Concluding remarks by Jean-François Bureau, NATO Assistant Secretary General for Public Diplomacy
22 Apr. 2009
|
Last updated: 12 May. 2009 11:12
We appreciate co-sponsorship with European Science Foundation. Thanks to Dr Heppener; and to François Gere for putting this meeting together and leading this joint initiative with NATO; I know it was not so easy.
This conference ends a four-year programme of common work.
Our common goals have been and remain: to analyze, understand, anticipate, counter and prevent threats to security.
To do that we need:
conceptual clarification;
to understand and explain security in different contexts – sociological, geographical, historical, and individual – in order to reach a better understanding and, more importantly, an enhanced ability to deal with the coming threats and challenges to security.
You have looked into law, ethics, and justice as they are central to making progress in security policy.
You have conducted research on how individual insecurity can lead to extreme behaviour that can be used and manipulated by organisations in order to achieve their goals. you have covered the different aspects of the relationships between identity, loyalty, and security.
You have discussed models of security and looked at the key factors of success and failure in the management of security.
Hence we have gathered here to work towards a synthesis and to address the topics which are not yet part of the research agenda. our colleagues from the European Science Foundation (ESF) want to be able to have a “framework for engaging in humanities and social sciences”. we, at NATO, wish for scientific knowledge to contribute to better fulfilling our role, especially with regard to the building of public perception in the field of security, and to do that you have worked intensively for two days at this forum probing what are “the intangibles of security”.
I hope that the significant parameters of risk, danger, trust, dialogue, risk communication, cohesion, and resilience, viewed through the perspective of many belief systems, will indeed prove susceptible to scientific scrutiny. a critical requirement of today’s world is to foster shared visions. nato and esf have worked on this aim and aspiration for a number of years. I trust that we will be able to agree on a strong framework with recommendations for science policy and research in this important field. the result of this “forward look” and the findings of this conference will shape our common future.
In this regard, i would like to contribute to this future work with my own expectations from a next step. With respect to NATO missions and developments, the following issues will be of key importance:
the coming months will be dedicated to the definition of NATO’s xxist century “strategic concept”: the definition of the relationship between defence and security issues will be a major issue;
defence and security have in common an increasing role of public perceptions and citizens’ understanding: perceptions do not come from nowhere. their building is a complex and changing interactive process which needs more scientific scrutiny;
failures to provide security have multi-faceted and long-term consequences for our communities but, at the same time, the best achievements of institutions do not necessarily change public perceptions: this paradox, which can be described as the asymmetric dynamic of security perceptions – failures only shape “hearts and minds” - will have new dimensions with never ending, ever increasing security expectations in our societies.
for these reasons, the relationship between perception and resilience will come as a major issue, and has to find a stronger scientific background.
I believe these items need more work, in a way which can be helpful to our next decisions. a strategic concept is not, as is too often believed, just one more statement. it will shape our defence and security establishments. it will face the challenge of an increasingly changing framework and, at the end, should contribute to the social contract which is so needed in our societies.
as you can see, beyond the next NATO strategic concept, our nations will have to address difficult but key issues. our responsibility is to contribute to this process in such a way that the public dimension will be a core one, on the basis of a more focused scientific input.
as you can see, nato is showing new interest in a common work, which will contribute to our decision-making process. i am ready to look at the best way to elaborate in greater detail in order to build a project along these key needs, which are not ours only, but are also the needs of our nations.
That could sum up my expectations with a new step we would look at together.
