|
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/98Book/ |
Upload File : |
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//SoftQuad//DTD HoTMetaL PRO 4.0::19971010::extensions to HTML 4.0//EN"
"hmpro4.dtd">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Rt. Hon. Michael Portillo's Address to 1998 NATO Workshop, Vienna, Austria</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY LINK="0000ff" BGPROPERTIES="FIXED" BGCOLOR="ffffff"><BASEFONT SIZE="3">
<P ALIGN="CENTER"><FONT COLOR="000000" SIZE="6" FACE="Palatino">Challenges
of European Security </FONT></P>
<P ALIGN="CENTER"><FONT COLOR="000000" SIZE="3" FACE="Palatino"><FONT SIZE="+1">The
Rt. Hon. Michael Portillo</FONT><A HREF="0_FN0.htm"><SUP></SUP></A></FONT></P>
<P ALIGN="LEFT"><FONT COLOR="000000" SIZE="3" FACE="Palatino">I would like
to look at the question of security in a context that goes beyond NATO and
Europe, and also talk about maintaining global order. In particular
I want to question the extent to which the foreign policies of NATO
members add to or detract from our security. </FONT> </P>
<P ALIGN="CENTER"><FONT COLOR="000000" SIZE="3" FACE="Palatino"><B>THE
NEED FOR CLARITY, CREDIBILITY, AND CERTAINTY</B></FONT></P>
<P ALIGN="LEFT"><FONT COLOR="000000" SIZE="3" FACE="Palatino">The world is
full of people who want political change and are willing to do violent
things for it if we let them. They will do as much as they think
they can get away with. They listen to what we say, but especially
they watch what we do. Our body language is more eloquent to them
than our rhetoric. Recently our body language has not given the
impression of fixity of purpose. </FONT></P>
<P ALIGN="LEFT"><FONT COLOR="000000" SIZE="3" FACE="Palatino">NATO’s
success has been founded on clarity of purpose, credibility of deterrence,
and the certainty of our response. These three Cs could be
summarized by a fourth: consistency. </FONT></P>
<P ALIGN="LEFT"><FONT COLOR="000000" SIZE="3" FACE="Palatino">But clarity,
credibility, and certainty are more difficult to maintain now. How
is it that Milosevic dares to do what he does in Kosovo? Because he
doubts our willingness and ability to intervene. It took us years to
get our act together on Bosnia and, despite NATO’s great achievements
there, we have been talking of leaving ever since we arrived. Mr.
Hans van der Broek, the Dutch Foreign Minister, made a wry comment
recently. He said, “Some people claim we learned nothing from
Bosnia. That is untrue. We learned that Milosevic has an iron
will, and he learned that we do not.” </FONT></P>
<P ALIGN="LEFT"><FONT COLOR="000000" SIZE="3" FACE="Palatino">Is it a
coincidence that Milosevic turned up the heat since we backed down on
Iraq? I think not. NATO Allies were clearly at odds over Iraq.
The distinction between the fire and the fire brigade was not
obvious to everyone. In any case, no one believed that the U.S. was
going to bring down Saddam. If that had been believed, there might
have been more support. </FONT></P>
<P ALIGN="LEFT"><FONT COLOR="000000" SIZE="3" FACE="Palatino">The West now
appears to be or can be portrayed as muddled and inconsistent. For
example, we say we are prepared to put up in the case of Serbia’s
internal affairs, but we wouldn’t even speak up over Chechnya. We
go to the aid of Albanians, but not of Rwandans or Burundians. France
tests nuclear weapons, but India and Pakistan must not. Saddam must
observe Security Council resolutions, but Israel need not. </FONT></P>
<P ALIGN="LEFT"><FONT COLOR="000000" SIZE="3" FACE="Palatino">I understand
the reasons. But we must also understand that we have lost moral
authority. And when Western leaders are involved in scandal, we lose
even more. </FONT></P>
<P ALIGN="LEFT"><FONT COLOR="000000" SIZE="3" FACE="Palatino">We seem to
have taken our eye off the ball. In India the BJP won the election
on a promise to test a nuclear bomb. What did we do to dissuade
them? Nothing effective, anyway. As Kofi Annan said, diplomacy
is nothing without weapons; but equally weapons are nothing without
diplomacy. </FONT></P>
<P ALIGN="LEFT"><FONT COLOR="000000" SIZE="3" FACE="Palatino">Now we face,
in my view, a greater chance of a nuclear exchange than at any other time
in the last 30 years. That is a major blow to our security, and I
feel we contributed to it by our neglect. </FONT></P>
<P ALIGN="LEFT"><FONT COLOR="000000" SIZE="3" FACE="Palatino">Vigilance is
the price of peace, and when vigilance lapses, the consequences are
serious. We have ignored Indonesia, too. A united, prosperous,
and democratic Indonesia must matter to us if we are to see a balance of
power in the Asia Pacific, which I believe should be a principle of our
foreign policy. </FONT> </P>
<P ALIGN="CENTER"><FONT COLOR="000000" SIZE="3" FACE="Palatino"><B>THE
NEED FOR A STRONG EUROPEAN SECURITY AND DEFENSE</B></FONT></P>
<P ALIGN="LEFT"><FONT COLOR="000000" SIZE="3" FACE="Palatino">As far as
NATO is concerned, we keep saying, “European Security and Defense
Identity: watch my lips.” Our adversaries watch our actions.
We keep cutting our defense budgets. The U.S. is now below 4%
of the GDP, the U.K. below 3%, Austria below 1%. I am one of the
guilty men. I was both Budget Director and Defense Minister in my
time. But because we have paid out a peace dividend, we now face a
greater risk of war. </FONT></P>
<P ALIGN="LEFT"><FONT COLOR="000000" SIZE="3" FACE="Palatino">SACEUR’s
panel was asked during this Workshop whether Turkey feels offended by its
treatment by the EU. My answer to that is yes, and it will damage
the Alliance. If one thing matters to European security above all
else, it is that Turkey should remain pluralistic, secular, and
pro-Western. The EU has shown by snubbing Turkey that other agendas
matter to it more than security, and the world has taken note. </FONT></P>
<P ALIGN="LEFT"><FONT COLOR="000000" SIZE="3" FACE="Palatino">Meanwhile,
we all know that part of the reason for wishing to develop a common
foreign policy in the EU is to build the Union into a political bloc in
the next century that is on a par with the U.S. and China. Those who
dream of that goal believe that Europe should have a foreign policy
distinctive from America’s—un-American or maybe even
anti-American. The divisions in the Alliance over Iraq show what the
effect of that would be on global order and our security. </FONT> </P>
<P ALIGN="CENTER"><FONT COLOR="000000" SIZE="3" FACE="Palatino"><B>CONCLUDING
REMARKS</B></FONT></P>
<P ALIGN="LEFT"><FONT COLOR="000000" SIZE="3" FACE="Palatino">I believe we
must recognize the following: that if we are to deal effectively with
Kosovo and Iraq and India and Indonesia, and whatever happens next, we
need clear U.S. leadership, and we have to follow that lead. We may
all have our occasional differences with the U.S., but in its foreign
policy it upholds the values to which we subscribe. If we indulge
ourselves in striking too many individual national or European postures,
we weaken the efficacy of those values in the world. </FONT></P>
<P ALIGN="LEFT"><FONT COLOR="000000" SIZE="3" FACE="Palatino">I believe
that the main threat to our security is not the strength of our
adversaries but the weakness of our collective will. The world now
doubts that we have the fixity of purpose, the moral authority, or even
the means to impose global order. And for as long as we go on
cutting our budgets, I doubt that we can prove them wrong. </FONT> </P>
<P ALIGN="LEFT"><A HREF="portillo98.htm">Go to Top of Page</A><BR>
</P>
<P ALIGN="LEFT"><A HREF="workshop98.htm">Return to Vienna '98</A><BR>
</P>
<P ALIGN="LEFT"><A HREF="../index.html">Return to Home Page</A></P>
<P ALIGN="LEFT">Copyright © 1998 Center for Strategic Decision
Research</P>
<P ALIGN="LEFT"></P>
</BODY>
</HTML>