[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 70 (Monday, May 12, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6024-S6025]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      SUPPORT FOR NATO ENLARGEMENT

  Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, when NATO formed in 1949, the world had 
been liberated from the grips of Hitler and the Japanese. But, the rise 
of communism and the Soviet Union brought new threats and the fear of 
nuclear war. NATO was created with vision and vigor to combat, through 
political and military means, the spread of communism. NATO has 
succeeded.
  Today, the Soviets are gone, and a partnership between Russia and 
NATO is growing. Still, freedom-loving societies have been threatened 
anew by state and non-state supported terrorists looking to achieve 
their destructive aims through the spread of WMD.
  The question looms whether NATO will address these new threats or be 
pushed to the side because it was unable to transform when the cold war 
ended. Some have said NATO's mission ended when the Berlin Wall fell. 
Some have even said NATO is dead. Well, I do not think NATO is dead. 
Now is the time to recommit ourselves to NATO to ensure that the 
world's greatest alliance for peace perseveres and is improved to 
remain strong for another 50 years. To do so, NATO must adapt its 
mission to deal with today's threats. NATO members must commit to a 
common defense with both policy and budgetary commitments that improve 
interoperability and reduce the capabilities gap between the U.S. and 
other members. As NATO's largest and most powerful member, the United 
States and her leaders in the Senate stand ready to strengthen NATO and 
repair recently strained relationships amongst NATO members. We must do 
so, and we must take the first step by supporting NATO enlargement and 
the admission of seven new members: Romania, Bulgaria, Estonia, 
Slovenia, Slovakia, Latvia, and Lithuania.
  NATO expansion makes strategic sense because expansion creates a 
united Europe. The addition of the seven aspirants creates a land 
bridge forming a contiguous alliance on the European Continent. Now, 
Western Europe from the Atlantic will be connected with its allies in 
Greece and Turkey on the Mediterranean and Black Sea. With the 
Partnership for Peace, NATO spreads across three continents. Bitter 
enemies just 13 years ago are now reliable allies.
  NATO membership is a carrot to political and economic reform to all 
nations wishing to join the alliance. Again, just 13 years ago, the 
seven proposed new members of NATO were under the darkness and weight 
of the Iron Curtain. Today, they are burgeoning democracies committed 
to market economics. To be in NATO, a democratic form of governance is 
needed. Spain, Greece, and Portugal undertook political reforms to gain 
NATO approval, and the same is true today for the seven countries 
currently seeking NATO admission.
  The seven new members are ready to actively participate and 
contribute to a robust NATO. In fact they are already doing so. I would 
like to cite Romania as one example. Romania has undertaken major 
political and economic reforms. Romania overthrew Nicolae Ceausescu--a 
ruthless and oppressive totalitarian leader. Since being unshackled, 
Romania has celebrated its freedom. Romania has held four nationwide 
elections, and democracy is blossoming.
  Romania is also committed to the defense of the members of the NATO 
alliance, both in Europe and the U.S. Some have questioned what the 
seven new members can bring to the table to

[[Page S6025]]

benefit NATO. We need not question whether Romania will be a positive 
force within NATO. Romania has risked the lives of its soldiers for the 
benefit of the United States.
  Participation in Operation Desert Storm--Romania contributed a 
military hospital company to the Allied Forces.
  Participation in Afghanistan--Romania used its own airlift, a C-130, 
to transport a battalion of soldiers to Afghanistan. These forces have 
made two rotations. Romania is currently involved in the peacekeeping 
mission in Afghanistan.
  Operation Iraqi Freedom--Romania mobilized its military police and a 
nuclear, biological, chemical detection team to work alongside U.S. 
forces in Iraq.
  Currently 5,000 U.S. marines are based at Constanza, Romania. Our 
strategic threats are different today than they were 50 years ago. We 
are no longer endangered by Russia. Today, the greatest threat to NATO 
and its members is the threat of terrorism and the spread of weapons of 
mass destruction. As a result, the U.S. should consider whether it 
would be wise to reconfigure our forces overseas.
  Our new threats are coming from the Middle East and southwest Asia. 
Romania and Bulgaria are halfway between Germany and the Middle East. 
Moving bases closer to the threat will allow the U.S. to mobilize 
faster and get to the fight sooner. We would also be welcome in Romania 
and Bulgaria. There is some question whether we are still welcome in 
Western Europe.
  There are those who say NATO is dead or has no modern mission. That 
is simply not the case. The Soviet Union may no longer be a threat, but 
threats still exist. The end of the cold war may have erased the notion 
of warfighting where million-man armies face million-man armies on the 
European Continent. But, the end of the cold war unleashed despots 
willing to use the asymmetrical means of terrorism and WMD 
proliferation as methods of aggression and diplomatic blackmail.
  NATO must adopt a new mission--combating terrorism and WMD 
proliferation both in Europe and globally. The threats that emerged 
from September 11 do not only affect the United States, these threats 
should be a concern to the entire NATO community. As we have seen, al-
Qaeda cells were active in Germany, Spain, France, and Italy.
  International terrorism on our shores was unknown to Americans prior 
to September 11. However, it was not uncommon in Europe. The other NATO 
members should unite behind America's interests to root out terrorism 
and stop WMD proliferation because the European members have been 
targets before and could be targets, again. This will require NATO to 
look not only within its borders, but NATO must also look beyond its 
borders. NATO members and Partnership for Peace participants stretch 
from the Pacific Ocean in the U.S. to bordering on China in Kazakhstan. 
There are several countries just on the edges of NATO's borders who 
wish to terrorize those countries within NATO.
  NATO has made a pledge to combat terrorism and WMD proliferation. The 
promise made by the NATO heads of state at the Prague summit to focus 
on terrorism and WMD proliferation is encouraging. Now, we need action. 
We should not let recent spats with France and Germany obstruct the 
implementation of this new mission. Moreover, France and Germany should 
not let their disagreements with the U.S. obstruct this new mission. 
Such actions benefit none.
  For NATO to remain relevant, the European members must close the 
capabilities gap between U.S. and European forces. Many NATO members, 
including France and Germany, have reduced defense spending over the 
last decade. Such reductions leave the alliance vulnerable and make it 
difficult for NATO members to participate in operations with the U.S.
  U.S. defense spending is dwarfing European defense spending. 
America's defense budget is greater than all other 18 NATO members 
combined. The $48 billion dollar increase in U.S. defense spending from 
fiscal year 2002 to fiscal year 2003 is greater than what 12 of the 
other 18 members spend on defense.
  Europe's leaders are world leaders. NATO members must make a greater 
investment in national security, NATO's longevity, and world security. 
We do not need them to spend as much as the U.S.; we need them to 
complement the U.S. and add value to NATO operations.
  NATO should focus its spending on interoperability and communications 
improvements. The U.S. has committed billions to making it so all four 
branches of the military can be linked using the same communications 
devices. We are dedicated to interoperability within our own forces. It 
has not been easy and the job is not finished, but we have seen the 
fruits of this effort in Iraq and Afghanistan. Who would have imagined 
years ago that a B-52 pilot could talk with a Special Operations team 
on the ground to deliver close air support? This was possible because 
of interoperability.
  NATO must focus on such interoperability. Not only must we ensure 
that a European tanker plane can refuel a U.S. fighter. We must ensure 
that 26 members, who speak many different languages, can share a common 
communications network and operate as one cohesive force, not 26 
independent militaries. If this gap is not closed, no value will be 
added and we will have to question NATO's worth.
  NATO must not be just an alliance based on military strength. NATO 
must be a diplomatic alliance. Military might alone is not the 
solution. First, we must use all diplomatic means to achieve peace. The 
united strength of NATO as a diplomatic force will also increase the 
security of NATO's members.
  In the near future, NATO must make decisions to determine whether it 
will be a vibrant alliance capable of protecting its members in the 
21st century or whether it is a relic of the past. I know it can have a 
meaningful mission in the future--a mission focused on rooting out 
terrorism and stopping the spread of WMD. To do so, NATO members must 
increase defense spending and focus on modernization and 
interoperability. I am confident NATO's members want NATO to have a 
great role in shaping the 21st century. As a member of NATO, the U.S. 
should push for a strong alliance. By expanding NATO to include seven 
new members, we will take a key step in making NATO strong and viable 
for the 21st century. The Senate sent a strong message of support by 
approving the admission of Romania, Bulgaria, Latvia, Lithuania, 
Estonia, Slovenia, and Slovakia to NATO. The vote is good for the 
safety of the U.S., Europe, and the world.

                          ____________________