[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 9]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 12045-12048]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                              NATO SUMMIT

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. JOHN S. TANNER

                              of tennessee

                    in the house of representatives

                         Thursday, May 7, 2009

  Mr. TANNER. Madam Speaker, from April 2-9, 2009, in my capacity as 
President of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly (NATO PA), I spoke at the 
60th Anniversary Summit of NATO in Strasbourg/Kehl; chaired the NATO PA 
Standing Committee meeting and conducted bilateral meetings in Vilnius, 
Lithuania; traveled to Kiev, Ukraine and Tbilisi, Georgia on NATO PA 
Presidential visits; and addressed the EAPC Ambassadors in Brussels, 
Belgium. The Honorable Jo Ann Emerson (R-MO), who chairs the NATO PA's 
Civil Dimension of Security Committee and serves on the Standing 
Committee of the NATO PA, and NATO PA Secretary General David Hobbs, 
joined and worked with me to make this a successful trip.
  In the NATO PA, parliamentarians from NATO member and partner states 
gather to discuss NATO issues and as elected officials, have a close 
working relationship with the Alliance. In addition to my role as the 
Assembly's President, I chair the U.S. delegation to the NATO PA. The 
U.S. delegation is always bipartisan, actively and regularly 
participates in the NATO PA sessions, and several of our delegates hold 
elected offices within the Assembly. The NATO PA meetings afford an 
opportunity to sound out parliamentarians from allied states on public 
opinion, defense and foreign policy, and trends in strategic thinking. 
These meetings also allow us to come to know members of parliaments who 
play important roles in shaping the security agenda that their 
governments debate at NATO headquarters. These relationships can last a 
lifetime and enhance mutual understanding of issues in the different 
member countries.


                     NATO SUMMIT IN STRASBOURG/KEHL

  The NATO Summit was held April 3-4 in Strasbourg/Kehl, which is 
situated on the German-French border. There is great symbolism in the 
Alliance's 60th Anniversary being celebrated on this border, given what 
has transpired over the last century in those two countries which drew 
the United States into both World War I and World War II.
  On behalf of the alliance parliamentarians, I addressed the Heads of 
State and Government at the NAC (North Atlantic Council), the 
Alliance's decision-making body. I outlined three serious challenges 
facing NATO at this time in its 60th year which we, as 
parliamentarians, believe are critical to the Alliance: the mission in 
Afghanistan, our relationship with Russia, and the need for a new 
Strategic Concept.
  At the beginning of the NAC, NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop 
Scheffer welcomed Albania and Croatia as new members of the Alliance. 
He noted that their membership comes as the result of long years of 
hard

[[Page 12046]]

work and that both countries have shown dedication and drive in 
completing the necessary reforms of their governing structures and 
their militaries. Since the United States is the depository country of 
the Washington Treaty, President Obama handed over copies of the 
Washington Treaty to the Presidents of Albania and Croatia, signifying 
the two countries' admission to the Alliance. Additionally, the 28 NATO 
Heads of State and Government unanimously agreed to appoint Danish 
Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen as NATO's next Secretary General. 
He will officially take up his duties on August 1 of this year, when 
the term of Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer expires after over 
five years of leading the Alliance.
  For the first time, the NATO PA was mentioned in the NATO Summit 
Declaration. In paragraph 17 it states: ``We welcome the role of the 
NATO Parliamentary Assembly in promoting the Alliance's principles and 
values.''


                               LITHUANIA

  On April 5 in Vilnius, I chaired the Standing Committee meeting of 
the NATO PA. The Standing Committee consists of the heads of the Member 
delegations, chairs of the five NATO PA Committees, and the Bureau of 
the Assembly. In a productive session, we approved Bulgarian MP Assen 
Yordanov Agov as the Assembly's new Vice President. Mr. Agov will 
replace outgoing NATO PA Vice President Rasa Jukneviciene, who vacated 
the post to serve as Lithuania's Defense Minister. Among other agenda 
items, the Committee discussed relations with the Russian delegation to 
the NATO PA, increasing the profile of our relationship with Georgia, 
relations with Belarus, cost cutting measures for NATO PA meetings in 
light of the current economic climate, and the Assembly's contribution 
to a future NATO Strategic Concept. I took the opportunity of the 
Standing Committee forum to emphasize my presidency theme of teamwork 
and a ``Team NATO'' concept, and that keeping a critical mass of public 
support to maintain the Afghanistan mission is essential. 2009 is a 
critical year for the Alliance in Afghanistan, and I stressed a sense 
of urgency with this timeline.
  Also in Vilnius, Ms. Emerson and I attended a working dinner hosted 
by the Speaker of the Seimas (Lithuania's Parliament), Arunas 
Valinksas. We were joined by Seimas Members Juozas Olekas and Emanuelis 
Zingeris and the Director of the Seimas's International Relations 
Department, Sigitia Trainauskiene. Our Ambassador to Lithuania, John 
Cloud, also participated. We thanked the Lithuanians for their 
contributions in Afghanistan, highlighting that their per capita 
contribution to the effort is impressive. In turn, the MP's thanked the 
U.S. for its support throughout the Soviet occupation and its role in 
regional NATO initiatives such as Baltic Air Policing. We discussed 
energy issues, mainly Lithuania's concern regarding the requirement to 
close their nuclear power plant by the end of this year (an EU 
membership condition they agreed to eight years ago). We encouraged 
them to amend Lithuania's residency law which currently requires 
Americans (and other non-EU nationals) who are working in Lithuania to 
live in the country for two years before their family members can 
receive residency permits to join them. They reassured us it would be 
resolved by this summer. We also encouraged them to address Jewish 
property restitution issues.
  We enjoyed a warm reception from our Lithuanian counterparts and the 
visit underscored the strong working relationship between our two 
countries. This year marks five years of NATO Membership for Lithuania. 
The bilateral visit and the NATO PA meetings, particularly on the heels 
of the NATO Summit, received positive attention from the local media.


                          UKRAINE AND GEORGIA

  Immediately following our participation in the Strasbourg/Kehl Summit 
and the Assembly's Standing Committee meeting in Vilnius, the 
delegation traveled to Ukraine and Georgia on April 6-7. The purpose of 
the visits was to underline the Assembly's continuing commitment to 
Ukraine and Georgia's Euro-Atlantic integration and to obtain firsthand 
views on progress in the reform process. The two governments provided 
an opportunity to discuss a variety of security-related topics ranging 
from Afghanistan to the Russian occupation of Abkhazia and South 
Ossetia. I emphasized to the Ukrainians and Georgians that this being 
my first official trip as NATO PA President was meant to send a signal 
of their importance to NATO and to Europe. We thanked Georgia and 
Ukraine for their contribution to NATO activities, encouraged them to 
continue pursuing NATO membership, and reassured them that we are here 
to help them achieve this goal.


                                UKRAINE

  In Kiev, we were greeted by our Ambassador to Ukraine, William 
Taylor, and hosted by the Verkhovna Rada (Ukrainian Parliament). We met 
with MP's from BYuT (Block of Yulia Tymoshenko): Andriy Shkil (Head of 
Ukrainian delegation to the NATO PA), Ostap Semyrak, and Vadym Korotuk; 
Party of the Regions: Hryhoryi Illiashov; Our Ukraine: Ivan Zaiats, 
Yuriy Samoilenko, and Borys Tarasuk (Chairman of the Committee on 
European Integration). We also met with Speaker Volodymyr Lytvyn, 
Deputy Prime Minister Oleksandr Turchynov, had a particularly 
informative briefing from Deputy Defense Minister Ivanschenko, and 
spent over an hour in a private meeting with President Viktor 
Yushchenko. We did not meet with Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, as 
other events required her to cancel all of her meetings that day. While 
at the Rada, we observed a session of Parliament with Hans-Gert 
Pottering, President of the European Parliament.
  Ukraine's political leaders readily acknowledged the harm caused by 
instability in parliamentary coalitions and friction between 
governmental factions. Most agree that the constitution should be 
amended to reduce the scope for political instability, and a 
constitutional commission is likely to be established to develop 
possible solutions. The need for stability has recently been underlined 
by the financial crisis which has hit Ukraine particularly hard. The 
various factions do seem to be working together to ensure the delivery 
of IMF support and to adopt an economic program
  President Yushchenko's popularity ratings are low. On April 1, the 
Rada voted to hold presidential elections on October 25, much earlier 
than the anticipated January 2010 date, which would mark the end of 
Yushchenko's five year mandate.
  Ukraine is vigorously striving for NATO membership. Indeed, Ukraine's 
intention to join NATO was declared in 2002 and subsequently written 
into national legislation when the current main opposition party was in 
power.
  Regarding the outcome of NATO's Strasbourg/Kehl Summit, Ukraine 
welcomed the reiteration of NATO's ``Bucharest message''--that NATO's 
door remains open, and that Ukraine and Georgia will become members of 
NATO. The Annual National Program--a framework intended to help Ukraine 
plan and continue to implement political, economic, defense and 
security sector reforms is being prepared. The view was expressed that 
the Annual National Program is seen as a Membership Action Plan in all 
but name.
  Ukraine is the only NATO partner participating in all NATO-led 
operations. The current financial crisis is necessitating a review of 
commitments and transformation efforts, and some reductions in the 
scale of contributions to operations might have to take place. However, 
it was not felt that Ukraine would withdraw from any operations and 
strenuous efforts are being made to sustain those particular 
commitments. The Ukrainian officials explained that even Ukraine's 
peacekeeping operation in Afghanistan is a delicate issue, as 15,000 
Ukrainians were killed in the Soviet's Afghanistan campaign, and those 
wounds still have not healed.
  Public support for NATO membership remains relatively low but it is 
rising, particularly among the younger population. The government 
believes that the more is known about NATO, the more support should 
increase. Over the past decade, it has been important that candidate 
state governments take the lead in persuading public opinion of the 
value of NATO membership. Representative Emerson offered that instead 
of using terms such as ``NATO'', ``MAP'', etc., government officials 
could relate and appeal to the people on a more direct level by talking 
about personal security and how that affects them.
  Ukraine's aspirations to NATO membership is but one source of 
friction with its neighbor, Russia. Others include energy, the 
expiration in 2017 of the agreement under which Russia leases naval 
bases in the Crimea for its Black Sea Fleet, and even the demarcation 
of borders.
  It was stressed that Ukraine does not seek to antagonize Russia, but 
only to pursue its own independent course. It was pointed out that 
Russia has itself a more extensive list of areas of cooperation with 
NATO than has Ukraine, and that the NATO PA could seek to help the 
Ukrainian public realize that Russia is actually very actively 
cooperating with NATO on certain key issues. The Ukrainians pointed out 
that there are six working groups in Ukraine-NATO and 19 working groups 
in Russia-NATO.
  We took the opportunity in the meetings in Kiev to thank Ukrainian 
governmental and parliamentary representatives for their country's 
contributions to NATO's operations, and to underline the Assembly's 
support for Ukraine's process of Euro-Atlantic integration. We 
underlined the strong relationship between the Assembly and the 
delegation from the Verkhovna Rada, and I reiterated the sentiments I 
expressed at the Strasbourg/Kehl

[[Page 12047]]

Summit regarding NATO enlargement: that this process enhances Euro-
Atlantic security, threatens no one, and is not subject to a veto by 
any other country.


                                GEORGIA

  In Georgia, we were greeted by our Ambassador, John Tefft, and hosted 
by the Georgian Parliament. We met with the Speaker of the Georgian 
Parliament David Bakradze; met with the official opposition (Levan 
Vepkhvadze, Gia Tortladze of Powerful Georgia Party, Nikolz Laliashvili 
of the Christian Democratic Party, and Rati Maisuradze of the Christian 
Democratic Party); had lunch with the Georgian delegation to the NATO 
PA headed by Giorgi Kandelaki; met with the Minister for European and 
Euro-Atlantic Integration Giorgi Baramidze (former head of the Georgian 
NATO PA delegation); had a very informative discussion with Prime 
Minister Nike Gilauri; met with President Mikheil Saakashvili; attended 
a dinner hosted by Speaker Bakradze which members of the opposition 
were invited to and attended; and lastly, met with Nino Burjanadze of 
the radical opposition (former Speaker of Parliament and driving force 
behind the April 9 protests). Georgia is seeking to make considerable 
progress with internal reform. For instance, it is looking at various 
forms of constitutional reform to strengthen parliament and to improve 
election practices. It is pursuing the recommendations of the Council 
of Europe and the OSCE, and seeking to build public trust in the 
system. It is noteworthy that although opposition figures within 
Parliament feel that democratic processes could be improved, they 
nevertheless believe that the overall situation is good.
  Georgia must continue to reform its economy, build a free press, and 
establish an independent judiciary.
  Despite the financial crisis, Georgia still expects modest economic 
growth in 2009. It has a balanced budget and a stable economy with 
relatively low inflation. The economy is attracting a high level of 
foreign investment. The economy is also diversified in terms of 
products and markets, so Georgia is not dependent on any particular 
geographical region or any single commodity. Furthermore, Georgia had 
been fortunate in not having substantially de-regulated the banking 
sector.
  Representative Emerson was impressed with Georgia's agricultural 
development and the positive role agriculture can continue to play in 
Georgia's economic future.
  There is a very broad political consensus on joining NATO. This view 
was expressed by both government and opposition representatives. The 
government contends that over 70 percent of the population and nearly 
all of the political parties support NATO integration.
  Georgia is developing its Annual National Program, and in that 
context it was stated that ``the `Membership Action Plan' route was not 
the only road to NATO membership.''
  NATO--and especially United States--support is seen as crucial to 
Georgia. Governmental and parliamentary representatives expressed their 
gratitude for the Assembly's particularly strong support following the 
events of August last year. Russia's continuing occupation of South 
Ossetia and Abkhazia was unacceptable, as was its recognition of the 
two regions' independence. Russia remains in violation of the EU-
brokered ceasefire agreement. There has, for instance, been no draw 
down of Russian forces in South Ossetia and Abkhazia. On the contrary, 
new military facilities are under construction, tens of thousands of 
people remain displaced (in addition to the hundreds of thousands 
displaced in the 1990s), and international monitors can still not cross 
the administrative boundaries. Georgian officials believe that a 
continuing international presence remains vital.
  Russia has made no secret of its opposition to Georgian membership in 
the Alliance and its desire to see ``regime change'' in Georgia. There 
is a widespread belief that tensions with Russia will persist until 
Georgia becomes a member of the Alliance. Russia's goal in fomenting 
such tension, Georgian officials contend, is simply to present an 
obstacle to Georgia's membership.
  Even so, Georgian officials said they have no desire to see Russia 
isolated from the international community. Russia, NATO and NATO 
aspirants have common interests in some areas, in their view.
  The European Union's Monitoring Mission (EUMM) provided us with a 
detailed briefing.
  EUMM's mandate is to monitor the implementation of the EU-brokered 
ceasefire agreement, in particular the withdrawal of Russian and 
Georgian armed forces to the positions held prior to the outbreak of 
hostilities. It is also tasked to contribute to the stabilization and 
normalization of the situation in the areas affected by the war, to 
monitor the deployment of Georgian police forces, and to observe 
compliance with human rights and rule of law. The Mission covers three 
functional areas: Internally Displaced People (IDP)/Humanitarian, 
Police/Justice/Human Rights, and Military.
  Regarding Georgian IDPs, there are more than 230,000 IDPs from 
conflicts in the 1990s, and a further 130,000 from the war in August 
2008. Of that latter category, some 100,000 have been able to return to 
their homes since Russian forces have pulled back--with some important 
exceptions--to within the administrative boundary lines of South 
Ossetia and Abkhazia. The EUMM has been able to provide substantial 
assistance in collective data on IDPs. On the Police/Justice/Human 
Rights part of the mission, there is good cooperation with the Georgian 
authorities which has, for instance, helped to clarify the distinctions 
between Georgian police and armed forces. The EUMM's work is limited, 
however because it cannot obtain access to South Ossetia or Abkhazia. 
In the military area, Georgia has agreed to limits on the numbers and 
nature of weapons within a zone around the administrative boundary 
lines. This is seen as a substantial confidence-building measure.
  Although much has been achieved, several key challenges remain. These 
include the continuing presence of Russian forces at Perevi and 
Akhalgori, the lack of clear dialogue with Russian, South Ossetian, and 
Abkhazian representatives, unsolved shootings, persistent acts of 
provocation, the reinforcement of defensive positions on either side of 
the administrative boundary lines, and the EUMM's lack of access to 
South Ossetia and Abkhazia.
  Representative Emerson chairs the NATO PA's Civil Dimension of 
Security Committee and is considering taking her committee to the 
border area, possibly sometime next year.
  Our visit took place two days before demonstrations were planned 
outside the Georgian Parliament (for April 9). The purpose of the 
demonstrations was to demand the removal from office of Georgia's 
President Mikheil Saakashvili. Naturally, the demonstrations were the 
subject of considerable discussion with government leaders, 
parliamentary supporters, and opposition representatives from within 
and outside the parliament.
  Government and parliamentary representatives upheld the right to 
demonstrate and protest, but there was concern that protests might 
become violent. Officials also shared concern about how such 
demonstrations would be perceived internationally. Some opposition 
figures in parliament expressed fear that the demonstrations might get 
out of hand. They argued that if the demonstrations concerned the pace 
or nature of certain reforms, this could be the basis for legitimate 
protest.
  In the various discussions on this matter, we urged restraint by all 
parties. Many observers had felt that the response to demonstrations in 
2007 had been ``heavy handed,'' and this too had harmed Georgia's 
reputation. It is in Georgia's national interest that the 
demonstrations remain peaceful. We encouraged Georgian officials to 
allow the protests to happen, and indeed, there was no violence during 
the demonstrations, due in large part to the appropriate way the 
government handled the demonstrations, which has earned them goodwill 
internationally.
  Representative Emerson and I spoke at length with the Georgians (and 
the Ukrainians) about the importance of peaceful transitions of power, 
peaceful reform, the rule of law, and functional bipartisan relations 
being essential to a stable country and democracy. We reassured them 
that opposition is to be expected in a democracy, that the majority has 
an obligation to take into account the ideas of the minority in 
deliberations, and that the minority in turn has an obligation to 
participate in a responsible way and accept that whoever has the 
majority at a given time, will end up making most of the decisions. We 
also stressed the importance of the opposition marginalizing the 
extreme opposition factions. Representative Emerson and I shared our 
experiences of being in both the minority and the majority. We also 
relayed that, although members of opposite parties, we are able to 
effectively work together, especially when it comes to important 
issues.
  We also applauded Georgia's progress in the implementation of 
reforms, and reiterated the Assembly's support for that process. 
Representative Emerson commended the younger generation for stepping up 
and taking responsibility for leadership and the future course of their 
country. We also welcomed the government's decision to increase its 
force commitment to the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) 
in Afghanistan.
  We underlined that--as I stated in my speech at the Strasbourg/Kehl 
Summit--NATO enlargement threatens no one. Allied nations make good 
neighbors, and new members promote regional and Euro-Atlantic 
stability--ends that serve everyone's interests--and Russia has no veto 
over the sovereign decisions of its neighbors.

[[Page 12048]]

  The NATO Parliamentary Assembly does not wish to interfere in 
Georgia's internal affairs, nor provide support for any particular 
party or faction. It supports Georgia, the Georgian people, and 
Georgia's right to determine its own future.


                                BELGIUM

  On April 8 in Brussels at NATO Headquarters, I addressed the EAPC 
(Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council) Ambassadors. The meeting was 
chaired by NATO Deputy Secretary General Claudio Bisogniero. The EAPC 
brings together 50 NATO Partnership countries (28 NATO countries and 22 
Partner countries) for dialogue on political and security-related 
issues, and provides the overall political framework for NATO's 
cooperation with Partner countries and the bilateral relationships 
between NATO and individual Partner counties with the Partnership for 
Peace Program.
  I delivered an overview of the Strasbourg/Kehl Summit and several 
Partners gave their thoughts on the Summit conclusion, including Russia 
and Georgia.
  There was a vigorous discussion among the Russian, Moldovan, and 
Romanian ambassadors at the EAPC meeting about the uneasy political 
situation in Moldova.
  My speech to the EAPC ambassadors mentioned the work of the NATO PA 
and its role in building NATO partnerships. I noted Jan Peterson's (of 
Norway's NATO PA delegation) work on the Strategic Concept and welcomed 
suggestions from NATO PA associate members.
  The brief was well received around the table and several Allies and 
Partners were very complimentary of the work done by the NATO PA and 
the NATO PA Secretariat staff in Brussels, led by David Hobbs.
  Immediately following the EAPC meeting, we (joined by the Deputy 
Chief of the U.S. Mission to NATO, Walter Andrusyszyn) met with Russian 
Ambassador to NATO Dmitry Rogozin, per Rogozin's request. Rogozin 
offered that parliamentary diplomacy through the auspices of the NATO 
PA could help alleviate the deep mistrust in Russia regarding 
engagement with the Alliance, and advocated an ambitious set of 
meetings. Noting that he is a former parliamentarian, Rogozin said he 
is willing to use his contacts in the Russian Duma to encourage this. 
We agreed that parliamentary diplomacy and the NATO PA have a positive 
role to play in the NATO-Russia context, but warned that practical 
constraints would make the scale of Rogozin's proposals difficult to 
implement. We also emphasized that enhanced engagement with Russia 
would require a more constructive approach than had been seen in the 
past from Russian participants in NATO PA events; that engagement needs 
to be a two-way street, but that nevertheless we would discuss Russia 
with Administration officials upon our return to Washington.
  Raising Afghanistan, Rogozin noted that Moscow intended to continue 
to allow the transit of non-lethal goods bound for NATO forces in 
Afghanistan. He also said he expects resistance from the Taliban to 
increase in response to the U.S. troop increase in Afghanistan. Rogozin 
also offered that the crisis in NATO-Russian relations over the August 
2008 Russia-Georgia war could turn out to be useful. Noting that the 
decisions taken at the April 3-4 Summit provided a way ahead on 
resumption of the NATO-Russia Council (NRC), Rogozin said he hopes to 
get the relationship to a qualitatively new level.
  We reiterated our hope that we can have open dialogue with the 
Russians on the issues and threats we have in common, such as nuclear 
proliferation and radical fundamentalism, and that our differences will 
not preclude us from having discussions on these common interests.
  This was a very tightly choreographed trip, which depended on exact 
timing and movement in order to achieve the results that it did; 
therefore, the support of the United States military was again 
essential to its successful planning and execution. Our aircrew was 
from F Company, 52nd Aviation Regiment, Wiesbaden Army Airfield, 
Germany. We could not have made our intense schedule work without their 
professional efforts and dedication to duty. Also, I must mention our 
military escort, Col. Tom Shubert, USAF (Ret.). He was the facilitator 
in the various air movements and air space clearance. His work was 
extraordinary.

                          ____________________