Slovenija >> NATO Joint website in suport to the accession of Slovenia to NATO, edited by Governmnet PR & Media Office, Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Ministry of Defence (active 2001- 2004)
Slovenia and NATO

Slovenia and NATO
Press Centre
Events
Public Opinion
Documents
Publications
Links
EnglishE-mail

PRESS CENTRE

NATO Enlargement -- Time For A New Paradigm?

37 Conference on Security Policy, Muenchen 2-4 February 2001
The Addres of Dr. Dimtrij Rupel, Minister of Foreign Affairs Republic of Slovenia

Let me at the very beginning ask a rhetorical question: Has the time finally come for a new paradigm for the future enlargement of NATO? Are the reasons, conditions and circumstances of the Madrid round of enlargement still valid, and are they sufficient for the next round? What should remain, what should be changed and what is new? Is there a need for a new paradigm?

Without any doubt, we can conclude that the basic reasons, conditions and circumstances for a further enlargement of the area of security and stability of the Transatlantic Alliance will remain valid and up-to-date in the future, too. However, there are new elements to be added which did not exist at the time of the Madrid Conference: the experiences of preparations for membership and of newcomers to the Alliance - Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary. Closely connected to that is the Membership Action Plan - the mechanism and tool for direct preparations of aspirant countries for membership. In this period, NATO, for the first time in its history, has carried out a military intervention, in the operation against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, and then in Kosovo continued the operation in support of peace. Since St. Malo, we have been witnesses to an extraordinarily dynamic process of development of a common European security and defense policy and formation of common European forces.

The general standpoint of the Russian Federation is by no means a new and an unknown element. However, what is unknown is its practical and concrete policy at the next enlargement round, in general, and after the decision by the Allies on which country will be invited into the Alliance next year, in particular. The aspirants are also not new, but have indeed changed considerably since the Madrid and Washington Summits, learned a lot, invested a great deal (of knowledge, people, financial means) in order to prepare for membership. It is also possible that in the not so distant future, new candidates may emerge and by that considerably contribute to various geo- political and geo-strategic elements of enlargement.

Both the new and the changed elements will have an important influence on further discussion on enlargement and on the appearance of a new paradigm.

When the aspirants last year tried - individually or all together - to encourage discussion on further enlargement, part of the answer as a rule was "wait for a new American administration". Now it is here and as far NATO is concerned, its policy is clear and unambiguous: President Bush will pay a visit to the NATO Headquarters in Brussels as early as this June. We believe that this is not only strongly symbolic for the Euro-Atlantic Alliance but also pragmatic search for an early consensus on the basic definition of the future Alliance, including its enlargement dimension.

Secretary of State Colin Powell, in his confirmation hearing before the Senate Committee for International Relations, strongly emphasized his belief in NATO as a "sacrosanct bedrock of our relations with Europe". As far as further enlargement is concerned, Secretary Powell has left open the question of how many and who. Not for long, though. He has announced that, before summer, a comprehensive analysis will be done of the present criteria, proposals for their adaptation to the new circumstances and enlargement by new ones, such as military capabilities, geo-strategic situation, engagement of the candidates in their own preparations, credibility in implementation of adopted obligations. And Powell emphasizes that it is not only a matter of a "quantitative approach" (large powers, big area and "rightsizing, defense budget and public support") but also of a "qualitative dimension", i.e. the power of NATO as a political alliance, and thus the difference which "appears in the strategic environment with respect to whether one is in NATO or not".

Senator Jesse Helms, in his speech at the American Enterprise Institute a few weeks ago, stressed the need for "righting the wrongs of Yalta", proposing admittance into the Alliance of the three Baltic candidates. Some in the US Committee on NATO stress that further NATO enlargement is primarily a matter of the political vision of the Euro-Atlantic community and transatlantic bonds, so to say, a political imperative of the new time. Henry Kissinger asked in a recent "The Washington Post" whether NATO was still at the center of the common transatlantic destiny. His answer was that here is a rich agenda for dialogue before us, which should give answers to the new view on the Alliance. This should also contain a new assessment of the strategic priorities, which he sees on NATO's south flank. Senator Jospeh Biden, after his return from Kosovo, called in a recent "The New York Times" on the new Administration not to forget that security in the Balkans means the security of Europe, which is, at the same time, the security of the USA.

General Weisser, the key defense advisor to the German Defense Minister Ruehe at the time of the last round of enlargement, writes in a last week's "The Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung" that the time has come to work on general guidelines for the next enlargement round, which must contribute to the security and stability of Europe. The candidates must prove worthiness for membership by achieving basic criteria like functioning democracy, successful market economy, civil and democratic control over the armed forces, military capability to contribute to the common (collective) security, credibility of the armed forces etc. In the geo-strategic environment, he, too, underlines the increasing importance of NATO's south flank.

This fleeting glance at the statements and comments of leading politicians and experts from both sides of the Atlantic in the first month of this year shows clearly enough that a constructive and all-round discussion has already begun. The Munich Conference, this traditional gathering place of experts in the field of international security and defense, could therefore not take place at a more suitable time. I believe that it will make a significant contribution to the further course of preparations for the NATO Summit in Prague in the year 2002.

The rhetorical question from the introduction is indeed just a rhetorical one. The new paradigm is already emerging. The Madrid Conference was in its basis a political one, founded on the NATO enlargement study, which has highlighted as the necessary criteria functioning democracy, market economy, human rights, state of law and good-neighborly relations. The experiences from the preparatory period and the first years of full membership of Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary show that these criteria must be further developed and upgraded.

To develop means to depart from the broadest political point: the continuation and completion of the process of the democratic transformation of Europe into "a Europe whole and free", including "righting the historic injustices". This also means a struggle against corruption, elimination of judicial backlogs, completion of the privatization process, restitution of the nationalized property, abolishment of all kinds of injustice, better civil service, foreign investments and investing abroad, settled legislature in the field of international security obligations, protection of classified information, etc.

The upgrading means in the first line preparation for concrete assumption of the obligations of an allied country, i.e. a reform and modernization of the defense system in accordance with the NATO standards, rightsizing of the armed forces, NATO- comparable defense budget and positive public opinion, which is all included in the Membership Action Plan. A credible enlargement paradigm will thus have to be at the same time political and practical one.

Before the Madrid Summit the Allies offered us the Enlargement Study, in the preparation of which the aspirants were not involved. Before the next Summit the aspirant countries wish to co-operate actively and to contribute to the new paradigm. The "Vilnius Statement", signed by the foreign ministers of the nine aspirants in May 2000 and the activities the "V/ilnius-9" or "A/spirant-9", which were carried out at different levels and on different occasions in the past year and which will continue all the time until the Prague Summit, are our constructive contribution to the further development of the Alliance, full members of which we wish to become sooner or later.

At the Washington Summit, NATO reiterated its commitment to its further enlargement in accordance with the principle of the "Open Door Policy". This gives aspirant countries, among them Slovenia, the hope that they will be invited at the next Summit, presumably in Prague in October 2002. Slovenia is counting on becoming one of the first new members and has been working very hard for that goal, which is one of its national strategic priorities. However, at the same time, Slovenia is well aware that in order to accomplish that goal it will also have to provide an appropriate defense budget and carry out the required "right-sizing" of its armed forces.

Not only is NATO membership Slovenia's official national strategic priority, which enjoys the broad support of the majority of the political parties and of the public, but it has also carefully planned and implemented a number of activities in order to meet the criteria. Thus the Government confirmed the national strategy for integration into NATO as early as in February 1998, which was later passed by the National Assembly and presented to the Alliance. In October 1999, the Government passed the Annual National Program for the Implementation of the Membership Action Plan (MAP) and submitted it to NATO. On the basis of assessment of the implementation of the first Membership Action Plan and the NATO Report on Slovenia's progress, in September 2000 the Government adopted the Annual National Program for the Implementation of the Membership Action Plan 2000-2001 and submitted it to NATO.

The Prague Summit will take place five years after the Madrid Summit, when invitations to three Central European countries to join the North Atlantic Alliance were extended. It seems that the Prague Summit will be both high time and a symbolic venue for a new decision on further invitations.

Slovenia was one of the initiators and, together with Lithuania, co-organizer of the ministerial conference of the nine aspirant countries in Vilnius. The "Vilnius Declaration", which states that Europe should become whole, democratic and free, is a sign of political solidarity among the aspirant countries, which are aware that synergy of efforts will lead us to our common goal - fully-fledged membership in the Alliance. Slovenia is, however, of the opinion that each country should be assessed individually for meeting the criteria and admitted to membership "on its own merit", as stipulated in Article 8 of the Madrid and Washington Declarations.

We by no means see the enlargement process as some kind of a beauty contest. On the contrary, aspirant candidate countries have already invested utmost efforts to put in place an effective democratic leadership and a fully functioning market economy, and to contribute to the Alliance's endeavors to secure peace and stability in the Balkan region.

Some of these countries are no longer mere partners, since they showed Alliance-like behavior during the Allied Force Operation back in 1999. And Slovenia is one of these countries.

In addition, as a member of the Partnership for Peace, Slovenia has been actively contributing to stabilization in Bosnia and in Kosovo by participating in the operations of KFOR, SFOR and UNMIK. It has also supported Croatia in its bid to join the Partnership and will do the same for the candidacy of Bosnia. This is how we already contribute to the stability and security in South-East Europe.

Slovenia is also in the final stage of negotiations with the European Union and hopes to complete them by the end of the current year. Slovenia is strongly convinced that its EU-membership would contribute to stability and security in Central Europe and also project them into the South-East European region. Also in this respect, Slovenia closely follows the process of establishing common European security and defense, and believes that these are indivisible and closely connected with the transatlantic dimension otherwise represented by NATO. Slovenia also believes that the common European security and defense policy does not mean a diminished role or weakening of NATO but rather its completion and a new dimension. Slovenia's active participation in building the common European Security and Defense Policy therefore also reflects its own security interests.

Although we expect an intensification of the enlargement debate only in the next fall, we believe that some signs are promising. It seems that the question of further enlargement is slowly moving from the back to the front burner.

However, one must not forget that every candidate country should be judged on its own achievements and merits, as was also clearly expressed by the Allies at the Madrid and Washington Summits.

The Washington Summit launched the Membership Action Plan, thus providing aspirant countries with a more systematic, focused and result-oriented process. Successful fulfillment of the MAP itself certainly does not imply an automatic invitation. We are fully aware that, at the end of the day, the decision will be a political one.

We still have to do our homework to the best of our abilities, resources and knowledge. The remaining time until the Prague Summit will be crucial for prioritizing our resources, both financial and human. Public support in Slovenia for our endeavors has been maintained at a high level, but no one can say how the public will react tomorrow should Slovenia not be invited, after investing a lot but gaining little or nothing. The MAP of today is different from the MAP of April 1999 when it was adopted. It has grown up. So have we. We have learned a lot and so have the Allies.

If the MAP process, together with the whole PARP and IPP process had been as clear to us in April 1999 as it is today, we would have prioritized our activities better and earlier. However, the time and effort invested so far are not lost. We understand that the criteria according to which we will be judged have been "upgraded" since Madrid, now including more than before the security bonus that each new nation will bring into the Membership. We accept that, because we also want the Alliance to remain strong and able to respond to tomorrow's threats.

We hear about different scenarios for the Prague Summit decision on the issue of new invitations. Two of those four scenarios are not, frankly speaking, very encouraging for the aspirants. The scenarios of prolonging the decision to the years 2005, 2006, or no invitations and no mention of the future possible dates will undoubtedly undermine the Alliance's credibility about the declared continuation of the Open Door Policy. I believe that those two scenarios should be discarded without any hard feelings.

It is not so important whether all nine aspirant countries or only a smaller number of them are invited. Of paramount importance is that the invitations are extended at the Prague Summit. This is the only credible confirmation of the Alliance's declared Open Door Policy. In this scenario, those countries not invited should be given a streamlined, more goal-oriented "MAP 2", and not just continue with the MAP in its present form.

We believe that there cannot be any veto by non-NATO nations or any behind-the- scenes deals on the question of who should be invited and who should not, or even whether to extend new invitations at all. The key issue is fulfillment of the required criteria and the concrete contribution of each nation to the security of the Alliance. These two things should be the "fil rouge" for those preparing the decisions when the time comes. And the time will surely come in Prague. And Slovenia will be waiting prepared, as it is was waiting prepared in 1997 in Madrid.


About the site