News

It is always good to be in Poland. First, as a bulk of Lithuanians, you are feeling at home when being abroad. Second, there is also a great professional satisfaction. Being a diplomat I know that there will be no dramatic questions about finding a place in or getting back to Europe. Conferences with this kind of titles are flourishing these days. Please, get me right. It not to say that all these undertakings are worthless. I am only saying that mostly all those events are missing the point. With today's audience I do hope we will jump over this part and, without wasting our time, focus on the crux of the matter - NATO enlargement process, a means to construct a more secure Europe. After the September 11 attacks against the United States many things are different. Indeed, it is a watershed in our security thinking and foreign policy apprehension. The challenge of terrorism does not only change our talking points. It is deeper. Our agenda is changed. Security and defense is different. I am different. We all are different.Our policies are becoming different in many respects. On the other hand, it has become even more evident that there are things which are to stay unchanged. The goal, a secure Europe, united, free and prosperous, is as it was on September 10. In order to be successful, our policies therefore have to be twofold. In our security and foreign policy we have to act quickly and be able to accommodate urgent changes and corrections. On the other hand, and I would like to stress it, the core of the efforts remains the same. Let me first to elaborate on what is changing. The geo-strategic environment is different. Classic geopolitical schemes are giving way to rather complex set of new factors. We in Lithuania believe that geopolitical context is becoming much more favorable to go ahead with vigorous project of European/Euroatlantic unification. New paradigm is seen in the realm of security. One could argue that security does not mean, prima facio, defense anymore. Security is broader than defense. Effective security will require additional qualifications, intelligence, special forces, preventive/preemptive action etc. Policies of enlargement. Comparing the first round of NATO enlargement in Madrid and forthcoming one in Prague I wish they be different in one respect. As President Bush put it in Warsaw few months ago: "As we plan the Prague Summit, we should not calculate how little we can get away with but how much we can do to advance the cause of freedom." The visionary thinking of securing a maximum has to prevail over negative instincts of lowest common denominator. There is yet another dimension of NATO enlargement. NATO Secretary General Lord Robertson, so famous for his ability putting things into prospective, said recently: "The events of September 11 focused Russia on the fact that there are larger things out there than obsession with NATO moving into the Baltics".It could not be said better. And the attitude is changing in Russia. That is an encouraging sign. It is time to stop wasting political energy in Russia, NATO, and the Baltics and concentrate on what indeed matters. The rapprochement between NATO and Russia alone is an outstanding feature in today's political reality. This relationship, taken anew, would have a potential to go beyond scheming of two old rivals into what one might call a true partnership. It remains to be seen whether the shift we are witnessing is a tactical or tectonic one. Nevertheless, no one could deny that it provides us with a unique opportunity to explore and enrich the security co-operation between NATO and Russia. I am tempted to believe that with portion of both imaginative thinking and caution the initiative of the UK Prime Minister Tony Blair could lead to success. Of course, the key is mutual political will to co-operate and build mutual trust. We are interested in new policies succeeding. We were aware of the need to build a constructive agenda with Russia already long ago. The speech of the President Valdas Adamkus on 10 September 2001, immediately before the tragedy in America, sets the guidelines for our further co-operation with Russians. Being Russia's neighbor and constructing its policies as a part of that of NATO-Russia and EU-Russia relations, Lithuania is nothing but eager to contribute to the dialog with Russia. The NATO-Russia relationship, however distinctive is only one piece in an overall puzzle of today's security. It brings me to second part of my thoughts, what is to stay unchanged. I mentioned we are different. Yes, and no. We supported NATO in Kosovo crisis, we act as Allies in the NATO and US fight against terrorism today. We will act as an Ally in future as well. As I mentioned above, NATO enlargement is seen in new context. Nevertheless, the underlying rationale for further NATO enlargement remains the same. Rationale of the President's Bush speech in Warsaw did not change. All this has only been reinforced by the need for common action based on common values. Trilateral co-operation of Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia remains as important as it always has been. Baltic membership in NATO will solidify the achievements of the first round of enlargement as well as it will help to project stability and security beyond the Baltic sea region. Further NATO enlargement will also bring more political cohesion and effectiveness into the Alliance. The co-operation of Vilnius Group, V10, is to stay. The logic of the V10 solidarity and co-operation has proven its value in the context of enlargement. Political solidarity proves being a proper response to major security challenges, be it NATO enlargement or anti-terrorist campaign. The third round of the Membership Action Plan is as valuable as previous two. We are preparing for the NATO membership and further doing our homework within the framework of the MAP. Review of the force structures as well as development of defense capabilities is another major area of our practical preparations. Resources play an important role in it. Parliamentary parties pledged allocation of 2 per cent of GDP for the development of the defense capabilities. Criteria for the membership are the same. All criteria are laid down in the 1995 Study on NATO enlargement and the 1999 Membership Action Plan. To sum up, few thoughts on the way ahead. At the Prague Summit in 2002 Allies have to proceed with robust and energetic enlargement inviting as many countries as feasible, each being considered on an individual basis. No decision to postpone decision. Clear timelines are most important to make enlargement process a success. Invitees should become full-fledged members of the Alliance in 2003 or 2004.