Chapter 3
“It was an exciting moment to be in Mongolia as the country rediscovered its history and strived to build a democratic and free market future.”
The establishment of diplomatic ties between the United States and Mongolia in January 1987 occurred on the eve of great international change, especially in the Soviet Union when Gorbachev’s introduction of glasnost and perestroika gained traction and ushered in an era of transformation within the various former Soviet republics and beyond.
As a close neighbor of the Soviet Union, Mongolia was also drawn into this period of dramatic change. Many Mongolian students received their higher education either in the Soviet Union or in various Central European countries, including East Germany, Czechoslovakia, Poland, and Hungary. Some returned to Mongolia with new ideas as to how their country too might change course and move in a different direction. The prominent Mongolian writer and political commentator Baabar, for example, recalls his early contacts with the Solidarity movement while a student in Poland during the early 1970s—and the fact that he was jailed for translating Solzhenitsyn into Mongolian during the 1980s.
When the Berlin Wall was finally torn down in November 1989, the impact reached at least as far east as Ulaanbaatar. Indeed, some of the scenes during subsequent months on Ulaanbaatar’s Sukhbaatar Square and elsewhere were reminiscent of similar events taking place in Central and Eastern Europe. As with many other allies of the former Soviet Union, Mongolia was part of a broad movement toward major change that favored both democracy and market-based economic reform.
The fact that the United States had recently established an embassy in Ulaanbaatar provided an important opportunity to observe the unfolding events at first hand. In early December 1989, proponents of Mongolia’s emerging democracy movement celebrated Human Rights Day at the House of Youth in downtown Ulaanbaatar, initially drawing a crowd of around 200. The demands put forward by these peaceful demonstrators resonated with many other Mongolians, and the number of demonstrators quickly swelled to reach many thousands.
In March 1990, Chairman Batmonkh made the dramatic announcement that the entire Politburo would step down and a new government would be appointed. Gombojav Ochirbat then became the new chairman of the ruling Mongolian Revolutionary People’s Party (MPRP). In May, First Deputy Prime Minister D. Byambasuren visited Washington. Mongolia, once one of the most isolated of countries, was finally beginning to open up to the wider world.
Not long afterwards—on May 4, 1990—Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Desaix Anderson, addressing the House Foreign Affairs Committee, affirmed that the United States had been “presented with unique opportunities to be supportive of positive developments at a turning point in Mongolia’s history and at a time when their leaders are looking to us for assistance.”
A few months later, Ambassador Joseph Lake, the first resident United States ambassador in Ulaanbaatar, attended the inauguration of Ochirbat, Mongolia’s first democratically elected president. “It was a fascinating blend of Mongolian traditional culture and modern trappings,” Lake observed:
Ochirbat appeared for his inauguration wearing the traditional Mongolian deel and the traditional hat. The state seal was presented in a very traditional style, in a formal wooden box. The whole inaugural process was something that reached back to the roots of Mongolian history. One of the other currents developing in Mongolia at this time was the rediscovery of its own history.
* * *
Along with other democratic nations, in Europe and elsewhere, the United States reached out to Mongolia during the early 1990s to help support the country’s efforts to move in a more democratic direction. Remembering those “heady” days, Lake recalled, “We received numerous requests for education and information” as Mongolia began to re-engage with other parts of the world. In fact, at one point the embassy even received an urgent phone call from an opposition member of parliament asking for a copy of Robert’s Rules of Order.
“It was an exciting moment to be in Mongolia as the country rediscovered its history and strived to build a democratic and free market future,” Ambassador Lake noted. “Even the simplest things which Americans saw as natural were new to Mongolians.” According to Lake, the early American diplomats were received “with open arms.” Moreover, “as change began to take place in Mongolia, the United States was idealized far beyond our capabilities and reality.”
The Asia Foundation, based in San Francisco, was one of the first private US institutions to respond as Mongolia made its choice for democracy. It launched its first programs in 1990 and opened its resident office in Ulaanbaatar in 1991 when Shel Severinghaus arrived as the first resident country director. Even during the late 1980s, the Asia Foundation was approached by Mongolian government officials as the country began to reach out to broaden its engagement with the international community, both public and private. At the time, the very idea of a nongovernmental organization (NGO) was a new, strange, and even dangerous concept for most government officials in Mongolia.
During the early years, the Asia Foundation office in Mongolia established its presence in a rented log cabin in central Ulaanbaatar, reportedly one of the oldest permanent structures in the city. According to some accounts, the log cabin had once served as the residence of Sukhbaatar, the Mongolian revolutionary and nationalist hero.
This small log cabin, replete with history, soon became a useful meeting ground and a source of support and inspiration for Mongolia’s rapidly emerging civil society, including a growing network of indigenous NGOs. Over time, the series of seminars, workshops, book distributions, and other outreach programs sponsored by the Asia Foundation proved instrumental in bringing international experience to bear as Mongolia faced new circumstances and worked through new challenges.
“The Asia Foundation was the pioneer that first worked with Mongolia’s fledgling civil society, providing critical support and exchange opportunities to civil society leaders,” recalls Chris Finch, the first executive director of the Mongolian Foundation for Open Society, the Soros-supported institution that later became known as the Open Society Forum. According to Finch, the Open Society Forum built on and in some cases expanded on the early Asia Foundation work.
Since 1991, the Asia Foundation has worked closely with Mongolian counterparts on a broad range of issues, many of them directly related to the establishment and support of democracy and civil society in Mongolia. Funding came from both private sources and the US government, including USAID and the Department of State. More recent programs include a focus on anticorruption, antitrafficking, and environmental concerns. In addition, the Asia Foundation has helped promote a national dialogue on Mongolia’s rapidly growing mining sector.
Other American institutions contributed toward building democracy in Mongolia in various ways. US-based “political foundations” supported by private donations as well as the US government, such as the International Republican Institute (IRI), for example, have sponsored a wide range of democracy-related activities in Mongolia, helping to introduce Mongolian political leaders to American notions of how political parties forge coalitions, draft position papers, gauge popular opinion, and mount election campaigns. The National Democratic Institute (NDI) and National Endowment for Democracy (NED) share similar interests and have been similarly involved, though on a smaller scale.
IRI initiated its first program in Mongolia in 1991, sending speakers and technical experts to Mongolia. A couple of years later, it opened an in-country office in Ulaanbaatar, marking the start of a long-term, on-the-ground presence that provided firsthand experience in post-Soviet Mongolian politics, based on its ongoing work in the former Soviet Union and beyond. From the beginning, IRI committed itself to a nonpartisan approach, making its advice and training available to any political party that requested it.
Over the years, the IRI program in Mongolia concentrated on political party development, electoral systems, and capacity-building within Mongolia’s parliament, the Great Hural. Famously, it introduced Mongolia’s Democratic Party (DP) to the idea of a “Contract with Mongolia,” along the lines of Newt Gingrich’s “Contract with America,” which had become part of the political discussion in the United States during the 1990s. Some commentators from both inside and outside Mongolia claim that it was the DP’s use of this idea that helped catapult it to an unexpected victory in the 1996 parliamentary elections. While IRI was later criticized in some quarters for introducing American-style approaches to election politics in Mongolia, others welcomed the opportunity to learn from the American experience and adapt certain aspects of it to a Mongolian context.
Later, polling, focus groups, and public opinion analysis figured prominently in IRI’s outreach and capacity-building efforts in Mongolia, based partly on the assumption that political parties need to shape their programs and policies in ways that respond to the views and positions espoused by an informed electorate. Twenty years later, IRI is still actively involved in Mongolia, albeit on a much smaller scale. More recently, the IRI programs in Mongolia have focused on decentralized development and grassroots democracy.
* * *
“Hands-on” encounters in support of democracy include direct contact between American members of Congress and their Mongolian colleagues. Many Mongolian parliamentarians have visited Washington and discussed ideas with members of both the United States Senate and the House of Representatives, as members of the American Congress undertake similar dialogue in Ulaanbaatar.
According to Ambassador Lake, Senator Alan Cranston of California became the first sitting US member of Congress to visit Mongolia when he passed through Ulaanbaatar in August 1988. “Subsequently we had a visit by one member of Congress connected with IRI and then our first full-fledged Congressional Delegation (CODEL) in 1993.”
Several members of the US House of Representatives have demonstrated a sustained interest in Mongolia over time, including Jim McDermott of Washington state, whose daughter taught math at the International School of Ulaanbaatar for several years. Representative Joe Pitts of Pennsylvania, who donated a fire truck and other equipment to Ulaanbaatar, was awarded Mongolia’s “Polar Star” and has provided additional support to Mongolia in his role as chairman of the House US-Mongolia Friendship Caucus. In addition, current and former House speakers and minority leaders have visited Mongolia on a number of occasions.
During the late 2000s, the House Democracy Partnership (HDP) emerged as an important vehicle for promoting US-Mongolian parliamentary exchanges. A direct successor to the Frost-Solomon Task Force that assisted parliaments in Central and Eastern Europe during the early 1990s, the HDP was created in 2005. Two years later, the first programs in Mongolia were initiated. Fourteen other legislatures belong to the HDP partnership worldwide, including those in Kosovo, Afghanistan, East Timor, Georgia, and Peru.
As part of its core program, the HDP has co-ordinated several exchanges involving elected members and staff personnel, such as Representative David Price of North Carolina, who visited Mongolia in June 2011. Representative David Dreier of California visited on a regular basis over several years, including in August 2005, July 2007, and June 2011. Staff exchanges have been even more extensive and sometimes extend to third countries. For example, in 2009 a staffer from each of the Great Hural’s seven standing committees participated in an HDP-sponsored training program in Macedonia.
Bipartisan Senate support helps further affirm congressional support for Mongolia’s “decision for democracy.” In October 2007, the Senate passed a resolution recognizing the 20th anniversary of diplomatic ties between the United States and Mongolia. Among other things, that resolution highlighted shared democratic values and expressed appreciation for the presence of Mongolian peacekeepers in Iraq, Afghanistan, Sierra Leone, and Kosovo. Resolution sponsors included Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Senator Richard Lugar of Indiana, and Senator Joseph Biden of Delaware. As vice president, Biden subsequently visited Mongolia in August 2011 during a trip through Northeast Asia that also included Japan and China.
Similarly, in June 2009—on the day of President Elbegdorj’s inauguration—the US Senate passed another resolution, commending Mongolia for its democratic election and peaceful transition while also citing positive trends in its relationship with the United States. In addition to Senators Lugar and Murkowski, sponsors of this resolution included Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts and Senator James Webb of Virginia. A similar resolution was adopted in June 2011 in connection with President Elbegdorj’s visit to Washington to meet with President Obama in the Oval Office, providing yet another opportunity to demonstrate official US support for Mongolia’s continued commitment to democracy.
* * *
Undoubtedly, the signature event and most widely publicized expression of US support for Mongolia so far came on November 21, 2005, when President George W. Bush made his historic journey to Ulaanbaatar on Air Force One, accompanied by First Lady Laura Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. As with many visitors, his itinerary included a visit to a ger along with a drink of airag and a cultural show featuring throat singing and Mongolia’s traditional stringed instrument, the morin huur. He also addressed an audience of some 800 people at the State House and met with President Enkhbayar and then Prime Minister Elbegdorj.
On departing Mongolia, Bush declared, “I feel very much at home in your country.” He also echoed comments shared by virtually every other American visitor to the high steppes of Mongolia, praising it as a “beautiful land, with huge skies and vast horizons.” Subsequently, Mongolian postal authorities issued a commemorative stamp to honor and remember President Bush’s historic visit. Beyond the platitudes and seemingly trite sentiments, President Bush’s remarks reflected a genuine amazement, respect, and appreciation for Mongolia, a relatively small country that seemed to have chosen an unlikely and less well-traveled path, one very different from the one most of its neighbors had embarked upon during the post-Soviet era.
Vice President Biden’s visit to Mongolia on August 22, 2011, garnered almost as many headlines as that of President Bush nearly six years earlier. Accompanied by his granddaughter Naomi, he arrived in Ulaanbaatar en route from China to Japan—the first US vice president to visit Mongolia since Henry Wallace’s trip in July 1944, more than 67 years earlier. Vice President Biden’s brief but packed schedule involved meetings at Government House with both President Elbegdorj and Prime Minister Batbold, among other events.
In his meetings at Government House, the vice president evoked well-worn themes emphasized by many senior visitors over the years, describing Mongolia as a “shining example for other nations in transition” and an “emerging leader in the worldwide democratic movement, a responsible actor on the world stage, and a close friend and partner of the United States.” He also highlighted cooperation in other areas, including international peacekeeping and growing commercial ties. Concluding his official remarks, he stated, “We look forward to even closer ties in the years to come.”
Privately, the American vice president urged the Mongolian government to strengthen the country’s economic links with the United States while also going forward on a long-delayed “transparency agreement” aimed at improving Mongolia’s business and commercial environment and making it more transparent. Contrary to what was reported in both the Mongolian and international press at the time, the issue of nuclear waste storage in Mongolia figured nowhere on the agenda and was not discussed at all.
Before departing from Mongolia after his brief visit, Vice President Biden and his party participated in a colorful encounter with Mongolian culture and traditions at Yarmag Denj, near Genghis Khan Airport, not far from where a similar event had been organized for Vice President Wallace nearly seven decades earlier.
The event started with a long song and morin huur ensemble and continued to include throat singing and a demonstration of both traditional dancing and contortionism. The late afternoon program also involved archery, horse racing, and a wrestling competition, which the vice president briefly joined in, facing off against a very large Mongolian wrestler in traditional dress. At one point, Vice President Biden aimed his bow in the direction of the accompanying press corps, urging them to “be careful.” As with many foreign visitors, he was given a parting gift—a restive brown horse that he promptly named Celtic in honor of his Irish ancestry. After the foreign delegation had left, the gift horse was passed on to a local herder, never to be saddled or ridden again—or, at least, that is what high-level visitors are told when they inevitably ask what will become of “their” horse once they have left Mongolia.
* * *
High-level affirmation for Mongolia as an emerging democracy is further reflected in a series of other visits over the years, including trips to Ulaanbaatar by senior American officials from the Department of State and Department of Defense at various times. Most notably, four US secretaries of state—James Baker, Madeleine Albright, Condoleezza Rice, and Hillary Clinton—each visited Mongolia during their tenures in office. Former president Jimmy Carter has also visited Mongolia, undertaking a birding expedition to the Gobi in August 2001.
The first trip by a sitting US secretary of state to Mongolia occurred in August 1990, when James Baker visited Ulaanbaatar. As he recalls in his memoir:
Only days before, Mongolia had completed its first multiparty elections in nearly seventy years, with a voter turnout of more than 90 percent. The revolution in Eastern Europe was slow in spreading across the Urals, but Mongolian democracy had a real chance to flourish, and I wanted to lend the moral encouragement of the United States to their efforts at self-determination.
(The Politics of Diplomacy: Revolution, War and Peace, 1989–1992)
As fate would have it, Baker’s visit occurred at exactly the same time that Saddam Hussein launched the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, provoking an international crisis that ultimately resulted in the First Gulf War. From the very start, Baker worked to forge an international coalition against the precedent of one small country being invaded by a much larger neighbor. Indeed, Mongolia itself issued one of the first statements condemning the invasion—a gesture that Kuwait remembers with appreciation to this day and one that almost certainly played a role in Kuwait’s decision in 2010 to become the first Arab country to open an embassy in Ulaanbaatar.
In Baker’s recollection, the US embassy in Mongolia in August 1990 consisted of “three rooms on a stairwell in an apartment building.” Communications proved difficult, and the decision was quickly made to cut short his already brief official visit and return to Washington by way of Moscow as part of an effort to also enlist Russian support.
In recalling his first visit, Baker later praised Mongolian officials for their hospitality as well as for their flexibility and support. He also committed himself to a longer second visit—a commitment he fulfilled the following year when he visited Mongolia again, this time staying longer and seeing more of the countryside.
If anything, this second visit confirmed and strengthened Baker’s interest in Mongolia still further, an important factor in generating additional international support for Mongolia in various international forums during the coming months, when Russia terminated its large assistance program to Mongolia and the country’s future economic prospects seemed especially bleak.
At a personal level, Baker maintained a strong interest in Mongolia even after leaving office, visiting the country in 1996 to observe elections and then again with his son in 2006 to explore possible business interests. In retrospect, it is no exaggeration to say that Baker’s initial two visits to Mongolia during the early 1990s were landmark events, playing an important role in laying the foundation for a productive partnership between the United States and Mongolia that continued after he left office.
Baker is often remembered in Mongolia as one of the authors of the term “third neighbor” to describe the concept of Mongolia looking beyond its two immediate geographical neighbors to develop strong relations with the world’s democratic nations, including not only the United States but also Japan, South Korea, India, Canada, Australia, and various European countries. In fact, the “third neighbor” concept now serves as one of the pillars of Mongolian foreign policy, affirming as it does the importance of maintaining positive relations with its immediate neighbors, Russia and China, while also reaching out to a range of other countries as well as the United Nations and other multilateral organizations further afield.
Secretary of State Madeleine Albright’s visit in May 1998 during the Clinton administration struck similar themes while also reflecting broad, bipartisan US support for assisting Mongolia during the difficult years of its transition. She was met on arrival by her counterpart, Foreign Minister Amarjargal. From there, she proceeded directly to the countryside, visiting a herder named Vanchigdorjit living in the Jargalantin Am Valley, where she was offered both fermented mare’s milk and a horse. During her brief trip, the secretary addressed the Great Hural, lauding Mongolia for its commitment to both democratic values and an open economy. She also met with President Bagabandi.
Albright’s visit took place at a time of considerable political turmoil in Mongolia, Prime Minister Elbegdorj having only just assumed office. In her public remarks, she emphasized the role that both participation and effective communication can play in strengthening grassroots democracy.
As the first female US secretary of state, Albright took a special interest in the challenges facing women in Mongolia. During that May 1998 trip, she participated in a roundtable discussion with several Mongolian women, lauding their contribution as providing an “extraordinary beacon of democracy.” She also announced a $30,000 grant to the National Center against Violence. Subsequently, the funds supported a domestic violence shelter in Ulaanbaatar—a facility now called the “Madeleine Albright Shelter”—that continues to provide valuable service to the women of Mongolia to this day.
As with a number of senior visitors, Madeleine Albright returned to Mongolia on a second occasion, this time as a private citizen. Her return visit to Ulaanbaatar in April 2011 evoked many memories. During the course of her stay, she gave a lecture at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade entitled “Celebrating Mongolian Democracy: A Special Role in Asia.” While fondly recalling her visit to Mongolia 13 years earlier, she also reflected on both the challenges and opportunities facing Mongolia in the years ahead.
First Lady Hillary Clinton was another high-profile visitor to offer support for Mongolia’s fledgling democracy during the 1990s. In her memoir Living History, she recalls her September 1995 trip to Ulaanbaatar fondly, noting, “We arrived on a crystal-clear day with bright sunshine” and left immediately from the airport to spend time with a herder family. She was “mesmerized” by her encounter, striving to come up with the right set of adjectives to describe the life of a traditional rural Mongolian family that had set up its fall camp against a backdrop of the steppes that was “stunning in its vastness, serenity and natural beauty.” As she recalls, she also tasted fermented mare’s milk when it was offered to her, though everyone in the White House press corps declined it for themselves.
“The country faced difficult times,” Clinton writes in her memoirs. “It was important for the United States to show support for the Mongolian people and their elected leadership and a visit from the First Lady to one of the most remote capitals of the world was one way to do it.”
For the jaded traveler, journalist, or academic who is already familiar with Mongolia and its many challenges, the inevitable references to democracy and remote but stupendous landscapes may begin to seem hackneyed and even stereotypical. Yet such comments reflect the reality that senior visitors are often truly impressed by what they encounter when they experience Mongolia for the first time, developing a real affection for the country and its people that Mongolians, as survivors throughout the centuries, have often used to their advantage. Moreover, the historical record suggests that positive impressions by first-time visitors, especially senior ones, can sometimes reap dividends for Mongolia later on. Without doubt, high-level American officials who have visited Mongolia in recent years have usually come away impressed by it.
Events on Hillary Clinton’s crowded schedule during her first visit to Mongolia in the early fall of 1995 included lunch with President Ochirbat, tea with a group of Mongolian women, and a meeting with students at the Mongolian National University. In her remarks at the university, she spoke of “the courage of the Mongolian people and their leadership, urging them to continue their struggle toward democracy.” The brief visit made a strong impression on Mrs. Clinton regarding Mongolia’s commitment to democracy, despite the many obstacles it faced: “From then on, whenever we visited a country that was struggling to become democratic, we would break into a chorus of ‘Let them come to Mongolia!’ And so they should.”
Nearly 17 years later—on July 9, 2012—Clinton paid a second visit to Mongolia, this time as secretary of state. The stopover was part of a 13-day worldwide tour, the longest, most complex, and most grueling of her tenure in office: prior to landing in Ulaanbaatar, she had visited France, Afghanistan, and Japan, and immediately afterwards she proceeded to Southeast Asia, stopping off for meetings and other events in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia, before returning to the United States via the Middle East. On several occasions during her 21-hour stopover in Mongolia, she recalled her previous admonition (“Let them come to Mongolia”), in this case congratulating Mongolia on its recent parliamentary elections in late June 2012 as part of an impressive series of electoral milestones stretching back two decades.
This time, Secretary Clinton’s schedule included meetings with President Elbegdorj, Prime Minister Batbold, and Foreign Minister Zandanshatar. At the meeting with President Elbegdorj, which took place in a large ceremonial ger at Government House, Secretary Clinton was once again given the opportunity to politely sip fermented mare’s milk. Ushered into the lavish round felt tent, the Mongolian president welcomed her warmly into “our oval office.” Following the meeting, she participated in a special session of the governing council of the Community of Democracies; addressed an International Women’s Leadership Forum sponsored by the Community of Democracies; officially launched the new Leaders Engaged in New Democracies (LEND) network; and met with members of the embassy staff, including families.
As with her initial visit as First Lady 17 years earlier, Secretary Clinton was able to see something of Mongolia’s countryside outside Ulaanbaatar, in this case traveling by road more than an hour east to Terelj National Park, with its attractive hills, rivers, trees, and rock formations. Before flying off to Vietnam, she spent one night in Terelj relaxing by a swiftly flowing river at sunset while Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia and the Pacific Kurt Campbell enjoyed a few brief moments of fly-fishing. Amidst the headaches, heartaches, and uncertainties posed by the “Arab Spring” and problematic developments elsewhere in Asia, the stopover in Mongolia offered a welcome if momentary opportunity for relaxation and reflection beside the Terelj River in the face of a growing list of more pressing challenges in other parts of the world. By comparison, potential issues related to Mongolia seemed both more modest and more manageable.
The Mongolian journey also offered a useful opportunity to advance concerns related to the role of women, both within the region and beyond. Other participants at the Women’s Leadership Forum organized in advance of the secretary’s trip included former Canadian Prime Minister Kim Campbell and former Kyrgyz President Roza Otunbaeva. The former president recalled both the historical relationship between Mongolia and Kyrgyzstan (many Kyrgyz believe that their ancestors once lived in western Mongolia) and more recent ties, including the ongoing support over several years that Mongolia offered for Kyrgyzstan’s struggling democracy. (President Elbegdorj had visited Bishkek earlier in the year as part of a series of continuing exchanges involving officials from the two countries.) All nine of Mongolia’s recently elected female parliamentarians, spanning the entire spectrum of Mongolian politics, also attended.
The secretary’s remarks at the Women’s Leadership Forum, while offering encouragement for those working toward greater female participation in politics, included a broader focus on Asian democracy. Referring to Mongolia as “an inspiration and a model,” she noted, “[A]gainst long odds, surrounded by powerful neighbors who had their own ideas about Mongolia’s future, the Mongolian people came together with great courage to transform a one-party Communist dictatorship into a pluralistic, democratic political system.” She then made the case that democracy and human rights should be viewed as “the birthright of every person born in the world.”
One key section of her speech directly challenged statements made by some commentators that democracy “isn’t perfectly at home in Asia” or might be “antithetical to Asian values.” Citing developments in Thailand, Burma, East Timor, and elsewhere, Clinton argued that these nations “show what is possible.” At the same time, she directly challenged countries that “resist reforms,” specifically taking on the argument that “democracy threatens stability” or that “democracy is a privilege belonging to wealthy countries.” Subsequent media reporting interpreted these sections of the speech as a subtle “dig” at China, noting that while Secretary Clinton never mentioned China by name, some of her reflections might well be relevant to Mongolia’s large neighbor to the south.
As already noted, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice accompanied President Bush during his historic visit to Mongolia in November 2005, making her the fourth American secretary of state to visit Mongolia while in office. Only a month earlier, Donald Rumsfeld had become the first and so far only US secretary of defense to visit the country. While his schedule included meetings with high-level Mongolian officials, it was clear from the outset that one of his specific purposes was to thank Mongolia for its contributions to international coalition efforts in both Afghanistan and Iraq.
This appreciation was notably reflected in Rumsfeld’s meeting with some 180 Mongolian soldiers who had recently returned from service in the two war zones, sharing the danger and experience of war with American soldiers serving there. During his remarks to the Mongolian military contingent, Rumsfeld specifically singled out two Mongolian soldiers—Sergeant Azzaya and Sergeant Samuu-Yondon—for their vigilance in February 2004 while serving with a Polish detachment at Hilla in Iraq. Facing a split-second decision to determine the true intentions of an Iraqi in a pickup truck who was driving erratically outside their camp, they fired on the driver, who turned out to be a would-be suicide bomber. Their prompt and decisive action halted the attack in its tracks, thereby saving countless lives.
* * *
While high-level visits help affirm the importance of US-Mongolia bilateral relations as well as mutually shared views about democracy, US support over the years also includes a strong “grassroots” dimension, one based partly on the provision of both moral and material support to Mongolian civil society. As noted earlier, such aid has come from many sources, including the Asia Foundation, International Republican Institute, National Democratic Institute, and National Endowment for Democracy. While USAID has been at the forefront of such efforts, direct grants have also been provided through the US embassy, in part to address issues such as trafficking, child labor, media, and disability concerns.
Regardless of the specific activity being supported, there was widespread interest on the part of the international NGO community in building and strengthening Mongolia’s indigenous NGO sector and making it more transparent. American and international NGOs played a part in many of these programs. Indeed, the growth of Mongolia’s NGO sector and civil society over the past two decades is in no small measure linked to the early initiatives launched by many of these organizations, some of which have received US government funding but many of which rely primarily on private donations from ordinary American citizens.
The emergence of trafficking as an issue reflects one of the more negative aspects of globalization, namely the dubious movement of people—sometimes via forced labor, often including vulnerable young women—to other countries, where they are all too often abused and exploited. In the case of Mongolia, such concerns include the trafficking of young women to various Asian destinations, including China, Korea, Japan, and Malaysia. As Mongolia’s mining boom unfolds, it is possible that Mongolia will itself become a trafficking destination. One of the hallmarks of democracy anywhere is the willingness to talk about problems and address them openly, rather than ignore them or pretend that they do not exist. In the case of trafficking, the US embassy has worked with civil society over many years to proactively address these concerns and minimize their impact before they become a much bigger problem.
In recognition of these ongoing efforts worldwide, the US Department of State each year honors several individuals with “TIP Hero” awards, giving them to those who have made a notable impact on addressing Trafficking in Persons (TIP) concerns. As a reflection of the commitment of individual Mongolians to addressing these concerns, two Mongolians have received such awards in recent years, including the “TIP Hero” award issued in 2010 to Geleg Ganbayasgakh for her work with the Gender Equality Center, which so far has assisted some 300 trafficking victims, in part through its phone hotline, counseling, and shelters.
Ms. Ganbayasgakh has herself designed university curricula, textbooks, and pamphlets on the nature of human trafficking and approaches towards ending it. Reflecting a long-standing interest in issues affecting women, the award—signed by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton—was delivered in person by former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright at the US ambassador’s residence during a private visit to Ulaanbaatar in April 2011.
Disability issues in Mongolia have also received increased attention from the US embassy, reflecting the view that one of the core strengths of democracy is its ability to provide a “voice” to individuals and communities that all too often have almost no chance to be heard. Already, there is a growing interest on the part of Mongolians with disabled children and adult Mongolians who are blind, deaf, or otherwise disabled to participate more fully in the economic, political, and social life of the country—an interest which the US embassy actively seeks to support.
Building on this interest, USAID programs implemented since 2009 include several activities related specifically to disabled people. While engaging with local NGOs working with Mongolia’s disabled population, the program also aims at effecting policy change, including the adoption of regulations to ensure that new buildings provide access for Mongolians confined to wheelchairs. In advance of the 2012 parliamentary elections, the USAID-funded NGO Mercy Corps provided support aimed at ensuring that disabled Mongolians have access to voting booths.
A variety of other US embassy outreach programs have strengthened engagement with Mongolia’s disabled population in other ways. For example, nearly every cultural event sponsored by the US embassy in recent years has included outreach focused on Mongolia’s disabled community. In addition, the alumni association of USG-funded students who have studied in the United States has organized summer camps for disabled Mongolians and supported events to publicize disability concerns among the broader Mongolian public.
In September 2010, Andrew Imparato, president and CEO of the American Association of People with Disabilities, based in Washington, D.C., visited Mongolia to discuss, among other issues, aspects of the American Disabilities Act that might be relevant in Mongolia.
Following that visit, the Mongolian NGO “Wind Bird” sponsored a unique, two-week study trip to the United States that included meetings with Special Assistant to the President for Disability Policy Kareem Dale and State Department Special Advisor for International Disability Rights Judith Heumann. In addition, the group—which included both journalists and disabled people—saw at first hand various US approaches to disability issues in Washington, Baltimore, and Seattle. In their own words, participants returned “inspired” and “motivated” to adapt to Mongolia some “lessons learned” from their trip across the United States.
* * *
International partnerships between countries do not necessarily imply identical views on the issues of the day. Indeed, voting patterns for Mongolia and the United States at times differ in the United Nations and in other international forums. However, the relationship and level of trust is such that American and Mongolian diplomats freely and candidly discuss a range of issues, even on occasions when their views and perspectives may diverge. Yet it is often the case that Mongolia and the United States find common ground on a number of important issues and concerns.
For example, in 2010 and again in 2011 during its tenure on the board of governors at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in Vienna, Mongolian and American diplomats regularly discussed a wide range of issues, including shared concerns about nuclear proliferation related to Iran. Similarly, during the first half of 2011, the United States along with a number of other countries participated in an ongoing dialogue with Mongolia, privately expressing concern about Syria’s pending 2012 bid to become a member of the UN Commission on Human Rights at a time when hundreds of Syrians were already being killed on city streets across the country. In the end, Mongolia indicated that it was willing to consider putting itself forward for a vacant seat on the Commission if no other Asian country would do so—a step that, by some accounts, was sufficient for Syria to withdraw its candidacy and cede its prospective seat on the Commission to another Arab country, Kuwait.
Historically, Mongolia has had long-standing ties with North Korea. More recently, it has forged robust ties with South Korea as well, potentially putting it in a position to at some point provide a “bridge” between two very different political and economic systems. Although Mongolia’s own efforts in this area have not yet borne fruit, it has on occasion suggested that its example might one day be relevant to North Korea, especially its experience in moving relatively quickly from a Soviet-style political and economic system to a market-oriented one following its “decision for democracy” just over two decades ago. In the words of former deputy secretary of state Richard Armitage, it is useful and appropriate for Mongolia to keep lines of connection with both Koreas “warm,” in the hopes that it might one day help facilitate useful and ultimately broad-based changes that contribute to stability across the Korean peninsula.
* * *
Mongolia’s assumption of the chairmanship of the Community of Democracies in July 2011 seemed especially appropriate, representing another important milestone in Mongolia’s ongoing journey as a country committed to democracy. At the same time, it provided further opportunity for a continued conversation on democratic issues between the United States and Mongolia, a conversation that began at the outset of Mongolia’s “Democratic Revolution” in the early 1990s. In this high-profile position, Mongolia has already engaged with other countries such as Tunisia, Burma (Myanmar), and Kyrgyzstan on how its own experience with democracy may be relevant elsewhere.
The idea of the Community of Democracies first emerged in 1999 when Madeleine Albright was secretary of state. The Community itself was officially organized in Warsaw in June 2000, resulting in a “Warsaw Declaration” that emphasized the importance of elections, freedom of expression, education, rule of law, and peaceful assembly as true hallmarks of democracy everywhere. Ten countries were represented at a ministerial level at that first meeting—Chile, the Czech Republic, India, Mali, Mexico, Poland, Portugal, South Africa, South Korea, and the United States.
Six years later, the convening group added six more countries—including not only Mongolia, but also Cape Verde, El Salvador, Italy, Morocco, and the Philippines—to its membership. Prior to Mongolia’s chairmanship, previous chairs included Poland, South Korea, Chile, Mali, Portugal, and Lithuania. The rationale behind the establishment of the Community of Democracies reflects a recognition that liberty and democracy will always be subject to challenge and can never be taken for granted. As an organization, the Community explicitly acknowledges the importance of civil society and encourages its active participation.
Even before assuming its two-year chairmanship in July 2011, Mongolian officials had noted that during their term in office they wished to emphasize democratic education and civil society as important themes, culminating in hosting the biennial Community of Democracies Ministerial Summit. As already noted, during its chairmanship Mongolia welcomed Secretary of State Clinton to Mongolia in early July 2012 to participate in a special session of the governing council, launch the LEND initiative, and address the International Women’s Leadership Forum. Other international events held in Ulaanbaatar during the country’s term as head of the Community of Democracies included a seminar on “Education for Democracy” (May 2012) and a meeting on “Election Challenges in a Young Democracy” (November 2012). For Mongolia, its time in a leading role was to culminate in the Ministerial Summit in Ulaanbaatar in late April 2013––after which the chairmanship would pass to another young democracy, El Salvador.
A few skeptical outside observers have on occasion suggested that Mongolia’s interest in democracy is only superficial, reflecting little more than a foreign policy ploy aimed at setting Mongolia apart from its neighbors in Central and Northeast Asia in the eyes of the rest of the world and thereby garnering more international interest and support than would otherwise be the case. But, so far, Mongolia’s commitment to democracy has been widely accepted within the country over two decades, despite growing cynicism about politicians, deep concern about corruption, and an often vociferous debate about what a mining-based economy portends for Mongolia’s future.
* * *
Looking back over the course of two decades, democracy in Mongolia, as in other countries, is primarily a continuing journey rather than a final destination. It is a journey with many bumps, obstacles, detours, and hurdles at every step of the way. This was highlighted in April 2012 with the arrest on corruption charges of former president, prime minister, and speaker Enkhbayar, a leading figure from the Mongolian People’s Revolutionary Party (MPRP) who had dominated Mongolian politics for much of the 2000s.
As the international community watched events unfold, early comments emphasized the importance of adherence to transparency, rule of law, and due process, even while the Mongolian legal process took its course. Concerns were also expressed in some quarters, both locally and abroad, that the timing of the arrest was politically motivated and primarily aimed at excluding Enkhbayar from running in the parliamentary elections scheduled for late June 2012. These concerns were further heightened when Enkhbayar went on an extended hunger strike that appeared to threaten his health and attracted additional attention in Mongolia and abroad. They gained still more momentum when Mongolia’s General Election Commission (GEC) disqualified Enkhbayar from being a candidate in June 2012, not long before the elections were due to commence.
Public opinion on the case was and remains divided, even after Enkhbayar was convicted of corruption and sentenced to a four-year prison term in July 2012. Here again, televised scenes involving the undignified arrest of a former president—followed weeks later by his exclusion from the June elections—contributed to a sense of uncertainty and concern about what these developments might mean for the future of democracy in Mongolia.
The former president’s international outreach campaign went into especially high gear during late spring and early summer 2012, convincing a number of highly placed individuals from the United States, Australia, and Britain to launch an intense lobbying effort of their own on behalf of Enkhbayar to demonstrate that his case might mark the demise of democracy in Mongolia. Those actually living in Mongolia were less convinced. Subsequently, the annual Freedom House survey, issued in early 2013, registered an improvement in Mongolia’s rankings. In continuing to describe it as a “free” country, the Freedom House report assigned Mongolia a 1 on political freedom (including the conduct of free and fair elections) and a 2 on civil society, on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 reflecting the highest mark possible. This put Mongolia in the same place as Croatia, Ghana, Hungary, Israel, Japan, and South Korea and far ahead of its two immediate neighbors, Russia and China, and the five nearby “stans” of former Soviet Central Asia (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan). Mongolia’s ranking in Transparency International’s annual corruption index also improved during the same period, moving from a low point of 120th out of 182 in 2011 to 94th out of 174 in 2012, placing it on par with countries such as India and Senegal.
As the Enkhbayar case gained momentum and headlines during May and June 2012, other commentators as well as the “blogosphere” highlighted the corrosive effects of corruption, arguing that no one, least of all senior politicians, including former presidents and prime ministers, should ever be above the law. A number of Mongolians went even further in their comments, suggesting that the most strident international criticism directed toward Mongolia at a time when it finally seemed to be taking corruption seriously was unwarranted and even hypocritical, especially when it came from wealthy foreigners with powerful political connections of their own. According to such critics, it was precisely this unhealthy mix of wealth, economic interests, connections, access, and political power that, increasingly, seemed to be undermining democracy in Mongolia.
Whatever the merits of the case, Mongolians across the country voted in large numbers in parliamentary elections held on June 28, 2012, reflecting yet again the propensity on the part of the Mongolian voting public to surprise. About two-thirds of those eligible actually voted, down from the 90 percent or more that went to the polls in earlier elections back in the 1990s and early 2000s, but still a respectable figure when compared with the turnout for most elections in Europe and North America.
When all the votes were counted, the Democratic Party (DP), tracing its origins to coalitions formed during the early years of Mongolia’s democracy movement, held the most seats, though not enough to form a new government on its own. The Mongolian People’s Party (MPP), the country’s oldest political party dating back to the Soviet era, placed second. Enkhbayar’s breakaway party—which assumed the mantle of the old Mongolian People’s Revolution Party (MPRP) while also forming a temporary “Justice” coalition with the Mongolian National Democratic Party (MNDP)—came third, garnering more than 20 percent of the popular vote and emerging as a potential “kingmaker” in forming the next government. While the MPRP/MNDP Justice platform argued for a strongly nationalistic economic policy, individual party members affirmed a continued commitment to maintaining and promoting strong ties with Mongolia’s various “third neighbors,” including the United States. Other political parties also shared this view.
My assignment as US ambassador to Mongolia concluded in July 2012, providing me an opportunity to watch the June 2012 elections firsthand just prior to leaving Mongolia for a new posting in Afghanistan.
On the eve of elections, taking the long but scenic journey on dirt tracks through the Hangai Mountains from Bayanhongor north to Tsetsergleg, I talked to GEC officials at small polling stations in isolated valleys or on mountain ridges with breathtaking views toward the sparkling rivers and deep green forests below. In each case, the relevant staff expressed confidence that the elections scheduled for the next day would be successful, despite their having to become familiar with a new election law that introduced a measure of proportional representation as well as the use of electronic voting machines for the first time.
On the following day, I got up early to watch the polls open in a gymnasium in Tsetserleg, capital of Arkhangai. Appropriately, I was asked to produce my “monitoring pass” from the Mongolian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade before being permitted to enter. Monitors from all the major political parties had registered ahead of me, intending to watch closely throughout the day as the electoral process took its course. About 30 people were already lined up to be among the first to vote.
Just before 7 a.m., the GEC official responsible for the polling station made a few brief remarks to open the proceedings. Then everyone—GEC officials, election monitors, and voters alike—stood at attention, hands over their hearts, to listen to their stirring national anthem. Many of the early voters were elderly and most of the women wore traditional deels, lending a note of dignity as well as color to polling day, while also suggesting that Mongolians continue to regard the opportunity to cast a meaningful ballot as representing something special.
Throughout the course of the day, I observed voting at polling stations in three other provinces—Ovorhangai, Bulgan, and Tov—before reaching Ulaanbaatar by late afternoon. The scenes were impressive at each stop along the way. Outside the Erdene Zuu Monastery at Kharkorin, three women stated that they had already voted, pronouncing that the new electronic voting machines were “simple” and “easy to use.” Two grizzled herders in Bulgan, wearing black leather boots and tan deels and burned deep brown by the sun, expressed the same sentiment before mounting their horses to ride ten miles south toward their summer camp. These were Mongolia’s seventh successful parliamentary elections in succession, a rare achievement in a part of the world where such elections are more often the exception rather than the rule.
Inevitably, concern was expressed in some quarters about some of the procedural aspects of the June 2012 elections, especially among certain aspiring members of parliament who failed to get elected. In reality, though, Mongolia—and most especially individual Mongolians from the length and breadth of the country—had once again demonstrated the country’s ongoing commitment to democracy, despite the obstacles. In doing so, they reflected in a visible, practical way the sentiment expressed by the young democratic leader S. Zorig, known at the time within Mongolia as the “Golden Magpie of Democracy.”
Zorig’s words come from a letter he had written from Moscow during the 1980s, long before his all-too-early death at the age of 36 in October 1998, when he was murdered in his Ulaanbaatar apartment, literally, according to some reports, on the eve of becoming Mongolia’s youngest prime minister. Addressed to his sister Oyun, then living in Prague but later a member of parliament and government minister herself, he stated that, ultimately, he would always place his trust in the “wisdom of the Mongolian people.” Years later, his statement remains as relevant as ever, perhaps offering inspiration to a new generation of Mongolians as they confront enormous challenges from every direction in the years ahead.