Says NATO Secretary General
Both after the first visit to Kyiv by a delegation of NATO ambassadors taking part in the jubilee Ukraine-NATO Commission’s meeting and in his exclusive interview for The Day NATO Secretary General Lord George Robertson pointed out that NATO is prepared to go in its relationship with Ukraine as far as Ukraine itself is prepared to go from various points of view. He repeatedly stressed that there is a long and hard way to go and carefully avoided giving a direct answer to the question what exactly the alliance is going to offer Ukraine at the Prague summit in November. It is obvious that the time for statements on partnership has passed. And the time to speak about integration will obviously come only after successful joint efforts where diplomacy will not play the first role anymore. Today both sides realize the need to change the format, though often this is hard even psychologically. Lord Robertson is far from giving generous promises. However, the implication of his statements is that in fact everything is possible if you work on it really hard. Good if the impressions NATO Secretary General got, in part, in Donetsk will help him with this.
Q: Is Ukraine’s decision to reinforce its European integration policy in line with NATO’s vision? What further steps can the alliance propose in this regard? Do the NATO allies share the same position regarding the future direction of cooperation with Ukraine? How do the NATO allies see future cooperation with Ukraine? Why does NATO view Ukraine as an important partner and is willing to strengthen its cooperation with Kyiv?
As the North Atlantic Council had a chance to state clearly during the recent visit of Permanent Representatives to Ukraine, NATO fully appreciates Ukraine’s strategic orientation and its aspirations to be part of the Euro-Atlantic mainstream. There is no ambiguity here and all the allies are ready to support Ukrainian efforts aimed at bringing it closer to political, economic, and defense standards enjoyed by the allies. But everybody must be aware that this is going to be a long-term project. There are no shortcuts possible when it comes to far-reaching reforms. And this is the essence of our offer to Ukraine: a credible and serious promise of assisting your country in implementing concrete programs. And all the talks that I and the NATO ambassadors had with your political leaders — President Kuchma, ministers, secretary of the Security Council, and deputies of Verkhovna Rada — created a strong impression of the willingness to go in that direction. This political determination will be crucial in the months and years to come.
But make no mistake — NATO has a strong self-interest in developing its partnership with Ukraine. Yours is a country of great strategic importance, of huge potential. Ukraine’s contribution to European security and stability — for instance through participation in NATO-led peace operations in the Balkans and in the international coalition against terrorism — is highly regarded.
More generally, I was particularly struck by the energy of the people we had a chance to meet with during our trip. Whether in Kyiv, Donetsk, Lviv, or Kharkiv we encountered young people, dynamic people — students, academics, businessmen, and journalists. They believe in a bright future for Ukraine, and we share this optimism.
Q: What level of cooperation can Kyiv realistically expect to achieve in its relations with NATO in the coming few years, for example Ukraine’s potential participation in the Membership Action Plan? What obstacles could Ukraine encounter on its way towards NATO and how can they be overcome? What external factors will be taken into account while making a decision regarding Ukraine?
Interesting question, which I have been asked before. My answer is still the same: NATO is prepared to go as far as Ukraine is prepared and ready to go. That means that within our special, Distinctive Partnership — which apart from the Russian Federation NATO has only with Ukraine — we can achieve a great deal. We do not know yet where this road will take us, but I can frankly tell you that a great deal depends on Ukraine. The allies are eager to engage, consult, and support you in all endeavors serving modernization efforts. We can offer advice on your defense reform program — in fact it is already one of the star performers in our cooperation. The allies want to share experience in training competent personnel — civilian and military — that is indispensable for managing change. By signing the MoU on host nation support the allies have indicated clearly their interest in making use of your assets and infrastructure. They want to explore the unique capability in the area of strategic lift — your Antonov transport planes. We want to continue and intensify political consultations, cooperation in such fields as civil emergency planning, science program or defense support. So, as you can see, there is no shortage of work or topics composing the substance of our relationship.
If one were to talk about any obstacles one would have to mention the obvious problems that a country on the move experiences. Managing reforms is not easy — you need competent people, with linguistic skills, you need procedures, which are free of red tape. But most of all it is Ukraine that has to be a driver in the process of cooperation — it is you who have to choose realistic priorities, devise solid programs, and implement them. Let me therefore stress that the development of NATO- Ukraine relations will be a sovereign matter for the two parties.
Q: What is the substance of work to be done by Ukraine and NATO in between the meeting in Kyiv and the summit in Prague?
The mandate provided by the Foreign Ministers is very clear — we need to agree jointly on an attractive set of proposals on how to invigorate our relationship. Specific areas for cooperation and dialogue need to be identified and they need to be based on Ukraine’s priorities and capabilities. We are well advanced in this work. At our latest NUC meeting we conducted a comprehensive stock-taking review, taking both a bird’s eye and a more analytical look at the progress of the NATO-Ukraine Commission. Rest assured — we will present our leaders in Prague with a meaningful menu of proposals, a real action plan, worthy of the new quality of our relations.
Q: Which word will you prefer to characterize the relations between Ukraine and the alliance: integration, cooperation, or rapprochement?
All those words are very pertinent, but my preferred expression is solid partnership. Partnership, in fact five years of Distinctive Partnership since the signing of the charter, has been both the substance and the spirit of our relationship. And solid — because it has managed occasional glitches and created strong foundations for taking our cooperation further.
Q: What impression you got in Donetsk was most significant to you?
Very difficult question — there were so many memorable moments during that visit.
First of all I have to mention a tragic dimension. I came to Donetsk just a few days after the tragic death of miners from the region. Having been the elected parliamentary representative of a district with a large mining community I feel a personal affinity to the people employed in this noble, but often dangerous, profession. I felt very honored to have a chance to light a candle in the local chapel devoted to the miners.
Second, together with the Dean of the North Atlantic Council, Ambassador Wright of Canada, we took part in a demonstration of land mine destruction. One could not but be impressed with the professionalism and dedication of the staff in a Donetsk factory, engaged — together with the NATO agency NAMSA, as part of the program sponsored by a group of allies — in turning the objects of war into children’s toys.
And thirdly, speaking of children, I had a wonderful time meeting students of special school No. 115 in Donetsk. Not only have they shown an admirable interest in NATO by breaking their holiday to meet us (and asking a lot of very clever questions!), but they also displayed a splendid knowledge of both official NATO languages, English and French. Thanks to them, Ukraine can be assured of a great future.
Q: A new NATO-Russia Council of twenty has been recently established. What factors will determine its success and what are its prospects? Can this new body possibly have both positive and negative impact? What needs to be done to make this body truly effective?
As with other relationships the best guarantee for success lies in the determination and good political will of all sides involved. The NATO-Russia Council (NRC) is working already at full speed — we are capitalizing on the solemn commitment made by the twenty Heads of State and Government in Rome.
We are tackling substantive issues — terrorism, peacekeeping, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and arms control. And we are doing this in a new spirit of inclusiveness and mutual respect. Whether it is in a project sponsored by NATO aimed at helping the Russian military personnel to find their way in to civilian life, or whether it concerns an exchange of intelligence information helping all the allies and Russia to fight terrorism — all members of the NRC follow the logic of common interest. And it is this logic that ensures that prospects for this new Council are good indeed.
So, to answer your question directly — I do see a lot of positive impacts without any negative side effects. It is, after all, a win-win proposition — good for Russia, good for NATO, and good for Euro-Atlantic security and stability overall.
Q: How would you assess an application submitted by the former Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) to join NATO’s PfP program? How would NATO respond? What implications will it have for overall European security? Can this move by the former Yugoslav nations be treated as an argument against NATO opponents?
What we are aware and have taken note of is a statement of intent by the authorities in Belgrade concerning an interest in joining PfP. This is a welcome and positive signal. Overall, it reflects constantly improving relations between NATO and Yugoslavia. We are very satisfied with the normalization of our contacts and dialogue, at the high and medium government level. This is indeed positive news for the Balkans, for the collective job of bringing permanent stability to this region. The NATO Foreign Ministers in May decided therefore to work with the FRY leadership in achieving the progress necessary to enable participation in PfP. Cooperation with the ICTY, democratic reform and control of the military, as well as full and transparent implementation of The Dayton Peace Agreement are essential in this respect.
Don’t forget that even in the most difficult period for our relationship with Yugoslavia NATO never had any quarrel with the Yugoslav people. Following the victory for democracy in that country we simply try to regain the time lost during the dark era of Milosevic.
Q: It has been stated that the upcoming Prague summit will not only be the summit of enlargement, but also of transformation. What are the goals, main elements, and principles of the future transformation? How could Ukraine potentially contribute to this process? How do you see NATO and its role in the world in ten, twenty years?
You are absolutely right. Prague will certainly see new members being invited to join the alliance. NATO’s open door policy remains in force and the Cold War divisions need to be overcome also in the institutional dimension.
But the summit will deliver on all the key issues of European and transatlantic security. We will tackle the transatlantic gap in technology and spending. NATO’s capabilities must keep up with the times, it is essential for the credibility of the alliance. The alliance will also ensure — by reviewing and adapting its policies, structures, and capabilities — that it will remain a major focus for international response to terrorism and other new threats, including weapons of mass destruction.
We are aiming as well at finalizing the institutional links between NATO and the European Union. The cooperative potential of the two organizations needs to be unlocked — for the benefit of transatlantic relations, to maximize our collective contribution to stability in such areas as the Balkans.
Last but not least the Prague summit will mark a further deepening of NATO’s Partnerships arrangements — be it with Russia, Ukraine, countries of Central Asia or participants in the Mediterranean dialogue.
We hope and expect that Ukraine will play a substantial role in helping us to implement this ambitious agenda. The best contribution your country can make is by continuing to improve its standards, by persevering with its reforms, by simply abiding by its international commitments. NATO and Ukraine, like a good couple, have much to look forward to in the years to come.
