News

"A Changing NATO? NATO Enlargement"

Distinguished Chairman,
Excellencies,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
From our discussions at this conference, it is evident that NATO is still a very relevant organisation. Its evolving agenda in light of recent and ongoing developments is indeed challenging. The global threat of terrorism has mobilised more co-ordination among like-minded states in the international campaign against terror. Improved ties with Russia offer new possibilities for building a more co-operative NATO-Russia relationship. The growing crisis management dimension of the European Union is raising the potential for stronger European capabilities and increased burden-sharing. I feel privileged to now introduce another item on the evolving NATO agenda, namely, how enlargement can change the Alliance. I firmly believe that this change will bring about positive developments.The aspirant countries, or Vilnius 10 Group, seek to join NATO because they regard the Alliance as a cornerstone of European security and a solid transatlantic community of shared values. This was clearly evidenced the day after the tragic events of September 11th. When NATO invoked Article 5 on September 12th, NATO was not alone in its support of the United States. Within hours of this historic decision, the Vilnius 10 Group issued a statement of solidarity, in which they agreed that these attacks were not only on the United States, but on our common values. Together with the 46 member countries of the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council, they also pledged to undertake all efforts needed to combat terrorism. As countries knocking on NATO's door, we firmly believe in the Alliance's credibility as a strong and viable multinational organisation, in its vital role in keeping Europe stable and linked to the U.S. and in its ability to adapt in a new era.The Alliance adapted successfully to the most recent wave of NATO enlargement. The enlargement in Prague should proceed even better, because it will have the added benefit of learning from the experience of the previous round. A direct result of that experience is the introduction of the Membership Action Plan. Its implementation by the aspirant countries has laid the groundwork for a smoother accession and integration process of new members. By their own account, the newest NATO members readily admit that the MAP countries are now better prepared than they were to assume the obligations of membership.How will enlargement change NATO? Perhaps we should reverse the question and ask what would be the consequences of a failed or delayed enlargement. NATO's partners can and are enhancing peace support operations and will continue to make crucial contributions in the fight against terrorism. Candidate countries preparing to assume the obligations of membership are already acting as de facto members. They contribute actively - in political, economic and military terms - to the implementation of NATO's policies and decisions. They take part in NATO's co-operative outreach initiatives and are projecting NATO values not only in their respective regions, but beyond them as well, thus expanding the zone of security and stability in Europe. What is to be gained if they are kept on the margins? The new threats and challenges in today's interdependent world call for more solidarity and co-ordination among states, especially those bound by common values, democratic traditions and the rule of law.Our determination to join NATO is the best evidence that the Alliance has lived up to its tasks. Admission of the willing and prepared candidates into the Alliance is the best recognition and international validation of NATO's objectives. Enlargement ensures its dynamism, political sustenance and expands its policies and high standards to a broader area. So in a nutshell, the conclusion is that Euro-Atlantic security will suffer if enlargement fails or is delayed. It would diminish Alliance credibility and cohesion.Since its very establishment, the Alliance has been evolving and building on its experience. It ended the war in Bosnia, won one in Kosovo and prevented another one in Macedonia. This process of adaptation is a continuous and natural one. We should not be afraid of bringing about further changes, since the Alliance and the world will keep evolving anyway. Enlargement offers us the opportunity of strengthening support for the Alliance and its objectives. The environment, in which the Alliance exists, has been evolving on a global scale as well. The Alliance today is more likely to interact with new interlocutors world-wide, just as key Allies have been working with Pakistan and the Central Asian republics in support of Operation Enduring Freedom. In the face of the global terrorist threat, we cannot discount the factors shaping today's security agenda. Nor can we ignore the possibility of wider range of Alliance missions. Significant internal adaptation of the Alliance has already taken place. It prompted NATO to open up to new democracies seeking membership. It facilitated the launching of co-operative outreach initiatives, like Partnership for Peace, the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council and the Mediterranean Dialogue. Along with the core function of collective defence, other activities were added to the list: partnership and co-operation with the states in the Euro-Atlantic space, out-of-area peace support and other international crisis management operations. Will the enlargement strengthen or weaken the Alliance? The candidates are no less interested in the preservation of NATO efficiency, than the current members. We do not want the future NATO to be a weak one. We are not going to stand by idly or passively and watch the Alliance be diluted. I strongly agree with Senator McCain that the potency of NATO will be multiplied not diluted by enlargement. The discussion in months to come on how NATO can be enlarged and kept strong will be an important one. Our input in this discussion, as a candidate country, will be our own individual performance in implementing the MAP and practical contribution to Alliance operations and initiatives.Some are concerned about the possible impact of enlargement on the transatlantic link between Europe and North America, which is essential to European security. I would argue that the admission of the present candidates will contribute to strengthening that link. The candidates are clearly pursuing transatlanticist policies. This bodes well for the political cohesion of the Alliance and the development of the Common European Security and Defence Policy.Concerns have also been raised about the possible negative impact of enlargement on Alliance efficiency and decision-making. Current candidates actively contribute to the implementation of Allied decisions. The NATO candidates were unwavering in their political and practical support during the Kosovo crisis and the ongoing campaign against terror. Enlargement will free the political energies of current and prospective members for work on other issues of common concern. What will the current candidates bring to the Alliance, how will they enrich today's NATO?New entrants will bring new capabilities, new enthusiasm for NATO and their own spirit of co-operation, which has evolved, especially over the past two years, among themselves and their neighbours. The new entrants' integration into Alliance working proceedings will require less time and effort, because they have all gone through the rigorous training school and control mechanisms of the Membership Action Plan (MAP), Partnership for Peace (PfP), Planning and Review Process (PARP) and participation in NATO-led operations. Candidates will also bring the solidarity and programs they developed while seeking membership. Allow me to name a few involving my own country of Lithuania: - The multilaterally supported Baltic defence co-operation projects, which will become a natural regional extension of NATO's integrated structure once Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia are in NATO;- Our long-standing bilateral relationships with virtually each and every NATO ally and non-aligned neighbour and partner. Allow me at this point to mention, that we firmly believe that NATO should further enhance its dialogue with Ukraine too; - The culture of co-operation among the candidate countries within the Vilnius Group process, which we would like to continue and promote within and outside the Alliance.The candidates will bring their own unique experience in the areas of economic, political and defence reform, democratic practices, civilian control over the military, bilateral and regional co-operation. We can share this experience with interested partners in such regions as Trans-Caucasia or Central Asia and thus project and solidify common values, standards and practices.The successful endeavours of the candidates could be incorporated into the Alliance's internal practices and converted from tools of membership preparation into tools of Allied action.Mr. Chairman,Last but not least, our contribution to the Alliance will include our policies promoting good-neighbourly relations as well as our ability and openness to co-operate with Russia. This contribution will include, among other things, a fair knowledge of the Russian language and political culture. As our Russian counterparts are aware, we are prepared to build further co-operative ties with that country based on the solid foundation that NATO membership will provide. It will be a relationship of the same constructive nature as Russia now shares with the two current NATO Allies on her border - Norway and Poland. We look forward to participating and contributing to the strengthening of the NATO-Russia dialogue.Mr. Chairman,Let me conclude by saying that change is inevitable in today's world. The key to dealing with change successfully is the ability to adapt and to turn it into a force for positive development. Enlargement offers us that opportunity. Let us make the most of it.