NATO Speech at the Bohemiae Foundation, Prague 29 April 1996

The New Role of NATO in European Security Speech by the Secretary General Ladies and Gentlemen, It gives me great pleasure to address the Bohemiae Foundation today, in this my first visit to the Czech Republic as Secretary General of NATO. Given the impressive list of individuals who have spoken here in the short three-and-a-half years of the Foundation's existence, I feel very much honoured by your invitation. The Czech Republic, perhaps more than any other country, is commonly associated with the term "Central Europe". For centuries, the term meant precisely what it said: being in the centre of Europe. And not surprisingly, Prague has long been a principal centre of European intellectual and cultural life. However, during the Cold War, the term "Central Europe" came to be used in a very different way. As François Bondy once pointed out, those in the region who used the term did so to distance themselves from the East, to remind others that the countries behind the Iron Curtain were more than just Soviet satellites. Thankfully, the end of the Cold War has freed us from this narrow, negative definition. Today, no longer the object of someone else's ambitions, Central Europe is free to define itself as part of something - as being in the centre of an increasingly united Europe. But what exactly is this "increasingly united Europe"? And what does it mean in security terms? In these brief remarks, I would like to offer you a few reflections on these important questions from NATO's perspective.

In 1949, the drafters of the Washington Treaty envisaged the Atlantic Alliance as the cornerstone of a broader community of European and North American democracies - a community based on common values rather than common fear. At the centre of their view was post-war renewal and the reconstruction of Western Europe. The professed goal of the Alliance was to contain and deter the threat posed by Soviet armed forces. But a closely-related goal was to provide in such circumstances of confrontation the umbrella of security under which the process of greater European economic and political integration could take place. But the values upheld and defended by this Euro-Atlantic security community were never conceived as geographically or culturally restricted. Rather, they were at the heart of all societies which had already established or which yearned for democracy and individual freedoms. As Czechs, you will be rightly proud of the achievements and the worldwide reputation of President Havel and other prominent human rights activists in keeping the flame alive in this country and elsewhere in Central and Eastern Europe. It is a flame which it has always been NATO's goal to nurture and protect on this great continent of ours. We, like you, have held to that goal ever since NATO was created and we hold to it just as passionately today. I want to pay tribute today to the courageous men and women in your country and elsewhere who cherished those freedoms through the dark days of the Cold War and who brought about the events which opened the opportunity for a Europe united by common values to replace a Europe divided by spheres of interest. Many paid the ultimate price, many others suffered at the least the loss of their freedom.

With the Cold War now well behind us, we in the Alliance can emphasise this aspect of our original vocation: to safeguard and further our democratic values and to support the widening integrative process of the new Europe. But this effort is not something for the Alliance alone to undertake. Other European institutions have a key role to play. Security in the post-Cold War world is much broader than that which can be fully or satisfactorily addressed only by military capabilities or through security guarantees against physical attack. In today's world, ethnic, social, demographic and economic factors affecting regional or local stability can become the seedbed from which more serious conflicts may emerge. All our institutions have to be fully involved and to work closely together to enhance European security in its broadest sense. Let me tell you how NATO is taking up the challenge presented by the new circumstances on our continent. In doing so, I will make clear that NATO has not relinquished the capacity and the will to address concrete security issues: far from it. This is amply demonstrated in Bosnia, where NATO is spearheading the international force assembled to implement the Peace Accords. But again, it is not NATO alone. The Implementation Force is, rather, a real "coalition for peace". For the first time in the Alliance's 47-year history, the Allies have been joined by other nations - 17 of them, including the Czech Republic, and including even countries from beyond Europe. Together, we are working to secure for the long-term the hard-won peace, and thus enable the reconstruction of a viable and peaceful civil society in Bosnia-Herzegovina. We have passed a number of significant milestones in overseeing and ensuring that the parties respect what they have agreed to. Most recently, some 10 days ago, we reached the D+120 milestone, by which the parties were to withdraw forces and heavy weapons into cantonment areas and continue with the demobilisation process. This process is taking longer than foreseen but, on the whole, we are satisfied with the general compliance of the parties to date. However, IFOR will continue to be vigilant and keep the situation under close review. The safe environment and restored climate of confidence which IFOR is aiming to create are an essential underpinning for the preparations for the elections to be held later this year. The period up to the elections, and the elections themselves, will be crucial in ensuring that we can build lasting peace in Bosnia.

IFOR did not come about by accident. Without the preparation in the Partnership for Peace, it could not have been assembled so quickly and effectively. The Partnership has put a premium on practical cooperation to develop the capability for Partners and Allies alike to work together jointly in a range of peacekeeping-type operations. One could say the Operation Joint Endeavour represents the strongest possible endorsement of the work we have done together. From the very beginning, the Czech Republic has been one of the most active participants in all facets of Partnership for Peace activities. It has established a strong representation both at NATO HQ and in the Partnership Coordination Cell and has hosted several PfP activities, including the highly successful exercise "Cooperative Challenge". Through PfP, the Czech Republic developed, in its contacts on the working levels with NATO staff, a growing acquaintance with NATO standards and procedures, and I am convinced that this process of close cooperation between NATO and the Czech Republic will continue to develop further. There is little doubt that this active participation in the Partnership for Peace smoothed the path of Czech forces' participation in IFOR under NATO command. The Czech mechanised infantry battalion, deployed in Sector South-West as part of the Canadian-led brigade, has been a very important contribution to IFOR and is highly appreciated. IFOR and the Partnership for Peace are vivid examples of a Europe growing together. Obviously, the closest form of integration is membership. It is in recognition of this "logic of inclusion" that NATO leaders at their Summit in January 1994 made the commitment in principle to the addition of new members to the Alliance. The project called "Europe" cannot be limited to a line artificially drawn almost 50 years ago. It is a simple fact that countries which have come to share the values which NATO was created to defend must have open to them the opportunity of joining our Alliance.

So my first and foremost point is this: NATO enlargement will happen. The free choice of alignment must be the very basis on which the new Europe must be built. It is also in our fundamental security interest to ensure that the new democracies continue to develop in a positive direction and participate in all aspects of the construction of Europe. For over four decades political and military cooperation in NATO has resulted in a degree of transparency and trust that has created a historically unique zone of stability among its members. It should be our goal to extend this zone of stability by giving our neighbours an opportunity to become part of this unique security culture. My second point: those who join will be full members with all the benefits and obligations that membership implies. NATO is not interested in semi-detached members, and we are certainly not interested in ideas for political but not military membership of NATO. All those who join will be covered by Article 5 of the Washington Treaty, and all those who join will have to be capable of fulfilling their obligations on behalf of others. My third point about enlargement is that we need to get it right, and that requires time. So before we can identify specific candidates for membership, we need to conduct a dialogue with interested parties. This dialogue is currently taking place and will keep us busy for the remainder of this year. Indeed, there is a lot to be discussed. We have to explain the roles and responsibilities of membership, its costs as well as its benefits. The current NATO Allies must thoroughly assess how new members will impact on the political and military structures of the Alliance. And those aspiring to become members must carefully consider the implications NATO membership will have for them: how it will affect their political and military environment and how they see themselves contributing to our overall security. In my view, this is a matter that must not be confined to expert circles, but to a broader public debate.

We must also ensure that, as we proceed with enlargement, we build a security environment which provides reassurance and confidence to all countries, whether they belong to NATO or not. What we want is a Europe without the Cold War dividing lines. It is a Europe in which a democratic Russia has its rightful place. In our own interest we want to see a strong and democratic Russia, as a stable and reliable partner. If Russia develops along the path of democracy as we all wish she will, and if we work together, there is hardly any security problem in the Euro-Atlantic area that we could not deal with. A strong bond between NATO and Russia must be a key element of the new European security order. The beginning of such a close NATO/Russia relationship is already well underway. Russia is part of the IFOR coalition in Bosnia, and the cooperation on the ground between NATO and Russian forces is excellent. But cooperation in Bosnia is not enough. We have proposed to Russia a relationship that would allow us to tackle a far wider set of issues: to prevent and end regional crises and conflicts; to prevent nuclear proliferation; to devise common strategies for dealing with new security challenges; and to develop together a cooperative approach to European security. Russia is still hesitating whether to take up the offer. She has not yet fully found her new role in this new Europe. Perhaps it would be unrealistic to expect such a major process of adjustment to happen within only a few years. But our goal is clear: it is to pursue a NATO-Russia relationship which permits both sides to tackle pragmatically the problems we face in common. We will continue this pursuit. It would be a historical mistake to create new dividing lines in Europe or otherwise isolate Russia. We want to work closely with Russia because a healthy and cooperative partnership between NATO and Russia can and must be a key foundation of security in post-Cold War Europe.

Ladies and Gentlemen, As long as we were locked into the straitjacket of the Cold War, NATO could only deal with the potential effects rather than the causes of conflict. Today, we can pursue a broader, more proactive approach - one that seeks to shape events. Today, in the midst of building a new security order in Europe - a real, cooperative security architecture - we are also furthering the integration of Europe. This process will continue, and on many levels - institutional, political, economic, social. It will reinforce, not impair, the consolidation of democracy and market reforms which we are witnessing in so many parts of Central and Eastern Europe. The North Atlantic Alliance remains solidly behind this process, as it has throughout the past half decade. And it will continue to be so, even if - as I have sought this afternoon briefly to describe to you - it is a NATO with new missions, with new Partners, and ultimately, with new members.