Interview with US Ambassador Richard E Hoagland

Following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, Tajikistan has faced innumerable challenges in its quest for peace and prosperity. In an interview with IRIN, US Ambassador to Tajikistan Richard E Hoagland, a former director of the US State Department's Office of Caucasus and Central Asian Affairs in the Bureau of Europe and Eurasian Affairs, offered his assessment of a country very much on the right direction, noting that political and economic reform were key to Tajikistan's future development. QUESTION: In a recent interview you were quoted as saying Tajikistan was "at a crossroads". What did you mean by that? ANSWER: What I mean by that is that in Central Asia, Tajikistan has developed a relatively good reputation for democratic development and democratic practice. In fact, this is probably the result of the tragic civil war. But the positive outcome has been, rather than extreme power politics as you see in other places in the region, there is real dialogue and political pluralism that exist here. As the government consolidates it power, as it heads towards elections, we would hope that they don't make some of the mistakes that the other countries in the region have made in the past. We would hope that they would continue along the path of democratic pluralism. Q: Tajikistan has faced a great deal of challenges since it gained independence in 1991. What is your overall assessment of where the country is now? A: What I often tell my colleagues in Washington is that Tajikistan is about 10 years behind the other [Central Asian] countries. That's not necessarily negative. What it means is that it can learn from the mistakes that other countries in the region have made during that period - and I believe they are. The government is committed to economic reform. It has pluralistic politics. And for that reason, I would say that Tajikistan is standing in a fairly good position in the region. Q: In terms of peace and stability, the country has moved ahead greatly since the civil war. Is that process of reconciliation continuing? And what impact - if any - does that have regionally? A: The peace accords - the Moscow Accords - were signed in 1997. As a result of that, 30 percent of government positions - including military and even parliament - were to be for the former opposition. We've moved ahead now. We're seven years after the fact. That original understanding is starting to fray a little bit, but because there has been pluralistic politics, it seems to be moving along OK. How does it affect the region? That's very difficult to answer. I think each country is still so focused on its own internal, political and economic developments, that it's a little hard for the countries to look regionally and develop regionally. I know that the government here is a very strong proponent of regional cooperation and we fully support that position. Q: You mentioned that there has been a great deal of reform in the country. Can you please give some clear examples of that? Specific examples of what that reform would be? A: What I mean is that reform is starting and the government has the right intentions right now. Specifically, there has been a lot of new legislation written. For example: the parliament just passed the law on micro-financing which is terribly important for beginning to build small and medium sized enterprises. The president in his speech to the nation last Friday [30 April] reaffirmed his support for economic reform and called for banking reform so the conditions are established in the country for international investment. That's very positive. Q: How would you compare the level of reform in this country with some of the other Central Asian countries? A: It's always dangerous to try to compare one country with another and it's especially dangerous for an ambassador who is not accredited to other countries to comment on those countries. In principle I can say that Kazakhstan started its economic reform seriously very early and has done quite a good job of it. Its banking system for example, is meeting international standards. Kyrgyzstan is in the middle of a very positive economic reform right now - and it's moving ahead with that. I think Tajikistan is moving in the same direction. Q: The issue of press freedom continues to pop up in the country. Do you see any headway being made on that front? A: Well, there is headway. First of all, there are independent mass media here - newspapers, radio and television stations. True independence for mass media really depends on the economic conditions in the country. We've seen that throughout the former Soviet Union. But the important point is that there is the beginning of press freedom here. There are opposition newspapers. There's some harassment of them. We don't deny that. We pay close attention to it. But in general, there is a positive trend in freedom of the mass media in Tajikistan. Q: What role do you see the United States having in this part of the world? A: Our fundamental policy for three years has been that security is not simply a matter of military and military agencies. True security for the countries of Central Asia will come only with economic and political reform. The citizens of the countries need to feel that they have a voice in their government. And that's why it is important to continue political reform. They need to feel that they and their children and grandchildren will have economic opportunity. And that's why it is important to continue economic reform. When those are lacking then the population would tend to turn to other voices, and the voices that still exist - the other voices that still exist in this region - do include extremists, terrorists and revolutionaries. So for real solid development and security in the region, these three factors must be taken into account: actual physical security, economic development and political development. The second point that I would make about the US role in the region is that we firmly support the sovereignty and independence of every country and every country's right to make its own decision about its foreign policy. Many people have raised the question of competition and between Russia and the United States. We do not believe in zero-sum thinking. We don't think there needs to be a new "great game". There is room for real cooperation between Russia and the United States as well as other players in the region, including China and Iran for that matter. Q: Poverty continues to be a dominant issue in the country. Is there any improvement on this? A: It is still a terrible problem in this country because the economy was devastated by both the fall of the Soviet Union, this was the poorest of the Soviet republics to begin with, and then was further devastated by the civil war. It's only in very recent years that the economy is starting to recover again - starting to grow. The IMF has a poverty reduction programme here and they have judged that the level of poverty is beginning to fall. But much more needs to be done. Q: Many aid agencies believe there should be less emphasis on humanitarian assistance to the country and more on development. Would you agree with that assessment? A: We do in fact. We have really changed the mix of our assistance in the last couple of years. During the 1990s, humanitarian assistance was an absolute must because of the civil war. It was essential simply to keep people fed and to take care of refugees both external and internal. Now that the country has achieved stability, now that the economy is beginning to grow, now that for all intents and purposes this is an absolutely normal country - the international donors need to help more with development so Tajikistan can catch up and move forward. Q: How concerned is the US government on the level of drug trafficking in the country and what is it doing to assist the government in mitigating it? A: This is a horrendous problem and it's a problem we are very much aware of. It's a problem that we try to be involved in helping to solve. One of the key things is that we are the major donor to the Drug Control Agency of Tajikistan. The Drug Control Agency has established a reputation - I would say a world-class reputation - of an honest organisation that is playing an important role. There are concerns right now being voiced internationally because the Russian Border Force may withdraw from the border within the next year or so. That would raise questions of whether the Tajik border guard is prepared to assume those responsibilities. I think they will be, but it's going to take a fair amount of international assistance and cooperation - including cooperation from Russia - to achieve this goal. It's in everyone's interest - Tajikistan's, the region's, Russia's, western Europe's, the whole international community's - to make sure that the massive amount of narcotics flowing out of Afghanistan does not destabilise this country. Q: Washington has invested millions of dollars promoting civil society and grass roots democracy in Central Asia - including Tajikistan - since these countries' independence. How important is that level of engagement now? A: It's extremely important and it needs to continue. [And] I would humbly suggest that it should even grow. Everyone knows that these countries have their own history, their own culture. They were isolated from the international community for centuries essentially after the collapse of the Silk Road. Then they were under the influence of the Russian empire, and then the Soviet empire. You can't change the way countries are organised over night. It takes a long time. It may take several generations. Civil society, nongovernmental organisations - everything involved in civil society - are part of the building blocks of diplomacy. But it takes a long time to make those bricks and build those walls. Q: What in your view are the most pressing challenges the country faces now and what is your overall prognosis for the country for the next five years? A: I have always learned from my experience as a press spokesperson not to take speculative questions. At the moment, Tajikistan is very definitely on the right path with economic reform. It has an admirable degree of political pluralism. If those both continue and continue to grow, then I would have a very bright prognosis for the country in five years. But it's always dangerous to predict because nobody knows what is going to happen tomorrow.