#3 - JRL 8038
US Department of State
Opening Remarks At the Civil Society Event
Secretary Colin L. Powell; Ambassador Alexander Vershbow
Spaso House
Moscow, Russia
January 27, 2004
AMBASSADOR VERSHBOW: Good morning, everybody. It’s a great privilege and pleasure to have the opportunity to introduce Secretary of State Colin Powell. As the Secretary is very well known and admired worldwide, I’m not going to recount to the details of his career and his lifetime of accomplishments. But I would like to explain briefly why I’m so glad that all of you are here to meet with him today. For generations U.S.-Russian relations ranged from cool to cold and were conducted almost entirely in official channels. While high-level meetings remain important, the further development of our relationship depends on building broader ties not only between institutions, but between the people of our two countries. Each of you can contribute and are contributing to these ties and I hope that today’s meeting inspires you to do even more in the future. In addition, I know that all of you are strongly committed to Russia’s continued transition to democracy and to the strengthening of civil society here. Your work in these areas is vital if Russia and U.S.-Russian relations are to achieve their enormous potential. So today’s event is an opportunity for us to demonstrate our admiration for your work in building a strong, democratic Russia and for you to share your hopes and concerns for the future. And I hope you will do that very candidly with the Secretary. So now, please join me in warmly welcoming Secretary of State Colin Powell to Spaso House. Mr. Secretary.
SECRETARY POWELL: Well, thank you very much, Mr. Ambassador. And good morning, ladies and gentlemen. It’s a very great pleasure for me to be back in Spaso House and to be back in this room. I’ve been in this room many times over the last thirty years. I’ve been in this room as a young Army officer, as a lieutenant colonel, I’ve been in this room as a National Security Advisor to President Reagan, I’ve been in this room as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the Armed Forces of the United States, and now I’m here today as Secretary of State. And over that long thirty year period, I have seen many changes, not only in Spaso House itself it’s quite beautiful today but also in U.S.- Soviet, and now U.S.-Russian relations.
I remember I used to come here in the late 80’s with Secretary of State George Schultz when I was National Security Advisor to President Reagan and we would almost sneak people in, dissidents and those who were speaking out against the Union at that time. And they took risks to be here because there wasn’t a vibrant civil society at that time. People who were speaking out on the edges of society in the darkness. And it’s amazing now to come to Moscow and to come to Spaso House and be able to speak to people who are now in the center in of society, at the heart of society, because what you do and the many organizations that you represent will determine the future of Russian democracy and Russian society. Because a vibrant civil society that is dealing with the issues of the day, dealing with issues of education and young people, reaching out to those members of society who do not feel they are an essential part of society yet, it is so vital for the vibrancy, for the life of a democracy. Before I came back into government service as Secretary of State and after I left the Army, I became part of what is called Civil Society. I started a foundation that helped young people in America. Because despite all the wealth that my country has, despite all the success that we have enjoyed in our democratic journey, there are members of American society who are still waiting to benefit from that society. And so I spent several years of my life working with young people to tell them that they could hope for a better life, that America was there for them, too, and not just for the well to do and the middle class, but for everyone. And I found that such organizations as the one I chaired were important you can’t always rely on the government, you can’t rely just on business, it has to be a partnership between government, between business, and especially between a vibrant civil sector, a civil society, people who are willing to devote their energies to the betterment of their society.
You should be so proud of what you have done and what you are doing. I have to sometimes pinch myself when I come back to Moscow and see all the lights compared to the way it was so many years ago. To see advertising signs everywhere, to think that there is a shopping center under Red Square. I was kidding on the radio a few moments ago, in my hometown back in the United States, in McLean, Virginia, a very nice little community just outside of Washington, the local gas station where I pump my gas is now LukOil. I mean, we have come a long way over the last thirty years. We’ve come a long way because we’ve seen the triumph of the human spirit. We have seen bold leaders come forward who said that here in the Soviet Union, at that time, things must change. And things changed because of what Russian people did, but also because you had people who wanted to help you, nations that wanted to help you, nations that for so many years you thought for so many years were your enemies, especially the United States. In the late 80’s and early 90’s when my principal role was to be a soldier and defend my nation and to make sure that my armed forces were the best, I could begin to work with military leaders in the Soviet Union who also understood that things had to change, and that constant enmity was not the way of the future. Old enemies have become now very good friends.
My conversations yesterday with President Putin and with Minister of Defense Ivanov and Minister of Foreign Affairs Ivanov, we talked about all the areas in which we are cooperating: in trading relations, working together to resolve regional conflicts, working together to help the Indians and the Pakistanis move away from the dangerous situation they were in a year and a half ago, working together to talk to the Iranians about what they are doing with respect to nuclear weapons program, working together to see if we could find a solution to the difficult situation in the Middle East between the Israelis and the Palestinians, working together in so many areas, working together in space, working together to reduce tensions around the world, working together in Georgia, so that we can be seen as cooperating to help Georgia achieve a democratic system. Yes, there are areas where we have had disagreements, such as over Iraq, and yes, we can talk to one another about concerns we have about the direction that Russian democracy has taken from time to time, and the various zigs and zags. But we do this now not as enemies staring across an iron curtain, I do this now not from my military headquarters in Frankfurt where I kept an eye on the Russian 8th Guards Army all that time. But now we do it as friends, where we want to do everything possible to improve that friendship and improve that partnership. And with leaders like President Putin and President Bush who respect one another and who get along well and have a common interest in moving the relationship forward, that relationship will move forward. And when we offer criticism, it is in the spirit of friendship. It is a friend talking to another friend, and when we are criticized, we recognize it is criticism coming from a friend to a friend. And nowhere is it more important for us to have this kind of open, candid dialogue between friends as it is in our discussions with the civil society, the civil sector, the leaders who are here today.
And so, I’m very pleased to be with you this morning, I’m very pleased to have a chance to have a discussion, a conversation with you this morning, to see where we go in the next thirty years together, as friends and partners who have one goal in mind: to find ways to help our people, the people of the United States, the people of Russia, the people of the world to better lives, lives where they will see no more war, where their children will face brighter futures and not conflict. That is our mutual goal and no member of the society is more important than the members who are here today, the organizations that you represent. And I thank you for the leadership role that you play in making Russia firmly democratic, a country that is respected throughout the world, a country that is doing everything it can for its citizens. So, thank you for being here and I look forward to our conversation. Thank you.
AMBASSADOR VERSHBOW: Do we have a microphone for the questions? Here in the front.
QUESTION: I am Ida Kuklina from the Union of the Committees of Soldiers’ Mothers of Russia, I think that’s it. Two of us represent this organization which is working for ten years, and I think in one thing you are mistaken. The army in Russia is the mutilated copy of the Soviet army. In this sense it did not change. And we see the only way to solve this problem, to make it democratic military reform, for this they need the abolishment of involuntary conscription. We think the military reform is a key question of democracy development in Russia. So, my question is: Is the U.S.A. ready to support our strategic goal to make our army really democratic? Maybe you heard about the latest tragedy in our army when about 200 soldiers was frozen during transportation to North Siberia. And one of them was frozen to death. It is continuous, the enormous human rights violation in the Russian armed forces. Thank you. And by the way, let me, let us to present us with one of our edition. Thank you.
SECRETARY POWELL: Of course, thank you. I did hear about the recent tragedy where the soldiers were exposed to very difficult conditions and one died as a result. And I know that the leadership here in Moscow was terribly shocked by that and I know that investigations are underway. For a number of years in my conversations with the Russian military leaders and civilian leaders I have encouraged transformation and we’ve talked about the prospects of a volunteer force, a contract force as opposed to a conscription force. And in my conversations last evening with Minister of Defense Sergey Ivanov, we talked about some of the efforts now underway to shift from a conscript to at least partially a contract-volunteer force. And as you make this shift, and I’m not sure if they will, if the plans will make a complete shift in the near future, but as they make this shift I think additional pressure will be put on the system to treat soldiers with respect and to give them the best working and living conditions possible. Because otherwise people will not volunteer for the military. That has been our experience. So, I regret the recent incident and loss of life, and I know it is something that your government is looking into. To the extent that we can provide advice to the Russian military, we stand ready to, we have a great deal of experience with matters of this nature, particularly matters relating to a volunteer-contract force and we have offered that information to the Russian military.
QUESTION: I am Yelena Panfilova of anti-corruption center, Transparency International Russia. And my question obviously from the area which is of interest for us and for any person trying to get elected or re-elected.
SECRETARY POWELL: Wait a minute. I gotta get the right channel. Sure it’s English?
MS. PANFILOVA: Yes.
SECRETARY POWELL: I can’t hear you because I’m listening to Russian!
(Laughter)
MS. PANFILOVA: Okay, I’m Yelena Panfilova of the center, anti-corruption center, Transparency International, and my question relates to (inaudible) of our work and of the interest of any person who is trying to get elected or re-elected in any country. And my question is about, I would like to ask your comment of the latest initiatives of the American government concerning the prohibiting corrupt officials to visit United States of America. I would like to know your opinion, why it’s happening now, and how American administration is going to determine who is corrupt and who is not corrupt enough to get to America? Thank you.
SECRETARY POWELL: We have put in place a number of new policies with respect to the issuance of visas and who will be permitted to enter the country as a way of protecting our homeland, but also as a way of protecting travelers, people who are on airplanes coming to our homeland. We are also at the same time, as I’ve said a number times over the last two days, trying to do it in a way that does not make us look like a place that does not welcome people. We want people to come to the United States we just want to know who you are and why you’re coming, how long you’re going to stay and when you leave.
So, I think that’s reasonable for us to do to protect our homeland. I think you’re making reference to a recent Executive Order that the President signed that gives the Secretary of State the authority to deny visas if information is presented to me by my Embassy and is substantiated by my staff and others in the American government that a particular person is corrupt. It will be a judgment call. It will have to be a fairly clear case, but it will be a judgment call that I am responsible for making on behalf of the President. And we won’t do it in an irresponsible way. We will make sure it is pretty solid evidence before I would exercise that authority.
What we are really trying to do is send a signal to nations around the world that corruption sucks the life out of a democracy. When you tolerate corruption and when corrupt individuals are allowed to freely travel with the privilege of a visa, when you tolerate that kind of behavior, you are undercutting the rule of law and you are saying to your people there are two kinds of law: one for you and none for corrupt officials. So, I hope that by sending this message with this Executive Order we are helping countries around the world that are fighting corruption to fight corruption, so it is as much a signal about our determination to fight corruption as it is a procedural so to keep the corrupt people from entering the United States for perhaps conducting illegal or corrupt activities that are not to our benefit or to the benefit of the country that they come from.
QUESTION: Mr. Yuriy Vadimovick Samodurov: Thank you, Samodurov Yuriy, Director (inaudible) Center, Evening Andrea Saklarov. Since 1994, Russia has been waging war in Chechnya. Unfortunately, Russia cannot stop this war with its own power. The peace agreement signed by President Yeltsin and President Maskhadov was actually devaluated and is continuing. Many of my colleagues from this room asked both President Bush and other leading nations in the world with a request to take this to mediation in resolving this conflict. And, in fact, the departing party and the conflict there (inaudible). Moreover that the other side, President Maskhadov, many times said that they are ready to solve this conflict with the help of intermediaries. The Ilias Akhmadov’s Plan was recently published and it was discussed very actively in our society. My question is, why disregarding that this conflict is lasting for so long and there are such victims, western countries and the United States, as well, are not showing enough interest to become real mediators in solving this conflict? Thank you.
SECRETARY POWELL: It is very tragic conflict that has been going on for too long a period of time. We have encouraged the Russian government to seek a political solution and over the years that the conflict has been underway, we have continued to encourage political efforts to find a solution. Different plans have come along in recent years that have been considered but have not produced the kind of success we had hoped for. It is an internal matter for Russia. It is part of Chechnya is part of Russia and we have encouraged the Russian government to respect human rights, to make sure that there are no actions taken that are inconsistent with international human rights obligations. And we stand ready, if asked by the parties, to play a more extensive role, but there are limits to what the international community can do other than encourage Russia to try to find a political solution among the parties. Perhaps is not a satisfactory answer, but it is an issue that we discuss with the Russian leadership at every opportunity. I did yesterday with Minister Ivanov in our conversations and hope that a political way forward will be found. We were not satisfied with the election that was held not too long ago. We didn’t think that was a helpful step, or a productive step moving forward, and we will continue to point out the deficiencies we see in Russian behavior in Chechnya as we move forward.
QUESTION: (Inaudible), Political Analyst for Russian Television. My question is as you have noticed there are quite a few people here in Russia (inaudible) the States to be all around helping Russia so there are domestic problems. What is your opinion? Are there domestic problems in Russia relating to probably to civil society issues or whatever you called internal affairs that cannot be solved without the assistance, or should I say the interference, of the United States?
SECRETARY POWELL: I would like you to tell me.
(Laughter)
QUESTION: No, I mean you have been here for five or six times. That is a lot of people, right?
SECRETARY POWELL: Yeah, of two days.
MR. KUTCHER: Well, yeah, focus on people we never get a chance to talk to, right?
SECRETARY POWELL: I've been coming for many years, but to make this useful, we -- I have spoken to Minister Ivanov and to President Putin and I had a column in Izvestiya yesterday that laid out some of the current concerns we have and we presented this to our Russian colleagues, as I said in the spirit of friendship, these concerns we had with respect to free media, with respect to some election practices, making sure that justice administered is transparent and follows the highest legal standards. But in order to take advantage of this opportunity, and to inform me so that I can take your message back to the United States to share with my leaders. I would like to hear you answer the question you raised. What areas would you like to see additional help in?
QUESTION: Well, personally I think international terrorism is quite enough, you know, to be a common problem to address for both Russia and the United States. But ok, I'm quite satisfied with what you just said, thank you.
QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, my name is Svetlana Ramazanova. I come from Dagestan, but now I live in Moscow. I am an alumna of the Teachers of English and American Studies program, which is sponsored by the State Department of the USA. First of all, we alumni are very grateful for everything which is done by means of such programs, but my question is: In connection with the latest events in Iraq, it seems that there is some antipathy towards America in Muslim countries, and I think that such a great country as the United States should address such public moods. And my question is, is anything being planned or is anything being done just to…I don’t know…to address such antipathy which takes place?
SECRETARY POWELL: We are working hard to put in place radio and television stations that will broadcast throughout Iraq, both via satellite and terrestrial television, and of course radio stations, to carry our message that we are there in peace, we are there to help them build a democracy, that we are not anti-Muslim, we are not anti-Arab. I think as people in the Arab world and in the Muslim world see that the Iraqi people are building their own society, hundreds of newspapers are opened, civil society is now starting to come alive. Local governments are forming, reconstruction is underway. We're still fighting terrorists and we're still fighting elements of the old regime, but we are slowly but surely transferring responsibility for Iraq's future back to Iraqi hands. I think as more and more people see that, and as we transfer sovereignty back to the Iraqi people next summer, sovereignty to control their own destiny and to run their own country, I think the world will respond, especially the Muslim world will respond in a positive way. And the anti-Americanism we have seen in the Muslim world and, to a lesser extent, in Iraq.
The Iraqi people are glad that Saddam Hussein is gone. They also want us to leave, and we want to leave, but they don't want us to leave until we have helped them build a democracy that will not fall apart after we leave. So, I think we are working hard on getting the right message out. We have just started a Fulbright Scholars program for Iraqi students. We brought the Iraqi National Symphony Orchestra to the United States, so the kind of cultural exchanges, educational exchanges that you are familiar, with we are now starting to conduct with the Iraqis. So, they will have the same positive experience of coming to America and seeing our culture and our society, and how it is a society and a culture of peace and reconciliation.
QUESTION: My name is Anatoliy Yermolin. I will speak in Russian. (In Russian) Mr. Secretary of State, thank you very much for the opportunity of talking to you. Until recently I was the head of one of the largest educational, nongovernmental projects launched by the oil company Yukos Company. It was titled “New Civilization.” Ten years ago I was in charge of the anti-terrorism group in charge of President Yel'tsin's (inaudible). Now I am a deputy in the State Duma.
My question concerns issues of international exchange, educational exchange between the U.S. and Russia. Recently in Washington, a conference on exchange programs was held. And one of the most acute questions debated at the conference was the question of the severe reduction of exchange programs by the Congress of the U.S. Now we have over one hundred people being trained in the U.S. under exchange programs. These teenagers are fully funded by Russian businesses. And now I can be straightforward asking about money. Wouldn't Congress like to return once more to this topic and analyze the need for that drastic reduction of funding of exchange programs with Russia? There are a great number of alumni of such programs in attendance here, and we are aware of the great contribution they are making to the development of democracy and a civil society in Russia.
SECRETARY POWELL: I'll also ask the Ambassador if he may wish to say a word, but I'm a great supporter of these kinds of exchange programs. A number of the programs that we had with Russia began in the '80s and '90s, and Congress is asking questions about whether or not they have matured to the point that perhaps they can be done in other ways, or others can pick up the responsibility. With all of the nations that we now work on exchange program activities, with all of the nations of the former Soviet Union, nations in Latin America that are now democracies, increasingly more and more African nations, there are finite limits on the total amount of money that is available. And so the Congress has been doing some rebalancing. But there are some new programs that I think are going to be starting here in Russia, so we remain committed to the program. I am pleased to hear that Russian business is now picking up the slack. That's as it should be, it seems to me, and so I congratulate you on your determination to do that.
Do you want to add anything?
AMBASSADOR VERSHBOW: Just to second the point about the importance of business and Russian foundations stepping up to this challenge, because it's a mutual interest and I think that we have many different problems in the world, not least Iraq. We continue to have very active exchange programs here, but to the extent that private initiatives are filling the gap, we can only welcome that.
QUESTION: My name is Olga Krylova. I'm an alumna of a Freedom Support Act program for school students, and being in the program I learned how to contribute to community service and how to volunteer. And my question is if you support community service somehow, if you volunteer personally. And this question may seem to be a little off-road, but I think that volunteering and helping community service somehow is a good way to contribute to democracy-building. This is my question; thank you.
SECRETARY POWELL: That's what we call in the United States a softball.
(Laughter)
I could talk about it for a couple of hours, but I am a strong supporter of community service. In the foundation that I ran for several years working with young people, we worked on providing mentors for young people. We worked on giving them education so they would get the skills they needed for the 21st century. We worked on making sure that our poor youngsters had health care. We worked on making sure that they had safe places to play and to study after school, boys' clubs and girls' clubs. But the last part of our program was service. We required the young people to serve their community, whether it was making sandwiches for hungry people or helping old people, working in hospitals, mentoring youngsters younger than them, but finding ways to serve your community. Because we believe strongly, especially for young people, that early in life they should be taught that service to others is part of having a quality life. Moreover, service to others is an obligation of citizenship, not something that you should just do because someone has forced you to do it. You should do it because it is your obligation, it is how you pay back the society that has given you so much. And we believe that that should be put into the minds and hearts and souls of children at the earliest possible age. If it is nothing more than being in an elementary school and picking up the trash in the playground, that is service to your community, to your school.
I don't have as much time to volunteer now as I did before, but when I was out of the military and working on this foundation I adopted a local school and worked at that school providing books, providing facilities, getting the building painted, providing mentors, partnering that school, a poor school in an inner-city neighborhood. I partnered that school with my church, and I told the members of my church in a nice suburban neighborhood, a well-to-do neighborhood, that we have an obligation to go back into the inner city and help these youngsters. And so I created a partnership between my church and the school, and to this day on weekends those youngsters are at my church being mentored. We have provided scholarships for them to go to colleges and to go to good high schools. And we have a mentoring program within the State Department. For example, next week, on the 2nd of February, 150 young people in middle school -- 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 years old -- will be coming to the State Department to spend the day and learn what work is about and what the State Department does. And so on that day, in addition to my other duties, I will be spending time, I will volunteer time to spend with two youngsters who will be with me all day.
QUESTION: My name is Dmitriy Babich, and I am asking this question for the Third Channel of Russian television and Russian Profil' magazine. Mr. State Secretary, two years ago Russia gave passage to American troops to go to Central Asia, and together we did a great job fighting the Taliban regime in Afghanistan. A lot of people in Russia expected that, in return, America would make its policy in the CIS a little pro-Russian, maybe help Russia with WTO accession. Can the United States do something more for Russian interests in the CIS and maybe soften its position on some of the issues which are sensitive for Russia in that area and also in WTO accession?
SECRETARY POWELL: On WTO we fully support Russian membership and fully support Russia as it goes through the accession process. We discussed this yesterday during my meetings and with business leaders this morning. It is Russia that has to earn accession to the WTO, and we have indicated we would help with the writing of regulations, or helping Russia deal with the specific issues that have to be dealt with as you move toward WTO accession. So, we will help in every way we can as Russia earns WTO accession and meets all the standards for accession.
With respect to the CIS and Central Asia, we did cooperate well more than two years ago in dealing with the threat of the Taliban and al-Qaida and terrorists in Afghanistan. Many people at that time said, "This is a bad idea. We now have Americans in the old parts of the Soviet Union, and how terrible it is that American presence, some American personnel, are located in these countries." But our presence is not that large. Moreover, why are we there? Are we there to threaten Russia? Are we pointing a dagger in the soft underbelly of Russia? Of course not!
What we are doing is working together against terrorism, against drug smuggling, against illegal smuggling of individuals, against trafficking of persons across those borders. And so, I believe that we are helping Russia, but we are also helping the former states of the Soviet Union, those Central Asian states that are now free and independent. We're helping them as they move down their democratic path. And so it is not necessarily an area where we have to compete, it's an area where we have cooperated and can cooperate. And so, we support Russia and its relations with its other CIS partners. We also look to having good relations with those CIS partners ourselves, and I think we have succeeded. When I think back two years ago, when we first had to move into Afghanistan, or when I first became Secretary of State some months before that, I was being immediately accused by certain officials of having bad feelings toward Russia, or intending to threaten Russia by what we were doing with Central Asia. But now we can talk about Central Asia in an open, direct way as we work together to solve mutual threats against our interests: terrorism, smuggling, and the other things I mentioned. People should stop viewing it in the old context of the Cold War, because that's gone.
QUESTION: My name is Yuriy Dzhibladze, I'm president of the Center for Development of Democracy and Human Rights. We would like you to take the following message to Washington: We are very concerned about the democratic backslide in Russia and the acceleration of authoritarian tendencies, starting with the war in Chechnya and continuing with the stifling of independent media, establishing control of the parliament, widespread abuse of the law by the law enforcement agencies, and now the attack on the business community with politically motivated and selective application of the law in the case of Yukos and Mikhail Khodorkovskiy.
We know that the state of democracy in Russia was high on your agenda in the talks with the Russian leadership, and I have two questions. What did President Putin have to say in this respect and, secondly, what does the United States intend to do to support democracy in Russia, and especially in the situation when funding under the Freedom Support Act for Russia has been cut by 50 percent last year? Thank you. (Applause)
SECRETARY POWELL: I think our record is clear with respect to the support that we have given to creating democratic institutions in Russia. I think it is absolutely clear that we believe that any democratic nation needs a free press, it needs a vibrant press, it needs a press which allows for the clash of ideas to take place. So that people can express their views through the media and so that the media is there to report on political campaigns, and so that politicians competing for office have access to the media. We believe strongly in this.
We believe strongly in the rule of law. We have had our own corporate scandals, and they are pointed out to me with regularity by my Russian colleagues: Enron, Tyco, many others. I've also seen friends of mine, people I know in these companies, being marched into court with their arms behind their backs. They're now going to face justice. And so we believe that the rule of law must trump everything, must be on top of everything, and nobody is above the law. But the law has to be administered in a transparent way, in a way that people can watch it being administered so that there is no question that guilt will be determined, or innocence will be determined, and my message to President Putin was of that character.
President Putin, with respect specifically to the case you made reference to, made it clear that he understands and that we could see as this case unfolded that it would be done with full transparency, in accordance with the rule of law, that nobody was above the law or beneath the law. We will continue to speak out when we believe that things are happening in Russia that are not fully consistent with what we understood to be the commitment that Russia has made toward democracy. That's what I did yesterday, that's what I did in my article in Izvestiya. President Putin and Foreign Minister Ivanov presented their position, their side of the story. We had good, candid discussions, as we say in the diplomatic service. They understood my point of view and the point of view I was representing on behalf of the American people, and they responded and I will take their response back. This is how two great nations, which are partners and friends, speak to one another. I think the message was delivered clearly and I think it was understood.
I think the Ambassador wants to say something about the Freedom Support Act.
AMBASSADOR VERSHBOW: I'll just say very briefly that it was not cut by fifty percent and while the administration did, given other priorities, have to reduce its request to Congress, the Congress, as always showing its wisdom, reinstated some of those cuts. So, as the Ambassador here, I can only be happy that we have more Freedom Support Act funds than we expected for this coming year. One last question, very brief.
QUESTION: Thank you. Kamila, Freedom Support Act exchange program alumna, the American Councils for International Education. And my questions is concerning the International Criminal Court that was established in 1998 and the Rome Statute of this Court. As we know that the main problems of the modern society are the problems of human rights violations, and especially the war crimes, genocide and terrorism we were speaking about. What is the U.S. position towards the International Criminal Court and its jurisdiction over those crimes described? Thank you.
SECRETARY POWELL: I know that many nations in the world have signed up to and ratified their commitment to the International Criminal Court. The United States has a different view of it. And President Clinton had signed it, but put a condition on it that suggested he would not be sending it to our Congress for ratification. Long before the Rome Statute of 1998, when I was Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the United States military, and this issue was starting to emerge in the early '90s, I objected to anything that would lead to an international criminal court. And the reason for that was that the United States Government has very high standards with respect to how its military personnel and diplomatic and other personnel behave. And we also have constitutional requirements to protect our citizens, and especially to protect our military.
We have a slightly different problem than just about any other country in that our military is so widely dispersed around the world serving the cause of peace and freedom. And we simply could not take our young volunteers, who are entrusted to our care by their families and who know that they are accountable under our Constitution to meet the highest standards of human rights and justice and will be punished under our courts, either civilian or military courts, we could not subject them to an international tribunal that reports to no government and that is not responsive to our own Congress or to our Constitution. We recognize that this is not a view held by many other nations, and other nations can participate in the work of the International Criminal Court. We have been working to get what are called Article 98 agreements, so that we can put our troops in places that have ratified the International Criminal Court, that it will not apply to our soldiers, that they will not be turned over to the International Criminal Court while they are stationed in those countries. This in no way is an effort on our part to relieve our personnel of the responsibility for meeting the highest standards of performance, of behavior and respect for human rights.
(cross-talk)
AMBASSADOR VERSHBOW: OK, We'll pass it up, please send it up. She wants to give you something in writing.
We're very sorry that the Secretary has such a tight schedule that we can't continue for I'm sure what could be many hours, but again thank you all for coming. I think the Secretary has gotten at least a representative sampling of what's on the minds of Russians participating in the development of civil society here. And I look forward to continuing the dialogue, and maybe we can do this again with the Secretary on his next visit.
SECRETARY POWELL: Good. Thank you.