Chapter 8
“God has placed in every human heart the desire to be free.”
In mid-June 2011, following in the footsteps of his immediate predecessors Ochirbat (1993–97), Bagabandai (1997–2005), and Enkhbayar (2005–08), all of whom had met with serving American presidents, President Elbegdorj traveled to Washington to meet with President Obama at the White House.
His trip to the United States lasted most of the week. It started in San Francisco, where he met the mayor, visited The Asia Foundation and the Asia Museum, spoke at Stanford University, and held a dialogue with members of the Mongolian American community living in the Bay area. He also officially opened the new Mongolian Consulate in San Francisco, an important step that should help further strengthen Mongolia’s profile in the western United States. Several days later, President Elbegdorj concluded his American journey in New York, where he spoke to the Council on Foreign Relations and was interviewed by various members of the press.
In between, the wide range of activities arranged during his two-day stay at Blair House in Washington reflected the depth and breadth of the expanding US-Mongolian partnership over nearly 25 years. While the Oval Office meeting was the highlight of the journey, other stops in Washington underscored the comprehensive and growing nature of the diplomatic relationship.
Having studied at the University of Colorado and at Harvard University’s Kennedy School, President Elbegdorj was well aware of the symbolism associated with many of the events on his itinerary. For example, he began his first day in Washington by laying a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier in Arlington Cemetery, accompanied by his wife and youngest son, who was born in Massachusetts around the same time as the 9/11 attacks on the Pentagon and New York’s World Trade Center in 2001. From there, he proceeded to Walter Reed Hospital, meeting with wounded American soldiers and delivering handwritten greeting cards prepared by his 24 foster children back in Ulaanbaatar.
President Elbegdorj was accompanied on his visit to both Arlington Cemetery and Walter Reed by Sergeant Azzaya and Sergeant Samuu-Yondon, the two Mongolian NCOs who had demonstrated conspicuous bravery in foiling the plans of a would-be suicide bomber during the Mongolian military’s second rotation in Iraq. Later, he was joined at Blair House by Minister of Defense Bold in a meeting with Admiral Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, providing another opportunity to discuss the evolution of Mongolia’s military over the past many years, including not only its current deployment in Afghanistan but also its growing role in UN peacekeeping operations throughout the world.
Other aspects of the visit emphasized Mongolia’s growing commercial ties with the United States and its commitment to democracy. During his time in Washington, President Elbegdorj addressed a large group of business leaders at a lunch sponsored by the American Chamber of Commerce; witnessed new agreements with the Department of Commerce and Federal Aviation Authority; observed the signing of documents to formalize the sale of three Boeing aircraft to Mongolia; and was hosted at another lunch by Secretary of Commerce Gary Locke, an American of Chinese origin who would shortly depart as the new United States ambassador to Beijing.
Democracy themes also figured prominently in the visit, for example in a speech at the Brookings Institution and in meetings on Capitol Hill with the leadership of the Senate and the House of Representatives. At a lecture at the US Capitol sponsored by the Congressional Mongolian Caucus with the House Democracy Partnership and the National Endowment for Democracy, President Elbegdorj reflected at length on “shared” values, repeating more than once the statement that democracy is truly a Mongolian value and that Mongolians, too, desire to decide for themselves where they live, what they believe, how they worship and what they want to think and say. Reflecting further, at one point he suggested, “God has placed in every human heart the desire to be free.”
On one evening, the Mongolian embassy hosted a reception at a restaurant overlooking the Mall, the Washington Monument, and the US Capitol. The event started with two national anthems—one a praise song to the Mongolian homeland, the other the “Star Spangled Banner,” both delivered in the haunting, high voice of a Mongolian long song singer.
In another evening event, this one sponsored by the Asia Society, President Elbegdorj received the group’s “Distinguished Statesman Award,” after which Dr. Henry Kissinger received the Asia Society’s “Lifetime Achievement Award.” Two other awards were presented that night—one, on “Public Policy,” to Under Secretary of the Treasury Lael Brainard, the other, on “International Business,” to Jim Rogers from the United States and Wang Yusuo from China. The evening entertainment included a tsam “mask dance,” provided by the Mongolian Khan Bogd ensemble directed by Gankhuyag Natsag. In addition, the bilingual Yu Ying (“nurturing excellence”) charter school, located in Washington, performed a familiar Chinese song and dance for the large and appreciative audience.
In possibly unintentional ways, the juxtaposition of themes related to Mongolia and China at the Asia Society dinner, as well as the presence of Henry Kissinger as an acclaimed twentieth-century foreign policy strategist, accentuated the changing face of Asia, while also underscoring some of the major new challenges that lay ahead. More than a decade into the twenty-first century, East Asia is becoming increasingly visible while undergoing significant change. Mongolia too, with one foot in Northeast Asia and another in Central Asia, is part of this mix and faces a period of both great challenge and incredible opportunity. If Mongolia has already witnessed dramatic events and great change during the past 25 years, the next quarter century promises to be at least as interesting.
* * *
What form will US-Mongolian diplomatic relations take in the coming years? While predictions are inherently risky, there is little doubt that a strong foundation has been established, one that is both broad and deep. In January 1987, when diplomatic notes were signed at the Department of State leading to the establishment of new embassies in Washington and Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia was almost as isolated as North Korea is now. Yet, in just 25 years, Mongolia has maintained good relations with its neighbors while reaching out to the wider world. It has also fundamentally transformed the way in which it is governed as well as the organizing principles on which its economy and society are based.
As a country, Mongolia has changed fundamentally. It is wealthier than it used to be; and, as a society, it has become far more complex. During the 1990s, many Mongolians had high hopes for democracy and its anticipated material benefits. Mongolians also reveled in rediscovering their identity and history, which had been suppressed during the Soviet era. By 2012, Mongolians had become more nationalistic, more cynical about their politicians, and more skeptical about the intentions and motivations of foreign investors attracted by the country’s mining boom. At the same time, Mongolians have become more religious in some cases, due partly to a modest revival in religious belief and practice derived in part from Tibetan Buddhism and from visits involving Buddhist spiritual leaders in recent years. These included a visit by the Dalai Lama in late 2011 in which he urged his followers to “learn English” in order to forge closer ties with the wider world. While Tibetan Buddhism plays an increasingly notable role in Mongolia, the Kazakh Muslim minority in the far west and in Ulaanbaatar and a newer Christian presence in some parts of the country are also now a part of the Mongolian religious and social fabric. Inevitably, these changes in Mongolia’s economy and society will have an impact on the way in which the United States and Mongolia interact in the years ahead.
Looking beyond 2012, there should certainly be opportunities for the US-Mongolian diplomatic partnership to be strengthened still further, not only through bilateral co-operation but also by deepened engagement in multilateral forums. Increasingly, what were once perceived as isolated, country-specific issues are becoming more regional, even global, in scope. Common interests will come into play, and common values will further enrich the discussion. If Mongolia ultimately succeeds in its aim of becoming a truly successful market-based democracy, its experience will provide important, relevant “lessons learned” in Asia and beyond.
Development ties between the United States and Mongolia, involving ongoing partnerships with both USAID and MCC, are important now but, it is hoped, will fade into history over the next 25 years, or possibly within the next decade, if not earlier. Indeed, Mongolia will be in a much better place when vibrant and flourishing commercial ties, rather than foreign aid, determine its development path. Just as South Korea was transformed from an aid-receiving to an aid-giving country in little more than a generation, Mongolia too could aspire to such change.
International experience related to the growth and expansion of mineral-rich economies is sobering. Much of this experience is well known in Mongolia. Among other things, it emphasizes the importance of focusing on major long-term priorities, most notably education, infrastructure, and good governance. Tackling corruption is another vital issue, as is ensuring that social and environmental concerns be properly addressed. No two issues are more important for Mongolia than instilling good governance and reducing corruption. If these twin concerns are not effectively addressed, all of Mongolia’s other dreams for the future could come crashing down.
Drawing on widely available international experience from many countries, Mongolia will want to implement approaches that minimize the “boom or bust” nature of mineral price cycles, in part by diversifying its own economy. While the mining sector will be central in shaping Mongolia’s future, other sectors such as tourism, agriculture, and services also offer important avenues for future success.
One hopes that commercial ties between Mongolian and American companies will grow significantly during the coming years. In addition to technology, US companies bring knowledge of hard-earned lessons in how to address environmental, social, and other concerns. Subject to the prohibitions of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, the American business community also provides a level of transparency, accountability, and corporate governance that is not universally observed. As Mongolia moves forward, the quality of the private firms operating in the country will be at least as important as the magnitude of the foreign investment it attracts.
At this point, direct US private investment in Mongolia remains at modest, even disappointing levels. In the coming years, one hopes it will increase substantially, building and strengthening a vibrant economic relationship to complement those already established in other areas. Realistically, in the absence of a strong commercial partnership involving not only trade but also investment between the two countries, it is hard to see how relations in other areas can thrive over the long term.
National sovereignty is the central concern of any government, and security requirements will continue to be viewed by senior Mongolian officials as an important issue in the years ahead. At some level, Mongolia has survived in the past by being seen as “the sharp bone that no one else would ever want to swallow.” Given its geographic location, Mongolia is irrevocably connected with both Russia to the north and China to the south. Inevitably, important aspects of Mongolia’s future will depend on what happens in both countries in ways almost entirely beyond Mongolia’s control. Demographic or other decline in Russia and rising nationalism among a younger generation in China would both have negative repercussions for Mongolia. Economic problems in either country would also adversely affect Mongolia.
As Mongolia faces continued rapid change, it will look even more deeply into its own past to strengthen its identity, drawing on age-old cultural and spiritual resources when confronting an uncertain and increasingly unfamiliar future. In the past Mongolia’s strong sense of self-identity, combined with an ability to respond calmly to outside challenges with flexibility and pragmatism, have always been among its main strengths. At its best, Mongolia as a society will reflect a strong sense of self-confidence while engaging in positive ways with the rest of the world. More pessimistically, the emergence of latent xenophobic tendencies in Mongolia, as in all societies, could undermine relations with its neighbors both near and far.
As Mongolia’s strategic approach over the last two decades suggests, security in an increasingly globalized world made up of nations large and small inherently involves at least two main tasks. First, it requires maintaining internal strength and cohesion rather than displaying a divided face to the wider world. And, second, it requires a strong commitment to dealing with the outside world in a positive and proactive way, typically involving mutual co-operation as part of joint efforts that include many other countries. Mongolia’s participation in UN peacekeeping assignments in Africa and elsewhere has added significantly to its international reputation. Such deployments will likely become even more visible and possibly more frequent in the future.
The need for national consensus necessarily places a strong burden on Mongolian politicians. While engaging in vocal and sometimes acrimonious and even ferocious debate on internal issues, they will need to present a unified face to the rest of the world, at least regarding the main pillars of the country’s foreign policy. Mongolia’s current approach to foreign policy, based on strong ties with its first and second neighbors while reaching out to a diverse set of “third neighbors,” is a powerful formulation. Ironically, the more successful that Mongolia is in doing this, the harder it will become.
The generally high level of goodwill that Mongolia enjoys on the international stage, will, it is hoped, make the process easier. In early 2011, National Geographic ranked Mongolia among the “top 20” travel destinations of the year. Also in 2011, CNN described Mongolians as one of the “top ten coolest nationalities,” somewhat behind countries such as Brazil and Jamaica and ahead of the United States. The New York Times ranked Mongolia high on a similar list of top travel destinations published in early 2013. A few years ago, the founder of the Mongol state—Genghis Khan—was declared as none other than “Man of the Millennium.” Very probably, Mongolia will continue to figure in similar rankings related to tourism, culture, history, and other topics in the years ahead.
Such rankings are not scientifically based and need not be taken too seriously. More to the point, Mongolia should be more interested in where it ranks on Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index or on any number of “ease of doing business” or “level of innovation” indexes, areas in which Mongolia’s performance has been mixed in recent years. That said, international reputation can make a difference. A country with unique cultural features and strong “brand recognition” is better placed to thrive in a connected world in which former notions of geographic isolation are becoming much less relevant.
At this point, Mongolia’s “soft power” as viewed from North America and Europe lies to a considerable extent on its reputation as a faraway exotic place that provides a convenient platform on which others all too often project their own myths and fantasies. In an increasingly homogenized world, those living in other countries will usually find most attractive the distinctive aspects of Mongolia. The sense of spaciousness that Mongolia’s wide-open spaces make possible strikes an especially evocative chord, and one hopes it will be maintained, whatever lies ahead.
If Mongolia is “lucky,” it could emerge as a country like Australia, a relatively egalitarian society shaped by the ethos of the outback, even if most of its citizens do not live there. The next generation of Mongolians will face many choices and, for many, the realities of life in a small town or as part of a herder encampment that moves four times each year do not figure in their plans for the future. For them, the bright lights of a big city like Ulaanbaatar (or Tokyo, Seoul, or Los Angeles, for that matter) beckon and can become overwhelming.
Yet it is hard to imagine a Mongolia in which nomadic traditions do not play an essential part in shaping and forming the wider society—and where herders are not perceived in some measure as serving as the “guardians of the nation’s soul.” Certainly, friends of Mongolia around the world will wish Mongolia well as it seeks to preserve this aspect of the country, even if most of Mongolia’s citizens live in Ulaanbaatar and other cities and towns rather than being scattered across the vast countryside. Already, more Mongolians live in urban areas than in rural areas, and this trend is likely to continue for at least the next several years, in keeping with similar transitions that have taken place in other parts of the world.
Maintaining a positive international reputation will hinge partly on Mongolia’s ability to retain the distinctive aspects of its culture while also keeping its commitment to democracy. In addition, it will want to address environmental concerns in ways that ensure that the magnificent Mongolian countryside remains largely protected. Amidst the enormous changes now underway across the country, sympathetic outside observers will fervently hope that Mongolia can somehow also manage to maintain the ethos of the steppe, one based on centuries of history and a herding lifestyle that so far has met the test of time and proved both resilient and sustainable, even if the various forms it takes have changed over time.
Along with commercial relations, strong people-to-people ties also represent a potential area of further strength in the US-Mongolia partnership. Already, the growing number of Mongolians enrolled at colleges and universities in the United States, who then return to Mongolia on completion of their studies, bodes well for the future. During the coming years, the number of Mongolians studying in the United States will likely increase still further, even as more and more Americans find their way to Mongolia, whether as students, tourists, academics, or entrepreneurs. Alumni ties that last a lifetime will further strengthen the relationship. And at some point, there may well be a thriving American University in Mongolia—perhaps more than one.
Beyond education, Mongolia’s intriguing cultural assets, fascinating history, and unique landscapes should help build ties still further in the years ahead. Whether involving creative artists, academic researchers, or environmental NGOs, there is significant scope for Mongolians and Americans to study and work together while also learning from each other. Governments can certainly aid and facilitate this effort. But, over the long term, the most compelling and durable people-to-people ties are typically those that have been established and sustained without bureaucratic interference. More usually, it is private individuals working creatively, independently, and on their own, who are able to build and maintain the most enduring people-to-people relations.
Looking back, those directly involved in first launching diplomatic ties between the United States and Mongolia in January 1987 could hardly have contemplated just how far the relationship might travel in the next quarter century. Looking ahead another 25 years, to January 2037 when, it is hoped, the first half-century of the US-Mongolian partnership will be celebrated with appropriate toasts and fireworks, the shape of the future may seem even more unimaginable.
Yet, in navigating the obstacles as well as the opportunities that undoubtedly lie ahead, it will almost certainly be useful to occasionally recall an earlier American diplomat’s words about Mongolia. That short phrase, written by A. W. Ferrin to his colleagues back at the State Department in Washington in 1918, expressed the hope that, having established a formal diplomatic presence in Ulaanbaatar, the United States might indeed prove to be a “most helpful factor in the development of a wonderful country.”