01 November 2002
U.S. Sees Prague Summit as "Critical Turning Point" for NATO
(NATO Ambassador Nicholas Burns in Berlin Oct. 30) (4330)
The NATO Summit in Prague "will be a critical turning point for NATO"
because the allies will shift their mission and military might "from
an inward focus on Europe outward to the new threats that we must all
face together," U.S. Ambassador to NATO Nicholas Burns said in Berlin
October 30.
The NATO summit "is about transformation, enlargement, and cementing
our relationships with states to our east," he said, but in addition,
"Prague will be a place where NATO must speak about Iraq. It will be a
valuable opportunity for allied unity in the face of this common
threat."
The ambassador did not directly mention recent U.S.-German
disagreements, but noted that "there are different views on how to
deal with the threat posed by Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass
destruction program. However, I know that we all can agree that Iraq
is a serial violator of U.N. resolutions," and that Saddam Hussein has
built biological and chemical weapons and a supporter of terrorism,
Burns said.
He recalled the history of U.S.-German cooperation in NATO, including
in the Balkans and Afghanistan. "It remains essential that the United
States and Germany work together, bilaterally and in NATO, to face the
challenges ahead of us," Burns said. "There can be no peace and no
stability in Europe without German-American cooperation."
America sees NATO "as the most successful Alliance in history," he
said. "But in thinking about NATO's future, we must agree that as the
threats to our common security change, NATO must change with them..
The most dangerous threat in this new era is the toxic mix of weapons
of mass destruction and terrorism."
At the Prague Summit, Burns said, "we must speak with one voice and
tell Saddam that the will of the U.N. must be respected and that we
will stand together until this problem is resolved. As President Bush
has made clear, we want diplomacy to succeed, but if it fails to
convince Saddam to fulfill his U.N. obligations, the U.S. will have no
choice but to pursue other options."
However, Burns also pointed out that "there is little of lasting
consequence that the United States can accomplish in the world without
the sustained cooperation of its Allies and friends. Indeed, we
Americans have much to gain from a multinational approach to defense
and security. But we need strong allies to help. NATO must transform
itself to remain the central pillar of transatlantic security and the
indispensable Alliance."
He characterized the agenda for the summit as "the three news - new
military capabilities, new members as we enlarge, and new
relationships with Russia, Ukraine, Central Asia and the Caucasus,"
and said there must be progress in all three areas in order for NATO
to transform itself to meet 21st Century threats.
The United States is "asking each of the allies to agree on a specific
set of new military commitments with timetables," he said. Noting that
the United States spends 3.5% of its gross domestic product on defense
and would like to see all of the allies reach the 2% level, he said:
"Unfortunately some - including Germany - are well below that
standard."
"We cannot succeed in NATO without Europe doing more," he said. "In
return, the U.S. will continue to do its part to open our markets to
fair defense trade. Indeed, we are beginning a six-month review of our
export control system with that in mind."
Burns also cited the importance of a NATO Response Force "able to
deploy in- or out-of-area, ready for action within 7 to 30 days, and
able to sustain itself in the field for up to a month."
He also said that on his recent tour of the nine countries that are
candidates for NATO membership, he was "very encouraged" by what he
saw.
"All of these countries have work to do to complete the reform
revolutions that began a decade ago -- to vanquish corruption, illicit
arms trade, trafficking of women and children. But all of them have
made extraordinary progress," he said, adding that President Bush will
decide "in a few days" which of the countries the United States will
support for membership.
He also discussed Alliance relations with Russia and Ukraine, saying
that "NATO had hoped at Prague to announce a new step forward in our
relations with Ukraine. But allegations that President Kuchma approved
the sale of a Kolchuga Radar System to Iraq has stopped our dialogue
with him dead in its tracks. Ukraine must cooperate as we respond to
this problem. The U.S. believes NATO should maintain its links with
reformers in Ukraine, but we cannot conduct business as usual with
leaders who violate United Nations sanctions on Iraq."
Following are his remarks:
(begin text)
"LAUNCHING NATO'S TRANSFORMATION AT PRAGUE"
Manfred Woerner Memorial Lecture
Delivered by U.S. Ambassador to NATO R. Nicholas Burns
Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung
Berlin, Germany
October 30, 2002
Thank you, General Naumann.
All of us at NATO appreciate your service to the alliance as chairman
of the military committee, and your continuing support of NATO in your
new career. Thanks also to Dr. Karl-Heinz Kamp, Director of Foreign
and Security Policy Planning for the Konrad Adenauer Stiftung, for
your kind invitation to deliver the Manfred Woerner Memorial Lecture
this evening. I am delighted to be in Berlin to see the refurbished
Brandenburg Gate and to meet with you as the German and American
governments and our NATO allies prepare for NATO's historic Prague
Summit in November.
Let me begin by saying a few words about the former NATO Secretary
General in whose honor this lecture series is named. Manfred Woerner
was a truly great NATO Secretary General whose legacy of leadership
still inspires our Alliance.
Secretary General Woerner presided over the NATO alliance as it
prevailed over communism. He was at the helm as the Berlin wall fell,
Germany was re-united in NATO, and the Soviet Union collapsed. One of
my predecessors, Ambassador William Taft, IV, said that Manfred
Woerner was the guiding force behind NATO's post-Cold War agenda and
that he led NATO as a German, as a European, and also as a true friend
of the United States as we sought to construct a Europe "whole, free,
and at peace."
Germany continues to provide NATO with key leaders who are important
to its success. We welcome the vision of General Harald Kujat, the new
chairman of NATO's military committee, and the expertise of Assistant
Secretary General for Political Affairs Gunter Altenburg. I also
salute the significant contributions and unparalleled experience of my
friend and colleague -- and able tennis partner -- Ambassador Gebhardt
von Moltke.
It remains essential that the United States and Germany work together,
bilaterally and in NATO, to face the challenges ahead of us. Konrad
Adenauer and Manfred Woerner believed throughout their careers, as did
generations of American leaders, that there can be no peace and no
stability in Europe without German-American cooperation. That is
undeniably true today.
They also knew that NATO is vital to Europeans and Americans alike to
secure the defense of freedom. In this sense, we are gratified for
Germany's sizeable troop contributions -- 6,000 strong -- to allied
peacekeeping operations in Bosnia and Kosovo, and for its past
leadership of Task Force Fox in Macedonia.
We also applaud Germany's efforts in the broader international
security arena. More than 3,000 German troops are currently deployed
to support military and humanitarian operations in Afghanistan. The
U.S. very much welcomes and supports Germany's recent offer to lead
the International Security Assistance Force with the Netherlands in
Afghanistan. We encourage the new German government to be a strong and
active presence in the Alliance and in the fight against terrorism.
Ladies and gentlemen, I am honored to be here tonight to share my
thoughts with you on how the United States sees the upcoming NATO
Summit in Prague. Our view is at once simple and yet far-reaching: we
want the Prague Summit to launch a whole-scale transformation of the
NATO Alliance for the 21st century. The old NATO served us well, but
our task now is to build a transformed Alliance that can extend the
peace and our common security for the next generation of Europeans and
Americans.
We Americans see NATO as the most successful Alliance in history, and
the most important for our country as we chart our 21st century
foreign and security policy. But in thinking about NATO's future, we
must agree that as the threats to our common security change, NATO
must change with them. During the Cold War and into the 1990s, we
faced threats from within Europe, and thus centered NATO's defensive
strategy here in Germany to avert them.
Today, most of Europe is at peace. The threats to that peace come not
from strong states within Europe, but from unstable failed states and
terrorist organizations far from Europe's borders. The most dangerous
threat in this new era is the toxic mix of weapons of mass destruction
and terrorism, aimed not just at our militaries but at our civilian
populations as well.
NATO Secretary General George Robertson, speaking at a conference in
Brussels recently, said, "Geography will no longer act as our shield,"
because the current and future security environment "does not afford
us the luxury of fighting theoretical battles about what is 'in' and
what is 'out-of-area.'"
NATO is already operating well beyond the borders of our member
states, and that is where we will stay in the future. The old
"out-of-area" debate is indeed dead. As Allies, we have already agreed
that NATO must be able to act wherever our security and the safety of
our people demand action, because the virus of insecurity and
terrorism is spreading -- from the attacks in the U.S. on September
11, 2001 and at a synagogue in Tunisia to, in the last few weeks, a
French oil tanker in the Indian Ocean, a nightclub in Bali, and most
recently a theatre in Moscow.
With this in mind, it is clear that NATO is at a pivotal moment as it
faces these new threats. We know that we must stand up to confront
global terrorism and that we must create a renewed, more flexible, and
purposeful alliance to defeat it.
When President Bush meets with the other NATO leaders in Prague three
weeks from tonight, they will make historic decisions to create a new
NATO to protect Europe and North America in the years ahead. Their
agenda will be "the three news" -- new military capabilities, new
members as we enlarge, and new relationships with Russia, Ukraine,
Central Asia and the Caucasus. These "three news" are inter-dependent
-- like the legs of a stool -- for without progress in all three
areas, NATO will not be able to accomplish the transformation required
to meet the threats of today and tomorrow.
With such an ambitious agenda before them, Prague will surely be one
of the most important NATO Summits in half a century, and a historic
pivot point from which NATO will redirect its efforts in the future.
Here is the NATO that the U.S. believes we and our allies need for the
21st century threat environment:
First, it is a NATO of new military capabilities. Capabilities
designed to counter the new threats, which could come from anywhere,
but most likely from outside of Europe. We need to decide at Prague on
new ways to counter chemical, biological or nuclear attack on our
forces and civilian populations. Our leaders will agree to create new
NATO teams to respond to weapons of mass destruction, attacks in our
cities and against our forces. The U.S. hopes they will also agree to
examine options for development of missile defense to protect Europe
and the U.S. from ballistic missile attack.
By Prague, we are asking each of the allies to agree on a specific set
of new military commitments with timetables. We must also face the
ever-widening capabilities gap between the U.S. and its Allies. Based
on our experience in Kosovo, we cannot deal with soldiers unable to
communicate with each other, aircraft unable to use precision weapons,
commanders unable to see the battlefield. At the very least, NATO
Allies must agree to fund within the next year, key functional
capabilities in a few vital areas: strategic airlift; secure,
interoperable communications; ground surveillance systems; protection
against chemical and biological weapons; and more special forces
units. In short, we need to be able to get to the fight quickly and
flexibly, with lethal and precise firepower, and sustain ourselves
until the job is done.
While not every Ally can do everything, NATO is built and sustained on
the premise that every ally, whether big or small, can contribute
something. Recognizing the importance of stronger militaries in the
new threat environment, some Allies -- the U.K., France, Portugal and
Norway -- have raised their defense budgets this year. For other
allies, pooling of resources or specialization in certain capabilities
may be the answer. All allies need to look hard at the resources they
devote to our common security. In just the last few weeks, we have
been encouraged that European Allies are considering the lease of air
transport to get our soldiers to distant theatres, tankers to fuel
them, and precision-guided munitions to win the fight once we get
there.
The U.S. will spend 3.5% of its gross domestic product on national
defense this year. We would prefer that all of our allies reach the 2%
level. Unfortunately, some -- including Germany -- are well below that
standard. Even without spending more money, many allies could use
their existing defense euros more wisely by providing professional
military units with the tools they need to carry out Alliance
missions, rather than retain static conscript forces. European Allies
that failed to invest in modern military capabilities in the 1990s
must now rise to that challenge. We cannot succeed in NATO without
Europe doing more. In return, the U.S. will continue to do its part to
open our markets to fair defense trade. Indeed, we are beginning a
six-month review of our export control system with that in mind.
But military hardware can only do so much. New threats require an
agile, deployable command structure if we are to defeat them. Allies
need to shed an outmoded mindset and a rusty NATO military order
better suited for a continental war than the threats we face now. Our
Allied armed forces need to think and be trained to deploy flexibly
and quickly to ensure our security wherever it is challenged. At
Prague, NATO leaders will agree on the major foundations of this new
command structure to give us the capacity to respond to the new global
terrorist threat by striking back quickly and with lethal force.
With this in mind, one of the most important U.S. proposals for Prague
is to create a NATO Response Force to meet this new challenge.
Secretary Rumsfeld proposed this multinational combat force of
approximately 20,000 personnel from air, land, and naval components,
able to deploy in- or out-of-area, ready for action within 7 to 30
days, and able to sustain itself in the field for up to a month. This
proposal won broad support from Allied defense ministers in Warsaw,
and we want it to be endorsed by heads of state and government at
Prague.
We see this new NATO force as the heart of the transformation that
NATO must adopt -- an ability that we did not have immediately after
September 11 -- to strike back quickly and forcefully when an Ally is
attacked by a distant foe, as the U.S. was by al-Qaeda. NATO must
create this capability if it is to be relevant in the new global
terrorist environment. A NATO Response Force, focused on combat
missions, will complement and not compete with, the E.U.'s proposed
Rapid Reaction Force which will focus on peacekeeping duties. In fact,
we see these two forces as mutually reinforcing, as we see the entire
range of NATO-E.U. cooperation. We must now follow up to ensure that
Allies participate in and contribute to the NATO response force, and
get it ready to put planes in the air, ships under sail, and boots on
the ground as soon as possible.
The Prague summit will be the first NATO heads of government meeting
in a former Warsaw Pact country. That powerful symbol is linked
directly to the second great step forward that NATO's leaders will
take in Prague: to invite new members to join our Alliance. NATO is
close to a consensus on a historic enlargement in Prague, certainly
the largest since the Alliance was created. President Bush led the way
to this decision when he said in his visionary Warsaw speech in 2001
that "Yalta did not ratify a natural divide, it divided a living
civilization." He made it clear that his goal was to erase the false
lines that have split Europe for too long. He said, "Every European
nation that struggles toward democracy, free markets, and a strong
civic culture must be welcomed into Europe's home. I believe in NATO
membership for all of Europe's democracies that seek it and that are
ready to share the responsibilities that NATO brings."
President Bush and his Alliance partners have the opportunity to
create, in the 21st century, a world our fathers and grandfathers
could not give us in the 20th. At Prague, NATO's decision to take in
new members will serve one of the great strategic aims of our time: a
Europe whole, free, united, and at peace. This summer, I visited some
of the great battlefields of the first and second World Wars -- the
Somme, Ypres, Bastogne -- where hundreds of thousands of Germans and
British and Americans and others perished. Surely we have the
capacity, by extending NATO's reach, to ensure that Europe never sees
such bloodshed again, and that it will never again be divided by
ideology or war.
I just returned two weeks ago from a nine-country, six-day tour of all
the countries wishing to join NATO. My delegation and I met, for the
third time this year, with the presidents, prime ministers, foreign
and defense ministers of each country. We were very encouraged by what
we saw and by the pace of reforms in all nine of the aspirant
countries. Many of them have already been participating with NATO as
"virtual allies" deployed in the Balkans or training and exercising
with NATO forces, or by contributing to the anti-terrorism coalition
in Afghanistan. Even after the heads of state and government make
their decisions on enlargement, we expect continuing reforms in the
"invitee nations" throughout the accession and ratification processes,
and continued engagement with those nations not invited.
All of these countries have work to do to complete the reform
revolutions that began a decade ago -- to vanquish corruption, illicit
arms trade, trafficking of women and children. But all of them have
made extraordinary progress. President Bush will decide in a few days
which of the countries the U.S. will support. NATO, as a whole, then
will announce its decision at Prague. I am convinced that NATO will be
stronger when the new countries formally join our Alliance at our next
summit in the spring of 2004.
The third aspect of the new NATO is our commitment to strengthen
relationships in the east -- with Russia, with Ukraine, and with the
frontline states of the Caucasus and Central Asia.
The NATO-Russia council, created in may of this year, is off to a good
start, and we look forward to taking stock of this progress with
foreign minister Igor Ivanov in Prague. In September, Russia hosted a
joint civil emergency exercise in Noginsk, where 30 countries
cooperated to respond to a mock terrorist attack using chemical
weapons -- a threat all of us could face. NATO and Russia are
examining how we can work together on theatre missile defense, joint
search and rescue, and training programs. We are also thinking through
the threats of ballistic missile proliferation and weapons of mass
destruction. The NATO-Russia council can be the forum where Russia and
all the NATO countries learn to cooperate in a way we have never done
before. We need to keep that worthy goal as our target and undertake
more ambitious projects together in 2003.
NATO had hoped at Prague to announce a new step forward in our
relations with Ukraine. But allegations that President Kuchma approved
the sale of a Kolchuga Radar System to Iraq has stopped our dialogue
with him dead in its tracks. Ukraine must cooperate as we respond to
this problem. The U.S. believes NATO should maintain its links with
reformers in Ukraine, but we cannot conduct business as usual with
leaders who violate United Nations sanctions on Iraq.
As NATO seeks new, more durable relations with Russia and Ukraine, we
must also reach eastward to create new political and military ties
with the states of Central Asia and the Caucasus. These countries were
vital to our successful campaign in Afghanistan. As NATO seeks in the
future to respond to the threat of terrorism and to instability in the
arc of countries ranging from North Africa to the Middle East to South
Asia, we need the active support of Armenia, Georgia and Azerbaijan,
of Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan and Kyrgystan to
protect us and them from the many dangers we all now confront. As NATO
devoted itself to stabilizing Central Europe and the Balkans in the
1990s, we must now look east in the next decade to extend our hand in
partnership to each of these countries as we seek peace and stability
for them and for ourselves.
Ladies and gentlemen, Prague will be a critical turning point for NATO
because we will shift the mission and full military might of 19
countries from an inward focus on Europe outward to the new threats
that we must all face together. In this sense, NATO's Prague Summit is
about transformation, enlargement, and cementing our relationships
with states to our east. NATO remains vital to Germans and Americans,
Czechs and Latvians, Spaniards and Kazaks. NATO alone can weave the
essential threads of political and military cooperation crucial to
keep us all safe, prosperous and united in the dangerous 21st century
world we inhabit. This is now NATO's central responsibility -- to
unite us all, as Allies and Partners, from Vancouver to Vladivostock
in a single, common, purposeful institution which can create a new
democratic peace in Europe.
As we seek that peace, we must not shrink from challenging those who
would destroy it. I want, in this context, to say a few words about
the difficult issue of Iraq. Clearly there are different views on how
to deal with the threat posed by Saddam Hussein and his weapons of
mass destruction program. However, I know that we all can agree that
Iraq is a serial violator of U.N. resolutions; that it is a country
with a leader whose craving to dominate others has led him to build
biological and chemical weapons; that Saddam's ruthless disregard for
his own people and long-standing support for terrorism as a tool of
both domestic and international politics shows he will have no qualms
about threatening and actually using these weapons himself or through
terrorist proxies.
After September 11, 2001, we can no longer afford to turn a blind eye
to this threat. That is why President Bush has chosen to pursue action
so vigorously in the United Nations. It is also the reason why Prague
will be a place where NATO must speak about Iraq. It will be a
valuable opportunity for allied unity in the face of this common
threat. At Prague, we must speak with one voice and tell Saddam that
the will of the U.N. must be respected and that we will stand together
until this problem is resolved. As President Bush has made clear, we
want diplomacy to succeed, but if it fails to convince Saddam to
fulfill his U.N. obligations, the U.S. will have no choice but to
pursue other options.
Ladies and gentlemen, as a career diplomat, I believe fervently that
we can only conquer these challenges by maintaining the NATO bridge
that links North America to Europe in common cause. We in the United
States have struggled throughout our own history with isolationist
versus more engaged foreign policy impulses. But we know that in the
21st century, ours is a global and interconnected world. International
terrorism is, by definition, transnational. If a Saudi madman based in
Afghanistan can recruit terrorists living in Europe for attacks on New
York and Washington, D.C., we Americans can no longer afford to think
of the United States as invulnerable. Nor would we want to pursue a
unilateralist course, for there is little of lasting consequence that
the United States can accomplish in the world without the sustained
cooperation of its Allies and friends.
Indeed, we Americans have much to gain from a multinational approach
to defense and security. But we need strong allies to help. NATO must
transform itself to remain the central pillar of transatlantic
security and the indispensable Alliance. "If NATO succeeds in enacting
these changes," to quote President Bush, "the rewards will be a
partnership as central to the security and interests of its member
states as was the case during the Cold War. We will sustain a common
perspective on the threats to our societies and improve our ability to
take common action in defense of our nations and their interests. ...
we cannot afford to lose this opportunity to better prepare the family
of transatlantic democracies for the challenges to come."
As we prepare for the NATO Summit in November, this is the strongest
wish of the U.S.: that we will unite our two continents again in
common cause for the challenges ahead, and for the peace and security
of all our peoples. The new NATO is within our reach. Let's go build
it together, at Prague and beyond.
(end text)
(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S.
Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
