U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
95/05/30 Intervention at the NAC Ministerial Meeting
Office of the Spokesman
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Office of the Spokesman
(Noordwijk, The Netherlands)
___________________________________________________________________
As Prepared for Delivery May 30, 1995
For Immediate Release
INTERVENTION AT THE NORTH ATLANTIC COUNCIL MINISTERIAL MEETING
SECRETARY OF STATE WARREN CHRISTOPHER
Noordwijk, The Netherlands
May 30, 1995
Mr. Secretary General, distinguished colleagues: Eighteen months ago in
Brussels, I said this Alliance had to make an historic choice: whether
to embrace innovation or risk irrelevance. The choice that we made
weeks later at the January 1994 Brussels Summit was clear, and today, so
is the record.
At that Summit, the Alliance took a series of momentous decisions,
building on the landmark London Summit of 1990. As 16 allies, united by
common values and purpose, we reinforced NATO's strength in the west and
extended a hand of cooperation to the east.
Today we continue our historic enterprise. We also broaden our
endeavor, as Russia becomes a full participant in the Partnership for
Peace, and we inaugurate a new NATO-Russia dialogue.
Earlier this morning, I outlined my views on the key areas of action for
this North Atlantic Council ministerial:
First, we will review the progress of the Partnership for Peace,
and prepare a plan of action for the future.
Second, we should reaffirm our agreed timetable for completing our
study on enlargement, and for presenting its results to partners. Our
goal should be to complete the presentations in time to permit thorough
analysis of the results before our next ministerial in December.
Third, we will launch tomorrow the beginning of a new era in NATO-
Russia relations -- a critical component of Europe's evolving security
architecture.
Let me begin by reviewing the progress of the Partnership for Peace.
Two years ago, the Partnership was a vision -- in part, the vision of my
late colleague, Les Aspin. Today, it is action. It is British soldiers
exercising on Polish soil. It is Czechs and Belgians working side-by-
side in Partnership offices. This summer it will be soldiers from the
Baltics in the bayous of Louisiana. With 26 members, the Partnership
for Peace has become a vibrant and integral part of Europe's security
structure.
At our last meeting in December, we called for establishment of a
defense planning and review process by early 1995. We have met that
goal; indeed, 14 partners are already participating. This process will
promote greater openness in defense planning and budgeting among our
nations. It will improve the ability of Partners to work with Allies in
future joint missions. Moreover, it will provide aspiring NATO members
with valuable experience in allied practices and procedures.
The Alliance also agreed in December on a substantial exercise program
that will build toward more complex and varied training scenarios. Here
too, we have made impressive progress. The rigorous agenda for 1995
includes 11 joint exercises and more than 100 other activities.
Partners are working with NATO on many aspects of peacekeeping and
humanitarian operations, from delivery of assistance by air to search
and rescue at sea. The United States will be hosting a major exercise
at Fort Polk, Louisiana, this August, that will include a significant
number of allies and partners. And even as we meet, American soldiers
are in Ukraine, training with Ukrainian forces in the spirit of the
Partnership.
We believe there are a number of promising areas in which we could
intensify the political and military relationship between NATO and its
partners:
First, agreement on a set of principles for civilian and democratic
control of the military could help guide our partners in their national
reform efforts.
Second, a joint defense planning and review process committee could
help us explore the possibility of expanding the Partnership's focus to
include all armed forces of the partners, not just those dedicated to
peace-keeping and humanitarian tasks. The committee could also
recommend measures for adapting partners' military doctrine and forces
to NATO's.
Third, we can find ways to enable partners to play a more active,
substantive role in the planning of Partnership activities and
exercises.
Fourth, we can engage partners more routinely in the substantive
activities of the NAC and NATO senior committees.
Finally, the resources that NATO dedicates to the Partnership could
be increased significantly.
In order to maintain the Partnership's momentum, NATO must provide
sufficient resources. NATO has taken the important first step of
adopting a comprehensive funding policy for this purpose. We need to do
more.
We expect each partner to undertake the long- and short-term planning
necessary to ensure its own participation in Partnership activities.
Several Partners have already included the Partnership for Peace in
their national budgets and made other adjustments reflecting their firm
commitment to the Partnership and to relations with NATO. Others should
follow.
Even though Partners must bear the responsibility for their
participation in the Partnership, we must recognize that some will need
assistance getting started. If we want the Partnership to succeed -- a
goal that serves all our interests -- each NATO member must be willing
to do its part to help.
This fiscal year, the United States is providing $30 million in
bilateral assistance directly related to the Partnership. As President
Clinton pledged in Warsaw last July, his budget request for fiscal year
1996 designates $100 million to help our new partners work with us to
advance the partnership's goals.
The Partnership for Peace is firmly established as a central feature of
Europe's new security architecture. In less than two years, the
Partnership is achieving its broad purposes. It is providing its
members a permanent association with NATO, a vital link to virtually all
that NATO is and does. And for those Partners that aspire to join the
Alliance, it is helping to develop the common standards and practices
that will enable a smooth transition to becoming an effective ally.
In January, 1994, at President Clinton's initiative, the Alliance
launched a historic process that will lead to admission of new members
from the democracies to the east. That process is now moving forward
according to schedule. NATO's study on how enlargement will occur is
making good progress and should be completed this summer. This will
allow us to complete presentations on the study in Brussels and partner
capitals in time to thoroughly assess the way forward at our December
meeting.
NATO enlargement remains an essential part of our strategy to build a
more integrated Europe of democracies at peace. It is essential that
our efforts to integrate these states remain open and inclusive. Each
prospective member should be considered individually, on a case by case
basis. Above all, we must not let one set of arbitrary lines across
Europe be replaced with another.
Clearly, it is in the interest of every NATO ally and partner that
Russia participate constructively in building a more secure and
integrated Europe. We welcome Russia's decision to proceed with its
participation in the Partnership for Peace and to move ahead to fashion
a broader relationship with the Alliance.
An enhanced NATO-Russia relationship is the next important element of
our overall strategy for European security. This relationship can
reinforce European security and contribute to NATO's fundamental goals.
The first component of this relationship will be the Partnership for
Peace. As it does with our other Partners, the Partnership for Peace
will help build our cooperation with the Russian military. Russia's
Individual Partnership Program envisions continued exchanges in both
directions. Russian and Allied troops will participate in multinational
exercises and train together for real-world peacekeeping operations.
Outside the Partnership, we will hold political consultations with
Russia on a number of critical security issues where Russia has special
interests or capabilities. These include nuclear non-proliferation,
implementing the Chemical Weapons Convention, building confidence in the
Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention, as well as nuclear safety and
the prevention of nuclear smuggling.
We should be prepared to go beyond these initial elements and develop
the NATO-Russia relationship further. To this end, we welcome
tomorrow's 16 + 1 meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Kozyrev. We
urge an immediate start to the dialogue on the direction our
relationship should take. I hope we can define a framework of goals and
objectives for an expanded relationship by the time of our next
Ministerial meeting in Brussels. This process should proceed in rough
parallel with NATO's enlargement. As Russia progresses with democratic
reform and demonstrates respect for international norms, we can deepen
this relationship even further.
Ukraine is also critical. With its size and position, and its history
of subjugation and upheaval, it is a linchpin of European security.
NATO's strategy and evolution must take into account this country's
strategic importance as well as its historic decision to give up nuclear
weapons, to build democratic institutions and to pursue free market
reform. The United States believes that the door to greater cooperation
and integration with the West should be open to countries that take the
bold and difficult steps that Ukraine has taken.
We must also sustain our important progress in another new area of focus
for NATO -- fighting the spread of weapons of mass destruction. The
diplomacy that members of this Alliance brought to bear made a decisive
contribution to the indefinite extension of the nuclear Non-
Proliferation Treaty last month. We welcome the development of new
channels for consultation on non-proliferation matters with Russia and
other NACC partners.
NATO is at the core of our strategy for strengthening security in Europe
-- but it is not the exclusive forum. Our comprehensive strategy
envisions strong, interlocking institutions of security and economic
cooperation, each with special and complementary strengths. That is
why, last December, our Heads of State and Government took important
steps to bolster the effectiveness of the Organization for Security and
Cooperation in Europe.
With its broad membership and extensive commitments on human rights, the
OSCE is uniquely equipped to address the root causes of conflict in
Europe. Its potential is especially evident in Chechnya -- where it
represents the only official international presence. As our communiquÈ
will emphasize, we are profoundly troubled by the continued war in
Chechnya. This tragedy has killed thousands of innocent civilians,
damaged reform, and hurt Russia's standing in the international
community. We urge the Russian authorities to cooperate with the OSCE
mission to permit the unimpeded delivery of humanitarian relief and to
reach a genuine political solution to that conflict.
Let me also emphasize the continuing support of the United States for a
more capable European defense identity -- one that will strengthen our
flexibility, support European integration, and result in a more balanced
sharing of burdens. The Alliance should continue to strengthen its
relations with the Western European Union. The benefits of improved
cooperation are already evident in the conduct of the joint NATO-WEU
Operation Sharp Guard. Similarly, we should redouble our efforts to
complete development of the Combined Joint Task Force concept. CJTF
will enable NATO to conduct the full range of its missions more
efficiently, allow the WEU to make use of Alliance assets, and
facilitate operations with non-members of the alliance.
As I said this morning, this comprehensive strategy for European
security will strengthen our ability in the future to prevent the kind
of tragic conflict we are witnessing in the former Yugoslavia. Let me
say first that our allies with personnel on the ground have shown
remarkable courage and leadership in standing firm in conditions of
great threat and adversity. We all owe a debt of gratitude to our NATO
allies and all the nations that have placed their troops and personnel
in harm's way to uphold the principles of the international community.
Later today, we will all have an opportunity to discuss the
understandings that the Contact Group ministers reached last night in
five key areas:
First, we agreed that UNPROFOR should remain in Bosnia-Herzegovina
to carry out its important mission.
Second, we agreed that UNPROFOR should move rapidly to reduce the
vulnerability of its forces, by regrouping units and avoiding activities
that could unduly endanger their safety.
Third, we should take steps to assure the freedom of movement and
safety of UNPROFOR personnel. We intend to ask our military experts to
examine promptly the specific proposals of France, the United Kingdom,
and others with a view toward achieving that objective.
Fourth, we agreed on the need to enhance the capability and
strength of UNPROFOR to assure that it can carry out its mission safely
and effectively -- and the United States intends to provide appropriate
support to that end.
Fifth, we agreed to continue to pursue our efforts to obtain
recognition of Bosnia-Herzegovina by Serbia and to achieve an effective
closure of the border between Serbia and Bosnia-Herzegovina.
The diplomatic efforts of the Contact Group remain the basis for
achieving a political solution to this conflict. The United States will
continue to lend its vigorous support to those efforts.
Speaking as the representative of President Clinton and the American
people, let me assure you that America's engagement in Europe and in
NATO is as firm and unshakable as ever. The United States has enduring
political, security, economic and cultural links to Europe that must and
will be preserved. NATO will remain the anchor of American power and
purpose in Europe. We will continue to maintain approximately 100,000
American troops on European soil. We will continue to help preserve
peace and prosperity for the next 50 years and beyond -- this time for
the entire continent.
Thank you very much.
(###)