93/12/02 Excerpts of NAC Intervention, Brussels (Brussels, Belgium)  Return to: Index of 1993 Secretary of State's Speeches/Testimonies || Electronic Research Collections Index || ERC Homepage

Note: This Electronic Research Collection is an archive site. For the most current information, please visit the State Department homepage.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
93/12/02 Excerpts of NAC Intervention, Brussels
Office of the Spokesman



AS PREPARED FOR DELIVERY

                  EXCERPTS OF NAC INTERVENTION
                               BY
             SECRETARY OF STATE WARREN CHRISTOPHER

                       NATO Headquarters
                      (Brussels, Belgium)
                        December 2, 1993


I am delighted to be with you for this very important meeting of the 
North Atlantic Council.  First let me pay tribute to our Secretary 
General.  Manfred Woerner deserves tremendous credit for his leadership, 
determination and dedication.  We are all in his debt.  Let me add that 
I have valued the exchanges that I've had in recent weeks with many of 
my colleagues here today as we have approached this ministerial.

Last June in Athens, on behalf of President Clinton, I proposed a NATO 
summit.  Today, we must ensure that the Brussels summit that is just six 
weeks away is successful for our alliance and for each of our member 
nations.

At the summit, President Clinton will articulate his vision of 
transatlantic security and prosperity -- and the strong and unbreakable 
link between the United States and Europe.  The President recognizes 
that American leadership remains indispensable.  And he is determined 
that the United States will continue to provide that leadership because 
it is profoundly in the interest of both the United States and Europe to 
do so.

The security of our Alliance depends not only on our military 
capability.  Security also depends fundamentally on our ability to 
consolidate democratic institutions, ensure respect for human rights, 
and sustain the hard march of economic reform to eventual prosperity.  
Each of these post-Cold War elements of security must advance -- or none 
of them will.

Western leaders in the late 1940s created the institutions that enabled 
Western Europe to rebuild and renew itself after the Second World War.  
Their foresight and fortitude and the steadfastness of their successors 
enabled our values to prevail in a long and bitter Cold War.  And 
millions of people, for the first time in their lives, have the chance 
to enjoy political freedom and economic opportunity.

We must resolve to secure and expand the blessings of peace that our 
predecessors did so much to achieve.  We must help to reduce the 
insecurity and instability that has come with the demise of the Soviet 
empire.  We must build the structures and the patterns of cooperation 
that will help to ensure the success of democracy and free markets in 
the East.  We must move decisively beyond the age of confrontation in 
Europe when the balance of power was a poor substitute for a concert of 
free peoples.  We must infuse this Alliance with the new vision and 
vitality that earned many of our distinguished predecessors the mantle 
of statesmanship.

We have many issues to decide.  But the Alliance must also make an 
historic choice.  That choice is whether to embrace innovation or risk 
irrelevance.

We must adapt this Alliance to the new security challenges that confront 
Europe today.  At the same time, we must strengthen the core political 
cooperation, security commitments and military capabilities that have 
kept the Sixteen strong and free.  We must act to revitalize the 
Alliance's continued central role in European security and in the 
transatlantic partnership.

We all recognize that our most important summit task is to decide how 
the Atlantic Alliance will reach out to the East.  Two years ago, we 
created the North Atlantic Cooperation Council -- the NACC.  With the 
Partnership for Peace, we can now deepen NATO's engagement with the 
East.  We must demonstrate that the West is committed to helping 
Europe's new democracies address some of their most immediate security 
problems.  At the same time, we should signal that we envision an 
evolutionary expansion of the Alliance.

We should extend an invitation to join the Partnership for Peace to all 
NACC states and other nations on whom we agree.  Those who join will 
enter a much fuller relationship with NATO.  The Partnership for Peace 
will provide a means for each state to develop a practical working 
relationship to NATO and determine what resources it wants to commit to 
that relationship.  We envision defense cooperation developing in a 
broad range of fields.  The Partnership will be a military relationship 
but, like all of NATO's activities, it will have a strong political 
dimension.  The Allies should provide all participants in the 
Partnership with a pledge of consultation in the event of threats to 
their security.  And for partners once part of the communist world, this 
cooperation will help adapt defense structures to civilian control.

The Partnership will enhance regional stability.  It will develop 
capabilities to meet contingencies, including crisis management, 
humanitarian missions and peace-keeping.  It will develop useful habits 
of cooperation.  It will enable us to develop common military standards 
and procedures.  Peace Partners will train side-by-side with NATO 
members and take part in joint exercises.  To ensure operational 
effectiveness, the Partnership should have a planning group in Mons and 
should make full use of the political and military institutions of NATO 
here in Brussels.  Active partners will have permanent representatives 
to take part in the work of these organizations when dealing with 
Partnership matters.

Our new partners should finance their own involvement, but some new NATO 
resources will be necessary.  There will be costs, but of a manageable 
size.  The United States stands ready to contribute its share, and it is 
essential that all Allies do the same.

Let me be clear with respect to a very important issue that the 
Partnership raises.  The Partnership is an important step in its own 
right.  But it can also be key step toward NATO membership.

NATO is not an alliance of convenience, but an alliance of commitment.  
Expanded membership must strengthen, not weaken the ability of the 
Alliance to act.

The Partnership will maintain NATO's core purpose and capabilities.  The 
current military and political processes of the Alliance will continue 
undiluted, but the Partnership will multiply the ability of the Alliance 
to meet security needs.

I am pleased that the Partnership for Peace has received the active 
support -- and reflects the constructive suggestions -- of every NATO 
ally.  The Alliance must understand that this Partnership represents a 
decisive commitment to become more fully engaged in security to the 
East.

This is an historic commitment that our leaders should be prepared to 
make at the January summit.  Today we should continue our work to make 
sure that next month, NATO will take this decisive step to deepen our 
security cooperation with our new Partners.  We want the Partnership to 
begin functioning next year.  Turning former adversaries into partners 
is in the fundamental interest of every member of this Alliance.  We 
must seize this extraordinary opportunity -- the opportunity that this 
Alliance has worked so successfully to create.

A second summit objective I want to address is the need to strengthen 
the evolving relationship between NATO and the Western European Union.  
Previous American administrations were ambivalent about the development 
of a distinct European security capability.  Today, the United States 
fully supports efforts to create a strong and effective European 
Security and Defense Identity.  Such an identity is a natural element of 
European integration.  It will make the European Union a more capable 
partner in the pursuit of our mutual interests.

A third summit objective should be adapting Allied military 
capabilities.  The United States has proposed the creation of Combined 
Joint Task Forces.  We believe CJTF strikes the right balance.  It would 
allow new flexibility for organizing peace-keeping and other tasks.  It 
would enable NATO to take effective action in contingencies that do not 
evoke Article V of the North Atlantic Treaty. 

The CJTF concept will strengthen existing command arrangements and make 
them more flexible.  It will allow maximum use of limited resources.  It 
will demonstrate that each of our countries is bearing its fair share of 
common responsibilities.  And it will ensure that NATO and WEU work as 
partners, not rivals, as their relationship evolves.

Finally, between now and the summit, we must also prepare the Alliance 
to meet other new challenges that have come in the wake of the Cold War.  
Most urgent is curbing the spread of weapons of mass destruction and the 
means of delivering them.  This threat constitutes the arms control 
agenda of the 1990s.  At the summit, we must make a fundamental alliance 
commitment to combat proliferation.

The most immediate task is to develop the overall policy framework to 
NATO efforts against proliferation.  We envision a senior group at 16, 
with representatives of both foreign and defense ministers.  NATO 
supports, but should not duplicate, non-proliferation efforts underway 
through other institutions and negotiations.

Our non-proliferation agenda should be consistent with our essential 
mission of protecting the security of our members.  We must adapt 
alliance military strategy and capabilities to deter the use of weapons 
of mass destruction and protect against their use.  We must intensify 
our individual and collective efforts to isolate states that actively 
pose proliferation threats.

Let me raise one final issue that is not on our agenda today but that 
each of our nations must also address.  Last June at our Athens 
ministerial, I made a statement in this forum with respect to the 
Uruguay Round.  Let me repeat that advancing transatlantic security 
requires us to focus not only on renewing the NATO Alliance but also on 
successfully concluding the GATT negotiations.

Our publics and parliaments understand that transatlantic relations 
cannot be overly compartmentalized -- either substantively or 
institutionally.

As great allies and great powers, Europe and the United States share 
great responsibilities.  We are partners in a community of shared values 
and interests.  Our values and interests converge in this Alliance -- 
and they converge in a successful conclusion to the Uruguay Round.  
Through NATO and through GATT, we can reinforce transatlantic security 
and prosperity -- and reaffirm the transatlantic partnership.  We have 
the chance to construct the architecture of a better world.

Since the end of the Second World War, together we have created and 
sustained a successful liberal trading order.  That system has allowed 
our economies to grow and our people to prosper.  Now we have an 
historic opportunity to open markets further, to the benefit of our 
nations on both sides of the Atlantic.

These are momentous weeks for the West.  By December 15, we have the 
responsibility to come together and lift the global economy.  On January 
10, we have the responsibility to come together and renew the most 
successful Alliance in history.  The United States and Europe share 
these responsibilities -- and we must meet them.

(###)

To the top of this page