13 February 2002

Powell on Russia, Europe, Central Asia, Proliferation

The United States is "on the road to a vastly changed relationship with Russia," Secretary of State Colin L. Powell told the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Foreign Operations, Export Financing and Related Programs February 13.

Testifying in support of President Bush's foreign operations budget request for the fiscal year (FY) 2003, Powell said in his opening statement that "the way we handled the war on terrorism, the ABM [Anti-Ballistic Missile] Treaty, nuclear reductions, and NATO is reflective of the way we will be working together with Russia in the future."

While the United States has "not forgotten about Russian abuse of human rights in Chechnya, Moscow's nuclear proliferation to Iran, or Russian intransigence with respect to revision of Iraq sanctions," he said, "the way we are approaching Central Asia is symbolic of the way we are approaching the relationship as a whole and of the growing trust between our two countries.

"We are taking issues that used to be problems between us and turning them into opportunities for more cooperation. Such an approach does not mean that differences have vanished or that tough negotiations are a thing of the past. What it means is that we believe there are no insurmountable obstacles to building on the improved relationship we have already constructed."

Regarding European charges of "unbridled U.S. unilateralism," Powell said he believed "we have been successful in bringing the Europeans to a calmer level of concern ... But we have also demonstrated that when it is a matter of principle, we will stand on that principle."

To deal with weapons of mass destruction, Powell said the United States is pursuing a comprehensive approach that includes export controls, non-proliferation, arms control, missile defenses, and counter-proliferation.

"There is a definite link between terrorism and WMD [weapons of mass destruction]," he said. "Not to recognize that link would be foolhardy to the extreme."

Following are excerpts from his prepared opening statement dealing with Russia, the Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty, Europe, "unilateralism," and weapons of mass destruction:

Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I am pleased to appear before you to testify in support of President Bush's budget request for FY 2003.

Let me say here at the outset, Mr. Chairman, before I go into the details of the budget and our foreign policy, that President Bush has two overriding objectives that our foreign policy must serve before all else. These two objectives are to win the war on terrorism and to protect Americans at home and abroad....

We have had great success over the past five months in the war on terrorism, especially in Afghanistan.... We are also forming important new relationships with the nations of Central Asia.

At the same time, we and our partners have made significant progress in combating the terrorist menace beyond South Asia. From Spain to the Philippines, numerous arrests have been made, terrorist cells disrupted, and future attacks thwarted. Nearly $80 million in suspected terrorist assets have been frozen worldwide. And we have demonstrated our resolution to wage the war as long as is necessary to defeat terrorism....

Over the past year, Mr. Chairman, I believe the broader tapestry of our foreign policy has become clear: to encourage the spread of democracy and market economies and to bring more nations to the understanding that the power of the individual is the power that counts. And when evil appears to threaten this progress, America will confront that evil and defeat it - as we are doing in the war on terrorism.

In weaving this tapestry, we have achieved several successes in addition to the successes of the war on terrorism and the regional developments its skillful pursuit has made possible. Let me highlight several.

With regard to Russia, President Bush has defied some of our critics and structured a very strong relationship. The meetings that he had with President Putin and the dialogue that has taken place between Russian Foreign Minister Ivanov and me and between Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld and his counterpart, and at a variety of other levels, have positioned the United States for a strengthened relationship with the land of eleven time zones.

The way that Russia responded to the events of September 11 was reflective of this positive relationship. Russia has been a key member of the antiterrorist coalition. It has played a crucial role in our success in Afghanistan, by providing intelligence, bolstering the Northern Alliance, and assisting our entry into Central Asia. As a result, we have seriously eroded the capabilities of a terrorist network that posed a direct threat to both of our countries.

Similarly, the way we agreed to disagree on the ABM [Anti-Ballistic Missile] Treaty reflects the intense dialogue we had over eleven months, a dialogue in which we told the Russians where we were headed and we made clear to them that we were serious and that nothing would deter us. And we asked them if there was a way that we could do what we had to do together, or a way that they could accept what we had to do in light of the threat to both of our countries from ballistic missiles.

At the end of the day, we agreed to disagree and we notified Russia that we were going to withdraw from the ABM Treaty. I notified Foreign Minisnter Ivanov - we talked about our plans for two days. President Bush called President Putin. Then the two presidents arranged the way we would make our different announcements. And the world did not end. An arms race did not break out. There is no crisis in Russia-U.S. relations. In fact, our relations are very good. Both presidents pledged to reduce further the number of their offensive nuclear weapons and we are hard at work on an agreement to record these mutual commitments. This is all part of the new strategic framework with Russia.

We even managed to come to an agreement on how we are going to work through NATO. We are now developing mechanisms for pursuing joint Russia-NATO consultations and actions "at 20" on a number of concrete issues. Our aim is to have these mechanisms in place for the Reykjavik ministerial in May. And as we head for the NATO Summit in Prague in November, I believe we will find the environment for the continued expansion of NATO a great deal calmer than we might have expected.

I believe the way we handled the war on terrorism, the ABM Treaty, nuclear reductions, and NATO is reflective of the way we will be working together with Russia in the future. Building on the progress we have already made will require energy, good will, and creativity on both sides as we seek to resolve some of the tough issues on our agenda. We have not forgotten about Russian abuse of human rights in Chechnya, Moscow's nuclear proliferation to Iran, or Russian intransigence with respect to revision of Iraq sanctions. Neither have we neglected to consider what the situation in Afghanistan has made plain for all to see: how do we achieve a more stable security situation in Central Asia? We know that this is something we cannot do without the Russians and something that increasingly they realize can't be done without us, and without the full participation of the countries in the region. We are working these issues as well.

In fact, the way we are approaching Central Asia is symbolic of the way we are approaching the relationship as a whole and of the growing trust between our two countries. We are taking issues that used to be problems between us and turning them into opportunities for more cooperation. Such an approach does not mean that differences have vanished or that tough negotiations are a thing of the past. What it means is that we believe there are no insurmountable obstacles to building on the improved relationship we have already constructed.

It will take time. But we are on the road to a vastly changed relationship with Russia. That can only be for the good - for America and the world. ...

Another foreign policy success is the improvement we have achieved in our relations with Europe. In waging war together on terrorism, our cooperation has grown stronger. NATO invoked Article 5 for the first time ever on September 12. Since then, the European Union has moved swiftly to round up terrorists, close down terrorist financing networks, and improve law enforcement and aviation security cooperation.

Moreover, President Bush has made clear that even as we fight the war on terrorism, we will not be deterred from achieving the goal we share with Europeans of a Europe whole, free, and at peace. We continue to work toward this goal with our Allies and Partners in Europe. While in the Balkans there remain several challenges to our achieving this goal, we believe we are meeting those challenges. We have seized war criminals, helped bring about significant changes in governments in Croatia and Yugoslavia, and our military forces are partnered with European forces in Kosovo and Bosnia to help bring stability and self-governance, while European-led action fosters a settlement in Macedonia. We need to finish the job in the Balkans - and we will. We went in together with the Europeans, and we will come out together.

I also believe we have been successful in bringing the Europeans to a calmer level of concern with respect to what was being labeled by many in Europe "unbridled U.S. unilateralism". Notwithstanding the recent reaction in parts of Europe to President Bush's State of the Union Address, I still believe this to be true.

There was significant concern among the Europeans earlier last year that because we took some unilateral positions of principle for us that somehow the U.S. was going off on its own without a care for the rest of the world. This was particularly true with respect to the Kyoto Protocol. So we set out immediately to correct this misperception. Beginning with President Bush's speech in Warsaw last June, his participation in the G-8 meetings and the European Union summit in July, our extensive consultations with respect to the new strategic framework with Russia, and culminating in the brilliant way in which the President pulled together the coalition against terrorism, I believe that we demonstrated to the world that we can be decisively cooperative when it serves our interests and the interests of the world.

But we have also demonstrated that when it is a matter of principle, we will stand on that principle. In his first year in office President Bush has shown the international community who he is and what his administration is all about. That is an important accomplishment - and one that is appreciated now everywhere I go. People know where America is coming from and do not have to doubt our resolve or our purpose. They may not always agree with us, but they have no doubt about our policy or our position. We want to ensure that this policy clarity and this firmness of purpose continue to characterize our foreign policy, and not just with the Europeans but with all nations.

Let me just note that this sort of principled approach characterizes our determined effort to reduce the threat from weapons of mass destruction [WMD] - an effort well underway before the tragic events of September 11 added even greater urgency. We and the Russians will reduce our own deployed nuclear weapons substantially. In the meantime, we are using a comprehensive approach, along with our friends and allies, to tackle WMD elsewhere, an approach that includes export controls, non-proliferation, arms control, missile defenses, and counter-proliferation. As you heard President Bush say in his State of the Union address to the Congress, "the price of indifference [to WMD] would be catastrophic."

Director of Central Intelligence Tenet emphasized in his testimony last week that there are terrorists in the world who would like nothing better than to get their hands on and use nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons. So there is a definite link between terrorism and WMD. Not to recogize that link woul be foolhardy to the extreme. ...