(00:00:00) It's a particular pleasure for me to present today's speaker Ambassador Morton abramowitz president of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace for the last 18 months. I serve on Mort's board and we have become good friends. The endowment was founded by Andrew Carnegie in 1910. Its goal is to contribute to world peace and to educate people to have a better understanding of Foreign Affairs. It does this through a rotating staff of experienced Foreign Affairs Associates who do research publish appear in the media lead conferences and contribute to the dialogue of our nation's public policy in the field of international affairs. Mort retired from the Foreign Service in 1991 after serving two years as ambassador to Turkey including the time of Desert Storm and Iraq and the Kurdish Uprising prior to his assignment as ambassador to Ankara. He had been assistant Secretary of State for intelligence and research during the height of the problems in Central America. He also served as ambassador to Thailand where we first met as Deputy assistant secretary of defense for inter American East Asian and Pacific Affairs and was US ambassador the to the mutual balance forced reduction negotiations in Vienna Ambassador abramowitz has degrees from Stanford and Harvard served in the Army and has authored three books relating to China Korea and East Asia. He has also received numerous Awards including the president's award for distinguished Federal service in 1981. 85 and 88. Mort is one of the most knowledgeable people in the country and the subject of Foreign Affairs. He is constructively outspoken on the subject now that he is out of government. We are very fortunate to have him with us today to discuss the foreign policy issues facing the new Administration. I'm now very pleased to present Ambassador Morton abramowitz. Thank you very much Ed. (00:02:11) Let me start off by apologizing. I'm in good shape, and I always don't I don't not always sound like this, but I can't shake a sore throat. So please bear with me. I'm a little sheepish to say as I was mentioning to Bob folky that I have been to Laos Cambodia turkistan, Papua New Guinea, but I never been to Minnesota and it is a great pleasure for me to be here. Although the only things I'm going to see are the Radisson Hotel and the Minnesota Club. I will have to come back again. It's also a very great pleasure to see old friends and colleagues and mentors like Harland Cleveland and I'm particularly pleased to see members of the American Refugee committee. I was Ambassador to Thailand from 78 281 and we had an extraordinary human humanitarian disaster there Cambodia and indo-chinese boat people and American Refugee committee was one of the American one of the American (00:03:25) Private voluntary (00:03:27) organizations who contributed very significantly, and I am very grateful to them, and I'm glad to see Neil ball and his colleagues here. Thank you. I come from Washington. Where is it noted? I spent 30 years in State Department, which is now regrettably a distressed area. I left diplomatic life 18 months ago to join the world of think tanks. And if I ever write a memoir about my daily fare, I will call it an odyssey from cables to articles needless to say my perspective is from inside. The Beltway Washington is currently in something of a frenzy. Let's Guild of the New York Times correctly calls it jobs jobs jobs. He was referring of course not to unemployment. But to the immediate interest of many of my Democratic friends (00:04:31) as (00:04:32) psychiatrist friend told me she recently called the patient to tell him that she wanted to cancel appointment the next day. She got a recording which said I'm out of town for the next three days and I will call when I return if you leave a message. But if this is the Clinton transition team, you can get in touch with me at the following numbers. In Washington, we live by mantras. So let me begin with the emerging mantras of foreign policy in Washington these (00:05:11) days. For me first (00:05:17) domestic and foreign policy or a seamless web revitalization of the US economy is necessary to preserve our capacity to act effectively abroad second man. Shh. We have new international priorities such as competitiveness the environment and population policy which have risen in importance for our military and security issues have become less dominant (00:05:42) third mantra' (00:05:44) The government is still geared to fight the Cold War. Our Machinery must be overhauled to reflect the demands of the new world and new US (00:05:53) priorities. (00:05:56) These mantras indeed relate I think correctly to a new foreign policy era. They describe what must do for the longer term to ensure that we can compete and protect our interest in an increasingly interdependent World in a global economy. I suspect that most of you will also agree with them as pillars of policy thinking the problem with these mantras is they that they do not tell us what we need to do today and foreign policy that is how we should deal with the extraordinary difficult problems that have emerged with the end of superpower rivalry, which defined International Affairs for the past 40 years and that brings me to the purpose of my discussion. I want briefly and crudely and I emphasize crudely since there is not much time to do the following to describe the farm policy Legacy. Which George Bush left Bill Clinton. I would characterize it as something of a mess (00:07:07) secondly (00:07:09) to review some of the pressing foreign policy problems that mr. Clinton will face in his first year. They are daunting. There are no obvious Solutions in sight and if he is not careful and managing them. They can undermine his Prestige is popular support and his domestic agenda. (00:07:29) Looking back. (00:07:31) I believe there were two Bush administration's in foreign policy. The first Bush presidency from 1989 to the end of Desert Storm in 1991 impose some order on a rush of extraordinary developments created by the breakdown of the Warsaw Pact. It's three principal achievements were to stop the Nicaraguan war in its tracks a war which was bitterly dividing the country to be to respond reasonably well to the end of Communism in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union and most important most impressively to facilitate the rapid unification of Germany. The administration made one bigger in this period it Mister Ed and mismanaged the Iraqi situation A stunning error, which led to war and that was in large part caused by the centralization and secrecy of the administration's foreign policy management, but even this era had a happy ending at least a very fortunate ending the destruction for at least a decade of a dangerous dictators aggressive potential including his nascent the development of weapons of mass destruction. The second Bush Administration foreign policy beginning from March 91 has been more of a disaster area. Although there were some exceptions in a genuinely, you know, Innovative move. Mr. Bush forged the path for not NAFTA and the opportunities opened up for diplomacy by the results of the Gulf War has produced the first movement toward the Middle East settlement after 12 years of failure. I would date the beginning of the decline in our International Effectiveness from when at the height of American military power and influence the u.s. Failed to remove Saddam Hussein from Power. Whatever the reasons for this failure and I believe they have mostly to do with domestic considerations sitar saddam's continuation and power undermine much of the moral basis of the Gulf War and help put a quick end to the development of a new world order saddam's rule continues to haunt us today, and he continues to Royal the Gulf Waters. Since that time and March 91 the US and the world have drifted dangerously and international relations and let me briefly briefly enumerate. Protracted and bloody confrontations have been allowed to fester in the heart of (00:10:10) Europe (00:10:12) years ago. Such conflict would have bought started Wars among the powers today. They have set off vast and costly human disasters which endanger political stability in the Balkans in Central Europe and perhaps is even far away as Russia. There are now more refugees in Europe at any time since World War Two. The G7 the principal mechanism for managing the world decline the world economy. (00:10:46) I was right the first time (00:10:52) the G7 has declined into virtual uselessness and the world economy sunk into recession the Uruguay round goes on endlessly NATO and the transatlantic Alliance have lost much of their efficacy and our experience and identity crisis Europe increasingly pays less attention to us. Well, it has become something of a zombie and dealing with crises on its own doorstep. The Russian ship of state is listing dangerously. Well, the Russian Nation maybe fragmenting there is uncertainty about the future of our nuclear weapon of their nuclear weapons and our Arms Control agreement numerous areas where the United States has expended enormous effort and resources in the past decade Afghanistan Angola Liberia, Nicaragua, Salvador are all engulfed in disorder. If not, chaos United States has responded by mostly walking out I can go on with this list, but that that suffice for the moment. Now, of course not all of these problems can be laid on American doorstep or on George Bush's doorstep the yugoslavs deserve most of the blame for the horror and that disappearing country and most democratic Public's have retreated into insularity in the face of domestic recession and reduce security preoccupations. However, fundamentally improved our security is with the decline of Communism. The Cold War was yesterday's concern. I remember vividly the present Prime Minister of Turkey always telling me when I was in Ankara, when I brought up things that occurred previously yesterday was yesterday today is today and today we Face a set of different and difficult International problems, but it remains true that not much will happen to deal with these problems. If the United States does not reassert itself as the world's leader in action occasional ineptitude, but most of all abdication of leadership has and Lease at least contributed to this drift and decline in world affairs. For various reasons we are well aware of these problems and other foreign policy issues. I have not mentioned. We're not discussed in the campaign perhaps Murph mercifully. So because they might have that might have contributed less to understanding and more to freezing positions on key issues. What makes many of these problems so difficult now for new president is that they have deteriorated so much that is options have become even more painful and that the prospects for Success even more uncertain Among the many foreign policy issues requiring the new president's attention. Let me focus on those whose resolution may require some unpopular measures such as US military involvement or large amounts of money or both. in the former, Yugoslavia I can only conclude that Bosnia is probably finished putting it back together after the terrible things that have happened strikes me as nearly impossible. There is an immense problem with winter coming on of caring for to nearly two million displaced people. I frankly don't know how that will be done unless secure relief roots are established or Safe Haven zones where people can come too. If Serbia is not deterred. We are likely to see ethnic cleansing and widespread Terror expand into Kosovo and Macedonia with assess astronomical human humanitarian costs. And if War expands in those areas, we could conceivably see a war across International boundaries involving Bulgaria Greece and Turkey and Serbia a third Balkan war in the century. We gained little if we act after the event has occurred and obviously there are no easy solutions. In the case of Russia its future ultimately will be determined by its own leaders and citizens and will reflect as George Kennan always reminds us the Russian character experience and culture. But it assess a successful transition to democracy and a free market or the Russian form of democracy in the Russian form of the free market will be one of the world's incredible feats. But it will not likely take place without sustained and very substantial Western support for the nascent Democratic forces. There are obviously enormous security humanitarian and political implications for us. If these Democrats that these Democrat Democratic forces in Russia fail now the else in government has done much in its short life, but it's problems are staggering and its support in the Russian public diminishing. We have of course been helpful, but we have not given this task the priority and the care deserves or adequately mobilize our own public support and World support and behalf of the Russians contrast it to the two percent of GNP. We spent on the Marshall Plan. Former President Nixon periodically remove the rides us and our government for its inadequacy in supporting Russia and for not getting our priorities (00:16:53) straight. (00:16:57) In Iraq, we have pursued a policy in the tootin two years since Desert Storm, which I (00:17:05) would characterize as (00:17:06) hope hope that something will turn up leading to saddam's exit and to our extrication from the area. It is indeed possible. We have not fought the last battle when Saddam Hussein he only has to March up the road a couple of miles in Northern Iraq and retake a Turkish town a Kurdish town to test the new president. There are more over fundamental questions about Iraq involving Saddam, but transcending him that we have avoid tackling and these and the answers to these questions are Central to the future of the gulf and the Middle East should we encourage the destruction of Iraq as a state or the creation of a Federated more democratic Iraq, or should we simply watch Saddam Hussein replaced by another militaristic best baathist government. I fear generally fear the latter may be what will happen. These questions raid difficult issues for our Arab friends who look to Iraq as a bulwark against Iran and their answers have life and death implications for people like the Kurds when we have taken under our (00:18:19) wing in Haiti. (00:18:22) Mr. Clinton has no choice. He will have to do something. Our policy has produced the worst of Worlds. The Embargo has truly decimated a poor people without toppling the dictatorship. We can expect large numbers of Haitians. They are already building boats as you well know to head for the United States unless mr. Clinton acts before he enters office in some fashion to stem that tide. Too unpleasant Alternatives, he could consider our to announce and later carry out if necessary his intent to end the (00:19:00) Embargo (00:19:01) or to promise the overthrow the dictatorship or both conceivably the rulers of Haiti in the next six weeks may be scared enough to offer us some sort of deal which could prevent people from fleeing but unlike unlike the present policy. Mr. Clinton will give Haitians a hearing to establish their cleaning their claims to Asylum. Although most of them will still be sent home. Finally, let me say a word about Somalia. I would have written this a little differently a week ago. As another in my litanies of woes it is still willful but is better late than never our offer to the United Nations to provide US forces to protect the delivery of food is long overdue. The world has allowed for the United States as many as a half a million people to die needlessly and many more will die if forces do not arrive soon. If the security Council, it accepts the u.s. Offer which I expect today or tomorrow. I believe that within several months we can establish a safe adequate food delivery system system, which can begin the restoration of the Somali people the long-term future of the country. However is unclear and it will require a substantial multi lateral support effort is not a u.s. Responsibility alone, perhaps even a un trusteeship as some are now proposing and it is possible but not likely that US forces could be out of Somalia by the time mr. Clinton takes office. Now I have surveyed only some of the bigger issues. I've left out. For example favorite a realm very key to the new presidents concerns International Trade Finance World growth in concentrating on problems that may involve US forces or large amounts of money considerations that impact mr. Clinton's ability to focus on the economy and deliver on his promises. I've understated many of the complexities of the issues for example any US military involvement almost certainly now requires a multilateral umbrella. Sharing the burdens very desirable but it takes time great diplomatic effort and it is not easy to achieve Peace Keeping and peacemaking. These institutions are growing but they are still embryonic and much remains to be done. And neither. Mr. Bush nor Mister Clinton are making the case for the most politically difficult of all government programs foreign aid, which currently amounts to less than 1% of the annual budget. (00:22:05) Not GNP (00:22:08) the new administration. Of course May simply bite its time. Or react spearing lie to these crises conceivably this nation continue to believe that foreign policy issues. No longer have strategic importance as if what happens abroad does not affect major US interest or is if inaction has no penalties we could easily content ourselves ourselves with what I call the usual rhetorical clucking we deplore we are sorry. We regret and pseudo activity that satisfy the political pressures that will arise (00:22:48) It's (00:22:48) possible. The new president will be lucky Serbian president. Milosevic may take his time on cassava or the serbs my tire of him. Hopefully that would be very good and find ways to speed his departure from Power Russian recovery least some recovery could take place earlier than expected change the mood of that country and the prospects for long-term Democratic Evolution. We may be able to limp along on a rack a lot longer watching carefully as Saddam tries to remain afloat, but Mister Clinton can't count on any of this and luck is not a good guy to policy. The fact is that whatever we do these complex issues will have significant implications for American painful decisions. And whether to act or not to act will be uncertain in their consequences, but they will have to be made nonetheless. These problems can turn out badly whatever the new president does at a minimum or in crises can undermine as prestigious. As I said and compromise is ability to carry out contentious domestic programs managing these crises. Well is also important for the future for our continuing leadership in the world being the sole military superpower no longer easily translates into political influence with allies or enemies and conversely military might can become as much a burden as an asset if it's not properly handled. (00:24:25) Clint mr. Clinton will not (00:24:28) likely nor should he succumb to the temptation of his predecessors all of them to spend most of his time on foreign policy rather than domestic policy United States, but the United States should certainly be able as Linda Johnson used to say to walk down the street chew gum at the same time the distinction between Don foreign and domestic in a great power is largely illusory both require attending by leaders, and we need to worry that the nation will not respond when the new president does come and tells us about the pressing problems out there when decisions are forced on him. By events Beyond his control. Mr. Clinton is of course well aware of these and other difficult situations. I do not know how we will tackle them which ones he will give priority. He's an internationalist clearly, but he may but he may have to do things for which the ground is not been late. There is now a little public support for increased foreign involvement. But whatever he does you have to work closely with the public with the Congress and our friends and allies to manage these things and to bring them along especially if military intervention are greater foreign aid are required. No, I'm going on for probably too long both for you and for my voice and only a few of the problems. The new president will have to deal with I have not discussed the longer-term challenges of foreign policy to integrate our political aspirations with our economic interests particularly in Asia to deal with population growth immigration flows and vast income disparities. All of which threaten world's ability to enhance our environmental goals and to meet such dangers as eggs and drugs these issues tend to get ignored. I tell you that for sure they tend to get ignored in the higher levels of government, whatever the Prada stations you hear about their importance be skeptical. Largely because these current problems drive them out. But tending to them is Central to establishing a more stable World Order. As I said such new issues simply cannot be tackled by the us alone. They require concerted World attention and effort new institutions and processes. In multilateral organizations and that will take a long time to put together in the past 40 years. The United States has not a lot to build International institutions, but we've also frequently acted unilaterally and that day is probably over whatever our military strength. There is an enormous opportunity with the end of the Cold War for a new period of constructive International activity. And such activity remains heavily dependent on the dynamism idealism and strength of the United States what the new president does in the next four years will be critical. If we are to make krog progress. Mr. Clinton must use American power and influence in concert with others. Certainly, you must work to rebuild our domestic infrastructure our competitiveness and our education and Health Systems among others, but the president's capacity and political attitude to carry out all these urgent domestic efforts to manage the problems that have emerged at the end of the Cold War and to shape and reshape International institutions to meet our concerns and interests. All these are clearly interrelated foreign policy and domestic policy in today's age are indeed a seamless web especially in a great and powerful pluralistic democracy such as the United States. Thank (00:28:33) Very much. (00:28:48) The first question here from Tony Kowalski who's the executive director of Minnesota's American Refugee committee? (00:28:55) Thank you. Mr. Ambassador. You mentioned to humanitarian tragedies that in fact, we've been discussing these past few days as the board of the American Refugee committee Somalia and and Bosnia, I think we're relieved. First of all that humanitarian action is being taken by this Administration if belatedly are to solve the problem and hopefully with a multilateral umbrella rather than a veneer my question has to do with your statement with regard to Bosnia. In fact because you said you can only could conclude that Bosnia. Bosnia is finished. I really fear the even uttering of that expression because if there is anything with regard to the Interests of the United States or the world those vital interests are being played out more in former Yugoslavia than Somalia what in your opinion made the administration act in Somalia and not in Bosnia where if Bosnia disappears we risk another Palestinian situation. (00:30:14) Let me say two things before. I answer your question. First of all, I agree that What's happening to Yugoslavia is a much greater interest terms of the thinking of traditional interest in Bosnia than in Somalia. And secondly, my statement about Bosnia is not a statement. I like to make obviously it's reflects my inability to comprehend how it can be put together in the real world. Obviously, I would hope that would be possible now in turn regard to to Somalia why that decision was made I think relates to tooth two (00:31:02) factors. (00:31:07) the immensity of the horror and the fact that people were actually starving and dying and the public pressures on the US government to do something all combined secondly and very important. It is not a complicated military problem. It's that it can be done. I think it can be done reasonably quickly. I cannot preclude it will involve some casualties, but it can easily be done you are dealing with basically groups of young people lightly armed poorly LED and who can easily be taken care of? I think the mirror announcement of US forces is I think a very healthy Factor situation in Bosnia and Yugoslavia is far more complicated far more difficult to deal with militarily and is clearly one of the understandable factors, which has precluded our involvement and it's a very difficult. It's a very difficult judgment to make the use of force in Bosnia. When you cannot easily see an early end when you can see wider conflict when you can see large numbers of casualties. It's a decision. However, you can terms of Bosnia and the rest of the Yugoslavia. You could sit still and watch the Deans disaster unfold or you can decide there's certain things limited things. You may want to do. It's very complicated. I don't envy the man who has to make that decision, but I think that decision and by decision, I mean either to act or not to act that decision is going to have to be made in some (00:32:56) point. Thank you. Mr. Ambassador. We have a question now from Bill (00:33:01) Weir. Ambassador Abramovich, would you give us your thoughts on the rapidly Rising human population worldwide and what alternatives may be open to the Clinton Administration and or the United Nations to avert a very great disaster as human overpopulation destroys the environment required for its survival Well, you certainly have put your finger on one of the world's great problems and and dealing with it is enormously difficult. I've seen their different projection some of which are truly horrific and the impacts. Our population is clearly the biggest factor in terms of safeguarding the world's environment. I think we can begin by reversing and I expect mr. Clint to do. So a terrible policy of the Bush Administration terms of supporting population control programs in a variety of countries on the basis that somehow or other they contributed to abortion these programs actually the denial these programs actually contributed more to abortion than the program's themselves. And so that's a start the provision of family delivery services to to the acceleration of those the family Planning services to as many people in the less developed countries as possible can be accelerated clearly Economic Development has got to be a factor here the empowerment of women you these are some of the factors this is not an area I know deeply about I've looked into it and I'm deeply Disturbed at the potential for it, but it is a problem that I think requires the Urgent most continuing attention of the world. Thank you. Mr. Ambassador a question here from Bob Woods. (00:35:02) Mr. Ambassador. I would like your (00:35:03) perspectives on the recent events in Venezuela. And what do you think that bodes for the future of the Venezuelan (00:35:10) democracy (00:35:13) the testing limits of my (00:35:14) knowledge? It's sort of hard to (00:35:22) to make a judgment on Venezuela in the sense that he was a government which had extraordinary advantages which in the past two or three years was carrying out the right Market policies trying to get away from profligate practices of the past trying to decentralize trying to introduce more market-oriented elements. They had a good policy. It's led to two to revolts. The first I forgot was nine months ago. I forgot what it was. Yeah. It was in February. I believe and II just a week ago. So clearly something has to be done in (00:36:09) the in the (00:36:12) Venezuelan government to restore some confidence in the people and of course in the military now how this relates to the continuing president Carlos Andres Paris. I would suspect he is his way of rule is perhaps at the heart of this but it's not an area. I frankly know that much about and I hesitate to really say (00:36:37) more on it. Thank you. Mr. Ambassador. We have a question now from Dave Tesla. Mr. Master considering the Bleak picture that you paint of our current foreign policy and foreign relations. And the fact that we have a very inexperienced president or a president that has little or no experience in foreign policy. What do you anticipate? And what is your gut feeling as to what our situation will be in foreign policy and two and three and four years down the road. Well, (00:37:07) I was trying to I was not presenting you first of all. Who are they a balanced approach to various aspects of foreign policy? I was trying to present a picture of problems that are immediately on the horizon, which a new president has to deal with which are very difficult involved terribly difficult decisions, perhaps resources and people and that he can't avoid and I was trying to get away from the notion that simply well we can clean up the health system. We can we can get jobs going and we could sort of turn away from the world. I was trying to make the point simply that how he handles. This is very into much interrelated with a success of aesthetic domestic programs. I believe that there are If we can get growth going here in the world and in the world if we can generate the resources required in certain issues, we can make significant contributions. The long term to issues like Russia Haiti. I believe is a problem that can be dealt with it'll take some strong and decisive leadership. The one issue. I don't know how we will deal with which I think is very important and I can't give you an adequate answer frankly. That's Yugoslavia because everything I see about that place barring unforeseen changes like the death of velocity which leads me to believe there's further disaster and store both in human terms and in political terms and what the United States is prepared to do about it and how its prepared to act. I don't know. I think however that with that getting worth World growth going which in many ways is the most important (00:39:17) of the (00:39:18) sort of broader foreign policy issues. We have revitalizing the G7 getting World growth going concerning World growth. I think will go a long way toward creating a better mood a better climate for managing foreign problems and or the resources for dealing with it. So I apologize for presenting something of a skewed picture. But my purpose was to say that the economy stupid may have been may have been the the thing that won the election but you better watch out for foreign (00:39:50) policy. Thank you. Mr. Ambassador our next question from Tom (00:39:54) Durant. Mr. Ambassador back to an old haunt of yours Cambodia. The Khmer Rouge were violated every agreement made in Paris. I've now taken six un people as hostages continue to trade in gems and and Timber over the Thai border. When and would you have the UN use Force to take the arms from the Khmer Rouge and what would you do about Thailand to prevent it from making that they're five million dollars a month in trading gems and Timber over the Border. There are a number of issues involved in Cambodia. And one of the one of them will be on Mister Clinton's desk. I'm not discussed it at all. And that is the extension of the UN effort in Cambodia, which is costing a hundred million dollars a month. It was scheduled for 18 months. It will go on till April or May. I forgot which one there are in elections and then will presumably depart the scene. That is absolutely impossible. There is no Effective Government in Cambodia. And if the UN departs the scene, we will just continue to see Cambodia to descend into further Disorder. So you're going to have a continued costly undertaking in Cambodia, whatever we do with the Khmer Rouge or not. Now as to the Khmer Rouge, I hate to say this because I have been ambassador to Thailand. So I'm very fond of like the country is a great country and it's done a marvelous job, but they more than the Chinese have been the Principal support for the Khmer Rouge and and they have financially (00:41:52) financially. (00:41:55) Supported them. They have turned the other cheek allow time Military and Commercial interests to support the Khmer Rouge. I think we simply have to put pressure on them to stop this that will not be easy. That will not be easy. I don't believe there's any possibility that the UN is going to take on the Khmer Rouge --and. I don't think militarily people were going to send in units or anybody's prepared to do so, but I do believe we should do everything possible to undermine the basis of Khmer Rouge power. Now, there are differences as to the strength of the Khmer Rouge. There are people who think by and large the Khmer Rouge have have diminished that their efficacy has been deteriorating and they are essentially a regional power in Western Cambodia. I frankly don't know enough myself to to make that judgment, but I am skeptical of it. I still think they constitute aside from Anarchy the major problem and trying to put together Cambodia. (00:43:05) Thank you. Our next question is from Gary Capon. (00:43:09) Mr. Ambassador. Would you give us your perspective on turkey as a critical link between the east and (00:43:14) west? (00:43:17) Another favorite country among the u.s. Relationship with turkey for the last I guess 40 years has been based on the following (00:43:30) factors. (00:43:35) resistance to Soviet aggression NATO us bases and Military assistance that is the combination which (00:43:47) was at the heart of u.s. Turkish relations (00:43:51) that combination does no longer (00:43:53) exist. (00:43:55) The southern flank of NATO is not very important. Maybe Harlan will disagree with me. I don't think you will Southern flank of NATO is no longer very important the Russian threat to turkey has disappeared. Maybe they'll repair in 20 years. But right now it's not a serious threat and the basis for a strong that basis for strong American Western Turkish relationship is is finished. I'm not finished with diminished in my view. The base's for our relationships with turkey should be the following. (00:44:30) One (00:44:32) that it is very important in an area like the Middle East that we see preserved a secular Muslim democracy and that turkey is certainly not a perfect democracy but it is moving in that way that is profoundly in the interest of the world in our secondly as long as the gulf is unsettled as long as we are concerned about about Iran or Unpretty surge in Iraq, as long as oil is important element in American policy. Then I think turkey is a bulwark hate to use that term as a hackneyed term but a source of strength for us as long as it remains. In the western camp and finally the most important and although it will be difficult. I think it is. It is conducive to Turkish democracy to Turkish dynamism Turkish growth to do everything we can to bring turkey into the western family of Nations right now. As you know Turkey cannot get in the EC part of it as an economic reason turkeys undeveloped the Greek to ECS had a lot of trouble with the Greeks but part of it is a Subterranean cultural and religious reason. I hope that over the years that will be removed and that turkey will eventually become part of the Western Community in a much more institutionalized sense. Thank you. You are listening to Ambassador Morton a Brahma was president of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace speaking to the Minnesota meeting on the station's the Minnesota Public Radio. We have a next question from Jerry Joseph the former ambassador. (00:46:22) Center the Netherlands Thank you. Mr. Ambassador. You mentioned the teenagers in Somalia with guns. All the newspaper reports would indicate that there are plenty of guns except maybe for the Muslims in Yugoslavia. It's very remember correctly during the Carter years. There was an effort to have some kind of voluntary compliance on the limit of the sale of arms. It didn't work. What I would like to know is realistically is there anything that we can do to bring the arms trade under some kind of control (00:46:59) talk about the conventional arms straight. I mean we are making serious efforts in terms of the (00:47:04) just plain guns. (00:47:08) Let me just say it's not the question you asked but you raised the point that arms in Bosnia. I think at one time arming Bosnia arming the bosnians defend themselves against the serbs would have been very fruitful. In might have had some significant impact providing them arms right now is not likely to serve much purpose and in my view is not a really effective way to deal with the problem of Serbian further expansionism. I just wanted to take advantage of that of your intervention. This is a very hard problem. It's been over for with us for many years. The US wants to sell arms doesn't want anybody else to sell arms. We want to sell arms to the good guys. We don't like people sell them to the nuts are good guys. The Russians the Russians are in deep trouble. Mr. Guide our got up. You probably saw him on television yesterday, you know, they barely hanging on by their there by their fingertips and sending arms to Iran to India one of the few ways. They can survive nevertheless all that having been said and despite the bleakness of the prospects particularly, for example, the United States where we're still in a recession and the defense industry is is in is at least in some instances hurting. Although the stocks are pretty good. I think we should make every effort to try to find means with our allies and Friends to limit arms to dangerous areas and to people whom we agree on we should limit arms to like the Iranians. I can't say the prospects of success are going to be good. Obviously think we should make the (00:49:13) effort. We have a question now from kennel wragge. Mr. Ambassador. (00:49:21) Could you please comment on a theory? I recently read that it posits that the real significant threat in the Middle East is Iran rather than Iraq and that Iraq being the natural and historical counterforce to A-Rod and specifically Saddam Hussein. It's probably in our best interest to leave him in power for a while. Well, let me start with the bat the the the last part of your statement core question. I don't believe it's in our interest to see him in power. I think he's a disaster for the people of Iraq. He's a disaster for the area and I think we should do everything possible to see him depart the scene then their second part of that question is what type of Iraq do we build up and clearly rack can be any sort of barrier against Iranian aggression my own belief, maybe maybe fanciful maybe tilting at a windmill is that we have to work toward a Federated more democratic state which permits the Kurds in Northern Iraq to have a serious and substantial. Amount of autonomy on the other hand if we have a and I booted to it in my speech if we see preserved a military dominated baathist government. We will see certainly overtime A Renewed effort to reunify the country and and drive the perhaps. I'll lead to repetition of previous experience with the Kurds and the Shiites in the South now as to the danger of Iran, Iran has the potential for being a much more powerful party right now. It's very weak. My belief is question is who rules are an At this present time I think the Iranian government, whatever (00:51:30) its. It's a tactical (00:51:33) moves is a danger to the Middle East. I'm skeptical that it can change internally. I think it is either has to fall or we will over time be faced with a real concern about Iranian role in the Gulf. But Iran has the potential for being a major power, which I don't think can really be resisted question is to turn around and its internal politics. Hopefully not that we can do it all but hopefully until more constructive (00:52:07) state.