Preview of the Seoul Conference on The Community of Democracies
Transcript #1
WELCOME BY: MICHAEL VAN DUSEN, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, WOODROW WILSON INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR SCHOLARS
CHAIR: MARK PALMER, PRESIDENT, CAPITAL DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
PARTICIPANTS: PAULA DOBRIANSKY, UNDERSECRETARY OF STATE FOR GLOBAL AFFAIRS; CHANG-BEOM CHO, DEPUTY FOREIGN MINISTER, REPUBLIC OF KOREA; AMB. CARLOS PORTALES, DIRECTOR GENERAL FOR FOREIGN POLICY, MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS, REPUBLIC OF CHILE; WALT RAYMOND, PRESIDENT, COUNCIL FOR COMMUNITY OF DEMOCRACIES; AND ROBERT HERMAN, CO-DIRECTOR, DEMOCRACY COALITION PROJECT

MR. VAN DUSEN: I think it is fair to start. We have a wonderful panel here. My name is Mike van Dusen. I'm deputy director of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. And I'm here standing because Lee Hamilton, who would love to be here, our director, is in Puerto Rico for a fund-raiser to keep this place going. And he regrets very much that he cannot be here, but we had a marvelous opportunity to have a big event in Puerto Rico and he is there.

We're very happy to partner with the Council for the Community of Democracies in this event. I think it very appropriate to have an event which brings together Woodrow Wilson's vision for self-determination and democracy. It brings together the Council for the Community of Democracies and many people involved with Freedom House, Freedom House having just put out a report with the Council on Foreign Relations talking about the importance of developing a caucus, I guess, of democracies at the United Nations.

I'm very happy to introduce the moderator for the first panel. Mark Palmer is an old friend of the center. He served with distinction as United States ambassador to Hungary around the time that the Berlin Wall came down and things in Eastern Europe changed. He is vice chair, I guess, of the board of Freedom House and vice president of the council organization that's partnering with us.

It's also good to welcome back Paula Dobriansky, an old friend of the center. She's spoken here frequently. And a special welcome to Ambassador Portales and Vice Foreign Minister Cho.

Mark, it's yours.

MR. PALMER: Thank you, Mike. And good morning, everybody. One only needs to read the Washington Post front page this morning to know why what we're going to be talking about this morning is really critically important.

From my point of view, it is clear that North Korea now represents a major challenge, so the fact that this meeting will be held in Seoul is timely and will bring, I think, additional focus to the Community of Democracies.

The fact that North Korea and Iraq are very much on the front page reminds us that the security threats in the world are, without exception, dictatorships and that the only way to deal with them is by cooperation among the democracies. So the community of democracies, I think, is gaining in importance as the world comes to grips with these problems.

We have a wonderful panel, and I don't want to take up any of their time. Undersecretary Dobriansky, who will speak first, doesn't really need any introduction, and you all have bios. She is, for my money, the first undersecretary for global affairs who sees her position as heavily democracy promotion, although she certainly has other important responsibilities.

She has a long history of being supportive of the values that underlie the community of democracies. She has a distinguished history both inside and outside government, most immediately prior to this job as head of the Council on Foreign Relations here in Washington.

So without further ado, Undersecretary Dobriansky.

MS. DOBRIANSKY: Thank you, Mark. And also, thank you, Mike. I'm very delighted to be here this morning. I'm very pleased that the Wilson Center, in coordination with the Council for the Community of Democracies, in fact, has put this program together this morning.

I think it's very timely, not only as we go forward to Seoul, but I also think it's timely -- (brief audio break) -- can have this dialogue about where the Community of Democracies -- in fact, where the community is, where we're going, and what we can and should be thinking about.

As we look toward next month’s meeting of the Community of Democracies, I think that it is useful to remember that the very concept of democracy is a community itself -- a convergence of disparate ideas from disparate sources. The modern concept of democracy is not the heritage of a single generation, nor is it the legacy of a single nation. Rather, it is a synthesis of ideas cultivated from different times and from different societies. Democracy is and always has been a combination of the best designs for responsive government, prosperous society, and free people. From ancient Greece, democracy received its foundations of direct government by the citizenry. From England, democracy inherited the parliamentary system of government. From France, democracy acquired its notions of individual rights and liberties. In other words, democracy has always benefited from the contributions of different ideas and diverse societies.

In that spirit, we are approaching next month’s meeting in Seoul, Korea, as another important opportunity to strengthen democracy by bringing together the world’s democratic nations and their diverse ideas for developing and expanding democracy to meet the needs of the 21st Century. The Community of Democracies presents an exceptional opportunity for building better democracies and promoting democratic development. It is an extraordinary forum in which nations can come together not because of factors like common borders or common histories, but rather because of common values and ideals and common commitments for the future. Indeed, it is a unique global initiative in that it brings together only democratic nations to identify ways to fortify and consolidate democratic institutions at home, regionally, and worldwide. Secretary Powell will lead the American delegation in Seoul, a fact which underscores our commitment to a Community of Democracies.

We will meet at a crucial moment in history, a time in which threats to freedom and democracy are numerous and ominous. In this global climate, it is then all the more essential that democratic nations join to demonstrate that democracy offers the best antidote to the popular discontent that sometimes breeds terrorism. It is all the more necessary to show that the movement toward democracy will not be impeded by either totalitarian states or rogue leaders. And so we must renew our commitment to the democratic values of political and economic freedom, respect for the rule of law, and respect for human dignity itself. The Seoul meeting of the Community of Democracies will provide us with that opportunity. What are our general hopes for Seoul and the specific mechanisms we look to employ to realize those hopes?

In Seoul, we will reaffirm the democratic principles laid down in the inaugural meeting at Warsaw 2 years ago:

- that peace, development, human rights, and democracy are fundamentally linked;

-- that equality, freedom, and due process are the inalienable rights of all people;

-- that governments must be responsive to the will and to the needs of its citizens.

In Warsaw, governments pledged to support one another in pursuing democratic principles and in fortifying democratic institutions. But to better support nations in the democratization process, the Seoul meeting will also recognize the fact that nations will vary in their progress toward these ideals.

And so the design of the Seoul conference will take into consideration the stage of democratization of attendees by including nations both as participants and as observers. One- hundred eighteen nations have been invited as participants, and 21 nations as observers. This system acknowledges the progress that observer countries are making toward greater democracy and improved human rights while also giving them the opportunity to learn from the experiences of participant countries. We hope that this new approach will better serve observer countries by including them among the community of nations committed to these ideals and by providing a framework that will better support countries through their particular stages of democratic development.

Our great hope for the Community of Democracies is that it will be a cooperative effort that benefits from the contributions of all corners of the globe and all sectors of society as well. No matter how successful the ministerial meeting might be, there will always be limits to what governments alone can do. The most effective outcomes are those reached in partnership with civil society. Therefore, the Seoul Ministerial will be partnered with a parallel meeting of non-governmental organizations {NGOs) and civil society representatives who will explore ways to strengthen civil society around the world. Forging closer ties between governments and non-governmental groups is vital to our success. Full democracy must be buttressed by a strong civil society that will hold governments accountable to their citizens. The public-private partnerships that we expect will emerge from Seoul will provide another aspect of support for democracy worldwide by helping to guarantee that governments remain transparent and responsible.

Part of the value of public-private partnerships is that they are designed to move beyond orations toward actions, real and tangible ways to improve the condition of democracy everywhere. Similarly, that emphasis on action will be a driving force in the discussions at the Community of Democracies ministerial meeting, as well as the NGO forum. We must focus on a concrete agenda for strengthening democracy where it exists and for encouraging it where it does not yet exist.

Therefore, we intend to produce a plan of action that will cement our responsibilities:

-- promoting respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms;

- advancing the rule of law;

-- insuring free and fair elections;

-- guaranteeing a free media; and

-- upholding accountable, transparent government.

The Seoul Plan of Action should also incorporate the fact that we bear these responsibilities not just for our own nations alone. We also owe a duty to our neighbors and fellow democracies to help them fully realize these promises of democratic development. Therefore, we must work as individual actors, regional partners, and global stewards of democracy.

Toward that end, an important objective of our discussions should be to highlight the particular importance of regional cooperation to advance democratic progress. A more robust region of democracies will make safer neighbors, better trade partners, and stronger allies. There are a number of means of regional cooperation which can be employed to reach this goal. Regional mechanisms for human rights reporting and democracy monitoring can help avert democratic crises. Bilateral and multilateral engagement can spur nations to better address democratic deficits that may exist. But perhaps the greatest potential for regional action to improve democracy lies in the development of regional instruments. Regional instruments can serve as a call to action for member states to build democratic institutions, adhere to democratic principles, and provide assistance to other member states where principles of democracy may be at risk. They can serve not simply to memorialize ideas but to motivate actions. Neighborly relations can be a means to strengthen a regional commitment to democracy.

A leading example of how a region can join forces to strengthen regional commitment to democracy is the Inter-American Democratic Charter. Adopted by the Organization of American States on September 11, 2001, the Charter embodies the region’s agreement upon a set of democratic values and provides mechanisms for the defense and advancement of those values. The Charter reinforces existing political commitments to democratic institutions while also putting forward mandates and activities to strengthen democratic systems and democratic culture in the Americas. It affirms that the people of the Americas have a right to democracy while their governments have a corresponding obligation to promote and defend it. Just as the Charter grew out of the 2000 Community of Democracies meeting in Warsaw, we hope that more examples of regional cooperation for democracy will come from our meeting in Seoul.

The African Union, in its early stages, has also expressed a commitment to democracy. We need to support this effort and share those lessons we have learned in this hemisphere with our CD partners in Africa. It is our hope that by encouraging our democratic partners from Africa, the African Union will continue on its present course and serve to strengthen and broaden Africa’s democratic development.

In addition to stressing the importance of regional action, our discussions in Seoul should pinpoint the need for democracies to take decisive action where threats to democracy exist. By preparing a slate of counteractive measures, the world’s democracies can go far toward averting democratic setbacks. From early warning systems to mediation to multilateral action, the countries in the Community of Democracies should consider the range of options that can be used to preserve and protect democratic institutions.

As we proceed in Seoul, our energies should also be focused on formulating real agendas for action in areas vital to democratic growth such as education, good governance, and fostering healthy civil societies. All of these areas are baseline necessities for effective democratic development. In particular, education is a fundamental element in a democratic society. To be full participants in democracy, people must be knowledgeable about their rights and duties as citizens. Moreover, democracies also bear responsibility to their people to adhere to standards of good governance. Corruption, lack of transparency, and a failure of citizen access to government are all failures which can erode support for democracy. Thus, it is vital that a nation be equipped with a robust civil society, fueled by a spirit of volunteerism, that can take an active role in governance.

The Community of Democracies is designed to catalyze a new way of thinking among the world’s democratic governments. This new way of thinking will orient governments not only by traditional factors like geography or ethnicity, but by a factor which is far more revealing -- a common commitment to democratic values. As we move beyond Seoul, we hope that the unity nurtured there will carry over into existing international and regional organizations. Though the Community of Democracies is not intended to act as a standing body, it is meant to form an informal caucus within existing international bodies that will facilitate actions to uphold democratic ideals.

President Ronald Reagan once said that "Democracy is not a fragile lower. Still, it needs cultivating." The Community of Democracies provides us with an opportunity to do precisely that -- to nourish budding democracies while tending to the further refinement of mature democratic systems. We eagerly anticipate this unique forum and the contributions it will make to democracy around the world.

Thank you. And I look forward later to our discussion. (Applause.)

AMB. PALMER: Thank you, Undersecretary Dobriansky. I now have the pleasure to introduce Deputy Minister Cho. Mr. Minister, if things go well in Seoul, we know it's entirely because of you and the hard work that you've put in, and we're grateful that you're spending time with us this morning. If things go badly, we'll all blame the North Koreans. (Laughter.)

Minister Cho has a very distinguished history. He was responsible for European relations in the ministry. He has done a lot of work on international-organization matters, IAEA and U.N. And he currently is the deputy minister for policy planning and international organizations.

Mr. Minister.

MIN. CHO: Thank you, Ambassador Palmer, for your kind introduction. I would like to begin by expressing my sincere gratitude to the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and Council for the Community of Democracies for the excellent arrangements made for this morning's meeting.

I'm most grateful for the invitation extended to me and consider it an honor, a privilege, to take part in this gathering. Held barely one month prior to the second ministerial conference of the Community of Democracies, today's meeting is indeed very timely as it provides a valuable opportunity to focus our attention on the conference.

Today I would like to introduce first to you the state of overall preparation for the upcoming Seoul conference, which has, as its aim, the strengthening of solidarity among our democratic nations in the world and the promotion of action for the development and spread of democracy. I will then, as requested by the organizers, speak for a few minutes on the developments and challenges to democracy in Asia.

As Professor Robert Dahl, a prominent scholar in the field of democracy, so eloquently put it, "Democracy, it appears, is a bit chancy. But its chances also depend on what we do ourselves."

This is an insightful observation on the need to coordinate cooperative action at the appropriate time for the promotion of democracy. Armed with the global trend of growing cohesion among nations, we are better-equipped than ever before to resolve the problem we face in today's world.

I truly believe that there is no time like the present to embark upon the journey towards achieving our long-cherished aim of strengthening and expanding democracy across the globe. In this regard, the second ministerial conference of the Community of Democracies, to be held in approximately three weeks, is indeed highly fitting.

It will provide an invaluable opportunity for democratic nations to come together to poll their wisdom as they engage in discussions on how best to strengthen and promote democracy for the world peace and prosperity.

As you are well aware, Seoul Ministerial Conference of Community of Democracy will be held at the COEX Convention Center in Seoul on November 10th to 12th, 2002, which is just three weeks away. As Undersecretary Dobriansky mentioned already, foreign ministers from 118 democratic nations across the world have been invited to attend the conference as full participants.

In addition, in order to allow for a more inclusive gathering in which as many countries as possible are able to take part, the convening group of the Community of Democracies decided to invite 21 additional countries as observers, as well as the Holy See and five international organizations, as guests of the conference.

The list of invitees was decided upon on the basis of a consensus following a series of consultations among the convening group, which consists of 10 countries; of course, United States and South Africa, Portugal, Poland, Mexico, Mali, India, Czech Republic, Chile and Republic of Korea.

These invited participants, observers and guests were decided upon in strict accordance with certain democratic development criteria which are elaborated in the document we call Criteria for Participation and Procedures, which has been already previously agreed upon among the 10 convening-group members.

As of yesterday, October 17th, 96 countries have confirmed their participation in the Seoul conference. In addition, we expect 20 or 30 more countries will notify us in the coming days of their attendance at the Seoul conference.

Seoul conference will mainly be consisting of two plenary sessions and four roundtables under the overall theme of democracy investing peace and prosperity, which will provide an ample opportunity for participants to engage in discussions of the indisputable relations between the democracy, on the one hand, and the realization of peace and prosperity on the other.

The participants in the roundtables will have opportunities to examine in greater detail the issues such as the consolidation of democratic institutions and regional cooperation to promote democracy and the issues of media democracy, as well as democratic assistance coordination.

In addition, the Seoul conference, as in Warsaw, will include a parallel forum of non-governmental organizations and civil-society representatives who will explore, through interaction with the participants of the ministerial conference, the ways to consolidate and expand democracy throughout the world.

One of the characteristics, key characteristics of the Seoul conference, which is a little bit different from the previous meeting in Warsaw, is greater interaction envisaged between the representatives of the governmental conference and those representatives who will participate in NGO conference.

We are currently planning to organize one of these four roundtables which is on issue of enhanced coordination of the democratic assistance in a manner in which the representatives from the NGO and representatives from the governmental side can have kind of interactive discussions to explore the effective ways and means to further strengthen our coordination efforts in terms of democratic assistance.

And we also in Seoul conference envisage a special session in one of the secondary plenaries which will be devoted to the kind of interactive discussions between representatives of governmental conference and NGO conference on the results of these two independent forums discussions so that the outcome could be mutually reinforcing.

And also we have in mind a kind of joint social gathering of agents in which both -- I mean the representatives participating in both forums can have an opportunity of making themselves more acquainted with the other side's views and opinions.

Another key characteristic of the Seoul conference is that it will be action-oriented. Namely, the purpose of the Seoul conference is to build upon the democratic principles and practices enshrined in Warsaw declaration to come up with concrete and feasible measures for the consolidation and enlargement of democracy.

To this end, the convening role of the Community of Democracies is drawing up a Seoul plan of action which will be finalized at the conference next month. This action plan will embody a number of specific measures democratic nations, both new and old, are to implement.

A range of measures we plan to include in that plan of action are the measures for the promotion of democratic progress through the regional institution such as human rights and democratic monitoring mechanisms, and secondly, measures to be taken individually or collectively by the countries of Community of Democracies to respond to the threat to democracy if that threat is imminent.

And also, thirdly this action plan will include the importance of the establishment of rule of law and development of a strong political party system and a healthy civil society which we believe are essential for building strong democratic institutions and practices, and also essential for the promotion of good governance.

Plan of action will also highlight the importance of strengthening public education for democracy and measures to nurture a stronger civil society through volunteerism. It will also emphasize the importance of improving the effectiveness of democratic assistance through enhanced coordination.

Lastly, in order to support and review the implementation of the action plan which the Seoul conference will adopt, the action plan will entrust a convening group to continue to meet on a regular basis and also serve as a bridge between regions and regional organizations.

In addition to the Seoul plan of action, we are also preparing to adopt a statement on terrorism. Being the first gathering since the horrific September 11th terrorist attack and in the wake of the recent other terrorist attacks in various parts of the world, the Community of Democracies will strongly denounce, through its statement, terrorism as a direct threat to democracy and humanity, and it will stress the importance of strengthening democratic principles and institutions as crucial elements in the fight against terrorism.

It will also note the fight against terrorism requires a comprehensive approach, including the need to address the conditions that may offer a breeding ground for terrorism while underscoring that the terrorism cannot be justified by any cause or under any circumstances.

Finally, the statement will underline the Community of Democracies' strong commitment to the pursuit of concerted efforts among democracies to combat terrorism.

Furthermore, Seoul conference, at the end of the meeting, plan to approve a chair's statement which will be issued by the host government on behalf of the convening group. The chair statement will reflect the result of the discussions and the proceeding of the conference in a concise and effectual manner, and I hope so that the chair's statement can serve as a kind of official record of the meeting.

The Seoul conference will hold particular significance as it reaffirms the enthusiasm and commitment displayed at the Warsaw conference and further opens a new chapter for action-oriented dialogue in Community of Democracies.

With your active support, the Seoul conference will be real forum for Community of Democracies to be developed as a valuable player in leading a march toward consolidating expanding democracy across the globe.

So far, I have discussed overall preparation for the upcoming Seoul conference and some elements to be included in outcome of the conference. I wish now to turn to the issue of democracy in Asia for a brief moment.

Over the past 10 years, we have witnessed strong advances toward the achievement of democracy, many nations in Asia-Pacific region. Korea's successful transition from military rule to civilian government and first transfer of power from a ruling to an opposition party are excellent examples.

There are many more. Nepal has held its first election. A civilian government has been established in Thailand. In Taiwan there has been also a successful transfer of power between ruling and the opposition parties. Civil war has come to an end in Cambodia, and East Timor recently gained its independence.

Drawing on its experience of democratization, the Korean government has been making great efforts for the promotion and the consolidation of democratization in Asia. It has been actively voicing its views to international community on the realization of democracy in Myanmar in particular. It has also made financial contribution to Afghanistan totaling almost $50 million to help democracy take root in this young country that has endured for so long the suffering of war.

In addition, the Korean government dispatched troops as part of U.N. peacekeeping operations to promote democratization in the nascent independent country of East Timor. I firmly believe that these activities by the government of Republic of Korea will prove to be valuable input as we strive to promote and consolidate democracy in Asia.

Nevertheless, democracy in Asia still face daunting challenges, the most critical being unbalanced development geared only toward economic growth, not supported by advances in democracy. This imbalance is a likely cause of the economic stagnation that results from a lack of social transparency and accountability. It may even make the nation susceptible to the return of authoritarian rule. In other words, in the age of political transition to democracy, accompanied by rapid economic growth, the risk of backtracking due to a level for democratic culture and good governance is a major, major obstacle.

In this regard, the experience of Korea serves to illustrate how difficult it is to maintain stable political progress and economic growth without adherence to democratic principles and institutions. After 30 years of speedy economic growth, the financial crisis that struck in late 1997 made us only too painfully aware of the inconsistencies and vulnerabilities in our political economic system that have been built up over the past decades of government-controlled politics manipulated, financial and corporate practices.

However, those severe economic hardships -- Korea has learned a valuable lesson: that unless we enhance social transparency and accountability, as well as strengthening democratic institutions and practices, a genuine market economy will not flourish. As President Kim Dae Jung so powerfully put it, democracy and the market economy are like two sides of the coin or two wheels of a cart. A lack of democratic transparency and accountabilities hinders economic development, as a result disrupting the process of democratization and ultimately bringing about its decline.

Another hurdle to the development of democracy in Asia is the lack of mutual understanding due to the racial, linguistic, religious, ideological and cultural diversities in the region. Without respect for co-existence, tolerance, domestic instability and regional disputes are about to occur. There is no room for democracy in the midst of war or terrorism. Indeed, democracy can only flourish in peace, and peace can be truly enhanced in the democratic society.

In light of this, dialogue among Asian countries, and with the nations of other continents, is essential for the advance of democracy. Really dialogue can serve as a starting point for the promotion of consolidation of democracy worldwide.

In this respect, I believe the Seoul conference holds particular significance as it opens a window of opportunity for effective dialogue on international cooperation for such efforts. The triumph, however, of democracy cannot be guaranteed without real action from all of us. The realization of global peace and universal prosperity will be far from reach without true investment in democracy. We have learned from the past that there is a need for strong action at all levels, spanning small civic organizations and extending to an international coalition, if we are to ensure the complete fruition of democracy. It is my firm belief that the upcoming Seoul conference will constitute an important opportunity for the advancement of global peace and universal prosperity for all by fueling such fueling such actions.

To conclude, distinguished guests and ladies and gentlemen, I would like to once again express my sincere hope that all those present today this morning will continue to show great interest in the tasks that face us in promoting democracy worldwide, and will support the Seoul conference so that we can ensure it's a resounding success. Thank you very much. (Applause.)

MR. PALMER: Thank you, Mr. Minister. Now it's a great pleasure to introduce Ambassador Portales. As we all know, Chile is the host of the 2004, the next follow-on foreign minister meeting, and so we are very glad he can be with us this morning. He is the director general of the Chilean Foreign Ministry. He was previously the permanent representative of Chile to the OAS, Chile's ambassador to Mexico. and as someone who himself served on a policy planning staff, I wanted to underline that he was head of the policy planning staff of the Chilean Foreign Ministry -- that is, for those of you who have not served in foreign ministries, the place where people are paid to think. And I think that's the reason why he is actually going to speak to us twice today. He is the most thoughtful person perhaps, or at least paid to be thoughtful person, on our agenda. Mr. Ambassador?

AMB. PORTALES: Thank you very much for your challenging introduction. (Laughter.) Thank you very much, the Woodrow Wilson Center for Scholars for the invitation, and the Council For a Community of Democracies. I will try to be brief.

Let me start with a personal remark. Twelve years ago -- a little bit more than 12 years ago -- a group of Chilean scholars came to Washington and organized in the Wilson Center a roundtable on the Chilean transition to democracy. Well, it was a few months or a few weeks before President Aylwin was inaugurated as the first democratically-elected president of Chile in 17 years. We had the experience of dictatorship, and now we have the experience of a successful democratic government for more than a decade. And I think that for us it is very important to be the host of the third ministerial meeting of the Community of Democracies, and to participate in this global movement of countries devoted to these values.

I think this also shows the importance that the international community plays in the trend-setting of democracy. Democracy is a question of the conditions of each country, but it's not isolated from the global environment, and what countries and persons, peoples, groups, civil society do for democracy in the world matters in each country. And therefore I think this is the essential value of the Community of Democracies -- a group of countries open to civil societies that help each other in strengthening the ways of organizing the political community.

I think that democracy and the triumph in a way of democracy was the main achievement of the 20th century. But the 21st century has new challenges for this now prevalent form of social and political organization.

In the 20th century we were devoted to the expansion of free and fair elections, and now we are going to support broader components of democratization. And therefore the agenda of the Community of Democracies is enlarged. We have now new problems to tackle at the global level and in each national setting. Democratic government is supposed to provide better protection for civil rights, and the decentralization of political power has improved citizens -- I believe it will influence the decision-making process, in particular at the local level. In many countries institutions that once were non-democratic have become more democratic. The military, once a dominant political role to play in many countries, has a far lesser role in emerging democracies. Nevertheless, in many countries democracy is not deeply rooted. The lack of previous experience in representative government, deep social and economic inequities, or insufficient institutional development should be credited as some of the most critical shortcomings that have upset democratic consolidation. Therefore, we have to tackle this problem.

Also, populist or authoritarian trends in many emerging democracies frequently express people's frustration in democratic rule. It is well known the ability of political and social elites in many countries to influence political outcome in its favor. A new challenge for democracy.

Corruption and government inefficiency also encourage people to pull out from politics, leading to an increasing political apathy -- a favorable environment for giving corrupt politicians more leeway -- another challenge for democracy.

Therefore, we think that the role of the movement for democracy and the role of the Community of Democracies is to tackle all these problems. We have been working in the convening group for the preparation of this whole plan of action under the leadership of the Korean Foreign Ministry. And I think we have been able to put together a project that will take into account these different aspects. I think this is a very important step for the Community of Democracies.

I will try just to highlight some challenges that I think are the challenges of this community from the approval of this whole plan of action to Santiago. The first challenge is the implementation of this whole plan of action. We have go get a document that probably will be approved in Seoul and we have to be able to develop all the aspects that are and were also highlighted by the previous speakers in this plan of action. We have a very important task. And therefore we see that the task of the community from this conference to the third ministerial conference and the task of implementation of this whole plan of action.

I would like to highlight the importance of regional action. We have as a community to be able to make bridges among different regions. We have experiences and we have different experiences in different regions, but we do have organizations in our region -- the Organization of American States that has been for decades working on democratic promotion in all aspects of our agenda, and we have in other regions other experiences. The possibility of the community to be able to make these bridges may reinforce this movement in the whole world, and therefore we think that from Seoul to Santiago we have to make significant progress in making those bridges. We have to be clear we want more participation of all regions, and we hope that the importance of the European participation in this endeavor will be enhanced in the following years. That I think is a challenge for the community.

We think also that we have to focus very strongly in the institutions of democracy. We have been working in several regions on judicial reform. We have to work on the structure of the political system and political parties -- an essential element of democracies. I think the role of the community in integrating the debate or improving the political process and the political party system is very important.

We have to incorporate people that we excluded from the political system in democracy. And I think here two issues are very clear to put in our agenda. On the one hand, one issue that has been very strongly promoted by our African friends is poverty and democracy -- how we have to overcome poverty in order to strengthen participation. And also the political side, civil society participation -- the incorporation of the population. The political system may not be far apart of the population. The political system is for the population. And I think the importance of incorporating or more incorporating civil society in this element. This meeting is a meeting called by the Council for the Community for Democracy, and we are very interested in the result of the NGO meeting in Seoul. And I think a very fruitful factor could be built from these relations between governments and civil society -- at the global level, at the regional level, and also at the national level.

And, finally, I think we have to stress the need of cooperation, cooperation among the countries. We have to be able to establish a network of cooperation. We don't see the community as replacing the existing mechanism, but as a way to make known each other in the different ways. We have been working in the Americas -- and here's the representative of the Organization of American States -- in trying to build this link between government, between government and political parties, between international foundations that support democracy. And I think that the challenge to promote cooperation to use the financial resources on the one hand, the human resources on the other hand, and to connect experiences. I think these make this movement for democracy truly global. And I think this is a challenge that the community has for the next year.

Coordination among different regions will be -- if we improve coordination among different regions, we will be entering a new period with a new step.

In summary, during the following conference of the Community for Democracy, the promotion of far-reaching democratic institutions will be a necessary step for democratic consolidation in the world.

And of course we have also to deal with international problems that affect everybody, and particularly the democratic system -- international problems across the board that challenge us, due to drug trafficking, to international crime, to terrorism -- also affect democracy, and we have to cooperate in dealing with these problems. These are the goals that we will be looking for to achieve from Seoul to Santiago and beyond. Thank you very much.

(Applause.)

AMB. PALMER: Thank you, ambassador. In order to democraticize our own process here, I thought we could now take a few questions, and then we'll carry on with Walt and Bobby Herman. So the floor is open for a few questions. If no one else wants to break the ice, I will. It seems to me, Mr. Minister and Paula, that the region in the world which is perhaps the most challenging for determining participants and observers is the Middle East -- the least democratic region. I would be interested to know how you solve this problem -- that is, among the participants and the observers, are there any -- some -- from the Middle East? And who are they?

MINISTER CHO: Yes, thank you, Ambassador Palmer. Certainly we have both participants and observers from the Middle Eastern region. In fact, I must confess that convening group members have spent quite some time to identify which countries would be eligible for the full participants and which countries as observers, and what should be the remaining others. So far I think we have three?

MS. DOBRIANSKY: Four. Four participants.

MINITER CHO: Four participants from the Middle East, including Israel --

MS. DOBRIANSKY: Morocco.

MR. CHANG-BOEM: Bahrain, Jordan. And we have the others as observers around here -- six countries. My staff maybe -- Mr. Kim, you help me. How many? Please count it quickly. We have observers. When we decide on all these least participants or observers we were very careful not to do that in a manner which offends the others which are not invited as a full participant. So what we did is a kind of demarches, prior demarches to these countries before sending out the invitation letters, explaining what is criteria of selecting these list of participants. And we explained to them at this time in the Seoul conference the list of the participants will not be exactly the same as that list which we used for the first minister meeting in Warsaw. After the Warsaw meeting, upon mandate from the foreign ministers of convening group countries, senior officials of the convening group sat together to work on a document which I referred to before, entitled "Participation Criteria and Procedures," which elaborate which criteria, democratic standards will be applied in the selection process for the participants who were invited to the Seoul conference. And we explained all this to the observer countries. And if, knowing all this background, if these countries who we addressed have still expressed interest of participating in the Seoul conference, even in the capacity of observers, then we as a host country, on behalf of the convening group, sent out the official invitation. In that way we tried to minimize any potential -- how can I put it? -- negative reactions from the democratic standards for being invited as full participants. So my answer to your question is certainly we have both participants and observers from the Middle East. We look forward to the active contribution of these representatives when they come to Seoul.

MS. DOBRIANSKY: Yes, I may just add to that. When the convening group got together and deliberated about the full range of participants and observers, we did discuss, I would say, very specifically the region of the Middle East, and I think also very thoughtfully. In an interesting way over the last year there has been a lot of ferment and a lot of discussion about the Middle East and about engagement and outreach. And we all felt that it was important to look through very thoughtfully, very carefully as to those that we felt would come forward and join as participants, as the minister said. At the same time, we also noted that a number of countries in the region have taken some very striking steps. And we felt that because the convening group in fact did determine well in advance that we wanted to have not only participants but observers -- observers to enable those countries that may be making a number of significant steps -- some maybe more than others -- but to bring them into the process, to let them observe and engage with other participants in the community of democracies that informal as well as formal exchanges could be beneficial.

I'd also add to what the minister said and underscore what struck all of us: quite significantly, a number of countries of the Middle East approached us and indicated that they wanted to know more about the Community of Democracies, that they also were interested in contemplating and thinking about, possibly in the spirit of regional cooperation, focusing on a regional discussion sometime in the future -- maybe into next year. So we welcomed that. We felt that that was important to engage on, to explore, to see what that entails.

And then, finally, I'd just to amplify the minister's point, because this is new in this process -- this wasn't a part of Warsaw, and this is a part of Seoul -- as the minister indicated, we feel it was important to have personal and direct contact with those countries we reached out to as observers, because they'd have questions -- Well, what does it mean? And we felt that that direct contact not only in this case, but in others, was very beneficial in articulating the spirit in which we were trying to reach out, but also at the same time the parameters that do exist in the context of the community.

Q What were the criteria employed to invite groups to the civil society forum?

MR. PALMER: Okay, if you'll be patient, we'll come to that. Please?

Q I'm Harry Dunphy from the Associated Press. I wondered if Undersecretary Dobriansky or Minister Cho would address the threat posed to democracy in Asia by a nuclear-armed North Korea, and whether that subject will be addressed at the Seoul conference.

MS. DOBRIANSKY: Well, I'll start, and maybe state more broadly we are very concerned about threats to democracy at large. In my own remarks, as you heard, this is something that we deliberated on even very broadly, be it whether it's in the region or outside of the region in other regions. And in fact, as the minister I think pointed out, it was very striking when we gathered a year ago, at that time we talked extensively about the importance of talking about in particular terrorism and counterterrorism. And the issuance of a statement. And, as the minister indicated, that is something that we are seeking to do.

But, simply put, I'd say this, that first all threats to democracy are of concern to the conference, and very specifically the action plan also addresses this very issue, and suggests some courses of action that should be contemplated by all participants of the Community of Democracies.

MINISTER CHO: Threat to democracy will be one of the important subjects the Seoul Conference will address at the meeting in Seoul in November. Particularly we will focus on such a threat as put by the potential disruption of the constitution process, and also a threat which we have been witnessing in the context of terrorism. And the most recent one was the bomb attack in Bali. All this we believe is a direct threat to democracy.

The issue of the North Korean nuclear development we are, as the allies in the United States and others, very much concerned -- deeply concerned about the seriousness of the issues. We have been informed by our ally the United States about the situation which was raised when the U.S. special envoy, Assistant Secretary Kelly visited North Korea early October. And we are in the process of very close intense consultation among the countries of the traditional partners -- the United States, Japan and others.

As you know that the -- like others in the international community, the Republic of Korea is strongly opposed to such a threat of the North Korean nuclear development programs, and we are urging North Korea to fully comply with their commitment under the Non-Proliferation Treaty, the NPT Treaty, and also their obligation under the agreed framework, and also you know the South-North Korea have signed the joint denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula Declaration -- all these obligations under these arrangements I think North Korea should comply with those obligations. We hope that the threat coming from the newly-rebuilt North Korean nuclear development programs could be wisely dealt with, hopefully through peaceful means and through intensive dialogue as soon as possible, so that we see such a threat would be effectively responded.

Yes, we will discuss the issue of the threat and how the Community of Democracies could effectively deal with those threats in the Seoul conference. You will see the outcome of those discussions and the action plan, as I alluded to in my presentation. Thank you very much.

MR. PALMER: I'll take one more question now, and then we'll finish up with the presentations. And then we can come back to questions. Yes, please, in the back.

Q Hello, thank you. I am Elizabeth Spehar from the OAS, and I thought that Ambassador Portales's remark about the importance of looking at regional experiences was very important. I see the Community of Democracies' movement as having great potential in that field, among others; in other words, deepening the exchange of experiences among regions in terms of how democracy is currently being promoted and defended, and what we can learn from each other.

In that regard, as Undersecretary Dobriansky mentioned as well, in February of last year the OAS hosted what I think was a very interesting meeting, where we brought together representatives of regional multilateral institutions to talk about our role in our respective regions, and what we could learn from each other. And out of that came a report and some quite concrete follow-on ideas, including the idea of having a second of this type of meeting hosted by another multilateral organization. In fact, at the time the OSCE had tentatively offered to take on that role. Since then we are not aware of any more movement. And I was just wondering whether this panel is aware if there is any kind of movement in that regard, or whether perhaps the Seoul meeting can be an occasion to restimulate that idea. Of course the multilateral regional institutions are not the only vehicles for deepening regional exchanges, but I think they can be an important one, particularly since various persons have mentioned that the OAS, various other organizations, have a number of new instruments that it would be interesting to share. And I think particularly since we have now a newly-reconstituted African unity that might be quite interested in hearing more about other multilateral regional experiences. So I just wanted to ask whether something was already in the works, or whether we could perhaps push this at the Seoul conference. Thank you.

MS. DOBRIANSKY: I'll make three brief comments. I don't know if you would like to comment. Three very brief comments.

First, regional cooperation is a priority to us. And as I specifically mentioned, we have been contemplating one idea relevant to the AU and the OAS, of bringing together, say, some leaders from the Caribbean and with some counterparts in the AU, and basically to have a discussion about best practices, if you will, and a sharing of experiences.

With regard to the OSCE, there have been different ideas that have been contemplated, but they have not gelled yet. But this is a priority for us, and this is something we are going to look at specifically. It's not only just one area, but literally looking at multiple areas.

And finally I would say, in maybe turning it over to Ambassador Portales, we have had in fact many discussions looking at Seoul and as moving forward to Santiago, and just what kind of steps can be taken in between. And with the outpouring of interests from a number of regions -- as I mentioned before also the Middle East -- we think that there are going to be multiple opportunities to undertake certain steps between Seoul and Santiago.

MR. PORTALES: Just a brief comment. First, one, yesterday we didn't have time, but we were approached this week by the government of Romania, reiterating their interest in that meeting of the OSCE. And I think that we hoped this will end up in a second regional meeting. And I think that we have to find in the follow-up process novelty ways of cooperation among different regional organizations. I think that is going to be what makes really global this movement -- trying to compare and to take advantage of different processes that have already taken place in some regions, and how to apply it to other regions. I think that's a very important thing, and I think also this not only should be at the level of government, but also I think it's a task of the NGO meetings, how to find ways to make interchange more appropriate among non-governmental organizations of different sectors.

VOICE: And, finally, I will reiterate our interest in political parties. They are international, and we have to be able to use that channel also for comparing experiences among different countries -- how political parties could work in advancing democratic political systems. And I think there are channels, political foundations are also another instrument. I refer to the meeting of the workshop in Santiago organized by the Organization of American States where the political foundation from Europe and the international institutes of U.S. parties were present, and I think there are several ways to improve communication of experiences and strengths. And I think that should be definitely an issue going to be a priority of the community in the next years.

MR. PALMER: One of the ideas that Freedom House and particularly Max Kampelman, who was of course sort of the godfather of the Helsinki process -- Max has been pushing in Freedom House and the board has endorsed the idea that the OSCE could be an engine for working with the governments of the Middle East and non-governmental organizations in the Middle East to help foster democracy in the Middle East. One of the things that's interesting that I hadn't focused on until recently is that I think it's six Middle Eastern countries signed the Helsinki document in 1975. And the EU and Europeans have begun their own kind of dialogue with a number of regional countries. And so one of the ideas -- and perhaps this is what Undersecretary Dobriansky was referring to -- but one of the OSCE ideas would be to initiate perhaps with the Community of Democracies, and most importantly the people of the Middle East, a dialogue on democracy.

So now we will return, and in the interest of time I won't do extensive introductions of Walt Raymond and Bobby Herman. They are well known I think to most people in this room. They both have extraordinary records in this field of both creating institutions -- the National Endowment for Democracy and the Community of Democracies itself -- and being real fighters and promoters of this cause.

MR. HERMAN: Thank you, Mark. I am delighted to share a podium with a distinguished number of current policymakers, and also some government has-beens like myself.

So let me -- we come together in Seoul not just on the eve of the Seoul conference, but also at a time when the need for strengthening and expanding democracy has never been greater, and never been more important to the creation of a just and peaceful world, as many of the speakers have talked about.

I am going to talk briefly about the parallel non-governmental conference that goes by the catchy and very creative name of the Community of Democracies Non-governmental Forum. And I can also provide a bit of a link between Warsaw and Seoul. Two and a half years ago I had, while serving as the policy planning staff at the State Department had the privilege of being part of an international team that really helped bring to fruition the Community of Democracies's initiative. Then there were some problems in Florida, and I soon found myself working on the NGO side of the street. And I can tell you it's a lot -- while it's harder sometimes just being on the outside looking in, it's a lot easier I think being on the advocacy end than on the receiving end of lots of complaints from people like me about why a particular government is or is not invited to the conference.

The convening group for the upcoming Seoul conference I think has taken the legacy of the inaugural meeting in Warsaw, and really stands poised to add its own accomplishment. And I think most notably in the introduction of the two-tier system for participants, which we heard about, an innovation necessitated by strict invitation criteria which we I think welcome.

And let me also just -- a word of compliment to Paula and her very capable staff I think that after some initial review process in the Bush administration certainly Paula and her staff have been embracing and working very long and hard along with their convening group colleagues to ensure success in Seoul, and we very much appreciate I think the ongoing dialogue we have had with Paula about various issues connected to the CD.

My group as well as others have been critical of some of the aspects of the process, as well as some U.S. government positions, even while we recognize some of the constraints and competing agenda that the conference organizers face. And I think for their part most of our governmental colleagues understand that it's our responsibility as democracy advocates and activists to press the governments in order that the CDs extraordinary potential be realized.

Now, the original architect of the Community of Democracies thought it was essential that a global gathering of democratic governments also have an independent but simultaneous meeting of leading civil society thinkers and doers in the democracy sphere -- not just NGOs -- that's important. The people are invited in their individual capacity, not just organizationally. The rise of civil society globally is arguably one of the transformative forces in contemporary international politics. And, on a very practical note, the CD founding mothers and fathers believe that the companion forum had a crucial role to play in helping to hold those governments accountable for the commitments they were about to make in endorsing the Warsaw Declaration.

The forum is also seen as an important opportunity for those activists from non-democratic countries to have a platform on the world stage. And I am pleased to say that we are organizing in Seoul a special panel devoted to the strengthening of civil society in closed societies.

Indeed, many of the newer democracies around the world, most notably in the former communist countries, but elsewhere as well, civil society leaders from the democratic opposition came to occupy the highest positions in the new government. And perhaps even more than their counterparts in mature democracies, these men and women understand the role of the robust civil society in creating really the foundation for a vibrant and durable participatory democratic system.

So what does all this mean for the non-governmental forum in Seoul? Walt Raymond is going to talk a little bit and provide a more detailed description about the actual program and some of the principal goals of the gathering.

If you had left before I did it, I would have axed it from the speech. (Laughter.)

Let me raise a few issues that go to the broader purpose of the forum and its symbiotic relationship with the ministerial. Unquestionably part of the attraction for prominent civil society actors from around the world to come together in Seoul is not just the opportunity to exchange ideas and to network and to discuss lessons learned -- although all those things I think certainly apply. But, even more importantly, it's the possibility of making their collective voice heard by the assembled ministers with the explicit goal of trying to advance democracy internationally. Democratic social change, I think as we have heard, is most far-reaching and durable when it results from a combination of bottom-up grass-roots activity and top-down policy reform.

In that spirit, let me then just mention a couple of themes and ideas that I hope will and expect will be part of the discussion at Seoul, and ones which my group, the Democracy Coalition Project, among others, will be pushing for concrete action and recommendations.

Now, while the initial steps to tighten criteria for the ministerial are certainly -- ministerial participation is certainly to be applauded. The standard should continue to be raised as the CD looks toward Santiago in 2004. Countries that lack a genuine and demonstrated commitment to democratic governance, as defined in the Warsaw Declaration, should join the ranks of observers or better yet be dropped all together. The integrity and the reform-inducing value of the CD really depends on the degree to which membership is made meaningful. And to this end the convening group I think also should devise and institutionalize a mechanism for systematically consulting with civil society in the countries under consideration for inclusion in the CD.

Now, if you give the Community of Democracies greater traction, or greater attraction in an impact as an instrument through which resources are allocated, governments should link foreign assistance decisions to participation in the Community of Democracies. This process is in a more inchoate form is already underway. The logic underpinning the Millennium Challenge Accounts, discussions at Monterrey and other fora I think suggest that poor or fledgling or fragile democratic countries should be privileged in the provision of bilateral development assistance. This is because democracy and human freedoms are values that the donor members of the Community of Democracies seek to nurture and support, regardless of any causal link between democratic policy and other very laudable goal -- progress and other laudable goals from alleviating poverty, to eradicating infectious disease, to combatting environmental degradation. And where democracy and respect for human rights are absent, development aid should be channeled only through non-governmental institutions, except in dire emergencies or humanitarian crises.

Now, the overall effectiveness of CD would also be greatly enhanced, as was mentioned a little bit earlier, where democratic governments to work more collaboratively in regional and global institutions to advance their common interests. This includes in the United Nations, where an initial and cautious, and now flagging, effort to form a democracy caucus needs to be revitalized. That was one of the basic messages of the report that just came out from the joint task force between Freedom House and the Council on Foreign Relations.

On a related point, I think, it's really an affront to democrats in both open and closed societies alike, as well as a major impediment to institutional reform, to have -- I'm sorry, institutional impact -- to have repressive authoritarian governments serving on the U.N. Human Rights Commission.

As you heard, the ministerial is also going to issue a statement on democracy and terrorism. Obviously this is a fundamental and timely issue, and surely is going to receive considerable attention in Seoul at the non-governmental forum. I think it would be our hope that the statement will talk about democracy promotion as a strategy for addressing the root causes of extremist violence, and reiterate the words that are in the Warsaw Declaration that cooperation to combat transnational challenges, including terrorism, be conducted, quote, "only in accordance with respect for human rights and the norms of international law."

There is also a growing threat to democracy, whether from coups or gradual erosion, but I am going to leave that to my colleagues in the follow-on panel to discuss that.

Let me just say in closing that here is an opportunity in Seoul I think for civil society participants to move beyond informed and even in some ways path-breaking discussions to generate practical, achievable recommendations aimed both at the ministers, but also at the broader non-governmental community itself. Garnering support for these measures and developing an implementation plan, complete with monitoring, which Ambassador Portales discussed, I think is one of the major challenges before the Community of Democracies as we head from -- as we emerge from Seoul and head toward Santiago.

(Applause.)

MR. RAYMOND: As the co-host, and part of the organizing process, I am aware that we are already over time. I am not going to give a speech. What I am going to do is to isolate four points that I think have not been stressed and are worth noting.

Bobby Herman has covered the ground pretty well, so I won't repeat anything he said. First of all, what is CCD? CCD was established after the Warsaw conference, and it's basically dedicated, as Paula said, to trying to help foster this century of democracy, and to seek a community of democracies working together to strengthen democracy across the wide spectrum of cultural and religious traditions. We are not an organization that has lots of programs. We are an organization that tries to help facilitate the bringing together of groups -- official and nonofficial. And, as a matter of fact, when the United States Administration decided to be active in supporting the next round of Community of Democracies in Seoul 2002 there was a question as to what type of NGO presence should we have, i.e. who or what could serve as a U.S. the coordinating point. As Deputy Foreign Minister Cho said, there is a coordinating committee of 10 countries, and paralleling that, there are organizations, or NGOs, in some cases institutes, representing each of these 10 countries. This group of NGOs represents the International Planning Committee, and that has been the group that has been putting together the Seoul non-governmental conference. Who will represent the U.S.? It's difficult to have one organization. It's probably even difficult to have eight organizations. But in our case we have netted together eight organizations that represent a whole range of different tendencies in the United States, and these eight organizations have created themselves as a Coordinating Committee. All of them have very robust programs around the world, with the exception of the CCD. So CCD was asked to chair, as sort of an honest broker. We have been very busy in that regard, and that's who we are.

The second point that I would make is that I was very gratified -- or shall I say honored? -- to have been involved in what I think was in the post-war period -- not '40s, not '50s, '60s -- one of the pivotal policy developments. This policy was enunciated by President Reagan in his June 8th speech in Westminster in 1982; a speech that established the basis for a whole flood of democratic activity. His democracy speech is one which is still quoted, and in fact Undersecretary Dobrianski earlier today quoted a segment from the speech. That set in a motion a process that energized NGO activity in the United States and supported institution building around the world. It became a centerpiece of U.S. foreign policy to strengthen democratic institutions. Mark Palmer was one of the speechwriters for the Reagan speech -- in fact, may have been the key one. You have seen what has happened in 20 years after this, you have the National Endowment, you have NDI, you have IRI, you have organizations like that, but you also have the reemergence of an Asia Foundation, which was struggling to hold onto its $5 million and almost lost it -- it was a battle between Congress and the executive branch, with the Congress saving the Asia Foundation -- not the executive branch at that time.

But, beyond that, there were a number of other organizations that were federally funded – the United States Institute of Peace (USIP), the International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES) and others came on line. Now it's a given. Twenty years ago, 25 years ago, you would not have found the same process. The same thing has been happening in many other parts of the world, in some cases -- in many cases the organizations which are, quote, "NGOs," are actually NGOs with federal funding -- it's kind of a misnomer, but nevertheless it works. I have been dealing with the Dutch embassy to see if I could get them to underwrite some tickets to go to Seoul. They referred me to two Dutch NGOs; these NGOs are federally funded, but they are independent. When you go to Germany, you run into the schiftung network, and this goes on and on. The Portuguese have been very active, other countries have been active. There's a process in train, but some of you are all old enough to know what it was like before 1982.

The question now is are we seeing the second major policy movement towards democracy building. The first was the inventions and innovations that came after '82; the second started in 2000, proceeding on in 2002, and with Ambassador Portales and his colleagues proceeding onto Santiago in 2004. We are seeing a major new step forward in democracy building.

My third point focuses on the specifics of Seoul. We are engaged in the non-governmental part of Seoul. I might point out it's not the NGO forum, it's the Community of Democracies Non-governmental Forum. In answer to a question of the gentleman in the center -- that specifically is defined that way because it is not only a collection of NGOs, but invitations are extended to a wide group of independent people, some of whom may represent NGOs, some of whom may represent think tanks, some of whom may simply represent themselves, but they have good ideas and we want them to share them with us.

Now, what we want to have come out of Seoul from our side, as Paula Dobriansky said, are action programs, specifics. And to do this we are trying to get as practical as possible. And the "we" in this case is the International Planning Committee of 10 countries, representatives from 10 countries. We have identified nine specific areas that we want to focus on. And we believe that if we can come up with precise action plans, precise ideas, precise recommendations, we benefit by great support that we are receiving from the ministerial side, and have an invitation to present these recommendations and action plans to the ministerial at the last planning session of the conference.

This is an offer we could hardly refuse. It is as if you offered the opportunity to a collection of independents or NGOs to develop their ideas in private meetings and then to table their plans to a group of foreign ministries and key representatives from more than 100 foreign ministries. They would say they had just gone into fairyland. I mean, to believe that you could sit there and make your case to 100 key foreign delegations around the world is almost unbelievable. However, it's going to happen. So we need to identify real recommendations that are worth the kind of discussion and time we are going to have.

One -- there are nine panels. Panels will cover key areas for democracy. They include discussions on: Markets, political parties, countering corruption, the freedom of association, local government, civil society and opening closed societies, media independence, gender issues and, last but not least, civic education. All these areas are critical to democratic society and will be discussed in detail at the Forum. I could spell these out, but if you want to go back in the history of the last 20 years, you can come up with all kinds of examples of how these different sectors have been critical to the development of democracy.

For example, let me talk about local government. I used to chat with Dr. Les Solomon, who set up a center for training local government specialists at Johns Hopkins. One of Les Solomon's students in those days was Jerzy Regulski, a Polish advocate for effective local government. He fine-tuned his ability to focus and think about local government in Poland. When he returned to what was soon to be a free Poland, he became the father of a nation-wide local government process in Poland. It's been a model for many other countries in Central Europe and elsewhere. It is a example, but we have had many others. You could come up with endless examples of how media has played a critical role in the movement toward democracy. Labor and the freedom of association with Lech Walesa.

Now, after we develop these we will table them with the ministers. I will take one specific example: civic education. We could make recommendations that might include, one, a commitment of governments to increase the funding of civic ed in schools; two, to expand cooperation between governments and NGOs to share material and idea about best practices; three, commitment by countries with significant experience to assist others; four, appeal to international institutions and IFIs, U.N.-related agencies to provide added resources; and, five, to make civic education an integral part of education reform activities, particularly in Africa and elsewhere -- and would have to be supported by member governments and international financial institutions.

Now, my last point -- Bobby has already mentioned that participants are coming both from the developed countries, underdeveloped countries, democracies and non-democracies. And the last point is very important. We are going to have participants from non-democracies represented -- not the countries, but the people -- coming from those countries. Hope to have people from Zimbabwe, from Belarus, Central Asia, some of the Middle East countries -- Burma, Cuba. And we are going to be looking at the cutting-edge questions of how you can turn those countries more in the direction of democracy.

I think that basically is the key: to be able to engage those people in discussion. I would hope that that would be something that will be of interest to the press as well.

What I hope happens, in conclusion, at the end of the day in Seoul is that the case will be made sufficiently so that those people who are actively engaged in providing support for such processes will realize that it's vital to not only commit but to extend your commitment to support. I think at this juncture we have learned that government funding for non-governmental organizations, when it is passed in ways which do not dictate but help, can be vital. And it's the government funding increasingly which is going to be probably the key to making these independent organizations move forward in a more diverse way. I think we have seen that it can be done, and it can be done without compromise. And the model of that of course starts with Ronald Reagan's speech in June 1982 which fostered the family built around the National Endowment for Democracy. I would hope that that commitment would be made. You will hear later the UNDP has been taking a very, very important leading role in this, and have made a number of commitments. And I think their role and the role of governments, the role of internationals is vital, and it's the partnership, as Paula pointed out -- it's the partnership between the private and the public which is essential to make the non- governmental organizations, the independent sectors of society, the key elements in building democracy, to make it strong and vital.

So thank you very much. And I hope the rest of the conference is interesting to you.

(Applause.)

MR. PALMER: Walt, you are really in charge. Do you want to take a break now, or -- which risks losing people -- or….?

MR. RAYMOND: I think we should take a short break. People want to just get up and stretch, and then come back in five or 10 minutes.

MR. PALMER: All right. Thank you, Mr. Minister, thank you, ambassador.

[END OF PANEL #1.]

(C) COPYRIGHT 2002, FEDERAL NEWS SERVICE, INC., 620 NATIONAL PRESS BUILDING, WASHINGTON, DC 20045, USA. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. ANY REPRODUCTION, REDISTRIBUTION OR RETRANSMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION, REDISTRIBUTION OR RETRANSMISSION CONSTITUTES A MISAPPROPRIATION UNDER APPLICABLE UNFAIR COMPETITION LAW, AND FEDERAL NEWS SERVICE, INC. RESERVES THE RIGHT TO PURSUE ALL REMEDIES AVAILABLE TO IT IN RESPECT TO SUCH MISAPPROPRIATION.

FEDERAL NEWS SERVICE, INC. IS A PRIVATE FIRM AND IS NOT AFFILIATED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. NO COPYRIGHT IS CLAIMED AS TO ANY PART OF THE ORIGINAL WORK PREPARED BY A UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE AS PART OF THAT PERSON'S OFFICIAL DUTIES.