Speech

Ladies and gentlemen,

Dear friends,

It gives me great pleasure to be back in Moscow, and to have theopportunity to address such a distinguished audience. I am firmlyconvinced that frank and open dialogue between NATO and the Russianpeople is critical to our efforts to ensure the long-term security ofthe entire Euro-Atlantic region. And I am hopeful that our discussiontoday will contribute to this effort.

Just a fewmonths ago, President Putin, in a speech to the Russian SecurityCouncil, summed up the NATO-Russia relationship by pointing out that, “in just a very short time, we have taken a gigantic step” away from past confrontation and stereotypes. And he judged that NATO-Russia relations had “become a real factor in ensuring international stability,” underlining that this cooperation had made it possible for us to “deal a serious blow to international terrorism”.

President Putin’s evaluation is right on the mark.

The strategic environment in the Euro-Atlantic area has changeddramatically over the past several years, and the NATO-Russiarelationship has changed with it. We have left old Cold War threatperceptions behind us, because our real threats are clear: terrorism,which can strike anywhere at any time, ruthlessly and murderously; theproliferation of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons andmaterials, which can turn a local tragedy into a global catastrophe;and the multitude of challenges posed by failed states and regionalconflicts – violence inspired by ethnic and religious hatred,trafficking in arms, in human beings, in narcotics. These are thechallenges of the twenty-first century, and no single state or militaryAlliance, no matter how powerful, can face them alone.

This was the spirit in which our heads of state and government took thecourageous step three years ago to create the NATO-Russia Council.Their goal was a bold one: to achieve a qualitatively new relationshipbetween NATO and the Russian Federation, aimed at “achieving a lasting and inclusive peace in the Euro-Atlantic area on the principles of democracy and cooperative security” But they believed that the time had come for such a bold step.

For the past three years, the NATO-Russia Council has made significantprogress toward making this vision a reality. We have intensified ourcooperation in preventing, combating and managing the consequences ofterrorism, as evidenced by the far-reaching NATO-Russia Action Plan onTerrorism approved by our Foreign Ministers last December. Russia hasoffered practical support to NATO’s mission in Afghanistan, and morerecently, a contribution to our anti-terrorist naval patrols in theMediterranean Sea.

Cooperation among our militaryforces progresses very well. We are pursuing, for example, an ambitiousprogramme of cooperation with the 15 th Motorised Rifle Brigade inSamara, and a NATO-sponsored programme to re-train released Russianmilitary personnel to make their transition to the private sectoreasier. We also have just completed a NATO-organised course for seniorRussian officers at the General Staff Academy here in Moscow, aimed atenhancing their ability to function effectively in multinationaloperations.

Efforts to enhance the levels ofinteroperability among our soldiers, our theatre missile defencesystems, our civil emergency response teams, have made steady progress,making us more able with each passing day to translate words intoconcrete joint actions. Just two months ago, in Vilnius, ForeignMinister Lavrov signed the Partnership for Peace Status of ForcesAgreement, laying an important legal foundation for even more ambitiousforms of practical cooperation.

Beyond being amechanism for technical cooperation, however, the NATO‑Russia Councilalso serves as an effective forum for political dialogue between Russiaand the member states of NATO. Our consultations on the Balkans haveresulted in a joint initiative to promote improved border controls inthe region. Our discussions of Afghanistan have led us to explore a newNRC initiative to combat illegal trafficking in narcotics throughtraining of relevant Afghan and Central Asian personnel.

We have exchanged views on Iraq, Georgia, Uzbekistan, and othersensitive subjects where we have not always agreed, but where we haveshared information and political perspectives in a spirit ofpartnership and mutual respect. One recent example is last December’spolitical crisis in Ukraine, where differences between the Russiangovernment and the West over the unfolding political crisis in Ukrainethreatened, in the view of many, to undermine the relationship we havebuilt, over so many years, between NATO and Russia. Yet it was in theNATO-Russia Council where we managed to bridge our differences, andagree upon a joint call for free, fair Presidential elections whoseresults would reflect the will of the Ukrainian people.

With this solid record of accomplishment behind us, it should be aneasy task indeed to stand before you as NATO Secretary General andChairman of the NATO-Russia Council, and make the case for intensifiedcooperation against the threats of today and tomorrow.

Yet this is only half of the picture. For the bold, forward-lookingagenda I have just described, as important as it is, is only part ofthe NATO-Russia relationship. Just as important as looking toward thechallenges of the future is a frank treatment of the legacy of an oftendifficult past. If we are to build a true partnership, it must be basedon trust. Trust between genuine partners, working to develop commonsolutions to shared challenges. Trust in a shared vision of a commonfuture.

NATO and Russia have made considerableprogress toward building a genuine, sustainable partnership over thepast four years. Yet public perceptions in Russia, including in much ofthe political elite, do not seem to reflect this reality. Too manystill seem to cling to the past. The last time I was in Moscow, forexample, I gave a live interview on Ekho Moskvy radio. Duringa telephone poll taken while I was on the air, seventy-one per cent oflisteners agreed with the statement “NATO is an aggressive militarybloc”. Well, not the NATO I am in charge of.

Lastspring, when the three Baltic states joined NATO, the Alliance beganconducting routine peacetime airspace patrols – as is done in everyother NATO member state, including those who are surrounded by otherAllies. As is done in Russia itself. The Russian media, however,reacted as if this were a provocative step explicitly aimed atthreatening Russia. Hardly a word was written about the fact that NATOand Russia had launched an ambitious programme designed to integratetheir civil and military air pictures, thereby enhancing our ability towork together in combating terrorist threats to aviation.

Another example is the CFE Treaty. NATO Allies have workedconstructively for years with Russia, Georgia and Moldova to resolveamicably questions of compliance with this Treaty. Our aim is to securethe entry into force of the Treaty’s adaptation agreement – anagreement that Russia continues to regard as essential for her nationalsecurity, and which Georgia and Moldova, as well as NATO Allies andRussia, will have to ratify. We have been quick to welcome positivedevelopments in this area, such as the joint statement last month byForeign Ministers Lavrov and Zurabichvili. And we have even offeredfinancial assistance to the implementation process. Yet we are oftenaccused of meddling in “bilateral” affairs.

In broaderterms, we have too often found ourselves drawing distinct conclusionsfrom the same set of objective facts, whether in Yugoslavia in 1999,Georgia in 2003, Ukraine last year, or Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan thisyear. We have to understand together that long-term stability can onlybe assured through effective, democratic governance. Regimes that seekto suppress the legitimate aspirations of their own people tend only toexacerbate the problems posed by corruption and extremism – problemsthat will inevitably spill across international borders.

But we have made important progress in bridging certain analyticaldivides over the past three years, even if more needs to be done. Wewill probably have to focus even more in the months and years to comeon public outreach efforts, to finally do away with clichés from thepast.

I do not mean to minimise Russia’s own nationalexperience over the past fifteen years. The Russian people have shownextraordinary resilience through a period of turbulence in their owncountry and their immediate neighbourhood that many have compared tothe infamous “time of troubles” in the seventeenth century.

It is understandable, therefore, that in many ways Russia looks tofurther change beyond her borders – and above all, in her immediateneighbourhood – with a certain amount of scepticism and sometimesanxiety. But change, though often difficult, comes with extraordinaryopportunities. The nations of Central and Eastern Europe who haveundergone unprecedented democratic transformations over the past decadeand a half in pursuit of their integration into the Euro-Atlanticcommunity know this. The people of Georgia and Ukraine have come torealise it as well.

The NATO-Russia partnership mustkeep pace with this change, if we are to realise the full scope of thehistoric decision we took in 2002 to achieve a “new quality” in ourrelations. We must also develop a higher degree of consensus in theNATO-Russia dialogue on the nature of long-term stability and the needfor positive change. This, in turn, must be based upon mutualconfidence that the perspectives we bring to the table are designed toenrich a common response. That we do not seek to underscore whatdivides us, or score points against each other in an outdated zero-sumcompetition.

The democratic changes of the pastseveral years, changes that are continuing in places from Afghanistanto the Balkans, have ultimately made Russia more secure. When pressed,we have shown an extraordinary ability to finally bridge ourdifferences – for example, with regard to last year’s Ukrainianpolitical crisis. But how much better off would we be if we could avoidsuch differences entirely, by engaging in a more open strategicdialogue before such crises emerge?

Ladies and Gentlemen,

NATO is Russia’s partner in security, and this partnership can go asfar as the Russian government, and ultimately the Russian people, areprepared to take it. If you doubt this, consider the fact that NATO iscurrently conducting five ongoing missions – to maintain peace andstability in Kosovo and Afghanistan, to build the capabilities of theIraqi security forces, to promote defence reform in Bosnia andHerzegovina and to help defend, deter and protect against terrorismthrough maritime operations in the Mediterranean. All five of thesemissions enjoy the active support of the Russian Federation, whetherthrough votes in the UN Security Council or through the actualcontribution of military forces or logistical support. Our interestscoincide more than ever before. And I am sure that NATO’s support tothe African Union in Darfur will also meet with active Russianapproval.

But in broader, strategic terms, NATO’soverall objective to expand security and stability, based upon shareddemocratic values, throughout the Euro-Atlantic region and beyond, isdifficult without robust cooperation with Russia. Effective responsesto Russia’s real national security threats are equally impossiblewithout cooperation with NATO Allies, using mechanisms like theNATO-Russia Council. The future is in your hands, and the hands of yourpolitical leadership. Only by taking full advantage of thepossibilities we have at our disposal for real political dialogue andpractical cooperation can we leave behind the suspicions of the past infavour of a common future – and move from the “time of troubles” to a“time of hope.”