NATO Enlargement: Report Is Responsive to Senate Requirements, but Additional Information Could Be Useful
Published: 2002-11-15T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: On November 21 and 22, 2002, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) will consider the admission of new members to the alliance. To facilitate congressional deliberations on NATO enlargement, the United States Senate mandated in 1998 that GAO review and assess a report that Congress directed the President to provide on countries seeking membership in NATO. The President submitted a classified report to Congress on August 26, 2002. To fulfill its mandate, GAO determined if the report met the Senate's requirements and if the cost estimates were sound.
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: The President's report responded to the mandated requirements with information that was generally accurate and current. The report provided a detailed discussion of each country's eligibility in terms of defense, budgetary, information security, legal, and economic issues. However, the discussion of each country's efforts to implement democratic principles and reforms was limited. That discussion did not reflect the challenges these countries face in the transition to democratic societies--or their efforts to address those challenges--in areas such as civil liberties, judicial independence, human rights, and minority rights. These are important principles of the alliance and a fuller discussion could be useful. GAO provides additional information on these issues in appendix II to help Congress in its deliberations on NATO enlargement. The figure below shows current NATO members and the nine countries that will be considered for membership in November 2002. The National Security Council generally concurred with the contents of this report.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: On November 21 and 22, 2002, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization  (NATO) will consider whether to invite new members into the alliance from  a list of nine countries seeking NATO membership. NATO wants new  members to be democracies, have harmonious relations with neighboring  countries, modernize and restructure their defense capabilities, protect  civil liberties and human and minority rights, and have an open market  economy. The admission of new members requires ratification by two- thirds of the United States Senate. The last time NATO considered adding  new members, Congress was concerned that the President did not provide  sufficient information in a time frame that facilitated congressional  deliberations on the countries invited to join NATO. As a result, the Senate  mandated that the President provide Congress with information on  countries seeking to join the alliance—before NATO made any decision on  enlarging its membership. In particular, the President was required to  assess how countries would further the principles of the North Atlantic  Treaty, contribute to North Atlantic security, and affect U.S. national  security interests. He also was required to evaluate countries’ eligibility for  membership and estimate the military requirements and costs associated  with a country’s membership for both NATO and U.S. budgets.
The Senate mandated that we review and assess the President’s report. To  fulfill that mandate, we determined if (1) the report met the Senate’s  requirements and the information was accurate and current and (2) the  methodology for deriving cost estimates was sound.
To assess the President’s report, we developed an extensive array of  documentary and testimonial information from a broad spectrum of  sources, including U.S. government and military reports and analyses,  government reports and analyses of the countries seeking NATO  membership, discussions with aspirant country delegations to NATO, and  discussions with a broad range of research organizations and experts. We  also conducted in-depth data gathering in three aspirant countries— Bulgaria, Latvia, and Slovenia—that included meetings with several  government agencies and a variety of private-sector, nongovernmental, and  research organizations. See appendix I for a detailed description of the  scope and methodology.
The President submitted his report to Congress on August 26, 2002. In  presenting the results of our assessment, we have not discussed the  specific conclusions or information in the President’s report because that  report is classified.
subsections: section_title: Background
paragraphs: The North Atlantic Treaty was signed on April 4, 1949, by 12 European and  North American countries to provide collective defense against the  emerging threat that the Soviet Union posed to the democracies of Western  Europe. Since its inception, the alliance’s key objective has been to achieve  a lasting peace in the North Atlantic area that is based on the common  values of democracy, the rule of law, and individual liberty. Article 10 of the  treaty permits accession of additional European states if they are in a  position to further the treaty’s principles and contribute to North Atlantic  security. While members must unanimously agree to any new country’s  accession, the treaty contains no explicit criteria that a country must meet  to join the alliance. NATO’s invitations to countries to join the alliance are  political decisions based on the unanimous agreement of members.
Since its inception, NATO has enlarged its membership four times as  changing political and strategic circumstances have warranted. The first  three occasions were linked to confrontation with the Communist bloc,  particularly the Soviet Union, and were taken to meet pressing strategic  and security needs. Turkey and Greece joined NATO in 1952 for strategic  reasons, permitting NATO to shore up its southern flank to forestall  Communist military action in Europe at the height of the Korean War. West  Germany joined the alliance in 1955 after agreeing to maintain extensive  NATO forces on its territory and to place its national army within NATO’s  integrated command structure. With Spain’s membership in 1982, NATO  gained better access to Spain’s air and naval bases, while the newly  democratized nation improved its chances of joining the European  Economic Community.
A significantly different strategic environment marked the fourth, and  latest, enlargement, when NATO’s goal was to extend stability eastward  into the political vacuum resulting from the Soviet Union’s collapse. In  1994, NATO committed to enlarging its membership to include the newly  democratic states of the former Communist bloc. As a result, Poland,  Hungary, and the Czech Republic joined the alliance in 1999, and several  more east and central European countries are seeking membership.
At the 1999 summit meeting in Washington, D.C., NATO promulgated,  among other things, the Membership Action Plan, to provide guidance and  counseling to other NATO aspirants to facilitate their preparations for  possible membership. The plan sets forth defense, budgetary, information  security, legal, political, and economic goals for countries to work toward  to enhance their readiness for membership. Essentially, NATO wants  countries that are seeking to join the alliance to (1) be democracies that are  based on the rule of law; (2) have harmonious relations with neighboring  countries and settle international disputes peacefully; (3) provide and  protect civil liberties, human rights, and minority rights; and (4) have an  open market economy. In addition, NATO wants countries to modernize  and restructure their defense capabilities to be interoperable with NATO  and, hence, to be able to contribute to NATO operations. To reach that goal,  NATO would like countries to spend at least the equivalent of 2 percent of  their gross domestic product on defense development. Countries also need  to implement NATO requirements for handling and securing NATO  classified information and to be free from legal barriers that would prevent  a country from deploying forces abroad or hosting foreign troops on their  territory. Each country participating in the Membership Action Plan  develops an annual plan of actions that it will pursue to achieve those  goals. NATO reviews the plans and progress implementing them and  provides annual feedback to each country. Representatives of NATO’s  newest members, as well as representatives of the countries currently  seeking NATO membership, generally agree that the program has provided  crucial guidance and is a major success in assisting countries’ preparations.
As of September 2002, there were nine countries participating in the  Membership Action Plan—Albania, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, the  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Romania, Slovakia, and  Slovenia—and at least one additional country, Croatia, was poised to begin  participation in the fall of 2002. The nine countries have undergone three  annual planning cycles and will submit their fourth annual plan to NATO in  the fall of 2002. At its summit meeting in November 2002 in Prague, NATO  will decide which of these countries should be invited to join the alliance in  the next round of enlargement. Figure 1 shows the nine countries  participating in the Membership Action Plan and current European NATO  members.
section_title: Report Responded to Mandate, but Additional Information Could Be Useful
paragraphs: The President’s report responded to all of the Senate’s information  requirements for each of the nine countries seeking NATO membership,  providing information that was generally accurate and current. Discussion  of countries’ eligibility addressed their achievements toward the goals in  NATO’s Membership Action Plan; those goals include defense, budgetary,  information security, legal, economic, and political goals. Discussion of  most of these goals was generally detailed, but discussion of the  implementation of democratic principles and reforms was limited.
subsections: section_title: The Report Responded to the Mandate’s Requirements
paragraphs: The President’s report responded to the five requirements in the Senate’s  mandate and provided responses with regard to each of the nine countries.  The five requirements were to assess (1) how countries would further the  principles of the North Atlantic Treaty and contribute to North Atlantic  security, (2) how countries would affect U.S. national security interests, (3)  countries’ eligibility for membership, (4) the impact on NATO’s costs and  members’ shares of those costs, and (5) the impact on U.S. defense and  other budgets. No major events appear to have been excluded. The  information provided in the report was generally accurate and current and  generally consistent with the data we collected independently from a broad  array of U.S. government, NATO, and foreign government sources as well  as research and other nongovernment organizations. The report’s cutoff  date for the timeliness of the information was July 15, 2002, and the time  frames for events, particularly recent ones, were usually identified. No  recent events have occurred to alter the general information provided in  the report.
First, to assess how countries would further the principles of the North  Atlantic Treaty and contribute to North Atlantic security, the President’s  report discussed countries’ achievements in this area. For example, in  discussing countries’ potential impacts on North Atlantic security, the  report described countries’ contributions to regional peace—in particular,  the ways in which countries address controversial issues with neighboring  countries and their contributions to NATO operations. Second, to address  the implications of countries’ membership for U.S. security, the President’s  report provided a detailed discussion of the contributions that countries  have made and continue to make to NATO operations in Europe’s Balkan  region—such as operations in Bosnia and Kosovo—and their cooperation  and assistance in the war on terrorism. To meet the two cost requirements,  the report provided estimates of the potential impact of countries’  membership on both NATO costs and U.S. budgets. Finally, the bulk of the  report addressed country eligibility by discussing their accomplishments in  achieving the goals of NATO’s Membership Action Plan. As discussed in the  next section, the report provided information about each country’s  eligibility in relation to several of those issues, but there was limited  discussion of the implementation of democratic principles and reforms.
section_title: Report Provided Limited Discussion of Some Eligibility Issues
paragraphs: The President’s report presented a detailed discussion of the defense,  budgetary, information security, legal, and economic issues surrounding  each country’s eligibility for membership. The information was accurate  and current. Discussion of defense issues, in particular, was extensive,  describing for each of the nine countries its achievements in terms of five  capability areas: (1) deployability and mobility; (2) sustainability and  logistics; (3) consultations, command, and control; (4) effective  engagement; and (5) survivability of forces and infrastructure. The report’s  discussion of budgetary issues focused on each of the nine countries’  commitments to defense spending as a percentage of its gross domestic  product, and the defense budget planning systems that each country has  implemented. Discussion of information security and legal issues focused  on the extent to which each country had met or achieved NATO  requirements. For information security, the report assessed the extent to  which each of the nine countries had implemented NATO requirements for  personnel screening and the handling and storage of classified documents.  Regarding legal issues, the report assessed whether a country’s  constitution and/or laws provided any barriers to the deployment of the  country’s troops abroad, or the hosting of foreign troops in-country, in  support of NATO operations. In the economic area, the report discussed  the status of each country’s economy.
Although the information provided in the report regarding the  implementation of democratic principles and reforms was accurate and  current, the discussion was limited. The report did not fully delineate the  challenges facing the nine countries seeking membership or what they have  been doing to address those challenges. The political goals addressed in  NATO’s Membership Action Plan cover a broad spectrum, ranging from the  implementation of democratic institutions, free and fair elections, the rule  of law, judicial independence, and civil liberties to peaceful relations with  bordering countries, peaceful settlement of international disputes, and  protection of human rights and minority rights. However, the report’s  discussion of the challenges facing the nine countries in such areas as civil  liberties, judicial independence, human rights, and minority rights—as well  as government efforts to address those challenges—was either limited or  absent.
The nine countries seeking membership in NATO have been transitioning  over the past decade from state-controlled communist systems to  democracies and market-based economies. The political goals of the  Membership Action Plan represent some of the key values of the alliance.  Further, these countries have been pursuing the goals set forth in NATO’s  Membership Action Plan by enacting new legislation, amending existing  laws, and developing new programs to address many of these goals,  especially within the past 2 years. Because of these considerations, we  have provided additional information on countries’ implementation of  democratic principles and reforms in appendix II to help Congress in its  deliberations on NATO enlargement. We also provide the results of several  independent analyses of countries’ progress toward implementing  democracy and open economies in appendixes III and IV, which we believe  will be useful in assessing countries’ eligibility for NATO membership.
section_title: As a Preliminary Assessment, Cost Estimates Were Reasonable
paragraphs: The President’s report responded to the requirements for estimates of  potential impacts of new members on both NATO and U.S. costs. The  methodology in the President’s report for estimating potential cost impacts,  while preliminary, was reasonable. Changes in some factors in the  methodology for estimating the impact on NATO’s shared costs could  change the resulting estimates. We have not included the actual cost  estimates in this report because those figures are classified in the  President’s report.
The report’s methodology for estimating the impact on NATO’s shared  costs, in particular, was a reasonable approach for a preliminary estimate.  The report based its assessment on a 1997 NATO methodology to  determine the impact of adding three new members—Poland, Hungary, and  the Czech Republic—on NATO’s commonly funded budgets. In prior work,  we determined that approach was reasonable for the 1997 analysis.
In applying that methodology to the current analysis, the report used the  same determination of NATO’s military requirements applied to the 1997  analysis. Those military requirements fall into four categories: (1)  command and control, which reflects an extension of NATO’s  communications links to the new members; (2) air defense, which reflects  the integration of new members into NATO’s air defense systems; (3)  reinforcement reception facilities, which reflect upgrades to infrastructure,  particularly airfields, to receive NATO forces; and (4) training and  exercises. According to a U.S. Department of Defense official, NATO will  not determine specific military requirements for the 2002 round of  enlargement until it offers invitations to individual countries. Without  specific information on future NATO military requirements, it was  reasonable to base a cost estimate on NATO’s previous assumptions  regarding its military requirements. Estimates were provided for each  country in each of those categories of military requirements. In applying  the 1997 methodology, the report also used the 1997 NATO cost estimates  for the types of projects needed to meet those military requirements.
According to the U.S. Department of Defense analysts who performed the  analysis, the report updated the 1997 NATO methodology by assessing what  the current list of countries seeking NATO membership might need in  terms of NATO military funding for projects to meet NATO military  requirements. Assessments of what military upgrades each of these  countries would need were based on NATO and U.S. Department of  Defense reports and analyses that had determined that seven of the nine  countries had already met some of the requirements for air defense  capabilities. The report then adjusted the costs applied in the 1997 analysis  to reflect U.S. dollars in 2002. We found these adjustments to be generally  reasonable for a preliminary estimate. Once NATO has decided which  countries to invite into the alliance, however, NATO plans to analyze the  cost impacts on the basis of detailed country-specific assessments of each  country’s current infrastructure conditions and the upgrades needed to  meet NATO military requirements.
section_title: Conclusions
paragraphs: The President’s report responded to the Senate’s requirements. However,  the limited discussion of the implementation of democratic principles and  reforms in relation to countries’ eligibility for NATO membership did not  reflect the challenges these countries face in making the transition to  democratic societies or the breadth of activities they have engaged in to  consummate that transition. Because the implementation of democratic  principles represents important NATO principles, broader discussion of  these issues could be useful for a full appreciation of the conditions and  achievements of the countries seeking NATO membership.
section_title: Matter for Congressional Consideration
paragraphs: Because NATO’s political goals for countries seeking membership focus on  developing democratic institutions and principles, we have included  material in this report that goes beyond the information contained in the  President’s report. If Congress finds this material useful during upcoming  deliberations on NATO enlargement, it may wish to request that future  reports contain more detailed information on these issues.
section_title: Agency Comments
paragraphs: We provided a draft of this report to the National Security Council. In oral  comments, the council generally concurred with the contents of this report.
We are sending copies of this report to other interested congressional  committees, the Chairman of the National Security Council, the Secretary  of State, and the Secretary of Defense. We will also make copies available  to others upon request. In addition, this report will be available at no cost  on the GAO Web site at http://www.gao.gov.
Please contact me at (202) 512-8979 if you or your staff have any questions  about this report. Key contributors to this report were F. James Shafer,  Beverly Ann Bendekgey, Kelly Baumgartner, Monica Brym, Martin de  Alteriis, Berel Spivack, Ernie Jackson, Janey Cohen, and Lynn Cothern.
Joseph A. Christoff, Director International Affairs and Trade  The Honorable Joseph R. Biden, Jr. Chairman The Honorable Jesse A. Helms Ranking Minority Member Committee on Foreign Relations United States Senate The Honorable Carl Levin Chairman The Honorable John W. Warner Ranking Minority Member Committee on Armed Services United States Senate The Honorable Robert C. Byrd Chairman The Honorable Ted Stevens Ranking Minority Member Committee on Appropriations United States Senate The Honorable Henry J. Hyde Chairman The Honorable Tom Lantos Ranking Minority Member Committee on International Relations House of Representatives The Honorable Bob Stump Chairman The Honorable Ike Skelton Ranking Minority Member Committee on Armed Services House of Representatives List of Congressional Committees (cont.)
section_title: Scope and Methodology
paragraphs: To assess the President’s report, we determined if each of the United States  Senate’s information requirements listed in the legislative mandate was  addressed and if the information provided was accurate and current. We  also assessed the soundness of the methodology for deriving cost  estimates. We did not independently assess foreign laws or regulations and  based our discussion of those laws and regulations, particularly the  information provided in appendix II, on secondary sources.
To assess whether the report met the Senate’s requirements, we met with  and obtained documentation from representatives of numerous  organizations, including the U.S. Department of Defense, the U.S.  Department of State, the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, the Carnegie  Endowment for International Peace, the CATO Institute, the Center for  Defense Information, the Center for Strategic and International Studies, the  Council on Foreign Relations, The Heritage Foundation, the National  Defense University, the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human  Rights in the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, the  RAND Corporation, and the Woodrow Wilson Center for International  Studies. We obtained extensive country-specific documentation from, and  met at length with, all nine candidate country delegations to the North  Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in Brussels and several country  delegations visiting the United States.
We also collected extensive documentary evidence from the reports and  analyses of a broad range of organizations on the political, economic,  defense, budgetary, information security, and legal issues related to the  goals in NATO’s Membership Action Plan, including   the U.S. State Department’s country background reports, country  commercial guides, and annual reports assessing human rights  practices, religious freedom, and trafficking in persons;   defense reform assessments prepared by the U.S. Department of   the elections analyses of the Organization for Security and Co-operation   country background reports of the Congressional Research Service, the  U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, and the European Forum;  the constitutions of countries seeking NATO membership, and  assessments in the East European Constitutional Review;  the European Union’s annual regular progress reports on the political  and economic developments, and other preparations, of countries  seeking membership in the European Union as well as other reports and  documentation of the European Union, the European Parliament, and  the European Commission;   economic surveys of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and   the Fraser Institute’s annual assessments of economic freedom;  Freedom House country ratings of political rights and civil liberties and  its nations in transit country reports as well as reports from the  International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights, Human Rights  Watch, and Amnesty International;  The Heritage Foundation’s index of economic freedom reports;   the investment profiles of the European Bank for Reconstruction and   the Open Society Institute’s reports on minority protection and judicial   the International Press Institute’s world press freedom reviews;  reports of the Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern   evaluation reports of the Group of States Against Corruption;   aspirant countries’ third annual national plan under NATO’s Membership  Action Plan and related documentation; and  aspirant country defense modernization and reconstruction plans and  planned defense expenditures.
We conducted in-depth data gathering in three aspirant countries— Bulgaria, Latvia, and Slovenia—to check the validity of the information  gathered from these and other sources. While visiting the three countries,  we met with and obtained documentation from government officials in  defense, foreign affairs, economic, justice, and administrative ministries;  members of Parliament; and various nongovernmental groups, research  organizations, and media representatives. While we acquired some updated  information, we did not find discrepancies with the other information  gathered.
We assessed the President’s report by determining the extent to which it  addressed each of the mandated requirements. We assessed the accuracy  of the information in the report by determining if it was consistent with the  information in the sources we developed. We assessed the currency of the  information by determining whether any recent events identified in our  sources raised questions about the accuracy of any of the report’s main  findings.
To assess the methodology for deriving cost estimates regarding the impact  of a country’s membership on NATO’s shared costs, members’ shares of  those costs, and U.S. defense and other budgets, we analyzed the  methodology used in producing the estimated costs as well as the data on  potential impacts for U.S. budgets. We examined the assumptions on which  the estimates were based, reviewed the U.S. Department of Defense’s and  NATO’s estimates for the 1999 round of enlargement, and interviewed the  U.S. Department of Defense officials responsible for developing the  estimates. We verified that the methodology the report said it used to  assess the potential impact on NATO’s shared costs was in fact applied, but  we did not independently verify the source data on which the cost  estimates were based. While our assessment of that methodology is based  on the approach selected, changes in some factors in the methodology  could change the resulting estimates. For example, a change in NATO’s  military requirements could lead to a higher or lower cost estimate.
We conducted our work between July 2001 and October 2002 in accordance  with generally accepted government auditing standards.
section_title: Additional Information on the Implementation of Democratic Principles and Reforms in Countries Seeking NATO Membership
paragraphs: Because the President’s discussion of the implementation of democratic  principles and reforms in relation to countries’ eligibility for NATO  membership was limited, this appendix provides additional information, by  country, that we believe will be useful in understanding the challenges and  developments in the nine countries seeking NATO membership and the  actions their governments are taking to achieve the goals of NATO’s  Membership Action Plan. The information provided is based on our review  of the numerous sources identified in appendix I.
As the President’s report and the information contained herein illustrate,  the countries that will be considered for membership at NATO’s summit  meeting in Prague on November 21 and 22, 2002, have been active in  pursuing the goals set forth in NATO’s Membership Action Plan. Countries  have been enacting new legislation, amending existing laws, restructuring  and modernizing their military forces and capabilities, and developing new  programs, especially within the past 1 to 2 years. As a result, many of those  efforts are still in the process of being enacted and/or implemented, so  there is little, if any, implementation history to assess in terms of their  impact or benefits.
subsections: section_title: General Information on Countries Seeking NATO Membership
paragraphs: The following tables provide general background information that could be  helpful in understanding the issues discussed in this appendix. Table 1  provides an overview of the applicant countries’ population size, border  countries, and the 2001 purchasing power parity gross national income per  capita as well as data for the United States and average data for NATO.  Table 2 provides information on the ethnic composition of each applicant  country.
section_title: Albania
paragraphs: Located in the southwest Balkan region of Europe, Albania has a  population of 3.5 million people. It shares a border with one NATO  member—Greece, one country aspiring to NATO membership—the Former  Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, and a third country—the Federal  Republic of Yugoslavia. After experiencing a financial collapse in 1997 that  triggered armed insurgencies, Albania adopted a new constitution in 1998  and since then has been consolidating democratic institutions and  processes.
subsections: section_title: Civil Liberties
paragraphs: The Albanian constitution and related legislation provide for the protection  of individual liberties, such as freedom of expression, religion, the media,  association, and movement, and the government generally respects those  rights. The sources we reviewed, however, indicate that although Albania  provides for freedom of the media, some concerns have been raised about  the use of libel as a crime against journalists and about physical attacks on  journalists. To help address concerns about media freedom, the  government passed the Law on Public and Private Radio and Television in  September 1998 to guarantee editorial independence and prevent  censorship.
section_title: Democracy and the Rule of Law
paragraphs: The government has made progress in providing for free and fair elections  since the political unrest of 1997. Albania passed a new electoral law in  May 2000 that (1) established a Central Election Commission as the main  institution to oversee and verify elections and (2) adopted more efficient  voter registration provisions. The Organization for Security and Co- operation in Europe reported that the 2000 electoral law generally  “provides a sound basis for democratic elections,” and that the 2000 local  and 2001 parliamentary elections demonstrated progress toward meeting  the standards of democratic elections.
The organization also noted several irregularities, however, in the 2001  elections, including improper handling of ballot boxes and perceived  political pressure on the Central Election Commission. The organization  has issued recommendations to further improve laws governing elections,  and the leaders of the two main political parties agreed in April 2002 to  establish a bipartisan committee to develop proposals for electoral reform.
section_title: Human Rights
paragraphs: Respect for human rights in Albania also has gradually improved since the  1997 insurgencies. Albania adopted a new constitution in 1998 that (1)  provides protection for a broad set of human rights and (2) establishes a  national ombudsman to both defend public rights and freedoms and to  enforce the public’s right to information. Albania also has signed a number  of international human rights conventions. While the Albanian government  notes that the new constitution represents progress in strengthening  human rights protections, it recognizes that many laws regarding human  rights still need revision.
According to the sources we reviewed, there are two key concerns  regarding the enforcement of human rights protections in Albania. First,  police misconduct is considered to be a serious problem. Police are poorly  paid and untrained and are reported to have used excessive force and  torture. To address these problems, the government began implementing a  1999 law to reorganize the police at all levels and developed an education  program for the police and the public. Second, Albania is a country of  origin and transit for trafficking in human beings, and there are reports that  the police were often directly or indirectly involved in the trafficking. The  government states that one of its main priorities is the fight against  trafficking in human beings, and it has developed a national strategy for  pursuing that goal. For example, parliament passed changes to the Criminal  Code in 2001 that made trafficking in human beings a criminal offense. In  2001, the government also established a regional center for antitrafficking  efforts to research the problem and to undertake police operations against  trafficking rings. The U.S. State Department reported in its Trafficking in  Persons Report for 2002 that Albania was not yet in full compliance with  the U.S. minimum standards for eliminating trafficking in human beings but  that Albania was making a significant effort to achieve compliance.
section_title: Minority Rights
paragraphs: The constitution protects minority rights and Albanian legislation provides  a legal framework for ensuring that ethnic minorities enjoy the same rights  as Albanians.   However, according to the U.S. State Department, the Roma  and the Egyptians are among the most neglected ethnic minority groups in  the country. The Roma, in particular, face discrimination in housing,  employment, education, and political participation. To help address these  issues, Albania became a member in 2001 of the Council of Europe  Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities.
section_title: Destruction of Arms and Land Mines
paragraphs: Albania is addressing a serious need for the destruction of arms that were  left in weapons depots throughout the country. According to Albanian  government officials, Albania stockpiled during the Cold War more than  130,000 tons of ammunition in 16 hazardous ammunition sites and over 150  storage facilities and produced more than 1.6 million antipersonnel land  mines. During the 1997 internal crisis, looters seized hundreds of thousands  of arms and ammunition, only some of which have been returned.  According to a NATO official, Albania needs to improve its ammunition  storage management to address issues of security, safety, and  accountability.
The government has recently been trying to address this serious stockpile  issue. For example, in 2000 the government ratified the Ottawa Convention  on the prohibition of the use, stockpiling, production, and transfer of  antipersonnel land mines and their destruction. That convention requires  Albania’s disposal of its more than 1.6 million antipersonnel land mines by  2004. The Albanian parliament also has approved a new law that provides  for the collection of weapons stolen during the 1997 armed insurgencies;  the government has established a special police unit to handle the  collection process. In 2001, Albania developed defense restructuring and  modernization plans that also provide for the collection and destruction of  these arms and mines. By September 2001, approximately 117,000 small  arms and light weapons had been destroyed and, according to the  government, only five hazardous ammunition storage sites remained.
section_title: Bulgaria
paragraphs: Located on the Black Sea in the southeastern region of the Balkans,  Bulgaria is home to about 7.7 million people. It borders two NATO  members—Greece and Turkey—and two countries aspiring to NATO  membership—the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Romania— as well as the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Bulgaria experienced a  period of social and economic unrest when it emerged from communism.  The country was slow to undertake reforms until 1997 when a newly  elected government accelerated economic reforms, helping to stabilize the  country. The government elected in 2001 has remained committed to the  implementation of political, economic, and defense reforms.
subsections: section_title: Civil Liberties
paragraphs: The Bulgarian constitution guarantees civil liberties such as freedom of  expression, the media, religion, association, and movement as well as  protection of privacy. However, the sources we reviewed indicate that  some of these constitutional guarantees may be limited in practice,  including the guarantees of freedom of the media and protection of privacy.  For example, in 2001 the International Helsinki Federation for Human  Rights reported that limits on freedom of the media could derive from the  possibility of criminal prosecution and punishment for insult and libel. The  federation also reported assaults against journalists and continuing undue  governmental influence over the media, especially the electronic media. In  addition, the U.S. State Department and other sources indicate that the  government exerts influence through official channels such as the National  Radio and Television Council, which is a quasi-governmental body  responsible for overseeing the national media and regulating private  broadcasts. The U.S. State Department further reports that the government  also uses less direct means of influence such as the diversion of advertising  revenue away from media outlets that criticize government policies.
The government has embarked on a number of efforts to address these  issues. For example, in 2000 the government adopted the Access to Public  Information Act to establish broader public access to government  information. In 2001, the government passed a new law that established an  Electronic Media Council, whose members will be chosen by Parliament  and the President, to regulate programming and issue licenses for the  electronic media. Some questions remain, however, about the effectiveness  of the implementation of these measures. For example, the International  Helsinki Federation for Human Rights reported in 2001 that organizations  or persons seeking access to government information continue to meet  with resistance from state bodies, such as the Ministry of Education, the  Ministry of Justice, the Chief Prosecutor’s Office, and the Directorate of  Religious Affairs. Further, implementation of the new Electronic Media  Council has been slow.
In addition to concerns about limitations on freedom of the media,  concerns have been expressed about the effectiveness of the constitutional  protection for privacy. The U.S. State Department indicates that the  Bulgarian government continues to infringe upon those rights. The sources  we reviewed indicate that government security agencies—such as the  National Intelligence Service, the National Bodyguard Service, and the  Ministry of Interior’s National Security Service—act without sufficient  judicial oversight. For example, the International Helsinki Federation for  Human Rights reported in 2001 that while the courts had issued more than  10,000 authorizations for wiretapping in 2000 at the request of the Ministry  of Interior, a mere 2 to 3 percent were actually used in criminal  proceedings. Further, the U.S. State Department reported in 2002 that  although the extent of the Ministry of Interior’s discretionary power to  authorize telephone wiretaps and electronic listening devices without  judicial review is unknown, concerns remained that government security  agencies acted without sufficient oversight. In response to such concerns, a  parliamentary commission charged with oversight of the “public order”  agencies held hearings in 2002 on the issue of sufficient oversight.
section_title: Democracy and the Rule of Law
paragraphs: The Bulgarian constitution and the Law on the Judicial System provide the  judiciary with the legal and institutional basis for independence. Sources  we reviewed, however, indicate that the judiciary is plagued with serious  administrative problems, such as complicated funding procedures that lack  transparency, inadequate training for judges, poor administration, and  corruption. The Bulgarian government has recently developed a detailed  Strategy and Implementation Program for the reform of the judiciary, and  government sources indicate that implementation of the program has  begun. The program covers a 5-year period with short-, medium-, and long- term priorities for developing European standards in justice, including  constitutional and statutory changes, budgetary improvements, specialized  courts, criteria for the selection of magistrates, disciplinary measures for  magistrates, a national institute for vocational training of magistrates, and  the provision of information technologies and software for the judiciary.
section_title: Human Rights
paragraphs: The Bulgarian government provides for and generally respects the human  rights of its citizens and has ratified most human rights conventions.  According to the sources we reviewed, however, Bulgaria’s human rights  record is considered poor in certain areas. The primary concerns, in  addition to the trafficking issues discussed in the President’s report,  include police brutality and misconduct and child abuse. The Bulgarian  government has been addressing human rights problems. For example,  within the National Police Service, a Human Rights Commission was  established in 2000 to serve as the central authority responsible for the (1)  review of human rights violations, (2) incorporation of human rights into  police training, and (3) review of police regulations for compliance with  signed international conventions on human rights. In addition, the  Bulgarian government has reinforced the institutional framework for the  protection of children by creating in January 2001 a new government  agency, known as the State Agency for Child Protection, to improve  coordination and implementation of policies at the national and regional  level and to provide guidance to and control of municipal service on child  protection activities. This agency is in the early stages of implementation  and lacks adequate personnel and financial resources. A National Advisory  Council for Child Protection was created at the same time to serve as a  consultative body on child protection activities and is composed of  members from eight government departments and associate members from  several nongovernmental organizations and two international  organizations.
section_title: Minority Rights
paragraphs: The Bulgarian constitution and related legislation prohibit discrimination;  Bulgaria also has ratified major international agreements aimed at  protecting minority rights. Sources we reviewed indicate, however, that  enforcement and implementation of provisions to protect minority rights  have provided only minimal protection, particularly for the Roma  population. Problematic areas include the absence of a systematic  mechanism for monitoring discrimination and incomplete incorporation of  treaty commitments on minority rights into legislation. To address minority  issues in the country, the government established the National Council on  Ethnic and Demographic Issues in 1999, but implementation of the  council’s efforts has been slow.
A serious concern regarding minority rights is that the Roma population, in  particular, suffers from widespread discrimination in employment,  education, health care, housing, social welfare, and the criminal justice  system. To address the ongoing difficulties facing the Roma population, the  government created a framework program for Roma integration in 1999,  but implementation of that effort has been slow. According to the U.S. State  Department, the only progress has been the hiring of a number of Roma  representatives in various local, regional, and national government  institutions.
section_title: Estonia
paragraphs: With a population of 1.4 million, Estonia is the smallest of the aspirant  countries. Located on the Baltic Sea, Estonia shares a border with another  country seeking NATO membership—Latvia—and with Russia. Estonia  regained its independence in 1991 and held its first elections in 1992. About  28 percent of Estonia’s population is composed of ethnic Russians.
subsections: section_title: Democracy and the Rule of Law
paragraphs: The Estonian constitution and related legislation provide the legal and  institutional framework to ensure democratic institutions and the rule of  law as well as the independence of the judiciary. The sources we reviewed,  however, raised some concerns about the effectiveness of public  administration and the civil service as well as the judiciary’s ability to  effectively implement the rule of law.
Estonia has made progress in modernizing its public administration and the  civil service, and both operate satisfactorily. Transparency and  coordination in civil service procedures, however, remain problematic. For  example, the European Union indicates that the lack of transparency in  recruitment and promotion threatens the impartiality of civil servants.  According to Freedom House, the Estonian government began substantial  reform of the civil service system in 1996. In April 2001, the government  approved a new reform program to further develop and improve the civil  service system. The government also has acknowledged that more remains  to be done to improve the recruitment, promotion, salary, training, and  appraisal systems.
A lack of experienced judges, insufficient training of judges, and a large  backlog of cases are considered to weaken the effective implementation of  the rule of law. The government is trying to address these issues with  ongoing reform of the court system and improvements in the training of  judges. In February 2001, for example, the government adopted a training  strategy that is expected to enhance judicial training.
section_title: Human Rights
paragraphs: The Estonian constitution guarantees the protection of human rights, and  the government generally respects those rights for its citizens and for the  large ethnic Russian noncitizen community (about 13 percent of the total  population are stateless). The Organization for Security and Co-operation  in Europe found in December 2001 that Estonia was in full compliance with  its recommendations on human rights and, as a result, closed its Estonian  office. Estonia also has ratified most of the major international conventions  in the field of human rights, although it has not ratified the United Nations  Convention on the Status of Stateless Persons.
The government has employed several measures to enforce the protection  of human rights. For example, in June 1999, the Legal Chancellor Act went  into effect, combining the role of the Legal Chancellor—who has the power  to ensure that the state maintains compliance with the constitution—with  the responsibilities of an ombudsman to handle complaints by private  citizens against state institutions on issues such as human rights and  minority rights. Further, all residents—whether or not they hold Estonian  citizenship—may now file complaints about alleged violations of human or  constitutional rights directly with Estonia’s Supreme Court, bypassing the  local and regional courts.
Concerns have been raised, however, with regard to trafficking in human  beings, police brutality, and poor prison conditions. According to the U.S.  State Department, Estonia is a country of origin for trafficking in human  beings. The government is addressing the trafficking problem through such  activities as (1) a police awareness program, (2) joint efforts with Nordic  countries on an antitrafficking campaign, and (3) work with an  international organization on a public information campaign. Although  there is no specific antitrafficking law in Estonia, the International Helsinki  Federation for Human Rights reported in 2002 that the new penal code  adopted in June 2001 criminalizes trafficking in women, and the U.S. State  Department determined that enforcement officials could fight trafficking  with criminal laws against activities such as pandering, kidnapping, and  inducing minors to engage in crime, extortion, and involuntary prostitution.  The U.S. State Department also found in 2002 that Estonia was not in full  compliance with the U.S. minimum standards for fighting trafficking, but it  was making a significant effort to become so.
To address concerns about police brutality, the U.S. State Department  reports that Estonian officials are working to develop, strengthen, and  professionalize the police force. Prison conditions, overcrowding of  prisons and detention centers, ill-treatment of prisoners, and a lack of  training and funding also have been serious problems. To address those  problems, the government adopted in March 2000 a 3-year development  plan for reforming the prison system. In December 2000, the Imprisonment  Act came into force to bring about some needed improvements. While  some improvements have occurred—for example, the U.S. State  Department indicates that work and study opportunities for prisoners have  since increased slightly—the European Union reported in 2001 that  continued efforts were required to improve the serious problems that  remain in prison conditions.
section_title: Minority Rights
paragraphs: The constitution prohibits discrimination against minorities, and the Law  on Cultural Autonomy provides for the protection of cultures belonging to  minority groups of Estonian citizens. Ethnic Russians comprise about 28  percent of the Estonian population, and sources we reviewed indicate that  the protection of this minority group is overall satisfactory. The  government also has addressed concerns about minority rights by creating  a roundtable of national minorities in 1993 to participate in the formulation  of policies affecting minority populations and more recently through a  government-approved minority integration program for 2000 to 2007. The  European Union indicates this program has started and is partially funded  by foreign assistance.
Although some officials in the United Nations, the Russian government,  and local ethnic Russian communities have criticized the language  requirements for both citizenship and employment, Estonia has amended  its laws on citizenship and employment to bring the minimum language  requirements into conformity with accepted international standards. The  U.S. State Department indicates, however, that language training centers  available in the country lack qualified teachers, financial resources, and  training materials.
section_title: Latvia
paragraphs: Located on the Baltic Sea, Latvia has a population of 2.4 million. It shares  borders with two other countries seeking NATO membership—Estonia and  Lithuania—as well as with Russia. Latvia regained its independence in 1991  and held its first elections in 1993. About 30 percent of Latvia’s population  is composed of ethnic Russians.
subsections: section_title: Border Relations
paragraphs: While Latvia enjoys good relations with its Baltic and Nordic neighbors, it  has yet to resolve border demarcation issues with Russia, Belarus, and  Lithuania. Latvia has ratified a border agreement with Russia, but the  Russian parliament has yet to ratify the agreement. Latvia and Belarus have  signed and ratified a border agreement, but the technical details remain to  be implemented. According to Latvian officials, Latvia has completed its  technical demarcation of the border, but Belarus has not had sufficient  funding to complete its border demarcation. Latvia and the European  Union have now provided Belarus with funding to finish its border  demarcation, which the Latvian government hopes will be completed by  the end of 2002. Latvia and Lithuania have signed a maritime border  agreement to settle issues regarding oil exploration and fishing rights in the  Baltic Sea. While Lithuania has ratified the agreement, Latvia has not yet  done so.
section_title: Civil Liberties
paragraphs: The Latvian constitution provides for the protection of individual liberties  such as freedom of expression, the media, religion, and association, and the  government generally respects those rights. Both Latvian and Russian  language media sources operate in the country. The sources we reviewed  indicate some concern, however, that Latvia may restrict media freedom  through legislative restrictions on language content. For example, the Law  on Radio and Television requires that no more than 25 percent of private  broadcasts can be in a language other than Latvian. According to a Latvian  expert on human rights issues, this legislation is a violation of freedom of  expression in the media. The owner of a Russian language media outlet is  challenging the law to bring it before the Constitutional Court.
section_title: Human Rights
paragraphs: The Latvian government provides for and generally respects the human  rights of its citizens and has ratified many major international human rights  accords. The sources we reviewed, however, raised concerns about  inefficiency in the judicial system, police brutality, and trafficking in human  beings. First, the protection of human rights is considered to be impaired  by inefficiency in the judicial system, which has a large backlog of court  cases and, as a result, long pretrial detention periods often lasting over 1  year.   Detention centers, as well as the prisons, are overcrowded and in  poor condition. The causes of these problems are considered to be  insufficient funding, training, and equipment for judges and bailiffs as well  as an insufficient number of judges. The European Union noted in 2001,  however, that the Latvian government is committed to strengthening the  judicial system and is undertaking reforms to improve its efficiency. For  instance, the government is considering draft legislation to modernize the  law on criminal procedure and is introducing alternative sentencing  options to reduce the backlog.
Second, there are reports of police misconduct in connection with suspects  and detainees. The government acknowledges that police brutality exists,  but feels that the number of incidents is not above the norm. In 2000, the  government amended the Law on the Constitutional Court to allow  individuals to file complaints directly to that court regarding violations of  their rights.
Third, Latvia is a country of origin and transit for trafficking in human  beings, which the government acknowledges. The U.S. State Department  reported in 2002 that Latvia does not fully comply with minimum U.S.  standards for eliminating trafficking, but the government is undertaking  efforts to reach full compliance. While Latvia does not have a law defining  trafficking in human beings as a crime, the government has introduced  legislation to make this an offense.
section_title: Judicial Independence
paragraphs: While the Latvian constitution provides for an independent judiciary, there  is widespread concern that, in practice, the executive branch exerts  influence over the judiciary. The European Union noted in 2001 that the  Ministry of Justice has considerable control over judicial administration,  financing, and career paths. The government acknowledges that the  executive branch consolidates and writes the courts’ budget but indicates  that the courts are involved in this process. The Ministry of Justice is  preparing new laws on judicial powers, court administration, and the  establishment of a separate judicial council to oversee the courts.
section_title: Minority Rights
paragraphs: Latvia has adopted measures to improve the protection of minority rights  and has fulfilled recommendations on the protection of minority rights  promulgated by the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe.  As a result, the organization closed its monitoring mission in Latvia in  December 2001.
The international community, however, has had concerns over perceived  inadequate protection of ethnic minorities in Latvia, particularly with  regard to ethnic Russians who represent about 30 percent of the  population. The Latvian government has taken steps in three key areas to  alleviate domestic and international concerns about the protection of  minority rights. First, the Latvian government is addressing minority rights  through a program for integration of society in Latvia that covers civic  participation; political, social, and regional integration; and education,  language, and culture. The program established an Integration Foundation  to oversee the collection and allocation of funding for projects to support  the participation of ethnic minorities in civil society, social and regional  integration, economic development, and information campaigns. The  European Union noted in 2001 that the program and related authorized  funds represent considerable progress in promoting social integration.
Second, the government abolished a controversial election law requiring  candidates for local and parliamentary elections to prove their proficiency  in the Latvian language to be eligible to run in an election. The international  community had criticized this requirement and the European Court of  Human Rights rendered a verdict in 2002 against the Latvian government  for having removed the name of a candidate from the election lists because  the candidate did not meet the requirement. The European Court  concluded that Latvia infringed on the candidate’s right to stand in  elections and awarded monetary damages to the defendant. The  government subsequently abolished the law in May 2002.
Third, Latvia has been working to improve the naturalization process. This  process has been criticized for lack of information on procedures and high  naturalization fees. There are an estimated 520,000 noncitizens in Latvia,  mainly elderly ethnic Russians who speak limited Latvian; approximately  51,000 persons have received citizenship since 1995. The government  changed legislation in 2002 to lower the naturalization fee for low-income  groups and to exempt graduates of minority secondary schools from the  language proficiency naturalization test. It also created a professional  naturalization board—which sources consider competent—to administer  and score the naturalization exam. The board conducted a naturalization  information campaign throughout the country in the Latvian and Russian  languages between November 2001 and February 2002. It started a second  information campaign in coordination with the British embassy in July  2002. The number of noncitizens passing the naturalization exam has  increased.
Nevertheless, the Latvian government indicates that the 1998 Law on  Education requires that by 2004, 75 percent of state-funded secondary  education must be taught in the Latvian language. The government  indicates that this law provides a sufficient basis for ethnic minority  education because it balances the goal of minority integration into society  with sufficient opportunity for learning about respective ethnic cultures.  Further, the Ministry of Education states that it has developed four model  programs that are based on the proportion of classes held in ethnic  minority languages versus the Latvian language.
section_title: Lithuania
paragraphs: With 3.8 million people, Lithuania has the largest population of the three  applicant countries located on the Baltic Sea. Lithuania shares a border  with a NATO member—Poland—and with another country seeking NATO  membership—Latvia. Lithuania also borders the Kaliningrad Region of the  Russian Federation, which became separated from Russia when Lithuania  and Latvia regained their independence.  Lithuania regained its  independence in 1990, but the independence proclamation was not  generally recognized until 1991. The first elections were held in 1992.
subsections: section_title: Border Relations
paragraphs: The sources we reviewed indicate that Lithuania maintains good relations  with its neighbors. According to the Lithuanian government, the situation  of Kaliningrad on Lithuania’s border poses no military or political  implications for Lithuania’s pursuit of NATO membership. First, the  transport of Russian troops and arms between Russia and Kaliningrad has  been carried out in complete accord with the transportation agreements  signed by the two countries. Second, since 1995 a number of  intergovernmental agreements have been undertaken to address relations  with Kaliningrad and Russia. For example, a 1999 intergovernmental  agreement on cooperation between regional and local authorities of  Lithuania and Kaliningrad led to the establishment in 2000 of a bilateral  Lithuanian-Kaliningrad Region Cooperation Council to support cooperative  efforts on the environment, border control, cross-border cooperation,  culture, and health care.
The key issue for Russia is the ease or freedom with which residents of  Kaliningrad will be able to travel to and from Russia once Lithuania joins  the European Union. The European Union requires its member countries to  maintain strict border controls, and unless the requirements are changed,  residents of Kaliningrad would have to obtain visas to travel between  Kaliningrad and the rest of Russia. According to media reports, the  European Union and Russia reached agreement on November 11, 2002, to  allow Russians traveling to and from Kaliningrad to use a special multiple- entry travel document, which is expected to go into effect in 2003.
Kaliningrad covers about 15,000 square kilometers and has just under 1 million people.
section_title: Corruption
paragraphs: Corruption and bribery in Lithuania are serious concerns. According to the  European Union, the government reported that corruption occurs mainly in  the field of public procurement and customs, with the most frequent type  of corruption being administrative corruption within the government.  Freedom House concluded in 2001 that corruption is one of the major  obstacles to business development in Lithuania.
The government has recently made progress in the fight against corruption  by pursuing several anticorruption measures. First, the Special  Investigation Service—the agency established in 1997 to coordinate  anticorruption efforts—strengthened its capabilities by (1) improving its  organizational structure and (2) providing specialized training and adopting  a code of honor for its officers. The European Union reports that the  service has achieved considerable results in fighting corruption in  Lithuania’s budgetary, municipal, and financial institutions as well as  among civil servants working in privatization, customs, law enforcement,  and other areas.
In addition, the government has developed a number of anticorruption  measures, including adoption in September 2001 of a comprehensive  “National Anti-Corruption Strategy,” which is a long-term project that  specified the government’s main directions and priorities in the fight  against corruption. Planned implementation of that strategy over a 7-year  period affects most areas of public administration, focusing on prevention  and investigation of corruption, enforcement of anticorruption laws, and  raising public awareness. Lithuania also, among other things, established a  new unit within the Customs Department to investigate violations made by  customs officials and has been participating in international anticorruption  organizations such as the Council of Europe Group of States Against  Corruption. The European Union reported in 2001, however, that further  progress is needed in certain areas such as strengthening public  administration and ensuring the transparency of administrative procedures  to reduce administrative corruption.
section_title: Human Rights
paragraphs: The Lithuanian constitution provides for the protection of human rights for  its citizens, and the government generally respects those rights. While the  sources we reviewed raised several concerns about human rights, the  government has been working to address each problem. The concerns  raised include police brutality, poor prison conditions, violence and  discrimination against women, child abuse, and trafficking in human  beings. The Lithuanian government has been addressing these and related  human rights issues through such efforts as (1) improving safeguards that  can prevent the ill-treatment of persons detained by the police; (2)  reconstructing correction facilities and improving the poor—and life- threatening—conditions of prisons; (3) ratifying the United Nations  Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against  Women; and (4) establishing a Children’s Rights Ombudsman in 2000 to  control the implementation of relevant laws, oversee local children’s rights  protection services, and investigate complaints. While institutional  mechanisms for coping with discrimination and violence against women  are developing slowly, the Children’s Rights Ombudsman has generated  some improvements in dealing with child abuse.
According to the U.S. State Department, Lithuania is a country of origin,  transit, and destination for trafficking in human beings. To fight that  trafficking, Lithuania established an organized crime investigation service  in 1997 in the police department. The government also has developed an  antitrafficking program for 2002-04; an interministerial commission is to be  established to coordinate implementation of that program. In 2002, the U.S.  State Department determined that Lithuania fully complied with U.S.  minimum standards for fighting trafficking. That determination means that  a government has criminalized trafficking in human beings, successfully  prosecuted the offense, and provided a wide range of protective services to  victims.
section_title: Judicial Independence
paragraphs: The constitution guarantees the independence of the judiciary, including  the independence of judges and the separation of powers. The sources we  reviewed, however, indicate that executive involvement in the court’s  budget process and the poor working conditions of the courts remain  constraints on judicial independence. In 1999, a Constitutional Court ruling  mandated restructuring of the judiciary to reduce the executive’s undue  influence over judges. According to the Open Society Institute, executive  involvement in the budgeting process of the courts and the allocation of  funds remains significant, and the budget process is insufficiently  transparent. The conditions of the courts may also affect judicial  independence because the courts are underfunded, working conditions are  poor, and caseloads are heavy due to a lack of qualified judges. And in 2001,  the Constitutional Court ruled that a parliamentary decision to significantly  reduce judges’ salaries was unconstitutional because it could threaten the  financial independence of the judges.
While some progress has occurred, the European Union noted in 2001 that  Lithuania needed to (1) adopt a new Law on Courts to remove executive  influence from both the budget process and the administration of the  judiciary, (2) provide adequate budgetary resources and managerial  competence, (3) further improve the court system in areas such as working  conditions for staff, and (4) improve the qualifications of specialized judges  and prosecutors through additional training. Adoption of a new Law on  Courts is a serious concern because the judicial system remains in a state  of flux without a new law, enabling continued executive influence in the  budget process and other areas of court administration. Pending adoption  of a new Law on Courts, the Department of Courts, under the Ministry of  Justice, performs some administrative tasks regarding the management of  the courts.
section_title: Minority Rights
paragraphs: Minority ethnic groups comprise about 20 percent of the Lithuanian  population. Our sources indicate that the protection of minorities is  satisfactory overall. Lithuania also has signed and ratified major  international treaties addressing racial and ethnic discrimination and the  rights of minorities, including the Framework Convention on Protection of  National Minorities. Concerns were expressed, however, that the Roma  population—although a relatively small community of about 3,000  people—faces serious problems in education, housing, and health. The  Lithuanian government has established a public center for the Roma in  Vilnius, the capital city, and a new Roma Integration Program 2000-2004 to  help the Roma integrate into Lithuanian society.
section_title: Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia
paragraphs: The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (Macedonia) is a landlocked  country of 2 million people. Situated on the southern part of the Balkan  peninsula, it borders one NATO member—Greece—and two other  countries seeking NATO membership—Albania and Bulgaria—as well as  the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Macedonia declared its independence  from the former Republic of Yugoslavia in late 1991. In early 2001, ethnic  Albanian rebels within Macedonia—the National Liberation Army— attacked Macedonian police outposts, leading to a 6-month armed conflict  between ethnic Albanian guerillas and Macedonian security forces. The  conflict ended with the signing of the Ohrid Framework Agreement on  August 13, 2001, by Macedonia’s four main political parties, two of which  were ethnic Albanian parties. NATO forces were brought in to oversee the  peace plan and to disarm the Albanian liberation forces. A NATO force  remains deployed in Macedonia to provide security for international  civilian monitors of the peace agreement.
subsections: section_title: Democracy and the Rule of Law
paragraphs: The constitution guarantees the principles of democracy, including free and  fair elections. Although the sources we reviewed indicate that the effective  implementation of democratic institutions has been difficult in Macedonia,  the interim government has taken several steps to implement the political  provisions of the Ohrid Framework Agreement. These steps include the  ratification of 15 constitutional amendments that call for political reforms  and the adoption of an amnesty law for former ethnic Albanian rebels that  covers crimes for high treason, armed rebellion, mutiny, and conspiracy  against the state. Currently, the interim government is slowly implementing  the statutory reforms required for the full implementation of the  agreement.
Although implementation of the agreement’s political reforms has been  slow, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe concluded  that the parliamentary elections of September 15, 2002—an integral  component of the Ohrid Framework Agreement—were largely free of  ethnic violence and generally in line with international standards. The  organization stated that this election represents a significant improvement  over recent elections and a major contribution toward restoring a  sustainable political process in the country. The new election system  adopted earlier in 2002 was highlighted by the organization’s international  observation mission as a major contributor to a successful September 2002  election process. As of September 16, 2002, unofficial election results  indicated that Macedonia’s Social Democrats received nearly two-thirds of  the vote and the interim government coalition of two nationalist parties— one Albanian, the other Macedonian—was not reelected.   According to  media reports, the Albanian parties were satisfied with the high voter  turnout and the general conduct of the elections, which experienced few  irregularities. The issue that is pending is how the new government will be  formed and if the Social Democrats will share power with the new Albanian  party led by a former Albanian rebel leader.
section_title: Human Rights
paragraphs: The constitution provides for a broad set of human rights. The human  rights situation in Macedonia, however, deteriorated significantly during  the internal conflict in 2001; the government was unable to provide  protection against human rights violations and violated those rights in  some instances. According to the sources we reviewed, although the  internal conflict has ended, serious concerns remain with regard to police  misconduct and violence as well as trafficking in human beings.
Police misconduct was a serious problem during the conflict and still  remains a concern. During the conflict, police and security forces violated  citizens’ constitutional rights, particularly with regard to ethnic Albanians.  According to the International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights, there  is no adequate legal recourse in Macedonia for unlawful or irregular police  activities. In addition, unofficial paramilitary organizations that exist under  the control of the Minister of the Interior are of serious concern to the  government and the international community.
Trafficking in human beings is a serious problem. Macedonia is a country of  transit and destination for such trafficking. To address the trafficking  problem, the government adopted a new law in 2002 that criminalizes  trafficking in human beings and actions associated with that trafficking.  According to the U.S. State Department, the new law has resulted in a  number of arrests. The U.S. State Department also notes that the  government has devoted a significant amount of resources to  antitrafficking programs, such as that of an interministerial working group  devoted to legal reform and to the creation of a special police unit  dedicated to antitrafficking efforts.
According to the U.S. State Department, the Macedonian government  offers limited support for victims of domestic violence and relies heavily on  international donor aid to maintain that limited support. In addition,  sources indicate that lingering patriarchal social attitudes limit women’s  participation in the economy, the government, and political life. Women’s  participation in politics is disproportionately low. In Muslim communities,  women are deprived of their electoral rights due to the practice of “family  vote” through which men vote on behalf of the women in their family.  Efforts to address these issues are hampered by insufficient monitoring  procedures and a lack of public awareness, particularly with regard to  domestic violence.
section_title: Minority Rights
paragraphs: The constitution protects the right of minorities to preserve and express  their cultural, religious, and linguistic identities, including the right to  primary and secondary education in the minority language. Sources we  reviewed, however, indicate that societal discrimination against  minorities—including Roma, Albanians, Turks, and Serbs—remains a  problem. Turks and Roma complain of governmental, societal, and cultural  discrimination, but the most explosive source of ethnic tension is the  country’s large Albanian minority. The problem of discrimination against  minorities was addressed by the August 13, 2001, Ohrid Framework  Agreement, which contains broad constitutional and legislative reforms  focused on greater minority rights and increased minority participation in  the domestic police force and other governmental institutions. However,  according to the New York University School of Law, which monitors  constitutional issues in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union,  implementation of the reforms in the Ohrid Framework Agreement has  been slow.
section_title: Romania
paragraphs: With nearly 22 million people, Romania is the most populous of the nine  countries aspiring to NATO membership. Situated on the Black Sea,  Romania is also bordered by one NATO member—Hungary—as well as  Moldova, Ukraine, and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Bulgaria, on  Romania’s southern border, is also seeking membership in NATO. While  Romania was slow to implement reforms after it adopted its new  constitution in 1991, the government elected in November 2000 has been  aggressively pursuing the adoption and implementation of political,  economic, and defense reforms.
subsections: section_title: Border Relations
paragraphs: Romania has worked to establish harmonious and constructive  relationships with other countries on a bilateral, trilateral, and regional  basis. The sources we reviewed indicate that Romania has concluded  numerous treaties on political, economic, and security issues. Romania  also has participated in several regional organizations and activities, such  as two committees that address regional cooperation in defense matters— the South Eastern Europe Defense Ministerial Coordination Committee  and the Political-Military Steering Committee of the Multinational Peace  Force South Eastern Europe, both of which it is chairing for 2001 to 2003.  Romania also participates in the South Eastern Europe Cooperation  Process, a subregional group aimed at implementing measures to (1)  strengthen stability, security, and good neighborly relations; (2) intensify  multilateral economic, commercial, and cultural cooperation; and (3)  combat organized crime, terrorism, and trafficking in drugs and arms.
Recently, however, some tensions have arisen with Moldova, one of the  countries Romania borders. Romania was the first country to recognize the  independence of the Republic of Moldova, a country with which it shares a  heritage of language, culture, and traditions. The two countries had a good  relationship during the 1990s. According to a January 2002 assessment in  Jane’s Intelligence Review, and recent media reports, Moldova’s election in  2000 of a traditional communist as president has created tensions with  Romania due to Molodovan policies and political positions reminiscent of  the Soviet era.
Another neighboring country, Hungary, adopted a Status Law passed by the  Hungarian Parliament in June 2001, which gave ethnic Hungarians in other  countries the right to work in Hungary for 3 months each year as well as  health, transportation, and education benefits. That law strained Hungary’s  relationship with some neighbors—in particular, Romania and Slovakia— because Hungary appeared to be trying to spread its political jurisdiction to  the citizens of other countries and, in doing so, discriminating against non- Hungarians in those countries. However, Romania and Hungary have since  concluded a Memorandum of Understanding addressing the issue, thereby  muting tensions between them.
section_title: Civil Liberties
paragraphs: Romania has been generally successful in providing for and protecting civil  liberties. The sources we reviewed indicate that the constitution and laws  generally protect civil liberties and that the government generally respects  those protections. Romania enjoys a diverse media sector, with 15 national  daily newspapers and many more local papers—most of which are  private—as well as more than 70 private television channels and more than  150 private radio stations, according to the European Union.
Nevertheless, certain legal provisions have raised concerns about possible  limits to freedom of expression and the media as well as freedom of  religion. While the constitution provides for freedom of expression and the  media, it prohibits “defamation of the country” and “offense to authority.”  Because libel and slander are criminal offenses that can bring prison  sentences, there is some concern that such legal provisions may be used to  intimidate the media. For example, Human Rights Watch reported in 2002  that these kinds of constitutional curbs on free expression in Romania  were used by authorities to interfere with journalists’ work. The European  Union noted in 2001 that no progress had been made during the previous  year in addressing its own concerns about such legal provisions in  Romania.
Religious freedom is also constitutionally protected and generally  respected by the government, but religious groups must register with the  state to be recognized as a religion. Recognition as a religion enables  religious groups to teach religion in public schools, receive funds to build  churches, pay clergy salaries with state funds, subsidize clergy’s housing  with state funds, broadcast religious programming, and enjoy tax-exempt  status. While about 86 percent of Romanians are adherents of the  Romanian Orthodox Church, the government officially recognizes 15  religions. New minority religious groups have reported, however, some  impediments to registration.
section_title: Human Rights
paragraphs: The sources we reviewed indicate that the constitution guarantees human  rights and that the government generally respects those rights. Several  serious problems remain, however, including (1) police brutality toward  detainees and prisoners; (2) generally harsh and overcrowded prison  conditions; (3) weak enforcement of constitutional protections against  discrimination, especially for women and the Roma population; (4)  trafficking in human beings as a country of origin and transit; (5) violence  against women; and (6) issues concerning institutionalized children. For  example, the European Union reported in 2001 that cases of inhuman and  degrading treatment by the police continued to be reported by human  rights organizations, that prisons were extremely overcrowded, and that  prison conditions overall were often extremely poor. A particular problem  cited was the excessive length of pretrial detention periods that could last  as long as half of a prison sentence.
Many government actions—most of them relatively recent, however—are  under way to address these problems. For example, the government  adopted the operating procedures for an ombudsman office in 1997 to  protect citizens against abusive or random acts by public officials and has  ratified major international human rights conventions. According to the  European Union, government efforts to address problems in prison  conditions have led to some improvements.
Further, the U.S. State Department noted in 2002 that Romania was making  a significant effort to eliminate trafficking in human beings, although the  country was not yet in full compliance with the U.S. minimum standards for  doing so. In 2001, the European Union also concluded that there was some  progress in addressing the needs and care of institutionalized children, but  more was needed. The Romanian government included provisions to  address both the trafficking and adoption issues in its April 2002 action  plan for preparation for NATO membership.
section_title: Judicial Independence
paragraphs: The sources we reviewed indicate that the constitution and related  legislation generally provide for an independent judiciary. These sources  also indicate, however, that the judiciary is not sufficiently independent  from the executive branch or political influence and that it suffers from  endemic corruption. The government has been implementing reforms to  address these issues, but because the reforms are generally recent there  has been little, if any, opportunity as yet for their implementation.
Executive responsibilities over the judicial branch, in particular, are  considered intrusive and the most serious threat to judicial independence.  The Ministry of Justice (1) controls the judicial branch’s budget process;  (2) is involved in the appointment, evaluation, promotion, and disciplining  of judges—particularly through its (nonvoting) chairmanship of the  Superior Council of the Magistracy, which makes those decisions; and (3) is  responsible for the training of judges. Because of the role of the Ministry of  Justice, some concern also has been expressed about the potential for  political influence over the judiciary.
According to the sources we reviewed, the current Romanian government  is addressing these concerns about judicial independence by pursuing  policy and organizational changes such as (1) enhancing judicial  independence through statutory changes that strengthen the role of the  Superior Council of the Magistracy and make it an autonomous public  institution; (2) adopting a new Code of Conduct for Magistrates that has  been distributed to all courts of appeal and prosecutors’ offices; (3)  creating the legal framework to establish specialized courts for cases  involving minors as well as labor, commercial, fiscal, and administrative  issues; (4) providing professional training for judges and court clerks; and  (5) amending the Criminal Procedure Code to address weaknesses in the  state prosecution system. The government also is trying to consolidate the  status of judges by, among other things, providing them with appropriate  wages and social protection as well as both initial and lifelong training. And  in its efforts to fight corruption, the government is developing a pilot  project for the random assignment of court cases to help prevent judicial  corruption.
section_title: Minority Rights
paragraphs: The constitution protects the rights of national minorities and calls on the  state to create an environment in which minority groups can preserve,  develop, and express their identity without discrimination. The  constitution and electoral laws allow recognized ethnic minorities one  representative in the Chamber of Deputies (one of the two houses of  Parliament) if the minority’s political organization obtains at least 5 percent  of the average number of valid votes needed to elect a deputy outright.  Organizations representing 18 minority groups elected deputies under this  provision in 2000. The constitution and electoral law, however, provide the  Roma minority population with one guaranteed seat in parliament, while  the Hungarian minority population has obtained parliamentary  representation through the normal election process.
Nevertheless, concerns have been raised about the effectiveness of  Romania’s achievements in protecting minority rights. The sources we  reviewed indicate that while Romania provides institutional protections for  minorities, respect for minority rights in practice and the effectiveness of  the implementation of related programs, is mixed or weak.
The sources we reviewed also indicate that Romania’s Roma population  endures significant hardships and remains subject to widespread  discrimination. The European Union reported in 2001 that (1) instances of  police harassment have been documented against individuals and even  entire Roma communities; (2) the Roma face difficulties in gaining access  to schools, medical care, and social assistance; (3) the Roma are often  banned from public places; and (4) despite its illegality, a number of job  advertisements explicitly exclude Roma applicants. Roma are particularly  vulnerable to the effects of the generally poor economic conditions in  Romania.
Romania launched a series of new initiatives in 2000 to address concerns  about the protection of minority rights and the problems that the Roma  face. In the fall of 2000, Romania adopted an ordinance on the prevention  and punishment of all forms of discrimination that creates a National  Council to Prevent and Combat Discrimination. In April 2001, the  government adopted a long-term initiative called the National Strategy for  Improving the Condition of Roma. A law passed that same month on public  administration also allows the use of minority languages in  communications with public authorities when the minority population is  more than 20 percent of the local community. Because these are recent  initiatives—both the National Council and the new Strategy (a 10-year  program) were scheduled for implementation some time in 2002—there  has been limited, if any, opportunity for implementation. There also is  concern that the Roma may not benefit from the language provisions  because they do not comprise more than 20 percent of the population in  any location.
section_title: Social Justice
paragraphs: The government has been working to address some important social justice  issues. For example, recent laws have been passed to address poverty and  the restitution of property. Starting in January 2002, a family’s income was  to be supplemented with government grants to provide a minimum income  guarantee. The Real Estate Restitution Law went into effect in 2001, setting  out the basic principles and procedures for the restitution of properties  forcibly taken by the communist government and addressing weaknesses  in prior legal provisions.
section_title: Slovakia
paragraphs: With a population of 5.4 million people, Slovakia borders the three most  recent members of NATO—Poland, the Czech Republic, and Hungary—and  also shares borders with Austria to the west and Ukraine to the east. Once  part of the former Czechoslovakia, Slovakia became an independent state  in 1993.
subsections: section_title: Democracy and the Rule of Law
paragraphs: The international community, and NATO in particular, watched the most  recent parliamentary election in Slovakia with great interest and concern  because the party leading in the polls—the Movement for a Democratic  Slovakia—had failed to show commitment to democracy and the rule of  law when it was last in power. Slovakia held that election September 20 and  21, 2002. Although the Movement for a Democratic Slovakia party did win a  plurality with 19.5 percent of the votes, it could not find partners to  form a coalition government. As a result, Slovakia’s President asked the  leader of the Slovak Democratic and Christian Union party to form the next  coalition government. U.S. and European officials have expressed  satisfaction with the results.
section_title: Human Rights
paragraphs: The Slovak constitution provides for the protection of human rights and the  government generally respects those rights. In addition, Slovakia’s legal  system complies with international human rights standards. In 2001, the  constitution was amended to establish the legal basis for an ombudsman  office to protect fundamental human rights in cases where governmental  administrative units violate the legal system or the rule of law. Parliament  elected the first ombudsman in March 2002.
Nevertheless, concerns have been raised about poor police treatment of  persons detained for trial, about long pretrial detention of the accused due  to a large backlog of court cases, and about trafficking in human beings.  The sources we reviewed reported ill-treatment of detainees—especially  ethnic Roma—at the hands of the police. The European Union noted in  2001 that there is an urgent need to improve police recruitment and  establish an effective system to handle complaints against the police.
A backlog of court cases leading to long pretrial detention periods is  another human rights concern, according to Freedom House. For example,  the European Court of Human Rights ruled in 2000 that the detention  period of an individual in a mental hospital violated the right to a speedy  trial. And the European Union reported in 2001 that some court  proceedings have exceeded the 3-year statute of limitations. The  government has initiated a judicial reform plan, which includes an  amendment to the Civil Procedures Act aimed at reducing the length of  judicial proceedings by broadening the mandate of district courts and by  limiting appeals to regional courts.
Slovakia also is a country of origin and transit for trafficking in human  beings. Although the government established a special branch in 2001 in  the Office for the Fight Against Organized Crime to combat organized  crime and trafficking in human beings, the European Union concluded in  2001 that the government had made only limited progress in fighting  trafficking in human beings.
section_title: Judicial Independence
paragraphs: Slovakia’s constitution provides for an independent judiciary, but there are  concerns about executive influence over the judicial system through  administrative, personnel, and budget oversight. To address these  concerns, a constitutional amendment was passed in 2001 establishing an  independent Judicial Council to carry out administrative functions for the  judiciary. This amendment also expands the scope of the Constitutional  Court by providing greater access to the court by individuals and allowing  the court to award damages to individuals whose rights are violated.
section_title: Minority Rights
paragraphs: The constitution provides for the protection of minority rights and the  government generally respects those rights. Slovak legislation also  provides a legal framework that ensures that ethnic minorities enjoy the  same rights as ethnic Slovak citizens. Nevertheless, serious problems  regarding societal discrimination against the Roma have been reported.  Roma suffer from poverty, violence, and abuse as well as social  discrimination in housing, health care, social services, public  administration, education, and employment. To address the Roma  situation, the government adopted a Roma strategy in 2000 that funds  programs in housing, infrastructure, education and training, employment,  and health at the local and national levels.
section_title: Slovenia
paragraphs: A country of 2 million people, Slovenia was once part of the former  Republic of Yugoslavia. It shares borders with two NATO members—Italy  to the west and Hungary to the east—as well as with Croatia to the south  and Austria to the north. Slovenia declared its independence in June 1991,  adopted its own constitution in December 1991, and held its first free  elections as an independent country a year later.
subsections: section_title: Border Relations
paragraphs: Slovenia’s relations with its neighbors are generally harmonious and  cooperative. Border definition issues and issues related to the succession  to the former Republic of Yugoslavia are generally being addressed through  cooperative efforts. There has recently been heightened tension, however,  between Slovenia and Croatia. While Slovenia and Croatia had reached  agreements on border and other issues resulting from their independence,  Croatia has yet to ratify agreement on borders between the two countries.  According to recent media reports, Croatia cannot gain parliamentary  support to ratify the border agreement and wants new negotiations, which  Slovenia has refused. There is also some dispute over Croatia’s recent  requirement that oil transported overland through Croatia must be moved  through strictly defined routes. According to media reports, Slovenia has  been attempting to address the oil transport issue bilaterally, but it also has  considered filing a complaint with the World Trade Organization to resolve  the issue.
section_title: Civil Liberties
paragraphs: Slovenia has been successful in protecting civil liberties. The sources we  reviewed indicate that the constitutional guarantees of freedom of thought,  speech, public association, the media, religion, and equality are generally  respected by the government. The media are diverse and enjoy full  freedom, with both publicly and privately owned media in existence. Some  sources note, however, that insulting a public official is prohibited.  According to an official at the Ministry of Justice, while there have been  some cases of individuals suing the media for insulting public officials,  public officials have won in only a few cases and not much has been  awarded to those winners. The legal issue in these cases is that the law  does not define “insult.”
section_title: Human Rights
paragraphs: The sources we reviewed indicate that Slovenia’s constitution broadly  protects human rights and freedoms, and guarantees the rights of the  disabled. The government respects those human rights guarantees and has  an Ombudsman for Human Rights. According to government officials,  Slovenia also is very active internationally in facilitating the protection of  human rights through the efforts of such groups as the Council of Europe,  the United Nations, and an informal group of states known as the Human  Security Network, which combines efforts to promote humanitarian and  security issues. Some concerns have been expressed, however, about (1)  the abuse of persons in custody, (2) trafficking in human beings, and (3) the  legal definition of torture.
The sources we reviewed raised some concerns about excessive police  force against persons in custody. In its 2001 Annual Report, Slovenia’s  Ombudsman for Human Rights reported that the prisons and detention  centers were overcrowded, and that persons detained (but not yet  convicted) were subjected to more severe conditions than convicted  prisoners.
Slovenia is both a transit and destination country for trafficking in human  beings. The 2002 U.S. State Department’s Trafficking in Persons Report  found that Slovenia is making significant efforts to achieve compliance  with minimum U.S. standards for fighting trafficking, but that the country  does not yet fully comply with those standards. The report notes that  Slovenia lacks a law specifically prohibiting trafficking. Although persons  can be prosecuted under related offenses, prosecutors find it difficult to get  convictions under those related laws. The report also notes that the  government has made progress in monitoring its borders and consequently  has reduced illegal migration considerably. The government has named a  National Coordinator for Trafficking in Persons and has formed an  interagency working group that adopted a national strategy to combat  trafficking.
Concern also has been raised about Slovenia’s ability to prosecute persons  accused of torture. The United Nations Committee Against Torture has  recommended revision of Slovenia’s statutory definition of torture because  it was not considered to be broad enough to prevent people guilty of  torture from escaping punishment.
section_title: Minority Rights
paragraphs: Slovenia’s constitution protects minority rights and the government  generally respects those rights. The European Union notes that Slovenia  has ratified major international instruments in the field of protection for  minorities, and it has established a Government Office for National  Minorities to monitor implementation of legislation protecting minority  rights and to fund minority language media and culture.
Nevertheless, Slovenia’s constitution guarantees minority rights to  Hungarians and Italians, thereby guaranteeing each group representation in  the parliament as well as rights to bilingual government administration and  bilingual education. In contrast, however, the constitution recognizes that  the Roma community exists and stipulates that their rights should be  regulated by separate law, a law which, according to a Ministry of Justice  official, has now been passed. No other ethnic minorities are specified for  similar kinds of constitutional protections. Slovenian government officials  explained that the constitutional guarantees to Hungarians and Italians  originated in 1974 under the former Republic of Yugoslavia and were  carried over to the new Slovenian constitution, which was adopted in 1991.
section_title: Independent Assessments of Progress toward Democracy
paragraphs: NATO’s political goals for countries seeking membership focus on  developing democratic institutions and principles. This appendix provides  the results of two different analyses of democracy compiled by Freedom  House and an assessment by the European Union for seven of the nine  countries seeking NATO membership that are also candidates for  membership in the European Union. (Albania and the Former Yugoslav  Republic of Macedonia are not yet official candidates for membership in  the European Union.) We are providing the results of these independent  assessments, but we did not evaluate the methodologies for producing  these results or the application of the methodologies.
Analyses of Democracy Freedom House produces two different analyses of development toward  democracy in countries. One analysis measures democratic freedom in  over 200 countries and territories, while the other measures progress  toward democracy in those countries transitioning from communist  systems.
subsections: section_title: The European Union Assesses Implementation of Its Political Requirements
paragraphs: The European Union assesses candidate countries in terms of their  implementation of the union’s political requirements that countries must  have achieved stability of institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of  law, human rights, and respect for and protection of minorities. Table 6  provides the European Union’s 2001 political assessment for seven of the  nine countries seeking NATO membership, including its assessment of  what progress had occurred since the previous report and what kinds of improvements were still needed. (Albania and the Former Yugoslav  Republic of Macedonia are not assessed because they are not yet official  candidates for membership in the European Union.) As the table shows, all  seven countries have fulfilled the European Union’s political requirements,  but the European Union has identified areas in which each country must  continue to improve.
section_title: Independent Assessments of Economic Development
paragraphs: One of the goals of NATO’s Membership Action Plan is the commitment to  promoting stability through economic liberty. This appendix provides  information on two studies that produce numerical measures of economic  freedom—the Fraser Institute’s Economic Freedom of the World index and  The Heritage Foundation and The Wall Street Journal’s Index of Economic  Freedom. A third study by Freedom House provides numerical measures of  economic liberalization. This appendix also provides information on the  European Union’s assessments of development toward a free-market  economy in countries seeking NATO membership that are also preparing  for membership in the European Union. We are providing the results of  these independent assessments, but we did not evaluate the methodologies  for producing these results or the application of the methodologies.
subsections: section_title: Two Studies Rate Economic Freedom
paragraphs: Currently there are two studies that produce numerical measures of  economic freedom—the Fraser Institute’s 2002 Economic Freedom of the  World index, which covers 123 countries for the year 2000, and The  Heritage Foundation and The Wall Street Journal’s 2002 Index of  Economic Freedom, which covers 156 countries for the year beginning July  2000.
Both indexes are revised annually and are based on numerous measures or  indicators that are grouped together into areas of economic freedom. To  measure economic freedom, the 2002 Fraser Index studied 21 factors— some of which include multiple components—that fall into five  categories: (1) size of government expenditures, taxes, and enterprises;  (2) legal structure and security of property rights; (3) sound money; (4)  freedom to trade with foreigners; and (5) regulation of credit, labor, and  business. Each country’s overall score for economic freedom is based on  the average of its scores in each of these five areas. Scores range from 0 to  10, with 10 indicating the highest degree of economic freedom.
To measure economic freedom, the 2002 Heritage/The Wall Street Journal  index studied 50 independent economic variables that fall into 10 broad  categories, or factors, of economic freedom: (1) trade policy, (2) fiscal  burden of government, (3) government intervention in the economy, (4)  monetary policy, (5) capital flows and foreign investment, (6) banking and  finance, (7) wages and prices, (8) property rights, (9) regulation, and (10)  black market activity. Each country’s overall score for economic freedom is  based on the average of its scores in each of these 10 areas. The index  scores countries from 1 to 5, with 1 indicating an assessment of “most free.”  We transformed this ranking so that the higher number implies more  economic freedom.
Figure 2 presents the ratings of countries under both the Fraser index and  the Heritage/The Wall Street Journal index for each of the nine countries  seeking NATO membership and each of NATO’s current members. As the  figure indicates, the closer a country’s location toward the upper right of  the graph, the higher the combined rating of economic freedom. For  example, the two indexes together give the United States, followed by the  United Kingdom, the highest score for economic freedom. In constructing  figure 2, we transformed the Heritage/The Wall Street Journal ratings so  that 0 refers to the least economic freedom and 4 to the most economic  freedom. The Fraser index rates countries from 0 (least economic  freedom) to 10 (most economic freedom). Since none of the countries  scored less than 4.7, we truncated the horizontal axis between 0 and 5.
section_title: Rating of Economic Liberalization
paragraphs: Freedom House publishes an assessment of progress toward economic  liberalization in the 27 countries of central and eastern Europe and the  former republics of the Soviet Union. Nations in Transit 2002, the current  report, provides measures of the progress and setbacks in economic  reform in the 27 countries. The report scores economic liberalization on  the basis of an average of ratings for privatization, macroeconomic policy,  and microeconomic policy. On the basis of these scores, countries are  divided into three categories: consolidated market economies, transitional  economies, and consolidated statist economies. Table 7 provides the scores  and ratings for each of the nine countries seeking NATO membership and  the three most recent NATO members. As the table shows, six of the  countries seeking membership are categorized as consolidated market  economies and three are categorized as transitional economies.
section_title: The European Union Assesses Development toward Market Economies
paragraphs: The European Union annually assesses the extent to which countries  preparing for membership in the European Union meet the requirements  for accession. Part of that assessment involves a determination of the  extent to which the economy is (1) a functioning market-based economy  and (2) has the capacity to cope with the competitive pressures and market  forces within the European Union. Table 8 provides the European Union’s  2001 economic assessment for seven of the nine countries seeking NATO  membership. (Albania and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia are  not assessed because they are not yet official candidates for membership in  the European Union.) As the table shows, five of the seven countries that  are candidates for membership in the European Union have already been  assessed as having a functioning market economy, one is close to being a  functioning market economy, and one is making progress toward a market  economy.
section_title: GAO’s Mission
paragraphs: The General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress, exists to  support Congress in meeting its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve  the performance and accountability of the federal government for the American  people. GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and  policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help  Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s  commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of accountability,  integrity, and reliability.
section_title: Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony
paragraphs: The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost is  through the Internet. GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov) contains abstracts and full- text files of current reports and testimony and an expanding archive of older  products. The Web site features a search engine to help you locate documents  using key words and phrases. You can print these documents in their entirety,  including charts and other graphics.
Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and  correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as “Today’s Reports,” on its Web site  daily. The list contains links to the full-text document files. To have GAO e-mail this  list to you every afternoon, go to www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to daily E-mail alert for newly released products” under the GAO Reports heading.
subsections: section_title: Order by Mail or Phone
section_title: To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs
section_title: Public Affairs