to get to, it would be very hard to go there in the right way. Today’s priorities are victory, defense, military aid, and sanctions.
Why did the United States manage to impose sanctions so promptly, literally the next day after Russia attacked? Because they were ready. We had been working very actively on it for virtually half a year and provided a lot of information on the most sensitive segments and sectors that help all of Russia’s military efforts.
Sanctions are a very important element in speeding up our victory. The sanctions pressure is crucial, and its elements can cumulatively impact Russia’s capability to continue this unjust war drastically.
Will the United States designate Russia as a state sponsor of terrorism, and why is this status not enough for Russia?
Is there a chance that the United States will designate Russia as a state sponsor of terrorism, as U.S. officials still insist that they don’t consider it effective?
Since President Zelenskyy’s visit to the United States in September 2021, he and the whole foreign policy team have been working on three key priorities:
- strategic partnership and its evolution;
- the fastest possible security assistance and building our capabilities to deter the Russian attack;
- sanctions lists and pre-emptive sanctions with the same purpose of deterring Russia.
As soon as Russia attacked us again in February 2022, we started a vivid discussion about designating Russia as a state sponsor of terrorism. We continue working and actively call for a more ambitious posture on the isolation of Russia, so the status of a state sponsor of terrorism is still on the table.
However, every status has two elements: the status itself (it is very important to call an aggressor an aggressor and a terrorist a terrorist) and what it entails, that is, what restrictions it introduces.
Looking at the restrictions resulting from the status of a state sponsor of terrorism, a lot of them have already been introduced, but each one should be further reinforced.
Some restrictions similar to those applied against Iran, Cuba, or Syria should definitely be expanded and made stricter since we work with a nuclear power that doesn’t only sponsor terrorism but is an aggressor, a terrorist, and a war criminal itself.
Therefore, we don’t waive our requests to the United States, but we want it to be something more. And in this new initiative, the issues related to the confiscation of sovereign assets should be regulated.
Read also
Ukraine's Recovery: How to Change Critically Low Citizen Engagement Indicators?
The future has already arrived: blockchain technologies in the global economy and everyday life
