Ambassador Tatiana Gfoeller ELTR TV Interview (10-15-10)

ELTR TV: As is well known, our previous TV channels recently before the elections have aired a program of one of the parties competing for the parliament, namely [Arnemis] which was criticizing the United States for arranging the recent events in the south, and it was criticizing that these events were arranged by the [inaudible] of the United States of America. How can you comment on this criticism?

Ambassador Gfoeller: I have to say that I was very shocked to hear such statements being made about the United States of America. I think that our track record in our relationship with Kyrgyzstan speaks for itself.

As you know, we were one of the first two countries to recognize Kyrgyzstan’s independence, and since then we have worked very closely in every way possible to help Kyrgyzstan become a prosperous, developed, democratic and independent country. As you know also, we’ve been involved for many years now in trying to bring stability to Afghanistan and to rid Afghanistan of extremists, terrorists, in fact narco traffickers as well. And in this endeavor, Kyrgyzstan has been a very reliable, a very good partner and we’ve always been very grateful for Kyrgyzstan’s help in this common effort to bring stability to Afghanistan and to the whole region.

Stability in Afghanistan and in the region is in our national interest, it’s in Kyrgyzstan’s national interest, and in fact it’s in the national interest of Kyrgyzstan’s neighbors, all the way up to the Russian Federation.

So after all of the blood and treasure that we have expended throughout all these years trying to bring stability to the region, it’s simply ludicrous to say that we would want instability for the region.

ELTR TV: Recently it shows there is often conflict going on and one group of parties which are positioning itself pro-Russian and there are some others which are positioning themselves as pro-American parties. In your opinion is it good to be [dependent]?

Ambassador Gfoeller: I’m glad you posed this question. I think it’s sort of becoming my signature statement for the two and a half years that I’ve been here, which is that I absolutely reject this notion that the 19th Century “great game” still continues to be played in Central Asia. I simply refuse to believe that anything that Russia achieves in this region is necessarily to the detriment of United States interests, and I categorically say that what we are trying to achieve here in Kyrgyzstan is absolutely not against Russia. We actually have common interests with Russia in Kyrgyzstan and the region.

I personally have an excellent relationship with my Russian counterpart, Ambassador Vlasev whom I respect very much as a person and as a diplomat. Our embassies also have very good relations and we very often exchange information, for example, on what kind of support each of us is providing to Kyrgyzstan and we try and coordinate our support so we don’t duplicate what we’re doing, but that we can actually compliment our joint efforts I helping Kyrgyzstan.

AS Is aid, we have common interests in Kyrgyzstan and in the region. A big, big interest is fighting narco traffickers. While we also suffer from drugs that come out of Afghanistan, but certainly Russia’s young men and women are an even closer target of this very nefarious type of narcantalism.

Another very important common interest that we have is to fight extremism in all its forms that is unfortunately prevalent right now in parts of Afghanistan and could easily be exported. Again, we personally, the United States of America, have suffered from such religious extremism. I don’t need to remind you about the 9/11 attacks on our homeland. But Russia also suffers from religious extremism, so fighting it is basically in both of our interests.

Which brings me of course to our first discussion, building on your first question, which is that the Russian Federation and the United States of America have, I believe, a shared interest in stability. Stability in Kyrgyzstan and stability in the region.

So that means that if certain political parties express an affinity for the Russian Federation, they feel they have a lot in common with the Russian Federation, that doesn’t worry me. All along I’ve been saying that the United States interest in the election, which by the way I want to congratulate Kyrgyzstan on because it was very very successful. But our interest in this election was for it to be clean, for it to be successful, for it to be fair, and I think that it was. So we are satisfied.

ELTR TV: I would like to follow up on this topic and ask about the elections, regarding how clean the elections were. According to the new constitution which was adopted in the recent referenda, the country will be ruled by the parliament. How do you think, what kind of step this would be for Kyrgyzstan and how could you explain or comment based on your own experience?

Ambassador Gfoeller: First of all, let me congratulate again the people of Kyrgyzstan on a fantastic leaps forward on the road to democracy. I remember saying in April, after the tragic events of April, that while I very much mourned for the dead and the wounded who I felt were very close to me because I myself am becoming a Bishkek [Chamka] at this point. I’ve been living here for two and a half years. I personally mourn for them. But at the same time I said that if there is a silver lining to what happened, it is that now Kyrgyzstan again has a chance to set out on the road to democracy.

Of course the June events in the south were also very tragic, were a step backwards. However, I’m very happy to observe that Kyrgyzstan is now back again on the road to democracy. The constitutional referendum was very important, it went by successfully. But much more important, I would say, are the recent parliamentary elections of October 10th.

Our embassy had observers throughout Kyrgyzstan. We were also in touch with ODIHR, the international organization, which specializes in elections. And we were also in touch with a number of very active, very feisty Kyrgyzstani NGOs who also had their own observers of the election. Everybody’s consensus was that these were successful elections. That within the realm of the possible, that they were clean. That there was no systematic effort to adulterate the results. And that is fantastic. That is a superb achievement for Central Asia and for the entire region.

As for a parliamentary democracy or a presidential style democracy, it’s not for me to say what's best for Kyrgyzstan. You know that in the United States we have a constitution that has served us well for over 200 years. By and large we’re very happy with it. And it contains both a strong president and a strong parliament. There are really as many forms of democracy as there are nations. You can take, for example, the Swiss Confederation, which is not even a union of states like the United States, but a confederation of states where the presidency is so decentralized that it rotates. Every six months a new representative of one of the states becomes president. That I think would be difficult for the United States to apply, but it works very well for the Swiss Confederation.

So I think what’s really the bottom line about democracy is that it is rule based on the people, and how it actually is applied is not that important.

So I just want to conclude by saying that what’s important is that the people of Kyrgyzstan adopted a new constitution in clean elections, and I simply want to express my government’s support for your continuing adherence to this democratic path.

ELTR TV: If you allow me, Ambassador, I have the last question. This is a second question about the transit base. Is there an issue of prolonging the presence of the base or is there an issue of reformatting the transit base to some sort of military format or for like it existed in the past?

Ambassador Gfoeller: As I said earlier, we’re very grateful to Kyrgyzstan for hosting the Manas Transit Center. It’s important for us, as I said earlier, in trying to bring stability to Afghanistan and to the region. We’re grateful that we have been hosted by Kyrgyzstan now since just after the tragic events of 9/11.

As I said before, I think that the quest for stability in the region is in the interest of the United States, Kyrgyzstan, all of Kyrgyzstan’s neighbors including the Russian Federation. Not just in Kyrgyzstan. In Afghanistan and the whole region.

So I think because of that it’s in the interest of all of the above -- the United States, Kyrgyzstan, and Kyrgyzstan’s neighbors -- that the transit center continue to operate as it has been operating. But we’re quite cognizant that we’re guests here. This is not a permanent installation. Right now you’re in the process of forming your new government so we haven’t had yet any discussions regarding the transit center. But if the new government were to want to have discussions regarding the transit center with us, we would of course always welcome that.

Thank you.

# # # #