Address

Monsieur le Premier Ministre, Messieurs les Présidents du Sénat et de la Chambre des députés, Monsieur le Sénateur Roth, Mesdames et Messieurs les Parlementaires, Mesdames et Messieurs,

Je suis particulièrement heureux de me trouver aujourd'hui à Bucarest, à l'occasion de la quarante-troisième session annuelle de l'Assemblée de l'Atlantique Nord. Nos hôtes roumains ont accompli un travail admirable en organisant cet important événement, qui démontre à quel point la Roumanie est devenue un Partenaire hautement apprécié de l'OTAN, et avec quelle rapidité elle prend sa place dans notre famille européenne de démocraties.

Cette session de l'Assemblée de l'Atlantique Nord à Bucarest souligne également l'importance de la coopération établie entre l'OTAN et les pays partenaires. L'AAN et ses membres associés font partie intégrante de cette démarche coopérative et tournée vers l'avenir.

Vous, les Parlementaires de l'Assemblée de l'Atlantique Nord, avez fait oeuvre de pionniers dans notre approche du partenariat en vous ouvrant aux parlementaires et aux responsables politiques d'Europe centrale et orientale avant même la création du Conseil de coopération nord-atlantique, en 1991, et du Partenariat pour la paix, en 1994.

Je suis persuadé que l'AAN continuera d'éclairer ainsi la voie que décidera de suivre l'Alliance.

Permettez-moi de vous dire aussi combien nous avons été honorés par la présence de votre Président, le Sénateur William Roth, au Sommet de Madrid. Votre participation à cette réunion, Monsieur le Sénateur, a bien fait ressortir l'importance que nous attachons à l'AAN et au rôle qu'elle a joué en soutenant les décisions historiques prises par les chefs d'Etat et de gouvernement de l'Alliance à Madrid.

Mesdames et Messieurs les Parlementaires,

Lorsque je me suis adressé à la quarante-deuxième session de l'Assemblée de l'Atlantique Nord, tenue à Paris en novembre de l'année dernière, l'OTAN se préparait à vivre une année historique.

Le Sommet de Madrid, de même qu'un programme très ambitieux prévoyant des décisions importantes sur l'adaptation interne et externe, était encore devant nous. Je me souviens de vous avoir également exprimé ma préoccupation du fait que nous n'avions pas accompli tous les progrès escomptés dans nos relations avec la Russie. En réalité, on ne voyait toujours pas bien de quelle manière, exactement, un nouveau partenariat entre l'OTAN et la Russie s'instaurerait. Certains ont regretté que nous essayions d'en faire trop à la fois.

Douze mois plus tard, il est clair que notre décision de mettre en oeuvre ce programme ambitieux était pleinement justifiée. Un travail long et difficile et deux réunions au sommet - l'une à Paris, l'autre à Madrid - ont modifié à jamais le paysage de sécurité européen. Aujourd'hui, notre rêve d'une Europe unie, sûre, installée dans la paix, est plus réalisable que jamais dans la longue histoire de ce continent. Permettez-moi de récapituler brièvement les succès enregistrés par l'OTAN au cours de l'année écoulée :

• trois Partenaires - la République tchèque, la Hongrie et la Pologne - ont engagé des pourparlers d'adhésion, en vue de leur entrée dans l'Alliance;
• nous nous sommes engagés à laisser la porte de l'OTAN ouverte à de futurs membres;
• nous avons entrepris l'instauration d'un nouveau partenariat avec la Russie en signant l'Acte fondateur OTAN-Russie;
• nous avons créé des possibilités de consultations intensifiées avec nos Partenaires dans le cadre du Conseil de Partenariat euro-atlantique (CPEA);
• nous avons renforcé de façon substantielle le programme de Partenariat pour la paix;
• nous avons signé une Charte sur un Partenariat spécifique avec l'Ukraine;
• nous renforçons notre dialogue avec nos voisins méditerranéens non-membres de l'OTAN;
• nous avons accompli de nouveaux progrès dans la réforme de la structure de commandement de l'OTAN, et dans le développement d'une Identité européenne de sécurité et de défense au sein de l'Alliance.

En outre, l'Alliance, avec le soutien d'un grand nombre de nos Partenaires, a continué tout au long de 1997 de garantir la paix en Bosnie et l'application de l'Accord de Dayton.

Toutes ces mesures, ces "indicateurs du changement", vous montrent que l'OTAN d'aujourd'hui est bien différente de l'OTAN d'il y a quelques années seulement. Cependant, et si paradoxal que cela puisse paraître, la nouvelle OTAN reflète mieux que l'Alliance des années de la Guerre froide les objectifs et les ambitions partagés par les rédacteurs du Traité de Washington, en 1949. Les limites de la Communauté euro-atlantique ne sont plus définies par la géographie, mais plutôt par des valeurs communes - par un désir commun de se développer ensemble, d'établir des partenariats effectifs et durables, et de rechercher la sécurité non pas dans la confrontation mais dans la coopération.

Your Excellencies,

It may seem strange that at a time of relative peace in Europe, we are still so focussed on security. Quite simply, it is because we want this peace to last; we want freedom and democracy to take root; we want a situation in which no country of Europe will ever again look upon its neighbours as a potential or actual threat. That has unfortunately been true of Europe's past. We must make sure it is not true of Europe's future.

This is the reason why we have decided to enlarge NATO: to enlarge the area of stability in Europe where everyone's interests - large or small - are taken into account, and where we face the challenges of the future by working together, not against each other. These are the values that NATO has nurtured in Western Europe over the past half century. And it is only natural that our neighbours to the East should wish to enjoy the same benefits of peace and security as NATO's current 16 Allies.

But enlargement is not first and foremost about righting past injustices; it is about putting in place the conditions for future stability and prosperity. If we refused to accept the challenge of enlargement, confidence in Central and Eastern Europe would be undermined. The countries in this region would look for security by other means.

The accession talks currently underway with the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland will finish in November, in time for Alliance Foreign Ministers to sign the Protocol of Accession at their December Ministerial. After that, the next crucial step will be the ratification process in the sixteen member states.

Through ratification our Parliaments will share in the responsibility of building a new NATO for a new Europe. You as Parliamentarians will have to put the right questions, seek the right answers and, finally, reach a conclusion. I firmly believe that we have the arguments to win the case for opening the Alliance and I am confident that as the debate develops, support for NATO's enlargement will grow. But our job is to make sure that it is the right debate, and not a debate based on popular misconceptions.

For instance, I often hear it said that the costs of enlargement will be excessive or that they will fall unfairly on certain Allies. This is not true. We are currently working hard to estimate the cost and will present an objective and accurate position to NATO's Foreign and Defence Ministers in December. But I can say here and now that the costs will be manageable. And these costs will be shared fairly by 19 future Allies. Moreover these costs will pale in comparison to the costs we all have to pay when security breaks down. Think of how much it has cost us - and continues to cost us every day - to bring peace to Bosnia. I can say quite frankly that never before has building security been so cost-effective as with NATO's enlargement. Indeed at our meeting of Defence Ministers in Maastricht a few days ago, the three invitee countries made clear that they want to be full Allies, bearing the obligations as well as enjoying the benefits of NATO membership.

Another question that has been put forward frequently in the past was how to enlarge NATO and at the same time engage in a real partnership with Russia. I think it is now clear that NATO is doing both things successfully. We are not forced to chose. On the contrary, NATO/Russia cooperation as well as opening NATO will be a major stabilizing force for Europe, strengthening, not weakening NATO and Russia's abilities to deal with instabilities and crisis situations on their periphery.

In a nutshell: the stakes are too great for us to miss a unique historical opportunity to do away with the artificial dividing lines that were imposed on Europe almost fifty years ago. I am counting on you, the NAA parliamentarians, to help us dispel these misconceptions, to help us set the record straight: opening NATO is good for all of the Euro-Atlantic area. Its benefits far outweigh the costs.

At Madrid, we underscored that NATO enlargement is not a one-time event but a continuing process. Countries that have been invited to join the Alliance now will not be the last. The Summit Declaration states clearly that the door to NATO must and will remain open. No European democratic country, regardless of its geographic location or its history, will be excluded.

Despite some understandable disappointment on the part of those who had hoped to be invited at Madrid, I believe that our message of the "open door" has been well understood. Those countries which have not been invited have already made it clear that they will continue to press their case and to do all that is necessary to join. Thus, the powerful incentives for further reform, which the prospect of NATO and EU membership has created, will remain. Indeed, without the commitment of NATO and EU to open up we would not have seen the many bilateral treaties that have transformed the political landscape across Central and Eastern Europe settling longstanding border and minority issues.

While we are preparing to accept the first three new members, we will also be actively helping all the serious candidates for the future. Our Individual Dialogues with interested Partners will continue. This means that all Partners that aspire to membership or that otherwise wish to pursue a dialogue with NATO will have the opportunity to do so.

Second, interested Partners can prepare themselves by moving toward greater interoperability with NATO and by taking full advantage of all the opportunities of the enhanced Partnership for Peace; for instance in the area of more intensive defence planning, more demanding exercises and more input into their own individual partnership programmes. They will also in the future be able to establish Partner positions in NATO's future military headquarters.

This Partnership has proved one of the most novel and successful ideas of recent times. And it will become even more operational. The number of major military exercises has already grown from 3 in 1994 to 24 this year. Our military exercises will become more complex and robust. Our Partners will have a stronger presence at NATO Headquarters. Last Wednesday, Hungary and Ukraine were the first to establish diplomatic missions. Others will follow in the next few weeks. All our Partners will be involved more deeply in our decision-making and planning.

These opportunities will allow our active partners to come very close to NATO. The most active will undoubtedly enjoy many of the benefits that in the past have been the preserve of the Allies only. And with the new Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council, we are also enhancing the political dimension of the Partnership. This is particularly important for planning and overseeing a joint mission of Allies and Partners, as we are currently doing with SFOR in Bosnia.

Let me now say a word about the importance of Russia in our outreach and partnership.

NATO and Russia are destined to cooperate with each other. The interests that bring us together are far greater than any differences remaining from the past. This awareness forms the basis for our agreement in the NATO-Russia Founding Act.

We have quickly moved into the implementation phase. The Permanent Joint Council - created by that NATO-Russia Founding Act - is already up and running. Allied Foreign Ministers met with Foreign Minister Primakov a fortnight ago in New York. It was a very successful meeting. It showed a new spirit of cooperation and a desire on both sides to get down to serious work. It is not only NATO which is now proposing concrete activities to fill this relationship with substance. Russia is also increasingly active.

We agreed a work programme of consultative and cooperative activity to take us through the next few months. To implement it, we are establishing expert groups in areas such as disaster relief, science and the environment and peacekeeping where NATO and Russia can successfully work together. We also discussed the situation in Bosnia and how best to use our new PJC to support our common effort to bring lasting peace to that country. The opening of a NATO Documentation Centre in Moscow will help us to better inform the Russian public about the new NATO and our broad and inclusive approach to security.

But if the NATO/Russia relationship is to have its full impact on European security, it must have a substantive military to military dimension. That is why we are calling on Russia to become fully involved in the Partnership for Peace and to establish military liaisons with us.

So the NATO-Russia partnership is taking root. But it will need to be carefully tended if we are all to reap the benefits of a stable, strong and enduring relationship. The NAA and parliamentarians from all our EAPC countries can assist their Russian colleagues from the DUMA in seeing that there is an important place for Russia at the table. As you know, these parliamentary contacts are an integral part of the Founding Act.

Our new, distinctive relationship with Ukraine is also well on track. Its size and geo-strategic location make Ukraine a crucial factor for stability and security in Europe. The agreement signed at the Madrid Summit between Ukrainian President Kuchma and Allied leaders will allow this great country to more fully participate in the new European security architecture. Last Friday in Brussels we held our first meeting of the NATO-Ukraine Commission. We have concluded a full work programme. It will move our relations significantly forward in areas like crisis management, arms control and the economic and environmental aspects of security.

Intensive relations with our Central and Eastern European Partners should not lead anyone to believe that NATO is neglecting another area important for our security - the Southern Mediterranean. Indeed, we are making steady progress in developing our dialogue with six Mediterranean countries - Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Mauritania, Morocco and Tunisia. The Madrid Summit has helped institutionalise the dialogue by creating a special Mediterranean Committee. Here the 16 NATO nations will meet periodically with each of our 6 Mediterranean dialogue partners.

Let me turn to Bosnia. This country has now been at peace for almost two years; and the warring factions have been separated and disarmed in a way which makes a resumption of hostilities much more difficult. Thanks to NATO. But we have not done this alone. The contribution of 21 Partners and other non-NATO countries has made the Implementation Force and now the Stabilisation Force truly an international coalition for peace. SFOR has discharged its responsibilities with effectiveness, even-handedness and strength in conditions which have been far from easy.

The recent municipal elections were a step in the right direction on the long road towards democratization and reconciliation in Bosnia. Although the results still need to be implemented, those elections have revealed the first cracks in the ranks of the extremist political forces. They have produced some encouraging signs that the Bosnian people want to return to a multiethnic, tolerant society. We must continue to support those who in turn support and implement the letter and spirit of the Dayton Accords; and we will stand firm against those who would destroy the peace process. The more robust approach of the international community in recent months has demonstrated once again that in Bosnia two things count: firmness and consistency of purpose.

It is in this spirit that we have been prepared to use our strength to help ensure freedom of the media, while putting a stop to poison and hatred filling the airwaves. Let me assure you; the recent SFOR action will not be the last if such flouting of the Peace Agreement persists. Of course, the pace of peace implementation in Bosnia is always slower than what we would like. Much remains to be done before our goal of a self-sustaining peace is achievable. We should not become frustrated or heed the siren calls of defeatism: allow me to challenge the line taken by some calling for the abandonment of Dayton and advocating partition.

I want to tell you categorically here today that such a course of action would be catastrophic - morally, politically and economically. Partition would violate all our principles. It would reward aggression and extremism - with potentially terrible consequences elsewhere, and it would betray the majority of the Bosnian people who dream of life in a country at peace. It would also waste our massive international effort to create a better future for Bosnia - an effort that has already cost the lives of many brave soldiers, diplomats and businessmen.

To abandon Dayton now - at the very moment when our perseverance and resolve are beginning to show results - would, in my view, be absurd. We are making progress: the media is being democratized; the Specialist Police are being brought to heel; elections are being held without violence; new ambassadors appointed; the common institutions are beginning to function; airports are re-opening and the Standing Committee on Military Matters has been set up. Perhaps most importantly of all, our pressure on the parties to transfer their indicted war criminals to The Hague has yielded important results.

So this is not the moment to give up, but to stay the course. We must continue to marginalize those opposed to Dayton and keep the parties under solid pressure to meet their commitments. NATO troops cannot and will not stay indefinitely. But, as our Heads of State and Government said in Madrid, NATO has a long term interest in and commitment to Bosnia. We will not turn our backs on Bosnia. That would be against our interests as well as a tragic mistake at the very moment when peace is beginning to take hold.

In closing, I would simply like to share with you my most fundamental conviction: NATO's political agenda is not about NATO alone. It is about a vision of partnership and cooperation extending throughout the Euro-Atlantic region. Our objective is to harness the energies and synergies of a wider integrative process, of greater interdependence - economic, social, political. If we can sustain this momentum, we will not only achieve a peaceful Europe, but also a Europe with the stability, confidence and prosperity to be a true partner of North America in dealing with the enormous challenges we will undoubtedly face in the 21st century.

Based on our experience over the past 12 months I am confident that we can, and that we will succeed. Thank you.