Embassy of the United States

Q: Hello, this is the “Tochka nad I” program, and today we have a great opportunity to speak with the man who is known as the “Gray Cardinal” of the Orange Revolutions in Ukraine and Georgia. This is the Assistant Secretary for European and Eurasian Affairs, Daniel Fried. Hello Mr. Fried.

A: Thank you, although I don’t think I deserve that title.

Q: The Russian and Ukrainian press gave you that title. I know that Richard Lugar, the head of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, personally acknowledged your contribution in the democratic change in Ukraine. My first very diplomatic question is after your arrival here, could we expect a similar change?

A: Good heavens. First of all I have to say that no one in the United States coordinated the Orange Revolution or the Rose Revolution. I realize that there are some who would like to accuse us of being the hidden hand, but this is nonsense, I’m sorry.

I’m proud that the United States stands for freedom. And of course in the 1980s we were accused of being the masters of Solidarity in Poland. We weren’t –

Q: - but you were Ambassador to Poland.

A: That was many years afterwards.

Q: Oh, I’m sorry.

A: That’s alright. In the end it is the people of those countries, the people of Ukraine, the people of Georgia, the people of Poland, who need to decide their own fate, not us, not any other country, but those people. To answer the second part of your question, is there some kind of revolution awaiting Kazakhstan. I hope to see free elections in Kazakhstan, because I think that stability is derived from legitimacy, and that comes from democracy.

Kazakhstan has achieved a great deal in its 14 years of independence. You have statehood. You have secure borders. Kazakhstan has implemented many of the critical reforms necessary to start very rapid, productive economic growth. And of course, the income from natural gas and oil gives the country resources. And so the future can be very bright for Kazakhstan. And the leadership of the country can bring Kazakhstan to a level of prosperity, democracy, and clean transparent government that its people deserve. This is what the United States hopes for Kazakhstan and all the countries of Central Asia. We hope for stability and progress through democracy. Because this will help the people.

Q: Mr. Fried, very shortly before your arrival, the Hollywood film star Jean Claude Van Damme came here and very openly supported the current president Nursultan Nazarbayev. Did you come here for the same purpose?

A: We don’t support candidates in electoral campaigns. But I won’t hide that I respect many of the achievements President Nazarbayev has to his credit. He has led his country from its first days of independence, he has managed to take Kazakhstan to a moment of great opportunity and great progress. He has guarded and advanced Kazakhstan’s sovereignty. He has good relations with the United States, and he seems to have good relations with Russia. These are both important achievements. Now, as is my habit when visiting any country, I will meet with government leaders and members of the opposition and civil society. It’s not a secret, it’s normal practice. And of course, the Kazakhstan ambassador in Washington meets with the American opposition, that’s his job, and he’s good at it.

Q: Your meetings with the opposition and the administration, are these get-acquainted meetings, or is it like during the Soviet era, when customers could record their complaints in “complaint books?”

A: I don’t think much of the Soviet legacy anyway. I asked about the future of Kazakhstan. What I’m interested in, is the programs of people who say they want to lead Kazakhstan in the future. We talked about the future of the country. But the United States does not pick favorites. We go through elections ourselves, they are very exciting things, but the key is democracy. Because a democratically elected leader has a mandate.

Q: Nevertheless, if you analyze political and economic programs, both of the opposition and the current authorities, maybe you can compare them and say who’s more prepared for the longer term development and changes.

A: You can’t possibly get me to fall into the trap of endorsing one or the other candidate. That’s none of our business.

Q: OK, let’s switch topics. Your itinerary is taking you through Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzia and Kazakhstan. What can you say about what happened in Kyrgyzstan, was that a democratic change, or would you characterize it in a different way?

A: That was a very difficult moment that Kyrgyzstan went through. No one, including my government, thinks that disorder is the preferred way to change a government.

Q: Let me just break in here. George Bush said these events were an inspiration to the people of Central Asia.

A: That’s quite true and when a people has no choice, when the political system fails to provide them with democratic choices, such things happen. I’m proud that the United States stands for freedom. But I certainly would be happier to stand for freedom through orderly, free elections, such as the sort I hope we can witness here in Kazakhstan in December.

Q: So, such “Kyrgyzian” events are not possible for Kazakhstan?

A: How should I know? I’m neither a citizen of Kyrgyzia, nor of Kazakhstan. I think it’s a mistake to simply assume that events in one country automatically transfer to another. The only thing that I see that Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan have in common in this context is that people do demand freedom, and they do demand democracy, and they do demand clean government. And wise leaders support democracy and clean government themselves; they lead these movements, rather than follow them.

Q: About your visit to Uzbekistan. Were you satisfied with the outcome of the Andijan investigation carried out by the Uzbekistan authorities? That’s the first question. Secondly, did you manage to change anything about the removal of the military bases of the anti-terrorist coalition?

A: Well, the United States wants to have good relations with all the countries of Central Asia. And I should say that we appreciate our good relations and cooperation with Kazakhstan. The Government of Kazakhstan is a good, strong, and reliable partner in the war on terrorism. We are grateful to the government and to President Nazarbayev for his support. In the case of Uzbekistan, we have also had cooperation in this area. But our relations need to be broader than just anti-terrorism cooperation. Relations need to include cooperation on behalf of economic reform and on behalf of democracy. And as is known, we have had our differences with the Government of Uzbekistan on those issues. The Government of Uzbekistan asked us to leave the base at Karshi-Khanabad. We respect the sovereign decision of that government and we will leave. We hope that the Government of Uzbekistan will work with us on all the areas that have to underscore our relations. But I won’t hide that we are disappointed with the results so far.

Q: Getting back to Kazakhstan. In one of your public appearances you said that one of your main goals is the broadening of Europe. What do you think of Kazakhstan’s beautiful dream of getting the chairmanship of the OSCE in 2009?

A: Well, we certainly welcome Kazakhstan’s interest in the OSCE and we and other members of the OSCE will look at this question, particularly after the elections here. One of the reasons we welcome Kazakhstan’s support for the OSCE is that the OSCE is an organization that has as its mission the support of free elections and democracy throughout its area. So the support of Kazakhstan for the OSCE is a very good sign of Kazakhstan’s intentions. I expect that after the elections we will work on this issue fairly quickly.

Q: Here’s a question about U.S. policy in a global aspect in the Central Asian region. Today more and more often we hear about a chilling of relations between countries in Central Asia and the U.S. For example, many public opinion polls say among the population of Kazakhstan anti-American attitudes are increasing. In the summer during a meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization Russia and China and four other Central Asian countries called for the removal of the American military presence from this region. What’s your take on this? Is there a chill in relations?

A: No, I don’t think so. I’ve already spoken of the difficulty of our relations with Uzbekistan. In Bishkek I noticed nothing like that. I’m looking forward to my meetings tomorrow in Astana. We appreciate the friendship and cooperation of Kazakhstan and the Government of Kazakhstan.

With respect to the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, well, that organization said that the operation in Afghanistan was complete, so there was no need for the base, but of course some of those same governments have criticized what they claim is a lack of progress in Afghanistan, and they can’t have it both ways. The facts are that there is progress in Afghanistan, but no, the struggle against the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan has not ended. Certainly this is a struggle in which the countries of Central Asia have a very large stake. It is in their interest and our interest, it is in our common interest, that Al Qaeda be eradicated in Afghanistan.

Q: The former Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott back in 1997 gave a speech about the intentions of the U.S. to build the necessary institutes and mindsets here, which he said would require a lot of time and patience. Back in those days, the influence and authority of the U.S. were very strong. But now the U.S. is losing its political dividends, and its influence here seems to be cooling, and that of Russia and China is increasing. What do you think about this?

A: I disagree with that completely. First of all, we are not in a competition with Russia and China. We do not look at the countries of Central Asia as objects in some larger great game. We want the countries of Central Asia to be successful, strong, prospering, and therefore stable and secure. That is not sentiment, that is our interest, because if the countries of Central Asia succeed, then neither extremism, nor narcotics trafficking will grow. There may be some who would not like to see this, to see the countries of Central Asia achieve genuine sovereignty, but we do.

Q: Henry Kissinger at the beginning of the summer in a speech in India said a new Great Game is returning to the Central Asian region. Let me just explain to our viewing audience, 100 years ago there was a struggle between Russia and Great Britain for influence over this region. Today they say that the United States has replaced Great Britain in the game, as well as transnational oil companies, who are pursuing their interests. On the other side there are China and Russia, who have lost influence since September 11, 2001. So, the Great Game re-started with that statement by the SCO, calling for the removal of the U.S. military presence, that’s their trump card. Do you agree with Henry Kissinger, that a new game has begun?

A: We are not trying to increase our influence at the expense of Russia or China. Now, let’s be realistic. Russia has enormous interests in this region, it has enormous ties, there are millions and millions of ethnic Russians who live here. If I’m not mistaken, you may be an ethnic Russian. It is natural, therefore, that Russia will have a special relationship with these countries. It is also true that the United States and Russia have many interests in common in this region. That is, we both oppose terrorism, we both oppose the transit of illegal narcotics. Of course the United States wants to be friends with the countries in this region. But we do not ask these countries to be friends with us, and not with Russia, that would be absurd. All we ask is that these countries advance their own interests by way of reforms and cooperation with all outside countries. We don’t believe in Great Games, we don’t believe in spheres of interests. We do believe in democracy and economic development. And that’s what we support.

Q: Nevertheless, these indefatigable analysts continue to analyze, and say that the new team of Condoleezza Rice includes certain Cold War specialists, like Robert Zoellick, Nicholas Burns, Robert Joseph, and now you, a man who left his non-public job in the National Security Council and took a public job with the Department of State, and joined that core staff of the Cold War team.

A: I do want to comment on your remark about the team that Secretary Rice has assembled. And you are right, many of us have something in common, I’m thinking of Bob Zoellick, and Nick Burns, I would also mention Chris Hill, my counterpart for Asia, and myself. We all have in common that we saw freedom grow and flourish, starting in 1989. We saw an end to authoritarianism and the birth of new nations in freedom. And we all do believe in freedom very deeply. If you read Secretary Rice’s speeches, you will see this very clearly. You don’t have to read, as in Soviet times, between the lines, you can read the lines themselves.

Q: Speaking of Condoleezza Rice, is it true that she manages all of George Bush’s affairs? I’ll explain. Do you remember when Reuters published a report not long ago, that George Bush asked her for permission to use the bathroom?

A: Well, I will say, it is a pleasure to work for Condoleezza Rice, a colleague of many years standing. It is also a pleasure to work for a Secretary of State who has the complete trust of the president.

Q: Right after our conversation, you’re heading to Astana, where you’ll have a meeting with Nursultan Nazarbayev. What can you tell us about that?

A: Well, I can’t say, because that conversation hasn’t happened yet. I’m going to talk to him about some of the issues we’ve discussed, such as free elections. I’m going to listen very carefully to his views. I certainly want to express the appreciation of my government for all the cooperation from Kazakhstan on the war on terror. And I expect that we will talk about the future of Kazakhstan as it develops, and about the future of this region. I respect his leadership, and I respect the accomplishments he has as president. I’m looking forward to my meeting with him.

Q: Well, welcome to Kazakhstan, and thank you for such a substantive conversation.

A: Thank you very much. This is a beautiful, beautiful country with a great future, thank you for your time.