Return to: Index of 1995 Secretary of State's Speeches/Testimonies || Electronic Research Collections Index || ERC Homepage
U.S. Department of State 95/12/05 Secretary NAC Intervention Office of the Spokesman U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE Office of the Spokesman Brussels, Belgium December 5, 1995 INTERVENTION BY SECRETARY OF STATE WARREN CHRISTOPHER AT THE NORTH ATLANTIC COUNCIL Mr. Acting Secretary General, distinguished colleagues. It is an honor to speak to you on behalf of the United States. Let me begin by congratulating Javier Solana on his selection as our new Secretary General. Minister Solana has made a signal contribution to Spain's leadership role in Europe and its distinctive role in securing the peace in Bosnia. He and Prime Minister Gonzalez have also demonstrated leadership by making a strong transatlantic relationship such a high priority of Spain's EU Presidency. I have been honored to serve with him as a fellow NATO foreign minister. I am confident he has the vision and the strength to guide NATO at this time of unprecedented challenge. For NATO this is, without exaggeration, a moment worthy of being called "historic." In fact, we have just heard an announcement that adds to the history being made this week. Let me be the first of our Ministers to welcome what Minister de Charette has just said. The steps he has announced bring France more directly and fully into important aspects of the military side of the Alliance. It is particularly significant that France will now again be a full member of the Military Committee. It is also most welcome that Defense Minister Millon's presence in meetings such as this will become the rule, not the exception. Always a strong and loyal ally, France has been playing an important role in NATO's adaptation to its new post-Cold War tasks. Today, it has taken a further critical step, one that will increase the strength and effectiveness of the Alliance. The Alliance has also just approved its largest and most significant operation ever, and it has done so in the cause of peace. The mission in Bosnia will help to ensure the stability of Europe by helping to end the worst European conflict since NATO's creation. It will unite over two dozen nations in Europe and North America, including Russia, in a coalition of power and principle that only NATO could bring together, in a mission that only NATO could undertake. Today, the Alliance will also take the next step in our gradual but steady process of outreach and enlargement to the east. This process will encourage and consolidate the remarkable democratic gains that our new partners are making. It will help us move toward a Europe in which brutal conflicts, such as the one we are now resolving in Bosnia, become a thing of the past. Today's decisions reaffirm our conviction that NATO remains fundamental to stability and to peace on this continent. By acting on that conviction, we will ensure that for the United States, for Europe, and for the Alliance that unites our strength, the next 50 years will be as successful as the last. NATO was formed in the shadow of the Soviet threat. Meeting that threat was its primary goal for almost half a century. But its founders also created NATO to be a permanent alliance that would meet emerging threats to our security and deter new ones from arising. Likewise, our predecessors did not see NATO as a static institution. The Alliance has always been open to new members that shared its principles and that could contribute to its goals. It has always been dedicated to the integration of as much of Europe as would eventually become free. Our alliance helped assure the victory of democracy throughout Europe -- but that is not all it has done. In its first half century, it helped to reconcile nations that had long been divided by conflict, thus making European integration possible. It provided a secure environment for war-torn economies to rebuild. And it grew from its original 12 members to 16, bringing new nations into our transatlantic community of democracies. What NATO did to strengthen the bonds within our community complements what it did to protect our community. Today, NATO is fulfilling its enduring mission by meeting new challenges. It is helping us overcome what are now the most immediate threats to the stability of Europe: the fragility of democratic institutions in Central Europe and the former Soviet Union, the potential resurgence of old territorial disputes, and the exploitation of ethnic and religious tensions. It is in the former Yugoslavia that these new threats have appeared in their most dangerous and deadly form. And among all Western institutions, only NATO has had the strength to bring the brutal war in this region to an end. Without NATO's determined efforts, including its air campaign, there would not have been a peace agreement in Dayton. Moreover, the parties made it clear that they would reach a settlement only if NATO agreed to lead a peace implementation force. In less than two weeks, the Presidents of Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, and Serbia will gather in Paris to sign the peace settlement. Shortly thereafter, our soldiers will begin to deploy to Bosnia by land and by air, so that the parties will have the confidence they need to carry out the agreement. Advance teams are already on the ground to prepare for the arrival of the main force. NATO rightly refused to fight a ground war in Bosnia. But now we have a chance to secure the peace, and we are seizing that chance. This will be a noble mission, unique in the history of Europe. It will be a defining challenge for this Alliance. It will have profound consequences for our interests today and for our hopes for the future. Most immediately, it means that the killing in Bosnia can stop for good. It means that the children of a European country will be able to walk to school and play in the streets without having to fear a sniper's bullet or a falling mortar shell. NATO's mission is precisely defined and realistic -- to implement the military aspects of the Dayton agreement. It will not be NATO's job to guarantee Bosnia's recovery from four years of violence. But our troops can give Bosnia an opportunity to rebuild, an opportunity to find justice, an opportunity to flourish as a single, sovereign state. The deployment of IFOR means that this terrible war will not spread. Ever since the violence began, we have faced the real possibility that it would destabilize a region where shifting frontiers and ethnic tensions have long been a cause of conflict among great powers. A wider war would directly threaten those members of the Alliance that border this volatile region. As a threat to Europe's security, it would also be a threat to America's security. Ending such a war would be far more costly and dangerous than the operation we are launching today. The deployment of IFOR also meets a fundamental challenge to NATO and to its mission of protecting Europe from war. It brings an end to a war that for four years has been an affront to the values and a threat to the interests of each member of our Alliance. Our NATO troops in Bosnia will be joined by soldiers from many of our new partners to the east. In the last two years, we have held numerous exercises together under the Partnership for Peace. We have marveled that soldiers once trained to fight each other in war were training together to prepare for missions of peace. Now that training is paying off in a real mission with enormous stakes. We are determined that NATO will continue to reach out to new partners and new challenges. That is the future of our Alliance in a Europe that must become more integrated. Our comprehensive strategy, from the Partnership for Peace, to the process of enlargement, to our new relationship with Russia, is not an abstract vision. It is meant to help us deal with real world problems such as the war in Bosnia. And our mission in Bosnia will be its first true test. It is important and gratifying, for example, that Russia is playing a role in IFOR. Our Secretary of Defense, William Perry, has met with Russian Defense Minister Grachev four times in the last seven weeks to hammer out the operational details of Russia's participation. In Bosnia, we will demonstrate in the most tangible possible way that NATO and Russia can work together constructively on behalf of stability in Europe. And we will reaffirm the inclusiveness of our approach to European security. We must continue to strengthen the NATO-Russia relationship. The Partnership for Peace offers strong prospects to continue building cooperation with the Russian military and civilians alike. We look forward to Russian and Allied troops participating in joint exercises, while IFOR is in Bosnia, and beyond. And we welcome General Grachev's recent expressions of support for an enhanced Russian role in the Partnership. NATO has also developed a political framework for its future relationship with Russia. I want to encourage Russia to respond positively. This relationship is vital to building an integrated Europe at peace. Last May, we also recognized that Ukraine is a linchpin of European security. As a result, NATO is also developing a relationship with the Ukraine that will be similar to the ties we are developing with Russia. I am pleased that Ukraine has participated in several major land and sea exercises in 1995, and that Ukraine has declared its willingness to serve with us in IFOR. At last December's NAC, we launched the first phase of NATO's enlargement. The NATO enlargement study, which the alliance recently completed, will form the foundation of our enlargement effort. The study confirms that potential members must meet the same obligations as each existing member of the Alliance. We have made it clear to interested Partners that they will only be admitted to NATO if they continue to consolidate democratic institutions, establish firm civilian control over their militaries, and respect international norms at home and abroad. By participating in IFOR under NATO command, many will begin to demonstrate that they are willing and able to meet NATO's considerable obligations. Our strategy is producing many other positive results. From Romania to the Baltics, the prospect of NATO membership has been a powerful argument for continued democratic reform. It was an important incentive for Hungary and Slovakia to sign a treaty guaranteeing respect for borders and minority rights -- a treaty we expect to be fully carried out. These results demonstrate the wisdom of our course. Indeed, to lock in these kinds of gains, enlargement must move forward. Today, we begin the second phase of the process of NATO enlargement. Beginning in early 1996, those Partners who wish to pursue membership will hold intensive consultations with the Alliance. Their countries will learn quite specifically what will be expected of them and their armed forces if they become members. And NATO will assess what each potential member will be able to contribute. At the same time, the Alliance will consider what internal measures it will take to prepare for enlargement. In particular, we will examine the resource and staffing implications. We believe that this process should take us through all or most of next year. We should take on the question of the next steps at our North Atlantic Council meeting in December, 1996. What is important is that we remain or our steady, deliberate course. We will also take new steps to strengthen the Partnership for Peace. The Partnership will be a critical proving ground for partner countries wishing to join NATO. We will adopt a program of practical work that will strengthen ties. For some countries, this program will be a work plan toward membership. For others, it will deepen their long-term partnership with the Alliance. The Partnership for Peace will remain a permanent and significant part of Europe's new security architecture. Since its launch nearly two years ago, the Partnership has exceeded all expectations. In 1995, ten major exercises have been conducted in locations as diverse as the Black Sea waters of Bulgaria and Romania, off Denmark's Jutland coastline, the plains and forests of the Czech Republic and Hungary, and the bayous of Louisiana. At least a dozen major Partnership exercises of increasing complexity are scheduled for 1996, drawing on the land, sea and air capabilities of virtually every Ally and partner country. NATO is also taking a set of steps to strengthen the Partnership for Peace and the North Atlantic Cooperation Council in all their dimensions. I am pleased that this ministerial will agree to move forward in five specific areas, consistent with the proposals I set forth in Noordwijk last June: First, we will complete work with our partners through the North Atlantic Cooperation Council (NACC) on principles for civilian and democratic control of the military. Through the Partnership for Peace, we will develop concrete guidelines and actions to implement them. Progress in this area will help interested partner countries prepare for NATO membership, while making an important contribution to democracy across the region. Second, we have agreed to establish a joint defense planning and review process committee to foster deliberative consultations between Allies and partners. We will encourage partners to apply the planning and review process to all elements of their armed forces, not just those performing peacekeeping and humanitarian tasks. We hope that the committee can contribute to the interoperability of partner and NATO armed forces, and to the adaptation of partner military doctrines to NATO's. Third, we will establish a stronger, more substantive role for partners in the planning of Partnership exercises. Such a role will now become a standard, permanent feature of the exercise planning process. It will help us conduct more complex and challenging exercises that meet partners' needs, while improving our capability for joint action. Fourth, we will involve Partners more routinely in the substantive activities and consultations of the North Atlantic Council (NACC) and NATO senior committees. This will help us extend the kind of consultative and practical cooperation undertaken in the Planning and Review Process to non-military areas of the Partnership. It will also advance our goal of deepening the Partnership's political as well as its military character. Finally, we have agreed to increase our bilateral funding and improve its coordination in support of the Partnership. I placed a special emphasis on the urgency of additional resources at our last ministerial, and I am pleased that we have agreed to move forward. Although Partners will remain responsible for making their own contributions to ensure their participation, it is essential that NATO members do more to sustain the Partnership's success. I also look forward to the report due next spring that will recommend ways to realign NATO budgets and staff to meet future Partnership needs. Let me stress the importance of helping our Partners achieve greater compatibility with the Alliance. We should encourage other Partner countries to build on the examples set by Poland and Hungary by developing "national NATO compatibility plans". These plans would focus their efforts to reform military and defense structures in ways that are consistent with allied standards. Developing and implementing such plans will be of clear benefit to countries wishing to prepare for NATO membership. It will also strengthen the ability of other Partner nations to participate in peacekeeping and other joint missions. The United States is determined that the Partnership for Peace sustain the remarkable momentum it has achieved since its inception. The durability of the Partnership can be complemented by giving greater vitality to the NACC as a political framework for relations between the Alliance and its partners. The NACC should move beyond its solely consultative role to become a more results-oriented forum. Besides setting guidelines for civilian control of the military, the NACC could also work to encourage good neighborly relations between partner countries. This could lead to joint Partnership exercises designed to complement the confidence building measures underway through the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. Political cooperation of this kind can be another way to help prepare Partner countries for membership in NATO, and for all partner countries to deepen their security. Let me turn briefly to another issue that we must resolve if we are to solidify the comprehensive new European security architecture we are building. The Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE) Treaty is a landmark model for security cooperation, and critical to a stable and secure Europe. Under the Treaty, over 50,000 pieces of military equipment have already been destroyed. Confidence has been boosted by this reduction in arms, and by the openness with which it has been achieved. Indeed, the CFE treaty provides dramatic evidence that the Cold War is over. But the continued and complete fulfillment of all CFE obligations is essential to strengthening the security of all states party to the Treaty. The United States has welcomed the agreement reached last month in Vienna by all 30 CFE states specifying the elements of a solution to the flank problem. We must finalize a solution to the flank issue in the next several months. We should intensify our work in Vienna and agree to send policy-making officials, with decision-making authority from national capitals, no later than mid-February. These officials should press for a cooperative solution that reinforces the integrity of the Treaty and the security of all the states party to it. Finally, let me reaffirm the importance the United States attaches to a stronger European defense identity that will support greater operational flexibility for European operations and greater burden- sharing between European and North American allies. We support improving coordination and cooperation between NATO and the Western European Union. And we continue to support the concept of Combined Joint Task Forces-- and we hope to reach final agreement on it soon. Making progress on these fronts will contribute to the process of European integration, which the United States has supported for half a century and will continue to support as we approach a new century. I observed at the outset that this is a time of defining challenge for this Alliance and its future. More than that, it is a positive turning point for the United States and Europe, and for the relationship that we are destined to share. Over the past year, some have questioned whether we would drift apart, whether the ties that bind us would inevitably fray in the post-Cold War world. The events of the end of this fateful year prove them wrong-- profoundly wrong. Two weeks ago, we reached the agreement in Dayton-- an agreement that we would not have reached without steadfast military and diplomatic cooperation between the United States and its European allies. On Sunday, President Clinton completed his fifth trip to Europe as President-- a trip on which he reaffirmed our ancestral ties to Britain and Ireland, reinvigorated the peace process in Northern Ireland, and reinforced the determination of our Bosnia-bound soldiers training in Germany. On Sunday in Madrid, he stood with the Prime Minister of Spain and the President of the European Commission to launch an ambitious agenda of cooperation between the United States and the European Union. And next week, the eyes of the world will be on Paris when the settlement of the bloodiest war in half a century of European history is signed. We can be proud of these achievements. We can be proud of the commitment and cooperation that made them possible. We have demonstrated once again to ourselves and to the world that our common effort makes this a better world. Today, as we move forward together, let us have confidence in this great Alliance and in the common purpose that unites our two continents. Thank you very much.To the top of this page