President of the Republic of Kazakhstan Nursultan Nazarbayev

Good morning dear Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen!

I am sincerely glad to greet delegates and guests of the Second Eurasian Media Forum here in Almaty. It has become a good tradition to gather authoritative politicians, journalists, and scientists in our southern capital on these beautiful spring days. The theme of this forum concerning regional security and the role of mass media in this process is urgent as never before. The role of a word, an image not only in understanding, but also in constructing security becomes an important factor, as important as military components. A century ago Friedrich Nietzsche said: "Facts do not exist, there is only interpretation". Of course, probably, this is an overstatement but with great share of truth.

Evidently, radical changes in media-sphere represent not local but a global phenomenon.
According to evaluations of specialists radio needed 38 years to cover the audience of 50 million people, television took 13 years, and the Internet achieved this level within 4 years. In 2002 the number of Internet users exceeded 700 million people.

Aldous Huxley in his anti-totalitarian utopias wittily noticed "hundred repetitions three times a week for four years - and the truth is ready". In Eurasia we are facing a very bad problem. It concerns the replacement of a thesis - the battle against international terrorism to the battle between civilizations.

Let's consider a concrete case of Saddam Hussein. One can't dare call him a faithful Moslem after he initiated two wars against coreligionists, poisoned them with a chemical gas. This is not the problem of Islam, but the problem of the odious regime that threatened security of the region. Both concrete threats and risks visually demonstrated by this political figure relate to Islam in no respect. However informational interpretation to much respect was based on some threat that allegedly concerned belief.
Origins of terrorism are extremely various to tie them to the only reason. But it is evident that this is a complex of problems caused by poverty, poor development, low educational level, political interests, and history of different countries.

Clear understanding of this fact is very important for regular building of the whole security system.
After September 11, 2001 the world has changed a lot. This requires serious analysis. But one thing is evident - regional and global security today represents not a static term, like it was in the period of post-Yalta world. New threats and risks require new approaches.
We consider that unconditioned success of international anti-terrorist coalition in Afghanistan; change of regime in Iraq should favor decrease of tense not only in Central Asia and Middle East, but also on the global level.

Distribution of weapons of mass destruction always was and still is one of the most urgent problems of global security. Expansion of membership in nuclear club, the growing threat that international terrorists and irresponsible political regimes would get such weapon, appearance of non-traditional means of delivery and destruction, from so-called "dirty" bombs to compact nuclear devices - in many respects determine logic of the last international events.

Meanwhile there are examples of concrete, responsible decision of these problems in the world. I would remind you, that last decade Kazakhstan possessed the fourth largest nuclear arsenal in the world. However it was the first country in the world to deliberately refuse from possessing nuclear weapons and under strict control of international organizations the republic liquidated it on its territory. This was called the model for solving this problem, if you remember.

It is evident that this example is topical today as never before and the mass media could play a considerable role in visual demonstration of ways of removing complicated problems in the terms of normal political logic.

Structures of security in Europe after two world wars gained significant reserve of firmness despite all present collisions. Security systems in Asia, home of the greater part of population of our planet, now gain special role for global stability. For 10 years Kazakhstan has been actively working on convocation of the Conference on Interaction and Confidence-building measures in Asia. It took place last year in this very hall with participation of leaders of 16 Asian countries, including China, Russia, India, Pakistan and many other largest countries of Asia, and resulted in signing the Almaty Act.

Of course, creation of the architecture of security is a long process. But only through establishment of such institutions but not through speeches about impossibility to avoid conflicts, we can really decrease tense. We consider that media support of such moves is very important, as it opens horizons of understanding and confidence.

Among those intellectual phantoms that are very actively used during several recent years, the thesis about collision of civilizations that allegedly began is especially notable. But in practical level it is time to think not about the correctness of these hypotheses, but to think how to launch a real dialogue of cultures and religions.

Kazakhstan develops such forms of dialogue in its internal policy as well as on international level. Eight years ago we created a unique instrument of harmonization of inter-ethnic relations - the Assembly of Peoples of Kazakhstan. This institution received high evaluation of the OSCE and the United Nations. It really favors inter-ethnic dialogue in the country. Over all these years of independence not a single ethnic conflict emerged in Kazakhstan.

I would remind that it relates to a country with more than 120 nationalities and representatives of all main confessions of the world represented in its population. Example of our country can really be accepted as a model of inter-ethnic consensus. Because we managed to secure the main right of a person - the right to live in peace.

Leaders of a number of Moslem countries of the region, heads of largest American and International Jewish organizations, representatives of a number of Christian Churches met here in Almaty in February, 2003, to discuss the idea of inter-confessional forum of the world religions. We received principal support of spiritual heads of large religious communities and hope to gather heads and representatives of largest confessions of the world.

Influence of spiritual leaders at times is incomparable even to the influence of politicians. But it can be comparable to the activities of media community. We hope that Moslems and Catholics, Orthodoxies and Judas, Protestants and Buddhists would meet on the land of Kazakhstan in order to find ways of dialogue, but not the conflict of civilizations. And support of regional and global media would be one of the decisive criteria of success in this important mission.

Relations of society and mass media cannot be considered apart from historic and geo-political context. Some peculiarities of our life are sometimes not understandable for people in the West, who got used to simple and fundamental terms like private property, freedom of speech and open society.
But I want to remind once again, we have got out of the totalitarian society not long ago. This, in many respects, explains mistakes in the process of construction of a new state. In due time Marx and Lenin in details described the transition process from market economy to planning one, but there is no textbook in the world to describe transition from socialism to capitalism. However our undisputable advantage is that we know where we came from and know what we want. We want to build democratic society.

Our people are learning to live in democracy and freedom. It is a great achievement of the present generation. But it is also evident that if there was no proper management of the country in conditions of severe economic crisis, violent inter-ethnic conflicts throughout post-soviet territory, then the transition would have taken place according to another logic. First - move to anarchy, to bloody conflicts, and then to fascism. This logic leads to sorrowful results, and the fate of odious regimes in the world is known.
Democracy is our objective, but not the beginning of way. But let's look, what we achieved within such a short period of time. At that the main objective during these years was preservation and consolidation of our long-awaited independence. This was the Number One question. We moved along the only acceptable strategy in our conditions - first economy, and then politics.

This is the circumstance that dictated economic success and today's unconditioned leadership of Kazakhstan in the CIS in economic development and for the level of liberalization of economic system. Kazakhstan was first in the CIS to have been recognized a market economy by the European Union and the United States. We followed the principle of responsibility of the power for economic welfare of the people, presentation of political stability, civil peace, inter-ethnic and inter-confession accord. Through out external policy we created the belt of trust and stability around us. The model project of the Eurasian Union proposed by Kazakhstan was aimed at consolidating confidence and peace through economic integration.

We should give up the illusion that it is possible to realize model of liberal and pluralistic press in poor society, torn with social conflicts. This case does not even concern cultural traditions. This concerns the fact that weak civil society on the background of severely conflicting groups makes mass media an instrument of disintegration and collapse of the society.

In order to avoid this negative scenario it is necessary to develop fundamental conditions for free functioning of the press: stable multi-party political systems, numerous powerful non-governmental organizations, economic conditions for independence existence of mass media, liberal legislation on mass media, and, finally, creation of a real subject and an object of free media community. This may concern not only the layer of economically and politically independent middle class.

Looking though all the components, which are vital for existence of free press and television, it becomes obvious that Kazakhstan is step by step creating the environment for development of really democratic mass media. Of course there were also subjective mistakes in this process, as well as there were stops on the way. There was also fair critique of Kazakhstan. However the general positive trend is evident.
Essentially, Kazakhstan overcame one of the main diseases of closed communities - censorship is prohibited, state-owned mass media are neither monopolists, nor main players in the media-market. There are no closed themes for discussion in Kazakhstan. And your second meeting here represents the brightest proof of this. Majority of mass media - about 80 percent - are private. The legal environment for functioning of independent mass media has been created. A number of economic preferences and tax provisions for development of independent mass media were provided. The process of self-organization of the community of journalists is underway.

More than three thousand non-governmental organizations work in Kazakhstan today. Clearly admitting that the third sector is a key one in development of civil society, we for the first time in the CIS will realize special average-term government program for support of non-governmental organizations.
Today we can assuredly say that the stable layer of middle class appeared in Kazakhstan. Its main values are related to market, liberal community. This is the main social result of a decade of our reforms. However in political sense guarantee of economic and social support to free press is not less important. This is real logic of the situation. This excurse into the newest history was necessary to demonstrate a simple thesis: "Regional and global security bend on security of national states". But interpretation of security as a system of strict limitation measures of the government has gone to the past long ago. We proceed from another understanding of security. It may base not only one developed civil society with presence of real consensus on basic values in the society. And the role of mass media in this is invaluable.

Mr. Chairman, Dear Ladies and Gentlemen!

Once John Kennedy, having gathered American laureates of Nobel Prize in the White House, said that never before so many bright brains gathered in this building, except those remote days when Thomas Jefferson had lunches here alone. I think that today in this hall we are having the same concentration of intellectuals - which is a rare phenomenon.

I would like to wish you fruitful discussions, constructive interpretation of that uneasy tie that exists between security and mass media. Wish you success and thank you for your attention.