Richard A. Boucher, a career U.S. diplomat since 1977,
began his current asignment as US Senior Official for APEC, the Asia
Pacific
Economic Cooperation forum, in July 1999. Prior to this
assignment,
he was twice Chief of Mission at US diplomatic posts overseas.
From
1996 to 1999, he headed the US Consulate General in Hong Kong as Consul
General. Mr. Boucher was United States Ambassador to Cyprus from
October
1993 to June 1996. Previously, he served for four and a half
years
as the Deputy Spokesman and Spokesman for three Secretaries of
State.
Boucher is rumored to reassume the duties of Spokesman for his fourth
Secretary
of State shortly.
Insight: First, Ambassador Boucher I’d like to thank you for
agreeing to talk with us. As a key government official working
with Asia
on trade and other issues and as former head of U.S. operations in Hong
Kong, you have had long experience with Asia. Your insights will
therefore be of great interest to our readers. My first question
is about the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation organization, APEC,
where
you serve as the U.S. government’s senior representative.
Although
APEC will soon reach its tenth anniversary, in terms of international
organizations
it is a relatively new organization and is hardly a household
word.
Because of this, many of our readers may not understand exactly what
APEC
is and what it seeks to accomplish. Could you describe for us
what
the APEC organization is and what is its goal or reason for being?
Answer: First,
let
me thank you for this opportunity to talk about APEC and how we pursue
our
economic policy goals through this rather unique
organization.
APEC is a collection of 21 economies of the Asia-Pacific (see www.apecsec.org.sg for more
information) who come together to open up trade and investment and
pursue economic
reform. We have a series of meetings every year, including a
Leader’s
Meeting. President Clinton met his counterparts at the last
Leaders Meeting in September 1999 in New Zealand; this year’s meeting
is in November in Brunei.
The organization can really take on any topic the Leaders
want. Responding to their direction, we try to create a
momentum for reform
as well as deliver real benefits in terms of lower tariffs, smoother
trade, more open and stable economies, better social safety nets, and a
cleaner environment.
Insight: As I understand it, APEC representatives meet many
times throughout the year on a host of issues. Everything from
the environment and technology to customs regulations and other
issues. Is this
true and what kinds of meetings are planned for say the first quarter
of 2000?
Answer: In the
early part of this year, we start the planning and project cycle with a
meeting of officials in Brunei in February. We also have planned
meetings
of the Telecommunications Working Group, Education Ministers, economic
experts, Customs officials, aviation experts and a whole variety of
sub-groups. Meanwhile, we are proceeding rapidly to implement
several projects in
APEC economies to help them create the proper market environment for
electronic commerce and for distribution of natural gas.
Insight: In August, APEC held its most recent annual
Ministerial
and Leaders meeting in New Zealand. What were the major
accomplishments of that meeting?
Answer: The
Leader’s meeting in Auckland created a policy momentum for further
reform, to match the economic momentum that is now being seen in the
region. All
the Leaders pledged that there would be no complacency in their reform
efforts. They also specified common goals for a new round of
world
trade talks, including specifics like ending agricultural export
subsidies
and moving forward rapidly on tariff liberalization for key
sectors.
Finally, under the theme of strengthening markets, they directed
officials
and Ministers to carry out specific work this year, as mentioned above,
to improve markets for natural gas, lay the foundation for electronic
commerce, expand air services and open up other areas.
Insight: Why should business people in the U.S. and Asia care
about APEC and its work? How will APEC affect how they work, do
business and live over the next say ten years?
Answer: Business
and private sector groups are key contributors to APEC’s work.
Almost
every program or project in APEC requires significant involvement of
experts
from outside government. We work hand in glove with our business
community, relying on them for ideas, for help in promoting initiatives
and for help in implementing them.
For our private sector, APEC can deliver benefits on two
levels. First, it can help open up the overall environment for
business and trade, contributing to prosperity and jobs at home as well
as abroad. Second, we can fix specific areas that are
problems: slow Customs processing, high barriers for small firms,
etc.
Insight: The host nation for APEC changes each year. Last
year it was New Zealand and in 2000 it will be Brunei. Will
Brunei be
the site of all this year’s talks and what issues in particular will
the
U.S. be pushing to achieve at this years meetings?
Answer: Brunei’s
priorities are quite straightforward: a solid year of
accomplishment
centering on information technology, small and medium enterprises and
economic and technical cooperation. This coincides very closely
with
the U.S. agenda to lay the foundations for a 21st Century market
economy
in Asia that can resist shocks and can adapt to the new digital
age.
We are working with Brunei on specific projects that can help prepare
economies
for electronic commerce and a more flexible economic environment.
Brunei has a particular interest as well in energy and we are working
with
the Brunei government to promote the use of clean energy sources and
the
expansion of a market basis for stable energy supplies in the region.
Insight: The recent World Trade Organization (WTO) meeting in
Seattle was much more controversial than many had expected. Labor
and environmental organizations have used the demonstrations and the
city’s response to
attack both the WTO and the idea that open markets are necessarily a
good
thing. Do you see the APEC meetings also becoming more
controversial
and how do you respond to the critics of globalization that global free
trade has gone too far?
Answer: APEC has
been a force for more open trade and will continue to work for further
progress, because member economies are finding that more open trade
brings opportunity to all of us. In fact, APEC was instrumental
in the last round of
trade negotiations and will continue to press forward toward a new
round. APEC, because it is a voluntary and cooperative
organization, is also
an example of how nations can cooperate on a broad trade agenda, and
involve outside groups in our work. APEC has pressed, for
example, an environmental agenda for trade talks that would reduce
barriers to trade in environmental goods and eliminate the subsidies
that some countries apply to agricultural exports or fishing that cause
harm to the environment.
Insight: As fallout of the WTO meting in Seattle, some
observers
are saying the U.S.-China agreement on opening markets could be undone
by
a backlash against free trade and a coalescing of environmental, labor
and
other critics bent upon opposing greater U.S. trade with China.
As
a person who has lived and worked in China and who is also a key voice
on
Asian trade policy in the U.S. government, do you really see the impact
of what happened in Seattle as being so profound? Is a vote on
permanent
normal trading relations for China likely to go down to defeat?
Answer: The
agreement with China is good for America, and we look forward to its
passage. The President is making it a top priority in the New
Year to seek congressional support for permanent Normal Trade Relations
with China. As the
President said recently: "Bringing China into the World Trade
Organization
(WTO) on the strong terms we negotiated will advance critical economic
and national security goals. It will open a growing market to
American
workers, farmers, and businesses. And more than any other step we
can take right now, it will draw China into a system of international
rules
and thereby encourage the Chinese to choose reform at home and
integration
with the world."
Insight: You were in Asia in the years leading up to the Asian
Financial Crisis and saw the Crisis hit Hong Kong and many other
countries in the
region hard. Now at least most of Asia seems to be reemerging
from
the crisis into solid growth. What do you see as the long-term
effects
of the Crisis on Hong Kong in particular and on the region in
general?
Answer: The
financial crisis was indeed quite a shock to many economies of the
region, and all are thankful that recovery seems to be occurring
quickly. What has
been most notable through the crisis is that all economies understood
that
the way out is to move forward to more reform and openness, not
backwards
into isolation. Thus as the economic dynamic has emerged,
governments
remain committed to continuing the policy dynamic of reform. We
work
in organizations like APEC to support the momentum and help people
carry
through on their intentions. Only if we complete the processes of
putting in place stronger market mechanisms and better and more
impartial
economic management can we prevent a recurrence of crisis.
Furthermore,
electronic business and the emerging digital society require even more
openness,
fewer barriers and more opportunity, so all our economies must continue
to move in that direction to take advantage of the future.
Insight: You headed U.S. operations in Hong Kong during the
British return of sovereignty to China. Nearly two years later,
how do you judge the stewardship of Hong Kong’s political
leaders? Do you feel that Hong Kong’s government has gained or
lost in terms of credibility
in protecting legal and civil rights? Lastly what grade and why
would
you give the Hong Kong leadership on their handling on the Asian
Financial
Crisis?
Answer: Hong Kong
remains an open, free society with an underlying dynamism that will
stand it in good stead for the future. At the same time, we have
been concerned about some developments where Hong Kong’s unique
autonomy has been at risk. I don’t want to try to grade any
foreign government on its performance; that is for its people to
do, but recent economic growth statistics and new developments in
Hong Kong’s economy bode well for its future as
a regional center, which is important for US interests.
