U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE DISPATCH VOLUME 5, NUMBER 19, MAY 9, 1994 PUBLISHED BY THE BUREAU OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS ARTICLES IN THIS ISSUE: 1. U.S. Pledge to South Africa: Building Upon a Newfound Freedom-- President Clinton, Vice President Gore 2. U.S. Security Policy in Korea--Secretary of Defense William Perry 3. Promoting Democracy and Prosperity in Central Asia--Acting Secretary Talbott 4. Fact Sheets: Central Asian Republics 5. Fact Sheet: Georgia Article 1: U.S. Pledge to South Africa: Building Upon a Newfound Freedom President Clinton, Vice President Gore Statements at event following South African elections, Washington DC, May 5, 1994 President Clinton. Thank you very much. Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to all of you. Last week we watched with wonder as the citizens of South Africa went to the polls--as voters lined up for miles and miles, coming on crutches and in wheelchairs, waiting patiently, crossing the countryside to exercise their franchise--to create a new nation conceived in liberty and empowered by their redemptive suffering. I have just spoken with President-elect Mandela and with President de Klerk. I congratulated Mr. Mandela on his victory and told President de Klerk that he clearly deserves tremendous credit for his leadership. Their courage, their statesmanship--along with the leadership of Chief Buthelezi and others--has made this transition smoother than many thought possible. South Africa is free today because of the choices its leaders and people made. Their actions have been an inspiration. We can also be proud of America's role in this great drama. Because those of you here today and many others have helped to keep freedom's flame lit during the dark night of apartheid, Congress enacted sanctions to help squeeze legitimacy from the apartheid regime. Students marched in solidarity. Stockholders held their companies to higher ethical standards. America's churches--both black and white--took up the mantle of moral leadership. And throughout the fight, American civil rights leaders here helped to lead the way. Throughout, South Africa's cause also has been an American cause. Last week's miracle came to pass in part because of America's help. Now we must not turn our backs. Let me begin by saying that we all know South Africa faces a task of building a tolerant democracy and a successful market economy; and that enabling the citizens of South Africa to reach their potential, economically is critical to preserving the tolerant democracy. To show that reconciliation and democracy can bring tangible benefits, others will have to help. I'm convinced that South Africa can become a model for the entire continent. And America must be a new and full partner with that new government, so that it can deliver on its promise as quickly as possible. We've already begun. Over the past year, the United States sent experts to South Africa to help them negotiate the new constitution. We provided considerable assistance to help their elections work. We lifted sanctions. We sent two trade and investment missions to lay the groundwork for greater economic cooperation. And we had a very fine American delegation of election observers there during the recent elections. I'd like especially to thank the leader of that delegation, the Rev. Jesse Jackson, for his outstanding contributions to the success of the South African elections. Thank you, sir. Today I am announcing a substantial increase in our efforts to promote trade, aid, and investment in South Africa. Over the next three years we will provide and leverage about $600 million in funds to South Africa. For this fiscal year, we have increased assistance from $83 million to $143 million. Along with guarantees and other means, our resources--which will be mobilized for next year--will exceed $200 million. Through the programs of 10 U.S. Government agencies, we will work with South Africans to help meet the needs which they identify--to build homes and hospitals, to provide better education, and to promote good governance and economic development. I'm writing to the leaders of the other G-7 countries and asking them to join us in expanding assistance to South Africa. And we urge the international financial institutions, such as the World Bank, to do the same. Next week, I'm also sending an official delegation to South Africa for President Mandela's inauguration. Vice President Gore will lead the trip, along with Mrs. Gore. They'll be joined by the First Lady, Secretary Brown, Secretary Espy, and many others, including those here in the audience today. We are taking these actions because we have important interests at stake in the success of South Africa's journey. We have an economic interest in a thriving South Africa that will seek our exports and generate greater prosperity throughout the region. We have a security interest in a stable, democratic South Africa working with its neighbors to restore and secure peace. We have a clear moral interest. We have had our own difficult struggles over racial division, and still we grapple with the challenges of drawing strength from our own diversity. That is why the powerful images of South Africa's elections resonated so deeply in the souls of all Americans. Whether in South Africa or America, we know there is no finish line to democracy's work. Developing habits of tolerance and respect, creating opportunity for all our citizens-- these efforts are never completely done. But let us savor the fact that South Africa now has the chance to begin that noble and vital work. Thirty-three years ago, Albert Luthuli became the first of four South Africans to win the Nobel Peace Prize. As he accepted the award, he described his people as, and I quote, "living testimony to the unconquerable spirit of mankind. Down the years they have sought the goal of fuller life and liberty, striving with incredible determination and fortitude." Today, that fortitude and the strivings of generations have begun to bear fruit. Together, we must help all South Africans build on their newfound freedom. Thank you very much. And now I'd like to ask the Vice President to come forward to make some acknowledgments and some remarks and to talk a little about the historic trip that the American delegation he will lead is about to make. Mr. Vice President. Vice President Gore. Thank you very much, Mr. President. May I begin by acknowledging the presence of the delegation, which will be accompanying the First Lady and Tipper and me to South Africa. You know from listening to conversations among the three of us that we're very excited about this trip. It is one of the great moments in history. The last pillars of apartheid are crumbling, and three centuries of injustice are coming to a close. Many have brought about this moment, and we are very excited, as I mentioned, about the opportunity to witness this transformation. May I acknowledge Secretary Espy, who is going to be joining us in the delegation; your National Security Adviser, Mr. President, Tony Lake, who has worked tirelessly in the last 16 months and in other capacities prior to this Administration to help bring about this moment; and Ambassador Talbott of the State Department and his colleague, George Moose, from the State Department. Mr. Ambassador, thank you for the State Department's outstanding role in bringing this about. There are others who are present that I would like to mention. The President has already mentioned the Rev. Jesse Jackson in his role as the leader of the election-monitoring group. Some of you here may not know that, while there, he received special recognition and thanks for the manner in which he and the delegation he led contributed to this outstanding event, and played a considerable and important role in helping to guarantee and ensure the integrity of this important moment in history. Director Carol Bellamy of the Peace Corps is here; Administrator Brian Atwood of USAID; Ruth Harkin, President of OPIC; Ambassador Harry Schwarz, who will be coming to the podium in a moment; ANC Representative Kingsley Makhubela, who will also be coming to the podium in just a moment; and other distinguished guests, including the members of the Presidential delegation, composed of extraordinary individuals who contributed in a very personal way to the magnificent transformation taking place in South Africa. Each of you here today can be proud of the role that you played in dismantling apartheid. You led the way in one of the great moral struggles of this century. May I say that you will be getting calls today--we could not call you earlier--inviting you to a gathering at our residence on Saturday night- -those of you who can come--for the delegation prior to the departure for South Africa. I hope that all of you will be able to come and join us on that occasion. There are a number of Members of Congress who were extremely instrumental in raising the level of awareness in America to the horrors of apartheid. Unfortunately, due to key votes scheduled today on Capitol Hill, these members could not join us for this event, but they deserve special recognition for their role in bringing us to the threshold of new era in South Africa. Now the hard work of nurturing democracy and strengthening free market reform begins. South Africa faces a challenge more daunting than dismantling apartheid--the challenge of building a nonracial democracy and a culture of tolerance. As President Clinton has made abundantly clear, the United States of America will help. We will be there doing our part. Our work there is part of President Clinton's larger strategy of enlarging the world's community of free-market democracies in Africa and elsewhere. I will have an opportunity, along with several members of the delegation, to talk to the leaders of other nations in Africa that are in various stages of the transition to free-market democracies. I'll be visiting Namibia and Benin, as well as Cape Verde, on the way back from the inaugural events. Even as we focus today on assistance to South Africa, we are mindful of the importance of encouraging development throughout Southern Africa and beyond. South Africa's successful transformation will support these goals and give hope to all who love freedom. The monumental statesmanship demonstrated by President-elect Mandela and President F.W. de Klerk provides a shining example to help restore peace in nations like Mozambique, Bosnia, Haiti, Rwanda, Angola, Burundi, and elsewhere. As President-elect Mandela said following the four days of voting, the people of South Africa have been victorious; they have won. He also spoke to those around the world who believe in the struggle for justice and democracy and self-government. And in eloquent words he said this is your victory, too. On a personal note, I thought back to the Sunday morning--U.S. time--not that many years ago, when Nelson Mandela was released from prison. Our youngest child was the only one awake, and I was watching the television, literally transfixed by the scene unfolding in South Africa. It occurred to me as a parent that--for all the times when parents have to explain terrible, unjust horrors and tragedies in the world, and watch children contort their faces as they absorb the news that there are terrible things in this world they're growing up in--this was a moment, as this inauguration will be a moment, when parents around the world had the joy of being able to explain to their children the deeper meaning of an event that transcends the ordinary, lifts the human spirit, and gives us all hope that the greater capacities that lie within the human heart can find expression in ways that reshape our world and link the horizons and give us the opportunity for a much brighter future. On practical matters, the $600-mil-lion trade and investment package that the President announced today is the culmination of close cooperation and commitment between the Congress and 10 executive agencies. It also continues and builds on the work initiated last fall by Commerce Secretary Ron Brown, when he led a very successful trade and investment mission to South Africa. Brian Atwood and the U.S. Agency for International Development also deserve special recognition for creatively expanding the size and content of their investment programs. For the first time, USAID will be working with the South African Government to support its development priorities.I'm particularly pleased in this regard to be speaking at the USIA-sponsored conference on June 3 in Atlanta to promote business and educational exchanges between the U.S. and South Africa--June 3 and 4 in Atlanta. OPIC President Ruth Harkin also led a major business investment mission to South Africa and announced three U.S.-South African ventures that could pump millions of dollars into the country's disadvantaged community. Other agencies that have played leading roles in developing our robust economic package for South Africa include the Peace Corps--and I acknowledged Carol Bellamy earlier--the Trade and Development Agency, Eximbank, the U.S. Trade Representative, and the Treasury and Defense Departments. In closing--before asking our two guests to join us--in the past week, we witnessed this extraordinary historic event, but we should not forget, as Harry Truman once said, that people make history and not the other way around. Courageous men and women in Africa, in America--many of them here today, helped topple apartheid. The challenges ahead require continued hard work. To reiterate President Clinton's words, we pledge to help all South Africans build upon their newfound freedom. (###) Materials relating to the election in South Africa will be printed in Dispatch Supplement Vol. 5, No. 3.(###) ARTICLE 2: U.S. Security Policy in Korea Secretary of Defense William Perry Address to the Asia Society, Washington, DC, May 3, 1994 Today I would like to talk to you about my recent trip to Korea, and, in particular, to try to answer the critical question that was often posed to me on this trip and since this trip--that is, how is it possible to achieve a nuclear-free Korean Peninsula without creating an unacceptable risk of war? To achieve that objective, I believe we must focus on two critical efforts. The first is a diplomatic effort. We must make every diplomatic move to convince North Korea that a non-nuclear Korean Peninsula is in everyone's interest and, in particular, in North Korea's interest. And North Korea must understand that the world community is united in this goal. The second effort is for the United States and South Korea to be fully prepared to defend South Korea should the North Koreans take a rash action. North Korea must understand that starting a war would not only be rash, it would be self-destructive. Today North Korea threatens the peace and stability of Northeast Asia, which holds the world's fastest-growing economies. By the first years of the next century, East Asia and the Pacific will likely account for about one-third of the world's economic activity, and the markets created by this region's economies are increasingly important to the economic health of the United States. Last year, our trade with the Asia-Pacific region amounted to over $370 billion--40% greater than the U.S. trade with Europe--and almost 3 million American jobs depend upon this trade. The growth of Japan, South Korea, China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan since the Second World War has been nothing short of phenomenal. But the foundation of sustained economic growth anywhere is peace and stability, and it is very clear that Northeast Asia's peace and stability has been largely the result of America's military strength and its commitment to the region. The key to that commitment is the U.S. security relationship with South Korea and with Japan. The biggest threat to the peace and stability of that region today emanates from North Korea. The Threat Conventional Forces. North Korea has an unreasonably large conventional military force, which we estimate consumes about 25% of its gross domestic product, thereby keeping its citizens impoverished. If you compare the 25% that North Korea invests in its military with the 3% invested by the United States, South Korea, and West European countries and the 1% invested by Japan, you get a very clear picture of why the people in North Korea live in economic deprivation. Two-thirds of North Korea's million-man army is based within 60 miles of the DMZ, and much of this force is less than 50 miles from Seoul. This army has thousands of tanks and artillery pieces. It has built large tunnels under the DMZ and has established a very large complement of special operation forces. For decades, this excessive military force has threatened its neighbor in the south, and, in the last few years, North Korea has increased both the size and the forward deployment of these forces. But notwithstanding this build-up, there can be no doubt that the combined forces of the Republic of Korea and the United States could decisively defeat any attack from the North. The deterrent value of U.S. and South Korean military forces has maintained the peace on the Korean Peninsula for four decades and continues to maintain it today. Indeed, I believe there is no danger of an imminent military confrontation in Korea. However, during the last few years a new development has emerged--a major North Korean nuclear weapons program. This program could very well threaten the stability on the Korean Peninsula today. The Nuclear Program. In discussing this nuclear program, it is important to be clear about what we know and what we don't know about it. While many elements of this program are still unknown, we do know with certainty that the North Koreans have an operational 25-megawatt nuclear reactor; they have under construction a second, 200-megawatt reactor; they have a large reprocessing plant for separating plutonium from reactor spent fuel; they have radio-chemistry laboratories; and they have a high- explosive testing facility, all located in Yongbyon. We also know that when the 200-megawatt reactor is completed in a few years, it will have the potential to produce enough material for 10-12 nuclear bombs a year. The most reasonable explanation for this known collection of facilities is a nuclear weapons program, and this program has now reached a critical juncture. The 25-megawatt nuclear reactor has, as we speak, a load of spent fuel that if reprocessed after being removed from the reactor would provide enough plutonium for four or five nuclear bombs. The reactor has recently been shut down--a preliminary step needed to cool the core sufficiently to conduct a refueling operation. North Korea has declared that they intend to discharge and then refuel the reactor, and they have invited the IAEA--the International Atomic Energy Agency--to be present during this process. We believe it is critically important for the IAEA to be present at the unloading of the reactor and to conduct the necessary procedures to provide safeguards that the spent fuel from the reactor is not diverted to a nuclear weapons program. So we welcome this offer by the North and hope it is serious. Talks are now underway between North Korea and the IAEA to determine whether North Korea will permit the IAEA to be not only present but to conduct the inspections they believe are necessary to provide safeguards. We understand that the technology and the operating history of the 25- megawatt reactor make it technically necessary to do the refueling very soon, but, at the same time, it is our top priority to be sure that this refueling does not lead to diversion of the spent fuel to reprocessing into weapons-grade plutonium. It is equally important that this not become a source of new uncertainty about the use of spent fuel. We know that the last time the 25-megawatt reactor was unloaded, it was done without any outside, independent observation. We don't know how much was unloaded or what they did with the fissile material. We can only estimate how much was unloaded and speculate whether or not it was diverted to a bomb program. The Director of Central Intelligence, James Woolsey, has estimated that the plutonium from this last unloading already may have been used to build at least one nuclear device. We do not want this uncertainty to multiply with the present refueling. Observation of refueling is a most important first step in containing the North Korean nuclear program because it assures us that the fuel is not reprocessed and that it stays under international observation. But we need to go further than simply containing this nuclear program. We want to achieve a nuclear-free Korean Peninsula through implementation of the South-North Denuclearization Accord, which was reached last year, and through a determination of what happened to fuel that was removed when the reactor was shut down previously in the absence of outside monitoring. No doubt this will be a long, hard process that will take both steadiness and determination on our part. Other Factors. Looking beyond this nuclear program, we must take into account North Korea's other activities. We know that they're building ballistic missiles of increasing range and can already launch Scud missiles against virtually any target in South Korea, and they are developing longer range missiles that could strike targets in Japan, China, Russia, and other countries in the region. Compounding our concern is North Korea's history of exporting weapons technology, including ballistic missiles, to regions of instability around the world. As Tony Lake has noted, North Korea has become one of the foremost merchants of such weapons. It has sold Scud missiles to Syria and Iran, and it is actively marketing its next generation of ballistic missiles. In short, if North Korea develops nuclear weapons, we face a greatly increased danger that other hostile, rogue states around the world soon will have them also. Finally, the ruling regime of North Korea has used extreme, even shrill rhetoric--including a recent infamous threat to turn Seoul into a "sea of fire." We do not take every extreme North Korean figure of speech literally, but it would be imprudent not to take seriously the threat posed by North Korea's large conventional forces, its nuclear weapons program, and its harsh rhetoric. We must also take seriously its stated intention of effecting a reunification of Korea on the North's terms in 1995. The Response How the United States and its allies in the international community respond to the challenge posed by the North Korean nuclear program will be very important not only for the future security of Asia but, indeed, for the entire world. Our response to this challenge now will be a benchmark for responding to possible similar challenges in the future. There are basically three ways that the United States and its allies can deal with the threat posed by North Korea's nuclear program. First, and quite obviously, we could do nothing; second, we could apply military pressure; and third, we could pursue a strategy to persuade North Korea that it is in their best interest to give up their nuclear weapons program. The first option truly is untenable. Whatever dangers we face now in dealing with North Korea's nuclear programs, the dangers will be compounded two or three years from now if North Korea actually is able to produce enough plutonium to fabricate nuclear weapons at a rate of about a dozen a year--a number which is compatible with the size of the facilities we see being constructed. It is not satisfactory to say, as some have argued, that we could accept such a program and seek to deter North Korea from actual use of its nuclear arsenal as we deterred the Soviet Union during the Cold War. For even assuming that we could reliably deter actual use of North Korea's nuclear weapons, an unchecked nuclear capability--coupled with North Korea's large conventional military forces--could put North Korea in a position to subject South Korea to extortion in establishing its terms for unification. It could undermine the security of the whole Northeast Asia region and tempt other countries to seek their own nuclear weapons in self-defense. And, as I have mentioned, a nuclear North Korea could be in a position to export nuclear technologies and weapons to terrorist or rogue regimes around the world, unleashing a nightmare spread of nuclear threats. Thus, the North Korean nuclear weapons program is, in the long term, a problem not just for the region but for the entire world. These considerations make doing nothing an untenable option. At the other end of the spectrum would be the application of military pressure, but even limited application of military pressure entails the risk of a large-scale war. Although we will not rule out any option for all time, this course should only be considered when all other possibilities have been exhausted. That leads us, then, to President Clinton's strategy, which is diplomacy combined with military preparedness. The objectives of the President's strategy are quite clear: We want North Korea to comply fully with the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and the South-North Denuclearization Accord. The overall goal is a non-nuclear Korean Peninsula and a strong international non-proliferation regime. What Is at Stake. I believe it is important to understand just what is at stake. First and foremost is the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. This is a win-win scenario for both the North and the South. It is obvious what is at stake for the South. Less obvious is what is at stake for the North. The answer is a hell of a lot. The United States, after close consultation with the Republic of Korea and Japan, has agreed to pursue a broad and thorough approach in negotiations with North Korea, if we get back to the negotiating table. What "broad and thorough" means in non-diplomatic jargon is that the United States is fully prepared to discuss with the North not just the nuclear issue that is of concern to us but the full range of issues of concern to them and to us-- diplomatic, political, economic, and security. It also means that we are ready to move rapidly to resolve these issues and not get bogged down in endless haggling over minor issues. We invite North Korea to join the community of nations, and we're prepared to work with North Korea to help make that happen. Thus, North Korea is at a crossroads not just on the nuclear issue but also on the future of its relations with the rest of the world. We strongly urge North Korea to take the responsible path--to cooperate and forgo its nuclear ambitions. If doing the right thing doesn't motivate North Korea, then perhaps a simple cost-benefit analysis will. If the North is willing to live up to its international and bilateral nuclear obligations, we have made it clear that both we and our allies are prepared to move toward more normal political and economic relations with the North. That means much-needed economic assistance for its moribund economy and gradual integration into the wider Asian community. The North would no longer find itself internationally isolated and increasingly impoverished. Its security posture would actually be much improved. All of these benefits would help North Korea and its people much more than any nuclear weapons program. This is a truly positive vision, and we hope that the North will embrace it. Kim Il Sung recently declared that North Korea has no nuclear bombs, no desire to make nuclear bombs, and no secrets about such activities. There is an easy way for him to convince the world of this--by fulfilling North Korea's commitments to the IAEA, letting the inspections go forward, and implementing the North-South accord to denuclearize the peninsula. Diplomatic Efforts. Achieving our diplomatic goal--a nuclear-free Korean Peninsula without conflict--will require solidarity with our allies. We've been working with great energy to build an international coalition through the United Nations to address the North Korean nuclear problem. We've also been working closely with South Korea and Japan and consulting with Russia, China, and others that have a stake in preserving regional stability and preventing nuclear proliferation. On my recent trip, I discussed this issue with the leaders in South Korea and Japan, including the President of South Korea and the Prime Minister of Japan. I can report full solidarity with both of these important allies. This is absolutely essential. If North Korea were to perceive any daylight between our positions, it would harm our negotiations, and it could tempt North Korea toward military options. To focus our efforts, the Assistant Secretary of State for Politico- Military Affairs, Robert Gallucci, has been designated the interagency coordinator for Korea. He is the point man for dealing with the North Koreans, and he joined me in my meetings with the South Koreans and the Japanese--a sign of the close relationship between our diplomatic efforts and our military preparedness. As we view our diplomatic efforts in light of the alternatives I have described, we must make every effort to see that this strategy succeeds. That means that in dealing with a country such as North Korea we should expect our negotiations to be difficult, often confrontational, and probably protracted. To be successful, we will have to be clear and firm in our goals and objectives, flexible and creative in our negotiating tactics-- and remain calm through it all. Critics who often call for what may seem to be a quick and easy solution or who deplore the give and take essential to any negotiation will certainly be frustrated. And those who deny the reality or severity of the problem and, consequently, the acceptability of taking any risk to contain and reverse it also will be unhappy. But those who bear responsibility both for making policy and for its consequences should, for the good of the nation, weather the criticism and vigorously pursue this diplomatic course. President Clinton has correctly noted that our goal is not endless discussions but certifiable compliance. If the international community cannot convince North Korea to honor its nonproliferation commitments, the UN Security Council again will take up the issue, and the North will face increasing pressure in the form of sanctions. In particular, if North Korea were to break the continuity of safeguards-- for example, by refusing to allow adequate IAEA monitoring of the spent fuel rods it will remove from the 25-megawatt reactor--the issue would return to the United Nations, where the U.S. and others would consider appropriate steps, including sanctions. I believe that such an approach will be supported by the Republic of Korea and the world community. We believe this response would be commensurate with the problem posed by North Korea's refusal, and it would be done with no intention of being provocative. However, North Korea has stated that the imposition of sanctions would be equivalent to a declaration of war. This is probably another example of excessive North Korean rhetoric, but, as Secretary of Defense, I have a responsibility to provide for the adequate readiness of U.S. military forces in the face of such threats. Force Readiness. Our forces have been, are, and will be ready to meet any contingency. It is vital that we continue to maintain a strong U.S. and South Korean defense capability on the peninsula to dissuade the North from acting rashly. We cannot take any chances on this. We have to be prepared to help South Korea defend itself, as we have for more than 40 years. Based on my recent trip, I can report that we are fully prepared to do so. I note that the bulk of South Korea's defense comes from South Korea. Today it fields a potent military force of about 650,000 active duty personnel backed up by more than 200,000 ready reservists. Last week, I visited the First Infantry Division of the South Korean Army, which is located at the tip of the spear, as they say, between Seoul and the Demilitarized Zone. I can say with some personal confidence that South Korea's forces are well trained, well led, and highly motivated. Their equipment is generally of high quality, and they have important modernization programs well underway. These Republic of Korea forces are supplemented by about 100,000 U.S. military forces in the Western Pacific, including a well-trained, well- equipped, and highly professional military force in South Korea of about 37,000 personnel. Their job is to help deter North Korean aggression, to help defend South Korea if deterrence fails, and to build South Korea's defense capabilities through combined training. It is a tough, demanding job that for most of our forces over there means a year's separation from their families. I also met with some of our forces during my trip--in particular, the 2nd Infantry Division of the U.S. Army and commanders from the 7th Air Force and 10th Fighter Wing of the U.S. Air Force. These units are at the peak of readiness and are training constantly, and we are giving them the tools to perform their mission. We have underway a systematic modernization program for our forces in Korea. This program includes equipment such as the Patriot system, which we recently deployed to provide us with a point-defense system to protect targets such as airfields and ports against the Scud missile threat. I met with the battalion commander and his staff last week at one of the new sites at which the equipment was being installed. The Patriot batteries are all now operational, ready to defend designated areas. In addition, we are replacing the Cobra attack helicopter with AH-64 Apaches, we are replacing the M-113 armored personnel carriers with Bradley fighting vehicles, and we're significantly increasing our intelligence assets. All of this gives the combined U.S.-Republic of Korea forces a formidable military capability, but they would still be outnumbered by North Korean forces. Therefore, should conflict occur or even seem imminent, the U.S. forces now in Korea would be swiftly reinforced by U.S. combat aircraft and additional U.S. naval and ground forces. These reinforcements are intended to deal directly and rapidly with threats posed to the in-country forces. The primary threats to the combined U.S.-Republic of Korea forces are the large concentration of North Korean tanks and artillery and the numerical advantage in forward-deployed infantry forces combined with the tactical advantage of a short-warning attack. U.S. and Republic of Korea forces, on the other hand, have a distinct advantage in tactical air, in training, command and control, and in the potential for reinforcement. During my visit, I discussed with the combined forces commander, General Gary Luck, the strategy he has developed to maximize our advantages and offset the advantages of the North Koreans. For obvious reasons, I cannot discuss the details of this strategy, but I can tell you that I have developed complete confidence both in our commanders and in the strategy they have developed. Team Spirit Exercises. During the last few months, much has been made of the U.S.-South Korean exercise called Team Spirit. The Team Spirit exercises are purely defensive. They improve our ability to defend South Korea by testing our ability to reinforce, re-equip, and resupply U.S. and South Korean forces in the event of an attack from the North. They are part of an extensive and continuing program of U.S.-South Korea cooperation and joint activity for military preparedness. Successive U.S. administrations have agreed with their South Korean counterparts on supporting Team Spirit, but they have also recognized that it can be an appropriate subject of diplomacy in the context of progress on the nuclear issue. For example, Team Spirit '92 was cancelled to encourage the progress in the nuclear negotiations with North Korea. Team Spirit '93 was held as scheduled. Team Spirit '94 was put on the negotiating table last February as part of a complex package to induce North Korea to live up to its IAEA and North-South dialogue commitments. When North Korea reneged on those commitments, we decided--with the Republic of Korea--to reschedule Team Spirit. It could be suspended again if there is satisfactory progress on the outstanding issues. Absent that progress, however, Team Spirit '94 will be held this November. North Korea has no reasonable basis to regard such measures as provocative. In fact, they are all strictly defensive measures intended to protect South Korea and our forces from an unprovoked attack, and they are entirely capable of providing that protection. There can be no doubt that the combined U.S.-Republic of Korea forces would decisively and rapidly defeat any attack from the North. Conclusion We must understand that every course of action we could take has consequences. Acquiescing now to an active North Korean nuclear program would invite a future crisis. Taking military action now would invite an immediate crisis. Even the course we've chosen--a course which combines diplomacy with military preparedness--is not entirely free of risk. It is possible that North Korea could misperceive these efforts as provocations. We must face that possibility, comparing that risk to the far greater risk of letting North Korea develop the capability of producing a nuclear arsenal or the risk inherent in not maintaining the readiness of our forces. The Chinese have a proverb--maintain an army for a thousand days in order to employ it for one day. I would modify that by saying that we want to maintain a sufficient defense so that they never will be employed, because we all recognize that a war would result in heavy casualties and widespread destruction. With this posture, I have confidence that we can achieve a non-nuclear Korean Peninsula without a war. Certainly, we will not initiate a war with North Korea. Moreover, we will not provoke a war with North Korea by rash actions now or later. But we will not invite war by neglecting appropriate defense preparations. We have fought one devastating war on the Korean Peninsula in this century; we do not want to fight another. Arguably, the North Koreans initiated their attack in 1950 because they miscalculated the political will of the United States and because they observed a lack of military preparedness in the South. Today there can be no confusion about the solidarity between the United States and South Korea and the resolve of the United States to defend South Korea. There also can be no confusion about the military preparedness of the combined U.S.-Republic of Korea military forces and their ability to decisively defeat any attack from the North. Therefore, we and North Korea should put our priority on removing this nuclear program, which threatens the peace and stability in Korea, and then focus on building an economically strong peninsula based on this stability.(###) ARTICLE 3: Promoting Democracy and Prosperity in Central Asia Acting Secretary Talbott Address at the U.S.-Central Asia Business Conference, Washington, DC, May 3, 1994 (Introductory remarks deleted) What I would like is to focus on in my remarks on the broader goals and strategy of the Clinton Administration's foreign policy--and the place that the Republics of Central Asia play in our thinking about the world as a whole. In the post-Cold War era, the working principles that have shaped America--democracy and market economics--are gaining ever broader acceptance around the globe. The victory of freedom is not just ideological--it has important practical benefits as well. People on every continent--in countries ranging from Chile to South Africa, from Poland to South Korea--have over recent years and decades come to the conclusion, based on their own hard experience, that democracy and markets are the most productive ways to organize their lives. Market democracy makes not only for prosperous citizens but for safe neighbors as well. History shows us that market democracies tend not to go to war with one another; they tend not to sponsor terrorist acts against each other; and they are more likely to be reliable trading partners, to protect the global environment, and to respect international law. In short, market democracies are the kind of friends and stable partners that the U.S. Government and U.S. businesses seek throughout the world. But while democracy and market economics are ascendant in this new era, they are not yet everywhere triumphant. In many nations which have begun the transition, these systems are still only half-formed and fragile. Everyone in this room today is well aware that the transition to market democracy will not be easy for any of the nations of Central Asia--nor, indeed, for any of the nations emerging from the former Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact. There will be stumbles and setbacks along the way. In Tajikistan, for instance, there will be little progress on the economic or political front until the civil war in that country is ended. In the West, we also recognize that the legacy of 70 years of communist repression will not be overcome instantly. But for their part, the leaders of Central Asia must recognize that if their states are to join the community of democratic nations, there must be steady progress toward free and fair elections; respect for the right of citizens to form political parties; and for freedom of speech, press, and religion. With each of the nations of Central Asia, as well as all other countries of the world, our bilateral relations will be significantly affected by how these nations respect--and protect--the basic rights and freedoms of their citizens. During this long transition period, we will stay with the reformers and we will be as persistent and patient as they are. And we are optimistic about their eventual success. That is because the common denominator of democracy and the market-- freedom--has universal appeal. The end of the Cold War has brought about a moment of immense democratic and entrepreneurial opportunity. We must not waste it. We must not lose it. That is why the United States is pursuing a variety of mutually reinforcing policies and programs whose goal is to nurture, protect, and sustain market democracies throughout the world. In particular, we are focusing on those areas of the globe where success in one country or region will have an influence on surrounding areas. Our support for reform in Russia reflects that strategy as do our efforts on behalf of a multiracial democracy in South Africa. The theory here is simple: If reform succeeds in Russia, it is more likely to succeed among Russia's neighbors. By the same token, if racial harmony and democracy come to South Africa, that country could go from being a pariah on the continent to a model for others to make the transition. This same thinking underlies our support for the development of market democracy in the New Independent States of Central Asia. Central Asia is a gateway to three regions that are of great strategic importance to the United States: To the east lie China and the rest of Asia; to the south lie Iran, Afghanistan, and the Islamic world; to the west and north lie Russia and Europe. Moreover, in its own right, Central Asia is a region of vast natural and human resources offering the potential for the prosperity of its own people and benefits for American entrepreneurs with the foresight to do business there. The mineral deposits in Uzbekistan alone are estimated to have a market value of $3 trillion, and Turkmenistan produces 85 billion cubic meters of natural gas a year. As I said, in addition to natural resources, there are also immense human resources. I'm thinking of the research skills available from the pool of scientists affiliated with the many prominent institutions that were part of the former Soviet Academy of Sciences system. We here in Washington think of President Akayev as the "Thomas Jefferson" of Kyrgyzstan, and of Central Asia--and that's not just because he can quote from the writings of one of our own Founding Fathers. After hearing him engage Vice President Gore in a long and animated conversation about the potential of the information superhighway, I realized that President Akayev has more than a bit of Benjamin Franklin in him as well. If his vision--and that of the other reformers-- prevails, Central Asia will be a growing export market. This is a region as large as Western Europe, with a population of 50 million that will increase to 100 million by the year 2010. Thus, the Clinton Administration is eager to promote U.S. trade with Central Asia not only because it promotes our foreign policy goals, but because such trade will create profits and jobs here at home. The Administration wants to be sure that American business is competitive in Central Asia--that we don't lose in the global competition with Japan, Germany, South Korea, the People's Republic of China, Turkey, Pakistan, and Iran--all of whom have begun serious efforts to develop business ties to the region. For all these reasons, the Clinton Administration is using funds appropriated by Congress under the Freedom Support Act to assist economic reform throughout Central Asia. Much of our assistance is aimed at helping central and local governments remove the regulatory and legal obstacles to government divestiture and the formation of private capital. In addition, we are helping the governments of the region develop tax, budget, and monetary policies that will lead to economic growth and stable currencies. These are essential factors for would-be investors. In addition to our bilateral support programs, we have been working through the IMF and World Bank to foster stable markets in Central Asia. In this regard, we are heartened that Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan have taken the additional steps recommended by the IMF to privatize the state sector and reduce budget deficits. By so doing, both were able to reach standby arrangements that provide the balance-of-payments support for their international trade. We are strongly encouraging the Government of Uzbekistan to work closely with the IMF to undertake the fundamental political reforms that will allow a similar standby arrangement for that nation. We have also leveraged our assistance money to bring in support to the region from our allies. For instance, the joint U.S.-Israeli assistance program, operating in four Central Asian countries, provides technical assistance in agriculture; the joint U.S.-Turkey assistance program focuses on health and family planning issues; and the joint U.S.-Japan program provides urgently needed vaccines for children and needles and syringes to the Kyrgyz Republic and to Turkmenistan. During his visit to Almaty in October, Secretary Christopher announced that we will establish and manage a $150-million enterprise fund. It will provide desperately needed capital to the small-business owners who are building Central Asia's economies from the ground up. Entrepreneurs are on the cutting edge of the changes we want to encourage, and this enterprise fund promises to produce substantial results. But the American Government, by itself, cannot provide the hard-currency capital and management expertise in anything like the quantity that the business people of the region require. That can only come from our private sector. Only through cooperation with the firms represented here today--and other firms like them--can the U.S. Government do what needs to be done. The $150 million we have targeted for the Central Asian enterprise fund is a considerable sum, particularly in this era of concern over Federal budget deficits. But it is only enough to prime the pump. The big money will come from the big companies--on the magnitude of the $3 billion that U.S. companies such as Chevron and Philip Morris have already pledged to invest in Central Asia during the next few years. And with 300 American firms visiting Kazakhstan since February--that's in addition to the 70 that are already established there--that $3-billion figure will multiply several times in the coming years. Now, to be sure, American companies are not investing in the region for reasons of altruism; they're doing it because it makes good business sense. By the same token, our Administration is investing in the region because it makes good foreign policy sense, good national security sense. That is, we are investing in the region for reasons that go to the heart of what we see as America's vital national interests. By nurturing and sustaining private enterprise, we see ourselves as helping not only the centerpiece of economic reform, but also one of the key building blocks of democratization and collective security as well. As President Clinton has said, "Free markets not only enrich people, they empower them." As more people in Central Asia become property owners and shareholders, they will seek a greater voice in the political decisions that are made in their communities and their nations. And, as the peoples of the region gain their voice, consolidate their independence, stabilize their economies, and trade with other countries, the world will become a safer place. If we really take advantage of all the opportunities that are before us, the profits for American business- -and prosperity for the peoples of Central Asia--will eventually match the standards of Central Asian hospitality--the highest standards in the world. (###) ARTICLE 4: Fact Sheets: Central Asian Republics Kazakhstan U.S.-Kazakhstan Relations The dissolution of the Soviet Union in December 1991 brought an end to the Cold War and created the opportunity to build bilateral relations with the New Independent States (NIS) as they began a political and economic transformation. The United States recognized Kazakhstan's independence on December 25, 1991. It was the first country to open an embassy in the capital, Almaty, in January 1992. The U.S. Ambassador to Kazakhstan is William Harrison Courtney, who assumed the post on August 31, 1992. In January 1992, the U.S. initiated the Coordinating Conference on Assistance to the New Independent States in response to the humanitarian emergencies facing these states. The resulting Operation Provide Hope provided desperately needed food, fuel, medicine, and shelter. The cornerstone of the continuing partnership with Kazakhstan and the other NIS is the Freedom for Russia and the Emerging Eurasian Democracies and Open Markets (FREEDOM) Support Act, enacted in October 1992, which directly addresses their military, political, and economic transformation. On September 30, 1993, a new $2.45-billion assistance package for the NIS, funded with a combination of fiscal year (FY) 1994 and 1993 supplemental appropriations, was passed by Congress and signed into law by President Clinton. It will continue to address political and economic transformation and humanitarian needs. Through December 1993, the U.S. has provided about $55 million in humanitarian assistance and $32 million in technical assistance to Kazakhstan (not including Nunn-Lugar assistance to dismantle nuclear weapons--see "Military Issues"). The focus of U.S. assistance to Kazakhstan is support for its transition to democracy and to a market economy and provision of humanitarian assistance. Kazakhstani President Nursultan Nazarbayev made his first official visit to Washington, DC, May 18-20, 1992. In October 1993, Secretary of State Warren Christopher visited Kazakhstan, followed by Vice President Gore in December 1993. During President Nazarbayev's second visit in February 1994, he signed, with President Clinton, the Charter on Democratic Partnership emphasizing a common commitment to democratic values, human rights, and the rule of law. The two countries also agreed to broaden consultation on the transition of military forces to civilian control and the conversion of defense facilities to peacetime use. President Clinton pledged to provide additional humanitarian and technical assistance, commercial agricultural credit guarantees, Nunn- Lugar assistance for the safe dismantlement of nuclear weapons, and U.S. investment resources valued at about $311 million. Humanitarian Assistance. Under Operation Provide Hope, launched in February 1992, the U.S. has delivered to Kazakhstan medical supplies valued at $8.4 million and excess Department of Defense food commodities valued at about $2 million. Under the Medical Assistance Initiative, administered by Project HOPE--a private voluntary organization--more than $13 million in medical assistance has been delivered. About $1 million in emergency medicines and supplies have been delivered under the Emergency Medicines Initiative. In FY 1994, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is providing more than $7 million in food aid to vulnerable groups in Kazakhstan. In addition, USDA has approved $15 million for Kazakhstan in GSM-102 export credit guarantees. Assistance To Support the Transition to a Market Economy. The U.S. has established a Central Asia regional enterprise fund to help new and existing small and medium-sized private enterprises become commercially viable in a free-market environment. Technical assistance and training programs have been provided in privatization, agribusiness and agricultural development, environmental issues, tax policy, banking, housing, telecommunications, private sector development, defense conversion, international trade and investment, energy efficiency, coal mine safety, maternal and child health, environmental health, and health care financing. A medical partnership has been established between a coalition of Tucson-area health care providers and four hospitals in Almaty. The Peace Corps is conducting programs in Kazakhstan with a focus on small business development. Assistance To Support the Transition to Democracy Technical assistance and training programs have been provided in political party training, voter education, election administration, public administration, civic education, rule of law, legal reform and education, review of draft legislation and the constitution, human rights, tolerance and pluralism, independent media, foreign policy, diplomacy, university administration, civic education, and English- language training. Many Kazakhstani students have participated in higher-education exchange programs. The U.S. has provided translation and publication services for books and articles. Bilateral Economic Relations. The United States seeks to promote self-sustaining economic reforms in Kazakhstan by encouraging trade and investment by U.S. companies. A trade agreement between the U.S. and Kazakhstan, which came into effect in February 1993, provides for reciprocal most-favored-nation treatment and will create commercial opportunities for U.S. business and for emerging Kazakhstani enterprises. The agreement facilitates business by allowing free operation of commercial representation in each country and offers strong protection of intellectual property rights. A bilateral investment treaty (BIT), signed in May 1992 and entered into force in December 1993, provides legal protection and assurances for U.S. investors, including treatment at least as favorable as that given to domestic enterprises--guarantees of unrestricted transfer, non- performance requirements, and full access to binding arbitration in case of disputes with the host government. In October 1993, Kazakhstan signed a treaty with the U.S. on the avoidance of double taxation. An Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) agreement, which will encourage U.S. private investment by providing direct loans and loan guarantees and by assisting with project-investor financing, entered into force on May 19, 1992. OPIC is providing $3 million in insurance and $80 million in financing and insurance to two U.S. companies for oil and exploration projects in Kazakhstan. The U.S. Eximbank also is operating for short-term coverage. Military Issues. Kazakhstan has accepted all relevant arms control obligations of the former Soviet Union. On May 23, 1992, the United States signed the Lisbon protocol to the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) with Kazakhstan, Russia, Belarus, and Ukraine (those states on whose territory strategic nuclear weapons of the former Soviet Union are located). The protocol makes the four states parties to the START treaty and commits all the signatories to reductions in strategic nuclear weapons within the 7-year period provided for in the treaty. In December 1993, Kazakhstan ratified the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). President Nazarbayev presented President Clinton with Kazakhstan's instrument of accession to the NPT, confirming its adherence to the NPT as a non-nuclear weapons state. On December 13, 1993, the U.S. and Kazakhstan signed an umbrella agreement that provides the legal framework for the provision of Nunn-Lugar funds for the safe and secure dismantlement (SSD) of nuclear weapons and five SSD implementing documents that commit the U.S. to provide about $85 million to assist Kazakhstan with the dismantlement of nuclear weapons on its territory and related activities. In March 1994, an additional agreement was signed that will provide Kazakhstan $15 million to assist in the process of converting defense industries to civilian purposes. On June 5, 1992, Kazakhstan and seven other NIS countries signed the Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE) Treaty, which establishes limits on categories of tanks, artillery, armored combat vehicles, combat aircraft, and combat helicopters, and provides for the destruction of weaponry in excess of these limits. On July 2, 1992, the Parliament of Kazakhstan ratified the START and CFE agreements. On November 9, 1992, the CFE Treaty entered into force. Kazakhstan opposes proliferation of nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons or related technologies. It maintains a defensive military force and is not a significant exporter of conventional weapons. Political Conditions The Supreme Soviet (parliament) declared independence from the former Soviet Union on December 16, 1991. In the December 1991 presidential elections, President Nursultan Nazarbayev ran unopposed and received 98% of the vote. Parliamentary elections were held in March 1994. There are three legally registered political parties: the Socialist Party (formerly the Communist Party); the Social Democratic Party (which broke away from the Communist Party before independence); and the People's Unity Movement, with which President Nazarbayev is affiliated. There are several unregistered opposition political parties and numerous smaller interest or social groups. The government has refused to register any party whose platform it believes will foment ethnic tensions. The Nevada-Semipalatinsk anti-nuclear movement played an important role in the recent ban on nuclear tests in the republic. In January 1993, the Supreme Soviet adopted a new constitution which vests most authority in the president. It includes substantial protection for individuals, including members of non-Kazakh ethnic groups. However, the transition to democracy has been affected by ethnic tensions. Although Kazakhs comprise only about 40% of the population, they increasingly are predominant in the government and in higher positions in state enterprises. Kazakhstan's language law, due to take effect in 1995, declares Kazakh as the official language of the state and Russian as the language of inter-ethnic communication. Freedom of assembly and religion are guaranteed by law; prior approval by local authorities is required to hold a demonstration. Organizations which conduct public meetings also must register with the government. The Committee for National Security (formerly the Committee for State Security--KGB) can deny permission to travel outside the country. The press is increasingly pluralistic, with a large number of unofficial publications and radio and television companies. The government, however, has maintained control over some media outlets, such as state radio and television. Kazakhstan's system of state-sponsored trade unions is inherited from the Soviet period. Under the current constitution, workers may form or join unions. To obtain legal status, an independent union must apply for registration with the local judicial authority and with the Ministry of Justice, often a long and difficult process. The Independent Trade Union Center claims to represent more than 350,000 members. The right to organize and bargain collectively is limited, since most industry remains state-owned. Kazakhstan's legal system is based on the Soviet court system but is undergoing reform. The President recommends nominees for Supreme Court and provincial judgeships, which then must be approved by the Supreme Soviet. In July 1992, the Supreme Soviet established an 11-member Constitutional Court, whose function is to interpret the constitution, resolve conflicts between regions, and decide inter-ethnic problems. Foreign Relations Kazakhstan joined the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) in December 1991. It is a strong proponent of dialogue and cooperation among CIS states. It supports regional and international efforts to resolve peacefully the conflict in Tajikistan and also has contributed to efforts to achieve a peaceful settlement of the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan. Kazakhstan became a member of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) in January 1992 and the United Nations and of the North Atlantic Cooperation Council in March 1992. It is committed to observing international legal obligations and human rights commitments under CSCE. Economic Outlook With an area equal to about one-third that of the U.S. and a population of about 17 million, Kazakhstan is the largest of the Central Asian republics. It has made some progress in restructuring its economic system through a program of steady reform. It has liberalized prices; prepared legislation on banking, privatization, and bankruptcy; undertaken tax reform; implemented trade reform; liberalized investment laws; and begun the process of privatization. The privatization law, currently under review, permits private ownership in most sectors of the economy with the exception of farming, which remains communally owned. In November 1993, the Government of Kazakhstan introduced a new currency, the "tenge," which sharply restricted the money supply and ushered in sharp price increases. At the same time, however, the government issued a list of price controls for essential commodities, although at new, higher levels. Kazakhstan is a member of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, and the Asian Development Bank. Kazakhstan reached agreement on a systemic transformation facility with the IMF in July 1993 and drew its first tranche of $83.5 million. In December 1993, IMF Managing Director Camdessus signed letters of intent for a standby agreement. Kazakhstan will receive an additional $167 million-- up to its full quota--in 1994. It also is laying the legal foundation for foreign trade and investment. A National Council for Economic Reform, which includes the ministers of economy and finance and the chair of the National Bank, has been created to oversee reform of the country's economy. Despite this measure, unemployment continues to rise, industrial production is declining, and purchasing power has fallen significantly. Kazakhstan accounted for 26% of the former Soviet Union's agricultural production and has significant deposits of oil, gas, coal, iron, and other minerals. This natural resource wealth, including gold production estimated at $200 million annually, makes it a potentially promising market for U.S. investors. Kazakhstan and Chevron Corporation announced in April 1993 the formation of a joint venture company, Tengizchevroil, to develop the Tengiz and Korolev oil fields on the northeastern Caspian Sea coast. This is the largest foreign joint venture of any kind in the NIS to date and will provide the Kazakhstani Government substantial revenues. Philip Morris has signed an agreement for the largest foreign privatization in the former Soviet Union. It will work with Kazakhstan in tobacco cultivation, manufacturing, and processing. Kazakhstan's net output accounts for 4% of total output of the former Soviet republics. About 23% of the population is engaged in agriculture. Major products are wool, grain, and meat. The northern area of the country produces up to one-third of all wheat grown in the territory of the NIS. Kazakhstan was a Soviet industrial center during and after World War II, when the U.S.S.R. moved industry east of the Urals to protect it from Nazi invasion. Mining and quarrying play a major role in Kazakhstan's economy. Abundant mineral resources--which include oil, natural gas, metals, gold, and coal--provide the bulk of the republic's limited hard currency. Kazakhstan produces about 19% of coal and 10% of iron ore production in the NIS. Environmental Issues Kazakhstan is interested in working with the international community on environmental issues and has participated in conferences on regional environmental problems, especially the Aral Sea. The $15-million initiative that the U.S. is spearheading will help alleviate environmental effects of desiccation of the Aral Sea Basin and facilitate regional cooperation. Kazakhstan has established a Ministry of Environment and has introduced a pollution fee system which taxes air and water pollution emissions and solid waste disposal and channels the resulting revenues to environmental protection activities. Principal Government Officials President: Nursultan Nazarbayev Foreign Minister: Kanat Saudabayev (###) Kazakhstan at a Glance The origins of the Kazakh people are uncertain, but traditional similarities indicate that they may have descended from the Mongol Golden Horde. Kazakhs founded a great nomadic empire under Burunduk Khan and his son, Kasym Khan, who ruled from 1488 to 1518. Later, the empire broke into smaller groups called khanates. The region was incorporated into the Russian empire by 1848. A Kazakh nationalist movement arose in the early 20th century. The Soviet Army occupied Kazakhstan from 1919 to 1920 before it became a republic in 1921. After 1927, the Soviets forcibly settled the Kazakhs, diluting nationalistic sentiment by resettling large groups of Russians and Ukrainians into the region, especially during the 1950s. Kazakhstan covers about 2.7 million square kilometers (about four times the size of Texas). Ethnic Kazakhs make up 18% of the population of the capital (Almaty) and 50% of the surrounding countryside. According to 1991 estimates, total population was 16.5 million. Ethnic Kazakhs comprise about 40% of the country's population; Russians, about 38%. Germans, Ukrainians, Koreans, and other groups make up the remainder. (###) Kyrgyz Republic U.S.-Kyrgyz Relations The dissolution of the Soviet Union in December 1991 brought an end to the Cold War and created the opportunity to build bilateral relations with the New Independent States (NIS) as they began a political and economic transformation. The U.S. recognized the independence of the Kyrgyz Republic (also known as Kyrgyzstan) on December 25, 1991, and was the first country to open an embassy in its capital, Bishkek, in February 1992. U.S. Ambassador Edward Hurwitz assumed his post on September 3, 1992. In January 1992, the U.S. initiated the Coordinating Conference on Assistance to the New Independent States in response to the humanitarian emergencies facing these states. The resulting Operation Provide Hope provided desperately needed food, fuel, medicine, and shelter. The cornerstone of the continuing U.S. partnership with the Kyrgyz Republic and the other NIS is the Freedom for Russia and Emerging Eurasian Democracies and Open Markets (FREEDOM) Support Act, enacted in October 1992, which directly addresses their military, political, and economic transformation. On September 30, 1993, a $2.45-billion assistance package for the NIS, funded with a combination of FY 1994 and 1993 supplemental appropriations, was passed by Congress and signed into law by President Clinton. For FY 1992 and 1993, the U.S. provided about $124 million in humanitarian assistance and $12 million in technical assistance to the Kyrgyz Republic. The focus of U.S. assistance to the Kyrgyz Republic is support for its transition to democracy and to a market economy and provision of humanitarian assistance. Kyrgyz President Askar Akayev visited the United States May 15-22, 1993. He met with President Clinton, Vice President Gore, Secretary of State Christopher, and other senior government officials. During the visit, Foreign Minister Karabayev and Secretary Christopher signed a bilateral assistance agreement, which provides a legal framework for U.S. aid activities. Vice President Gore visited the Kyrgyz Republic in December 1993, where he exchanged an instrument of accession to the bilateral investment treaty and launched a joint agricultural commission. Humanitarian Assistance. In response to the March 6, 1994, land-slide disaster, the U.S. provided more than $125,000 for emergency relief. Between October 1993 and March 1994, a U.S.-Japan immunization program provided the Kyrgyz Republic with vaccines, syringes, and cold chain equipment valued at more than $1 million. The U.S. delivered emergency shelters and medical supplies worth about $200,000 and three World Health Organization medical kits to victims of the August 1992 earthquake. Through Operation Provide Hope, launched in February 1992, the United States provided food valued at about $800,000, and medicines, vaccines, and medical supplies worth $5.6 million to the Kyrgyz Republic. An immunization program for more than 500,000 infants in Central Asia, including Kyrgyzstan, was completed in 1992. The Medical Assistance Initiative, administered by Project HOPE--a private voluntary organization--has shipped about $9.3 million in medical assistance. Medicines valued at about $2.5 million have been delivered under the Emergency Medicines Initiative. An excess, 1,000-bed Department of Defense hospital consisting of medical supplies and equipment valued at $15 million was turned over to Bishkek in April 1993. In 1994, the Department of Agriculture (USDA) expects to provide about 88,000 metric tons of food aid, valued at almost $30 million. Assistance To Support the Transition to a Market Economy. The U.S. will provide $30 million in FY 1994 to support an enterprise fund for Central Asia to assist privatization. Technical assistance and training programs have been provided in privatization, tax policy and administration, monetary and banking policy, bank supervision, bankruptcy, international trade and investment, consumer protection, democracy and economic development, business, energy efficiency, labor management, immunization planning and policy, public health surveillance, maternal and child health, and housing reform. Through USDA's Farmer-to-Farmer program, U.S. volunteers work with local farmers and agribusinesses to assist with private-sector marketing and processing and distribution systems in an effort to increase private farm production and income. A health industry investment mission for Central Asia was conducted in the Kyrgyz Republic in September 1993. A medical partnership has been established between the University of Kansas Medical Center and two Kyrgyz hospitals. Assistance To Support the Transition to Democracy. Training and technical assistance have been provided in assessments of the Kyrgyz Republic constitution; judicial and legal systems; lawmaking for democracy; executive branch organization; parliamentary exchanges covering constitutionalism, law, and local and state government; diplomatic training; pluralism; election law; political party training; building political consensus for economic reform; independent media; function of cultural groups and arts organizations in a free-market economy; university administration; and educational exchanges. A U.S. university affiliation grant has been awarded to the University of Kansas and the Kyrgyz Technical University. Assistance has been provided in the translation, publication, and/or distribution of information on democracy and free-market economics. Peace Corps volunteers are working in the Kyrgyz Republic with a focus on English- language training. Bilateral Trade Relations. A trade agreement providing reciprocal most-favored-nation status entered into force on August 21, 1992. An Overseas Private Investment Corporation agreement, which will encourage U.S. private investment by providing direct loans and loan guarantees, became effective on May 8, 1992. An investment treaty entered into force in December 1993. The two countries currently are negotiating a tax treaty. The Export-Import Bank offers short-term credit for investment in the Kyrgyz Republic. Political Conditions President Askar Akayev, running unopposed, won 95% of the vote in the October 1991 elections. He won a vote of confidence in a national referendum held in January 1994. A reformer and ally of former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev, he was named president in November 1990 by the Supreme Soviet, which had amended the constitution to provide for a presidential system of government. Presidential elections are scheduled for 1996. A political party structure still is developing, but there are a number of small parties represented in the Supreme Soviet. President Akayev is not affiliated with any party. The Communist Party was suspended by the President in 1991, but former communist officials are active in politics. The government has endorsed a basic program of multi-party democracy, rule of law, respect for human rights, protection of the rights of minorities, religious freedom, recognition of the right of ownership of private property, and rapid conversion to a free-market economy. Although Kyrgyz comprise more than 50% of the population, the country has more than 80 ethnic groups. President Akayev and his government have sought to foster Kyrgyz national identity, while reassuring ethnic minorities. Elections to the Supreme Soviet, or legislature, were held in 1990, prior to independence, and it remains dominated by former communists. The government supports political activity, and opposition groups are free to organize. A new constitution, passed by the legislature on May 5, 1993, includes protection for individuals, including members of non- Kyrgyz ethnic groups. The new constitution declares Kyrgyz to be the national language but guarantees no discrimination for the use of other languages. The judicial system retains many of the laws and procedures of the Soviet period but is undergoing reform. On July 2, 1992, the Supreme Soviet passed a law supporting freedom of the press but also establishing guidelines proscribing publication of certain in-formation, such as material advocating violence or expressing religious or ethnic intolerance. There has been very little censorship of the press, but government ownership of all radio and television facilities and its influence with many publications has raised concern about media independence. Legislation adopted in February 1992 includes provisions protecting the right to form trade unions. The Federation of Independent Trade Unions of the Kyrgyz Republic is the sole successor to the former official trade unions and remains the only union organization. An April 1992 law recognized the right of unions to negotiate for improved wages and working conditions. Although wages continue to be set by government decree in most sectors, many factories have begun systems of bonuses and other incentives in keeping with the government's commitment to develop a market economy. The Kyrgyz Republic has nationalized the military forces of the Common- wealth of Independent States (CIS) on its soil. The government is considering disbanding the military, replacing it with a national guard and adopting a policy of neutrality. Foreign Relations The Kyrgyz Republic is a member of the CIS, the United Nations, the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE), the North Atlantic Cooperation Council, the International Labor Organization, and the Organization of the Islamic Conference. It favors close relations with the United States as well as with other CIS members, including Russia. It has declared its intention to observe international legal obligations and CSCE human rights commitments. A human rights conference was held in Bishkek in December 1992. Kyrgyzstan supports regional and international efforts to resolve peacefully the conflict in neighboring Tajikistan. Economic Conditions The Kyrgyz Republic has made significant progress in restructuring its economic system and has implemented legislation on disposal of state- owned property, privatization, joint ventures, foreign trade and investment, and free economic zones. During 1992, its economic transition resulted in increased unemployment and inflation. On May 10, 1993, the Kyrgyz Republic introduced its own currency, called the "som." On May 13, 1993, the Kyrgyz Republic became the first of the NIS to receive a full standby arrangement from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and to draw from the new IMF program to assist economies in transition. In February 1994, it hosted the first CSCE economic seminar on promoting small and medium-sized businesses in transition economies. Agriculture dominates the Kyrgyz economy, accounting for more than 50% of the nation's gross national product and providing employment for the majority of the work force. The Kyrgyz historically are nomadic pastoralists, and raising livestock remains the core of the country's agricultural economy. About 85% of the land is used for grazing, most for sheep and goat herding. Wool, fruits, vegetables, and sugar production are important. There also is some cattle production. Most of the republic's industrial base, including one technologically sophisticated "super factory," is located in Bishkek. Less than half of production is devoted to heavy industry, of which 27% is machine- building. Light industry accounts for 29% and food processing for 21% of total production. The Kyrgyz Republic produces electric motors, livestock equipment, refrigerators, furniture, cement, paper, and bricks. The country is targeting leather, wool, food processing, and tobacco for further development. Kyrgyzstan is known historically for textile production. It produces cotton, wool, and high-grade silks, which also are exported. Since the republic has limited reserves of oil, coal, and natural gas, it imports most of its fossil fuels. It does, however, have an abundant supply of hydroelectric power from several major plants and some potential to export significant amounts of this power. Site of the former Soviet Union's largest and most productive gold mine, the Kyrgyz Republic claims to have the world's fourth-largest proven gold reserves. It also has significant deposits of strategic rare-earth metals, and the Kyrgyz polymetallic complex is the leading producer of such metals in Eurasia. Prospects for develop- ment of rare-earth resources have led to considerable interest from foreign investors. It also has enormous deposits of antimony and mercury; the Khaydarkan Refinery is the largest mercury-producing facility in the world. The former Soviet Union's original uranium mines and its first uranium processing facility are located here. The country is considered to have significant uranium deposits, along with major deposits of high-quality construction materials such as basalt, marble, and other ornamental stones. The Kyrgyz Republic actively promotes foreign investment. The U.S. provides support and guidance to American firms interested in trade and investment. Morrison-Knudsen, for example, is developing gold deposits through a joint venture. Firms from other countries also are active. Goldstar Corporation of South Korea has established manufacturing facilities; Turkish and Polish firms have invested in fur and sheepskin processing plants; a joint venture with Liechtenstein has been set up for silk processing; and an Italian firm has started a food processing operation for tomato paste. The public and private sectors in the United States, South Korea, Turkey, Italy, Spain, and Israel have provided loans and credits. The Kyrgyz Republic is a member of the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. In 1992, it became a member of the Economic Cooperation Organization--an Islamic economic bloc which includes six states of the former U.S.S.R. and Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan, and Turkey. Environmental Issues The Kyrgyz Government is working with the U.S. and the international community on environmental issues and has participated in conferences on regional environmental problems. It has expressed interest in international assistance for the protection of Issyk Kul Lake, one of its premier tourist sites. It has a small Ministry of the Environment. Principal Government Officials President: Askar Akayev Prime Minister: Apas Djumagulov Foreign Minister: Roza Otunbayeva (###) Kyrgyz Republic at a Glance In the 10th century AD, nomadic tribes known as Kyrgyz migrated from the northern plains into present-day Kyrgyzstan. By the 16th century, they dominated other inhabitants. Between the 17th and 19th centuries, they were overrun by invading groups and, in 1876, were absorbed into the Russian Empire. Soon after, Russians and other Slavs moved into the region, settling grazing lands formerly used by Kyrgyz nomads. The assignation of the best lands to the Russian colonizers led to a revolution in 1916, during which the Kyrgyz suffered heavily. Nearly one-third fled to China. At the time, the czarist government did not recognize the area as a separate political entity and included the Kyrgyz, along with other Central Asian nationalities, in Russian Turkestan. However, after the Bolshevik Revolution, the Kara-Kyrgyz Autonomous Oblast was formed. The Kyrgyz Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic was established in 1926, and Kyrgyzstan became a union republic in 1936. It declared independence from the U.S.S.R. on August 31, 1991. Kyrgyzstan is located in the center of the Asian land mass and has an area of 199,000 square kilometers. It is primarily a mountainous country. Its border with China in the southeast includes Pobedy (Victory) Peak and Khan Tengi Peak, two of the highest peaks in the territory of the New Independent States. Bishkek, the capital, is the largest city in the republic, with a population of nearly 616,000. The Kyrgyz are a Muslim Turkic-speaking pastoral people with definite Mongol strains. In 1989, some 2.5 million Kyrgyz lived in the former Soviet Union, most of them in the Kyrgyz Republic. From 1979 to 1989, the Kyrgyz population grew at 4.4% annually, while the Russian population decreased by the same amount. By 1991, Kyrgyzstan's population was estimated at 4.6 million. Kyrgyz constitute some 52% of the population, Russians 22%, and Uzbeks 13%. The rest are Ukrainians, Germans, Tatars, and other groups. Russian and Kyrgyz are the most widely spoken languages. Dominant religions are Sunni Muslim and Russian Orthodox. (###) Tajikistan U.S.-Tajikistan Relations The dissolution of the Soviet Union in December 1991 brought an end to the Cold War and created the opportunity to build bilateral relations with the New Independent States (NIS) as they began a political and economic transformation. The United States recognized Tajikistan on December 25, 1991, and opened an embassy in the capital, Dushanbe, in March 1992. The ambassador to Tajikistan is Stanley Tuemler Escudero, who assumed the post August 17, 1992. In January 1992, the U.S. initiated the Coordinating Conference on Assistance to the New Independent States in response to the humanitarian emergencies facing these states. The resulting Operation Provide Hope, launched in February 1992, provided desperately needed food, fuel, medicine, and shelter. The cornerstone of the continuing U.S. partnership with Tajikistan and the other NIS is the Freedom for Russia and Emerging Eurasian Democracies and Open Markets (FREEDOM) Support Act, enacted in October 1992, which directly addresses their military, political, and economic transformation. On September 30, 1993, a new $2.45-billion assistance package for the NIS, funded with a combination of FY 1994 and 1993 supplemental appropriations, was passed by Congress and signed into law by President Clinton. It will continue to address political and economic transformation and humanitarian needs. Through December 1993, U.S. assistance to Tajikistan has been about $73 million in humanitarian assistance and $4 million in technical assistance. The focus of U.S. assistance is the provision of humanitarian assistance and support for Tajikistan's transition to democracy and to a market economy. Humanitarian Assistance. The U.S. has taken an active role in providing humanitarian assistance and in coordinating an international response to the civil war and a series of natural disasters. The U.S. provided more than $9 million to meet non-food and supplemental food needs of Tajikistani refugees and internationally displaced persons most affected by civil strife. An additional $1.2 million was provided for food, fuel, and medical supplies in the Pamir region. In response to 1993 spring flooding, the U.S. shipped 1,400 tents along with blankets and food kits with a value of $1.8 million. The U.S. also gave a $246,000 grant to better enable local governments in Central Asia to respond to emergency humanitarian crises. In September 1993, $275,000 was provided for repair of a hydroelectric plant. In August 1993, $800,000 was provided for water and sanitation cleanup in response to a cholera outbreak and $700,000 for emergency feeding operations and protection requirements. Operation Provide Hope delivered food worth $1.1 million and medicines, vaccines, and medical supplies valued at $5.8 million; under the Medical Assistance Initiative, Project HOPE--a private voluntary organization-- has shipped more than $4.7 million in medical assistance to Dushanbe. Under the Emergency Medicines Initiative, about $500,000 in emergency medicines and medical supplies, 30 World Health Organization basic medical kits, and 3 supplemental emergency kits were delivered to Dushanbe. The U.S. completed a program to immunize about 500,000 infants in four states of Central Asia, including Tajikistan, with follow-up technical assistance in need assessments. An immunization policy workshop was conducted. In FY 1994, the U.S. Department of Agriculture expects to provide more than 20,000 metric tons of food aid, valued at about $30 million. In addition, the U.S. Agency for International Development expects to provide about $6 million in food aid targeted to the nutritional needs of children and pregnant and post-partum women. Assistance To Support the Transition to a Market Economy. Training and technical assistance programs have been provided in entrepreneurship, small business development, market economy, tax law and collection, agribusiness, and environmental and maternal and child health. The U.S. will provide $30 million in FY 1994 to support an enter- prise fund for Central Asia to assist privatization. Assistance To Support the Transition to Democracy. Training and technical assistance programs have been provided in building political consensus for economic reform, rule of law, diplomacy, and independent media. Educational exchange programs play an important role in these areas. Bilateral Economic Issues. An Overseas Private Investment Corporation agreement entered into force on June 25, 1992. A bilateral trade agreement came into force in November 1993. Military Issues. Tajikistan has declared its willingness to accept all the relevant arms control obligations of the former Soviet Union. It has stated its intention to accede to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty as a non- nuclear weapons state. It has no nuclear, biological, or chemical capabilities. Political Conditions Tajikistan declared independence on September 9, 1991. In November 1991, Rakhman Nabiyev, a former Communist Party official, won presidential elections held under an amended Soviet-era constitution which declared Tajikistan to be a secular, multi-party republic with a presidential system of government. In November 1992, after a three-month period of intensive fighting among regional and clan factions, Nabiyev submitted his resignation to the legislature, which then abolished the positions of president and vice president and adopted a parliamentary form of government, with Imomili Rakhmanov as Chairman of Parliament and Head of State. The political situation in Tajikistan remains fragile. The January 24, 1993, summit of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) passed a resolution to form a Collective Peacekeeping Force (CPF) composed of regional CIS forces to stabilize the situation in Tajikistan. The CPF is expected to remain in Tajikistan throughout 1994. The UN Security Council voted on April 23, 1993, to send a political and humanitarian mission to Tajikistan to facilitate reconciliation and return of refugees. The first round of UN-brokered negotiations among representatives of the Tajik Government and opposition took place in Moscow in April 1994. The last full parliamentary elections were held in February 1990. By- elections were held in 1993 to fill vacant seats. A new constitution was published in April 1994. A referendum on the constitution and form of government, followed by elections, is expected in late 1994. In May 1993, the Supreme Court of Tajikistan banned three opposition parties for actively working to overthrow the government. Since that date, several new parties have organized. Following Tajikistan's declaration of independence, freedom of speech, press, and expression expanded greatly. The Rakhmanov Administration has created an information office under the joint administration of the Council of Ministers and the Parliament Presidium to coordinate the flow of information to the state-controlled media. The Committee for State Security (KGB) and the Ministry of the Interior share responsibility for security and public order. According to the Law on Social Organization and the Law on Trade Union Rights and Activity, all citizens are guaranteed the right of association. The communist-era Confederation of Trade Unions remains the dominant labor organization, although it no longer is affiliated with the Communist Party. A new, national army is responsible for border defense. According to the constitution, church and state are separate in Tajikistan, and religious freedom is guaranteed by the Law on Freedom of Faith and Religious Organizations of December 1990. Although about 90% of the population is Muslim, there is no official discrimination against other religions. Freedom of speech and association also are guaranteed, although a permit to demonstrate is required. Foreign Relations On December 21, 1991, Tajikistan became a member of the Commonwealth of Independent States. Tajikistan also belongs to the United Nations, the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, and the North Atlantic Cooperation Council. The current government is committed to respecting international legal obligations and CSCE human rights commitments. It has been an active participant in regional dialogues and peace-making efforts and has supported international efforts to resolve peacefully its internal conflict. A CSCE mission opened in Tajikistan in February 1994 with a mandate to foster dialogue and confidence-building measures among parties to the dispute and to promote human rights, the development of democratic institutions, and the rule of law. Economic Outlook Progress in implementing an economic reform program has been slowed by unsettled political conditions. The civil war damaged the economic infrastructure, limited industrial and agricultural production, and led to serious food shortages. Little progress has been made toward establishing a market economy. Tajikistan is the only Central Asian country that has not left the ruble zone and issued an independent currency, but Russia's reluctance to provide desperately needed rubles is increasing the likelihood that Tajikistan will do so. Tajikistan has one of the lowest standards of living and is one of the most rural of the New Independent States. Under the former U.S.S.R., its net output in all major sectors was less than 1.5% of the total for all republics. About 40% of the population is engaged in agriculture and forestry and 20% in industry and construction. Much of its territory is high mountains, from which it obtains minerals and hydroelectric power, which are the foundation of its economy. Since the country has little capacity for processing raw materials, these are exported. Agricultural products and exports include cotton, fruits and vegetables, and silk. Tajikistan imports consumer goods, clothing textiles, and food from other republics. Tajikistan encourages foreign investment to help rebuild its economy. Its reform program aims to develop small and medium enterprises, while continuing state support for large enterprises. A major effort will be made to develop non-ferrous metallurgy. Tajikistan is a member of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. In 1992, it became a member of the Economic Cooperation Organization--an Islamic economic bloc linking six Islamic states of the former U.S.S.R., and Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan, and Turkey. It is a member of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. Environmental issues Tajikistan has not undertaken any significant environmental protection programs. (###) Principal Government Officials President: Imomili Rakhmanov Prime Minister: Abdujalil Samadov Minister of Foreign Affairs: Rashid Alimov (###) Tajikistan at a Glance Located in Central Asia, Tajikistan's neighbors are China, Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, and Kyrgyzstan. Pakistan is only 20 miles away and is separated from Tajikistan by a narrow corridor of Afghanistan. Tajiks are ethnically Persian, unlike most of the Central Asians, who are ethnically Turkic. The capital, Dushanbe, was founded in 1922 on the site of the village of Dush. From 1929 to 1961, the city was known as Stalinabad. Most Tajiks live in rural qishlags of 200-700 homes. In mountainous areas, qishlags generally consist of 15-20 homes. The Tajiks are descended from one of the most ancient settled societies in Central Asia, and archaeological remains date back to at least 3000 BC. Modern Tajik is related closely to the Farsi dialect spoken in Iran and Afghanistan; there are about 4 million Tajiks in Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, with another 4 million in Afghanistan. In ancient times, the kingdoms of Bactria and Sogdiana were tributary states of the Persian Empire. In 329 BC, Alexander the Great conquered the region, followed by Arab invaders in the 7th century AD, who converted the people to Sunni Islam. In the 10th century, Turkic invaders replaced the Arabs. Although other invasions followed--notably the Mongols in 1221--the Tajiks developed an impressive culture. The magnificent ruins at Bukhara and Samarkand, today inside the bound-aries of Uzbekistan, are products of Tajik culture, and the Tajiks have made notable contributions to Persian literature since the 10th century AD. In the mid-15th century, Tajikistan was conquered by the nomadic Uzbeks and was part of the emirate of Bukhara until Afghans conquered it in the mid- 18th century. In the 1860s, Russia gained control of some Tajik territory. An attempt after the 1917 revolution to absorb the country triggered the Basmachi revolt in 1922. Although the rebels operated in some parts of the country until 1931, the area became a Soviet republic of the U.S.S.R. in 1929. Despite Soviet rule, the Tajiks retained their Islamic heritage, and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1980 caused much local unrest. Tajikistan declared independence on September 9, 1991. According to 1990 estimates, the population of Tajikistan is about 6 million comprised mostly of Tajiks (62%), Uzbeks (24%), and Russians (8%). (###) Turkmenistan U.S.-Turkmenistan Relations The dissolution of the Soviet Union in December 1991 brought an end to the Cold War and created the opportunity to build bilateral relations with the New Independent States (NIS) as they began a political and economic transformation. The United States opened an embassy in the capital, Ashgabat, in March 1992. The U.S. Ambassador to Turkmenistan is Joseph S. Hulings III, who assumed the post on August 17, 1992. In January 1992, the U.S. initiated the Coordinating Conference on Assistance to the New Independent States in response to the humanitarian emergencies facing these states. The resulting Operation Provide Hope provided desperately needed food, fuel, medicine, and shelter. The cornerstone of the continuing U.S. partnership with Turkmenistan and the other NIS is the Freedom for Russia and Emerging Eurasian Democracies and Open Markets (FREEDOM) Support Act, enacted in October 1992, which directly addresses their military, political, and economic transformation. On September 30, 1993, a new $2.45-billion assistance package for the NIS, funded with a combination of FY 1994 and 1993 supplemental appropriations, was passed by Congress and signed into law by President Clinton. It will continue to address political and economic transformation and humanitarian needs. Through December 1993, U.S. assistance provided to Turkmenistan has been about $110 million in humanitarian assistance and $3 million in technical assistance. The focus of U.S. assistance is provision of humanitarian assistance and support for Turkmenistan's transition to democracy and to a market economy. Humanitarian Assistance. Through Operation Provide Hope, launched in February 1992, the U.S. provided food worth about $626,000 and medicines, vaccines, and medical supplies valued at $5.3. Under the Medical Assistance Initiative, Project HOPE--a private voluntary organization--has shipped about $3.3 million in medical assistance to Ashgabat and Tashauz. Medicines worth $461,062 have been provided under the Emergency Medicines Initiative. The U.S. also funded the provision by the American Red Cross, in cooperation with the American Hospital Association, of medicines and medical supplies valued at about $4.5 million. The American Red Cross also has contributed $500,000 to enable local Red Crescent societies in Central Asia to increase regional services. Between October 1993 and March 1994, a U.S.-Japan immunization support program provided Turkmenistan with vaccines, technical assistance, syringes, and cold chain equipment valued at about $900,000. An immunization program for more than 500,000 infants in Central Asia, including Turkmenistan, was completed. It included donations of cold chain equip- ment and supplies, follow-up technical assistance, and an immunization policy workshop. In FY 1994, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is providing $10 million in concessional loans to the Government of Turkmenistan for the purchase of agricultural commodities. In addition, USDA has approved $5 million in export credit guarantees under the GSM-102 program. Assistance To Support the Transition to a Market Economy. The U.S. will provide $30 million in FY 1994 to support an enterprise fund for Central Asia that will assist privatization. Technical assistance and training programs have been provided in market economy, economics, agriculture and agribusiness, and maternal and child health. The U.S. cooperates with Turkey on technical assistance projects in the health field. A hospital partnership was established in April 1993 between the Cleveland Clinic Foundation and the Medical Consultative Center in Ashgabat. Partial funding has been provided for a study on upgrading an oil refinery and for a study of several telecommunications projects. The U.S. and Israel cooperate on the implementation of a program for joint technical assistance and training in agricultural development projects and cooperative scientific research. Assistance To Support the Transition to Democracy. Representatives from Turkmenistan have participated in programs in building consensus for economic reform, municipal government, executive- legislative relations, leadership and organizational skill development, tolerance and pluralism, foreign policy process and diplomatic training, independent media, and academic exchanges. The Peace Corps is working in Turkmenistan with a focus on English-language training. Bilateral Trade Issues. A trade agreement entered into force in October 1993. The U.S. and Turkmenistan are consulting on bilateral investment and tax treaties. An Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) agreement, which will encourage U.S. private investment by providing direct loans and loan guarantees and by assisting with project-investor matching, entered into force on June 26, 1992. Military Issues. Turkmenistan has accepted all relevant arms control obligations of the former Soviet Union, and has pledged to accede to the nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty as a non-nuclear weapons state. Under a bilateral security arrangement with Russia, it will disband most of its existing military forces. It has no nuclear, biological, or chemical capabilities. Turkmenistan has expressed interest in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's Partnership for Peace initiative. Political Conditions Turkmenistan declared independence on October 27, 1991, following a referendum that received 94% support. Saparmurad Niyazov, head of the Communist Party since 1985 and President of the Republic of Turkmenistan since the creation of the post in 1990, was elected President of the new state in a direct election on June 21, 1992. His term of office expires in 2002. The parliament, also elected in 1990 under the communist system, will remain in office until the next scheduled elections in 1995. The government is dominated by members of the former Communist Party, which has been renamed the Democratic Party and is the only registered political party. The 1992 constitution declares Turkmenistan to be a secular democracy in the form of a presidential republic. It establishes the branches of government as the Presidency, the National Assembly, the Cabinet of Ministers, the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Economic Court. The Halk Maslahaty (People's Council) is an advisory body which includes these groups plus 60 popularly elected members and local government officials. It has some authority to ratify treaties. The constitution vests a disproportionate share of power in the presidency. The president effectively makes all policy decisions, appoints government officials, and determines which legislation will be considered by the National Assembly. The government publicly has stated its commitment to democratic and economic reform and recognizes that progress in pursuing such reform is necessary for successful relations with the West. However, it is concerned that democratic reforms may lead to political chaos and has been moving very slowly to initiate change. It maintains strict control over opposition political parties and the media, rarely permitting criticism of policy or officials. Unregistered organizations, including political parties, cannot hold demonstrations or meetings. Although the constitution guarantees freedom of religion, religious congregations are required to register with the government. Turkmen are primarily Muslim. In an effort to foster a renewed sense of nationalism, the government has tended to favor ethnic Turkmen, especially in employment practices. The constitution designates Turkmen as the official language, while also guaranteeing use of other languages. While Islam did not play an important role during the Soviet era, the revival of Turkmen nationalism is linked to a resurgence of Islam. The court system includes a Supreme Court, provincial courts, district and city courts, and a Supreme Economic Court, which decides cases between state economic concerns and ministries. The president appoints all judges for a term of five years without legislative review, except the Chairman of the Supreme Court, and has sole authority to remove them. The new constitution, adopted in 1992, theoretically established judicial independence; in effect, the judiciary is subordinate to the president. Travel within the country and the former Soviet Union generally is unhindered but the government has restricted movement by political critics to prevent the dissemination of unfavorable commentary. Travel outside the area of the NIS requires an exit visa. The Committee on National Security (KNB) assumed the responsibilities of the former Soviet Committee for State Security; its personnel and operations remain the same. Turkmenistan's Federation of Trade Unions is inherited from the Soviet era. The right to collective bargaining is not protected by law. The Ministry for Economics and Finance prepares general guidelines for wages and sets wages in health care and the arts. Annual negotiations between the trade union and management determine wages and benefits for each enterprise, but the workers' ability to bargain is limited. The government recently concluded an accord with Russia, agreeing to cooperate on military and security issues and to place most of the Turkmen armed forces under unified command. Foreign Relations On December 21, 1991, Turkmenistan became a member of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). On January 22, 1993, Turkmenistan refused to endorse a draft CIS charter creating closer political and economic ties among members. President Niyazov has argued against greater integration of CIS members and the establishment of a CIS coordinating role. Turkmenistan also is a member of the United Nations, the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, and the North Atlantic Cooperation Council. Economic Outlook The government has moved slowly on economic reform, limiting privatization efforts and reserving 80% of oil, natural gas, minerals, and most of agriculture for state ownership. A series of laws on foreign investment, banking, property ownership, and intellectual property rights were passed in 1992 but these have not translated into significant support for economic reform. The issuance of its independent currency in 1993, the manat, has increased the need for the government to move decisively on controlling government spending, promoting foreign investment, and instituting a number of other long- awaited reforms. Turkmenistan is largely desert and has the second-smallest population in the CIS. Irrigation--in particular the Karakum Canal--allows cultivation of a significant amount of cotton. Other major products are wool, grapes, and vegetable oil. It produces much natural gas and is mostly self-sufficient in energy; the gas field of Sovetabad is today a major source. The country produces 5% of the natural gas in the Commonwealth and 1% of its oil. Western Turkmenistan has fisheries and fish processing (beluga sturgeon, prized for caviar, is found in the Caspian region) and chemical and mining industries. The country is one of the least industrialized in the Commonwealth; less than 10% of its labor force is engaged in industry, and it imports large quantities of food, clothing, and consumer goods. Turkmenistan is a member of the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. In 1992, it became a founding member of the Economic Cooperation Organization--an Islamic economic bloc which includes six Islamic states of the former U.S.S.R. and Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan, and Turkey. Environmental Issues While Turkmenistan has one of the most highly developed systems of nature preserves of the Central Asian states, it also has one of the most serious environmental problems. Continued development of the Karakum Canal exacerbates existing water pollution, pesticide residue, and water-table problems in the region. The resulting ecological devastation is contaminating the Aral Sea and the surrounding area, creating a dry seabed which has become a source of toxic windstorms and is endangering the local population. Principal Government Officials President and Prime Minister: Saparmurad Niyazov Minister of Foreign Affairs: Khalikberdi Atayev (###) Turkmenistan at a Glance Located in Central Asia, Turkmenistan extends from the Caspian Sea on the west to Uzbekistan and the Amu Darya River on the east. Bordered on the north by Kazakhstan and on the south by Afghanistan and Iran, it is the southern-most of the former Soviet republics. Primarily desert, Turkmenistan has an arid climate and extreme temperature fluctuations. The capital and largest city, Ashgabat, is in the south at the foot of the Kopet Dag mountains, which rise along the border with Iran. The population is concentrated there and in the Amu Darya Valley in the northeast. Ashgabat was founded in 1881 as a fortress. Most Turkmens are Sunni Muslims. Their society is patrilinear, with extended families made up of parents, unmarried children, and married sons. Many women in Turkmenistan weave woolen carpets which feature distinctive colors and patterns. Aside from the Turkmens (72% of the population), there are Uzbeks (9%), Russians (9%), and Kazakhs. From 1979 to 1989, the Turkmen population grew at 3.5% annually; the Russian population decreased by 3%. Forty percent of Turkmenistan's people speak Russian fluently; 75% speak Turkmen, which is the official language. The country is 488,000 square kilometers. The 1990 population was 3.6 million, just more than 1% of the Commonwealth's population. The origin of the Turkmens is uncertain, but they were known to be pastoral and nomadic until their conquest by czarist Russia in the 19th century. The Turkmen Soviet Socialist Republic was established in 1924. Turkmenistan declared its independence on October 27, 1991.(###) Uzbekistan U.S.-Uzbekistan Relations The dissolution of the Soviet Union in December 1991 brought an end to the Cold War and created the opportunity to build bilateral relations with the New Independent States (NIS) as they began a political and economic transformation. The U.S. recognized the independence of Uzbekistan on December 25, 1991, and opened an embassy in the capital, Tashkent, in March 1992. The U.S. Ambassador is Henry Lee Clarke, who assumed the post on August 24, 1992. In January 1992, the U.S. initiated the Coordinating Conference on Assistance to the New Independent States in response to the humanitarian emergencies facing these states. The resulting Operation Provide Hope provided desperately needed food, fuel, medicine, and shelter. The cornerstone of the continuing partnership with Uzbekistan and the other NIS is the Freedom for Russia and Emerging Eurasian Democracies and Open Markets (FREEDOM) Support Act, enacted in October 1992, which directly addresses their military, political, and economic transformation. On September 30, 1993, a new $2.45-billion assistance package for the NIS, funded with a combination of FY 1994 and 1993 supplemental appropriations, was passed by Congress and signed into law by President Clinton. It will continue to address political and economic transformation and humanitarian needs. Through December 1993, the U.S. has provided about $17 million in humanitarian assistance and $13 million in technical assistance to Uzbekistan. The focus of U.S. assistance is support for its transition to democracy and to a market economy and provision of humanitarian assistance. Humanitarian Assistance. Through Operation Provide Hope, launched in February 1992, the U.S. delivered food valued at more than $500,000 and medicines, vaccines, and medical supplies valued at $5.5 million to Uzbekistan to meet critical emergency needs. Medicines worth more than $500,000 have been delivered under the Emergency Medicines Initiative. The American Red Cross has received $500,000 to enable local Red Crescent societies in the Central Asian republics to increase regional services. The U.S. also completed a program to immunize more than 500,000 infants in four states of Central Asia, including Uzbekistan. Cold chain equipment and other supplies were donated, as well as follow-up technical assistance and workshops on cold chain equipment and immunization policy. Under the Medical Assistance Initiative, administered by Project HOPE--a private voluntary organization--$4.8 million in medical assistance has been provided. In response to an explosion at an oil well in spring 1992, the U.S. airlifted fire-fighting equipment to Tashkent. In FY 1994, the U.S. Department of Agriculture is providing about $4.2 million in food aid, distributed by a U.S. private voluntary organization to vulnerable groups in Uzbekistan. Assistance To Support the Transition to a Market Economy. The U.S. will provide $30 million in FY 1994 to support an enterprise fund for Central Asia that will assist privatization. Technical assistance and training programs have been provided in the fields of privatization, market economy, entrepreneurship and small business development, the U.S. state and federal tax system, financial consultations, tax policy and economic advisement, agribusiness and agricultural development, training and research, labor and management relations, international trade and investment, environmental health, maternal and child health, and medical information systems. A hospital partnership program between the University of Illinois Hospital and Tashmen Medical Institute No. 2 was established in December 1992. The Peace Corps is working in Uzbekistan with a focus on English-language training. Assistance To Support the Transition to Democracy. Technical assistance and training programs have been provided on rule of law, review and assessment of the constitution, election law and criminal law, law enforcement training, foreign policy, diplomacy, tolerance and pluralism, leadership and organizational skills, building a political consensus for economic reform, independent media, English- language training, the U.S. educational system, university administration, and academic exchanges. Bilateral Trade Relations. An Overseas Private Investment Corporation agreement with Uzbekistan, which encourages U.S. private investment by providing direct loans and loan guarantees and by assisting with project-investor matching, entered into force on October 28, 1992. A trade agreement guaranteeing reciprocal most-favored status to the products of each country was signed on November 5, 1993, and entered into force on January 13, 1994. On March 1, 1994, a bilateral assistance agreement and an open lands agreement were signed. A bilateral investment treaty and a treaty for the avoidance of double taxation are under discussion. The U.S. Export- Import Bank has made available short-term financing insurance for U.S. investments to assist businesses to export goods and services to Uzbekistan. It also made the first preliminary commitment based on sovereign risk in the NIS to Uzbekistan. Military Issues. Uzbekistan has accepted relevant arms control obligations of the former Soviet Union. It has acceded to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty as a non-nuclear weapons state. It is organizing the Uzbek National Army, a force of about 35,000. Political Conditions Uzbekistan declared its independence on August 31, 1991. Islam Karimov, the First Secretary of the Communist Party under Soviet rule, was elected President of the Republic of Uzbekistan in December 1991. He and the highly centralized executive branch dominate the political scene. Despite the government's official goal of creating a multi-party democracy, little progress has been made in Uzbekistan's transition from Soviet authoritarianism toward a more pluralistic democracy. The People's Democratic Party of Uzbekistan (PDP), successor to the Communist Party, remains the dominant party. Its members include the majority of the Supreme Soviet, elected in February 1990 for five-year terms. Only one other party, the Fatherland Progress Party, legally exists in Uzbekistan. An adviser to President Karimov created this party, apparently to give some semblance of a multi-party system. To control the political arena, political parties, like all other social groups, are required to officially register with the government. It denied registration to some political groups and other associations and has required groups that were already registered to re-register, effectively closing down the Erk (Freedom) and Birlik (Unity) parties, the most serious opposition groups. Compared to the Soviet era, Uzbekistan has made some progress in passing progressive legislation. In December 1992, parliament adopted a new constitution establishing specific rights for individuals and groups and enacted legislation defining citizenship and minority rights and protecting religious freedom. The new constitution also prohibits censorship. New legislation gives workers the right to create and join trade unions and declares all unions independent of the state's administrative and economic bodies. These new laws eliminate the union's role in state planning and in enterprise management, emphasize their responsibility for "social protection," and empower unions to bargain collectively but not to strike. Despite the new legislation, the security services remain instruments for maintaining government control over society and are responsible for various human rights abuses. In fact, security forces moved government observance of human rights backward in 1993 compared to 1992. Security forces suppressed opposition political parties and movements by frequently detaining or arresting opposition activists on trumped-up charges. In 1993, the government tried two political dissidents on charges of insulting the President's honor. Although both trials ended in guilty verdicts, the defendants were released under presidential amnesty. The government prohibits unsanctioned public meetings and bans demonstrations. Although expressly prohibited by the constitution, press censorship continues. In March 1994, security forces arrested eight Erk members and charged them with distributing anti-government literature. The atmosphere of repression reduces freedom of expression and makes it increasingly difficult to criticize the government. Foreign Relations Uzbekistan is a member of the Commonwealth of Independent States and a supporter of close political and economic ties among its members. It also is a member of the United Nations, the North Atlantic Cooperation Council, and the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE). In early 1994, the U.S. successfully encouraged Uzbekistan to assign a permanent representative to the CSCE in Vienna and to open a human rights dialogue in the CSCE to help improve its performance in this area. Uzbekistan supports regional and international efforts to resolve the conflict in Tajikistan. It has agreed to participate in a peace-keeping force. Economic Outlook Uzbekistan is committed to a gradual transition to a market economy in order to avoid social disruption. In November 1993, after Russia expelled it from the ruble zone, Uzbekistan issued the "som" coupon as an interim currency until conversion to a permanent currency later in 1994. Monetary financing of a government deficit resulting from continued subsidies of energy products, basic consumer goods, and state firms has fueled high rates of inflation. Uzbekistan is the most populous of the Central Asian states and Uzbeks are the third-largest ethnic group in the former Soviet Union after Russians and Ukrainians. It is the world's fourth-largest producer of cotton and has developed a chemical industry based on the by-products of cotton processing. Its economy has suffered from an over-dependence on cotton production and from the effects of severe environmental damage near the Aral Sea. Uzbekistan produces significant amounts of natural gas and is expanding its oil and gas sector. It also is an important region for raising cattle, sheep, and silkworms and has large reserves of gold, copper, lead, zinc, and tungsten. A significant uranium producer in the NIS, Uzbekistan suspended exports to the U.S. in 1992 in the face of a dumping suit brought by U.S. uranium companies. It may be allowed limited uranium exports in the future. Uzbekistan depends on nearby states for virtually all industrial and some food products. With its rich and diverse natural resource base, the Government of Uzbekistan has high hopes for foreign investment and joint ventures. The government has announced a number of reform measures to attract foreign investment but continues to control international trade through strict regulation of import and export licensing. Although the government maintains control of the majority of large enterprises in key sectors of its economy, it has begun to promote privatization. A privatization committee established in October 1992 has made progress in privatizing small businesses in the retail, services, and light industry sectors. Privatization also has continued apace in the real estate sector, with nearly all single- family housing now in private hands. In early 1994, the Uzbekistan Government successfully concluded the first two in a series of privatization auctions designed to transfer state corporations to the private sector. Uzbekistan is a member of the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. The Government of Uzbekistan became a signatory to the Convention on Settlement of Investment Disputes Between States and Nationals of Other States in March 1994. In 1992, it joined the Economic Cooperation Organization--an Islamic economic bloc which includes six Islamic states of the former U.S.S.R. and Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan, and Turkey. Environmental Issues Uzbekistan has participated in conferences on regional environmental issues and has proposed the creation of a Central Asian organization to resolve environmental problems of the Aral Sea. It has established the Fund for Ecology and Health of Uzbekistan, which is designed to increase public consciousness and understanding of environmental problems, a Ministry of Energy and Electricity, and a Ministry of Minerals and Water Resources. On April 20, 1994, the Government of Uzbekistan signed a memorandum of understanding with the U.S. for a USAID-sponsored Aral Sea project covering potable water and environmental education. The country suffers serious environmental problems as a result of its cotton monoculture, which caused agri-chemical pollution, and it is actively seeking additional international assistance to address this issue. Principal Government Officials President: Islam Karimov Prime Minister: Abdulhashim Mutalov Foreign Minister: Saidmukhtar Saidkasimov (###) Uzbekistan at a Glance Located in the heart of Central Asia between the Amu Darya and Syr Darya Rivers, Uzbekistan long has been a center of Muslim culture. Conquered by Muslim Arabs in the 7th century AD, its territory was overrun by the Mongols in 1220. In later centuries, separate Muslim city-states with strong ties to Persia emerged. Russian trade with Uzbekistan grew during the 16th and 17th centuries, and in 1865, Russia occupied Tashkent. By the end of the 19th century, all the territory that constitutes the present Central Asian republics had been brought under Russian rule. Rivalry between Russia and Britain was contained by having Afghanistan as an independent buffer state and by agreeing that East Turkestan was under Chinese control. The Russians destroyed the Khanate of Kokand, but left the Khanates of Khiva and Bukhara under native emirs as protectorates. Russia placed the rest of Central Asia under colonial administration, invested modestly in development of infrastructure, promoted cotton growing, and encouraged settlement of Russian colonists. In 1924, following the establishment of Soviet power, the Soviet Socialist Republic of Uzbekistan was founded from the territories of the Khanates of Bukhara and Khiva and portions of the Fergana Valley that had constituted the Khanate of Kokand until the Russian conquest in 1867, when they were included in the Governorate-General of Turkestan. The Uzbek nationality was consolidated out of the core Muslim Turkic urban and settled agricultural population that had previously been called "Turkestani" or "Sart." Uzbekistan declared its independence on August 31, 1991. According to 1992 estimates, the population of Uzbekistan is 21.5 million. Its territory is 477,000 square kilometers. (###) ARTICLE 5: Fact Sheet: Georgia U.S.-Georgia Relations The dissolution of the Soviet Union in December 1991 brought an end to the Cold War and created the opportunity to build bilateral relations with the New Independent States (NIS) as they began a political and economic transformation. The U.S. recognized the independence of Georgia on December 25, 1991, and opened an embassy in the capital, Tbilisi, in April 1992. The U.S. Ambassador to Georgia is Kent N. Brown, who assumed the post on August 14, 1992. In January 1992, the U.S. initiated the Coordinating Conference on Assistance to the New Independent States in response to the humanitarian emergencies facing these states. The resulting Operation Provide Hope provided desperately needed food, fuel, medicine, and shelter. The cornerstone of the continuing U.S. partnership with Georgia and the other NIS is the Freedom for Russia and Emerging Eurasian Democracies and Open Markets (FREEDOM) Support Act, enacted in October 1992, which directly addresses their military, political, and economic transformation. On September 30, 1993, a new $2.45-billion assistance package for the NIS, funded with a combination of fiscal year (FY) 1994 and 1993 supplemental appropriations, was passed by Congress and signed into law by President Clinton. It will continue to address political and economic transformation and humanitarian needs. Through December 1993, the U.S. has provided about $268 million in humanitarian assistance and $11 million in technical assistance to Georgia. The focus of U.S. assistance is provision of humanitarian assistance and support for Georgia's transition to democracy and to a market economy. Humanitarian Assistance. The U.S. began planning an emergency winter assistance program for Georgia in spring 1993. Following Chairman Shevardnadze's appeal to leaders of the Group of Seven industrialized nations in July 1993, additional assistance was programmed to meet the needs of displaced persons fleeing the fighting in Abkhazia. In response to these emergencies, the U.S.: -- Dispatched 19 emergency flights to Tbilisi from October to December 1993, delivering more than $10 million in food, medicines, and medical supplies; -- Dispatched a team of experts to Tbilisi in December 1993 to address the public health problems resulting from the failing water and sewer systems; -- Dispatched a team of energy experts to Tbilisi in December 1993 to assist the Government of Georgia in developing a contingency plan for dealing with possible energy shortfalls during the winter; -- Provided $3.2 million for American private voluntary