04 December 1998
(Amb. Ely-Raphel at the Atlantic Council of Slovenia) (1600) Ljubljana, Slovenia -- U.S. Ambassador to Slovenia Nancy Ely-Raphel told the North Atlantic Council of Slovenia December 1, "You are strong contributors to the OSCE [Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe] process, and a leading candidate for both NATO membership and EU accession. My government strongly supports Slovenia's candidacy in both NATO and the EU." The ambassador recalled that President Clinton recently told Prime Minister Drnovsek, "Slovenia is the best candidate for NATO's next wave of enlargement," but she reminded the Council that the president did not say when the "next wave of enlargement" would take place. She urged the "governing coalition and the opposition to work together to keep EU and NATO legislation moving swiftly through the legislative process," saying, "There will be major changes made in the economic, political and military fields in Slovenia as you get closer and closer to EU and NATO membership." Assuring the Council that the "ultimate goal, that of further integration into Euro-Atlantic structures, is surely worth the struggle," she said, "The U.S. is looking to Slovenia to lead the way for Central and Eastern Europe to be fully integrated into the Euro-Atlantic Partnership for the 21st century and to make the vision of a free and democratic Europe without dividing lines a concrete reality." Other points the ambassador made were that "The U.S. does not seek a place at the EU table" and "NATO has and will continue to have a much more limited role" in the 21st Century. Following is the text of the ambassador's remarks: (Begin text) SLOVENIA, THE "EURO-ATLANTIC PARTNERSHIP FOR THE 21ST CENTURY" Remarks by Ambassador Nancy Ely-Raphel North Atlantic Council of Slovenia December 1, 1998 I would like to thank the Atlantic Council of Slovenia for their kind invitation to speak this evening. This is clearly a much warmer reception than the one I received during my first weeks in Ljubljana. My secretary had made reservations for me at a very good restaurant here in town. I arrived at the appointed time and told the maitre d: "You have a table for the American ambassador," to which he replied, "Yes, but he is not here yet." To which I replied, "Yes, she is." I wish I'd had the wit to reply "kamor si hudic sam ne upa, poslje babo." I would like to discuss my country's strategy for creating a stronger Euro-Atlantic Partnership for the 21st century. The goal of this exercise is to expand cooperation between the U.S. and our European partners to advance security, prosperity and democracy -- the three objectives which lie at the core of this partnership. The impetus for this strategy is the confluence of several major transatlantic summit meetings in 1999: The 50th anniversary NATO Summit in April, the two U.S.-EU summits, and the OSCE [Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe] Summit in December. These meetings take on an added significance because they stand poised together on the brink of a new century and a new millennium, at a time when we are all still adjusting to the end of the Cold War. During the Cold War, Western Europe and North America stood together against an external threat. Our challenge now is to take maximum advantage of these 1999 summits to fulfill President Clinton's vision of a democratic, unified Europe without dividing lines. We believe each institution -- NATO, the OSCE, and the U.S-EU "New Transatlantic Agenda" -- should be allowed to focus on what it does best; but we also don't want to miss this historic opportunity to coordinate visions, to collaborate on policy, and to create new areas of cooperation beyond the boundaries of Europe. Let me make one thing clear: The U.S. does not seek a place at the EU table. Nevertheless, we recognize the importance of an even closer, more open economic relation with Europe. Such a relationship reinforces our prosperity and the economic well being of all our citizens in a global marketplace. The U.S. and the EU have worked together to bolster the international trading system and to address international financial instability. NATO, meanwhile, has and will continue to have a much more limited role. Its primary mission must remain collective defense. But the Alliance has also always had the option of using its strength beyond its borders to protect its common security interests, something the founding fathers of NATO recognized in 1949. While we oppose any effort to "globalize" NATO, tomorrow's Alliance must, to quote President Clinton again, also be able to defend enlarged borders and defend against threats to our security from beyond. All of this brings us to the role Slovenia will play in the Euro-Atlantic Partnership for the 21st century. You are strong contributors to the OSCE process, and a leading candidate for both NATO membership and EU accession. My government strongly supports Slovenia's candidacy in both NATO and the EU. I can only admire your government's willingness to take on the enormous task of harmonizing Slovenia's laws and regulations so that they conform to the 80,000 pages of the EU's acquis communitaire. In my country, we have enough problems getting Congress to concentrate on our own, internal legislation! As far as NATO is concerned, Slovenia Weekly recently noted President Clinton's words to Prime Minister Drnovsek in Washington a few weeks ago: "Slovenia is the best candidate for NATO's next wave of enlargement." I would ask you to please notice what President Clinton did not say: When the "next wave of enlargement" would take place. Since NATO is an alliance that operates by consensus among its 16 members, it is not his place nor does he have the authority to determine such events. This procedure by consensus will remain in place when the Alliance expands to 19, 20, 21... With each expansion, the prospect of winning agreement on vital issues will become that much more difficult. So will it be with the issue of expansion itself. My government is firmly committed to the NATO enlargement process and believes the April 1999 Washington Summit should take concrete steps to ensure a continued, vigorous and credible open door for the Alliance, just as President Kucan called for recently. Having said that, I must add that we must be realistic: Admission to NATO must be based on performance -- not hopes or promises. Aspiring countries need to be those candidates who meet the same strong standards NATO set for the first three invitees. This is the only way to maintain a credible enlargement process and a strong and cohesive NATO. In that regard, the Alliance continues to use two benchmarks to guide decisions on further enlargement: The 1995 NATO Enlargement Study and the Madrid Communique from the 1997 Summit. These in turn provide two tests for judging the readiness of aspiring members. First, is a candidate country ready to assume the responsibilities of membership by being able to contribute to Alliance security? For example, if NATO were required to take military action to halt renewed fighting in Kosovo, member states would be called upon to contribute troops and materiel to NATO operations, as well as to act in political concert with allies to achieve NATO's political objectives -- at the United Nations, at the OSCE, or wherever necessary to maintain Alliance cohesion. Second, is a decision to extend invitations to candidate countries in the overall political and security interests of the members of the Alliance, that is to say: Will such invitation(s) contribute to the security of the Alliance? If, for example, a specialized military unit in an allied country is required by NATO's commanders, that unit must be made available to NATO as soon as possible, and in such form that it will add to the Alliance's military capabilities. Aspiring allies must be, in other words, ready to hit the ground running. In short, Slovenia faces great challenges in both of its Euro-Atlantic membership efforts. The common thread in both EU and NATO membership is the role of parliament in making changes happen quickly enough to maintain Slovenia's place at the head of both groups of candidates. As recent weeks have shown, these can be politically difficult issues. We all know that any hint of criticism of Slovenia's efforts by the EU or NATO is enough to quickly generate reactions and speeches in parliament about where or why the government of Slovenia has gone wrong. This is to be expected -- indeed, it has been my observation that the more vigorous the debate, the healthier the democracy! Having said that, however, it is quite another matter to spend valuable time in sterile or unproductive debate which moves Slovenia no closer to its goal. There is strong reason for the governing coalition and the opposition to work together to keep EU and NATO legislation moving swiftly through the legislative process. There will be major changes made in the economic, political and military fields in Slovenia as you get closer and closer to EU and NATO membership. Change can be uncomfortable, even frightening; but the ultimate goal, that of further integration into Euro-Atlantic structures, is surely worth the struggle. The U.S. is looking to Slovenia to lead the way for Central and Eastern Europe to be fully integrated into the Euro-Atlantic Partnership for the 21st century and to make the vision of a free and democratic Europe without dividing lines a concrete reality. (End text)