"Tackling
Terror: NATO'S New Mission"
Speech
by NATO Secretary General, Lord Robertson
It is a great pleasure to be here. The American Enterprise Institute
(AEI) has always been a wellspring of ideas for change, on a whole range
of issues. Many of those ideas are now becoming US policy. That makes
AEI the right place to discuss the idea of transformation.
With this audience, in this city, I don't need to explain the need for
change. We all know the threats we face. Terrorism has mutated from a
nation-specific problem of law enforcement into a lethal threat to national
security and international stability.
The willingness of today's terrorists, and their backers in rogue regimes,
to kill indiscriminately has transformed terrorism into the greatest security
challenge of the new century. Al Qaida planned to kill tens of thousands
on September 11th by turning airliners into deadly missiles. There can
be no doubt that if they gain access to other, even more potent weapons
of mass destruction, they will use them without a second thought.
This puts an immense burden on the governments of the free world. Not
least because today's enemies are unlike past antagonists. They are not
rational and predictable. They are not prepared to balance interests and
risks. No, they are extremist fanatics, driven by hatred, and operating
beyond rationality and predictability.
At the same time, however, we must not suggest that the terrorists are
winning. The September 11th attacks were horrific. But the terrorists
have suffered a series of massive set-backs since then, from Afghanistan
through the Balkans, where NATO has smashed key Al Qaida cells, to recent
arrests in North America, Europe and North Africa. They can hurt us. But
we can defeat them.
That is not complacency. Our ideals, our societies, our peoples have
been tempered in the victories over fascism and communism. They are too
strong for the new barbarians of terrorism.
But our victory will be easier, quicker and more assured if we remember
the lessons of the great struggles of the 20th century.
First, national governments must act promptly and effectively to mount
their own defenses. That is what the United States is doing now in perhaps
the most profound period of change in the past 50 years.
However, national solutions have never been enough on their own. The
history of my own country shows that the mirage of 'splendid isolation'
leads inevitably to bloody engagement. Far better to work with friends
to avert a crisis than to find yourself alone with the crisis on your
doorstep and your friends all looking the other way.
So the second priority for all free countries is to build and maintain
the friendships that are critical to winning our common war against terror.
As President Bush said on June 1st at West Point, "America needs
partners to preserve the peace".
You may already know what America's NATO Allies have done and are doing
to crush terrorism. But if you don't know, or have forgotten, let me remind
you of the Article 5 declaration that September 11th was an attack against
all 19 NATO Allies. The rapid deployment of NATO AWACS aircraft to help
defend American cities. The crackdown across Europe against Al Qaida and
its backers. The commitment by 14 NATO Allies of combat troops and aircraft,
support services and specialist skills to fight Al Qaida and the Taleban
in the mountains of Afghanistan, and bring stability to the streets of
Kabul.
For generations, NATO and its members have been America's staunchest
allies. It is no different in this time of crisis. As Secretary Rumsfeld
said in Brussels earlier this month, the war on terrorism would not be
possible without NATO.
But the old NATO will not be enough to meet today's risks and challenges.
The Alliance is therefore mirroring the profound change being wrought
by the Bush Administration in its most fundamental process of transformation
since the end of the Cold War.
I would not normally set out publicly what is still work in progress.
But I believe that it is essential in the current climate of concern here
in the United States for people to know and understand how NATO is changing
and how this will benefit the American people, and the people in all Alliance
countries.
Most fundamental, perhaps, is a simple policy decision. NATO has decided
that the Alliance must play a prominent role in defending its own populations
and forces against terrorist attacks.
Defense against terrorism was already one of the new tasks highlighted
in our 1999 Strategic Concept. Now it's front and center - a main focus
of our activities.
To this end, we have now defined "defense against terrorism"
broadly to include activities by our forces, "as and where required".
They must also be able to deter, defend, disrupt and protect against terrorist
attack, or threats of attacks directed from abroad, and to act against
such terrorists and those who harbor them. So much for the sterile "out
of area" debate that, as many of you will remember, hamstrung NATO
throughout much of the early 1990s.
So NATO can now take a lead in fighting terrorism. Sometimes that will
be the right approach. Sometimes other coalitions will be more appropriate.
A permanent coalition is better than a temporary one. An interoperable
coalition is better than an incapable one. A value sharing coalition is
better than a coalition of convenience. And a NATO coalition is better
than anything else.
Allies therefore agreed last week that, on a case-by-case basis, the
Alliance would be prepared to provide its formidable assets and capabilities
to support operations, including operations against terrorism, undertaken
by other international organizations or by coalitions involving Allies.
In other words, where it is appropriate, NATO will be able to support
a non-NATO operation.
This could include something as simple as doing the complex planning
that modern operations require, and in which NATO has over five decades
of experience. But it could also include much more substantial military
support.
Perhaps the most striking scenario would be future operations involving
NATO, its Partners including Russia, and other members of a grand coalition.
These decisions are immensely significant. They show that NATO is prepared
to act as a focus of the international community's military preparations
for defense against terrorism. They also underscore the need to develop
global deployment capabilities. NATO may even be in a position to take
on a wide-ranging facilitating role for UN-mandated operations, not just
against terrorism.
Taken together, these are substantial new commitments. To meet them,
NATO will need substantial new capabilities. And on that front too, major
transformations are underway.
Earlier this month, NATO ministers agreed on the need for a new, more
focused effort to develop Allied essential capacities. And they adopted
a methodical, effective roadmap to ensure that this effort delivers.
First, they agreed that, to carry out the full range of its missions,
including defense against terrorism, NATO should focus on four critical
military capabilities: secure, modern communications and information systems;
the ability to move forces quickly to where they are needed, and to stay
there as long as necessary; the means to work together seamlessly, and
to win in combat; and last but certainly not least, defenses against chemical,
biological, radiological and nuclear attacks.
To American ears, this may sound an obvious shopping list. But you have
decades of experience in deploying and maintaining your forces away from
home. For many European countries, this is a quantum leap in the way that
they think about armed forces.
Take Germany for example. Throughout the Cold War, the United States
and Germany's other NATO Allies demanded that German soldiers concentrate
solely on defending Western Europe against the Warsaw Pact. German operations
outside Germany were unthinkable. Now, however, we have changed our tune
completely. And Germany is not only prepared to listen. It already has
over 10,000 troops deployed abroad, including in Afghanistan. And it is
leading NATO's vital military deployment in the Former Yugoslav Republic
of Macedonia.
Second, we agreed on how to develop these capacities - to ensure that
promises made in Brussels are delivered by national capitals. We decided
that the new initiative on capabilities should be based on firm, nation-specific
commitments. The NATO countries also agreed to pursue further multinational
cooperation in defense, to create synergies and maximize their defense
dollars or Euros.
Endorsing the principles of nation-specific commitments, role specialization
and common acquisition and funding of key assets - these represent radical
breaks with the past.
To ensure a flexible, agile Alliance able to act rapidly, we have also
initiated military and internal reforms to streamline NATO's command structure
and decision-making.
Our challenge, from now until our Prague Summit meeting in November
and beyond, is to ensure that we do, indeed, deliver. The blueprint however
has been laid out, and we are now getting on with it.
That blueprint includes improving NATO's ability to assist national
authorities in protecting both civilian populations and critical infrastructure
against the consequences of terrorist attacks, and particularly attacks
involving chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear weapons.
I hope that terrorists will never get their hands on these weapons.
Or if they do, that we can prevent them from being used. But if we were
to be unsuccessful in preventing an attack, we must be prepared to deal
with the consequences. NATO's forces will therefore be better trained,
and better equipped, to work with civilian authorities to do just that.
My message to NATO leaders has been consistent: we must be ambitious
or we risk being negligent. Fine words. But let me show that NATO is translating
these words into action. We now have five concrete initiatives underway:
a prototype Deployable Nuclear, Chemical and Biological (NBC) Analytical
Laboratory; a prototype NBC Event Response Team; a Virtual Center of Excellence
for NBC Weapons Defense; a NATO Biological and Chemical Defense Stockpile;
and a Disease Surveillance System.
These are substantive, substantial measures on our agenda. And they
are set to begin delivering results in a very short time. But I still
view this as a downpayment and intend to press for further, more robust
steps.
I am dwelling on specifics because I want to demonstrate with concrete
examples that NATO gets it. NATO gets the big picture. That's why we are
moving forward with a sense of urgency to retool the Alliance to tackle
terrorism.
Countering terrorism is at the heart of NATO's new relationship with
Russia. Much has been said about this relationship. To my mind, the essence
is this. September 11th confirmed what we already knew. That the Cold
War alignment of adversaries is dead and buried. We need Russia to face
new and common threats, just as much as Russia needs us. Russia is now
willing to play an honest, cooperative role in working with us.
The new NATO-Russia Council allows just that. It in no way replaces
the North Atlantic Council. We have safeguarded our ability to act as
an Alliance. There can be no such thing as a Russian veto of NATO action,
or indeed a NATO veto of Russian interests.
But on a range of vital issues such as terrorism, missile defense and
proliferation, the new Council gives Russia an equal seat at the table
- and that has two real benefits. First, our cooperation will take an
immediate and concrete step forward in meeting urgent challenges. That,
alone, is significant. But the longer-term benefit to Euro-Atlantic security
is just as important.
If in the coming years, Russia comes to see NATO as an organization
to which it can turn - regularly and with confidence - for cooperation
in solving Euro-Atlantic problems, then we will have brought Russia into
Europe as a trusting and trustworthy member. That would truly be an historic
contribution to our common security, and a major contribution to the success
of our long-term fight against the new threats we all face.
At Prague in November, we will also take a decisive step forward in our
relations with countries across Europe and into Central Asia. The logic
is clear. Meeting challenges such as terrorism and proliferation requires
the broadest and deepest possible cooperation. And even small countries,
far away from Washington or Brussels, can play a decisive role.
For almost a decade, NATO has had increasingly close and practical relations
with 27 non-NATO countries, including the countries of the Caucasus and
Central Asia. Ask yourself whether the countries of Central Asia would
have been so ready, willing and able to offer the critical assistance
that helped bring down the Taleban without 10 years of cooperation with
the United States and its allies in NATO's Partnership for Peace. These
relations were critical. Now they are about to get an upgrade.
We will develop better intelligence sharing. We will share knowledge
on how to deal, together, with the consequences of a terrorist attack,
including the use of weapons of mass destruction. We will train more together,
so that when the time comes for joint operations, our coalition is as
strong and as broad as possible.
Let me offer a brief word on enlargement. All of the nations aspiring
to membership are busily focused on reforms before we even consider any
decisions - which is how I want it. But just because enlargement is not
a headline story at the moment, we cannot forget how dramatically the
decisions at Prague will reshape Europe. The democratic unification of
Europe is something easy to take for granted as we focus increasingly
on the so-called new agenda beyond Europe. But the uniting of that continent
so bloodied by war for centuries is far from complete. Prague will ensure
that that process is inevitable.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Today is an interesting day in American history. On June 20, 1782, two
hundred and twenty years ago the American Congress adopted the Great Seal
of the United States. It featured the legend "e pluribus unum"
- "one from many."
In a very real sense, that sentiment applies not only to the United
States, but also to NATO.
For over 50 years, the Atlantic Alliance has brought its members together
- to arrive at common perceptions of the challenges they face; to develop
common means to deal with them; and to act together, when they must, in
defense of their shared interests and values. Many countries formed one
strong, effective security community - a community that will only grow
as more countries come to share our values, and can share the burdens
of security with us.
Today, NATO is once again in a process of rapid, substantive transformation.
By Prague, that transformation will deliver results. It will enable NATO's
members, and its Partners, to work together to defend against terrorism
and weapons of mass destruction, and it will spark and guide substantial
improvements in our collective capability to win this fight.
Taking all elements together, the transformation of NATO will make a
key, indeed essential, contribution to US security, to the security of
all NATO nations, and in turn to the safety of future generations.
Thank you.
1. Turkey recognizes the Republic of Macedonia by
its constitutional name.
![](https://webarchive.library.unt.edu/web/20121107155910im_/http://www.nato.int/icons/general/compass.gif)
|