NOVINARSKO SREDIŠČE

NATO and Global Security Challenges after September 11, 2001

Ljubljana, Slovenia, January 17, 2002

Thank you, Dr. Bebler, for that warm introduction.
Members of the diplomatic corps, ladies and gentlemen,

Yesterday, the Slovenian Parliament launched what undoubtedly will be an extensive and wide-ranging public discussion of Slovenia's pursuit of NATO membership. I'm pleased to have the opportunity tonight to offer my own comments on this topic. I am doing so here in the capital. But I feel it is so very important in a democracy for discussions like these to take place around the nation on subjects of national significance. It is important for every Slovene citizen to ask tough questions, so that their elected representatives can factor their concerns into the decision-making process. This is an essential element of any civil society and is the bedrock of democracy. I am honored to be a part of it.

In the United States, the American public routinely asks very tough questions of its government. NATO does not escape this scrutiny, even after over 50 years of U.S. membership. There are Americans who view NATO as a Cold War relic and want to know why we still need the Alliance in the absence of the Soviet threat. Some Americans question the wisdom of continued NATO expansion, worrying that it risks weakening the most effective military alliance in history. Others recall the blood that has been shed in former Yugoslav republics over the last ten years and wonder why any of the successor states should be considered for NATO membership.

We answer that NATO is no relic. From its creation in 1949, the Alliance has adapted to meet new threats and challenges. Throughout the Cold War, it responded to dilemmas and crises from the rearmament of Germany, differences over force levels in the 1960s, and detente and Vietnam in the 1970s, to the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces debates of the 1980s and the demise of the Warsaw Pact in the 1990s.

NATO continues to adapt to confront new dangers. Although Cold War threats are well behind us now, the world remains plagued by oppression, ethnic conflict, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and the global spread of weapons technology and terrorism. Leaders at the Washington Summit in 1999 recognized this, and adopted a new NATO Strategic Concept which cautioned that "the security of the Alliance remains subject to a wide variety of military and non-military risks which are multi-directional and often difficult to predict -- including acts of terrorism, sabotage, and organized crime." However, few Americans would have predicted in 1999 that just two years later NATO would invoke Article V of its Charter for the first time in its history -- and would do so in defense of the United States.

America still needs NATO. One need only see the NATO AWACs aircraft currently patrolling American skies to understand why that is so. When America and the world were brutally attacked on September 11, NATO was first in line, ready and willing to go to work to set things right again - not with a quick and emotional reaction, but with the same deliberate and measured determination that has marked its entire history.

On September 11 terrorists turned instruments of commerce into weapons of war. The world also faces threats from weapons of mass destruction in the hands of terrorists or rogue states. The proliferation of missile technology that can deliver these weapons to any country is a challenge that must be confronted. NATO Allies would be shirking their responsibilities if they recognized a threat within their means to address, but failed to act. In the same way NATO has responded to previous threats and achieved consensus even in the face of difference, we must forge a common response to this new threat.

Constancy of purpose behind noble goals is what makes NATO the greatest Alliance in history. NATO has never deviated from its fundamental purposes, as laid out in the Washington Treaty -- to live in peace with all peoples and governments, to safeguard the freedom, common heritage and civilization of our peoples, and to promote the stability and well-being of the North Atlantic area.

The enlargement of NATO to include other countries willing and able to defend those goals can only strengthen the Alliance. If we are to meet new threats to our security, we need to build the broadest and strongest coalition possible of countries that share our values.

It is for this reason that at the end of the Cold War NATO reached out to former enemies and built new patterns of cooperation. The establishment of the North Atlantic Cooperation Council, the Partnership for Peace and the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council spurred new contacts and greater integration. The Membership Action Plan offered to NATO aspirants has provided additional incentives for political, economic, and military reform. The developing partnerships between NATO and non-aspirant countries remain a driving force for stability in the broader Euro-Atlantic region.

NATO's intensifying cooperative efforts with Russia are helping to build confidence, overcome suspicions, and establish the genuine cooperation we have long sought. As we look to the future, we look forward to working with Russia to meet the new threats from terrorism, weapons of mass destruction, and missile technology, and to developing new habits of political, military, and technological cooperation.

The wars of the last century taught us that we cannot afford to be complacent about events beyond our borders. Conflict cannot be contained by lines on a map. NATO undertook its first military actions in its fifty-year history in the heart of Europe to end the spiral of violence born of ethnic hatred and to overcome the forces of fear. Instability remains, and we condemn those who foster it. But for the first time in history, all governments in Southeast Europe are democratic, committed to mutual cooperation, and seek a future along a western path.

Since the end of the Cold War, NATO has played a key role in overcoming the divisions of the past and reaching out to former adversaries. But we have yet to complete our vision of a Europe whole, free, and at peace. This is why we feel the enlargement process must continue. This is why the United States supports NATO membership for all of Europe's democracies that seek it and are ready to share the responsibilities it entails.

As Slovenia's readiness to share these responsibilities is examined through the Membership Action Plan process, the NATO Allies are asking tough questions of Slovenia. We want to know whether Slovenia really shares the values and purposes of the Alliance. We ask what Slovenia could contribute to the common defense and whether her military capabilities and assets are compatible with NATO force structures. We wonder about the Slovene people's commitment to fulfilling the responsibilities of membership.

We are encouraged by the answers we have received from Slovenia, both in words and in deeds. Slovenia's commitment to democracy, to the rule of law, and to respect for human rights is unquestioned. She is well along the path of economic reform. The Slovene government is resolving remaining territorial questions and is promoting good neighborly relations. Plans for defense reform are comprehensive, well-conceived, and achievable.

Slovenia has avoided the temptation to turn her back on her troubled neighbors. The Slovene government remains active in promoting greater political understanding and in lessening tensions in the region. Slovene businesses are exporting their prosperity to less fortunate places through investments and partnerships. The International Trust Fund for Demining and Mine Victims Assistance is helping the victims of recent conflicts to return to their homes and fields and to rebuild their lives. Many other Slovene organizations, communities, and individuals are reforging the links shattered in the preceding decade.

Slovenia has supported NATO's mission and goals in more direct ways as well. Slovenia's armed forces have trained with Allied militaries under the Partnership for Peace and have served alongside NATO troops in Bosnia, Albania, and Kosovo. Through these experiences, NATO forces have learned to value the skill, professionalism and integrity of Slovenia's soldiers.

Slovenia has been demonstrating her commitment to peace in other regions and in other fora too. Slovenian contributions to UN missions in the Middle East, East Timor, and Cyprus have earned broad respect. During Slovenia's time on the UN Security Council, the Slovenian diplomatic team's judicious and capable handling of sensitive global issues showed the world that a small country can make a big difference.

Nowhere has Slovenia's determination to act as a "virtual" ally been clearer than in her immediate and wholehearted support for the Coalition against Terrorism. Parliament has ensured that Slovenia's legislation provides no shelter for terrorists and the networks that support them. The Slovene government has worked painstakingly with U.S. and EU officials to safeguard Slovenia's financial systems against the possibility of abuse. Slovenian law enforcement authorities have stepped up their vigilance from the international frontier to the front gate of our Embassy. Slovenia has offered military assets to Coalition relief efforts in Afghanistan. Most importantly, Slovenian humanitarian assistance has eased the suffering of the Afghani people.

Slovenia has reason to be proud of all she is and all she has done since she began NATO's Membership Action Plan. Nevertheless, the United States still has tough questions about Slovenia's readiness to join the NATO Alliance.

We are watching to see whether Slovenia will be able to achieve the defense reform goals she has set for herself in her Annual National Programme. We are tracking projected funding for defense to see whether Slovenia is on its way to meeting the NATO defense budget target of 2% of GDP. We are monitoring the level of public support for NATO accession, as an indication of the population's willingness to shoulder the responsibilities of membership. And we are looking to see whether Slovenia takes practical steps to improve transparency and to ensure a level playing field in business, trade, and investment. A free and open society demands a free and open market.

Slovenia must answer not just the United States' tough questions about her NATO candidacy, but also those of our eighteen fellow Allies --­ their governments, their Parliaments, and their citizens. One of NATO's great strengths is that its decisions are made by consensus. In the months between the Reykjavik Summit this spring and the Prague Summit this fall, each Ally will decide for themselves who they believe is ready for NATO membership. If Slovenia hopes to receive an invitation in November, she must have the support of all.

The toughest questions the Slovenian Government must answer about NATO don't come from the Allies, however; they come from the Slovenian public. Slovene citizens want to know why EU membership isn't enough -- why their country needs NATO membership as well. They wonder whether joining NATO would increase their security or whether it would make Slovenia a target of international terrorism. They question whether money spent on the National Defense budget might not be better spent on social programs. And, Slovenes ask why they should consider taking on the responsibilities of NATO membership -- why Slovenia should send her soldiers to fight in someone else's battles.

It is up to Slovenia's elected and government officials to answer these questions to the satisfaction of her citizens. I can only tell you why we have devoted our own resources to assisting Slovenia in her NATO aspirations.

As President Bush has said: "When Europe and America are divided, history tends to tragedy. When Europe and America are partners, no trouble or tyranny can stand against us." We welcome the consolidation of European unity, and the stability and reform incentives that the EU accession process creates. We see no conflict between EU and NATO membership. We support a greater EU role in European security, properly integrated with NATO.

But, for the United States, NATO remains the essential link between Europe and North America --­ the place for free nations to secure peace, security, and liberty in the face of ever-shifting threats and challenges to those values. While our relationships with Partner countries are already strong, joining the Alliance cements those ties. NATO membership unites our nations and our peoples in a collective commitment to our most sacred ideals: democracy and human freedom.

The September 11 terrorist attacks were a direct assault on these shared values. The universal condemnation of them demonstrated that an attack against one truly is an attack against all ­-- NATO members and non-members alike. The 85 nations who grieve for their fallen citizens understand that it is impossible to predict from whence the next threat will come. Terrorism, weapons of mass destruction, and other global menaces threaten all countries everywhere. It is no longer possible to stand safely on the sidelines. It has never been possible to predict exactly what dangers the future will hold.

We have a fundamental interest in enhancing Slovenia's abilities to provide for her own security. Secure democratic nations create stability and prosperity for us all. We have supported Slovenia's NATO-related defense reforms because we believe they are the most economical way for her to safeguard her citizens. NATO's mutually-supportive approach to national defense allows Allies to benefit from one another's strengths and to bolster individual weaknesses.

During yesterday's Parliamentary discussion, Jamie Shea spoke in very practical terms about what Slovenia would gain by joining NATO. I think his insights are worth repeating here.

First and foremost, he said that NATO membership would greatly increase Slovenia's access to the leadership in Allied capitals. I think this is absolutely true -- I know that in Washington, the opinions of Allied governments are sought out and valued by policy makers. I agree with Jamie that this higher level of influence increases an Ally's sovereignty rather than diminishes it because it enhances smaller countries' abilities to protect their interests.

Second, he stated that NATO provides the most security for the cheapest price in history. I could not agree more. While we support an integrated European Security and Defense Policy, and believe it can play a constructive role on the continent, ESDP does not equate to NATO's Article V guarantee. NATO's decision to invoke Article V in response to the September 11th attacks occurred the very next day. No spontaneous coalition of the willing could have responded as swiftly and in so united a fashion. No single country's military could wield the fearsome might of the Alliance's combined armed forces.

Third, Dr. Shea talked about the non-Article V ways in which the post-Cold-War NATO has enhanced European security. I agree that NATO has been a key instrument for crisis management in Europe and that it is the threat of armed action that brings parties to the negotiating table and allows successful diplomatic resolution of crises. There is no question that NATO efforts to end the conflicts in Bosnia, in Kosovo and most recently in Macedonia have directly enhanced Slovenia's security. However, Slovenia has had virtually no influence over NATO's actions in this regard.

This brings me to Dr. Shea's fourth and final point: NATO membership would give Slovenia a voice, a vote and a seat at the table in shaping the future. I think this an essential point for any small country considering NATO membership. For almost its entire history, Slovenia has been at the mercy of larger powers. NATO's consensus-based decision-making structure is the great equalizer for all Allies, large and small. NATO membership finally would give Slovenia the right to say "no" and to have its opinion respected by the entire trans-Atlantic community.

Greater access, cheaper security, regional crisis management, and a seat at the table are the real politik reasons for Slovenes to want Alliance membership. Last October, at the Sofia Summit, President Kucan eloquently described Slovenia's philosophical reasons for seeking to join NATO. He said:

Slovenia gained independence in order to become part of a safe and democratic world, sharing a common system of values, and to help consolidate it. Slovenia enshrined this among its priorities at its very birth. It is therefore firmly resolved to meet the required criteria for NATO membership painstakingly and with full responsibility. Slovenia has adopted a demanding but realistic Membership Action Plan, and is implementing it --­ for its own sake and for the sake of its responsibility to strengthen joint defense of the world of freedom."

We think Slovenia's pursuit of NATO membership will link her more profoundly to the United States, and to the trans-Atlantic community of free, democratic nations. We think it will help Slovenia strengthen her security and ours, in the face of both today's threats and tomorrow's. We think that the benefits of potential NATO accession far outweigh the costs. We will continue to support Slovenia in her efforts to meet the requirements for NATO membership.

Just a decade ago, Slovenes fought for the right to ask tough policy questions and the ability to determine for themselves what the answers should be. Discussions such as these are the essence of any democratic civil society. They should be cherished. I expect the Slovenian public to ask many tough questions about NATO in the coming months. I look forward to hearing the answers. I hope we all stop from time to time and remember how fortunate we are to be having such a conversation.

Thank you for your attention. And now, I open the floor to your tough questions....