"The adaptation of the Alliance and its impact on Partnership"

Introduction

The changing security environment of the last 10 years has set in motion a process of radical change within the Alliance. The Prague Summit this November will take decisions that will embrace new capabilities and missions; new members; and new partnerships.

Each of these decisions will impact on all NATO's Partners, present and future. What we should discuss today is how the EAPC can make the most of the changes within the Alliance for our overall benefit. And the way we plan the future of the EAPC can have a direct impact on the Alliance's ability to fulfill its mission.

Response to new security threats

As NATO designs new mechanisms to counter terrorism, and builds new coalitions, the EAPC has proved its value as a forum for discussion of global threats and cooperative action. We have already discussed in the second panel the potential usefulness of an Action Plan to counter terrorism. Terrorism is on every democracy's agenda and must remain there as long as the danger exists.

The proliferation of weapons, particularly given the quantities of small arms and light weapons that are circulating illegally in our area, is an issue that the EAPC is well placed to address in an effective manner. And other issues, such as border security and cross-border crime, are becoming more and more relevant to all of us. Consultations and sharing best practice within the EAPC can contribute to a step-change in tackling all these issues effectively.

New Missions

NATO has a direct interest in projecting security and stability outside its own area, towards the Middle East, the Southern Mediterranean basin, the Caucasus and Central Asia. The peacekeeping missions in the Balkans are successful examples of NATO outreach. The EAPC is an essential component in determining common positions and facilitating international coalitions of the type which has been so effective in Afghanistan.

But we should not limit ourselves to defining immediate responses to immediate situations. [As I said this morning in our Panel 2 discussion] We should aim to take a longer-term view, for example in our approach to the Middle East. While the Middle East Peace Process must continue, there could be merit in discussion and rationalisation of the various initiatives on the table for the longer-term security of the eastern Mediterranean.

While NATO is developing its new capabilities with the involvement of existing and future Allies, there is still scope for EAPC members to identify their own areas of specialisation which would add value to the overall effectiveness of our joint efforts.

The range and size of the missions and activities undertaken by Allied forces has increased dramatically in the past 5-10 years. The focus is changing, for example from South-East Europe to Afghanistan. The downsizing of NATO peacekeeping troops in Bosnia and Kosovo is natural, not only because military personnel are needed elsewhere, but because stability inside the region has increased while dependency on outside support has decreased.

But this doesn't mean that such support is no longer needed. This is where EAPC Partners and the future Allies from the region can play an enhanced role, both in terms of peacekeeping support and in terms of promoting the necessary security reform within individual countries. For instance, Romania and Bulgaria are pressing ahead with putting SEEBRIG into service for deployment in the Balkans, if necessary. And we are ready to offer whatever help we can to Serbia and Montenegro and Bosnia-Herzegovina in their preparations for PfP, as a milestone towards full MAP status.

Enlargement

Changing the European political map to design a larger, stronger and better-equipped NATO will alter the structure and balance not only of NATO but of the EAPC.

By bringing into NATO new members with direct national experience of regional problems that have been, up to now, largely beyond NATO's borders, NATO will benefit from a deeper insight and understanding of what is happening, for instance in the Balkans or the Black Sea region.

The diversity of interests in the EAPC area could be handled by making use of a "variable geometry" format, with NATO at the centre. Working formats - tailored to the specifics of a region and involving the Allies and the countries of the region - would ensure the EAPC plays a more active supporting role in conflict prevention and crisis management. It would reinforce Alliance policy on arms control, disarmament and non-proliferation. At the same time, it would lead to a more structured dialogue between NATO/EAPC and other regional actors and it could tie in regional initiatives with NATO/EAPC.

The South East European Steering Group, which involves a flexible number of Allies and all interested regional Partners as well as non-Partner nations, like Serbia and Montenegro and Bosnia and Herzegovina, has worked particularly effectively. This format is of course one of a kind. But it could be extremely useful in meeting the interests of regional Partners and others, for instance in taking forward the Mediterranean Dialogue.

We have distributed separately a short statement of the SEEGROUP countries about SEECAP one year after its endorsement. We think it has proved its value. Such regional cooperation is a valuable complement to the global fight against terrorism. We will continue to reinforce our work, in particular in combating cross-border criminal activity.

We know that our experience has sparked interest with governments in other regions. They are examining what we have done to see whether there are useful points which they could draw on in developing their own regional cooperation. We are happy to share our experience. We are eager to support a Common Assessment Paper on Security challenges and Opportunities in the Caucasus and Central Asia, in the Mediterranean basin, in the Black Sea area or for the entire EAPC region.

We welcome the decision yesterday to invite Croatia to join in the MAP process. Other Partners have already expressed interest in opening new chapters of cooperation with NATO, drawing on the experience of NATO candidate countries with the MAP process. Individualized programmes could be devised for interested Partners based on lessons learnt from the "intensified dialogue" of the pre-MAP era and the security sector reform process built into the MAP exercise. We believe some of our neighbours might welcome a NATO offer along these lines.

New partnerships

- European Union

The development of the European Security and Defence Identity will enable NATO's European members and the non-NATO EU Partners to take on greater responsibilities in security and defence in Europe.

Countries like Romania have already made pledges to the European Rapid Reaction Force precisely because we understand the value of a strong NATO - EU relationship which reinforces the strength of the Alliance.

- Russia and Ukraine

We welcome the new relationship between NATO and Russia. The launching, later this month, in Rome, of the NATO-Russia Council is a momentous event. We do hope that, on the way to Prague, a new level of NATO-Ukraine dialogue could be identified.

As a major European power, it is natural that Russia should have the opportunity to discuss security issues in Europe such as terrorism, peacekeeping, and civil emergency planning on an equal footing with current and future NATO Allies. For our part, we intend to participate constructively when we join the NATO/Russia Council after accession. We also look forward to seeing this new spirit of cooperation and collective approach reflected in NATO/Partners' discussions of concerns in the Caucasus and Central Asia and possible remedies.

- International Organisations

Cooperation between NATO, the EU, OSCE and other international organisations has advanced significantly in the past few years, especially in the field. The most visible success story is the resolution of last year's crisis in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia ª. But there is room for improvement through greater inter-institutional consultation, as set out in the joint Romanian-Austrian-Portuguese paper on NATO/EAPC/OSCE Cooperation. Taking regional and functional-focused approaches, e.g. on terrorism, would make this process even more effective.

And NATO could take a fresh look at cooperation with other organisations such as the Black Sea Economic Cooperation Organization or the Bucharest-based Regional SECI Center for Combating Trans-border Crime.

Romania's interest

Romania has a keen interest in an evolution of NATO and EAPC that is mutually reinforcing

• Our immediate neighbourhood includes Allies, Partner countries and potential Partners;
• We belong to a region that has emerged from 10 years of devastating conflict and violence only to face the growing menace of organized crime;
• We lie at the crossroads between Western Europe and the energy-rich Caucasus and Caspian region where long-term stability is not yet guaranteed.

We believe that the Alliance and the EAPC must adjust to the changing security environment as dynamically and imaginatively as it can. The EAPC should remain an attractive and useful forum for Allies and Partners alike by building on existing achievements and making full use of the provisions of the Basic Document and the fundamental principles of Partnership - inclusiveness and self-differentiation. In this way, we can ensure NATO 's place as the strongest and most enduring Alliance in history.

The new EAPC format

Before I close, I want to thank the Secretary General for his initiative in introducing this new format for EAPC meetings, even though this has added to his workload. A free-flowing discussion will always be more useful to the participants than formal and often unrelated presentations. So far I think it has worked pretty well. I hope we can continue with this practice.

ª Turkey recognises the Republic of Macedonia with its constitutional name.