132 



Mr. Penny. Is AKKOR also a bypass or do you share the view 

 of Mr. Joseph that AKKOR is just a different form of bureaucracy? 



Mr. Infanger. AKKOR would be difficult for you, Mr. Chairman, 

 to appreciate. It is something like having the American Farm Bu- 

 reau officed in the south building of the Department of Agriculture. 

 AKKOR is officed within the Ministry of Agriculture and it receives 

 state budget support although it represents private farmers. 



But it is clearly a reform organization with a political agenda of 

 change. It faces political constraints and it is developing a bureau- 

 cratic mode that is not appreciated out in the oblasts. 



And there is lots of flak in the newspapers, and I receive it 

 through visits from AKKOR members in my office to talk about dif- 

 ferent kinds of projects. It is the same sort of complaints that you 

 would hear out in the States about any large bureaucracy. 



I don't feel that is an excuse not to work with them. They are 

 the single organization in Russia which ties the private farmer in 

 Siberia to the private farmer in Krasnodar, and if you can't work 

 with AKKOR, you are just giving up an opportunity to work with 

 the single organization that is linked across the country. 



Mr. Penny. Does the agricultural reform agenda have any allies 

 within the Parliament? And, if so, what efforts are being under- 

 taken at that level to produce some type of agrarian reform legisla- 

 tion? 



Mr. Infanger. It is certainly my impression that the Minister of 

 Agriculture enjoys President Yeltsin's support. There are a few 

 members of the Supreme Soviet, which is the upper body in their 

 legislature, which support reform, although in differing ways. 



Mr. Karpov, who is an influential member of the Supreme Soviet, 

 just returned to Russia from a Cochran-sponsored visit to the Unit- 

 ed States. It is my intent to speak with him next week about his 

 visit, and he had given me his plan for agrarian reform, which 

 would be the fourth or fifth plan that I have seen for agrarian re- 

 form. But I want to talk to him and see what impact his Cochran- 

 sponsored visit had. 



There are not, however — my impression, of course — a whole lot 

 more of those peoples' deputies and members of the Supreme So- 

 viet which are outspoken advocates of land privatization, individual 

 responsibility, the development of an "agri-industrial complex," as 

 they call it, that is market-driven. 



Mr. Penny. Mr. Allard. 



Mr. Allard. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 



Welcome to the committee. 



Mr. Infanger. Glad to be here. 



Mr. Allard. You have probably had to deal with the Foreign Ag- 

 ricultural Service, so I would like to hear your insights on what 

 needs to be done to improve the USDA Foreign Agricultural Serv- 

 ice and its operation in foreign countries. 



Mr. Infanger. Please allow me to respond only in a very limited 

 fashion to that question. I live just 2 blocks from the Embassy's ag- 

 riculture office. I visit there every morning to collect mail and mes- 

 sages. I communicate quite often with the agricultural attaches 

 who are there within the Foreign Agricultural Service. I am not a 

 career FAS person. 



Mr. Allard. That is why I am asking you the question. 



