8 May 2001
Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs,
Good afternoon. First of all, let me thank you very much
for waiting for us. Just let me introduce myself. I am Marc
Grossman, the Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs.
On my left is Steve Hadley, who is the Deputy National Security
Advisor of the United States of America. And to my right,
someone you all know Sandy Vershbow, Ambassador to NATO.
Marc Grossman and Deputy National Security Advisor of
the United States, Steve Hadley
First of all, let me say that my purpose here today is
just to give you a very short report -- as you can see
that we are headed on to our next stop -- but to give
you a short report of why it is we came to NATO. And secondly,
a little bit about what we accomplished.
The first thing is that on May the 1st; President Bush
gave a very, very important speech about the future of
strategic stability and about the future of deterrence.
Among the most important points that he made in that speech
was the importance of allied consultations. And so we
have made NATO today the very first stop on a trip which
will take many of us to a number of countries in Europe.
I also want to let you to know that the Deputy Secretary
of State is currently in Asia -- Japan and Korea -- to
also have consultations with our friends and allies. This
close relationship with friends and allies, and the consultative
process is extremely, extremely important.
What we did today was we made a series of presentations
to the North Atlantic Council. All of those presentations
had two themes. The first theme was consultations. We
are here to describe the thinking of the United States,
but to hear back from our NATO allies about their thinking.
The Secretary General of NATO called it a process of thinking
that we all need to do together.
The second theme that ran through all of these presentations
is that the world of 2001 is not the world of 1972. The
world has changed. Russia is not our enemy. And there
are some pluses and minuses to that new world. So many
pluses that you all know about, but there are minuses
as well. The minuses have to do with proliferation, and
the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. And
so we tried in our presentations today to talk a little
bit about a comprehensive approach, an approach on which
we will work with friends and allies, to deal with this
new threat. Not just about missile defense but about a
comprehensive approach, a cooperative approach, an approach
we will take together.
We talked a little bit about why NATO has become - IS
- the most successful alliance in history. And that is
because we believe in deterrence, we believe in collective
defense, and we very much believe in meeting new threats,
and very much in meeting new opportunities as well.
People will obviously have to speak for themselves, but
I think it's fair to say that the Allies welcomed the
consultation. They recognize the world has changed and
recognize that there are new threats.
I know that the Allies would like even more consultations
and we certainly are committed to do that. Secretary Rumsfeld,
Secretary Powell, and the President will all come to Europe
in May and June. I think the Allies also recognized the
importance of a comprehensive and collective approach.
So I just report to you with that today, and finish where
I started: that our purpose today was to continue a conversation
that we have been having with this Alliance about a new
strategic framework, strategic stability, and a comprehensive
and collective approach to meet the challenges of this
I thank you very much, and I'd be glad to take a couple
Elizabeth, will you help me here?
Q: Have you discussed the ways to integrate Russia
in MDI and what are those ways?
A: Well sir, I would say two things -- actually,
three things, if I could. First, I thought the President's
speech on May the 1st was very eloquent in the way in
which he talked about Russia, and the future of the relationship
between the United States and Russia. And our whole purpose,
and the President's purpose in that speech, was to hold
out a vision for how we might manage relations between
Russia and the United States in the 21st century. Second
thing I would say is, we did discuss that question here
at the North Atlantic Council because people were interested
in how we would go forward, and we also received views
of Allies as well. And the third thing, I would say that
Deputy National Security Advisor Hadley, joined by Deputy
Security Defense Paul Wolfowitz, will be visiting Moscow
on Friday and will continue this conversation.
Q: When you talk about consulting friends and
allies, when the Americans wanted to go through with this
program, do you also expect those friends and allies to
pay part of the bill, a very substantial bill, of developing
the missile defense program?
A: Well, I think we need to step back here. Not
any of the conversation today, certainly from our side,
was that detailed. And we are not there yet. And that
was not the purpose of our consultation today. What were
trying to do today, as the Secretary General said, was
sort of expand people's minds so that they could think
about this new world, and think together about how we
want deterrence to function in the 21st century. The decisions
about how, and when, and how much, are still decisions
to come. And as we said today, decisions that have not
been made in the United States. We had today what I would
consider to be, and I've been around this alliance a long
time, a real consultation.
We'll take one more.
Q: Could you give us a list of the enemies that
you were talking about, and the actually individual threats
that they pose, and could you tell us whether your list
is actually agreed with, by other NATO allies. Do they
take these threats as seriously as you do?
A: I think one of the things that I was struck
by in the conversation today was: while by no means everybody
agrees on every single piece of the threat, I think there
was a general recognition that the world has changed.
As I said there are pluses and minuses to the world we
have today, and one of the big challenges is proliferation.
And standing here, I'm not going to go through one country
after another, this threat, that threat. But the fact
that people have these weapons, people sell them, the
fact that as we look forward into the future, we see more
and more of this, I actually thought was one of the things
that was generally agreed today. I said, I want to be
clear here, I don't say that there was any specificity.
But there was a general recognition that we needed to
do much, much more together in the areas of non-proliferation.
Anyway, thank you all very much.