23 сентября 1999 и 30 сентября 1999 проходят слушания в Сенате на тему "Corruption in Russia".
Подготовленное заявление Джо Байдена, заместителя председателя комиссии по международным делам:
There is a lot of clamoring right now--most of it driven by U.S. election hysteria--about ``Who lost Russia.'' This is absurd. Russia is not lost--it is right there where it has always been. In any case, it was not ours to lose. It still belongs to the Russians. They control Russia's destiny--no one else. No one--not the IMF, not the United States, not the G-7 countries--was ever going to influence Russia's policy except at the margins. What has been ``lost'' however, is a rational perspective on the pace and ease of the current transformation of Russia. No one said that change from a Communist system to a free market, democratic society would be easy. Change will take generations; we have always known that. This country, first under George Bush, now under Bill Clinton, has done the right thing in trying to ease Russia's transition from Communist bully to responsible member of the world community. And the successes are remarkable. We must remember that the Soviet Union came apart less than eight short years ago. In that brief time, Russia has reduced its nuclear arsenal and slashed its military spending. It has held democratic elections and resisted a return to Communism. It has opened its doors to the outside world so that foreigners now visit formerly closed cities, and Russians by the thousands come here. The Russian press--once represented by the dreary, Communist party-controlled Pravda, is now free and even raucous in its criticism of the government. And the welfare state that the Communists were so proud of, has--albeit painfully--begun to feel the effects of the global economy. Obviously, there have been, and will continue to be, frustrations and missteps. Corruption is one of the most visible ones. The current hysteria on this topic misses the main point--that corruption, while unpleasant for those of us in other countries to contemplate--harms the ordinary, decent Russian more than it does us. Russia has the biggest stake in getting its house in order. I must admit to some puzzlement about this focus on corruption in Russia right now. Corruption is always deplorable, anywhere that it occurs. But it is an ugly fact of life in many countries that we do business with every day. U.S. assistance to Russia has been carefully targeted at bringing about structural reforms that would be both deep and long-term. This assistance has included components on fighting both crime and corruption: Vice President Gore, in his semi-annual meetings with the various Russian prime ministers, has worked vigorously to promote rule of law in Russia. Topics of these meetings included: bilateral law enforcement cooperation, law enforcement assistance, rule of law assistance, anti-corruption assistance at the grassroots level, ethics training, and dozens more programs. It is patently ridiculous, therefore, to say that this Administration has ignored these problems. On the contrary, this Administration has not only identified the problems, but has devoted time, funds, and personnel toward addressing them. So, what are the lessons to be drawn from our experiences in Russia? That there are problems? Of course there are problems. We knew there would be. But there is tangible progress. It may be two steps forward and one step backward. But there is progress. Should we disengage because of these problems? Certainly not. The world needs a stable, prosperous, democratic Russia. There is simply no alternative to that. We, the other G-7 members, and other industrialized nations must continue with our assistance programs, IMF loans and other measures to cushion Russia's transition to democracy and free-market capitalism. Does this mean that we should not be careful of how we spend our assistance money there? No, of course not. If more controls are needed on U.S. assistance and IMF money, then let's put those controls into place. But under no circumstances can the West abandon Russia. Russia truly will be ``lost'' if we do that. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-106shrg61362/html/CHRG-106shrg61362.htm
Подготовленное заявление Джо Байдена, заместителя председателя комиссии по международным делам:
There is a lot of clamoring right now--most of it driven by U.S. election hysteria--about ``Who lost Russia.'' This is absurd. Russia is not lost--it is right there where it has always been.
In any case, it was not ours to lose. It still belongs to the Russians. They control Russia's destiny--no one else.
No one--not the IMF, not the United States, not the G-7 countries--was ever going to influence Russia's policy except at the margins.
What has been ``lost'' however, is a rational perspective on the pace and ease of the current transformation of Russia. No one said that change from a Communist system to a free market, democratic society would be easy.
Change will take generations; we have always known that.
This country, first under George Bush, now under Bill Clinton, has done the right thing in trying to ease Russia's transition from Communist bully to responsible member of the world community.
And the successes are remarkable. We must remember that the Soviet Union came apart less than eight short years ago. In that brief time, Russia has reduced its nuclear arsenal and slashed its military spending. It has held democratic elections and resisted a return to Communism.
It has opened its doors to the outside world so that foreigners now visit formerly closed cities, and Russians by the thousands come here.
The Russian press--once represented by the dreary, Communist party-controlled Pravda, is now free and even raucous in its criticism of the government. And the welfare state that the Communists were so proud of, has--albeit painfully--begun to feel the effects of the global economy.
Obviously, there have been, and will continue to be, frustrations and missteps. Corruption is one of the most visible ones.
The current hysteria on this topic misses the main point--that corruption, while unpleasant for those of us in other countries to contemplate--harms the ordinary, decent Russian more than it does us.
Russia has the biggest stake in getting its house in order.
I must admit to some puzzlement about this focus on corruption in Russia right now. Corruption is always deplorable, anywhere that it occurs. But it is an ugly fact of life in many countries that we do business with every day.
U.S. assistance to Russia has been carefully targeted at bringing about structural reforms that would be both deep and long-term. This assistance has included components on fighting both crime and corruption:
Vice President Gore, in his semi-annual meetings with the various Russian prime ministers, has worked vigorously to promote rule of law in Russia.
Topics of these meetings included: bilateral law enforcement cooperation, law enforcement assistance, rule of law assistance, anti-corruption assistance at the grassroots level, ethics training, and dozens more programs.
It is patently ridiculous, therefore, to say that this Administration has ignored these problems. On the contrary, this Administration has not only identified the problems, but has devoted time, funds, and personnel toward addressing them.
So, what are the lessons to be drawn from our experiences in Russia?
That there are problems? Of course there are problems. We knew there would be.
But there is tangible progress. It may be two steps forward and one step backward. But there is progress.
Should we disengage because of these problems?
Certainly not. The world needs a stable, prosperous, democratic Russia. There is simply no alternative to that.
We, the other G-7 members, and other industrialized nations must continue with our assistance programs, IMF loans and other measures to cushion Russia's transition to democracy and free-market capitalism.
Does this mean that we should not be careful of how we spend our assistance money there?
No, of course not. If more controls are needed on U.S. assistance and IMF money, then let's put those controls into place.
But under no circumstances can the West abandon Russia. Russia truly will be ``lost'' if we do that.
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-106shrg61362/html/CHRG-106shrg61362.htm
Reply
Leave a comment