[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 87 (Friday, July 1, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: July 1, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                  REPORT ON TRAVEL BY SENATOR SPECTER

  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, during the Memorial Day recess, I had the 
opportunity to travel from May 26 through June 7, 1994, to North 
Atlantic Assembly meetings in Oslo, Norway, and then on to Moscow, 
Russia; Almaty, Kazakhstan; Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan; Tashkent and Samarkand 
Uzbekistan; Ashgabat, Turkmenistan and the D-day ceremonies in France. 
I believe it is worthwhile to share with my colleagues some of my 
impressions from that trip.


                        north atlantic assembly

  At the North Atlantic Assembly meeting, considerable attention was 
given to the question of admitting countries from the former Eastern 
bloc such as Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic, and the Slovakian 
Republic to membership in NATO and the alternative of more limited 
participation in the so-called Partnership For Peace. Nations from the 
former Eastern bloc were understandably interested in becoming a part 
of NATO to enjoy the guarantee of collective security. Obviously, there 
is reluctance to grant NATO membership because of the potential 
obligation for NATO nations, including the United States, to defend 
those nations if attacked by Russia.
  There has also been considerable concern about the Russian reaction 
to the inclusion of the former Eastern bloc countries in NATO. Such an 
expansion of NATO might result in the isolation of Russia and 
nationalist dissidents in Russia might use such expansion of NATO to 
argue in favor of reconstituting the former USSR. In light of those 
difficulties, the lesser status of Partnership For Peace has been 
proposed which provides a lesser status and can include Russia as well.
  The issues of the expanded membership in NATO or the Partnership For 
Peace raise the underlying question of what NATO's mission should be 
now that the cold war is over and its principal opponent, the Warsaw 
Pact, has been disbanded.
  In a conversation with former Russian Ambassador Lukin, now chairman 
of the foreign affairs committee of the Russian Parliament, I asked for 
his views on the appropriate mission of NATO now that the cold war has 
ended. With a smile he replied that it was like a movie he once saw 
where the French, under King Louis XIV, were confronting the Germans in 
battle. When the Germans left the field it caused Louis XIV to proclaim 
``My enemy has betrayed me.'' Mr. Lukin was suggesting that NATO's role 
was really over.
  During later aspects of our trip to the Central Asian States of the 
former Soviet Union, the issue of Partnership For Peace was discussed. 
Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Turkmenistan have joined the Partnership 
For Peace and Uzbekistan has signaled its willingness to do so. It may 
be that NATO will undertake a changed mission with inclusion of Russia, 
former Eastern bloc countries and Newly Independent States in the 
Partnership For Peace and perhaps ultimately in a revised NATO.
  At the North Atlantic Assembly meeting there was considerable 
discussion of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The draft report on ``NATO 
Peacekeeping and the Former Yugoslavia'' noted the folly of issuing 
threats which, when not carried out do serious damage to the 
credibility of threatening governments. The report further noted the 
indispensable quality of leadership by the United States and further 
commented on the timidity and uncertainty of NATO, the Western European 
Alliance and the United Nations.
  The Economic Committee of the North Atlantic Assembly spent 
considerable time discussing the final draft of the agreement of the 
Uruguay round signed on April 15, 1994. The Committee noted the 
projected increase in global income by up to $700 billion.
  One area of significant concern is the change in the GATT rules on 
antidumping where there will be a reduction or elimination in the 
ability of many countries to use their national antidumping laws. This 
could be especially problemsome to the United States where so many of 
our industries (steel, textiles, glass, etc.) have been victimized by 
dumping, where the exporting nation sells more cheaply in the United 
States than in their home markets, and where the exporting countries 
engage in substantial subsidies. Those questions and many others will 
obviously have to be carefully considered when the GATT proposal is 
considered by the Congress.


                                 russia

  In Moscow we had an opportunity to meet with the former President of 
the USSR, Mikhail Gorbachev, who was robust and voluble during the 
course of a 1-hour meeting. Mr. Gorbachev said that it was very 
important for the United States to be supportive of Russia and for the 
United States to be active internationally eventhough there is an 
obvious tendency after the Cold War to look to domestic affairs. Mr. 
Gorbachev emphasized that it was in the national self-interest of the 
United States to do so.
  On the subject of NATO expansion and the Partnership For Peace, 
former President Gorbachev was emphatic that the new alliances should 
not be under the old umbrella of NATO which was antagonistic to the 
USSR, but instead should be under the umbrella of CSCE or a newly 
formed European Security Council.
  Mr. Gorachev emphasized the need for Russia to gain capital and urged 
the United States to help supply that capital. He noted that there had 
been a flight of capital from Russia in the past few years and said 
that this was very harmful.
  He further expressed his concern that any instability in Russia could 
be an opening for Russian nationalists to come to power. When asked if 
he planned to run again for the political office he replied with a curt 
``nyet?''
  While in Moscow, we met with the former Chief Judge of the Russian 
Constitutional Court, Valery Dmitriyevich Zorkin. Judge 
Zorkin advised that Russian courts were not functioning and that he had 
not undertaken any judicial duties on the Constitutional Court since we 
met with him on October 10, 1993, because that court had been 
dissolved. He further advised the Russian Government was functioning 
only by executive decree.
  Judge Zorkin was very pessimistic about the future of the Russian 
economy. He noted that a great deal of capital had left Russia as part 
of the free economy and that the sight regions of Russia could not be 
managed by the Government. He said there had been a dramatic decrease 
in industrial productivity with some 50 percent of the machinery not 
being utilized.
  On the political side, Judge Zorkin expressed the opinion that there 
was no real democracy in Russia now nor would there be in the near 
future because the Russian society was not sufficiently developed to 
have a viable democracy. He expressed his concern that the armed forces 
might be more active in the next election.
  While in Moscow, we also met with a number of officials to discuss 
the proposed arrangement for scrapping Russian naval vessels at the 
Philadelphia Naval Yard. Our meetings included Russian Ministry of 
Defense officials: Col. Alexander Letunov, First Deputy to Lieutenant 
General Zobnin; Capt. Genadi Volkov and Col. Dimitri Rogozin; Mr. Boris 
Ivanov, affiliated with Russian-American Enterprises, Inc.; and Capt. 
Peter Galbraith and Col. Gary Rubus, of the U.S. Embassy.
  Colonel Letunov advised that Russia was prepared to go forward with 
the sale of their ships for salvage and that it was now up to the 
United States to search for contracts to carry out the purchase of the 
Russian ships. Colonel Letunov advised that the Letter of Agreement was 
in effect and that it was his expectation that there would be an 
experiment with one ship to see if the environmental cleanup was 
possible; that Russia would look for the highest offer and was already 
dealing with other countries including Great Britain, India, Spain, 
Italy, Japan, Germany, Turkey, and Norway; that the other countries had 
not expressed the same concern about the environmental cleanup which 
had been insisted upon by U.S. officials; and that there are over 500 
ships now on the market for sale under a presidential decree to sell 
the ships for hard currency.
  From these meetings, it appears that the Russian officials are 
prepared to move ahead with this sale of Russian warships. The issue of 
feasibility for the environmental cleanup has yet to be determined and 
there is the significant open question as to whether prospective 
purchasers from other countries will offer more money if, in fact, 
those countries are not concerned about the environmental cleanup which 
will obviously be expensive to meet U.S. standards.
  I advised the Soviet officials that a feasibility study had been 
undertaken by officials of the City of Philadelphia and that members of 
the Pennsylvania Congressional Delegation had met with ranking 
officials of the Department of Defense in an effort to implement the 
transfer of Russian warships to the Philadelphia Naval Yard for salvage 
purposes.


                               kazakhstan

  Kazakhstan is a large nation stretching approximately 2,000 miles 
from the Caspian Sea in the west to China in the east and more than 
1,000 miles in a north-south direction. The country has special 
significance because there are approximately 100 SS18's each with 
multiple warheads located in Kazakhstan. The United States has agreed 
to pay Kazakhstan directly under agreement for their destruction.
  Kazakhstan's Foreign Minister Saydabayev stressed problems which his 
country was having with Russia and urged United States support to 
guarantee the democratic development of the Newly Independent States. 
He emphasized that the reputation of the United States is outstanding 
in the world and said that Kazakhstan needed economic aid in order to 
succeed with their market economy.
  The Foreign Minister emphasized that Kazakhstan was proceeding with 
privatization as rapidly as possible. Coupons were being distributed to 
citizens who could then use them for purchasing housing or shops or on 
a collective basis for acquiring a share of larger businesses.
  We met separately with a large group of businessmen who described 
very extensive privatization occurring in Kazakhstan. Philip Morris, 
for instance, had bought a tobacco factory, and Nabisco had bought a 
large candy factory.
  One matter involved a coal project with a group known as Partners in 
Economic Reform, Inc. The project director, Allen Irving, described his 
company's efforts to help to mine coal with modern procedures including 
worker protection. That corporation has a distinguished board of 
directors including Lane Kirkland, Richard Trumka, and W.J. Usery.
  We had a fascinating meeting with Defense Minister Nurmagambetov, age 
70, a very distinguished soldier who had been awarded medals as Hero of 
the USSR and Hero of Kazakhstan. He advised that he did not think that 
Kazakhstan faced a military threat either from China or Russia; and 
that there was no threat from Islamic Fundamentalism because 
Kazakhstan, although significantly Moslem, was a secular society.
  He reminisced about his first encounter with Americans on July 1, 
1945, when Americans and Russians embraced with their forces met in 
Berlin. He said it was unfortunate that an era of mistrust developed 
after Churchill's iron curtain speech in Fulton, MO, the formation of 
NATO, and United States military action in Korea and Vietnam. He 
welcomed our visit, saying that such contacts contributed to trust and 
understanding.


                               kyrgyzstan

  In Kyrgyzstan, the Speaker of the Parliament Sherimkulov expressed 
the opinion that if Boris Yeltsin could succeed on his economic reforms 
for 2 years, then there will be stability in Russia.
  He expressed concern about the economic development in Kyrgyzstan 
saying it would take much longer than many had thought, that it was not 
a matter for 2 or 3 years, but it would take decades for the market 
economy to take hold.
  Kyrgyzstan's Acting Foreign Minister Jekshenkulov said that his 
country was having substantial problems with privatization because of 
the absence of foreign investment. He noted that some 120,000 Russians 
had left Kyrgyzstan last year, weakening their country.
  When asked whether Russia would succeed with democracy and a market 
economy, Minister Jekshenkulov expressed some concerns. He commented 
that he had met Zhirinovskiy in 1989 at a youth conference and that 
while people were disinclined to take him too seriously, he had a 
certain grassroots appeal because he had talked of nationalism as 
opposed to bureaucracy. When asked if he thought Zhirinovskiy would 
come to power, the Minister said that it all depends upon what Yeltsin 
does.
  Minister for Trade Iordan acknowledged the difficulty of implementing 
privatization. He noted the psychology of telling people for 70 years 
that everything belonged to the State with the sudden change of now 
telling them to change to a system with private property.


                               uzbekistan

  In Uzbekistan we were scheduled to meet with three citizens who were 
identified as being opponents of the Government. That meeting did not 
take place as scheduled because, as reported by Ambassador Henry L. 
Clarke, two of the individuals scheduled to appear were detained by the 
Uzbek Government. Ambassador Clarke further advised that this type of 
detention prevented similar meetings during visits by then-Ambassador 
Strobe Talbott and with former National Security Council Adviser 
Zbigniew Brzezinski.

  When I received Ambassador Clarke's report, I requested that he 
immediately notify the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. When we heard 
nothing later in the morning, we went to the Ministry of the Interior 
where we requested to see the Minister. When we were advised that he 
was out of the city, we reported the incident to the Chief of Staff.
  Since we heard nothing until the scheduled meeting at 4 o'clock that 
afternoon with President Karimov, I raised the issue with President 
Karimov and presented him with a formal letter of protest.
  President Karimov advised that there must have been some mistake and 
promised to investigate the matter fully. Before proceeding on other 
matters, President Karimov and I discussed the issue of human rights 
and then the prospects for free parliamentary elections in Uzbekinstan. 
President Karimov said that there would be elections later this year 
for Parliament, with the multiparty system under procedures which had 
been established in collaboration with the CSCE, Britain, and France.
  President Karimov expressed concern about the rise of nationalism in 
Russia and said if nationalists found a leader, then the reforms in 
Russia and elsewhere in the former Soviet Union may be doomed. He noted 
that Zhirinovskiy says what many people in Russia think. He commented 
that Yeltsin used to talk of equality and the absence of any 
territorial claims by Russia, but that Yeltsin no longer says those 
things. He complained that Uzbekistan was treated very badly when under 
the control of the USSR which took 70 to 80 tons of gold and enormous 
quantities of cotton from his country each year.
  On the subject of Iran and the potential expansion of Islamic 
Fundamentalism, President Karimov stated that his country would oppose 
that, but added that he was concerned about the expanding relationships 
between Turkmenistan and Iran.
  We had a cordial meeting with Foreign Minister Saidkasymov who 
greeted us with the saying that ``a guest is to be treated better than 
a father.'' I replied that it was a wonderful saying so long as my two 
sons didn't hear about it.
  Uzbekistan Foreign Minister Saidkasymov said that privatization was 
going reasonably well in his country because Uzbekistan had a history 
for private activity in the past. He pointed out that in the Communist 
era, 50 percent of the bread came from the private sector and 80 
percent of fruits and vegetables were grown on plots of land owned by 
individuals.


                              turkmenistan

  In Turkmenistan, our scheduled meeting with President Niyazov was not 
held because he was unavailable due to his late return after his 14-
hour return trip from Indonesia. In the President's absence, we met 
with Shikh Muradov, Deputy Chief of the Cabinet of Ministers in Charge 
of Foreign Affairs and National Security who advised that he thought 
Russia would go ahead with its reform. He expressed confidence that 
Turkmenistan would work out its problem on shipping natural gas to Iran 
under an arrangement agreed to by Russia, Turkey, Iran, and 
Turkmenistan. He discounted any threat from Islamic Fundamentalism 
saying the relationship between Turkmenistan and Iran over the years 
would preclude fundamentalism making inroads there.
  Of all the countries in the Central Asian States, Turkmenistan 
appears to have made the least progress toward human rights. Mr. 
Muradov said that security was paramount and they were not ready for 
democratization. The next presidential election, originally scheduled 
for 1997, has been rescheduled for the year 2002. This action is hardly 
consistent with any movement toward democratization.
  Comments were made throughout the region that the Central Asian 
States could not be judged by U.S. standards on democracy and human 
rights. President Karimov summed up the regional sentiment when he said 
the ``U.S. should help us, not push us.''

                          ____________________