NATO
in the 21st Century
Speech
by NATO Secretary General, Lord Robertson
at the Charles University in Prague
Ladies and Gentlemen,
In its long and proud history, Prague, the "golden city",
has come to symbolise many things that have made Europe great.
Being, quite literally, at the centre of Europe, Prague has symbolised
religious and political tolerance, enlightenment, trade, and great
cultural and scientific achievements.
And this place of learning, Charles University, was in many
ways the epitome of all these virtues and achievements. Even
in the darker days of the 20th century, when your city - and
your country - were a victim of the ill winds that swept our
continent, Prague remained a symbol of hope -- a demonstration
that the flame of freedom may sometimes flicker low, but can
never be extinguished.
But now the Czech Republic has seized the historic opportunity
to find a new, peaceful and prosperous future among friends,
NATO Allies and Partner nations. The division of Europe has
been overcome, and the Czech Republic is now a staunch member
of the NATO Alliance. Prague has, once again, become the centre
of Europe, and it is therefore fitting that we hold our next
Summit in this city in November of this year.
During the Cold War, there were few Summits. Presidents and
Prime Ministers rarely met in a NATO context. And why should
they? After all, the Cold War seemed permanent and NATO was
very much on "automatic pilot".
This has now changed fundamentally. In the decade or so since
the end of the Cold War we had almost as many Summits as we
had in the forty years of the Cold War. The reason being because
NATO is evolving so quickly and we need top political guidance
on a much more regular basis. More than ever before, we have
to take stock of our achievements, adjust our course, and set
new goals for ourselves.
The leaders of NATO member countries - my bosses - may not
like this comparison I am about to make, but since we are at
a university, let me draw it anyway: NATO Summits are for Presidents
and Prime Ministers what term papers are for students. They
represent a crucially important deadline - a deadline you simply
cannot move. You have to deliver. No excuses, like: "my
dog ate my homework". A Summit, like a term paper, is the
moment of truth.
That is where the comparison ends, however. For while most
students dread the thought of having to do a term paper, we
are in fact looking forward to the Summit. Of course, we still
have homework to do to ensure success. But we know what we want
to achieve: We want "Prague 2002" to be another major
milestone in NATO's adaptation.
When NATO's leaders meet here in this city in November, more
than a year will have passed since the attacks on New York and
Washington on 11 September 2001. So this will be their key opportunity
to demonstrate that we have learned the lessons of September
11 -- and acted on them.
The Prague Summit, in short, will be a Summit of NATO's re-definition
- of its comprehensive external and internal adaptation. In
my remarks today, I would like to sketch some of the elements
this adaptation needs to address.
The first element is the enlargement of NATO itself. If Europe
is to grow together, if it is to overcome fully its Cold War
division, our key institutions cannot remain geared to the past
-- neither in their policies, nor in their memberships. We cannot
say we are simply full up.
The nations of Central and Eastern Europe have a legitimate
claim to get their fair share of "Europe" -- in all
its aspects, including its transatlantic security dimension.
To permanently frustrate these ambitions would only perpetuate
a division between a prosperous, secure and self-confident West
and an insecure, uncertain East. Without enlargement, Europe
would remain unfinished business.
That is why NATO -- very much like the European Union -- must
face up to this challenge. And that is why the accession of
the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland to NATO-- almost exactly
three years ago to the day - has only been the beginning of
the enlargement process.
Some have been asking: will the new member States pull their
weight? Will they play by NATO's rules? I believe they will.
The example set by the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland speaks
for itself. NATO has grown stronger through enlargement. And
as a result, Europe has become safer and more secure.
This logic will continue with the next round. The nations we
will invite at Prague know full well what it means to be in
an Alliance that works. Each of them will have had years of
experience working with the Alliance, as Partners, especially
in bringing peace and stability to the Balkans. Moreover, each
of them will have benefited from several years of NATO-assisted
defence reform. This will make them net security contributors
rather than mere security consumers.
Of course, the successful management of the enlargement process
will mean more than selecting and inviting a certain number
of countries. Managing enlargement also entails the need to
keep the door open for future members. And it means continued
engagement with all our Partner nations in the Partnership for
Peace, whether they aspire to NATO membership or not.
This leads me to the second element of NATO's adaptation, namely
NATO's Partnership initiatives. The Partnership for Peace and
the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council have changed the face
of European security.
They have become political and military instruments for serious
crisis management, as we can see every day in our operations
in the Balkans. And they have sowed the seeds of a true Euro-Atlantic
security culture - a genuine predisposition to work together
to tackle common challenges.
In the wake of the terrorist attacks on the United States,
the 46 countries of the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council acted
decisively as the world's largest permanent coalition, staunch
in their condemnation of criminal violence and robust in their
defence against its perpetrators.
Some people fear that this unique cooperative momentum of NATO's
remarkable Partnership initiatives will fizzle out after NATO
enlargement.
I believe that they are wrong. Whatever the size of NATO's
enlargement, we will still need a robust mechanism that links
the larger NATO with the rest of Europe, with the Caucasus,
and with Central Asia. All 46 countries, NATO members and Partner
countries alike, are now working on how to put this principle
into practice. Their challenge is to ensure together that their
Partnership remains as attractive after Prague as it is at the
moment.
A third element of NATO's adaptation is our relationship with
Russia. Throughout the 1990s, we danced nervously around each
other, sometimes warmer sometimes cooler. During this time,
NATO enlargement was a major bone of contention. Nowhere did
perceptions between NATO and Russia differ more widely. What
we saw as a natural part of Europe's growing together, Russia
perceived as a sinister geopolitical plot -- the encroachment
of a powerful and dangerous military alliance toward its borders.
This overshadowed our entire relationship.
That has now changed. September 11 has created an entirely
new context for NATO-Russia relations. It has highlighted that
NATO and Russia share common concerns -- and that they need
to address these concerns together. Hence our determination
to go beyond consultation and to work constructively together
on all the issues where we have what President Putin described
to me as "the logic of common interest".
The details are arcane but important. Until now, our relationship
with Russia has been conducted at "19 plus one". In
other words, NATO's 19 members have worked with Russia as if
they were a single entity, precooking their policies on all
issues before they were discussed with the Russian side. Now,
however, on a range of key issues, Russia will sit alongside
the 19 Allies as an equal partner. This new forum for cooperation
"at 20" should be ready well before Prague.
People often ask me about the real difference between "19+1"
and "20". My answer is: chemistry rather than arithmetic,
as even the best format and seating arrangement can be no substitute
for genuine political will and open mind on both sides.
All this does not mean that I harbour romantic expectations
about NATO's relationship with Russia. We will not always agree.
I do not expect Moscow to enthusiastically welcome NATO enlargement.
NATO countries will continue to be robust critics if we disapprove
of Russia's policies and their implementation, including in
Chechnya.
And we will ensure that cooperation does not undermine either
NATO's cohesion and autonomy of action, or the interest of third
countries. But this initiative gives us the chance to transform
the strategic landscape -- to finally get the kind of practical,
pragmatic NATO-Russia relationship we should have achieved a
long time ago. President Putin said to me in Moscow last year
that if this works, it will change the world. That is a real
goal for a transformation Summit.
Terrorism is, of course, another area of adaptation and re-definition.
Terrorism cannot be defeated by military means alone, but there
is a vitally important role for the military. And because NATO
is the world's most effective defence organisation, it has a
vital part to play in multinational crisis prevention and crisis
management, including in dealing with asymmetric threats.
NATO's indispensable role in the anti-terrorist struggle has
already been visible since September 11. By invoking Article
5 of the Washington Treaty, the Alliance's collective defence
clause, within hours after the attacks, NATO sent the strongest
possible message that an attack against one is an attack against
all. Since then, NATO has taken a series of important military
measures, from the deployment of AWACS early warning aircraft
to protect American cities to smashing Al Qaida cells in the
Balkans. And individual NATO countries have participated in
the US-led Afghanistan campaign, and are playing a key role
in the International Security Assistance Force in Kabul.
The Czech Republic has made a valuable contribution to our
common efforts. It has, for example, sent its first-class chemical
detection capabilities to Kuwait, and it is getting a field
hospital ready for Afghanistan. These are tangible and very
welcome contributions to the campaign against terrorism.
At our Summit, we will consolidate NATO's position as the primary
means for developing our armed forces to defeat terrorism and
contribute to meeting other asymmetric challenges. The European
troops on the ground in Kabul are able to cooperate effectively
only because of decades of experience working together in NATO.
NATO is now hard at work examining ways to further improve
military capabilities to defend and strike against terrorists,
and to develop our forces' ability to protect themselves against
chemical, biological and radiological weapons. In parallel,
we are looking at how best to use unique military skills and
capabilities more effectively to protect our populations, and
to assist in civil emergencies.
This new work is part of a wider effort to modernise our armed
forces. And this brings me to my last point for "Prague
2002": military capabilities.
This is a subject where I make myself unpopular with Ministries
of Finance by my bluntness. So let me be blunt again. Too many
NATO governments spend too little on defence. And too many governments
waste what they do spend on capabilities that contribute nothing
to their own security, the security of Europe or our wider collective
interests.
There is a lot of talk at the moment about United States unilateralism
and European weakness. Much of it is wrong. But it is absolutely
right that unless Europe does more militarily, we will not be
able to operate alongside America's rapidly modernising armed
forces. As a committed Atlanticist and as a committed European,
I believe that would be a disaster for the United States and
for Europe. So if Europe wants to punch its economic weight
when it comes to crises on its doorstep or more widely, we must
modernise our militaries. And do so quickly.
The answer to this predicament does not lie in institutional
quick fixes. Neither NATO nor the EU can deliver if nations
continue to peg down or ever cut their defence budgets. The
answer can only lie in higher defence budgets and in smarter
investment, using these budgets more effectively.
Smart investment is the only way to share the transatlantic
burden, and deal effectively with our common challenges. Only
smart investment will give us forces that are capable of maintaining
peace in the Balkans, bringing stability to Afghanistan, fighting
terrorism at home and abroad, and -- ultimately -- providing
for our collective defence.
But smart investment goes beyond defence budgets. To deal with
today's crises, we need better homeland defence, better intelligence,
more deployable civil police, and more effective monitoring
of money laundering. The list goes on and on. But there are
savings to be made as well. In today's world, we need fewer
unusable conscripts. Smaller heavy metal armies. Fewer static
bases. And fewer static headquarters.
These are stark choices with serious political and economic
implications -- especially for newer Alliance member countries
such as your own. But they are choices that cannot be put off.
Because they are fundamental to our common security.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
NATO's agenda at Prague runs from spreading stability through
our continent, building new bridges with Russia, helping to
beat the terrorist and giving military European countries the
ability to play a bigger military role in the transatlantic
partnership.
Remember also that today we have 60,000 NATO troops keeping
the peace in three Balkan countries, including 50,000 of your
young European counterparts. NATO's AWACS aircraft are flying
over the United States to prevent a repeat of September 11.
And in Brussels, a lot of grey middle-aged men and rather fewer
middle-aged women are boring each other to tears in long, tedious
but important meetings that prove that jaw-jaw is always better
than war-war.
Our Summit will help to keep NATO relevant to all its members,
as the main provider of security and stability throughout our
Euro-Atlantic area. Our agenda is one which no other institution
can address. Prague, the "Golden City" will be a "golden
opportunity" to demonstrate that NATO remains the bedrock
of our security -- and of that of future generations.
Thank You.

|