"Confronting the Security Challenges of the New
NATO"
Keynote Address
by Dr. Javier Solana, NATO Secretary General
Presidents,
Ministers,
Excellencies,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I am delighted to give the keynote address to the 15th NATO Workshop.
The Workshop provides an important forum for taking stock of what we
have achieved, and, more importantly, for looking ahead. In my
remarks this morning I will try to do both: highlight our
achievements thus far, and indicate what still lies ahead.
Europe has entered a new security era. Most nations on this
continent are displaying a remarkable sense of common direction and
common purpose. Integration has become a defining characteristic of
today's security environment. Institutions are opening up to embrace
new members. New mechanisms of cooperation enable all countries to
have a seat at the Euro-Atlantic security table. A common security
space from Vancouver to Vladivostok is no longer a distant goal --
it's a work in progress.
NATO's agenda reflects this cooperative spirit, this ethos of
adaptation and partnership. Yet, as the theme of this year's
Workshop implies, the Alliance faces new challenges. Let me focus on
the two most crucial challenges NATO is facing: first, identifying
the new risks and instabilities in today's Europe, and second,
developing and consolidating the tools that enable NATO to cope with
these risks.
First, a word about the new risks. You probably have heard from
other speakers about the risks posed by the proliferation of weapons
of mass destruction, or by social unrest or environmental
degradation. Allow me therefore to just focus on what I consider the
most urgent challenge we need to overcome: regional conflict in the
Balkans. The fragile peace in Bosnia and the crisis in Kosovo remind
us that there are still parts of Europe plagued by instability.
This not only poses a moral dilemma for us. It also represents a
concrete security challenge. Our continent simply will not find
lasting peace and stability if the Balkans remain volatile.
In Bosnia, we were able to break the fateful cycle of violence. The
NATO-led Stabilisation Force is a unique and unprecedented example of
what true, effective cooperation can achieve. Together, many nations
and many institutions are helping - sometimes pushing - Bosnia
towards a sustainable peace. We are still a long away from true
reconciliation. But if the international community stands firm, we
will make the parties realise that cooperation remains their only
viable option.
For its part, the Alliance is showing its commitment to this goal
with the continuation of SFOR's presence in Bosnia. In extending
SFOR now, we are giving a clear message to all concerned: we will
not leave before the job is done.
Bosnia demonstrates the importance of a coherent international
approach to crisis management. It demonstrates the need of close
interaction between institutions. And it brings home the crucial
role of NATO in helping to implement the wider strategy by the
international community.
Such an approach must also be taken regarding Kosovo. Clearly,
Kosovo is not Bosnia; no two crises are the same. But the events in
Kosovo display many characteristics that have become all too familiar
in the Bosnian conflict, most notably the revival of the cruel
practice of "ethnic cleansing".
We have to put an end to this outrage. A new Europe based on shared
values can only be built if we are ready to uphold these values when
they are threatened. In Bosnia, we have seen that we can make a
difference if we follow a coherent strategy combining political,
economic and military pressure. There is no reason why such a
comprehensive approach should not have a similar effect in defusing
the Kosvo crisis.
Let me be clear: like in Bosnia, it is the parties themselves who are
ultimately responsible for their future. But if the violence
continues, then the international community must take action and help
create the conditions for serious negotiations towards such a
political settlement.
NATO stands ready to play its role in this effort, just as we did in
Bosnia. Over the last weeks we have demonstrated our readiness to
back up international diplomacy with military means. The successful
air exercise last Monday demonstrated our ability to project air
power rapidly into this region. Our military authorities are looking
now at a wide range of options. And no option - I repeat, no option
- is being ruled out.
Now is not the time to lessen our pressure. The international
community must push forward with their efforts to reach a peaceful
settlement. UN, NATO, EU, OSCE: all institutions must play their
full part in preventing another Bosnia.
Bosnia and Kosovo represent the new risks of a Europe in transition.
They bring home the fact that deterrence and territorial defence are
no longer enough. To cope with risks like these requires an entirely
new set of tools and instruments. NATO has put some of them in
place. Let me focus on the most important ones.
First, the Partnership for Peace. This initiative has provided us
with new ways of cooperating across the Euro-Atlantic area. PfP has
enabled 27 countries with different security policies and traditions
cooperate on security - from Austria to Romania, and from Hungary to
Finland. Each Partner can decide the degree of his involvement in
the Partnership; each country can tailor its participation to its
specific needs and interests. All this gives PfP a tremendous
potential. It is the first step towards a wider security culture on
this continent and indeed beyond.
The major focus of the Partnership is enhancing our ability to work
together - be it on humanitarian operations or peacekeeping missions.
But the Partnership has also demonstrated its value in projecting
stability in a crisis. In the Kosovo crisis, both Albania and the
former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia have made use of the
consultation opportunities provided by PfP. We will be holding PfP
exercises in both countries, and we have advised them on how to
control their borders and cope with the influx of refugees. We have
also opened a Partnership Cell in Tirana this month. Together, these
measures have helped avoid a spillover of the crisis and reassured
both Partners that NATO will contribute to their stability in an
emergency.
The fact that so many non-NATO countries have contributed
significantly and successfully to the SFOR in Bosnia, and that so
many are indicating their readiness to help support the enhanced
Partnership activities in Albania and the former Yugoslav Republic of
Macedonia, testifies to the success of the Alliance's effort to build
new ties of partnership and cooperation with countries throughout the
Euro-Atlantic region.
These ties will be further strengthened by our cooperation in the
Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council. The EAPC brings together all NATO
and Partner countries to consult on all issues of European security,
ranging from peacekeeping to terrorism to even regional cooperation.
Like the Partnership for Peace, the EAPC has already demonstrated its
values as a means of crisis prevention. Just a few weeks ago we
inaugurated the Euro-Atlantic Disaster Response Coordination Centre
in Brussels. Today, this Centre is already playing its part in
addressing the Kosovo crisis, by supporting the UNHCR with carrying
aid into the region.
PfP and EAPC are NATO's most visible multinational instruments to
shape the evolution of Euro-Atlantic security. But they are not the
only ones. Our dialogue with Southern Mediterranean countries is
helping to foster new relationships in this vital region. And, last
but not least, our distinct partnership with Ukraine offers new
avenues for cooperation with a country of crucial importance for
stability and security in Europe.
But there is yet another instrument that we need to develop further
if our goal of a comprehensive Euro-Atlantic security architecture is
to become a reality: the new partnership with Russia. One cannot
build such an architecture without Russia, let alone against it.
Bosnia and Kosovo made it crystal clear: if the international
community is to act effectively in European crises, Russia must be on
board.
The mechanism to have Russia on board is there: the Permanent Joint
Council. It gives NATO and Russia a unique forum to consult on all
issues affecting their security: peacekeeping, nuclear safety,
NATO-Russia cooperation in SFOR, armaments-related cooperation,
terrorism, the retraining of retired military personnel - these are
just some of the areas of our work.
And we are enhancing military-to-military contacts, adding to our
very successful cooperation in the Stabilisation Force in Bosnia.
Our major common concern at the moment is, of course, Kosovo. At last
Thursday's meeting of the PJC, both NATO and Russia reaffirmed their
support for the international efforts to achieve a peaceful
resolution of this conflict.
We also hope that assurances given by President Milosevic during his
recent meeting with President Yeltsin will be transformed into deeds.
We have not got much time left.
Of all the many new instruments NATO has created over the course of
this decade, the NATO-Russia relationship is perhaps the most
innovative. It signals most dramatically how far Europe - and NATO -
have changed. But Europe is changing in many more ways. The
European integration process is one example of Europe assuming a new
quality: Europe is not only widening, but also deepening.
This brings me to the last instrument I would like to elaborate on in
my remarks today: a stronger European personality within NATO.
Monetary Union is only the latest step in Europe's evolution into a
unified strategic actor. A Common Foreign and Security Policy is
being shaped. A European Security and Defence Identity is beling
developed within NATO.
The transatlantic link is and will remain absolutely vital to the
continued success of the Alliance. But a new NATO requires a new
balance of responsibilities. It requires that Europe play a security
role in line with its economic strength.
Such a re-balancing is fully in line with the interests on both sides
of the Atlantic. The United States will not always want to take the
lead in each and every crisis in Europe. There may be situations
where a supporting role for a European-led coalition may seem more
appropriate. That is why all allies fully support the development of
a European Security and Defence Identity.
With both sides of the Atlantic agreeing on the strategic importance
of an European Security and Defence Identity, it has been possible to
make rapid progress in creating these new political and military
options. NATO's ever closer relationship with the WEU has provided
us with new options for European-led peacekeeping and crisis
management operations drawing on NATO assets and capabilities.
Later this year we will start the process of testing these
arrangements, leading in the year 2000 to a full trial.
As a result, we will have set the stage for Europe to play a security
role more in line with its economic and political strength. It will
be NATO's contribution to a new transatlantic bargain, a bargain that
better corresponds to the political, military and economic realities
of the 21st century.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Talking about security risks and challenges is not an expression of
pessimism. Indeed, compared to previous transition periods in
European history, this continent is doing remarkably well. NATO's
discussion of risks is a discussion of how to solve them. No problem
is insurmountable, provided we approach it with the right
instruments. NATO offers many of these instruments: partnership and
cooperation, military competence, and transatlantic solidarity. This
is a formidable combination. If we make full use of these
instruments, NATO and its Partners can, together, cope confidently
with any contingency the future may hold.
Thank You.
|