.

KGRKJGETMRETU895U-589TY5MIGM5JGB5SDFESFREWTGR54TY

Server : Apache/2.4.62
System : FreeBSD fbsdweb2.web.rcn.net 14.1-RELEASE FreeBSD 14.1-RELEASE releng/14.1-n267679-10e31f0946d8 GENERIC amd64
User : www ( 80)
PHP Version : 8.3.8
Disable Function : NONE
Directory : /domains/roger.dnai/96Book/

Upload File :

Current File : /domains/roger.dnai/96Book/Vahi

<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META NAME="GENERATOR" CONTENT="Mozilla/4.04 (Macintosh; U; 68K) [Netscape]">
<TITLE>Estonia Prime Minister Tiit V&auml;hi...Baltic Security Challenges: An Estonian View</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>

<CENTER>Baltic Security Challenges: An Estonian View</CENTER>

<CENTER>Prime Minister of Estonia Tiit V&auml;hi</CENTER>
Coming just two weeks after the meeting of NATO Foreign Ministers, one
week after the meeting of NATO Defense Ministers, and five days after the
first round of the Russian Presidential elections, our Workshop discussions
were both timely and necessary. They were also an opportunity for NATO
member-states to once again witness not only the desire but the ability
of applicant states to contribute to NATO structures and debates. Last
year in my address to the Twelfth Workshop, I touched upon two themes.
The first was that the post-Cold War world is not static, but a highly
dynamic place. The second was that things not only change, but they change
fast. The events of the last year have proven this to be true. Therefore,
I would like to include these same two themes�the dynamics of our time
and the pace of change�in a discussion of Baltic security.
<CENTER>NEW DYNAMICS IN THE BALTIC SEA REGION</CENTER>

Our view of security in the Baltic region has changed dramatically during
the last five years, as has our view of European security. The collapse
of Soviet domination turned enemies into partners. The withdrawal of foreign
troops from Baltic Sea states removed a potential security threat. The
continuing development of democratic structures and free markets is reuniting
areas of the Baltic Sea region with Europe. These changes, in addition
to the new dynamics of the Baltic Sea region, are redefining our approach
to security in Northern Europe. For example, NATO and its member-states
are now actively engaged in promoting stability in the Baltic Sea region
through cooperation and dialogue with newly restored democratic states.
In addition, traditionally neutral states such as Sweden and Finland are
increasing their ties with NATO through Partnership for Peace, although
they have stated their desire to remain outside of military alliances.
The Baltic States and Poland seek NATO membership and the security this
alliance provides. Our security concerns, which some refer to as a dilemma,
stem from our recent as well as our distant past, a past plagued by numerous
invasions, occupations, and back-room deals. Our current concerns have
increased because of statements that seek to include the Baltics in outdated
�sphere of influence� concepts, despite our desire to belong to a multilateral,
democratic framework. Another aspect of Baltic security is Russia. Russia
is, and will remain, a major player in regional and international affairs.
The extent of Russia's cooperation with the West, as well as its commitment
to democratic reforms and its respect for the sovereignty of neighboring
states, will determine our security concerns and policies. Estonia welcomes
the peaceful means by which the recent Russian Presidential elections were
held, and hopes that Russia will continue to move forward, not backward.
The blossoming regional economic activity of the Baltic Sea area is another
important dynamic of regional security. The mutual contacts, economic links,
and wealth created by trade are certain to aid regional stability and increase
the importance of maintaining it. With these dynamics in mind, let me now
discuss the basic premise of Estonia's approach to Baltic security, and
how the rapid pace of change, especially in NATO structures, can lead to
stability and prosperity for all countries bordering the Baltic Sea.
<CENTER>REGIONAL COOPERATION AND WESTERN INTEGRATION</CENTER>

Estonia believes that a truly secure Baltic region has yet to be established
and that the potential risks of the area have yet to be eliminated. The
Baltic States and Poland remain outside two of the most important European
institutions. Democracy in Russia is struggling to take hold, and, as the
Presidential elections show, the outcome remains uncertain. Although there
are no immediate threats to Baltic security, problems may arise in the
long term if our security concerns remain unaddressed. Estonia and other
regional states seek to address these concerns through European integration,
as well as through NATO membership. We also seek to contribute to regional
security and stability through strengthened regional cooperation and economic
growth. Regional cooperation with our Baltic Sea neighbors, especially
Finland, Denmark, Germany, Norway, and Sweden, and the assistance these
states have provided in supporting defense initiatives and NATO integration,
have been excellent. So too is our cooperation with Latvia and Lithuania.
Forces from Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania continue to train together and
will soon create the first-ever Baltic Peacekeeping Battalion. We are,
and will remain, committed to regional cooperation in defense issues. While
welcoming our regional defense ties, I must stress, however, that they
are not enough. Addressing issues in a regional context is not a cure-all
for security concerns. Regional emphasis is useful under some conditions,
but regionalization in the Baltic region or anywhere else can lead to neglect
of security issues that potentially affect the whole of Europe. I do not
exaggerate when I state that Estonia's security is dependent upon the willingness
and ability of the West to integrate us into its structures. For Estonia,
as well as for Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland, NATO is a viable and proven
option for securing our newly regained independence. However, I am aware
that Western integration is neither as simple as some would wish nor likely
to happen as quickly as some would desire.

In managing an ever changing and uncertain world, NATO has adapted remarkably
to the challenges before it, especially in regard to Central Europe. The
decision to enlarge NATO is necessary, for the organization, for European
security, and for Baltic security alike. The Partnership for Peace program
is an important instrument for those states preparing for NATO membership.
For some PFP members, the process has brought them within their goal of
being ready and able to join NATO. For those who continue this process,
PFP should remain a classroom of active learning and preparation, but with
an enhanced curriculum for striving applicants. For neighboring states
of Estonia with no present ambitions to join NATO, such as Russia, Finland,
and Sweden, PFP should remain a mechanism for defense cooperation and dialogue.
Estonia's experience with PFP has been positive. Through PFP, our forces
receive training to meet future security challenges, hold exercises with
other PFP member-states, and gain the skills required for international
operations with NATO forces. The growth of our forces under the guidance
of NATO states and the transparency of this process through PFP create
an atmosphere free of suspicion. The next phase of NATO enlargement�the
�who� and the �when��will soon be discussed. It is of vital importance
to the Baltic region and especially to the Baltic States that the security
concerns of the northern European region be addressed during this debate.
While welcoming the accession of new members, we also hope that NATO will
have a strategy to strengthen the security level of non-named states. Estonia
believes that the often-stated principle that the strengthening of one
state's security cannot be at the expense of others must be upheld. Not
being chosen for immediate membership must not be viewed as a rejection
by NATO. On the contrary, it should be followed by greater measures to
aid integration. Plans to increase dialogue, as well as deepen and broaden
cooperation beyond the present PFP framework, would help enormously to
continue the integration process and extend a protective hand to applicant
states.

The evolution of NATO's structure will bring benefits to the Baltic
Sea region. The implementation of IFOR under NATO has been one of this
year's greatest security successes. Estonia, as well as other Baltic Sea
states, is actively participating in this program�the first opportunity
for non-members to be involved in a NATO operation, to be under NATO command
structures, and to serve alongside NATO troops. As we participate, we are
learning as much about NATO as NATO is learning about us. Of special importance
to future Baltic security is the close cooperation between our regional
forces in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Estonia's platoon, for example, is stationed
within Denmark's battalion, which is serving under the Nordic-Polish brigade.
Russian participation in the area is a positive step as well, and illustrates
that NATO enlargement is not aimed against them, but aimed against threats
to stability and democracy throughout Europe. Another beneficial change
in NATO's structure, resulting from the success of IFOR, is the development
of a permanent Combined Joint Task Force to handle similar operations in
the future. Estonia welcomes this development and hopes that preparation
programs for non-member states will be increased, so that when the task
force is activated, we all will be prepared. In addition to handling IFOR-type
operations, the task force will also serve as a vital means of expanding
NATO's multilateral security involvement in Europe.
<CENTER>CONCLUDING REMARKS</CENTER>

Baltic security rests on two points: the integration of the region into
European security structures, such as NATO, and the democratic development
of Russia. While we cannot directly influence the development of Russia,
we can influence and advance the process of integration. NATO's decision
to enlarge is vital for our future security, but it will also benefit European
security as a whole. To date, the effectiveness and credibility of NATO
have not been compromised by its changes; on the contrary, its changes
have strengthened it. Our challenge now is to address the continuing dynamic
issues through similarly dynamic responses. Judging by the events of the
last year, I believe that NATO has the foresight, the will, and the means
to do so.

<A HREF="V�hi.htm">Go to top of page</A>
 <A HREF="Workshop96.htm">Return to Warsaw '96</A>
 <A HREF="../index.html">Return to Home Page</A>
</BODY>
</HTML>

Anon7 - 2021