93 



7 

 ventures are best suited to the needs of the Russians and their financial capability, as well as their 



managerial ability. 



One fallacy I have noted in American businessmen's approach to ventures in Russia is their singular 

 focus. Perhaps this is acceptable here where supplies are more or less assured and where research 

 indicates there is a market for the product. That cannot be taken for granted in Russia. An 

 integrated approach seems best, with a good understanding of what is upstream and what the 

 downstream looks like, too. In fact, the best successes I know of involve the package approach, not 

 just simply selling a sin^e product 



Besides providing some financial assurance to small businessmen interested in Russia's agriculture, 

 I feel our government could provide valuable assistance by sending there two types of advisors from 

 the private sector. Neither would have anything to sell. They would go to Russia only to offer 

 themselves and their knowledge, experience and willingness to learn. Young people, young farmers 

 like in the Young Farmer-to-Farmer bilateral exchange program that used to exist between the U.S. 

 and USSR, would be one type. Retired farmers or retired extension agents would be the other kind 

 of person who could lend invaluable help. Some of this is being broached by the Peace Corps, but 

 more could be done in the way of targeting specific needs and regions. It is worth noting we have 

 a special resource for programs sudi as this. In some farming communities here in America there 

 are pockets of ethnic groups and nationalities who have first generation relatives in Russia who live 

 in farming villages and with whom free and open contact is now possible. 



U.S. agricultural interests are not being well served in most of the Former Soviet Union. They 

 cannot be, for only our embassy in Moscow has an OfBce of Agricultural Affairs. The Baltic states 



68-443 0-93-4 



