Transcripts
Press Conference with Ambassador Ordway
Kazakhstani Press Club
Almaty, Kazakhstan
May 22, 2007
Question: Your press conference today remarkably coincides with President Nazarbayev signing constitutional amendments which allow him technically to stay in office for life, which has already drawn much criticism from Kazakhstan’s opposition. What’s your sort of view about this latest decision?
Ambassador Ordway: I think the overall packet of amendments that was adopted by the parliament is in general a good step forward for democracy in Kazakhstan. I don’t think it would be appropriate for me to comment on any of the specific components or parts of that package other than to say that in general we think it is a very good movement forward and corresponds to some of the things that we have been urging Kazakhstan to do for some time.
With regard to the issue of the limitation on the number of terms for the president, I do have a couple of procedural comments.
The first is that, in contrast to the other elements of the package which had considerable discussion in the State Commission on Democratization and were the subject of a lot of discussion within the country, this particular proposal was added at the very last minute with no discussion whatsoever.
The second is, your very question demonstrates one of the problems with this amendment, that this tends to distract attention from the overall positive forward movement in the package of the amendments to this one particular element. But I really can’t comment on the substance of the amendment, particularly given the text of the 22nd Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Question: What can you tell us about the fourth Kazakhstani still detained at the Guantanamo facility. Will the United State pay compensation if it turns out he iolated no laws and was detained without cause?
Ambassador Ordway: With regard to the issue of compensation, we do not pay compensation for any of the enemy combatants who were in the Guantanamo facility.
With regard to the Kazakhstani citizen who is still there, as was the case before, I can’t provide any details other than to say that we have been and will continue to be in discussion with the government of Kazakhstan about any possible release or return of their citizens.
There are many of these people, the reason they are released is because we do not have any particular charges. They were enemy combatants who were found in Afghanistan in circumstances that they were fighting with or participating with forces that were fighting U.S. forces and therefore were captured as enemy combatants. There was then a process to determine whether they represented any future threat. If not, as was the case with the three who were released, they are then released.
We also had a very extensive process to determine when there was no longer any reason to hold those people because they represented no further threat. That is exactly what happened with the three who were released and returned to Kazakhstan. They were no further threat.
Question: To follow on the questions of my colleague from Reuters, my question is this. If Nazarbayev approves these amendments including the one that lifts the term limits, how will that impact the U.S. position on Kazakhstan’s application for the OSCE chairmanship? Is this something that Kazakhstan can forget about, or if Nazarbayev decides against it then the United States government is willing to support his application because of the positive steps that have been taken?
Ambassador Ordway: I think this does represent on the whole, as I said, a positive step forward. But the decision is still to be taken at the end of the year and our position will be determined by a number of factors. This is one important factor, but it’s not the only factor.
Among the other factors are there is the proposed amendments to the electoral legislation which also correspond to a request that we and other OSCE members have made. The draft law on the media is also I think another important indicator that we’re watching very carefully to see how that turns out in parliament.
I have no inside information as to whether there will or will not be early parliamentary elections, but if there were to be early parliamentary elections, how those elections were conducted would be obviously a very important factor.
Question: If Nazarbayev decides that he approves these amendments, and given that there have never been free and fair elections, that in fact probably he would be president for life. Wouldn’t that give a very strong negative mark against the application for OSCE chair?
Ambassador Ordway: I think what you’re trying to do is get me to comment on the substance of the amendment, that particular aspect of the amendment, which I won’t do.
Question: Where did the $84 million in the Bota Foundation come from? Why will it be kept under foreign control?
Ambassador Ordway: First of all, I don’t think it’s going to be under foreign control. The majority of the board of directors will be Kazakhstani citizens of the Bota Foundation.
There are two positions as to the nature of this particular amount of money. The position of the Kazakhstani government is that these are funds which are held in the Kazakhstani treasury account and are the property of the government of Kazakhstan.
The position of the United States is, the ultimate source of this money is corrupt transactions involved in the case which the U.S. government is pursuing against Mr. Giffen.
We disagree on the nature of the money, but in order to avoid further disputes we both agree that the money should be used for the benefit of the people of Kazakhstan, and that is exactly what the Bota Foundation will do, is to spend the money for the benefit of the people of Kazakhstan and particular for poor children in Kazakhstan. And it includes a number of measures to ensure that the money will be spent in an appropriate manner with full accountability and full transparency.
Question: Who will be the next ambassador to the United States? Has agremen already begun and if so, in whose name?
Ambassador Ordway: As far as I know, we’ve not received any request for agreement and normally those processes are confidential and it’s up to the government of Kazakhstan to make such an announcement. But I personally know absolutely nothing about any of it.
Question: What is the opinion of the United States about the agreement reached between Kazakhstan and Russia, taking into account President Nazarbayev's statement about Kazakhstan's readiness to transport gas via Russia?
Ambassador Ordway: First of all it’s actually, I think, involves another country called Turkmenistan, not just Kazakhstan and Russia. I believe it also concerns primarily gas from Turkmenistan, not Kazakhstani gas.
We believe that it’s very important that there be a diversity of supplies and diversity of transport routes for Central Asian hydrocarbon resources to get to markets. This includes through Russia. In fact, one of the major things we would like to see happen as quickly as possible is to expand the capacity of the Caspian Pipeline Consortium which does send oil through Russia.
We think that the prospect of diversification of transport will improve the situation for both Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan, as well as create a more reliable relationship with consumers in Western Europe.
Finally, I think there is still a lot to be discussed and negotiated about where and how Kazakhstani oil and gas gets to the world markets. If you take into account the volumes of oil in particular that Kazakhstan is going to be producing in the next decade, it is very difficult to imagine how any one route could accommodate the volumes that are projected from Kazakhstan. One example is that there is an existing pipeline to China which is already providing oil to China and for which there are plans to extend and expand that. Not to mention the fact that Kazakhstan is well advanced in negotiations to send oil through Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan and is undertaking significant infrastructure investments to support that particular [inaudible].
Question: Going back to the question on constitutional amendments, I was wondering whether I could ask you a more general question. Does the United States government share the opinion which seems to be shared by most people in the Kazakh government that President Nazarbayev’s prolonged rule will bring more stability to the country and particularly continuity in its investment policy, especially with regard to oil contracts?
Ambassador Ordway: I think you have to jump through several hypothetical hoops to get there. I think that’s a very speculative question to go from amendments that change term limits to a supposition that President Nazarbayev becomes president for life. I think there are many steps still, and many years still to come before we even know whether he is going to be a candidate for a future term. So I think at this point this is highly hypothetical.
Question: You don’t think the fact that he signed the amendments last night means that he intends to --
Ambassador Ordway: You should perhaps ask him. I think in the past he’s expressed his views on this, but I think if his views have changed then perhaps you should ask him and let him say it. I’m not his spokesman.
Question: How about [inaudible]? [Inaudible] Secretary to the Chairman of [inaudible]. [Inaudible]. The U.S. [inaudible]. In this regard I would like to refer your attention to the so-called international technical [inaudible]. [Inaudible]. As I know [inaudible] Securities and Exchange Commission program, [inaudible] economy [inaudible] actually [inaudible]. [Inaudible].
Question: I can translate in Russian.
Ambassador Ordway: Please.
I’m afraid I’m really not familiar with that particular subject so I’ll have to look into it and get back to you.
Question: What are the priorities for bilateral cooperation between the United States and Kazakhstan?
Ambassador Ordway: I think that if you look at the joint statement that was issued when President Nazarbayev visited the White House on September 29th, you will see a very clear outline of exactly all the areas where we intend to cooperate. I can mention some of them, but the document is really the authoritative basis and the fact that I forget something shouldn’t indicate that it’s not important.
But it includes further cooperation in the area of economic reform, economic diversification, and investment. It includes energy and energy transportation. It’s democratization, development of civil society. Law enforcement cooperation and the struggle against narco-trafficking. It includes cooperation in the military area between our two military establishments. And continuing our cooperation against terrorism. There are others, but it’s really very well written and very detailed about exactly what we think of the priorities.
Question: More and more problems are occurring at the Manas air base in Kyrgyzstan. Will the U.S. close this base? What purpose does it serve?
Ambassador Ordway: No. I think the base at Manas has a very specific function that it carries out and it is there to support the operation of U.S. and other coalition forces in Afghanistan. That particular operation is continuing. It, as you know from reading the press, there are serious challenges from the Taliban and al-Qaeda that have continued on in Afghanistan. At this point it’s not possible for us to see when the need for that base might go away because we still do not see when the need for continuing ongoing military operations in Afghanistan will end.
I think that for all the countries of Central Asia there are clear advantages to having a democratic, stable, secure government in Afghanistan rather than a return to the Taliban, and a period in which there was free reign for terrorists including Central Asian terrorists to operate out of Afghanistan. So we’re very grateful for the opportunity that we have in Kyrgyzstan to operate this base which we think is not only in our interest but in the interest of Kyrgyzstan and all the countries of Central Asia.
Question: Following up question on the amendment giving the current president unlimited terms in office. Doesn't the desire to rule forever cancel all the talk about democracy?
Ambassador Ordway: I think the questions illustrate the problem that I mentioned, which is that this one element, which has no immediate bearing for at least the next five years on the course of events in Kazakhstan, has overwhelmed the attention on what are, I think clearly, without any dispute, generally positive movements forward. I think the main task for those of us who want to support democracy and development of civil society in Kazakhstan and for Kazakhstan itself is to focus on exactly how it was going to carry out these political reforms.
Whether this particular amendment will have any affect at all is really an issue which is hypothetical and in the future. There are many more steps to be taken, not just this amendment, before you have a situation where you can say that President Nazarbayev will continue in office after 2012. That at this point is an open question.
Question: Do you have any new information about when the Kazakhgate trial against Giffen will start?
Ambassador Ordway: No, it’s the same answer I’ve given since my very first press conference which is I don’t have any information and I don’t know when the trial will start. You’ll probably know it before I do.
Nobody sent me an invitation. I’m sorry, maybe I’m not understanding. Are you talking about the trial of Mr. Giffen in New York? That’s completely in the hands of the court and the prosecutors. They don’t talk to me.
Question: I have a theoretical question this time. [Laughter]. Just sort of imagining the kind of international uproar [inaudible] by say [inaudible] parliament giving the same rights to President Putin, those in the media and Western governments as well all seem to have [inaudible].
Ambassador Ordway: You say the queen being given a lifetime term?
Question: Or say a prime minister, for example, gets the right to rule indefinitely.
Ambassador Ordway: But he does have the right to rule indefinitely.
Question: All right, well in that case let’s talk about the example with Putin. Why do you think Western governments have viewed a slightly softer stance towards Kazakhstan? Is it because generally the process that was mentioned is [inaudible] than it does in Russia, for example? Is there another reason for that?
Ambassador Ordway: I think you’re putting two different horses on two different carts here. In Russia, President Putin has made very clear what his position is and there has been no change in that and the constitutional amendment process in Russia is far more complicated and time consuming than it is in Kazakhstan. As far as I know, we certainly haven’t raised in any public way any concerns about the situation in Russia or even the proposals that were made to extend the term. Maybe we have, I just don’t remember any public comment from a U.S. spokesman about that issue.
In the case of Kazakhstan, as I said, this came up with no public discussion which I think is probably not the best way to go about taking such a decision. Ultimately it’s for Kazakhstan to determine exactly what if any term limits. As our little repartee showed, or an examination of U.S. history shows, there have been very many different approaches to this issue in different countries at different times. There is no textbook answer as to exactly what the democratic approach is.
Question: Given U.S. history and the United States has these limits, the two term limit for presidents, what is your view on this as such? Is it more beneficial to have only two terms rather than four or five or more?
Ambassador Ordway: There are a number of different approaches and there are some very democratic countries including many of the countries in Western Europe, Canada and others where there is no limitation on the length of term a head of government can serve.
I think it’s a decision for each country to make in light of its own circumstances, and what that means in terms of the development or preservation of its own democratic principles.
We’ve had, in the United States, had different approaches to this at different ties in our history.
Question: I’m terribly sorry, but as far as I understand this applies only to Nazarbayev. All subsequent presidents can only run for two terms.
Ambassador Ordway: That’s exactly what the 22nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution says, too.
Question: What is your opinion about the prospects for creating a national political party, along the lines of what was suggested by parliamentarian Mukhtar Shakhanov?
Ambassador Ordway: I think that’s really something for the Constitutional Council and the parliament to look at rather than me.
Question: You mentioned there is no accepted term limit [inaudible]. [Inaudible]? [Inaudible] that situation concerning [inaudible] freedom costs. Do you think it would affect their contributions?
Ambassador Ordway: You’ll have to ask Freedom House. I think they look at the totality of the situation using their own methodology and come to their conclusion which I don’t know what it will say about the issue.
I don’t want to get involved into a detailed debate on the pluses or minuses of any one particular aspect of the package of amendments. I think as I said, as a whole it represents a very positive step forward and an actual culmination of a process that involved a lot of discussion over a number of years, different bodies including the Democratization Commission.
History doesn’t end with this particular set of amendments. I suspect based on your question that there will continue to be debate and discussion and potentially even changes if it’s appropriate.
Question: Gist - can you at least say that a standard of democracy is free and fair elections?
Ambassador Ordway: I think that periodic elections that are conducted in accordance with international standards are one of the most fundamental elements of any democratic society.