AMB. YOVANOVITCH: THERE ARE MANY WAYS FOR MORE ARMENIAN-AMERICANS TO GET INVOLVED WITH ARMENIA
by Vincent Lima
ticle/2009-06-10-amb–yovanovitch-there-are-many-w ays-for-more-armenian-americans-to-get-involved-wi th-armenia&pg=4
Wednesday June 10, 2009
Will meet Armenian-Americans in U.S. cities in June
Yerevan – The United States envoy to Armenia, Ambassador Marie
Yovanovitch is travelling to the United States to meet with members of
the Armenian-American community. (See schedule here.) Armenian Reporter
editor Vincent Lima and Senior Correspondent Tatul Hakobyan met with
the ambassador at her residence in Yerevan on June 10 to discuss her
agenda and some of the issues she will discuss during her visit.
Armenian Reporter: Madam Ambassador, you’re going to be meeting with
members of the Armenian-American community in Greater Boston, New York,
Washington, and Southern California in the coming days. This’ll be
first such tour since Ambassador John Evans did one in 2005 – though
I know you spoke to several influential Armenian-Americans in the
United States before coming to Yerevan, and you meet Armenian-American
leaders when they come here to visit.
What do you hope to accomplish on this trip?
Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch: I think it’s always useful to try to
meet as many people as possible. What you stated in your question,
that’s really true: I have had the opportunity to meet people here
and in Washington.
There are other folks I have not had an opportunity to meet and groups
that I haven’t met with, and I think it’s important to maintain a
dialogue with the various members of the community on Armenian-American
relations, on our assistance programs here, and provide an opportunity
for people to ask questions, raise concerns, and also for me to hear
what people are doing both in the U.S. and here in Armenia.
I’d like to discuss the Armenian-American bilateral relationship,
which is an important one to us, and I think important to the
Armenian-American community.
I’d like to discuss our assistance, not just USAID, but also some of
the other forms of assistance that we provide, whether it’s military
to military, whether it’s the Millennium Challenge program, which is
an important program.
We also provide a lot of assistance through USDA for agricultural
programs. So there are a variety of programs that touch many facets of
Armenian life that are important for people in the U.S. to know about.
In addition, obviously there are a number of areas of concern,
whether it’s the assistance budget, or other policy matters that I’m
sure the Armenian-American community has questions about, and this
is an opportunity for individuals or groups to ask questions of an
administration official.
AR: The United States has invested a great deal of money in Armenia
over the last two decades. And the government is spending $48 million
on aid to Armenia this fiscal year. You may want to talk about what
that’s going to. My specific question is whether you think these
funds are well spent on Armenia.
MY: I do think the money is well spent.
With USAID specifically, the projects they work on are in the areas of
good governance, economic competitiveness – helping Armenia become
more competitive so that it can meet the challenges of the 21st
century – as well as in the social sector. We’re helping in health,
helping the neediest in Armenia. For example, soup kitchens, helping
with employment centers retraining people for jobs in sectors where
they’re actually hiring. Things like that.
Helping with good governance
AR: Now the good-governance programs include programs that may have
helped in the conduct of this last election. You said the money was
well spent. Can you talk about that?
MY: I think democracy and good governance is one of the areas that
require the longest for real change to happen. Although when one
looks at the economy as well, it’s very difficult to transition from
one system to another, as we’ve seen here in Armenia and we’ve seen
in other places as well.
The good-governance money primarily goes to helping civil-society
groups build capacity in order to help them work with the
government. As you know, in the United States we rely very heavily
on the civil-society sector to help provide position papers to
legislators, to help mobilize support for various agenda items, to
change what the agenda is in the United States. The environmental
movement started with a book and various organizations took that on.
We do a lot of different things. We also work with the CEC – the
Central Electoral Commission – to help them improve their procedures,
to help them work on the electoral lists, and so forth.
You asked whether the money is well spent. I think the projects are
worthwhile. Does that mean everything is perfect in Armenia? There’s
probably still a ways to go in that area and in other areas as
well. Just as there is in the United States. I think it’s a continuous
process, and I think that if anything, the most recent election show
that there is a need for continuing assistance.
Why recommend less aid?
AR: President Barack Obama has asked for $18 million less for fiscal
2010. I know Congress may yet restore some or all of these funds. In
the meantime, can you explain this request for a substantial reduction
in aid? Let me just add that we know that the administration has
asked for an increase in foreign aid overall [$36.5 billion], and
more than $322 million for Georgia, so the reason can’t be lack of
funds in an economic crisis.
MY: I think that it’s always hard to make those choices. I think that
President Obama has requested 25 percent more than President George
W. Bush did in his most recent request. President Bush had requested
$24 million in assistance. And over the past number of years, Congress
has always upped that amount from the administration’s request, which,
as Assistant Secretary Philip Gordon noted yesterday, it is likely
to do again.
AR: Do you see any merit in the argument, made by the Armenian
government, that some of the $1 billion promised in aid to Georgia
after the war there last August should go to Armenia to mitigate the
losses sustained by Armenia in that war?
MY: Well, I think that was a package that was meant for
Georgia. Congress reviewed the issue and allocated those moneys for
the losses that Georgia had suffered, most specifically for war damage.
Azerbaijan’s preparation for war
AR: One of the concerns that Armenian-Americans often raise and has
also been raised by Congress is Azerbaijan’s military buildup and the
explicit as well as implicit threats of the use of force. We talked
a bit about the foreign-aid package. Now on the military package,
the administration in its budget request is looking to eliminate
military assistance parity between Armenia and Azerbaijan.
Has the State Department observed any lessening of expenditures, or
planning, or threats of the use of force? Is the Department doing
anything by way of allocation or policy expression to discourage
Azerbaijan’s offensive military buildup?
MY: I think that U.S. government policy is very clear: We think
the only solution to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is a political
solution. There is no military solution to that conflict. And we have
made that clear to all.
The proposed budget figures, which are not final – Congress has not
voted on this yet – reflect U.S. interests in the region. As you know,
we have important counterterrorism and anti-drug-trafficking programs
with Azerbaijan and those funds go to those particular programs.
None of the funding that we provide, either in Armenia or in
Azerbaijan, is for offensive purposes.
Opportunities for investing in Armenia
AR: Looking at the U.S.-Armenia relationship, there are many elements
to it, and one of them is investment by U.S.-based businesses,
people, entrepreneurs investing in Armenia. Will your trip give
you an opportunity to talk to some of those investors – actual and
potential? Is that one aspect of the U.S.-Armenia relationship that
you would pursue during this trip?
MY: Yes, in fact it is. I think there are a lot of opportunities here
in Armenia. I will have an opportunity to meet with businesspeople,
with investors, and I look forward to briefing them on the situation
in Armenia.
Clearly, just as in any investment environment, there are challenges
here as well. And people need to come into any new situation with
their eyes wide open. And even though Armenia like the rest of the
world is going through a financial crisis, sometimes in crisis are
the biggest opportunities for foreign investors.
AR: In our editorials, we often say to readers, Look, we have a web
of connections between Armenia and the Armenian-American community
and – say, prior to the last presidential elections in Armenia, in
February 2008, we said – Use your network, use your connections to
encourage your friends in Armenia, your friends in the administration
in Armenia as well as civil society to make this election better
than any other. Is there any element in your trip – and obviously,
it’s not the State Department’s role to lobby, so I’m not asking if
you’re trying to cross the line here – is there anything you hope, any
kind of message you hope to give to the Armenian-American community
in terms of mobilizing them, encouraging them to use their networks,
to use their connections in Armenia in one way or another?
MY: That’s a really good question. Because I think just as we’re
taught in the United States that it’s important to get involved,
sometimes it doesn’t necessarily matter what your cause is, but it’s
important to be involved and try to make the world a better place. And
I know that many Armenian-Americans feel very strongly about Armenia
and already are involved, doing various good works here.
Partnering with Uncle Sam
One of the things I’d like to suggest to those who are not yet
involved is that there are many ways to get involved, especially
now when Armenia is going through a period of financial crisis and
there’s a lot of need here.
And we have some suggestions for how you might want to become involved.
One is to participate in one of the State Department humanitarian
assistance programs, where for a relatively small sum, $12,000, an
individual or a group can make a material difference in an orphanage,
a school. These are small infrastructure projects where perhaps a dorm
is reconstructed or a new roof built or something like that. It’s a
relatively small amount of money and it can make a huge difference to,
say, 80 kids.
There are also private-public partnerships with USAID, where people
can get involved on a larger scale, helping the needy. For example
we have soup kitchens here. Others are sort of more entrepreneurial:
For example we have a program in the IT sector where an IT company is
working with a university here to set up programming to develop the
kind of IT courses and expertise that the U.S. company needs when it
hires for its local company here. So that’s another area.
And I know in the Armenian-American community there are all sorts of
people with skills, all sorts of people who have businesses of their
own, some of them that may have local branches here, and maybe there’s
a way they can participate in that kind of a program or another kind
of a program.
Student exchanges
So I think there are many different ways that individuals can partner
with the U.S. government, and there are many other ways as well, such
as sponsoring an exchange student. As an exchange student myself,
I know how transformative that can be in a teenager’s or young
university student’s life.
AR: You were an exchange student in Russia?
MY: I was, yes.
AR: In the Soviet Union?
MY: Yes, many years ago. We don’t have to point out how many. I learned
Russian there, worked in this part of the world. I would never have
been lucky enough to come to Armenia if I didn’t have that experience.
And I think the same thing is true, when I meet people coming back
from the United States here in Yerevan, and they talk about their
experiences in the United States, it opens up a whole new world for
them: a different way of thinking, a different way of doing business,
perhaps, and it not only changes that person and allows that person to
accomplish more in their lives here, but it creates a ripple effect,
in terms of the people that individual touches.
AR: I know there are exchange programs for citizens of Armenia to go to
the U.S. in late high school and for college and graduate school. Are
there exchange programs for U.S. citizens to come to Armenia?
MY: Fulbright. And, of course, we have the Peace Corps. It’s
not exactly an exchange program, but we’ve had many of the same
elements. Just as with exchange students who go to the U.S., I think
that our Peace Corps volunteers here serve as young ambassadors of
what it’s like to be an American, what we think and do. They provide
an inspiration to many people.
Talking Turkey
AR: The State Department has said – and yesterday Assistant
Secretary Gordon reiterated – that Armenian-Turkish relations need
to be normalized "without preconditions and within a reasonable
timeframe." Mr. Gordon also said yesterday normalization should not
be linked with other issues. I take this to mean the Karabakh issue
primarily. I think that’s very important thing that we hadn’t heard
explicitly stated before. He also said, "We have seen no flagging of
commitment" on the part of either Armenia or Turkey.
At the same time, since the middle of April, the prime minister of
Turkey has explicitly and unequivocally set a precondition, the same
precondition that has existed for the last 16 years, and it’s exactly
a link to Karabakh. In other words, what Assistant Secretary Gordon
seems to be saying is that the precondition set by Prime Minister Recep
Tayyip Erdogan is not consistent with this commitment to getting this
done without preconditions and in the earliest possible timeframe.
So where does that leave us? Do you have any reason to believe that
Turkey will listen to what the United States government is saying,
and proceed with working toward the normalization of relations on
the terms that the State Department is urging and recommending?
MY: I think that as Assistant Secretary Gordon said yesterday, Turkey
is committed to doing it. I think it’s the official position of the
government of Turkey to go forward with normalization and that it
would be independent of any other issue. And that’s true also of
the Armenians.
I think both sides recognize that this is an important step forward:
opening the border, normalizing relations, having free commerce
among individuals and groups would be beneficial to Armenia, would be
beneficial to Turkey, would be beneficial to the region, economically,
politically, and it would also increase the security in the region. And
for all of those reasons, I think both countries recognize that this
is an important step to take, and are moving, as Assistant Secretary
Gordon said yesterday, toward that.
Now is this a simple thing to do? It is not. And so I think you see
that reflected in some of the statements, and I think that Assistant
Secretary Gordon is right: there is no flagging of commitment, we
are moving forward.
Is Turkey playing for time?
AR: There were statements from the American side, the Turkish
side, and the Armenian side that in the near future we’ll see new
developments. When can we expect new developments, or is Turkey just
playing for time?
MY: I would just let those statements stand. I think that Turkey
is committed to an actual opening of the border and not just the
process, not just playing the process as you indicated. And I think,
as Assistant Secretary Gordon said, we are moving forward. And we’ll
have to wait and see.
AR: On the ground, we see that Turkey closed the border in 1993,
and since that time Turkey has been saying that we will not open
the border until the Karabakh issue is resolved to Azerbaijan’s
satisfaction. What is the reason that Turkey would now open the border
if the Armenian-Turkish process is not linked with Karabakh?
MY: Because it is the right thing to do.
AR: So Turks didn’t understand for 16 years that it was the right thing
to do, to open the border, or did something change in our region? What
is the reason the Turks are now changing their minds and are now
ready to open the border and have normal relations with Armenia?
MY: Well, I think that’s a question you’ll have to ask the Turkish
government, but what I would say is that it’s pretty clear it is
the right thing to do, because it will be positive on a political
level, positive on an economic and commercial level, and positive on a
security level. So I think what we’ve been seeing is the Turks and the
Armenians moving forward toward something that’s in the common good.
AR: Do you know whether Secretary Hillary Clinton brought this issue
up in her meeting with her Turkish counterpart?
MY: She addressed that in her public statement on Friday at the press
availability, so I would direct you to those comments.
AR: Actually, our Washington editor was there, at the press
availability on Friday, and we’ve covered that already. I just wondered
if you had anything to add.
Finally, can you say something about your experience so far in Armenia?
MY: It’s been terrific. I’ve been here eight months and it’s been
challenging, it’s been interesting, people have been very warm and
welcoming and I’m looking forward to coming to the United States
and sharing some of that experience with people in the U.S. and I’m
looking forward to my first summer here in Armenia because I hear
they’re terrific.
AR: They are! Thank you