|
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/96Pictures/94Book/ |
Upload File : |
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//SoftQuad//DTD HoTMetaL PRO 4.0::19971010::extensions to HTML 4.0//EN"
"hmpro4.dtd">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META NAME="GENERATOR"
CONTENT="Mozilla/4.03 (Macintosh; I; 68K) [Netscape]">
<TITLE>Czech Republic Foreign Minister Alexandr Vondra...NATO and the
Partnership for Peace: A Czech View</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF" BGPROPERTIES="FIXED">
<CENTER><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE="+4">NATO and the Partnership
for Peace:</FONT></FONT></CENTER>
<CENTER><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE="+4">A Czech View</FONT></FONT></CENTER>
<CENTER><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE="+3">First Deputy Foreign
Minister of the Czech Republic<I> </I>Alexandr Vondra</FONT></FONT></CENTER>
<CENTER></CENTER>
<CENTER><B><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE="+1">INTRODUCTION</FONT></FONT></B></CENTER>
<P><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE="+0">A year ago in Budapest, I tried
to persuade members of the eleventh NATO Workshop that, not only is the
Central Flank of vital interest to the sixteen NATO members, but Central
European countries--including the Czech Republic, Poland, Hungary, and
Slovakia--need to become a legitimate part of this flank. At the January
1994 Summit, the Alliance confronted the issue of NATO's enlargement while
offering the Partnership for Peace program (PFP). In March 1994, my
country signed the PFP agreement. We subsequently presented our ideas on
implementation and are currently discussing the Czech partnership program
with NATO headquarters.</FONT></FONT> </P>
<CENTER></CENTER>
<CENTER><B><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE="+1">CZECH VIEWS OF NATO'S
ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS</FONT></FONT></B></CENTER>
<P><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE="+0">The Czech Republic views NATO as
the backbone of the present European security architecture. In the future,
an enlarged but nonetheless strong NATO will still play the same vital
role in European security. For one thing, NATO has staved off the
Communist onslaught, whose dimension was historically unprecedented. And
NATO's success in this crucial task is an excellent reason to believe that
the Alliance will be able to stave off future threats. NATO also provides
a crucial link between the United States and Europe. While the Communist
danger has blown over and Russia is no longer a direct and open enemy, a
U.S. presence in Europe is still needed.</FONT></FONT> </P>
<P><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE="+0">In addition, NATO's continued
existence may assist Europe with its chronic problems and protect Europe
from a possible outside threat. Further, it can help prevent open
antagonism among the major global economic centers. Finally, it replaces
mutual suspicion and hostility among European countries with the profound
camaraderie that NATO engenders. NATO may also permit balanced
development, based on the coexistence of both large and small nations in a
post-Cold War Europe. NATO is the first military alliance in history whose
purpose is not only to defend the sovereignty of its members but to
safeguard fundamental values, culture, and human rights. While relatively
few countries outside NATO share these same values and way of life, the
Czech Republic does.</FONT></FONT> </P>
<CENTER></CENTER>
<CENTER><B><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE="+1">REASONS FOR THE CZECH
PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM</FONT></FONT></B></CENTER>
<P><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE="+0">The Czech Republic, which lies
between two geographic areas characterized by quite different levels of
security, is seeking the most reliable way to safeguard its own security.
We do not take lightly the option of joining the Alliance; we are well
aware of both guarantees and commitments in such a bond. For my country,
however, membership is the logical choice. NATO is a community of
democracies, has a well-tested military structure, and links the United
States with Europe. We also understand the problems inherent in enlarging
NATO and the need for flexibility in the Partnership for Peace program. We
therefore accepted the offer to join the Partnership when it was made at
the 1994 Summit as the Alliance's response to a number of often
controversial NATO and non-NATO interests.</FONT></FONT> </P>
<P><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE="+0">We are soberly viewing our
security interests and goals within the larger European context and the
developments in Russia. But we do not wish any other country or
organization to feel it can judge our strategic aims or other intentions
relative to NATO membership. Participation in the Partnership for Peace
alone is not for us a guarantee of membership in NATO. On the contrary, it
would be alarming if the enlargement of the Alliance were not subject to
firm political criteria.</FONT></FONT> </P>
<P><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE="+0">My country is ready to fully
exploit both the political and military dimensions of the Partnership for
Peace. We believe that the PFP will provide opportunities for the
cooperative management of international crises and regional conflicts.
NATO has already proven its ability to enhance European security through
the role it has played during the crisis in the former Yugoslavia. Since
one thousand Czech soldiers are participating in the U.N. peacekeeping
there, we logically expect that the PFP will permit a better coordination
with the Alliance in such operations. Politically, the PFP's best feature
is that it permits consultation with the Alliance in the case of a future
threat to sovereignty, territorial integrity, or political independence.</FONT></FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE="+0">In the military sphere, the
Partnership for Peace program offers us a great opportunity to operate the
step-by-step transformation of our military toward compatibility with NATO
forces. We will achieve this through joint training and exercises. The
first peacekeeping exercises will take place in 1994 in the Netherlands
and in Poland, and the Czech Republic will participate in both. We plan to
organize similar training exercises on Czech territory in 1995. We have
already taken legislative steps to permit our participation in these
events: the Czech Parliament has voted to give our government the green
light for organizing joint military exercises with the armies of other
Partners, both at home and abroad. The Czech Republic does not view
Partnership for Peace as a program of unilateral military assistance, but
as a cooperative program. Therefore, our country is ready to bear its
share of PFP costs as well as any future NATO costs.</FONT></FONT> </P>
<P><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE="+0">Among the reasons why
Partnership for Peace became part of our agenda a half-year ago was Russia
and the possibility of NATO's future enlargement. Without Russia, there
would not be a Partnership for Peace in its present form. So, there is a
broader context for Russia's difficulties with its participation in the
PFP: Russia has a rather different idea of a European security
architecture, as the June 1994 Istanbul NACC meeting confirmed. Russia has
been pressing for a security system that would allow it to exert greater
influence. Although Russia's desire is logical, it is not necessarily good
for Europe. In fact, Russia has created its own sphere of influence with
the Commonwealth of Independent States, a structure in which economic
interdependence and military interests play the leading role. We wish the
Russian Federation all the best; we do not intend to isolate it. But
Russia's own choice to differ with the rest of the continent may produce
the very isolation that it fears.</FONT></FONT> </P>
<CENTER></CENTER>
<CENTER><B><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE="+1">THE CZECH POSITION "IN
A NUTSHELL"</FONT></FONT></B></CENTER>
<P><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE="+0">Let me summarize the Czech
position. The Alliance is the backbone of European Security. Although the
CSCE offers the widest possible platform to discuss security issues and
practice preventive diplomacy, it is based on a cooperative concept that
has its limits. In particular, the CSCE may be less useful once a conflict
has actually broken out. It is therefore vital to the Czech Republic, and
presumably to other European countries as well, that the basis of the
Alliance remain unchanged--even if it is necessary to orient future
programs toward increasing the Alliance's effectiveness outside its own
territory.</FONT></FONT> </P>
<P><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE="+0">To keep NATO as one of the
pillars of Europe's new security architecture, the Partnership for Peace
is helpful, but the preservation of the bond of the Alliance is still more
important. The Czech Republic is in favor of enlarging the Alliance while
keeping it strong. To this end, we offer our allies not only facilities
(such as divisional airfields), but credibility, political stability, and
the determination to safeguard the values on which the North Atlantic
Treaty is based.</FONT></FONT> </P>
<P><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE="+0">As our Foreign Minister recently
said in a speech to Czech military officers, joining NATO would mark our
third participation in an alliance. Our first alliance, which existed
between the two World Wars, ended in complete failure. The second was
imposed on us by the Soviet Union. The third must therefore be different,
unlike Munich or 1968. This is especially important since we just
commemorated the fiftieth anniversary of the Allied landings in Normandy.
Then, Norwegians, Czechs, Poles, Americans, British, and French worked
together to bring freedom and democracy back to Europe. Now, we must work
together again to bring stability, peace, democracy, and prosperity to
Central Europe.</FONT></FONT> </P>
<CENTER></CENTER>
<CENTER><B><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE="+1">CONCLUDING REMARKS</FONT></FONT></B></CENTER>
<P><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE="+0">In his latest book, Diplomacy,
former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger described NATO as the first
peacetime alliance in which America participated. Its immediate impetus
was the February 1948 Communist coup in Czechoslovakia. Thus, for the
second time in a decade, Prague became the symbol around which resistance
to totalitarianism was organized, although it was kept from participating
in and fully benefiting from the process it symbolized. Now that NATO
approaches its fiftieth anniversary, the time has come for Prague, and
other Central European capitals as well, to participate in the final
defeat of totalitarianism, the end of the Cold War, and the victory of
freedom.</FONT></FONT> </P>
<P><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE="+0"><A HREF="Vondra.htm" TARGET="_document">Go
to Top of Page</A></FONT></FONT> <BR><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE="+0"><A HREF="/94Book/94Workshop.htm">Return
to Os '94 Page</A></FONT></FONT> <BR><A HREF="../index.html">Return to Home Page</A> </P>
</BODY>
</HTML>