Meeting of the North Atlantic Cooperation Council in Ministerial Session NATO HQ Brussels 11 Dec 1996

Address by H.E. Uladzimir Syanko, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Belarus

Mr. Secretary General, Distinguished Colleagues, Ladies and Gentlemen, The year of 1996 has seen the beginning of a new stage in the development of the European security system. The bloodshed in Bosnia and Herzegovina was stopped. The OSCE Summit was held and its participants, despite existing differences, managed to sacrifice their narrow national interests for the benefit of arriving at the decisions which may lay the foundation for establishing strong architecture of all-European security and stability. Belarus has also made a tangible contribution to this process by completing on November 27 the withdrawal of the last strategic nuclear missiles from its territory. This is an evidence of a common European orientation of the leadership of Belarus, its commitment to the international obligations, disarmament and strengthening international peace, security and confidence. We are deeply grateful to those States which helped and continue to help us in solving difficult problems of disarmament. The withdrawal of nuclear missiles is a logic continuation of our policy of armed forces reduction and disarmament. Thus recently, for example, Belarus fulfilled its commitments under the CEF Treaty. Within a short period of time we have cut down the size of our armed forces more than by half. You can imagine, distinguished colleagues, what was the price of these really huge efforts to the Belarusian people. And they took these steps despite the heaviest economic crisis in the Republic. Belarus destroyed three times more tanks, combat vehicles and aircrafts than the UK, France and the USA taken together. I think that this figure does not need any comments, especially if we take into consideration the economic superiority of these countries. Recent depositing of its ratification instrument to the Chemical Weapons Convention and signing of the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty are just further examples of the Belarus commitment to disarmament. The initiative of Belarus to establish a nuclear-weapon-free space in Central and Eastern Europe is prompted by the same desire to increase the level of security in Europe. The Nuclear-Weapon-Free Initiative is aimed at strengthening the nuclear non-proliferation regime. We, of course, do not see it as an alternative to the NATO enlargement. Moreover, the Belarus initiative may become a basis for searching a mutually acceptable way out of the situation. I think that such a way-out should be in line with the substance and spirit of the OSCE Lisbon Declaration on a Common and Comprehensive Security Model, inter alia, the Heads of State or Government commitment "to attach importance to security concerns of all participating States irrespective of whether they belong to military structures or arrangements". Belarus shares the opinion of many delegations here that these five years were a big success of NACC. We think that NACC proved its importance as a forum for political consultations and mutual assistance in such major fields as arms control and armed forces reduction, emergency situations, crises prevention and management, democratic control in armed forces. NACC is also of high value to us as a forum to hold consultations on strengthening relations of good neighbourhood. NACC becomes even more important in connection with the plans to enlarge the Alliance. We think that NACC should take on main responsibility to avoid new division in Europe. In this connection we welcome all political efforts both of leaders of NATO and Partner-States to build more confidence and security guarantees in relations with Russia, our strategic partner. Throughout its history Belarus has always suffered huge losses when there was no agreement between Russia and the West. Therefore we are against any new confrontation with Russia and against any actions leading to such confrontation. Even if these actions are inspired by good intentions to strengthen international or its own national security. Located in the geographical centre of Europe Belarus also needs security guarantees and has its own strategic interests. Therefore Belarus would like to be a participant in the process of establishing special relations with NATO in the light of its enlargement to the East. We are against any conditions which may lead, even hypothetically, to the deployment of nuclear weapons and new dividing lines in Europe. Belarus supports NACC and PfP integration into the European security system with the OSCE, as we see it, as a central pillar. Therefore we support all steps towards development of relations between NATO and OSCE. Here NATO must find its place adequate to its nature as a political and military alliance but not as an exclusive guarantor of security . Under the present conditions when there is no threat of military attack from any European state the role of the Alliance should properly reflect this fact. I note with satisfaction that the Working Plan of NACC for 1996-97 contains not only military and technical activities but pays much attention to the problems of environmental and economic security. As stated by the President Lukashenko in Lisbon, these aspects of security are of special importance to Belarus. For example, this April in Minsk we hosted a seminar on conversion in defense industry. Taking this opportunity I want to express my gratitude to the NATO Economic Committee for its assistance and my hope that this fruitful cooperation will continue. In conclusion I would like to say once again that Belarus considers NACC a very useful forum for political dialogue on security and defense issues which brings together all those who are interested in increasing confidence and mutual understanding on the basis of partnership and cooperation. It reminds me of the words of Chancellor Helmut Kohl when at our last meeting in Berlin he said that "our European history teaches us that concepts of equilibrium, coalition thinking or models of "spheres of influence" have never led to lasting security and stability. We must learn from these negative experiences". It is exactly so. We must learn not to repeat these negative experience of the past. Thank you