Smooth relations
Christopher R. Hill, the United States ambassador to Poland, works in what is probably the best-secured building in Warsaw.
But inside, past the double-security check, is a cosy office fit for a true patriot, complete with baseball paraphernalia and family pictures. The atmosphere is so laid back one could nearly forget about the interview, were it not for the ambassador's rather extensive entourage which listened to every word of our conversation.
Hill's diplomatic career has brought him into contact with Poland on three different occasions, in posts that have spanned nearly two decades. He also served as the first US ambassador to Macedonia, was a special envoy for the Kosovo crisis and participated in the Dayton Peace Accords negotiations as well as the Rambouillet talks. His three Polish experiences encompass three very different periods - from what he describes as the tragic period of the early 1980s to the fresh breath of freedom of 1989 and the economic success of the new millennium.
"I can assure you it wasn't exhilarating or exciting," he says of the early 1980s. "It was just rather tragic because frankly no-one knew when it was going to be over. There wasn't a lot to be inspired by."
He recalls his tenure as senior country officer for Poland at the US State Department from 1989 to 1991 as a time when there was much optimism, but also concern about whether Poland would ultimately be an economic and political success.
"Then coming back, I can see a Poland that really has achieved a great deal of success, and I know that many people here may not appreciate how much success the country has achieved," he says. "But if they look back and think about it, they can see that it has come a long way."
Hill believes that the current investment climate, like everything in life, could be improved. The task of attracting foreign investors is a competitive one, and at a time of an internationally observed economic downturn businesses do not tend to have the capacity to develop.
"Poland needs to be more aggressive in attracting investments," Hill says. "(It) needs to work on its transparency (and its) decision-making to make it faster and more timely for foreign businesses. (The government) clearly needs to work on the infrastructure. This is an area where Poland is falling behind other direct competitors. So, clearly Poland remains a country that people are interested in, but it is going to have to do more."
Hill considers bilateral trade relations, with US exports at €715 million in 2001 - the latest figure available - as "woefully inadequate." He attributes this to unfavourable trade tariffs in the run-up to EU accession, and believes more could be done here. He also believes more could be done in the area of foreign direct investment from the US. To assist in attracting more FDI, he says the country should be more "aggressive about reaching out to investors."
"There has been considerable talk about naming an investment ombudsman to help investors deal with the Polish regulators, and the sooner that is done, the better," Hill says.
When talk turns to American companies present on the market, Hill is careful not to leave anyone out from his list of praises. He points out General Motors, Procter & Gamble and Avon among just a few of the "good corporate citizens" hailing from the US.
"But if Polish regulators could move a little more quickly, they could get even more of these companies," he says.
This, according to Hill, could be done by accelerating decision-making processes and assisting companies in knowing precisely what rules they may encounter when dealing with local authorities and partners.
"Some companies have experienced problems that cut across not just one ministry, but several ministries, and that's where Poland could provide a one-stop shop for investors so that they could take care of these problems," he says.
The company that could potentially become one of the biggest investors in Poland, American defence contractor Lockheed Martin, has encountered delays in its negotiations with the government over Poland's purchase of 48 F-16 aircraft. Hill cautiously stipulates that the embassy is not directly involved in the deal, but his "impression is that they've overcome a lot of the stumbling blocks a month ago and are proceeding much more quickly and are narrowing the differences between the two sides."
"There's a very good list of offset projects, which would be very valuable to the Polish economy," he says. "As soon as the offset deal is signed, and I expect to see it signed in a matter of weeks, we can start seeing these projects start."
What of the talk that the Americans have also offered the Polish army the possibility of purchasing a Joint Strike Fighter, a state-of-the-art multirole fighter, four years after it is introduced in the US in 2008?
"We've been talking to Poland about a sort of long-term relationship in the aerospace business," Hill says. "The F-16 that's being offered is a very, very modern version of this plane, and certainly down the road in 10, 15 or 20 years from now Poland may be looking to buy additional aircraft. Then it will be looking at the Joint Strike Fighter, which is also made by Lockheed, which is a very natural follow-on to the F-16."
With a current stance in foreign policy being perceived less than favourably by the nation's largest foreign investor, France, American businesses could be tempted to step in to overtake the French. Hill brushes off the possibility, with nothing but praise for French achievements in business here.
"I truly believe that France has earned its position as the number one investor because its companies see what our companies see, which is real opportunities in the Polish market," Hill says. "I don't feel that those opportunities are so affected by day-to-day political issues."
But would American companies be more likely to perceive the current situation or atmosphere as more conducive to business and take advantage of that?
"American companies, like French companies, see in Poland a country that really has a tremendous potential, is clearly going in the right direction and will be better 10 years from now than it is now, better 20 years from now than it will be 10 years from now. So I think it's based on a foundation of optimism in the country."
The French government is known for providing companies investing abroad with warranties. American companies are also privileged in a similar way, but Hill believes that the US government's political risk insurance is not something that American companies consider necessary for investing in Poland.
Drifting from the comfort of business-related talk, we move to a more sensitive topic, the recent "letter of the eight" European countries, including Poland, which expressed support for the American policy of war in Iraq and which has been said to violate a certain element of trust between the candidate countries and the EU. Hill skilfully manoeuvres around the issue.
"I really don't want to talk too much about Poland's relationship with EU members except to note the obvious, which is that several of the signatories of the letter are already EU members, and I don't think it's fair to singularise Poland as Poland was one of eight in this regard," he says. "And from what I understand, some of the criticisms of Poland had not to do with the actual substance of the letter, because the substance of the letter tracked very closely with EU positions on that. So, I think that Poland was well within European norms when it made the decision to sign this letter."
Hill believes that the country's signature on the letter will not prevent it from making it into the union on schedule in May 2004, nor will it affect its bilateral relations with its neighbours. He calls the relationship between the US and Poland "excellent."
"We see things similarly to the way the Poles see them, so our relationship is based on common interests, certainly mutual admiration, but above all mutual respect, because as a sovereign state Poland has its right to make its viewpoint known," Hill says. "Sometimes we have disagreements with Poland, but we always respect Poland's right to take a position."
So, has the current situation in Europe affected America's view of an enlarged EU?
"It's not correct for American diplomats to be offering places in the European Union to non-member countries," Hill says. "That's really a matter between the EU and those countries, but we support the aspirations for European integration. It's certainly not our intention to be a divisive force ... and sometimes when you're having arguments with people, it's good to stop, catch your breath and think about the things that you actually agree on. I would be cautious about exaggerating the degree to which there is divisiveness today."
Information has recently surfaced that the US government would be allocating several billion dollars annually for the reconstruction of Iraq, and that contracts would only be given to American and British companies. Meanwhile, the local press has already been speculating on lucrative contracts that Polish companies would land.
"With respect to contracts for companies, it's hard at this point to be specific except to emphasise that Polish companies have experience in Iraq; they have contacts in Iraq," Hill comments tactfully. "There's a logic to having Polish companies very actively engaged in Iraq."
Once our conversation has turned to an unavoidable topic - Iraq - Hill becomes more elusive. What is his government's vision for resolving the Iraqi situation?
"It is our further desire that this be done peacefully, but we believe very strongly that this is a threat to us all and one way or the other Iraq must be disarmed; we would very much like to see a more democratised Iraq.
"We're not naive about the problems that Iraq faces, we're not naive about the fact that democracy there is a very difficult thing to grow, but we also don't believe that there's any reason why Iraq can never become a democracy. The Iraqi people deserve all the help they can get in this, but ultimately they are going to be the ones to create the system. In no way is the US interested in occupying Iraq. Iraq should be for Iraqis."
With that issue smoothly out of the way, what about the likelihood of moving US army bases to Poland from neighbouring Germany?
"The issue of army bases and where they're best located is a long-term question," Hill says. "It's very unfortunate that this long-term issue, which has its roots in the economic underpinning, should be confused with short-term political issues.
"If we have some differences with the German government, I would not overvalue those and assume that somehow there is a fundamental shift in US-German relations. It is a question that will be answered with all the facts, and these facts have to do with long-term conditions."
Understandably, even rumours of such plans are perceived here as an opportunity in terms of economic development.
"I know that a number of mayors have been interested in hosting US bases," Hill says, although he is quick to emphasise that talk of such decisions has not been motivated by recent comments coming from Germany.
"I don't really want to get into speculating whether bases are going to be moved, and if they are moved, where they're going to be because frankly, in the context of the problems we're dealing with in Iraq, this issue seems to have got mixed up into questions that really have nothing to do with the base issue," Hill says.
These mixed opinions throughout Europe could be a signal of the arrival of a two-tier NATO. That surely must affect NATO's current role, after the breakup of the Soviet Union and the end of the cold war, the Business Journal puts to him. But Hill responds that he believes that the NATO military alliance continues to have a very fundamental role as the primary institution that anchors the US in Europe.
"NATO was set up for conventional war in central Europe, but clearly a conventional war in central Europe is not the only threat that NATO faces," he says. "Membership in NATO offers a certain stability that will help these states develop and help them grow economically."
We return briefly to foreign investment in the face of Rywingate, the government's recent corruption scandal. Hill expresses his concern that, as in any country where corruption scandals surface, incidents such as this one can have an impact on the willingness of foreign investors to put their money here.
"Corruption is a very, very corrosive thing in any country, so foreign investors look at that," he says. "It's really a little premature to speculate though on the Rywin affair and what conceivable relationship that could have with investment plans. One, of course, doesn't like to see reports of scandal. Poland has shown that it has institutions to deal with these problems."
To end our conversation the ambassador courteously adds that much has changed in terms of the cultural stereotypes that our two nations have had of each other and that "Americans know that Poland is a friend you can count on."
"Poland means some heroic leaders from the 1989 period," Hill concludes. "It also means the pope; and these are both very positive images for Poland - images that can be very helpful to Poland as it tries to develop a personality in the international arena and does what it can to attract investors."
Past the double-security check again, we leave in awe of a man who certainly knows how to handle his share of questions from the press. Aspiring diplomats, watch and learn.
But inside, past the double-security check, is a cosy office fit for a true patriot, complete with baseball paraphernalia and family pictures. The atmosphere is so laid back one could nearly forget about the interview, were it not for the ambassador's rather extensive entourage which listened to every word of our conversation.
Hill's diplomatic career has brought him into contact with Poland on three different occasions, in posts that have spanned nearly two decades. He also served as the first US ambassador to Macedonia, was a special envoy for the Kosovo crisis and participated in the Dayton Peace Accords negotiations as well as the Rambouillet talks. His three Polish experiences encompass three very different periods - from what he describes as the tragic period of the early 1980s to the fresh breath of freedom of 1989 and the economic success of the new millennium.
"I can assure you it wasn't exhilarating or exciting," he says of the early 1980s. "It was just rather tragic because frankly no-one knew when it was going to be over. There wasn't a lot to be inspired by."
He recalls his tenure as senior country officer for Poland at the US State Department from 1989 to 1991 as a time when there was much optimism, but also concern about whether Poland would ultimately be an economic and political success.
"Then coming back, I can see a Poland that really has achieved a great deal of success, and I know that many people here may not appreciate how much success the country has achieved," he says. "But if they look back and think about it, they can see that it has come a long way."
Hill believes that the current investment climate, like everything in life, could be improved. The task of attracting foreign investors is a competitive one, and at a time of an internationally observed economic downturn businesses do not tend to have the capacity to develop.
"Poland needs to be more aggressive in attracting investments," Hill says. "(It) needs to work on its transparency (and its) decision-making to make it faster and more timely for foreign businesses. (The government) clearly needs to work on the infrastructure. This is an area where Poland is falling behind other direct competitors. So, clearly Poland remains a country that people are interested in, but it is going to have to do more."
Hill considers bilateral trade relations, with US exports at €715 million in 2001 - the latest figure available - as "woefully inadequate." He attributes this to unfavourable trade tariffs in the run-up to EU accession, and believes more could be done here. He also believes more could be done in the area of foreign direct investment from the US. To assist in attracting more FDI, he says the country should be more "aggressive about reaching out to investors."
"There has been considerable talk about naming an investment ombudsman to help investors deal with the Polish regulators, and the sooner that is done, the better," Hill says.
When talk turns to American companies present on the market, Hill is careful not to leave anyone out from his list of praises. He points out General Motors, Procter & Gamble and Avon among just a few of the "good corporate citizens" hailing from the US.
"But if Polish regulators could move a little more quickly, they could get even more of these companies," he says.
This, according to Hill, could be done by accelerating decision-making processes and assisting companies in knowing precisely what rules they may encounter when dealing with local authorities and partners.
"Some companies have experienced problems that cut across not just one ministry, but several ministries, and that's where Poland could provide a one-stop shop for investors so that they could take care of these problems," he says.
The company that could potentially become one of the biggest investors in Poland, American defence contractor Lockheed Martin, has encountered delays in its negotiations with the government over Poland's purchase of 48 F-16 aircraft. Hill cautiously stipulates that the embassy is not directly involved in the deal, but his "impression is that they've overcome a lot of the stumbling blocks a month ago and are proceeding much more quickly and are narrowing the differences between the two sides."
"There's a very good list of offset projects, which would be very valuable to the Polish economy," he says. "As soon as the offset deal is signed, and I expect to see it signed in a matter of weeks, we can start seeing these projects start."
What of the talk that the Americans have also offered the Polish army the possibility of purchasing a Joint Strike Fighter, a state-of-the-art multirole fighter, four years after it is introduced in the US in 2008?
"We've been talking to Poland about a sort of long-term relationship in the aerospace business," Hill says. "The F-16 that's being offered is a very, very modern version of this plane, and certainly down the road in 10, 15 or 20 years from now Poland may be looking to buy additional aircraft. Then it will be looking at the Joint Strike Fighter, which is also made by Lockheed, which is a very natural follow-on to the F-16."
With a current stance in foreign policy being perceived less than favourably by the nation's largest foreign investor, France, American businesses could be tempted to step in to overtake the French. Hill brushes off the possibility, with nothing but praise for French achievements in business here.
"I truly believe that France has earned its position as the number one investor because its companies see what our companies see, which is real opportunities in the Polish market," Hill says. "I don't feel that those opportunities are so affected by day-to-day political issues."
But would American companies be more likely to perceive the current situation or atmosphere as more conducive to business and take advantage of that?
"American companies, like French companies, see in Poland a country that really has a tremendous potential, is clearly going in the right direction and will be better 10 years from now than it is now, better 20 years from now than it will be 10 years from now. So I think it's based on a foundation of optimism in the country."
The French government is known for providing companies investing abroad with warranties. American companies are also privileged in a similar way, but Hill believes that the US government's political risk insurance is not something that American companies consider necessary for investing in Poland.
Drifting from the comfort of business-related talk, we move to a more sensitive topic, the recent "letter of the eight" European countries, including Poland, which expressed support for the American policy of war in Iraq and which has been said to violate a certain element of trust between the candidate countries and the EU. Hill skilfully manoeuvres around the issue.
"I really don't want to talk too much about Poland's relationship with EU members except to note the obvious, which is that several of the signatories of the letter are already EU members, and I don't think it's fair to singularise Poland as Poland was one of eight in this regard," he says. "And from what I understand, some of the criticisms of Poland had not to do with the actual substance of the letter, because the substance of the letter tracked very closely with EU positions on that. So, I think that Poland was well within European norms when it made the decision to sign this letter."
Hill believes that the country's signature on the letter will not prevent it from making it into the union on schedule in May 2004, nor will it affect its bilateral relations with its neighbours. He calls the relationship between the US and Poland "excellent."
"We see things similarly to the way the Poles see them, so our relationship is based on common interests, certainly mutual admiration, but above all mutual respect, because as a sovereign state Poland has its right to make its viewpoint known," Hill says. "Sometimes we have disagreements with Poland, but we always respect Poland's right to take a position."
So, has the current situation in Europe affected America's view of an enlarged EU?
"It's not correct for American diplomats to be offering places in the European Union to non-member countries," Hill says. "That's really a matter between the EU and those countries, but we support the aspirations for European integration. It's certainly not our intention to be a divisive force ... and sometimes when you're having arguments with people, it's good to stop, catch your breath and think about the things that you actually agree on. I would be cautious about exaggerating the degree to which there is divisiveness today."
Information has recently surfaced that the US government would be allocating several billion dollars annually for the reconstruction of Iraq, and that contracts would only be given to American and British companies. Meanwhile, the local press has already been speculating on lucrative contracts that Polish companies would land.
"With respect to contracts for companies, it's hard at this point to be specific except to emphasise that Polish companies have experience in Iraq; they have contacts in Iraq," Hill comments tactfully. "There's a logic to having Polish companies very actively engaged in Iraq."
Once our conversation has turned to an unavoidable topic - Iraq - Hill becomes more elusive. What is his government's vision for resolving the Iraqi situation?
"It is our further desire that this be done peacefully, but we believe very strongly that this is a threat to us all and one way or the other Iraq must be disarmed; we would very much like to see a more democratised Iraq.
"We're not naive about the problems that Iraq faces, we're not naive about the fact that democracy there is a very difficult thing to grow, but we also don't believe that there's any reason why Iraq can never become a democracy. The Iraqi people deserve all the help they can get in this, but ultimately they are going to be the ones to create the system. In no way is the US interested in occupying Iraq. Iraq should be for Iraqis."
With that issue smoothly out of the way, what about the likelihood of moving US army bases to Poland from neighbouring Germany?
"The issue of army bases and where they're best located is a long-term question," Hill says. "It's very unfortunate that this long-term issue, which has its roots in the economic underpinning, should be confused with short-term political issues.
"If we have some differences with the German government, I would not overvalue those and assume that somehow there is a fundamental shift in US-German relations. It is a question that will be answered with all the facts, and these facts have to do with long-term conditions."
Understandably, even rumours of such plans are perceived here as an opportunity in terms of economic development.
"I know that a number of mayors have been interested in hosting US bases," Hill says, although he is quick to emphasise that talk of such decisions has not been motivated by recent comments coming from Germany.
"I don't really want to get into speculating whether bases are going to be moved, and if they are moved, where they're going to be because frankly, in the context of the problems we're dealing with in Iraq, this issue seems to have got mixed up into questions that really have nothing to do with the base issue," Hill says.
These mixed opinions throughout Europe could be a signal of the arrival of a two-tier NATO. That surely must affect NATO's current role, after the breakup of the Soviet Union and the end of the cold war, the Business Journal puts to him. But Hill responds that he believes that the NATO military alliance continues to have a very fundamental role as the primary institution that anchors the US in Europe.
"NATO was set up for conventional war in central Europe, but clearly a conventional war in central Europe is not the only threat that NATO faces," he says. "Membership in NATO offers a certain stability that will help these states develop and help them grow economically."
We return briefly to foreign investment in the face of Rywingate, the government's recent corruption scandal. Hill expresses his concern that, as in any country where corruption scandals surface, incidents such as this one can have an impact on the willingness of foreign investors to put their money here.
"Corruption is a very, very corrosive thing in any country, so foreign investors look at that," he says. "It's really a little premature to speculate though on the Rywin affair and what conceivable relationship that could have with investment plans. One, of course, doesn't like to see reports of scandal. Poland has shown that it has institutions to deal with these problems."
To end our conversation the ambassador courteously adds that much has changed in terms of the cultural stereotypes that our two nations have had of each other and that "Americans know that Poland is a friend you can count on."
"Poland means some heroic leaders from the 1989 period," Hill concludes. "It also means the pope; and these are both very positive images for Poland - images that can be very helpful to Poland as it tries to develop a personality in the international arena and does what it can to attract investors."
Past the double-security check again, we leave in awe of a man who certainly knows how to handle his share of questions from the press. Aspiring diplomats, watch and learn.
