[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 66 (Monday, May 19, 1997)] [Extensions of Remarks] [Pages E967-E969] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov] HEMISPHERIC LEADERS DISCUSS CHALLENGES AHEAD ______ HON. LEE H. HAMILTON of indiana in the house of representatives Friday, May 16, 1997 Mr. HAMILTON. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to call to my colleagues' attention the attached statement on conclusion of ``The Agenda for the Americas for the 21st Century''. On April 28 and April 29, a group of leaders of the nations of the Western Hemisphere, that included former Presidents Ford and Carter, gathered in Atlanta to address the challenges facing the Americas in the 21st century. As the attached statement attests, these leaders tackled the critical problems that must be addressed if we are to consolidate the impressive gains we have made in building a hemisphere that is resoundingly dedicated to free markets and democracy. The participants in this meeting are to be commended, and their conclusions merit serious consideration. I ask that the attached statement be printed in the Congressional Record. ``The Agenda for the Americas for the 21st Century'' We, the members of the Council of Freely Elected Heads of Government, have met in Atlanta, Georgia on April 28-29, 1997 to assess the state of western hemispheric relations and to offer our views and recommendations on ways to help achieve the goals that we share--the pursuit of peace; the end of illegal drug trafficking; the reinforcement, deepening, and extension of democracy; the promotion of a free trade area of the Americas; and social justice. The Council was established at The Carter Center after a Consultation on ``Reinforcing Democracy in the Americas'' in November 1986 by many of us. Since then, within the western hemisphere, we have worked to reinforce democracy at critical moments, including by monitoring and mediating 15 electoral processes in nine countries in the Americas. We have lent our support to freer trade, including by urging the U.S. Congress to approve the North American Free Trade Agreement. We have worked hard to reduce the region's debt and bring peace to Central America. For these past two days, we have reviewed a wide agenda confronting the nations of the hemisphere--trade, drug trafficking, poverty, and issues related to security and democracy. Our council of 29 current and former Presidents and Prime Ministers of most of the nations of the Western Hemisphere bring diverging perspectives to the table, which we found sometimes helps us to consider different approaches to an issue. We found ourselves in agreement on the basic goals, many of which were enunciated by the Western Hemisphere leaders in the Declaration of the Summit of the Americas in December 1994. The Americas should conclude a Free Trade Area of the Americas by the year 2005 while making sure that the benefits of freer trade are shared by all the peoples of the hemisphere. We should seek to eliminate the scourge of illegal drugs. The remaining territorial disputes of the hemisphere should be resolved soon. We should curb the purchase and sale of arms. The benefits of democracy should be extended to all the nations of the hemisphere, and we should deepen democracy, protect press freedom, and eliminate corruption and the disproportionate influence of money in the politics of all our nations. While we are committed to those goals, we have to express our great disappointment at the lack of progress in achieving them, and so we concentrated most of our time on how to translate those general statements into concrete steps forward. Let us identify, now, with greater precision what it is that we hope the leaders of the hemisphere should strive to achieve. First, some general principles: The issues on the agenda require cooperation and partnership, not unilateral dictation and paternalism. Most of the difficult issues on the agenda have two sides-- supply and demand on drugs, commodities, arms, bribery--and an effective strategy requires dealing with both sides. The moral basis of the new community of the Americas is democracy. Freer trade will enhance the ties between our democratic nations. 1. Trade, Integration, and Poverty We support the Summit Declaration to reach a Free Trade Area of the Americas by the year 2005. There has been great progress on negotiating bilateral and subregional free trade agreements, but thus, far, little progress toward the Summit goal of an FTAA. To attain that goal, the governments will need to move more quickly than they have during the past two years. All of our nations will benefit from freer trade, but that doesn't mean that everyone will benefit. The best defense of those people who suffer the increased competition of freer trade is not protectionism, but rather additional mechanisms to ensure that the benefits of freer trade are more widely shared and that those who lose the competition can be helped to adjust. 1. Fast-track: It is vitally important that the U.S. government obtains fast-track negotiating authority as soon as possible in order to begin serious trade negotiations. We were very encouraged in our discussions with U.S. leaders that there seems to be grounds for a workable compromise. The AFL-CIO wants adequate protections for workers and the environment in the trade agreement. In our intensive discussions with Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, the Speaker told us that he would support rapid passage of fast- track negotiating authority which included provisions for protecting labor rights and the environment, provided they are trade-related. We view this as a significant development that potentially goes beyond the existing NAFTA and hope Congress and President Clinton reach agreement on this as soon as possible. 2. Caribbean Basin Enhancement: It is vitally important that a Caribbean Basin Enhancement law is passed by Congress as early as possible to grant wider access to the U.S. market by the smaller and more vulnerable nations in the Caribbean Basin. These provisions will permit these countries to make the adjustment over an extended period of time to enter a Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA). (``Caribbean Basin'' includes Central America and the Caribbean.) 3. Paths to FTAA: We explored several different ideas as to the best way to pursue an FTAA. Some believe that the U.S. and other countries should negotiate bilaterally; others would like for negotiations to proceed between subregional groups. We propose an alternative: the nations of the hemisphere should define clear and specific criteria through their talks within the 11 working groups set up at the Denver Ministerial, and nations or groups would become members of a growing FTAA as they meet these criteria. Special transitional provisions might have to be made for the smaller economies. Governments should encourage their private organizations to participate in this process. 4. Caribbean Basin Commodities: Several small Caribbean Basin nations are very dependent on a few commodities, such as bananas and sugar, whose markets are restricted. We urge the United States and Europe to expand market access to these products. 5. Reducing Poverty and Inequality: It is urgent to reduce poverty and injustice through development strategies and investments that contribute to social, economic, and fiscal justice through health, education, job training, housing, and support for small and medium enterprises. Inasmuch as trade promotes growth, expanding trade can reduce poverty and inequalities as has been seen in Chile and the East Asian countries. But additional steps are necessary in order to compensate those who are hurt by the increased competition that comes from trade. Such steps would include increased productivity, technological transfer, and increasing annual rate of growth to more than 3% by generating more savings. Governments should also make education universal and higher quality for elementary school students and remove barriers to access by poor people to credit, land and education. [[Page E968]] 2. A New Hemispheric Approach to Illegal Drug Trafficking The hemisphere needs a new cooperative approach to combat illegal drug trade because so many of our countries are both producers and consumers of illegal drugs. Mutually recriminatory approaches distract from the real enemy: illegal drugs. If we recognize this, our efforts to fight the enemy can become a unifying rather than a divisive force for democratic governments in the hemisphere. It is time to change the relationship from an adversarial one to a partnership. The 1994 Miami Summit made explicit a new hemispheric-wide recognition of the seriousness of the drug problem and the shared responsibility among consumer, trafficker, and producer countries. We applaud the ratification at the 1994 Summit of three existing agreements against drug trafficking and money laundering, but these lack time schedules for implementation and meaningful enforcement measures. The political will to combat illegal drugs clearly exists, but political capacity is weak in many countries. The U.S. has filled the enforcement vacuum with its certification policy. With respect to the existing method of U.S. certification, the process should entain prior notification to the responsible authority within each foreign capital as to any concerns that have arisen and permit the opportunity of meaningful dialogue before the final assessment is made. There should be close coordination among U.S. officials in dealing with other nations. It is now time to replace the unilateral certification policy with a multilateral strategy which includes monitoring and enforcement of efforts to reduce demand as well as supply. We were very encouraged by our conversation with Speaker Newt Gingrich, Senator Paul Coverdell, General Barry McCaffrey, and Chairman of the House International Relations Committee, Benjamin Gilman--all recognized the need for a new approach to this issue. Speaker Gingrich described the certification policy as ``offensive and senseless'' and urged its replacement with a hemispheric-wide approach to the issue. He called for a dialogue among the nations of the Americans to develop a plan for a drug-free Western Hemisphere. We propose a multilateral forum, either through the OAS (CICAD) or the new blue-ribbon commission, that would devise a hemispheric-wide plan and strategies for each country. In addition, the group needs to develop standards (what constitutes success?) and measures of performance and assess each country's performance. The group could use standards developed in the 1988 UN Convention. The group could be modelled on the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, which is widely respected and competent. The plan should pursue each link in the drug-trafficking chain: production, processing, transportation, consumption, and money-laundering. The U.S. Administration should give more attention and resources to the treatment and education (demand) side of the problem because that is the most cost- effective way to attack the problem. The work of this group would be separate from the decisions made by the U.S. on aid, although we hope that the certification policy would be phased out as this group comes into being. The illicit traffic in arms, ammunition, explosives, and other dangerous materials is a concomitant of the illegal trade in drugs. Effective measures, requiring meaningful collaboration between nations of the hemisphere, will be required to combat this menace. We discussed the possible relationships to global efforts to control money-laundering and drug trafficking; specifically, coordinating with the UN's Durg Control Program and participating in a Global Narcotic's Conference. We also discussed the idea of a regional court of the Americas that could handle drug, arms trafficking, money-laundering, and other transnational crimes. Appeals from such a court could be sent to the Hague. We discussed the need to strengthen alternative development strategies based on trade reciprocity agreements for the Caribbean Basin and enhanced capacity of the IFIs to replace bilateral aid programs. Drug policy should not become a non- tariff barrier that will impede the continuing opening of markets and borders. 3. Resolving the Region's Territorial Disputes We agreed that although some of the long-standing border disputes have been dormant for long periods, they still remain a source of tension and a rationale for an unaffordable arms race. And, in some cases, they can erupt into conflict. The movement toward democracy and the end of the Cold War has diminished tensions in the region, and we do not mean to imply that the region is in turmoil. Quite the opposite. Democracy and peace is the norm, and we also believe that regional economic integration is a useful instrument for reducing security tensions. Still, territorial disputes remain potential problems. We therefore believe that the time has arrived to try to resolve definitively these territorial disputes. We discussed a number of strategies for accomplishing that, and rather than recommend a single strategy, we thought it would be far more useful to propose several ideas. The first question is who should mediate these disputes? The options are: (1) third-country governments; (2) institutions outside the hemisphere, like the Pope or the King of Spain; (3) the OAS; (4) a Commission of Mediators or Facilitators made up of a group of senior statesmen; or (5) The Carter Center or the Council of Freely Elected Heads of Government. Still, another alternative would be for the Hague Court to arbitrate the dispute. The second question is how should such mediators gain legitimacy for pursuing these issue. The options are: (1) the disputed states could invite; (2) the OAS could pass an ``umbrella resolution'' that would require all states with disputes to submit them to some mediation that could be chosen by the states; (3) the Presidents of the Americas could address this issue at the Summit of the Americas in Santiago in March 1998; or (4) the OAS or UN Secretary General could designate senior statesmen to undertake an assessment and feasibility mission to determine whether the governments were ready to settle the dispute--a kind of prenegotiation session. Whichever of these options are chosen, we recommend the OAS Secretary General and other leaders in the region become much more actively engaged into trying to resolve these problems. 4. A Regime to Restrain Arms Sales and Purchases Although Latin America spends relatively less on defense than most other regions, expenditures on expensive weapons systems divert scarce foreign exchange from more effective investments, including for education. They also compel neighbors to spend more on defense and, by doing so, generate international tensions. Moreover, we are concerned about the possibility of an arms race in Latin America, and we urge the governments in the region to pause before embarking on major arms purchases. Latin America has served as a model for nuclear non- proliferation with the Treaty of Tlatelolco, and we believe that it ought to embark on a conventional arms restraint agreement. The agreement needs to be multilateral--not unilateral, and it should involve purchasers as well as sellers. We recommend, as a first step, that the governments of Latin America pledge to accept a moratorium of two years before purchasing any sophisticated weapons. During that time, they should explore ideas to restrain such arms. We encourage them to look at the recent accord between Brazil and Argentina, which called for a region free of an arms race. At the same time, we call on the U.S. and other governments that sell arms to affirm their support for such a moratorium. Time is of the essence. Delay would be very costly to all of our nations. We urge the nations of the region to move quickly to implement a moratorium and to begin serious negotiations on ways to translate a moratorium into an agreement. In considering future agreements, governments should consider making a distinction between modernization and acquisition of new weaponry. We also suggest studies on banning landmines from the region and better regulations on the trade in firearms. We also urge hemispheric governments to sign a regional and an international Code of Conduct on Arms Transfers, which prohibits or restricts sale and transfer of weapons to: (a) states in international conflict; (b) states with internal conflicts and/or human rights abusers; (c) non-democratic states; (d) violators of international law; (e) states in which expenditures on health and education are less than for defense. We also recommend that all states agree to mandatory weapons export and acquisition reporting to the U.N. Register of Conventional Arms. States should also agree to participate in the Standardized International Reporting of Military Expenditures. 5. A Hemispheric approach to Extending, Reinforcing, and Deepening Democracy The hemisphere has reached an unprecedented moment in which all nations but one have held competitive elections. Elections are only one crucial element of democracy, however. We identified three issues for hemispheric cooperation on democratization: extending democracy to Cuba, deepening democracy by removing undue influence of money in campaigns and guaranteeing press freedoms, and eliminating corruption. Extending democracy to Cuba: The most appropriate and effective way to bring democracy to Cuba is through a policy of engagement rather than isolation. The Helms-Burton law is counterproductive because it causes greater problems for U.S. relations with its friends in Canada, Latin America, and Europe than it causes problems for Fidel Castro. We urge the U.S. Congress and President to repeal or significantly modify that law and to cooperate with Latin America in drafting a hemispheric-wide approach to facilitating democracy and civil society in Cuba. The extra-territorial aspect of the law is particularly objectionable. Cuba should be invited to participate in hemispheric events, provided that the government is prepared to accept the standards of human rights and democracy as enunciated in the American Convention on Human Rights, the Santiago Commitment, and the Managua Declaration. Deepening democracy. Democracy is a work in progress. Nowhere is it perfect. Existing campaign finance practices have tended to erode popular support for democracy even in countries like the United States. We discussed this issue along with access to the media for political candidates and concluded that reforms are necessary to restore confidence in the election process. [[Page E969]] We urge governments and parties throughout the hemisphere to remove the disproportionate influence of money in politics. Each country will devise their own systems to provide for equity, transparency, and accountability in their electoral processes, but in our review of a number models in this hemisphere and in Europe, we found that shorter campaigns, limits on expenditures, tax deductible small contributions, publicly subsidized media time, and effective monitoring all increased transparency and competitiveness of elections. Canada may be the best model in the hemisphere; the United States and Colombia might be among the worst. Freedom of the press from harassment, censorship and intimidation is vital to a thriving democracy. We unanimously endorse the Declaration of Chapultepec and urge all hemispheric leaders who have not yet done so to sign. Corruption: In 1995, this hemisphere constructed the first anti-corruption convention in the world. It is now time for all governments in the region to follow the lead of Bolivia, Paraguay, and Peru and ratify the Inter-American Anti- Corruption Convention before the 1998 Summit of the Americas. Transnational bribery is a negative consequence of the growing trade and investment relationships and privatization efforts of the hemisphere. We urge prospective bidders and government procurement agencies to sign Anti-Bribery Pacts. We applaud the initiative of the Inter-American Development Bank to require such transparency on their own projects, and we urge the World Bank to do likewise. We support the establishment of a strong OAS anti-bribery working group to provide legislative and technical assistance and to monitor national performance. We call on the OECD Ministerial meeting next month to follow the lead of the United States and the Inter-American Anti-Corruption Convention in criminalizing transnational bribery and ending tax deductibility for bribery. We intend to bring these issues to the attention of the leaders of the hemisphere, beginning with our three colleagues on this panel, who are incumbents--President Leonel Fernandez of the Dominican Republic, Prime Minister P.J. Patterson of Jamaica, and President Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada of Bolivia. After our press conference, we will be meeting privately with Vice President Gore to discuss these issues, and he will have an opportunity to state his response and U.S. policy tonight. We are heartened that U.S. President Bill Clinton will be visiting Mexico, Central America, and the Caribbean in a week, and will visit South America next October. Thomas ``Mack'' McLarty attended part of our meetings along with officials from the State Department and the National Security Council. The President's trip offers a real possibility of translating the general goals of the Summit of 1994 into something that would benefit the people of the hemisphere. We are pleased by the active participation of Ambassador Juan Martabit, who has been charged by Chilean president Eduardo Frei to coordinate all of the work of the Summit of the Americas that will be held in Chile in March 1998. He commented that ``our meeting had awakened the hopes that had diminished after the 1994 Summit.'' We therefore see our work these last two days as a kind of a bridge between two Summits. ____ Agenda for the Americas for the 21st Century Council of Freely Elected Heads of Government--April 29, 1997 Former President Jimmy Carter, United States. Former President Gerald Ford, United States. President Leonel Fernandez, Dominican Republic. Prime Minister P.J. Patterson, Jamaica. President Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada, Bolivia. Former President Oscar Arais Sanchez, Costa Rica. Former President Patricio Aylwin, Chile. Former President Rodrigo Carazo, Costa Rica. Former President Marco Vinicio Cerezo, Guatemala. Former Prime Minister Joe Clark, Canada. Former President Osvaldo Hurtado, Ecuador. Former President Luis Alberto Lacalle, Uruguay. Former President Carlos Andres Perez, Venezuela. Former Prime Minister George Price, Belize. Former Prime Minister Erskine Sandiford, Barbados. Former Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau, Canada. Vice President Carlos Federico Ruckauf, representative of Council member President Carlos Saul Menem, Argentina. Amb. Ronaldo Sardenberg, Minister of Strategic Affairs and representative of Council member President Fernando Henrique Cardoso, Brazil. Rodolfo Terragno, President, National Committee, Union Civica Radical Party, and representative of Council member Raul Alfonsin, Argentina. Dr. Robert Pastor, Executive Secretary of the Council of Freely Elected Heads of Government and Director of the Latin American and Caribbean Program. ____________________