[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 66 (Monday, May 19, 1997)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E967-E969]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




              HEMISPHERIC LEADERS DISCUSS CHALLENGES AHEAD

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. LEE H. HAMILTON

                               of indiana

                    in the house of representatives

                          Friday, May 16, 1997

  Mr. HAMILTON. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to call to my colleagues' 
attention the attached statement on conclusion of ``The Agenda for the 
Americas for the 21st Century''. On April 28 and April 29, a group of 
leaders of the nations of the Western Hemisphere, that included former 
Presidents Ford and Carter, gathered in Atlanta to address the 
challenges facing the Americas in the 21st century.
  As the attached statement attests, these leaders tackled the critical 
problems that must be addressed if we are to consolidate the impressive 
gains we have made in building a hemisphere that is resoundingly 
dedicated to free markets and democracy. The participants in this 
meeting are to be commended, and their conclusions merit serious 
consideration.
  I ask that the attached statement be printed in the Congressional 
Record.

          ``The Agenda for the Americas for the 21st Century''

       We, the members of the Council of Freely Elected Heads of 
     Government, have met in Atlanta, Georgia on April 28-29, 1997 
     to assess the state of western hemispheric relations and to 
     offer our views and recommendations on ways to help achieve 
     the goals that we share--the pursuit of peace; the end of 
     illegal drug trafficking; the reinforcement, deepening, and 
     extension of democracy; the promotion of a free trade area of 
     the Americas; and social justice.
       The Council was established at The Carter Center after a 
     Consultation on ``Reinforcing Democracy in the Americas'' in 
     November 1986 by many of us. Since then, within the western 
     hemisphere, we have worked to reinforce democracy at critical 
     moments, including by monitoring and mediating 15 electoral 
     processes in nine countries in the Americas. We have lent our 
     support to freer trade, including by urging the U.S. Congress 
     to approve the North American Free Trade Agreement. We have 
     worked hard to reduce the region's debt and bring peace to 
     Central America.
       For these past two days, we have reviewed a wide agenda 
     confronting the nations of the hemisphere--trade, drug 
     trafficking, poverty, and issues related to security and 
     democracy. Our council of 29 current and former Presidents 
     and Prime Ministers of most of the nations of the Western 
     Hemisphere bring diverging perspectives to the table, which 
     we found sometimes helps us to consider different approaches 
     to an issue.
       We found ourselves in agreement on the basic goals, many of 
     which were enunciated by the Western Hemisphere leaders in 
     the Declaration of the Summit of the Americas in December 
     1994.
       The Americas should conclude a Free Trade Area of the 
     Americas by the year 2005 while making sure that the benefits 
     of freer trade are shared by all the peoples of the 
     hemisphere.
       We should seek to eliminate the scourge of illegal drugs.
       The remaining territorial disputes of the hemisphere should 
     be resolved soon.
       We should curb the purchase and sale of arms.
       The benefits of democracy should be extended to all the 
     nations of the hemisphere, and we should deepen democracy, 
     protect press freedom, and eliminate corruption and the 
     disproportionate influence of money in the politics of all 
     our nations.
       While we are committed to those goals, we have to express 
     our great disappointment at the lack of progress in achieving 
     them, and so we concentrated most of our time on how to 
     translate those general statements into concrete steps 
     forward. Let us identify, now, with greater precision what it 
     is that we hope the leaders of the hemisphere should strive 
     to achieve.
       First, some general principles:
       The issues on the agenda require cooperation and 
     partnership, not unilateral dictation and paternalism.
       Most of the difficult issues on the agenda have two sides--
     supply and demand on drugs, commodities, arms, bribery--and 
     an effective strategy requires dealing with both sides.
       The moral basis of the new community of the Americas is 
     democracy. Freer trade will enhance the ties between our 
     democratic nations.


                   1. Trade, Integration, and Poverty

       We support the Summit Declaration to reach a Free Trade 
     Area of the Americas by the year 2005. There has been great 
     progress on negotiating bilateral and subregional free trade 
     agreements, but thus, far, little progress toward the Summit 
     goal of an FTAA. To attain that goal, the governments will 
     need to move more quickly than they have during the past two 
     years.
       All of our nations will benefit from freer trade, but that 
     doesn't mean that everyone will benefit. The best defense of 
     those people who suffer the increased competition of freer 
     trade is not protectionism, but rather additional mechanisms 
     to ensure that the benefits of freer trade are more widely 
     shared and that those who lose the competition can be helped 
     to adjust.
       1. Fast-track: It is vitally important that the U.S. 
     government obtains fast-track negotiating authority as soon 
     as possible in order to begin serious trade negotiations. We 
     were very encouraged in our discussions with U.S. leaders 
     that there seems to be grounds for a workable compromise. The 
     AFL-CIO wants adequate protections for workers and the 
     environment in the trade agreement. In our intensive 
     discussions with Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, the 
     Speaker told us that he would support rapid passage of fast-
     track negotiating authority which included provisions for 
     protecting labor rights and the environment, provided they 
     are trade-related. We view this as a significant development 
     that potentially goes beyond the existing NAFTA and hope 
     Congress and President Clinton reach agreement on this as 
     soon as possible.
       2. Caribbean Basin Enhancement: It is vitally important 
     that a Caribbean Basin Enhancement law is passed by Congress 
     as early as possible to grant wider access to the U.S. market 
     by the smaller and more vulnerable nations in the Caribbean 
     Basin. These provisions will permit these countries to make 
     the adjustment over an extended period of time to enter a 
     Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA). (``Caribbean Basin'' 
     includes Central America and the Caribbean.)
       3. Paths to FTAA: We explored several different ideas as to 
     the best way to pursue an FTAA. Some believe that the U.S. 
     and other countries should negotiate bilaterally; others 
     would like for negotiations to proceed between subregional 
     groups. We propose an alternative: the nations of the 
     hemisphere should define clear and specific criteria through 
     their talks within the 11 working groups set up at the Denver 
     Ministerial, and nations or groups would become members of a 
     growing FTAA as they meet these criteria. Special 
     transitional provisions might have to be made for the smaller 
     economies. Governments should encourage their private 
     organizations to participate in this process.
       4. Caribbean Basin Commodities: Several small Caribbean 
     Basin nations are very dependent on a few commodities, such 
     as bananas and sugar, whose markets are restricted. We urge 
     the United States and Europe to expand market access to these 
     products.
       5. Reducing Poverty and Inequality: It is urgent to reduce 
     poverty and injustice through development strategies and 
     investments that contribute to social, economic, and fiscal 
     justice through health, education, job training, housing, and 
     support for small and medium enterprises.
       Inasmuch as trade promotes growth, expanding trade can 
     reduce poverty and inequalities as has been seen in Chile and 
     the East Asian countries. But additional steps are necessary 
     in order to compensate those who are hurt by the increased 
     competition that comes from trade. Such steps would include 
     increased productivity, technological transfer, and 
     increasing annual rate of growth to more than 3% by 
     generating more savings. Governments should also make 
     education universal and higher quality for elementary school 
     students and remove barriers to access by poor people to 
     credit, land and education.

[[Page E968]]




       2. A New Hemispheric Approach to Illegal Drug Trafficking

       The hemisphere needs a new cooperative approach to combat 
     illegal drug trade because so many of our countries are both 
     producers and consumers of illegal drugs. Mutually 
     recriminatory approaches distract from the real enemy: 
     illegal drugs. If we recognize this, our efforts to fight the 
     enemy can become a unifying rather than a divisive force for 
     democratic governments in the hemisphere. It is time to 
     change the relationship from an adversarial one to a 
     partnership.
       The 1994 Miami Summit made explicit a new hemispheric-wide 
     recognition of the seriousness of the drug problem and the 
     shared responsibility among consumer, trafficker, and 
     producer countries. We applaud the ratification at the 1994 
     Summit of three existing agreements against drug trafficking 
     and money laundering, but these lack time schedules for 
     implementation and meaningful enforcement measures. The 
     political will to combat illegal drugs clearly exists, but 
     political capacity is weak in many countries. The U.S. has 
     filled the enforcement vacuum with its certification policy.
       With respect to the existing method of U.S. certification, 
     the process should entain prior notification to the 
     responsible authority within each foreign capital as to any 
     concerns that have arisen and permit the opportunity of 
     meaningful dialogue before the final assessment is made. 
     There should be close coordination among U.S. officials in 
     dealing with other nations.
       It is now time to replace the unilateral certification 
     policy with a multilateral strategy which includes monitoring 
     and enforcement of efforts to reduce demand as well as 
     supply. We were very encouraged by our conversation with 
     Speaker Newt Gingrich, Senator Paul Coverdell, General Barry 
     McCaffrey, and Chairman of the House International Relations 
     Committee, Benjamin Gilman--all recognized the need for a new 
     approach to this issue.
       Speaker Gingrich described the certification policy as 
     ``offensive and senseless'' and urged its replacement with a 
     hemispheric-wide approach to the issue. He called for a 
     dialogue among the nations of the Americans to develop a plan 
     for a drug-free Western Hemisphere. We propose a multilateral 
     forum, either through the OAS (CICAD) or the new blue-ribbon 
     commission, that would devise a hemispheric-wide plan and 
     strategies for each country. In addition, the group needs to 
     develop standards (what constitutes success?) and measures of 
     performance and assess each country's performance. The group 
     could use standards developed in the 1988 UN Convention. The 
     group could be modelled on the Inter-American Commission on 
     Human Rights, which is widely respected and competent.
       The plan should pursue each link in the drug-trafficking 
     chain: production, processing, transportation, consumption, 
     and money-laundering. The U.S. Administration should give 
     more attention and resources to the treatment and education 
     (demand) side of the problem because that is the most cost-
     effective way to attack the problem.
       The work of this group would be separate from the decisions 
     made by the U.S. on aid, although we hope that the 
     certification policy would be phased out as this group comes 
     into being.
       The illicit traffic in arms, ammunition, explosives, and 
     other dangerous materials is a concomitant of the illegal 
     trade in drugs. Effective measures, requiring meaningful 
     collaboration between nations of the hemisphere, will be 
     required to combat this menace.
       We discussed the possible relationships to global efforts 
     to control money-laundering and drug trafficking; 
     specifically, coordinating with the UN's Durg Control Program 
     and participating in a Global Narcotic's Conference. We also 
     discussed the idea of a regional court of the Americas that 
     could handle drug, arms trafficking, money-laundering, and 
     other transnational crimes. Appeals from such a court could 
     be sent to the Hague.
       We discussed the need to strengthen alternative development 
     strategies based on trade reciprocity agreements for the 
     Caribbean Basin and enhanced capacity of the IFIs to replace 
     bilateral aid programs. Drug policy should not become a non-
     tariff barrier that will impede the continuing opening of 
     markets and borders.


             3. Resolving the Region's Territorial Disputes

       We agreed that although some of the long-standing border 
     disputes have been dormant for long periods, they still 
     remain a source of tension and a rationale for an 
     unaffordable arms race. And, in some cases, they can erupt 
     into conflict. The movement toward democracy and the end of 
     the Cold War has diminished tensions in the region, and we do 
     not mean to imply that the region is in turmoil. Quite the 
     opposite. Democracy and peace is the norm, and we also 
     believe that regional economic integration is a useful 
     instrument for reducing security tensions.
       Still, territorial disputes remain potential problems. We 
     therefore believe that the time has arrived to try to resolve 
     definitively these territorial disputes. We discussed a 
     number of strategies for accomplishing that, and rather than 
     recommend a single strategy, we thought it would be far more 
     useful to propose several ideas.
       The first question is who should mediate these disputes? 
     The options are: (1) third-country governments; (2) 
     institutions outside the hemisphere, like the Pope or the 
     King of Spain; (3) the OAS; (4) a Commission of Mediators or 
     Facilitators made up of a group of senior statesmen; or (5) 
     The Carter Center or the Council of Freely Elected Heads of 
     Government. Still, another alternative would be for the Hague 
     Court to arbitrate the dispute.
       The second question is how should such mediators gain 
     legitimacy for pursuing these issue. The options are: (1) the 
     disputed states could invite; (2) the OAS could pass an 
     ``umbrella resolution'' that would require all states with 
     disputes to submit them to some mediation that could be 
     chosen by the states; (3) the Presidents of the Americas 
     could address this issue at the Summit of the Americas in 
     Santiago in March 1998; or (4) the OAS or UN Secretary 
     General could designate senior statesmen to undertake an 
     assessment and feasibility mission to determine whether 
     the governments were ready to settle the dispute--a kind 
     of prenegotiation session.
       Whichever of these options are chosen, we recommend the OAS 
     Secretary General and other leaders in the region become much 
     more actively engaged into trying to resolve these problems.


            4. A Regime to Restrain Arms Sales and Purchases

       Although Latin America spends relatively less on defense 
     than most other regions, expenditures on expensive weapons 
     systems divert scarce foreign exchange from more effective 
     investments, including for education. They also compel 
     neighbors to spend more on defense and, by doing so, generate 
     international tensions.
       Moreover, we are concerned about the possibility of an arms 
     race in Latin America, and we urge the governments in the 
     region to pause before embarking on major arms purchases. 
     Latin America has served as a model for nuclear non-
     proliferation with the Treaty of Tlatelolco, and we believe 
     that it ought to embark on a conventional arms restraint 
     agreement. The agreement needs to be multilateral--not 
     unilateral, and it should involve purchasers as well as 
     sellers.
       We recommend, as a first step, that the governments of 
     Latin America pledge to accept a moratorium of two years 
     before purchasing any sophisticated weapons. During that 
     time, they should explore ideas to restrain such arms. We 
     encourage them to look at the recent accord between Brazil 
     and Argentina, which called for a region free of an arms 
     race. At the same time, we call on the U.S. and other 
     governments that sell arms to affirm their support for such a 
     moratorium.
       Time is of the essence. Delay would be very costly to all 
     of our nations. We urge the nations of the region to move 
     quickly to implement a moratorium and to begin serious 
     negotiations on ways to translate a moratorium into an 
     agreement.
       In considering future agreements, governments should 
     consider making a distinction between modernization and 
     acquisition of new weaponry. We also suggest studies on 
     banning landmines from the region and better regulations on 
     the trade in firearms.
       We also urge hemispheric governments to sign a regional and 
     an international Code of Conduct on Arms Transfers, which 
     prohibits or restricts sale and transfer of weapons to: (a) 
     states in international conflict; (b) states with internal 
     conflicts and/or human rights abusers; (c) non-democratic 
     states; (d) violators of international law; (e) states in 
     which expenditures on health and education are less than for 
     defense.
       We also recommend that all states agree to mandatory 
     weapons export and acquisition reporting to the U.N. Register 
     of Conventional Arms. States should also agree to participate 
     in the Standardized International Reporting of Military 
     Expenditures.


  5. A Hemispheric approach to Extending, Reinforcing, and Deepening 
                               Democracy

       The hemisphere has reached an unprecedented moment in which 
     all nations but one have held competitive elections. 
     Elections are only one crucial element of democracy, however. 
     We identified three issues for hemispheric cooperation on 
     democratization: extending democracy to Cuba, deepening 
     democracy by removing undue influence of money in campaigns 
     and guaranteeing press freedoms, and eliminating corruption.
       Extending democracy to Cuba: The most appropriate and 
     effective way to bring democracy to Cuba is through a policy 
     of engagement rather than isolation. The Helms-Burton law is 
     counterproductive because it causes greater problems for U.S. 
     relations with its friends in Canada, Latin America, and 
     Europe than it causes problems for Fidel Castro. We urge the 
     U.S. Congress and President to repeal or significantly modify 
     that law and to cooperate with Latin America in drafting a 
     hemispheric-wide approach to facilitating democracy and civil 
     society in Cuba. The extra-territorial aspect of the law is 
     particularly objectionable. Cuba should be invited to 
     participate in hemispheric events, provided that the 
     government is prepared to accept the standards of human 
     rights and democracy as enunciated in the American Convention 
     on Human Rights, the Santiago Commitment, and the Managua 
     Declaration.
       Deepening democracy. Democracy is a work in progress. 
     Nowhere is it perfect. Existing campaign finance practices 
     have tended to erode popular support for democracy even in 
     countries like the United States. We discussed this issue 
     along with access to the media for political candidates and 
     concluded that reforms are necessary to restore confidence in 
     the election process.

[[Page E969]]

       We urge governments and parties throughout the hemisphere 
     to remove the disproportionate influence of money in 
     politics. Each country will devise their own systems to 
     provide for equity, transparency, and accountability in their 
     electoral processes, but in our review of a number models in 
     this hemisphere and in Europe, we found that shorter 
     campaigns, limits on expenditures, tax deductible small 
     contributions, publicly subsidized media time, and effective 
     monitoring all increased transparency and competitiveness of 
     elections. Canada may be the best model in the hemisphere; 
     the United States and Colombia might be among the worst.
       Freedom of the press from harassment, censorship and 
     intimidation is vital to a thriving democracy. We unanimously 
     endorse the Declaration of Chapultepec and urge all 
     hemispheric leaders who have not yet done so to sign.
       Corruption: In 1995, this hemisphere constructed the first 
     anti-corruption convention in the world. It is now time for 
     all governments in the region to follow the lead of Bolivia, 
     Paraguay, and Peru and ratify the Inter-American Anti-
     Corruption Convention before the 1998 Summit of the Americas.
       Transnational bribery is a negative consequence of the 
     growing trade and investment relationships and privatization 
     efforts of the hemisphere. We urge prospective bidders and 
     government procurement agencies to sign Anti-Bribery Pacts. 
     We applaud the initiative of the Inter-American Development 
     Bank to require such transparency on their own projects, and 
     we urge the World Bank to do likewise. We support the 
     establishment of a strong OAS anti-bribery working group to 
     provide legislative and technical assistance and to monitor 
     national performance.
       We call on the OECD Ministerial meeting next month to 
     follow the lead of the United States and the Inter-American 
     Anti-Corruption Convention in criminalizing transnational 
     bribery and ending tax deductibility for bribery.
       We intend to bring these issues to the attention of the 
     leaders of the hemisphere, beginning with our three 
     colleagues on this panel, who are incumbents--President 
     Leonel Fernandez of the Dominican Republic, Prime Minister 
     P.J. Patterson of Jamaica, and President Gonzalo Sanchez de 
     Lozada of Bolivia. After our press conference, we will be 
     meeting privately with Vice President Gore to discuss these 
     issues, and he will have an opportunity to state his response 
     and U.S. policy tonight.
       We are heartened that U.S. President Bill Clinton will be 
     visiting Mexico, Central America, and the Caribbean in a 
     week, and will visit South America next October. Thomas 
     ``Mack'' McLarty attended part of our meetings along with 
     officials from the State Department and the National Security 
     Council. The President's trip offers a real possibility of 
     translating the general goals of the Summit of 1994 into 
     something that would benefit the people of the hemisphere.
       We are pleased by the active participation of Ambassador 
     Juan Martabit, who has been charged by Chilean president 
     Eduardo Frei to coordinate all of the work of the Summit of 
     the Americas that will be held in Chile in March 1998. He 
     commented that ``our meeting had awakened the hopes that had 
     diminished after the 1994 Summit.'' We therefore see our work 
     these last two days as a kind of a bridge between two 
     Summits.
                                  ____


Agenda for the Americas for the 21st Century Council of Freely Elected 
                  Heads of Government--April 29, 1997

       Former President Jimmy Carter, United States.
       Former President Gerald Ford, United States.
       President Leonel Fernandez, Dominican Republic.
       Prime Minister P.J. Patterson, Jamaica.
       President Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada, Bolivia.
       Former President Oscar Arais Sanchez, Costa Rica.
       Former President Patricio Aylwin, Chile.
       Former President Rodrigo Carazo, Costa Rica.
       Former President Marco Vinicio Cerezo, Guatemala.
       Former Prime Minister Joe Clark, Canada.
       Former President Osvaldo Hurtado, Ecuador.
       Former President Luis Alberto Lacalle, Uruguay.
       Former President Carlos Andres Perez, Venezuela.
       Former Prime Minister George Price, Belize.
       Former Prime Minister Erskine Sandiford, Barbados.
       Former Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau, Canada.
       Vice President Carlos Federico Ruckauf, representative of 
     Council member President Carlos Saul Menem, Argentina.
       Amb. Ronaldo Sardenberg, Minister of Strategic Affairs and 
     representative of Council member President Fernando Henrique 
     Cardoso, Brazil.
       Rodolfo Terragno, President, National Committee, Union 
     Civica Radical Party, and representative of Council member 
     Raul Alfonsin, Argentina.
       Dr. Robert Pastor, Executive Secretary of the Council of 
     Freely Elected Heads of Government and Director of the Latin 
     American and Caribbean Program.

     

                          ____________________