At the meeting of the EAPC at the level of Foreign Ministers Luxembourg 29 mai 1998

Remarks by the Estonian Minister of Foreign Affairs Mr. Toomas Hendrik Ilves Mr. Chairman, After major engagements of the Alliance in keeping peace and creating stability in Bosnia, carrying out the first stage of NATO enlargement, activating the new EAPC arrangement, and working actively in various co-operation fora with Russia and Ukraine, one must redit to Alliance for actively engaging in the most complex issues in Europe today. Such activism has maintained NATO as a central player in the post cold war political scene, recognized as such by NATO supporters and NATO foes alike. There remain, however, areas where problems still exist. I would like to address three of them. First. The EAPC, as its predecessor the NACC did, opens up possibilities to address security issues in their broader sense, be they real burning issues or even crisis situations or normal day-to-day cooperation issues to build a more stable European environment.While we applaud the partners for deciding to continue SFOR, much needs to be done inopening up meaningful consultations on other issues, that have not been thoroughly debated yet, like Kosovo. Which brings me to my second point, Kosovo. The situation there is changing rapidly. This carries a clear message to those colleagues, who are negotiating the new strategic concept of the Alliance. The alliance should maintain flexibility as an independent organization, which can act to support stability in Europe. Such freedom, coupled with practical measures, now contemplated to support Albania and the FYROM, measures, which we fully support - serve as a credible deterrent to peace. Article 51 of the UN charter provides every country with an opportunity to ask for assisstance in times of crises. NATO should accept such a right as a basis for its own involvement. After all, NATO itself is based on that UN principle. NATO Ministerial Council decisions around the issue of Kosovo have also reminded us, what a valuable tool PfP is. It offers us various ways of supporting a country militarily, falling short of the direct military actions. And finally, although the Nordic-Baltic region is stable and prosperous, much needs to be done to guarantee the continuity of this environment to the next millenium. The Baltic goverments have applied to become full members of the Alliance. Richard Holbrooke repeats the US Administrations view in the last weeks article in the "Wall Street Journal" that the membership issue for the Baltic states is the "political and moral litmus test of our strategy to build a peaceful, democratic and undivided Europe" . As a neighbour of Russia Estonia is open-minded regarding Russia's security needs. We are working with Russia on these complicated issues. Our NATO application is not to seek refuge from Russia. We have kept our application open and transparent, we have no hidden agenda with the Alliance. Nothing will make me believe that the Alliance with the Baltic countries as members would somehow be less friendly to Russia than the present organization. Right now intensive work with Russia and others is going on to create a more comprehensive approach to regional CSBMs. We believe, those CSBM-s should be practical and down to earth. They should not create a special zone of security, but rather tap into the pool of generally accepted CSBM-s, which could be utilized also in all regions. I am glad to report, that with Russia we have already gone beyond the information exchange and the verification regime of the Vienna document, offering each other one additional visit to respective military bases and exchanging more information. Thank you, Mr Chairman.