[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 66 (Tuesday, May 21, 2002)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4651-S4654]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
NATO ENLARGEMENT
Mr. VOINOVICH. Mr. President, Last week, May 14-15, Secretary of
State Colin Powell joined foreign ministers from all 19 members of the
NATO Alliance in Reykjavik, Iceland, where they began to lay the
groundwork for the Summit of the NATO Alliance in Prague this November.
As many of my colleagues are aware, three themes have emerged to fill
the agenda in Prague: first, discussion of NATO's capabilities and the
ability to respond to today's most urgent threats; second, the
selection of new members; and third, the beginning of new relationships
with Russia, Ukraine and other members of the international community.
During the two-day ministerial meeting in Reykjavik, Secretary Powell
and his NATO colleagues addressed each of these issues, beginning with
the announcement of a new NATO-Russia Council. As the British foreign
minister put it, we saw the end of the cold war--again.
The agreement, which is to be finalized in Rome on May 28th, puts
Russia and the 19 members of the NATO Alliance at the same table, as
equal partners, to discuss a number of issues, including
counterterrorism, military cooperation, nonproliferation and
peacekeeping. While establishing new areas in which NATO and Russia
will work together, the agreement makes certain that NATO will maintain
complete control over enlargement and core military issues.
This news is even more significant when coupled with the recent
announcement that President Bush and Russian President Putin will sign
a treaty to reduce their nuclear arsenals by nearly two-thirds when
they meet in Moscow later this month. As Secretary Powell remarked in
Reykjavik, our relationship with Russia seems to be on sound footing as
we look toward the 21st century. It is my hope that conversations
continue to be productive, and I look forward to further discussion
about the implementation of these two agreements. However, I remain a
little bit skeptical that this will substantially change our
relationship with Russia.
In addition to discussion about NATO's relationship with Russia, the
ministerial meeting highlighted the urgent need to address the widening
gap in military capabilities between the United States and our NATO
allies. As Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Marc Grossman
remarked in testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on
May 1, ``The growing capabilities gap between Europe and the United
States is the most serious long-term problem facing NATO, and must be
addressed.''
This message is not new to members of the Alliance. We've talked
about it before. NATO developed the Defense Capabilities Initiative,
DCI, at the Washington Summit in 1999 to begin to address deficiencies
in technology and military equipment. But there has been little
progress, and as the events of September 11th have made all too clear,
the Alliance must have the ability to respond in times of crisis.
While the United States and our NATO allies have begun to identify
new threats in Europe and beyond, as Secretary Grossman remarked,
``There has to be lots more done at NATO to meet them.''
The United States has identified shortfalls in four key areas of
NATO's military capabilities, which Under Secretary of Defense for
Policy Doug Feith outlined in Senate testimony earlier this month.
These include: first, nuclear, biological and chemical defenses
[[Page S4652]]
to protect allied troops and territory; next, the capability to
transport troops to the battlefield--in short, we need the right
aircraft to get our troops where they need to be; third, communication
and information systems to allow allied countries to work together
effectively; and finally, modern weapons systems, such as precision-
guided munitions and capabilities to suppress enemy air defense.
In a NATO Communique released on May 14th, the NATO foreign ministers
recognized the need to take steps to improve military capabilities.
They note that ``To carry out the full range of its missions, NATO must
be able to field forces that can move quickly to wherever they are
needed, sustain operations over distance and time, and achieve their
objectives.'' In order to fulfill these objectives, they further note
that ``This will require the development of new and balanced
capabilities within the Alliance, including strategic lift and modern
strike capabilities, so that NATO can more effectively respond
collectively to any threat of aggression against a member state.''
While this statement is important, I am hopeful that these words will
be followed by action and the financial commitments necessary to make
this vision a reality. The United States has acted to increase its
investment in defense. And as Secretary Powell remarked to reporters
last week, ``We think that all of our colleagues in NATO should be
doing likewise.''
The United States will spend more than 3.5 percent of its GDP on
defense in Fiscal Year 2002. While we ask NATO aspirant countries to
spend 2 percent of their GDP on defense, nearly half of NATO's current
members do not meet this benchmark. Though we sought to address this
issue with the Defense Capabilities Initiative in 1999, defense
spending in many countries has actually decreased since that time. If
NATO is going to stay relevant, members of the Alliance must do better
with their defense budgets. At the NATO Parliamentary Assembly meeting
in Sofia, Bulgaria next week, I will be asking them why they have not
kept commitments on their defense spending.
NATO Secretary General Lord Robertson underscored the importance of
making substantial contributions to military capabilities during the
meeting in Reykjavik, saying the Alliance must change if it is to be
effective. Further, he was clear in his message: NATO must ``modernize
or be marginalized.''
Without the ability to communicate and work together in the field,
NATO cannot be effective. And without the fundamental ability to get
forces to the frontline to provide for the defense of NATO interests
when the time comes, NATO cannot fulfill its basic mission of
collective security. I look forward to continued discussion on this
issue in the months leading to Prague, and I am hopeful that as NATO
defense ministers and heads of state discuss viable options for closing
the capabilities gap, they come prepared to make financial commitments
to finally get the job done.
In addition to driving home the need for improved military
capabilities, the events of 9/11 and the U.S.-led military campaign in
Afghanistan have raised serious questions about NATO's ability to
respond to terrorist threats, which may likely originate outside of the
Alliance's traditional area of operations. This has already generated
much debate, and I believe this will be an important item on the agenda
in Prague. It will also be important in Bulgaria. I am hopeful there
will be productive dialogue as NATO considers action in this realm in
the future.
Finally, in addition to new capabilities and new relationships, the
question of new members will be on the forefront of the agenda this
fall. This is a big deal.
I have been a proponent of enlargement of the NATO Alliance to
include Europe's new democracies for many years, and I look forward to
a robust round of enlargement in Prague.
In March, I spoke to a gathering of individuals with ties to every
country aspiring to join the NATO Alliance, including: Albania,
Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Romania, Slovakia, and
Slovenia, as well as Croatia. They came together to promote the merits
of enlargement as a single, unified group--working together to deliver
the message that NATO expansion is in the strategic interest of the
United States, Europe, and the broader international community of
democracies.
As the meeting concluded, the delegation passed a resolution in
support of enlargement, reaffirming the importance of NATO to the
security and stability of Europe.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a copy of the Joint
Statement prepared at that meeting be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the statement was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
Joint Statement of the Representatives of Ethnic Communities on the
Enlargement of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Washington, DC,
March 16, 2002
1. We, the Representatives of the American ethnic
communities of the Albanian, Bulgarian, Croatian, Czech,
Estonian, Hungarian, Latvian, Lithuanian, Macedonian, Polish,
Romanian, Slovak and Slovenian descent, have gathered in
Washington, D.C. to endorse the vision of a Europe whole and
free as presented by President George W. Bush on June 15,
2001 and by former president William J. Clinton on October
22, 1996.
2. We believe that NATO is the backbone of the
transatlantic community and has been an effective bulwark in
the defense of freedom, democracy and human rights. We
further believe that a strong involvement of the United
States in Europe serves the vital interest of the United
States.
3. We thank the United States House of Representatives for
overwhelmingly passing the Freedom Consolidation Act of 2001
and we urge its expeditious passage by the United States
Senate.
4. We believe that the accession of the Czech Republic,
Hungary and Poland to NATO has contributed to transatlantic
security and strengthened and expanded the zone of peace,
stability, democracy and cooperation in Europe.
5. We share President Bush's belief that ``All of Europe's
new democracies, from the Baltic to the Black Sea and all
that lie between, should have the same chance for security
and freedom--and the same chance to join the institutions of
Europe--as Europe's old democracies have.'' Furthermore, we
believe that the almost 55 million people who live in
Europe's aspirant nations should contribute to and share in
the benefits of the family of European nations.
6. We commend Europe's new democracies for their progress
in solidifying democracy, establishing market economies and
building strong and just civil societies. We believe that the
invitation to join NATO will be a major achievement in the
struggle for freedom. In this regard, we honor all who have
suffered in this cause and we thank the United States for its
abiding support.
7. We recognize the significant progress that has been made
by Europe's new democracies in their preparation to shoulder
the responsibilities that membership in NATO requires.
8. We commend Europe's new democracies for their solidarity
with the American people after the terrorist attacks of
September 11, 2001 and for their willingness to act as de
facto allies of the United States and NATO. We recognize the
contributions of Europe's new democracies for opening their
air and land facilities to the United States and NATO and for
sharing their resources in promoting global security and in
the fight against terrorism.
9. We applaud Europe's new democracies for their commitment
to cooperation which was initiated in Vilnius, Lithuania in
May, 2000.
10. We urge Europe's new democracies to accelerate needed
reforms to enable their invitations to join NATO at the
Prague Summit. We also understand that this continued
commitment to shared values is an essential component of such
membership.
11. We express our thanks to the Czech Republic, Hungary
and Poland for their support of the Vilnius process, to
Denmark and Norway for their work in the security of the
Baltics and to Greece and turkey for their support of their
closest neighbor nations.
12. We commit ourselves to support and promote the
fulfillment of the vision of a Europe whole and free and
respectfully urge the President of the United States and the
United States Senate to support invitations to all aspirant
nations who have demonstrated their preparedness for
admission to NATO.
Mr. VOINOVICH. In the resolution, they note: ``We believe that NATO
is the backbone of the transatlantic community and has been an
effective bulwark in the defense of freedom, democracy and human
rights. We further believe that a strong involvement of the United
States in Europe serves the vital interest of the United States.''
I strongly support that message, and I share the sentiments expressed
by President Bush in remarks he delivered in Poland last June, when he
said that as the NATO Summit in Prague approaches, ``We should not
calculate how little we can get away with, but
[[Page S4653]]
how much we can do to advance the cause of freedom.''
During the cold war, as a public official in the State of Ohio, I
remained a strong supporter of the captive nations, who were for so
many years denied the right of self-determination by the former Soviet
Union.
When I was mayor of Cleveland during the 1980s, we celebrated the
independence days of the captive nations at city hall--flying their
flags, singing their songs and praying that one day the people in those
countries would know freedom.
In August 1991, as communism's grip loosened, I wrote a letter to
then-President George H.W. Bush urging him to recognize the
independence of the Baltic nations. Now, these countries are among
those being considered for membership in the NATO alliance.
Last May, I had the opportunity to visit Estonia, Latvia and
Lithuania as part of a Senate delegation traveling to the meeting of
the NATO parliamentary assembly, and I--along with my colleagues--was
very impressed with what I saw.
Our observations were confirmed when many of us visited with General
Ralston. He spoke very eloquently about what he has seen in the Baltic
nations--with heavy emphasis on their communication systems. He spoke
about BALTnet, and said the communication system in place in the Balts
is as good as any system within NATO. So is the network in Slovenia
they are ready to plug into NATO immediately.
As I stood with my colleagues in the streets of Lithuania--surrounded
by thousands of Lithuanian citizens all rallying in support of NATO
enlargement--I remembered the celebrations we had in Cleveland years
earlier, when Lithuania was still part of the Soviet empire. It was a
remarkable feeling for me to stand in a free Lithuania, and to talk
about making the country part of the NATO alliance.
After I returned to the United States, I sent a letter to President
Bush conveying my impressions of some of the work done in those
countries. I encouraged him to guarantee the freedom of those once
subjected to life under Communism by making clear his strong support
for NATO enlargement.
I was pleased when the President outlined his vision for NATO
enlargement in Warsaw last summer, noting that ``All of Europe's new
democracies, from the Baltic to the Black Sea and all that lie between,
should have the same chance for security and freedom--and the same
chance to join the institutions of Europe--as Europe's old democracies
have.''
During my time in the Senate, I have been privileged to travel to a
number of other NATO aspirant countries--Macedonia and Albania during
the war in Kosovo in 1999, and Slovenia, Romania, and Croatia in 2000.
I will visit Bulgaria over the Memorial Day recess to take part in the
meeting of the NATO parliamentary assembly, and I also hope to visit
Slovenia and Slovakia--the only country on the list that I have yet to
visit--later this month.
As we approach the Prague summit in November, the NATO alliance finds
itself at pivotal point in world history.
More than a decade ago, the fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse
of the Soviet empire marked a moment of profound change for millions of
people in Europe and the world at large. It was clear that the global
political scene was changed forever.
As we look toward Prague, it is evident that the world is again a
changed place. We face new challenges, and we must rise to meet them.
It is clear that the events of September 11 have given all of us a
new focus. They have opened our eyes to issues that must not be
ignored. I am grateful for the support that the United States has
received from our NATO allies and those countries aspiring to join the
alliance. This assistance is critical for the international community
to be successful in carrying out a comprehensive campaign to fight
terrorism, and it is important that these collaborative efforts
continue.
NATO's decision to invoke article V--signifying that an attack on one
was an attack on all--sent a strong message of solidarity to the people
of the United States, and the world at large. The world is different
not just for us in America, but for all of Western civilization. NATO
has begun to examine the role the alliance will play in efforts to
protect the world against threats associated with terrorism and weapons
of mass destruction.
Without a doubt, the events of September 11 dramatically impacted the
conversations that took place in Iceland last week, and they will
certainly influence the agenda in Prague this November. As the United
States and other members of NATO consider enlargement of the alliance
in the six months leading to Prague, it is within the broader context
of a changed world post-9-11.
I believe this debate is still very relevant. In fact, as some have
said, discussion about NATO enlargement is perhaps more important now
than ever before.
I strongly agree with remarks made by Under Secretary of State
Grossman in testimony before the Foreign Relations Committee earlier
this month. While acknowledging that some people have argued that after
September 11, expansion of the alliance should not remain a priority,
Secretary Grossman said he does not agree.
He remarked, ``I believe that enlargement should remain a priority .
. . The events of September 11th show us that the more allies we have,
the better off we're going to be; the more allies we have to prosecute
the war on terrorism, the better off we're going to be. And if we're
going to meet these new threats to our security, we need to build the
broadest and strongest coalition possible of countries that share our
values and are able to act effectively with us. With freedom under
attack, we must demonstrate our resolve to do as much as we can to
advance our cause.''
While NATO is a collective security organization, formed to defend
freedom and democracy in Europe, we cannot forget that common values
form the foundation of the alliance.
When we consider enlargement to include Europe's new democracies, we
must answer a central question: how would each country contribute to
the collective security of the NATO alliance? When we answer that
question, our response should certainly factor in the military
attributes of each aspirant country, which continue to be evaluated by
U.S. and NATO military officials. At the same time, as NATO evaluates
its needs for the future, we should take into consideration other ways
in which aspirant countries can contribute to the collective defense of
Europe.
Since September 11, the United States and NATO have called on members
of the international community to provide critical assistance in a
number of areas outside of the traditional military realm. While these
do not outweigh the need for improved defense capabilities, such as
strategic airlift capabilities and improved communication systems, they
are nonetheless critical to thwarting future terrorist attacks.
Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage outlined a number of these
areas in remarks to leaders of the NATO aspirant countries at the V-10
summit in Bucharest, Romania 2 months ago. Secretary Armitage said,
``The threats we now face have changed the way we think about defending
ourselves and broadened the scope of possible contributions to the
common defense. Forces in the field remain indispensable, but other
contributions are just as important. Law enforcement, intelligence
sharing, controlling the flow of terrorist financing are essential
weapons in responding to today's threats.''
We have seen the benefit of these contributions as the international
community continues to engage in a global campaign against terrorism.
The nine NATO aspirant countries, as well as Croatia, have reached out
to the United States in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks.
They have pledged their solidarity, volunteered their resources, and
shared intelligence information with the United States and NATO. They
have decided to act not as aspirants, but as allies, and their support
is highly important.
As significant as this cooperation has been, the work is not done. It
is critical that countries aspiring to join the alliance continue their
efforts to make progress in areas outlined in the membership action
plan--developing free market economies, promoting democracy and the
rule of law, respecting the
[[Page S4654]]
rights of minorities, and implementing military reforms. These values
are the hallmark of the NATO alliance, and they must not be neglected.
Secretary Armitage underscored this point to NATO aspirant countries
at the V-10 summit in Bucharest. He reaffirmed President Bush's
commitment to enlargement, which the President made clear in his
remarks in Warsaw, Poland last June. Secretary Armitage called on the
aspirant countries to continue their work, saying, ``We believe that
the conditions are better than ever to pursue a robust enlargement. Now
it's up to you. You have worked hard on your Membership Action Plans .
. . You have pursued political and economic reform programs; and you
have continued to restructure your militaries. These efforts must
continue.''
I was pleased when NATO foreign ministers again confirmed their
belief in the importance of NATO enlargement at the ministerial meeting
last week, noting ``At their Prague Summit in November this year, our
Heads of State and Government will launch the next round of NATO
enlargement. This will confirm the Alliance's commitment to remain open
to new members, and enhance security in the Euro-Atlantic area.''
As the U.S. Government has done, NATO foreign ministers called on
aspirant countries to continue their work to join the alliance not only
in the upcoming months, but in the years beyond November's summit.
As we approach the Prague Summit, I look forward to continued
discussion about the key issues facing the NATO Alliance. I am pleased
that the Secretary of State's visit to Reykjavik was productive,
providing a solid foundation for the ambitious agenda to be tackled in
Prague. I am confident that our visit to Bulgaria for the meeting of
the NATO parliamentary assembly will also serve as a forum to further
discussion on the subjects of new capabilities, new members and new
relationships.
I am pleased that the Senate voted overwhelmingly in favor of the
Freedom Consolidation Act last week, which passed by a vote of 85 to 6.
This bill puts the Senate on record in support of enlargement of the
alliance in Prague, expressing the belief that NATO should remain open
to Europe's new democracies able to accept the responsibilities that
come with membership.
At the same time, as I expressed last week and many of my colleagues
made clear during Senate debate of the measure, this does not guarantee
Senate support for the extension of invitations to all nine candidate
countries in Prague. There is still work to be done, and NATO aspirants
should continue to make progress on their membership Action Plans in
the months leading to Prague.
As a member of Congress who has long been involved with Euro-Atlantic
issues, I understand the importance of NATO expansion to strengthening
security and stability in Europe. I supported enlargement of the
alliance in 1997; I will again support enlargement at Prague. And I
believe NATO should be open to further expansion in the future.
It is clear that the selection of new members this year will take
place in a world vastly different than it was during the last round of
enlargement; nonetheless, we should continue to explore questions on
enlargement as NATO moves forward to strengthen its ability to provide
for the collective defense of Europe in the post September 11th
security environment.
I strongly believe that supporting NATO expansion demonstrates our
country's commitment to freedom, democracy and peace, and I will
continue to promote expansion of the Alliance to include Europe's new
democracies which demonstrate the ability to handle the responsibility
of NATO membership.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senator from
Oklahoma is recognized.
____________________