Hearing :: Georgia in 2008: Elections or Street Politics?

Print

UNITED STATES COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE 
(HELSINKI COMMISSION) HOLDS HEARING:
GEORGIA IN 2008:  ELECTIONS OR STREET POLITICS?


FEBRUARY 6, 2008

COMMISSIONERS:

REP. ALCEE L. HASTINGS, D-FLA., CHAIRMAN
REP. LOUISE M. SLAUGHTER, D-N.Y.
REP. MIKE MCINTYRE, D-N.C.
REP. HILDA L. SOLIS, D-CALIF.
REP. G.K. BUTTERFIELD, D-N.C.
REP. CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, R-N.J.
REP. ROBERT B. ADERHOLT, R-ALA.
REP. MIKE PENCE, R-IND.
REP. JOSEPH R. PITTS, R-PENN.

SEN. BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, D-MD., CO-CHAIRMAN
SEN. CHRISTOPHER J. DODD, D-CONN.
SEN. RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, D-WIS.
SEN. HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON, D-N.Y.
SEN. JOHN F. KERRY, D-MASS.
SEN. SAM BROWNBACK, R-KAN.
SEN. GORDON H. SMITH, R-ORE.
SEN. SAXBY CHAMBLISS, R-GA.
SEN. RICHARD BURR, R-N.C.

REP. LLOYD DOGGETT, D-TEXAS


WITNESSES/PANELISTS:

DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE FOR EUROPEAN 
AND EURASIAN AFFAIRS MATTHEW BRYZA

H.E. VASILI SIKHURALIDZE,
GEORGIAN AMBASSADOR TO THE U.S.

SALOME ZURABISHVILI,
FORMER FOREIGN MINISTER OF GEORGIA



               The hearing was held at 2:30 p.m. in Room B-318 of the Rayburn 
House Office Building, Washington, D.C., Alcee L. Hastings, Chairman, 
moderating.

[*]
HASTINGS:  Thank you very much for being here, ladies and gentlemen.  Welcome 
to the hearing.  

As we all know, Georgia has been very much in the news lately and may remain in 
the headlines for some time, so the reason for this hearing is obvious.  My 
apologies for being a few minutes late.  Airplanes don't always do what they 
claim they're going to do.  

But anyway, we hope to examine today where we all stand, after the events of 
the last few months, during which Georgia has experienced, quite frankly, quite 
a history.  I'm sure everyone here is familiar with the chronology that led to 
Georgia's snapped election last month, so I'll dispense with that portion of my 
remarks and allow that all of us are informed.  

I was appointed to lead the international observation mission for the OSCE by 
Foreign Ministers Miguel Angel Moratinos of Spain and Ilkka Kanerva of Finland. 
 The OSCE observer mission comprised the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly, the 
ODIHR, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and the European 
Parliament.  

In Tbilisi we met with candidates, including the opposition.  We also met with 
then Acting President Nino Burjanadze, who is the speaker of the parliament.  

On the basis of all the information we received -- and I would add a caveat 
there; not only did we, but I met with lots of Georgian citizens, just people.  
As a matter of fact, I'm real proud of the fact that there were three young 
people that were not going to vote, in the hotel that I was staying, and for 
the whole while that I was there, I just hammered them back and forth about 
voting and the importance of voting, et cetera.  One had family problems and 
didn't vote, but the other two did, and both of them were triggered by me, so I 
even helped people go to the polls in Georgia.  

On the basis of all this information we received, as well as monitoring the 
balloting and vote counting in many precincts, we concluded that, while there 
were significant challenges that needed to be urgently observed, Georgia's 
election largely met OSCE standards.  On January 6th, we announced our 
conclusions to the world.  

According to Georgia's central election commission, President Saakashvili was 
re-elected with over 53 percent of the vote, thus avoiding a run-off.  That 
result has been officially ratified, and Mikheil Saakashvili was inaugurated on 
January 20. 

Now, I'm well aware that many Georgian opposition leaders reject the official 
results.  They do not recognize President Saakashvili.  They may well believe 
that the international observation mission was wrong, did its work badly or was 
pursuing even less savory goals.  

But I'd like to affirm here that I stand behind the conclusions the OSCE 
observers reached in Tbilisi on January 5 and 6.  We had no ulterior motives or 
an agenda dictated by any government.  We called the election as we saw it.  
And I had said repeatedly around the world in election observations, if anybody 
can live through the Florida experience of the year 2000, and I can call that 
election bad, I sure can call one good or bad anywhere else in the world.  

But still questions have been raised by NGOs, and subsequent reports among 
others by the ODIHR.  This hearing will provide a venue to air some of those 
concerns.  Moreover, reconciliation has not been achieved in Georgia.  

Opposition leaders last week put forward a list of demands, including a recount 
of the ballots, equal representation on election commissions and guarantees of 
media freedom.  They say if these demands are not met, that they will launch a 
permanent street protest starting February 15th and will boycott parliamentary 
elections schedule for this spring.  

So once again we face uncertainty in Georgia.  Will we see any electoral 
approach for the resolution of political conflict or a protracted period of 
street politics?  I hope that Georgians can find a way to bridge their 
differences.  It would be deeply regrettable if uncertainty turns into 
instability.  

I see the upcoming parliamentary election as an opportunity to redress some of 
the grievances that have accumulated in Georgia over the last few years.  
There's every reason to believe that opposition parties have a good chance to 
win many seats in parliament, perhaps even a majority.  For that reason I 
strongly urge them not to boycott the election, but to participate and campaign 
more actively than ever before.  

But ultimately, it's for the Georgian people to decide how they want to pursue 
the development of democracy and integration into Western institutions -- 
clearly important goals for Georgia's population.  

Our three witnesses representing the United States government, the Georgian 
government and the Georgian opposition will give us critical perspectives on 
these issues.  We've also asked the National Democratic Institute and the 
International Republican Institute, which both fielded high-level permanent 
observer delegations, are to submit statements for the record.  Freedom House 
has also sent us materials.  

I'm not going to provide a detailed biography of our witnesses.  Their 
impressive resumes can be found on our Web site and the tables outside of the 
hearing room.  

And before we begin with Secretary Matthew Bryza, the deputy assistant 
secretary of state for Europe and Eurasia, I'm going to hear from my colleague, 
who was in Georgia with me as an election observer as well, and the weather 
didn't treat him well, and he wound up in Georgia for an extended period of 
time.  And he and I have not had an opportunity to communicate at length about 
that, so if you don't mind, I'd like, please, for my distinguished colleague 
from Texas, Lloyd Doggett, to make any opening statement he may wish to make.  

DOGGETT:  Well, thank you very much.  I'm mainly here, like you, to hear from 
our witnesses.  But, yes, we did not have Florida or Texas weather on any of 
the days that we were there.  

I want to thank you, Chairman Hastings, not only for holding this hearing, but 
for the outstanding leadership that you provided in Georgia, leadership of 
other parliamentarians from other democracies, as we served as observers there 
for these historic, really first genuinely contested elections in the history 
of the Republic of Georgia.  

As one of the observers, I shared the determination that Chairman Hastings, 
along with the other delegations of OSCE monitors, announced that this election 
in essence corresponded to OSCE standards.  But at the same time, I recognize 
that this very young democracy continues to face immense challenges.  

As best I could determine, the process as I saw it was at least as fair as some 
of the elections that I've observed in my home state of Texas, and probably 
better than at least one I remember from your home state of Florida.  

As an observer, one of the communities that I went to poll stations at was in 
the town of Gori, the birthplace of Joseph Stalin.  And I must say, as many 
elections as I've been through, I found it remarkable to see lines of 
Georgians, some stretching into the snow that day, turning out at a polling 
station on Stalin Avenue across the street from the Stalin Museum.  

In that polling station and in others, the people that I talked with -- and I 
sought out the observers for the opposition parties and the election commission 
members who were from the opposition parties -- I did not receive one 
indication of an election day irregularity at any of the polling stations in 
Gori or any other towns that I visited.

This spring, as the chairman has indicated, Georgians will hold parliamentary 
elections, which provide an opportunity for political reconciliation.  During 
this time it's critical that the government address the shortcomings that were 
identified in the election process and act on the recommendations of 
international observers and seek common ground with the opposition.  

But I would say that the opposition also has some responsibilities.  I 
personally spent 12 years in the minority in the opposition of this Congress, 
and finally one year in the majority.  The one year was much better than the 12 
years, but while I strongly prefer being in the majority, I recognize the 
important role that a minority plays in a democracy.  

So long as the rules permit the minority to always have a fair opportunity to 
become the majority, that's what a democracy is all about.  And I think that in 
ensuring that democracies flourish, the opposition has a critical role to play. 
 

In Georgia my feeling was that the concept of a valued loyal opposition -- 
loyal not to the majority, but loyal to the democratic process -- is not fully 
appreciated.  For every democracy to succeed, it needs to have an adequate and 
flexible opposition, presenting alternative policies to address the needs of 
the country.  

And I think totally rejecting the election process is not helpful, and it's not 
an alternative to the role that an opposition can play, just as the opposition, 
of which I was a vigorous part, played in the last 12 years and which our 
Republican colleagues play today here in the House.  

I was tremendously impressed, Mr. Chairman, as I know you were, with the 
important role that our ambassador plays in Georgia and his political officer, 
Alan Purcell, and their entire team.  Many of these polling stations I noted, 
including the one on Stalin Avenue, had a poster there paid for by U.S. 
taxpayers, explaining to people what these new voting processes were like and 
the steps that were taken to avoid election fraud.  

I believe that was a worthy investment of American taxpayer money, because it 
really is an investment in a bipartisan concern about Georgia and its 
importance to America and to this Congress.  

As you, I believe, referenced, our former colleague, Jim Kolbe, was there on 
behalf of the International Republican Institute, leading a delegation that 
included one of my constituents, who is a Republican with some experience in 
elections as a former secretary of state, and Ken Wollack was there with a 
delegation from the National Democratic Institute.  

I believe that our country should continue investing in and working with 
democracy to assist the Georgian people, build on the democratic gains that 
they have achieved and promoting Georgia in our dealings with them.  Our 
commitment is not to one person.  It's not to one party.  But it is a 
commitment for a more secure, a more democratic, and a more prosperous Georgia. 
 

I would particularly like to emphasize the dedication that you demonstrated, 
Mr. Chairman, in the leadership of the Helsinki Commission there in Georgia and 
to acknowledge the staff who accompanied us there.  Fred Turner, Lale Mamaux, 
and Ron McNamara assisted me personally and played an important role in our 
being able to accomplish our objectives of demonstrating our commitment to 
Georgia and our eagerness to assure a fair election.  

Thank you for this opportunity, and I'm going to ask that you include in the 
record an article that was published in the Austin paper, advising my Texas 
constituents of what was happening on the opposite side of the world when it 
came to democracy and why it's important to do.  Thank you so much.  

HASTINGS:  Without objection.  Thank you very much, Congressman Doggett.  I can 
tell you that it was a real reward for me, having participated in numerous 
election observations, to have you there with us.  

Before hearing from the deputy assistant secretary for Europe and Eurasia 
affairs, I would say this about Matthew Bryza.  I know a lot of people at the 
State Department, including the secretary of state.  I just was with the 
secretary of state last week in Colombia, yet another place that has impending 
elections and issues.  

But that said, I don't know too many people that have been as dedicated and 
committed, nor have as much knowledge or, from the standpoint of a legislator, 
a willingness to be accessible, as Secretary Bryza has been with me and the 
Helsinki Commission and my staff in my regular office.  

With that, Secretary Bryza, I welcome you and ask you to make any remarks you 
may wish to make.  I understand that you will have to move on after Mr. Doggett 
and I ask you a few questions.  

BRYZA:  Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman and Congressman Doggett, for being 
here, for those extremely warm and overly generous remarks about me, at least, 
and your staff and friends of mine I've known for years and working in the same 
direction, as you just described, to advance democracy in Georgia, my goal and 
your entire staff.  Thank you.  

And thank you for your leadership, and yours, Congressman, in being there to 
observe the elections.  The OSCE for us is the gold standard.  When it comes to 
election observation, you are a key part of that process.  Your credibility is 
unassailable.  You have so much experience observing these elections all over 
the world, and so we were very fortunate to have you there, and we followed 
absolutely carefully all of your words and your assessment and happen to agree 
with it.  

In fact, I fear that my remarks might sound repetitive, because I'm simply 
going to restate what both Chairman Hastings and Congressman Doggett have said, 
but I guess in a different way.  And I begin from the premise and fact that the 
United States government and everyone who is a citizen of the United States who 
has ever heard of Georgia or been there have a very warm feeling of friendship 
toward Georgia.  

And, too, it's accurate to say friends of mine are here with me on this panel, 
Ambassador Vasili Sikhuralidze and former foreign minister and distinguished 
opposition leader Salome Zurabishvili.  It's an honor just to be here with them 
as well on this panel.  

And I guess that's a good jumping off point.  Why do we have such positive 
feelings about Georgia?  Well, we have common strategic interests that drove 
our policy with Georgia, and we have shared values.  

Just for a moment on the strategic interests.  At the beginning of this 
administration, and in the last administration as well, we got very focused on 
Georgia for a couple of reasons that had to do with realpolitik.  

What really elevated Georgia's strategic interest in the international 
community was energy originally.  Oil and gas pipelines have traversed Georgian 
territory from the Caspian Sea and into Europe to help Europe achieve its own 
goal of diversifying its supplies of oil and natural gas.  

We also have a very strong record of cooperating with Georgia on hardcore 
security concerns and counterterrorism.  Before the Rose Revolution, we worked 
hard with the government of Georgia to change the situation in the Pankisi 
Gorge near Georgia's border with Russia's Republic of Chechnya, where we had 
serious concerns about international terrorists and other fighters, 
contributing to instability in the region.  And under then President 
Shevardnadze the Georgian government cleaned up that problem.  

And today we have a very strong security relationship with the government of 
President Saakashvili, with Georgia providing 2,000 troops in Iraq, which is 
the largest contribution of any country beyond the United States and the United 
Kingdom.  And that's just the beginning of our security relationship with 
Georgia.  

So the point I'm making is, yes, certainly, we have hardcore realpolitik 
interests on the table with Georgia, but the level of warmth and connection 
that we feel with Georgia, as officials or as private citizens, go well beyond 
that.  And that derives from the shared values that we experience with Georgia. 
 It's the love of freedom, political and economic freedom, and the commitment 
to democracy, democratic values and human rights.  

As you, Mr. Chairman, and you, Congressman Doggett, have outlined, the 
situation is not perfect in Georgia -- far from it.  And this election was not 
an example or a model to be followed elsewhere in the world.  

I come from Chicago, where we have also a peculiar form of local democracy at 
times, and all of us, all of our systems have their shortcomings.  And it's not 
an excuse.  That's an observation that imbues all of us that care about Georgia 
with energy to make sure these parliamentary elections coming up are 
significantly better in terms of the procedures than this election.  

That said, we share the assessment of you, Mr. Chairman, of OSCE, of the 
Parliamentary Assembly, of ODIHR as well, that in essence these elections 
adhered to the standards and commitments of democracy that we think of in the 
OSCE community, that in essence reflected those commitments -- and in practice, 
but there's more to be done to make sure the parliamentary elections provide 
that opportunity that Congressman Doggett spoke about for an opposition to 
flourish and to participate fully in the political life of the country.  

I'd like to put the remarks I just made in very brief historical context, not 
going back years, but just a couple of months.  In September and October, 
demonstrations began in Tbilisi that grew in size till November 2nd, when 
opposition leaders, including Mr. Zurabishvili, issued a series of absolutely 
understandable and legitimate demands that focused on the need for electoral 
reform.  

And by the way, we hailed in the State Department and the U.S. government that 
demonstration as an example of the exercise of the democratic right of peaceful 
and lawful assembly.  The next day some of those demands were escalated, and 
there were remarks about President Saakashvili, calling him a terrorist or a 
criminal or a traitor and calling for his overthrow.  

We didn't associate ourselves with those remarks, which are not in keeping with 
the spirit of democratic political behavior, because there was a call for a 
possibly extra constitutional change in power.  And in Georgia, as we all know, 
anybody who's followed Georgian modern history, all too often changes in 
government have occurred through protests on the street -- in fact, right in 
front of the parliament, where these demonstrations were happening.  

So there's a high degree of emotionality and tension that is always present in 
Georgian politics, particularly in the case of street demonstrations.  

This led to November 7th, where there were larger demonstrations after the 
Georgian government decided to disperse a protest in the same place in the 
parliamentary plaza or before the parliament building, as well as in Georgia's 
main thoroughfare, Rustaveli Avenue.  

Our assessment of what happened is that initially there was not force used, or 
excessive force, and some opposition people and participants in that 
demonstration I spoke with said, "OK.  Things were under control in the 
beginning."  But later in the day tensions escalated, emotions escalated, and 
there were violent clashes between demonstrators and government police.  

We condemned the use of force by the Georgian security services, by the police, 
on November 7th.  We assessed that excessive force was probably used and 
lamented that for the first in memory that the Georgian government did use 
force against its citizens.  Who threw the first punch will be debated, I 
guess, as long as people remember this incident.  We simply, though, lament 
that force ended up being used and that emotions escalated.  

That was the bad news.  And the bad news was also extended when the Georgian 
government closed the Imedi television station and instituted a state of 
emergency.  That was the bad news.  

The good news was that President Saakashvili tried to defuse the situation with 
a rather unorthodox and democratic step at that moment of high tension, which 
was to call for an election that would cut short his term by one year and would 
allow the Georgian people to decide on one of the primary demands of the 
opposition, which was to hold parliamentary elections earlier -- in fact, as 
they were originally scheduled to be separate from the presidential election in 
spring, rather than concurrent with the presidential election in November.  
That part was good.  

But still I was honored to be dispatched by Secretary Rice to Georgia to try to 
get the state of emergency lifted and to get the Imedi TV station turned back 
on.  And through a lot of hard work with the OSCE, with you, Mr. Chairman, with 
Acting President and Speaker Burjanadze, and with the EU, together there was a 
compromise negotiated that got Imedi TV back on the air for a while and got the 
state of emergency lifted.  That was good.  

And Georgia then was able to move toward parliamentary elections.  However, 
there was a lot of concern about the presidential election, first of all, as 
you already outlined, and serious irregularities that many people claimed had 
altered the outcome of the presidential election that then occurred on January 
5th.  

We listened carefully to all of those complaints.  Our embassy and Ambassador 
Tefft -- and thank you for mentioning him, Congressman Doggett; he is one of 
the best ambassadors anywhere we have in the world -- his team and he 
personally, that he personally led a very careful examination of the most 
serious complaints.  

We brought our concerns to the central election commission.  We received a 
detailed response.  We can argue over how adequate the responses were that the 
central election commission offered to all of the opposition people who raised 
concerns.  

But our honest and best judgment call, after weighting and analyzing, was that 
President Saakashvili probably did receive over 50 percent of the vote -- just 
squeaked by, perhaps -- as the ISFED Georgian NGO also determined through a 
parallel vote tally.  

And so we waited a week before anybody officially congratulated President 
Saakashvili on a re-election so that we could conduct this very careful 
analysis.  And after a week, we came out -- in fact, a week and a day -- where 
we came out, which is that the election was valid, legitimate, that President 
Saakashvili won a very narrow majority.  And that's when President Bush called 
him.  

Again, we recognize that there is serious doubt still out in the Georgian 
public about this result.  It will linger out there.  And to dispel any 
concerns in the future about the parliamentary elections outcome, we think it's 
crucial that the negotiations ongoing between the Georgian government and the 
opposition continue, that the Georgian government continues to take the 
opposition's demands with regard to electoral reform seriously, and that the 
Georgian government implements improved procedures to make sure everybody sees 
the parliamentary election as free and fair and legitimate.  

And my last comment would be that we indeed call on our friends and colleagues 
in the opposition to do just what you suggested, Congressman Doggett, and also 
Chairman Hastings, which is participate vigorously in the parliamentary 
election.  Develop the campaign platforms.  Fight for votes.  Win a significant 
number of seats, which is absolutely possible.  The outcome of the presidential 
election indicated that there was a near 50-50 split in the country.  

We anticipate, we hope that the opposition will score a significant number of 
votes or would be successful, at least, in convincing the Georgian public to 
vote for it.  We hope the outcome will be one in which the disposition of 
political forces in the Georgian parliament reflects the will of the Georgian 
voters, because it is the Georgian voters that must determine the political 
future of Georgia.  

If this election is free and fair, if the Georgian government restores the 
sense of momentum in democratic reform that had been out there, if these 
democratic reforms reflect the economic reforms that the World Bank cited as 
meriting Georgia's designation as the world's leading economic reformer last 
year, well then we feel that Georgia will be fully on track to realize its NATO 
aspirations.  

I realize there may be some questions about that in this question and answer 
session, so I end my remarks here -- again, thanking you for your leadership 
and for your assistance in helping us analyze what happened during the January 
5th election.  

HASTINGS:  Thank you very much, sir.  

Is the United States government involved in discussions between the sides about 
the 17 demands recently put forward by the opposition?  

BRYZA:  Well, these are discussions that are ensuing between the government of 
Georgia, largely under the leadership of Parliamentary Speaker Burjanadze and 
opposition leaders.  

We encourage the parties to come together and reach compromises on very 
legitimate demands and requests from the opposition.  So we do all that we can 
on the outside of the process, using whatever powers of suasion we have with 
our friends in the opposition and in the government.  

HASTINGS:  What do you feel would be the consequences, if the opposition 
chooses to boycott the parliamentary elections?  

BRYZA:  We think that would be unwise, because all Georgians have an 
opportunity, in the form of these parliamentary elections, to determine their 
country's political future through a democratic election process.  And we see 
an opportunity for the opposition again to realign the disposition of political 
forces in the parliament to reflect the will of the voters.  

That opportunity will materialize if these electoral reforms under discussion 
are implemented and if the election truly is free and fair and marks an 
improvement or a restoration of democratic reform momentum.  So, assuming the 
Georgian government lives up to its longstanding commitment to democratic 
reform, then the only way forward to strengthen Georgian democracy is for 
everybody to participate in the democratic parliamentary election.  

HASTINGS:  Mr. Secretary, two or three days after the election, I was 
personally attacked in the Russian media -- at least one of the major news 
sources in Russia.  And you've been personally attacked by Georgian opposition 
figures who claim, among other things, your friendship with President 
Saakashvili has colored your handling of the country's political crisis.  

I can handle mine.  I'm sure you can handle yours.  I chose not to respond to 
them at all, because my friends in Russia -- and I have numerous friends there 
-- know that, to the extent that I can reflect the wisdom of experience, one 
thing I've learned to do is to be fair.  And that's as it pertains to Russia, 
as well as other countries around the world.  

Toward that end, how do you respond to those allegations?  

BRYZA:  Mr. Chairman, I understand that it's all part of politics, part of an 
emotional battle that's going on.  And I take absolutely no personal offense at 
all, and I say that my feelings about Georgia span the political spectrum and 
span any administration.  

I recall when I was working on the National Security Council staff, many people 
were lamenting what would happen when President Shevardnadze's term expired, 
and oh my God, what will we do, because we have such a personalized 
relationship with Georgia.  And I said at that time what I say today, that our 
relationship with Georgia is with Georgia.  It's with all the people of 
Georgia.  

I have people I deeply respect and consider lifelong friends, sitting here in 
fact in the opposition, as well as in the government and in civil society in 
the person of Anna Dolidze and her husband Irakli Kakabadze.  

I feel very close to Georgia, regardless of political affiliation.  And so our 
commitment is to the democratic process in Georgia.  It is precisely the 
evolution of democracy in Georgia that elevates Georgia's strategic importance 
to, well, a point that we're here today talking about it.  If all we cared 
about in Georgia was security cooperation or oil and gas pipelines, we wouldn't 
be here today.  

One last word on Russia, too.  We welcome the tone and the substance of 
President Saakashvili's inaugural address, which had a central theme being 
reconciliation -- reconciliation between the government and the opposition, 
reconciliation between the government and civil society, which is an urgent 
need, and reconciliation between Georgia and Russia.  

We welcome the talks that ensued during the inauguration weekend, led by 
Foreign Minister Lavrov and then Foreign Minister Bezhuashvili, to develop a 
concrete road map to improve Georgian-Russian relations.  

We are completely supportive of that, as long as we understand it's in the 
context of the United States' absolutely unbending support for Georgia's 
sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity, and for, therefore, a 
peaceful settlement to its separatist conflicts.  

HASTINGS:  Toward that end, that's a very good segue to my last question in 
this round, and then I'll turn to Congressman Doggett.  

But when the president spoke of reconciliation and the desire to improve 
relations with Russia and then Foreign Minister Lavrov said that Moscow does 
not necessarily intend to recognize Abkhazia and South Ossetia, regardless of, 
for example, what happens in Kosovo.  

So are there any real grounds to hope for better relations, particularly in 
light of the fact the referendum of the citizens in Georgia reflected a desire 
to join NATO, and Russia has been constantly firm against those kinds of 
situations?  

But it's troubling to me.  I've spent 15 years now in the Parliamentary 
Assembly of the OSCE.  And on two of the terms, including my presidency, I 
participated in lengthy discussion regarding Abkhazia and South Ossetia.  

And the thing that always bothers me personally about these things is that, no 
matter the politics, people get hurt.  And a lot of the people that get hurt 
really are not anything other than people that want to get up in the morning 
and try to scrape through the day and are not going to be making these awesome 
decisions that our politicians make.  

So what real grounds exist for better relations?  And I could go on and on.  I 
won't.  I'll just leave it there and await your response.  

BRYZA:  Thanks, Mr. Chairman.  Well, I think, based on my own interactions in 
Tbilisi over the last couple of months, I think the goodwill is definitely 
there on the part of the government of Georgia and the people of Georgia to 
have a normal and friendly relationship with Russia.  Georgians are not 
inherently anti-Russian.  My God, they've been spending their entire existence 
living next to each other.  And I think that Russians are not inherently 
anti-Georgian at all.  

HASTINGS:  President Putin's mother lives in Georgia.  I didn't know that, and 
Lavrov is Armenian from...  

BRYZA:  Interesting.  And former Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov's mother also 
actually resided in the Pankisi Gorge.  We could go on for a long time about 
the cultural, political, all sorts of interconnections between Russia and 
Georgia, which is a good thing, a positive thing.  And we'd like to see that 
hopefully natural state of affairs resume.  

To a certain extent, the ball is in Russia's court, because, as we know, there 
are existing serious economic sanctions in place against Georgia.  The only 
existing road connection, the Verkhny Lars border crossing, is still closed.  
We hope it will soon.  There are still bans on the export of Georgian water and 
wine into Russia.  There have been prohibitions on air connections, as well as 
postal connections.  We hope that will soon be a thing of the past.  

We understand that to get to that point where these sanctions are gone, there 
needs to be a give and take negotiation, and we hope that's under way.  

But you also raised the conflicts.  And we should all be sober when we think 
about what could happen if people decide to define what happened in Kosovo as a 
precedent.  

I think our friends in Russia, as well as in Georgia and everywhere in the 
region, understand very well what a complex ethnic and political situation 
exists in the Caucasus on both sides of the Caucasus Mountains, be that in the 
South Caucasus regions or countries of Georgia, Azerbaijan and Armenian, or in 
Russia's own North Caucasus republics.  

I don't need to go into that.  I think everybody knows what's happened in the 
past and the tensions that are brewing now.  None of us, none of us, nobody, I 
think, who cares about peace and stability and freedom in the Caucasus wants to 
see Kosovo become a precedent.  And there's no reason why it should be.  
There's absolutely no reason why a unique conflict, as every conflict is, in 
one part of Europe has to be a precedent for a conflict anywhere else with a 
completely different history, set of participants, international, political, 
legal precedents.  These are absolutely different conflicts, and it's in no one 
interests for there to be a precedent.  

So what I hope will happen is we'll get through this Kosovo period, and then we 
will see a serious effort by our friends in Moscow and a continuing, serious 
effort by our friends in Tbilisi, as well as in Sukhumi, Abkhazia, and in 
Tskhinvali, South Ossetia, and those regions of Georgia, to accelerate and 
deepen our efforts to resolve those separatist conflicts in the context of 
Georgia's internationally recognized borders.  

To do that we, of course, need to build on the confidence building measures 
we've been trying to establish and the economic cooperation we try to foster in 
South Ossetia and the security measures.  We need to get beyond just those 
confidence building measures and work on the more substantive and crucial 
problems, which are political settlement that will be lasting and just and the 
return and better treatment of refugees and internally displaced persons, which 
is what you were talking about as well, Mr. Chairman.  

HASTINGS:  Thank you very much.  

Mr. Doggett?  

DOGGETT:  Thank you very much for your testimony and for your service, Mr. 
Secretary.  As you mentioned former President Shevardnadze, I was in Georgia in 
2002, and it was against that background of a little over five years that I 
noted such remarkable progress in so many ways in Georgia over the last five 
years.  

But it is important that you noted the most unfortunate events of November.  As 
one who has participated in more than a few demonstrations myself, I value the 
right of people in opposition to government policy to be able to express 
themselves without the threat of violence.  

And I think it is notable that though the United States and Georgia have a 
close security and other common concerns, that our government spoke out 
strongly against that unnecessary violent suppression of the opposition at that 
time.  

And my question to you is I saw from a distance a large demonstration the day 
after the election in Tbilisi, which was handled peacefully.  There were much 
larger demonstrations by the opposition and political rallies during the 
election process.  There have been some since then, all of which appear to have 
been peaceful in nature.  

Do you believe that the government has learned from the experience of November 
and that a peaceful demonstration will be handled peacefully by the government? 
 

BRYZA:  Congressman, it certainly appears that way.  Thank goodness that there 
has not been a repeat of the November 7th incident.  I can also say, from my 
own conversations with senior officials and the Georgian government, including 
that security side of the government, they, too, were shocked at what happened 
-- pained, as well, emotionally and physically.  

And they recognized that, again, as I said in my opening statement, a certain 
threshold had been passed in modern independent Georgia's history, where 
security services were used against peaceful demonstrators.  I don't think 
anybody, anybody, in Georgia is proud of that -- nobody.  

I think if you talk to the security people, however, they'd say, "Well, we 
found ourselves in that situation, and we did what we had to do, and we feel we 
responded in as responsible a way as possible."  You can argue over that.  I'm 
not an expert on that.  

I know that force was used -- it appears in an excessive way.  Serious injuries 
were caused in some cases.  And the Georgian government found itself in a 
position it did not wish to be in.  And so the key is to keep itself out of 
that situation.  Part of that means different types of responses to peaceful 
demonstrations, which we're seeing.  

But more importantly, I think what it means is to make sure the Georgian 
government reconnects with civil society and with the opposition and creates 
political space, through this election and the pre-election campaign, for 
everybody to have their voices heard, so that we have a real democratic 
process.  

And if that's what we see, then of course there'll still be peaceful protests.  
That's part of Georgia's spicy form of democracy.  But then it will be 
incumbent upon all of the leaders of Georgia, whether they're opposition or 
government, to decide Georgia's political future at the ballot box, rather than 
on the street.  

DOGGETT:  Even as we were there monitoring the elections, there was 
considerable rumor and discussion that there might be provocation or 
overreaction on election day.  It spoke well of all parties involved, from all 
of the opposition and from the government, from the election administrators, 
that with only a few minor exceptions, it appeared to have been a peaceful 
election day, and these concerns were overblown and over exaggerated.  

As to the improvements that you indicate need to be made in order to ensure 
that these parliamentary elections are an even higher standard compatible with 
democracy and OSCE standards, what are the main improvements that you would 
like to see occur?  

BRYZA:  Number one, we hope that, if and when there are significant complaints, 
that the central election commission finds a way to satisfy more clearly those 
people who issued their complaints.  I heard a lot of complaints...  

DOGGETT:  These would be complaints during the election process.  

BRYZA:  Yes, complaints about the election process that are raised after the 
election.  Many of the people that I spoke with in the NGO community and in the 
opposition parties were disappointed that they felt their responses from the 
central election commission were not substantive or serious.  But that's what 
happens after the election.  

To get to a freer and fairer election, I think we just need to look at some of 
the demands that the opposition has put out, warning that if the demands are 
not met by the 15th of February, there will be a permanent and large-scale 
protest.  

Some of those demands we don't necessarily agree with, when they focus 
backward.  Again, we'll be adjudicating the legitimacy of President 
Saakashvili's election.  The election's over.  He won.  And he was inaugurated, 
and heads of state were there, and heads of governments, and you were there, 
and I was there.  And so it's time to move forward and strengthen Georgian 
democracy.  So how -- just to answer your question.  

Some of the demands make a lot of sense and have been out there for quite some 
time.  So one would be to increase the political balance on the election 
commissions, the central election commission and all the election commissions 
throughout the country, so that the opposition has a stronger voice.  

Similarly, there appears to be a reasonable demand out there that the 
opposition has a stronger voice and has a more balanced board of directors of 
Georgian public television.  

As well, there's been demand for some time on the part of the opposition that 
the so-called majoritarian system of electing one-third of the parliament be 
abolished.  And it's not exactly a majoritarian system, but it's an interesting 
system that's in place in some quarters of Europe, whereby for one-third of the 
seats that are selected in the Georgian parliamentary election, in each 
district where one-third of those seats are selected, there's a winner take all 
situation.  So whatever party scores the most votes gets all the mandates from 
that district.  

Why that becomes problematic would be that if one political party -- let's say 
the ruling party -- had 51 percent popularity across the country, it's 
conceivable, in all of those seats where the majoritarian election system would 
be used, only that party's representatives would be selected, and candidates 
representing 49 percent of all of the other voters in Georgia would get no 
seats, according to that system.  So there's an understandable demand that that 
particular procedure be dropped.  

And there's been a demand that the threshold for membership in the Georgian 
parliament be dropped from 7 percent to 5 percent.  That's in terms of 
electoral reform.  

But then in terms of process, the obvious and simplistic response is that 
whatever happened that raised those complaints, be it excessive voter turnout 
numbers in some regions of Georgia in the Samtskhe-Javaketi region, which is 
ethnically Armenian, or in the Kvemo Kartli region, which is ethnically Azeri, 
that there not be concerns possibly about some sort of manipulation, whereby 
the turnout was larger than could have been expected.  

I'm not saying necessarily that something funny happened to drive up the 
turnout so high, but I am saying there are deep suspicions on the part of the 
opposition that something like that happened.  So we would hope that there 
would be no cause at all for those sorts of concerns in terms of procedures.  

DOGGETT:  Thank you.  

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  

HASTINGS:  Thank you very much, Secretary.  

I can't get this button.  I don't get a light.  That's why.  

Mr. Secretary, I thank you again.  I'm not going to go forward with additional 
questions.  I'll submit a few others to you in writing as we progress.  And 
again, I thank you for your service and for your appearance here today.  

It's important to the Helsinki Commission that we have persons like yourself, 
who are directly involved in these negotiations, come before us in public 
hearings.  That way I think it adds credibility to the substance of what it is 
that we are about in trying to promote democracy.  So toward that end, I thank 
you very much.  

And I now invite the ambassador of Georgia, who I've had an opportunity to meet 
with, Ambassador Sikhuralidze.  I get that name mixed up anyway.  Vasili -- 
that much I do know -- if you would come forward, and we'll take your 
testimony.  

BRYZA:  Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman.  It is a huge honor to be here or to 
receive any inquiry from you.  Thank you.  

HASTINGS:  Thank you.  

Ambassador?  

Mr. Ambassador, again, the credentials of the ambassador are on the table 
outside, and I won't go into great detail.  In the interest of time, we'll go 
ahead and receive your remarks.  You can summarize them, and your full remarks 
will be accepted into the record, or proceed as you see fit.  

SIKHURALIDZE:  Thank you.  Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  I would like to thank 
Helsinki Commission for organizing this event and this hearing.  

First, I would like to personally thank you and Congressman Doggett for 
participating and for your leadership role of election observer team, OSCE 
Parliamentary Assembly observer team in Tbilisi.  

First, I would like to also thank all of the international nongovernmental 
organizations who took part and participated in the election monitoring process 
in Georgia in this January.  So I may repeat statements already made by you or 
Secretary Bryza on speaking about these elections and the pre-election issues.  

So I would like to begin with several points on the developments leading to the 
January snap presidential elections.  So as you know, Georgia has implemented 
successful and much applauded economic and government supported (inaudible) 
formidable growth.  Nevertheless, poverty and unemployment still remain major 
issues, and time is needed for tangible results to be delivered to every 
Georgian family.  

This was one of the main motivating factors of the mass rallies of November 
2nd.  The leaders of the demonstration came up with four demands, as it was 
already mentioned, and which we are negotiating in the framework of the 
standing factional consultative group chaired by speaker of the Georgian 
Parliament, Ms. Nino Burjanadze.  

Here I would like to note that this and other fora for political dialogue 
existed before November last and are used today as well for meaningful 
dialogue.  Going back to that November events, there were that three out of 
four original demands met by government, but when the president was about to 
reach the leaders of the rally led the negotiations and came up with the 
summary demands, setting up the pattern of the constant opposition notification 
that can be observed till now.  

It has to be noted that the November demonstrations remained physical, I'm 
sorry it did not result in restraining leaders, despite the fact that the 
permit for the rally had expired for five days.  When the police attempted to 
restore traffic on the (inaudible), the protest turned violent, and so it had 
to resort to restore law and order.  

It was revealed later and that there was several occasions before, but it was 
finally revealed later that at the peak of the mass protest a well-planned coup 
by one of the head international figures was to be executed.  This plan was 
aiming at subversion of constitutional order by using large and unruly number 
of people and at the same time paralyzing the rightful state structure.  

So our Georgian government used government's adequate use that any democratic 
government would use in order to uphold law and order in the country.  Of 
course, I would agree with Matt, and I have the personal contact with a lot of 
high officials there, and nobody was happy with this development.  But the 
state acted in a way that it led.  

President made the decision to resolve this political crisis through the most 
democratic way -- elections.  He has announced his determination to resign and 
hold snap political elections and snap presidential elections on January 5th.  
The announcement by President Saakashvili was made two weeks prior to the 
actual resignation, offering additional time to the 45 days provided by the 
constitution for preparatory containing in preparation for the observers and 
central electoral commission and voters.  

On the elections themselves, I would like to only briefly cite some of their 
statements, where they are in opposite (inaudible) members.  I would say it was 
over 1,200 international observers and several ten thousands of local monitors 
scrutinized this process in general.  

An international election observer mission, including monitors from OSCE office 
for democratic institutions and human rights, OSCE Parliamentary Assembly, 
parliamentarians (inaudible) stated that, quoting, "The elections were 
certainly in line with OSCE and council of human commitments and standards for 
democratic elections and the mission legislation."  

Moreover, virtually everybody agreed with the mission assessment that this 
election was the first genuinely completed presidential elections, which 
enabled the Georgian people to state their political choice.  

To build consensus of such a move among observers, Georgia (inaudible) rather 
critical of them, so it is said that despite some irregularities on election 
day, the elections were held without any major violations, and that were really 
reflecting the will of Georgian people.  

At the same time, reports have identified some difficult challenges.  And 
Georgia witnesses persuaded to add response to all outstanding issues of 
(inaudible) system of Georgia.  Moreover, President Saakashvili has already 
invited international organizations, such as the Council of Human (inaudible) 
in addressing systemic shortcomings.  We also have invited international 
experts to arbitrate election districts to make the process even more 
transparent.  

Meanwhile, the new Georgian government is asked to implement an ambitious 
program of further economic liberalization.  One of the main items of Georgian 
government is improvement of social security system and the reduction of 
unemployment.  Greater integration, peaceful resolution of conflicts, energy 
security and fighting terrorism remain Georgia's foremost security points of 
priorities.  

The previous cycle was held with parliamentary elections, which has 
demonstrated all of the support in Georgia for (inaudible) integration.  
Georgia's leaders will continue dialogue with all political forces for 
achieving contracted compromise on all important issues and hope to achieve 
mutual understanding.  

Some of opposition leaders have taken, and so it is our demonstrated contracted 
accord to their demands for constitutional and administrative enactments.  
There are strict and intense negotiations are under way to reach mutually 
acceptable agreements.  I have more good news today about reaching agreement on 
several outstanding issues, and I think that this trend will continue.  

Unfortunately, recent developments demonstrated that some political forces do 
point to zero sum game, though this phenomenon certainly is not unique to 
Georgia, but rather it is characteristic to all young democracies.  Some of the 
political groups have been flirting with the idea of non-recognition of 
official election results.  (inaudible).  

Increasingly, only a handful of claims have been submitted to by approximately 
35,000 opposition observers.  Those claims have been scrutinized not only by 
Georgian institutions, but also by foreign and international observers, who 
concluded that the shortcomings have not affected the outcome of the election.  

Nevertheless, the leadership of Georgia stands ready to cooperate with the 
entire political spectrum to engage in more actively democratic institutions.  
The president has specifically invited some political parties and individuals 
who goes into the cabinet.  

The upcoming parliamentary elections, which will be held this June 2008, will 
be an important benchmark for politics in Georgia.  Campaign promises could be 
very interesting and vibrant.  And Georgia's leadership is fully committed to 
holding free and fair parliamentary elections.  

So after all, generally, we re-assert that the general presidential elections 
have importantly performed and progressed something with Georgian democracy.  
The government of Georgia has demonstrated ability to solve a political crisis 
through a political democratic means.  The process has been found from the 
street politics back to the political fora, enhancing democratic institutions 
and ultimately serving the best interests of the Georgian nation.  

And I am sure that the new parliament will be reflecting the will of the 
Georgian people as well, and it will be more vibrant and more politically to be 
a very important political benchmark for Georgia's internal politics.  

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  

HASTINGS:  Thank you very much, Ambassador.  

Ambassador, the co-chairman of the Helsinki Commission is Senator Ben Cardin.  
And while he is not with us today, I have accepted into the record his 
statement.  I'm going to read one paragraph from it and ask for your reaction 
to that paragraph and have you to know before reading it that fundamentally I 
thoroughly agree with what my co-chairman has reflected.  

It's not anything that I feel that is solely directed at Georgia as much as all 
countries where we assist in development or try to help or need to be mindful 
of a component that goes with freedom, and that is the rule of law.  

"Now, I'm confident," the senator says, "that Georgians will indeed get through 
this difficult period and continue their democratic development.  In that 
connection I'd like to stress the importance going forward of an independent 
judiciary.  President Saakashvili has spoken of the need to address poverty and 
strengthen the role of parliament.  But it is critical to create courts that 
citizens will trust and see as the appropriate forum to redress grievances.  
With all due respect for freedom of peaceful assembly, when people have faith 
in the impartial administration of justice, they may not feel to demonstrate in 
the streets."  

And he goes on to say that he's sure the U.S. government, including Congress, 
stands ready to assist Georgia in this regard.  To lay our bona fides on the 
table, even though Congressman Doggett didn't know I was going to read from 
that, both of us in our former professions before coming to Congress were 
judges.  And so I know I'm speaking for him, and I'm speaking for Ben Cardin, 
who wrote those comments.  What's your reaction?  

SIKHURALIDZE:  I certainly agree.  A judiciary and the general reform of the 
judiciary is one of the priorities of Georgia recent leadership.  Of course, it 
takes time.  It takes a lot of efforts, and it takes a lot of resources to 
establish this and to conduct important reforms in this sphere, but Georgian 
leadership is fully committed to these reforms, and they fully understand the 
need for the independent judiciary.  

So last year there were important and very big package of the legislation 
introduced in order to assure the independence of judiciary.  There are some 
more step-by-step programs how to improve the independence of judiciary, how to 
better select the judges, how to include the training for the judges and for 
the court personnel.  So it's a huge package, which should be pursued step by 
step, and we're fully committed to this judiciary reform.  

HASTINGS:  All right.  When in Georgia, I heard complaints from different 
individuals, both publicly and privately, in discussions.  And they were 
complaining about the use of state resources for politically related activities 
by state employees.  I heard that often, Ambassador, and the question, I guess, 
for you is has the government initiated any kind of investigation to look into 
the possible abuse of state resources of politically related activity?  

SIKHURALIDZE:  I also heard that on several occasions, and I know that was a 
problem.  Here we are several issues investigating, but no evidence was found 
that there was the use of state or the govern resources to force government 
employees to work in one way or another.  Or there were no evidence showing any 
abuse on the ground of the political membership or of the political parties.  
So I have not heard any proven case.  In any case, there was no...  

HASTINGS:  With all due respect, my question is is there any ongoing 
investigation being done to make that determination?  

SIKHURALIDZE:  There'll be one, no.  Yes.  

HASTINGS:  All right.  President Saakashvili has said, and I quote him, "that 
no one can ignore the opinion of the people who did not vote for us."  But 
given the polarization of the political environment, what are the prospects, 
Ambassador, of developing any kind of meaningful consensus prior to the 
parliamentary elections?  

And although I know the demands that are on the table are for February 15th, 
the parliamentary elections are in the spring.  So I heard you say that there 
was some good news that you received today.  I'm not asking you to relate that 
good news, but what are the prospects that a consensus can be formed prior to 
the parliamentary elections?  

SIKHURALIDZE:  There are several very important compromises that have been 
achieved.  First of all, I would like to mention that the threshold for the 
(inaudible), the parliamentary (inaudible) has downsized from 7 percent to 5 
percent.  There were the demands from the opposition to combat the election 
force majoritarian, both regional and nationwide elections, according to 
proportional system, which means that we had the two (inaudible) system.  

There was a proportional system and majoritarian system where winner takes all. 
 So therefore, the important compromise was achieved according to the demands 
of the opposition that would have changed this, the majoritarian system to the 
proportional system.

There were also negotiations about the composition of the central electoral 
commission.  So the strong belief of the government was that the central 
electoral commission should be the civil service type of organization without 
any popular representation within.  

But as far as they will have some other problems and the demands from the 
opposition parties, so now the composition is that the six people are elected 
by parliament, and they are considered to be civil servants.  Other six people 
are representatives of both parties who are represented in the parliament, and 
one person is nominated by the government.  This also is the important 
compromise.  

There are some other issues now under discussion, and maybe one of the most 
important issues is that our constitution provides that after presidential 
elections, it is not necessary to introduce the new government for approval to 
the parliament, but to (inaudible) after the parliamentary elections.  

Therefore, now the discussion is going on and there is the idea to have not 
only the introducing the new government after presidential elections, but also 
to seek for the support for the cabinet after new parliamentary elections.  

So there are some bunch of other issues.  We distributed here the recent 
article by the (inaudible) Monitor, who carefully describes the ongoing 
process.  And we hope that this process will be fruitful, and it will bring the 
real results, and we look forward that the parliamentary elections will be held 
in full accordance with...  

HASTINGS:  One more question before turning my colleague.  Before you left for 
the inaugural ceremony, you and I met, and I raised the issue with you of the 
case of Iea Tkuria (ph), and I'm curious.  Has there been anything that you can 
say to me about that?  

As you well know, a lot of questions have been raised about that particular 
trial, and I'm going to continue to ask you about it, and I'm hopeful that at 
some time I will get responses.  I'm not suggesting at all that you're not 
unwilling.  I'm curious.  Is there anything new to report on?  

SIKHURALIDZE:  Mr. Chairman, I have the court proceedings with me -- not here, 
but at work (inaudible), and I'll be able to send in some examples in this and 
give you more information on this case.  

HASTINGS:  I would appreciate that, because we continuously hear at the 
Helsinki Commission concerns, and in that regard I will continue to raise them 
with you.  

With that in mind, Congressman Doggett?  

DOGGETT:  I think I would just follow up on the chairman's question.  I gather 
what you're telling us is that you're mindful of this February 15th deadline, 
and the government is involved in serious discussion and attempt to respond to 
any of the requests of the opposition that it feels are reasonable.  And we can 
expect additional news in the short term about further government efforts to 
achieve reconciliation.  

SIKHURALIDZE:  Absolutely.  Absolutely.  The government is fully committed to 
the political dialogue, and we strongly believe that the entire political 
process should become within democratic institutions, and the government will 
do its best to keep it in this way.  

DOGGETT:  Thank you very much.  

HASTINGS:  Thank you very much.  

Ambassador, what's the status of Imedi TV?  And will the station be back on the 
air in advance of the parliamentary elections?  

SIKHURALIDZE:  It's a more internal issue of Imedi, because after Minister 
(inaudible) reviewed some tapes about this plot, most of Imedi journalists 
refused to continue their work with the current owners.  

HASTINGS:  That happened while we were there.  A lot of them...  

SIKHURALIDZE:  There was there with the current owner of this TV station.  And 
they declared very clearly that if the ownership issue was solved and they 
would have different owner and different worker, they will be able to continue. 
 Otherwise, they are choosing to continue.  Therefore, from our side we would 
facilitate the process, but it's mostly internal material issue, should this 
all work.  

HASTINGS:  I'm not certain if you spoke to the issue, or if you did speak of 
it, I didn't understand you, regarding the subject of regional governors in 
Georgia.  My understanding is they are still appointed by the president.  Are 
there any plans, or can you tell us whether or not there are plans to make the 
governors elected positions?  

SIKHURALIDZE:  Most of governors are elected.  I mean not.  Executive branch, 
yes.  There also important issue was how to elect the mayor of these, example.  
So the electoral system now in the cities are honest and in the regional they 
are honest.  The people elect the city council, and city council elects mayor.  
This is not the (inaudible) elections now for now.  

But the original values from this are still under way, and it should be also 
discussed within this parliament and the next parliament.  So this issue is 
still one that's...  

HASTINGS:  It's a very important issue, Ambassador.  The closer you get to the 
people with people that they elect, the more likely you are to have less 
friction.  I've been in this Congress long enough and observed the region long 
enough to see Russia retreat from advancement to retrogression.  And let me 
suggest what I'm talking about.  

When I first -- not the first time I went to Russia, but at some time during my 
many visits there, what I saw was the developing electoral system at the local 
level.  And then, under the aegis of the president, a lot of that changed.  

All I'm saying is even though you may be adversaries, if you want to look at 
something that shows how they went from good to centralizing power ostensibly 
in the hands of one person, name him president or name her president or 
anything you want to name them, there's still power in the hands of one person. 
 

And somewhere along the line if there is a lesson to be learned, I can say to 
you unequivocally -- as I have said, I consider a lot of Russian politicians 
and people that I've gotten to know to be friends, but at the same time, I say 
to them very firmly, and that's whether I'm speaking to Prime Minister Lavrov 
or anyone else -- that it doesn't make good sense to have taken away the power 
from the people and then say that you are providing for a democratic system.  

I just offer that as an observation.  I don't need a reaction.  But I do thank 
you.  And if you would stay and have any additional comments after our next 
witness, you are welcome to do so.  And thank you again, Ambassador, very much 
for your appearance.  

SIKHURALIDZE:  Thank you.  

HASTINGS:  I'd like to ask the former foreign minister, who I'm sure you know, 
to come up with us -- Salome Zurabishvili.  Ms. Zurabishvili is now opposition 
leader and head of Georgia's Way party.  And you are free, ma'am, to go forward 
with any observations you would like at this time.  

ZURABISHVILI:  Mr. Chairman, distinguished members of the commission, ladies 
and gentlemen, first of all thank you very much for inviting me to testify in 
front of this committee and to testify on the situation of Georgia at the 
juncture of time which is indeed crucial for Georgia.  

I also have a written statement that I will submit to you for the record.  

I think it is a time that is crucial for Georgia, because indeed what we have 
listened was a little bit the benign presentation of the situation in Georgia.  

And I can understand that for some looking from across the Atlantic to the 
Georgian situation, it might look, and we will all want to look at the 
situation that way, that there was a big social crisis that came out of 
economic reforms, led to a reaction from the Georgian president that led to 
timely elections.  

Those were not perfect, but democracy is never perfect, and next parliamentary 
elections will certainly be better and counterbalance all of that.  More than 
anybody else, I would like to believe that that is the situation in Georgia and 
that our road is leading us towards democracy.  But there are some hard 
questions to which I will try to answer and a number of facts that we have to 
face.  

First of all, what explains that between September 28th and today the Georgian 
population had to come out more than 11 times to make its voice heard and that 
those demonstrations were all between 100,000 and 200,000 -- and we don't want 
to quarrel with numbers, because everybody has its own numbers -- but there 
were significant protests for a small country like Georgia.  

What explains that all of these demonstrations were absolutely peaceful?  Not a 
single car was burned at any of those demonstrations.  Not a single evidence 
was brought of any weapons carried by any demonstrator.  All of those 
demonstrations were fully authorized and within the legal framework.  

What explains 7th of November, if it was so easy to call for parliamentary 
elections after all?  We were told at that time that it was impossible to have 
parliamentary elections, that the country was almost at war.  Those were the 
words of Ms. Burjanadze, leader of the majority party in the parliament.  

What explains the five repressions, crackdowns that we had on that day on 
November 7th?  What explains the crackdown on Imedi television and that was 
part of the five repressions and that was there on the morning of the 7th of 
November, together with a dozen of people that were hunger strikers, and there 
as no evidence of violence or of things getting out of hand?  

At Imedi the channel was closed down by Spetznaz during the first operation, 
and there was a second operation with about 2,000 soldiers that came to invade 
the television for no reason that I can understand.  

No threat was ever documented, whether the Russian spy, supposedly, plot or the 
overthrow plots.  If any called for overthrow of the government, those were the 
people that were standing in front of the parliament in November 2003, not the 
opposition that were standing in front of the parliament in November 2007.  

A number of facts.  First of all, it's not the social crisis that got the 
people of Georgia out on the streets, but rather injustice, deception, 
rejection -- rejection of the regime that has failed to deliver on the promises 
of the Rose Revolution that was made by the Georgian population and which 
carried a lot of hopes.  And all the people that are today in the opposition 
were part of the Rose Revolution.  I was a latecomer, as you know, but I was 
also part of this host.  

None of these demonstrators that were doing this mass protest had expressed 
social requests or economic requests.  It's clear that in the background of 
this protest there is this very difficult social and economic situation that is 
today's Georgia.  But basically, those were anti-Saakashvili protests on the 
background of the multi-fold and very deep crisis that we had been signaling to 
the international community for some time, saying that Georgia was not as rosy 
as it looked.  

And this crisis is a crisis of democracy, of the lack of an independent 
judiciary system.  And that may be the crux of the matter, and that is over 
everything else -- economy, the lack of guarantee for private property.  If you 
cannot go to tribunal and have your private property that is being confiscated 
or destroyed and you cannot be defended in front of the tribunal, then where 
else will you go but on the streets?  

What happens to that judiciary system when reforms were mentioned by the 
ambassador?  And I don't want to engage in polemics, but just to mention that 
among these reforms there is a school of justice and that it's headed today by 
the brother of President Saakashvili.  So maybe it's not the very core 
independence for the next judiciary and the next judges that will be brought up 
in this school.  

Local elections failed us, because they were in the system that was mentioned.  
The winner takes all.  It was first applied in the local elections, and as a 
result, the opposition is not represented at the local level, and there is no 
more self-government in Georgia today.  

And the governors are designated by the president, and the governors played a 
very heavy-handed role during the last election, especially in a province like 
Mingrelia, where the governor is known as being quite heavy-handed and is in 
that supported by the local police and local police efficiency.  

So the crisis was also a crisis of (inaudible), of not finding that the 
government was responding to those demands from the population for more justice 
and more democracy.  And there was no dialogue.  

And there was even a policy established by the government to say, "Well, we're 
not going to debate with the opposition for a year and a half."  That was the 
official policy, and they were followed, because "We are the matter.  We know 
what we're doing, and we do not need to debate with the opposition."  That's 
the way the opposition was treated and that part of the crisis that we got.  

Now, the opposition and the streets.  It must be clear that it's not the 
opposition that has thrown people on the streets.  It is a crisis that has 
thrown people on the streets.  And if anything, it is the streets and the 
people on the streets that have pushed the opposition to unite itself and to 
express its demands in a very clear form.  

And those demands were and remain and have been all the time nothing but get 
parliamentary elections, because that's the only way we know, and I think 
that's the only way any democratic country knows, for getting out of a crisis.  
It was not a request for the sake of the request.  It was to have those 
parliamentary elections when time was due.  

It's to be regretted that at the time nobody supported the opposition in its 
request to hold those parliamentary elections when they were due and to say 
that no parliament should ever extend its mandate, whatever the form of the 
extension and whatever the form of the vote.  

So today the opposition is very much linked to the population and is the way of 
expression of the demands of the population, but it's in fact holding back the 
population that is today, after the elections, much more polarized, much more 
radical than it was before the presidential elections.  

And the reason for that is that in fact Georgian leadership did not accede to 
the demand for elections.  It's that the president flatly refused on the 
evening of November 2nd the call for parliamentary elections and refused any 
discussion on that matter.  

And when he accepted finally to hold elections, he turned around the elections 
and offered a very different type of election -- presidential elections to an 
opposition that was united on the call for moving to a more parliamentary 
regime, because presidential system has not made it very clear to the Georgian 
people that it's the best system for Georgia.  

So he called the role of elections.  He called it at the wrong time, not giving 
the opposition much time to prepare, within the wrong context, because that 
followed a state of emergency and political questions that lasted much longer 
after November 7th than the state of emergency.  And we are even today striving 
to get people out of jail that have been arrested on the wake of November 7th.  

But clearly, the opposition could not refuse those presidential elections, 
because it would not be possible to explain to the people why calling for 
elections, then you suddenly refuse another type of election.  

So we went into this electoral campaign in a very unbalanced fashion, where 
there was a lot of manipulation, lots of use of administrative resources, of 
financial resources overboard.  So much money was spent in a poor Georgia, 
because that's the slogan of the president to get Georgia out of poverty.  Then 
how come he spends about $500 million for his campaign?  

And, of course, we had frauds.  There is discussion on the extent of the 
frauds, on the number of votes that were fraudulent.  But it's the inner 
conviction of the Georgian population that a second round was due and that the 
second round was taken away from them.  And in fact true parliamentary 
elections -- they are now eager to get a different way, the second tour.  And 
that's what the opposition is clearly about to try to get and try to get for 
the population.  

Finally, fair and democratic elections, transparent elections.  That can in 
this country provide what we have been wanting from the very beginning to do, 
which is to offer the possibility to get utterance through elections and not 
through revolutions or streets, like it was the case in the 90s or it was the 
case in 2003.  

For that, we need to restore confidence of the public in elections, and that is 
the major challenge that we face.  We're together for that with the government, 
and we're conscious of the fact that we have to get to that through dialogue 
and to get the demands that we have presented that are all very legitimate and 
all very democratic.  

And they all aim to one thing:  to convince not only us, because we're not the 
major part in that, but to convince the public opinion of Georgia, the voters, 
to go back to elections, those voters that went to take the major risks, not 
us, because we are the political leaders and figures, and we, after all, do not 
take very, very big risks.  

But the people in the regions, those that are under direct pressure from the 
local authorities, those are the ones that are once again to go and take the 
same risks for elections, where they are not sure whether we can defend their 
votes, whether we can defend their physical integrity, whether we can defend 
them in front of tribunals, who have not considered any of the complaints that 
we have presented to them after the elections.  

So we want to restore confidence in elections, in justice and in democracy 
through those very clear and concrete requests.  

Central electoral commission -- we have to have parity, and parity is not only 
six to six.  That's not enough.  We have to have a chairman that is either 
completely independent and acceptable by both sides, or we have to have a 
sharing of the chairmen of the different local commissions and district 
commissions.  

And we have to agree on the person of the chairman of the central electoral 
commission.  That was at the center of the things that were contested by the 
population and by the opposition.  And that, if we can agree, has to be an 
independent person in Georgia.  If we cannot agree, it could be somebody from a 
foreign country, a friendly country that would accept to be that independent 
person.  But it's clear that we need to have as the head of the central 
electoral commission somebody that is trusted by the whole Georgian population. 
 

Media -- we need some access to media.  Nobody, I think, in the world could 
pretend that elections were free and fair when they were prepared in a 
situation where there was no free media in Georgia, no free access to 
television.  There were six programmatic channels in different forms, the 
public channel and the private, but owned by members of the government of 
Georgia, no Imedi, except for 15 days.  

HASTINGS:  If I could just stop you on that point.  While I was there, I saw a 
person in the opposition on television...  

ZURABISHVILI:  On television.  

HASTINGS:  ... claiming that he had no access.  I found that strange.  

ZURABISHVILI:  We had access to the television, and even in time counts it was 
sometimes balanced, but the comments and the context in which we were presented 
on television is what makes partiality and objectivity doubtful.  And we need a 
public channel that is controlled by an advisory board that is also filled in 
terms of parity.  That's all we are asking.  It's that public channel.  

And we know we cannot control the others, except if the Niznik (ph) Commission 
is reactivated and becomes more active.  But the public channel that is paid by 
taxpayers' money should be a mother of objectivity, which it has not been able 
to do.  

And by the way, no compromat films showing leaders of the opposition being 
Russian spies should be shown on television during the electoral campaign, 
especially when the government after that comes and says to us that after all 
that was a mistake on their part, and there is nothing much to complain.  

The third and major problem that we'll have to deal for these next elections is 
how to end political intimidation and how to install freedom from here, 
especially again in the regions which are the most sensitive places in Georgia. 
 

How do we prevent arrest atrocities presents us a special operation police 
forces operations, and that was myself testimony to that in the district of 
Sanghori (ph) (inaudible).  Six (inaudible) officers were at the entrance of 
the precinct, and when I asked them to leave, they told me that they were in 
charge of the public order on the streets and the state.  

So we need reorganization of special police forces, and more than that 
humanitarian council to investigate and to report eventual new violations.  And 
no investigation has been carried out on either 7th of November repressions, 
excessive use of force, or on any of the complaints towards police forces 
during the pre-electoral campaign or the election date.  

We need to show that through the dialogue with the authority, but that means 
that we have a fair dialogue there, not dialogue for dialogue.  The dialogue 
should not be an occasion for the authorities the next day to come out and say 
that they were discussing with leaders of the opposition the eventual jobs in 
the cabinet ministers forum, because that's a way to discredit the opposition 
in front of its own public opinion.  

We were not talking about that.  We are talking only about the next elections 
and how to make them credible for the Georgian public opinion.  

And the concessions have to be real concessions, not the 5 percent barrier that 
for a long time has not been one of the requests of the opposition, especially 
if that opposition is going to go as a bloc, and not the winner takes all, 
which is a request of the opposition, but is not a major request, because today 
that system turns to the disadvantage of the old majority, and the majority 
knows it.  So it's something that we all consider as to the more democratic 
proportional system, and not a concession to the opposition.  

What we really need is serious concessions on the three major points I just 
mentioned -- the electoral administration, the media and the political 
intimidation.  And the opposition and the leadership have no other alternative, 
because we all have to convince people to go to these elections and that those 
elections are going to be the solution to the crisis.  

For that, we need the support of Georgia's partners and friends, because at 
stake are not just better elections or a step forward in democracy.  At stake 
is Georgia's stability and Georgia's democracy.  

Those three months will be crucial.  The opposition will have to use all the 
instruments it has, and it doesn't have much.  It has basically its own voice 
in the dialogue, if that is efficient.  And it has the streets.  And it will 
use the streets, if it's needed, in a peaceful way, in a legal way, as it has 
done so up till now, because that's all we are left to.  

The opposition, as you know, is represented in the parliament, but for the past 
four years no amendment of the opposition has ever been considered and adopted 
in the parliament.  So that doesn't leave much for us in the parliament.  

We also need, and I will finish with that, a new policy toward Georgia from our 
friends, one that is more clearly not personal and to the Georgian people, 
because democracy in Georgia is to be put to the credit not of its leadership, 
not of a group of people, but of the Georgian population.  

It has been a long quest for Georgia that started in 1918, a quest for 
democracy, for freedom and for independence, for which Georgian population has 
come out on the streets, has taken risks over and over again during the Soviet 
period, and again at the end of the Soviet regime.  So it's really the Georgian 
population that deserves credit and support for continuing of the democratic 
path.  

We need effective and constant and public pressure on the authorities to 
deliver whatever is needed to make those elections credible for the population. 
 We need NATO, and we need a map, and we need a very conditional map, and I 
would argue in favor of Bucharest, if that is still possible, despite November 
7th.  And Georgian opposition is ready to support that together with me today.  

We should go towards a map for Georgia, but that map should be made conditional 
to democratic achievement, to the profit of privatization that is going on in 
Georgia and that should be made transparent, and not only to the benefit of 
Russia.  And that is a very major concern for the Georgian opposition.  

And finally and to conclude, I want to say that I'm not an anti-Saakashvili 
radical.  As you know, I paid a very high price to my belief, if not in 
Saakashvili, at least a belief that we were going to create and to build 
democracy in Georgia when I came to join his government.  

But having been raised and lived for 50 years in a European democracy, I can 
recognize democracy when I see it.  And I can tell you that today Georgia not 
only is not a democracy, but is not any longer moving in that direction.  And 
the last chance that we have are the next parliamentary elections.  

And I think that we all have a stake -- we inside the democratic opposition, 
because we are a democratic opposition.  Nobody should be able to disregard 
this opposition and talk about it with terms like Russian agents or people that 
want to overthrow or to start plotting against any regime.  We do not deserve 
that.  

And this democratic opposition knows very well that what is at stake for 
Georgia is its stability, its future, and we are responsible for that in front 
of our population.  

Thank you very much.  

HASTINGS:  Thank you very much.  On January 29th, the opposition put forward 
their 17 demands that the government must need to avoid a new round of 
protests.  Where does that process stand now?  And an even more pertinent 
question, I guess, is how many of these demands have been met to your 
satisfaction?  

ZURABISHVILI:  For the time being, none.  The dialogue is going on.  The only 
concessions were those mentioned by the ambassador that do not exactly 
represent any of the demands that were presented, except the winner takes all 
system changed for a proportional.  But that is not directly the conditions 
that we need to convince the population that those elections are going to be 
free and fair.  

We still do not have a date for the election, which is again not among the 17 
demands, but it's part of what is needed to prepare for those elections.  

We on our side were going, I think, today to present a prioritized view of 
those 17 demands, so it's clear what is more important and what is really 
essential to guarantee for the next parliamentary elections to be credible to 
the population.  

Again, we are the ones that have to go to our voters and to the population and 
tell us, "Come with us for the next elections."  And we are to be convincing, 
so we have to be convinced that it's going to be a fair election.  So we are 
really deep in that matter.  

The fact that the dialogue has not yet given results doesn't mean that we're 
giving up on the dialogue.  We're continuing.  We know that NDI is also going 
to organize a more concrete dialogue of the issues of the electoral code, and 
that's very much appreciated.  And we'll be in all of these dialogues, as long 
as we have a hope for getting results.  

HASTINGS:  Well, when President Saakashvili included some well-known NGO 
figures in his new government, he also offered some opposition members some 
positions.  Do you discount that -- don't consider it serious gestures at all?  

ZURABISHVILI:  Not at all.  It's impossible to accept something that would have 
been a compromise for the whole opposition, when the population considers that 
the elections were fraudulent.  

And we are dependent on our population to get elected at the next parliamentary 
election and that what matters is we are not going for a three-month job to 
take the proposals that are made, because that would have been immediately 
interpreted, and it was already interpreted, by the population as we doing our 
own business with the government and trying to get seats and jobs for 
ourselves, not caring about delivering to the population whatever they were 
fighting for.  

HASTINGS:  So then on January 5th, the opposition feels that the elections were 
fraudulent.  Some members of the opposition seem to have concluded that no 
matter the results of that election, that they weren't going to accept it.  I 
was personal witness to that.  I'm not talking about something I'm thinking 
about or that I read about.  

I saw people come before the whole of the mission that I led that said that 
they didn't care -- and not their exact words; let me make that very clear -- 
but their position was that this election could not be a good election, and 
therefore, they were not going to accept it.  

I'm having trouble coming to an understanding of that kind of reaction.  And I 
understand, being in the opposition -- I've been in the opposition pretty much 
all of my life, so I certainly understand that -- but how is it that, for 
example.  This isn't about me, but just as a for example.  

I was a lead observer in Ukraine, in Azerbaijan, in Belarus and other places as 
either the lead observer or one of the key players in election observation, 
including Russia.  And in that regard, I met with oh so many election observers 
as I did in Georgia.  

In all of my election observation, I've not seen that many, and I'm not talking 
about on one occasion.  If you were thinking Ukraine, if you just take the size 
of it alone, there would have been the thousands of election observers.  Well, 
there were not.  There were a lot, but nothing by comparison.  

So at least on election day -- I might add we had an election here yesterday -- 
and one of the complaints I heard in Georgia from the opposition was that the 
polling places didn't open on time, and I said, "Hello?  Have you been to my 
country lately?"  Yesterday here in this great democracy there were polling 
places that didn't open as many as four hours.  

I heard from the opposition, for example, that there were long lines.  Well, I 
think long lines are meaning that there is a lot of interest, and not so much 
whether the process.  I didn't hear from the people that were in the long lines 
that they didn't get to vote.  And therein lies part of the problem.  

Now, I understand the process argument about the electoral commission, and 
those are arguments.  But how do you put to rest the fact that a lot of people 
that really don't -- nothing that I gain me from calling an election good or 
bad.  It does nothing for me.  I'm not in business.  I'm older and don't 
anticipate being in business.  I don't want to be no ambassador or nothing.  Do 
you understand?  So why would I come to Georgia to say in the face of the 
people that this was -- at least on that day it met the standards that are set 
forth in the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe?  

ZURABISHVILI:  Well, that's exactly what we do not discuss.  On that day the 
elections were pretty much in line with basic standards, although there was an 
activity (inaudible) that could be seen by the fact that all the buses and 
minibuses were hired by the national party and were outside of the precinct.  

But that cannot be proven, and there is no way a foreign observer, or a 
Georgian observer, for that matter, nothing that it can do to prove it, unless 
you find a person and you can prove that he's holding an ID that is not his 
personal ID, which is very difficult.  

But what we were contesting were the pre-electoral conditions and what happened 
after 8 o'clock that night, exactly because in fact Saakashvili didn't win the 
first round, and they discovered that at 8 o'clock because of the turnout of 
the population.  And there we had to prove that we're not planned, because 
especially of Georgian elections -- and I wrote a small booklet on the local 
elections, which were very close to what should have happened for the 
presidential elections, which is legal manipulation of the pre-election 
campaign and fairly quiet election day.  

But then it was not enough, and it didn't pay off, and the president didn't get 
his majority, and that's why they had to start the massive probes of that 
night, which caused delays.  And that was not observed, because it's not the 
process.  And I think that we should review that when we are talking about next 
observations and probably try to adapt it and to adjust to the situation.  

Many problems that we had were during that night.  I called myself the head of 
the OSCE mission, Ambassador Boden.  At 3 o'clock I woke him up, because we 
were called by commission members from regions, telling us we have finished 
counting for a long time, and we are not allowed to sign.  We are awaiting 
instructions from the central electoral commission.  

In other places people were forced to sign under police forces that got into 
the precinct.  For instance, in Mingrelia I mentioned the governor there and 
the police forces that are very effective.  

So we won't be able to change all of that.  We know that.  But what we have to 
know also that there were 4,500 precincts in which there were many Georgian 
observers as well and Georgian members of the commission, and it is the 
conviction of the Georgian population today that Saakashvili was not elected.  
And that is not something that we can change or that any international 
observation will be able to change.  We have to deal with that reality.  

And it's our task as an opposition to take that reality, but at the same time 
to prepare the Georgian population for the next election and convince them that 
it's not going to be the same next time.  

HASTINGS:  I just want to correct one thing for you.  Ambassador Boden was the 
head of the mission for ODIHR observers.  I was head of the mission, and that's 
not an important pride, but I just wanted to tell you you didn't wake me up at 
3 o'clock.  

ZURABISHVILI:  I hope next time I will be able to wake you up.  

HASTINGS:  I hope there is a next time.  

ZURABISHVILI:  I hope there is a next time, too, and I think that whole of 
Georgia hopes there is a next time.  

HASTINGS:  Exactly.  And one way to get there is for people to sit down and 
talk.  And it takes time.  You know I was asked once by a reporter did I think 
that it was fair that districts were drawn so that black people could be 
elected in the State of Florida.  

When I was elected in 1992, there had been 123 years that had taken place 
before any black person had had an opportunity to be elected.  That's a long 
time.  And so I said, "Yes."  And he said, "You mean it was fair for them to 
draw districts that would include you."  And I said, "Yes, just like they drew 
them to exclude me for 123 years."  

So it would be my hope that the opposition and the government understand that 
in dialogue and in time that you find agreement, rather than to put yourself in 
the position of in every instance deciding that you will not participate.  

I personally feel that the opposition benefits more by participating in the 
parliamentary elections than by boycotting them.  I'm not talking about street 
demonstrations, and let me tell you why.  That gives me, when I am talking with 
the ambassador or when I'm talking with Matt Bryza or anybody else from the 
perspective of American dollars being utilized to try to promote democracy in 
Georgia or anywhere else in the world, that gives me a greater hook, Madam 
Minister, to be able to say to them point blank.  And I would say to the 
ambassador, and I would say it to him,  

I read, while I was in Georgia, some of the formation of Georgia, stuff that I 
didn't know about.  I had time to do that.  And there was a time in Georgia 
when pretty much every segment of Georgian society was in the legislature.  You 
know something?  That time ought to resume.  And I don't care.  You can tell 
President Saakashvili and you can tell the opposition that some of us feel that 
everybody has a right to participate.  

And I guess that's basically what it boils down to.  And toward that end, I 
think you're getting there, and I would hope that it's done in a completely 
civil manner.  

My time is spent, and I appreciate you so very much.  And I'm constrained to 
give up the room in a few minutes, so I'm going to stop right there. 

ZURABISHVILI:  Thank you very much for the very long time you gave me.  
 
HASTINGS:  Thank you.  

ZURABISHVILI:  Thank you.  

HASTINGS:  OK.  Thank you all.  

Ladies and gentlemen, that concludes our hearing.  

                    [Whereupon the hearing ended at 4:25 p.m.]

END