Successes in Central Asia, The Caucasus, and Southern Europe

 Real Audio of Briefing

Copyright (c)2002 by Federal News Service, Inc., 620 National Press Building, Washington, DC 20045, USA.   For information on subscribing to the FNS Internet Service, please email Jack Graeme at info@fnsg.com or call (202) 824-0520.

       (Note: Off-mike portions resulted from technical difficulties at the source.)

       MR. TAYLOR: Thank you very much. Thank you, Ambassador -- (off mike). Thank you for coming here this afternoon.

       (Off mike ) -- a little about our work in Central Asia, which has a slight increase in its topicality this point, for obvious reasons. I will say a little bit about the kind of work we're doing there, what kinds of resources we are seeking, and then I'd glad to answer questions on anything that I have something to do with.

       I just got back from Central Asia last week, where I visited four or five countries -- (off mike) -- in Central Asia. I started off in Kyrgyzstan, went to Uzbekistan, on to Tajikistan, ended up -- (off mike).

       We are engaged there in -- (off mike) -- in our system -- (off mike). The reason we are doing that is that there's been a change -- (audio break) -- how are we doing?

       STAFF: Not well.

       MR. TAYLOR: Not well. You can probably hear me, but the folks in the electronic part probably can't. Is this better?

       STAFF: Thank you.

       MR. TAYLOR: I think that it's very clear to people in the region and it's becoming clear to us all that the security situation in Central Asia has improved. It's improved because, of course, of the war in Afghanistan and the attempts -- successful attempt to reduce the threat to Central Asia from terrorists and extremists.

       As a consequence of that emerging success, the security situation in (audio break) -- and as a consequence of that, our observation -- my observation from last week is that the leaders and the governments -- (audio break) -- able to and, I hope, willing to take some risks. And they're able to and willing to take some risks in the economic sphere, to relax a little bit their concern about a lack of control or a loss of control if they were to take some economic reform steps, as well as in the human rights sphere.

       We're going to try one more. (Cross talk, technical adjustments.)

       This is -- this now works? Okay.

       In addition to the economic-reform steps that they're willing to take, my observation is that they are becoming confident enough in the security -- the new security situation to relax a bit their grip and open up their societies to reform steps in the human rights area. We think that both of these, both the economic steps as well as the human rights steps, are very important. We think it's very important for the stability and security of Central Asian countries. We think this is good for our effort to deal with terrorists and extremists around the world, but in particular in Central Asia. And so we want to support that.

       Our assistance programs are designed to work on the economic transformation and the democratic, human rights transformation that we've been watching there in Central Asia. And frankly, it's been slow. And we are pleased. We're optimistic. We're encouraged with this new development over the past three or four months, since September 11th and the war against terrorism in Afghanistan, we think there have been improvements. So we want to encourage that.

       We've asked for significant resources to support the economic reform and the democratic reform in these countries. We've asked for over -- asked for and received over $300 million in this fiscal year for that region, and we are asking for an additional $300 million or so for the Central Asian region in fiscal year '03 and another supplemental request that we have before our Congress.

       Our support for these changes is in response to the governments of Central Asia and the people of Central Asia's willingness to take these hard steps. That is, the assistance will follow reform. We clearly do want to support these leaders and governments and people as they take the hard steps, but it's they that have to take the hard steps, they that need to make the economic choices and democratic, human rights choices that will allow our assistance to be of use and of value.

       So that's kind of the first piece of this. Again, my trip last week was to talk with government officials, surely, U.S. implementers of assistance, surely, but also talk to people there who are receiving some of these assistance benefits and some of the recipients of the program, the beneficiaries of the programs that we have there. And they are -- these programs are in the same area that we've talked about; that is, on the economic side as well as on the democratic, human rights side.

       Obviously, the security programs move forward in response to a request and in response to threats that they're facing.

       That is the main part of -- the burden of what I wanted to at least open up with. And I'm certainly happy to take questions about any of the topics in the assistance area in the region of the former Soviet Union and the Eastern European countries.

       MODERATOR: And with apologies for our technical glitches, we'll take your questions.

       Q Thank you, Ambassador Taylor.

       Shafaq Naharleva (ph), Azertaj News, Azerbaijan, another country in the front line of the war against terrorism.

       I had two questions, but the second will follow from the first, depending on your answer.

       MR. TAYLOR: Okay. So you'll ask them one at a time?

       Q Yeah.

       MR. TAYLOR: All right. That's good.

       Q The first is, I wonder if you could elaborate on how the quantity or the quality of U.S. assistance to Azerbaijan changed since the president gained the authority to waive section 907?

       MR. TAYLOR: Sure. Let me talk about the quality of the assistance. And as many of you know, but maybe not everyone, we had been constrained on the types of assistance that we were able to provide to the government of Azerbaijan up through and including a couple of months ago. A couple of months ago, the president was able to get from the Congress an ability to waive that or to suspend that restriction. And the president did so, used the new authority that the Congress gave him, suspend -- waived section 907 of the relevant law -- the Freedom Support Act -- and that allows us to change the quality and the types of assistance that we're able to provide.

       Before the president waived section 907, we could provide only assistance in the area of humanitarian assistance and in democratic assistance. There were a couple of other exceptions to the constraint -- for example, we could use some of our assistance to help U.S. firms as they were seeking to invest in Azerbaijan. So some of our agencies, like TDA and OPIC and XM were able to operate. But by and large, we could not provide assistance tot he government of Azerbaijan in the area of economic reform, as an example. Indeed, in security programs. So we went to the Congress last fall, after 9/11, and we made the case -- we pointed out that it would be important for the United States to deal with Azerbaijan in this war against terrorism for several reasons that we don't have to go through in any great detail.

       But Azerbaijan, of course, is on the route between here and Central Asia, but it's also on the route for terrorists to move back and forth in that region. There are several pockets of instability in the region, and Azerbaijan falls on the routes that go back and forth between these areas.

       So we thought it was very important that we be able to deal on a security level, as well as some of the financial aspects of the war against terrorism. As I say, the Congress agreed, gave the president the authority, the president used it. So we are now increasing our assistance in the security area. We will be increasing our assistance in the economic reform area, in particular as it applies to tracking the financial flows of resources to terrorist groups -- money laundering, anti-corruption, border controls, border guards. We've been providing some assistance along the area of nonproliferation, which was actually another area of exclusion from the restrictions, but now we're able to expand that. Our military is able to do some work with the military of Azerbaijan, again, in this war against terrorism, but also to enable and facilitate the movement of U.S. forces and U.S. supplies on the corridor between here and Central Asia.

       So those are the areas; the law enforcement, the border controls, economic assistance, in particular as it applies to money laundering and money flows -- those are the kind -- that's the quality difference that we are doing.

       Q Is that at all like the same assistance you are giving to Georgia today, moving some of the U.S. troops to Azerbaijan and training?

       MR. TAYLOR: We have -- the Congress gives us guidance on the kinds of assistance we provide to Georgia in some detail, both in the level and the types of assistance. We'll be developing the program in Azerbaijan together with the government of Azerbaijan on the merits of the individual programs that we think will be good for Azerbaijan and U.S. security, Azerbaijan economic and democratic reform, as we work it with both that government and our interests in the region.

       So we generally do not design our programs in one country based on programs in another country. We focus on -- Azerbaijan officials in Baku, our embassy there is very active, as well as our USAID mission and other implementers.

       So it's on the basis of that analysis that we'll design and continue to provide assistance to Azerbaijan.

       Q Ambassador, my second question is a little bit more specific.

       MR. TAYLOR: Oh, I thought that was your second question.

       Q (Laughs.) No.

       Q (Off mike.)

       MR. TAYLOR: Oh, I see.

       Q That's the second. The handout that we picked up says that one field in which U.S. assistance had a particularly positive impact is agriculture. And my question is on the same kind of assistance to Azerbaijan. I think the need in assistance in agriculture sphere is immense today in that country. You know that it has 1 million people living as refugees and IDPs as a result of conflict with Armenia. And most of them having agricultural background and being driven to the cities, where industry prevails, don't find themselves in the labor market. Do you have any plans of enhancing the assistance on that particular sphere, agriculture?

       MR. TAYLOR: We do. Actually, this is separate from your first question, because we have been able to provide some assistance to the private sector in Azerbaijan even before this Section 907 was waived. But we do intend to continue that, in particular in rural areas, in particular in refugee camps, where we intend to continue, indeed even to expand our efforts to provide small enterprises, whether they be agriculture oriented or food processing, small production -- agricultural production facilities, provide them with training, sometimes with equipment, often with small loans. We've been particularly impressed at the ability of a small amount of funds that go to providing micro-loans, very small loans, to bee keepers, to farmers who are just getting started and need a tractor or need some bit of equipment that would enable them to get started, and then they're on their own and then they can go into a more commercially driven enterprise. So it's that kind of assistance that we intend to continue.

       Q Slobodan Palovic (sp). I am with Southeast Europe News Service. Ambassador Taylor, in meantime, I would like to switch your attention from Central Asia to the Balkans. We know that assistance and support for the Serbia and FRY is suspended since beginning of April. Could you tell me -- we know what is the main condition to restart, to reestablish the support, but could you tell me, is there any time limit for this action by U.S. Congress and government? And what we can expect as next move of U.S. government if there is a delay regarding the cooperation of The Hague tribunal?

       MR. TAYLOR: You're right; it is well known the reasons for the U.S. suspension of assistance to Yugoslavia and Serbia. It is less well known that there were actually three conditions, two of which were met, as I'm sure you're aware. But there was good progress on the release of Albanian prisoners. There's been good progress on cutting off assistance to the Republic of Srpska in neighboring Bosnia.

       We are still waiting for concrete actions to support the International Tribunal in The Hague, and those actions are not only the sending of indicted war criminals to The Hague, but also opening files and making other materials available to facilitate the actions of that tribunal.

       Is there a time line? No, there's not a deadline. The suspension of our assistance will last until there is progress. As you're well aware, there's been some good steps taken recently in the passage of a bill that now there is a law in Yugoslavia, that hadn't existed in the past, but will allow under the Yugoslav law, under the Yugoslav constitution, these war criminals to be apprehended and sent to The Hague. This should remove one of the major hurdles that has faced the government, and we're hopeful that that removal, the removal of that hurdle, will allow some action to be taken over the next couple of weeks. We understand that it takes some time for -- first of all, the law only goes into effect, I think it's tomorrow. After a war criminal is apprehended, there is a legal process that has to be followed, which will take a week, 10 days.

       So somewhere between now and two weeks from now, one could reasonably expect there to be action to check that third requirement. And at that time, we will make recommendations to the secretary of State, the secretary of State will make his decision. If he finds the cooperation adequate, we can resume the assistance.

       Q According to the U.S. Congress, the suspension includes the support for Yugoslavia in the international financial institutions. At the beginning of next week, the vice president of Yugoslav government is coming to Washington to sign the very important agreement regarding the Yugoslav debt to the Paris Club. If there is still a lack of concrete actions in Belgrade regarding apprehension and transfer to The Hague some indictees, do you expect this signing will take place or not?

       MR. TAYLOR: I don't know about the signing, but the funds that we've set aside to deal with that Paris Club debt are not counted as assistance, so that's not part of the suspension that is affected by -- so far, the lack of coordination, of cooperation with the ICTY. So I would not expect that to be a problem for these discussions and that signature.

       Q Thank you.

       MODERATOR: We have a question in the back here.

       Q Just to follow up, could you --

       MODERATOR: Could you introduce yourself?

       Q Yes. I'm Dubra Kostavic (sp) of Vecernje novosti, the Belgrade daily newspaper. Could you be more precise concerning the indictees, the war criminals? Do you expect all of them to be sent to The Hague, or you expect few of them? Could you tell us the names, maybe?

       MR. TAYLOR: I can't. I can't tell you the names, because they aren't specified -- the names aren't specified in the legislation. The names aren't specified by the secretary of State. The U.S. government has not given anyone a list of indictees that must be sent.

       What we have said is we expect full cooperation, and so far that has not been achieved. We will examine and we'll continually examine the cooperartion between Serbia-Yugoslavia and the tribunal in The Hague. And once that level of cooperation rises to the level that satisfied the secretary of State, we'll be able to resume.

       MODERATOR: (Off mike.)

       Q I think I'm the most familiar with the region. That's why I ask so many questions.

       Ambassador, Eurasian assistance -- the appropriation levels have been somewhat fluctuating in recent years. And talking from the perspective on how these states are doing in general, can you make any predictions on what the U.S. government assistance will look like in this region for the coming two, three years?

       MR. TAYLOR: Yes. If there is continued progress, as I outlined in my brief statement at the outset -- continued progress toward economic reform and democratic reform in Central Asia, but not only in Central Asia, I would expect the U.S. executive branch to be asking our Congress for equal or increased amounts of assistance to this region over the next couple of years. I would anticipate that the Congress will be interested in our view. They'll first want to make their own trips and make -- come to their own conclusions about the effectiveness of our assistance. If they conclude, as I think we will, that this new focus on economic reform, democratic reform, human rights, security issues in the region justifies additional U.S. support, I think we will have a strong case to make to the Congress, and I think they will come to the same conclusion. So I would expect level or even increasing amounts of assistance to this region over the next couple of years.

       MODERATOR: Other questions? Our friends from Yugoslavia -- oh, way in back.

       Q Thank you. I'm Vadim Rabadynov (sp) with Radio Liberty, Russian Service. Could you give us updated information on international financial aid to Afghanistan? And in, you know, last week the donors' conference took place in Kabul. So what's the outcome?

       MR. TAYLOR: Actually, I can't. I am glad that I don't have anything to do with the Middle East.

       I'm glad I don't have anything to do with Venezuela. I'm glad that I don't have anything to do with Afghanistan. My writ starts at the northern border of Afghanistan and goes to the north. So I can talk to you about Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, but I can't say anything very intelligent about Afghanistan, so I won't try.

       MODERATOR: Other questions?

       If there are not -- sir.

       Q Thanks. David Allen (sp), Tokyo Shimbun.

       Ambassador, to what extent over the next few years are security matters going to be prioritized, as far as -- you mentioned transfer of weapons technology, perhaps human expertise -- especially with regards to perhaps Russia and even some of the other Central Asian countries? And the second part of that is, how would -- since -- in this region be tied, especially with politically kind of apathetic countries such as Belarus and Turkmensitan, that aren't willing to engage so much?

       MR. TAYLOR: On your last part of your question -- on Belarus and Turkmenistan, it is more difficult to provide assistance to those two countries, for different reasons. And as a consequence of the general principle that I've described earlier -- that is, assistance follows reform -- if the countries in the region, as many of them are, are willing to take the hard steps, are willing to risk the little bit of lack of control that they think they've got under their rigid economic system and relax that a bit, then we're willing to make the effort, provide the assistance, work with them, to support them in those efforts.

       However, if countries aren't willing to make those steps, aren't willing to take those risks, don't see the benefits of economic reform, democratic reform, such as we see in Turkmenistan and Belarus, then we don't waste taxpayers' money. There are areas that we can work in both of those countries. The young people in both of those countries actually are very eager to learn about the outside world, and some of our best programs in the whole region, but in particular in places like Turkmenistan and Belarus -- those programs where we get young people to come to the United States, to live in American homes, to go to American schools and to go back to Turkmenistan and Belarus and other parts of the region -- those kind of programs we can and do support and would like to do more of. They work with the government, where they're not willing to or able to take the steps toward economic, democratic reform. We don't have big programs there.

       On your first part of your question, about security: We have had, for some time in Central Asia and in other countries, worked in cooperation between our military and militaries in the region. This has been fairly low-level. It's been good contacts and good -- increase in understanding on both sides f the procedures on the kinds of equipment, the kinds of organizations that the militaries have on our side and on the Central Asian side in that case. We have been able to build on those relationships over the past six months. Obviously, there are U.S. troops in the region. That could not have happened so quickly, had we not had this foundation of an understanding between the American military and the militaries of Central Asia.

       Associated with these programs over the past couple of years have been fairly low level of equipment -- mainly in the areas of communications, some night-vision goggles, radios -- there have been some transportation assets provided, in terms of boats and vehicles to help the border guards maintain their surveillance capabilities on their borders and to control their borders.

       Most of this has been in the area -- has been to help them in nonproliferation areas, in export control, border security sectors, and it's that kind of assistance that we will be continuing and be expanding.

       MODERATOR: Other questions? (No response.) Well, in that case, Ambassador Taylor, before I thank you, I want to ask you if there's anything else you'd like to put out on the record in light of the questions you've gotten and so forth.

       MR. TAYLOR: No. I think this has been a useful discussion. I'm always interested to hear the kinds of questions that come up, is why we benefit from this kind of exchange, and I hope we can do this again.

       MODERATOR: Well, thank you very much.

       MR. TAYLOR: Thank you.

       MODERATOR: Thank you, ladies and gentlemen.

Copyright (c)2002 by Federal News Service, Inc., 620 National Press Building, Washington, DC 20045 USA. Federal News Service is a private firm not affiliated with the federal government. No portion of this transcript may be copied, sold or retransmitted without the written authority of Federal News Service, Inc. Copyright is not claimed as to any part of the original work prepared by a United States government officer or employee as a part of that person's official duties. For information on subscribing to the FNS Internet Service, please email Jack Graeme at info@fnsg.com or call (202)824-0520.