[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 138 (Wednesday, October 13, 1999)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E2080-E2081]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




           ADDRESS BY H.E. LENNART MERI, PRESIDENT OF ESTONIA

                                 ______
                                 

                        HON. DENNIS J. KUCINICH

                                of ohio

                    in the house of representatives

                      Wednesday, October 13, 1999

  Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I submit the following for the Record.

Address by H.E. Lennart Meri, President of Estonia, at the Breakfast of 
 the Joint Baltic American National Committee Honoring the Members of 
    the Baltic Caucus of the Senate and the House of Representatives


                    October 13, 1999--Washington, DC

       Mr. Chairman, Members of Congress, Ladies and Gentlemen:
       I appreciate being here in this very distinguished company. 
     I appreciate the opportunity to address this distinguished 
     audience here today and I will do so in a triple capacity: as 
     an Estonian, as a representative of the Baltic states, and as 
     European. I will focus on the challenge of NATO enlargement 
     to the Baltic states, but I will do so in the context of the 
     evolving European-U.S. relationship and of the situation in 
     and the relationship with the Russian Federation.
       The world today is changing, and it should be our joint 
     endeavor to change it in a way, which promotes our common 
     interests. These interests include, both as far as Estonia 
     and the U.S. are concerned, a stable and secure Europe and a 
     stable, secure, democratic and cooperative Russia. The 
     question is how to achieve these two aims. I will present to 
     you my case that, including the Baltic States in NATO can 
     actually contribute to both.
       Ladies and Gentlemen, the security relationship between the 
     US and Europe is changing and evolving. What is not and what 
     should not change is the American commitment to European 
     security. After all, for forty years it was the United States 
     presence in Europe that guaranteed safety and freedom to the 
     non-communist part of the continent. Even in countries that 
     were not and are not members of NATO it is generally 
     acknowledged today that their safety was a consequence of the 
     United States military presence in Europe. For all the 
     manpower and military hardware that the European NATO members 
     themselves put up it was essential for America to be ever-
     present and ready to support and lead the defense of western 
     Europe, should it come to that. Today, the security situation 
     has altered drastically. In this situation it is clear that 
     we Europeans have to do more and that we have to be better 
     prepared to manage crises on our own doorstep to be a more 
     partner to the United States.
       The contrary, the US presence in Europe is today as vital 
     as it has ever been. History has shown that the United States 
     will be involved, sooner or later, in a European conflict. 
     This is a sign of our close economic ties, but it is more 
     importantly, and I believe above all, a sign of the 
     convictions and values we share on both sides of the Atlantic 
     Ocean. Therefore we must continue to work together to 
     strengthen and expand the still all too narrow area where 
     democracy rules and human rights are respected. It is right 
     of the United States to want its European partners to 
     contribute more and it is right of the Europeans to 
     strengthen common defense capacities. Yet all this means is 
     that we are restructuring a successful and vital 
     relationship. We are not--and we must not--alter the 
     fundamental principles on which this co-operation is based, 
     and these principles are caught up in one word: NATO. NATO 
     is today and will remain for the foreseeable future the 
     only organisation capable of ensuring a safe and secure 
     Euro-Atlantic region.
       Estonia and our two Baltic neighbours, Latvia and 
     Lithuania, wish to be part of this co-operation. Or rather I 
     should say that we are already part of it. Estonia, Latvia 
     and Lithuania have been working together with NATO forces in 
     Bosnia and now in Kosovo. We are exercising with US and 
     European forces on a regular basis. In the very near future 
     Estonian radar stations and those of our neighbours will be 
     hooked up to NATO systems and we will start exchanging vital 
     information.
       Thus the co-operation between Estonia and NATO, between our 
     neighbours and NATO is already happening. We have 
     demonstrated clearly our willingness and readiness to 
     contribute to European and Trans-Atlantic security and 
     stability because we believe that this also affects our 
     security. Kosovo and Bosnia were not far away events in far 
     away places but were of direct relevance to our own national 
     security. If one nation in Europe is not secure then no one 
     is secure. We may be able to avoid direct conflict, but we 
     cannot avoid refugees and disruptions in trade that result 
     from these wars. Therefore it is in our direct national 
     interest to contribute to European and Trans-Atlantic 
     security, just as I am convinced that it is in the United 
     States interest to remain engaged in Europe.
       This is the reason why we wish to join NATO and this is why 
     I believe it is also in the national interest of the United 
     States to have the Baltic states become members of the 
     Alliance.
       Ladies and Gentlemen, it is fashionable for some nowadays 
     to speak of a realist, or neo-realist policy agenda. The 
     argument is that what worked well until the end of the Cold 
     War will work well today. I would be the last one to dispute 
     that the US policies, which led to the collapse of the Soviet 
     Union, were wrong or ineffective. On the contrary; they were 
     right and effective. But the world of 1999 is different from 
     the world of 1989, or 1979, 69 or 59. We no longer have the 
     Cold War; we no longer have the Soviet Union. Instead we have 
     a Central Europe stretching from the Gulf of Finland to the 
     Adriatic and Black Seas that is free once more and we have a 
     Russia which is struggling to find a democratic path. We also 
     have an independent Ukraine, and Georgia and Azerbaijan and 
     Armenia . . . The list goes on! And we are faced with the 
     fact that the United States truly is the one remaining 
     superpower.
       Thus, our policy agenda today should also proceed from the 
     fact that we face a new world, which requires new solutions. 
     The world of tomorrow is in the process of being shaped. In 
     shaping this world we must act with great agility and great 
     speed. Whether we term the policies realistic or idealistic 
     or something in between has in this case no relevance. What 
     is required is determined action. Any other approach is, I 
     believe, simply unrealistic.
       I am convinced that the United States has a profound 
     interest in leading this endeavour. An expanded area of 
     democracy and freedom is in the US interest, because it 
     increases stability. And stability in turn is a catalyst for 
     economic development, which increases trade, and so on. And 
     one major way of increasing stability is to continue the 
     enlargement of NATO.
       There will be those--perhaps even here, in this room--who 
     will say that I am wrong, that continuing the enlargement of 
     NATO will only irritate Russia, make it even harder to deal 
     with and that for that reason NATO should not expand. 
     Certainly not to the Baltic states.
       Ladies and Gentlemen, Dreams of the instant birth of a free 
     and democratic Russia, where human rights would be respected 
     were very popular in the West at the beginning of this 
     decade. We in Estonia never shared this enthusiasm. But 
     neither do we share the gloom of many Western observers today 
     who seem to write off Russia and to say that nothing good 
     will ever come out of there. I believe that Russia can indeed 
     become a truly democratic country. But it will simply take a 
     lot of time. What Russia needs during this time of growing up 
     is firm guidance on what is and what is not permitted in our 
     new world.
       Today we see once again the bombing of villages and the 
     killing of civilians in Chechnya. We see the deportation of 
     tens of thousands of persons from Moscow--simply because of 
     the different colour of their skin. And we see worrying calls 
     for a strong man

[[Page E2081]]

     to lead Russia. All of these symptoms give cause for concern. 
     We must in no way nurture these trends, we must in no way 
     give people who advocate such policies a reason to believe 
     that they are accepted or tolerated by the West. Rather we 
     have to support those politicians in Russia who even today 
     are expressing reservations about the war in Chechnya and the 
     deportation of persons because of the colour of their skin. 
     We must nurture the democratic forces in Russia, however 
     weak, so that Russia may one day find the political will to 
     abandon her post-feudal way of thinking and start to build a 
     civil society. This means supporting the Russian democrats 
     and providing assistance, but precisely targeted assistance. 
     It means staying engaged with Russia. It means stability 
     around Russia will be the best way to assist her democratic 
     forces. It also means enlarging NATO to include those 
     countries of central Europe that wish to join, including the 
     Baltic states.
       Ladies and Gentlemen, One of the fundamental tenets of our 
     common heritage is the promotion of the free right of men and 
     nations to choose their destiny. It is a tenet, which 
     underpins the international society in which we live and 
     where we wish to live. This is the principle, which should 
     guide us when discussing the future NATO membership of 
     Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. Any word--any hint--that 
     Russia has a say in this matter will only strengthen those in 
     Moscow who aim to do things the old feudal way. It will 
     strengthen those who do not wish to have Russia become a 
     member of the democratic society of nations. It will bring us 
     all further from the goal of enhancing the sphere of 
     stability and security in Europe.
       In short, Baltic NATO membership is in the interest of 
     those who wish to strengthen democracy in Russia.
       Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen, I have approached 
     Baltic membership in NATO from two angles: from a European 
     and from a Russian one. Europe's role within NATO is growing 
     and the Baltic states are committed to being part of this 
     development. We are willing to carry our share of the burden.
       On the other hand, Russia's future is only now taking shape 
     and Baltic membership of NATO will help steer this 
     development in the right direction.
       The Baltic Caucus in the Senate and in the House and Baltic 
     Americans are a crucial element in our strategy for gaining 
     membership of the Alliance. It is you who are our advocates 
     both here in Washington and across the United States. I hope 
     that my presentation here today has further served to 
     strengthen your resolve and has provided you with some 
     additional ideas on this issue. I am convinced that by 
     working together we can achieve our common goal so that 
     Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania may in the near future join the 
     United States as full members of NATO.
       By working together, Estonia and the US, the Baltic states 
     and the US, Europe and the US, we can ensure that our world 
     of tomorrow will be somewhat safer, somewhat more democratic, 
     somewhat more prosperous than the world of today.
       Thank you.

       

                          ____________________