Agenda
Conference materials
Press-center

Michel Duray

It’s a real pleasure to be back in Kyiv in my new capacity. I represent today an organisation which has recently celebrated its 60 years, which has 28 members (part of them are former Soviet and socialist countries) and which represents a little bit less than 1 billion citizens and taxpayers.

NATO is changing and changing quickly. I would like to say a few words about the strategic concept that is currently being developed.

NATO is not a global organisation and will not become global in the future. However, NATO is part of globalisation. We are part of globalisation but we cannot become global. There is no political will and no resources to do that. This is a very important message. People often believe that NATO will become a gendarme for the world. This is not on the agenda and this will not be on the agenda for the next 20 years.

However, we have to think globally. We are deployed in countries like Afghanistan and we have a big network of partners. Just today, NATO’s Secretary General is meeting with President Medvedev and Prime Minister Putin in Moscow. Two weeks ago, NATO’s Deputy Secretary General had official talks with China. Today, we have a high-level video conference between NATO and Pakistan. It is very important for us to outreach and to discuss security issues with our partners.

We are working intensively on a new strategic concept. This document will have to be approved at the summit of the heads of states and governments in November 2010. Why are we changing NATO’s strategic concept? We develop a new strategic concept because the interface is changing. The word interface is very important. Today, we have a lot of understanding of security, a lot of understanding of democracy, a lot of understanding of societies and cultures. Being an organisation composed of 28 member-states, we realise that even among ourselves we have a lot of differences and understandings of security.
 
On the other hand, we have the same problems with countries like China and other far away partners like Australia: proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, terrorism, rogue states, environment-related issue, and cyber-terrorism. These are all real security threats. A country can be destroyed even by stopping the power supply to hospitals.

The interface is very clear. We have a lot of international organisations, and NATO, not willing to become global, wants to have a comprehensive approach to find its own niche. International organisations can use their own experience and their own instruments to prevent international chaos, and to solve problems and manage crises. NATO has a lot of experience in crisis management. Management matters not only for business. We did manage the crisis in the Balkans, which is very different from the current crisis in Afghanistan.

Today’s mantra is that we need a comprehensive approach. Last week, our delegation visited the United Nations in New York. Now, the UN is sending a delegation to visit NATO next February. We begin real cooperation with the UN. We are also looking forward to very active cooperation with the European Union. The EU is a key player in terms of security, and the vast majority of NATO member states are also members of the EU.

Even through there are different approaches to crisis management, we believe that we should avoid duplications and we should create synergies among powerful international organisations. This is why we are rethinking the strategic concept and discussing it with a wide network of partners. When I say partners, I mean also the contact countries, such as China, Australia and Japan. They are donors to the ISAF in Afghanistan, contributing either money, troops, or experts.

We have to deal with mortal diseases, not a back pain. We have to keep this in mind: we have to fight them globally, together with all the international players - either nation-states, or international organisations.

If we fail collectively in Afghanistan, it may create a global security threat for all societies, including Ukraine. Today, the security of Europe is being dealt with somewhere in Kabul and Kandahar.

This is why we consider that our relationship with partners is very important. We are very thankful to Ukraine for participating in our military operations and for supporting the development of a new strategic concept.

We consider our relationship with Russia also very important. Today, in Moscow, the Secretary General is discussing a common approach to the Afghan problem. As Ambassador Rogozin said, [Russia] is interested in NATO’s success in Afghanistan. This is an objective reality.

This is why in the new strategic concept partnership will be given a lot of attention. All partners can participate in solving security problems without automatically becoming members. We are not trying to recruit members; we are interested in partnerships that will help to solve real, hard security risks existing today.

The new strategic concept is being discussed worldwide. This is the first time that we have engaged so many partners in such wide-raging discussions. In the past, NATO’s strategic concept was basically a secret document. Now, we are open to discussions; we ask independent experts and NGOs to provide their input. The new strategic concept will not reinvent the wheel because we believe that the Washington Treaty and Article 5 are still the cornerstone of our security. What we discuss today is what Article 5 means vis-à-vis new security threats and new realities. I will be happy to answer your questions. Thank you very much.

Developed by Art Studio