2001 Press Releases

Farewell Remarks by Ambassador Steven R. Mann

May 30, 2001

Thank you all so much for coming tonight. I have spent many pleasant hours in this garden, and I'm glad to have the opportunity to continue this for yet another evening.

It has been an honor greater than I can say to have served here as the United States Ambassador and, as President Bush says, to have engaged in a distinctly American internationalism: idealism without illusion, confidence without conceit, realism in the service of American ideals. It is also a true honor to live among the people of Turkmenistan and to have made so many friends in the time I have been here. And it certainly has been an honor to have been received so cordially by President SaparmuratTurkmenbashi and to have spent so much time in his company.

I have to be careful when I think that being an Ambassador is special, though. I have come across the story of the famous Khoja Nasreddin who goes to buy a parrot. So Khoja goes into a pet shop, looks around, finds a beautifully colored bird, and asks the shopkeeper for its price. The shopkeeper answers, "Ten dirhams." Astonished, Khoja says: "For what?" "Well, he speaks English, Russian and Persian." Khoja looks around and sees another very beautiful parrot and asks, "How much for this one." -- "Twenty dirhams." — "Why is that?" The shopkeeper says, "This one is brilliant in Turkmen, Uzbek, Hindi, and Urdu." So Khoja keeps walking around, and in a corner/he finds this old, gray, ugly, silent parrot. He asks its price and the shopkeeper says, "Fifty dirhams." Khoja asks, "And what is it that this one can do?" The shopkeeper replies, "I really don't know, but the other two call him Ambassador."

So in the two and a half years that I have been called Ambassador here, I have seen many changes in the nation. I count it a pleasure to have been here for the opening of the Arch of Neutrality, the National Museum, the Rukhiyet Palace, and of course the pyatinozhka and the vosminozhka. More substantially, I am enormously gratified by the changes I have seen since my first visit to Turkmenistan in July of 1980.

The greatest change, of course, lies in the independence that Turkmenistan has achieved after so many decades of dictatorship and domination as a part of the USSR. Never when I walked the tree-shaded streets ofAshgabat more than 20 years ago, when I enjoyed shashlik in the restaurant of Park No. 1, did I think that I would return to an independent and sovereign Turkmenistan, let alone return here as Ambassador.

I am mindful that I, like all of us at the American Embassy, fulfill an important task here. It is our national ideology — the way we are as a people, remembering our own revolutionary past — to offer a helping hand to new nations struggling to establish their own sovereignty and prosperity. But we have self-interested reasons as well for our goodwill to the former Soviet Union. We believe it is in our national interest to strengthen these new nations so that they become independent, stable, friendly nations and so that they do not go the path of internal turmoil and extremism. For regimes to be stable, we believe they must have workable legal and political structures and we believe they must have good economic growth. Our policies are designed to encourage these goals.

Turkmenistan enters the post-Soviet era with significant advantages. It has a great natural resource base. There is no tribal conflict; no religious fundamentalism; the level of education is high; the Turkmen people are gifted and hard workers; its borders are peaceful.

The question that remains unresolved for me, however, is what path Turkmenistan will take in the future. Whether it advances on the path of market reforms and rule of law, or whether it continues to maintain the same political and economic system that brought about the downfall of the Soviet Union. I have heard the argument that change must proceed slowly; to do otherwise is to risk instability.

In response to that, I must say that risk lies in failure to change — in failure to take the practical, tangible steps needed to develop a modern nation. What are those steps? America's experience -- and the experience of countries worldwide — shows that it is essential to place limits on the power of government and let free markets work. Central planning does not work. The system of five and ten year plans does not work. A system without independent courts and uncensored media does not work. This is not ideology, it is fact. The experience of the USSR shows this. The Soviet government and its captive media were forced to invent successes, as the society grew weaker and weaker. The path to success for the new nations of Eurasia lies in adopting the development model that decade after decade, on every continent, has been proven to make nations prosperous. There is no other way. History shows that the same principles apply to every nation.

I think of it this way. My proudest achievement in life is being the father of two children. In raising children, we all know that the way you raise them in the first years of their lives sets the pattern for the rest of their life. By the time a child becomes a teenager, or then grows into adulthood, it is very hard for him to change. The first years are the most important. There is a Turkmen proverb — "Name eksen shony hem orarsyn" — You reap what you sow. Thus it is with countries.

I have heard the argument that it took the United States 225 years to develop into the nation that it is. Yes, but — from the very first day of American independence, we had in place a set of legal and economic institutions that safeguarded our freedom, that assured our basic rights. We are prosperous 225 years later not because it took us that long to get it right — but because in those very first years, we made the necessary decisions to limit the power of government, in the belief that people themselves know best how to run their lives and support their families.

An argument I have often heard is that the Turkmen have an "Asian mentality" and so they are not comfortable with democracy as we understand it. I reject this idea. First of all, I have never heard this from the average Turkmen. I have never heard a single average Turkmen citizen in my two and a half years here say that they did not want to see honest newspapers and television and read honest facts about the nation's progress; that they did not want to choose which religious belief they follow; that they did not want to choose their officials; or that they want to have no recourse in any dispute with government officials. Secondly, I am compelled to ask, "which Asian mentality?" Japan? The Philippines? India? — All of them market-oriented democracies. I hope you will all join me in rejecting the stereotype of a monolithic and antidemocratic Asian mentality.

I talk like this because I have the deepest affection and concern for Turkmenistan. I do not know what the future will bring for this marvelous country. These years have seen difficult economic challenges. The economic future of the country will depend on three things. First is whether Turkmenistan will be able to diversify its export routes for natural gas. The second is whether the nation can reach a sustainable level of agricultural development. Right now, water shortages and salinization are presenting serious problems for agriculture. The third and most basic factor is what direction the country will take on political and economic changes.

Nothing is more important than rule of law. Simply in terms of economic imperative, rule of law is essential for development. Businesses will not make investments in a nation without this. Without the ability to express opinions freely, people do not feel free to innovate — to suggest new and better ways of doing things. Without open discussion, decisionmakers get no feedback on what is working or not working in the society. Without honest and public statistics, the same problem occurs. So simply as an economic development issue, not merely as a democracy or human rights problem, establishing rule of law is the most important issue that confronts Turkmenistan.

Those of you who know me well know how strongly I desire the best for this nation and the strongest relations between our two countries. I have worked hard to bring this about. The United States will not retreat from its efforts to develop a productive and warm relationship with Turkmenistan. My successor will do no less. What will the outcome be? The question is still unanswered and will remain so for some time. I would not expect it to be otherwise. As the sufi saying goes, "Only children and fools expect cause and effect in the same story."

I leave with the deepest respect for the persons I have worked with here; with the deepest admiration for those who have expressed-their beliefs regardless of personal risk; and with the deepest affection for the people of Turkmenistan. In every corner of the nation, I have been received with the openheartedness and warmth that is unsurpassed anywhere in the world. I take with me golden memories and the belief that I will enjoy the company of many of you again, both here in Ashgabat — to which I look forward to returning in my new position — and in the wider world.

Farewell.