SPEECHES

CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY

NOTES FOR AN ADDRESS BY

THE HONOURABLE JOHN MANLEY,

MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS,

TO THE NORTH ATLANTIC COUNCIL MEETINGS

BRUSSELS, Belgium

December 14, 2000

At the outset, let me say how pleased I am to attend my first NATO meeting as Canada's foreign minister. As a former minister of industry, I am deeply conscious that it is security and stability that permits the free flow of goods, people and ideas, which underpin the quality of our daily lives. NATO has a vital role to play in promoting the kind of world that makes this possible.

The Balkans

NATO's continuing contribution in the Balkans is one very visible example of its essential role today. I come to this portfolio at a time of great change in the Balkans. Optimism is in the air -- albeit tempered by caution. The democratic election of President Kostunica has laid the foundation for change in the region and for greater overall stability.

Canada applauds the courage of the Yugoslav people who made this change possible. But, we also believe that sustained international pressure played a significant part. The old FRY [Federal Republic of Yugoslavia] was at the centre of the region's instability. The new FRY now has an opportunity to place itself at the heart of its stability. Many challenges remain, but the admission of the FRY to the United Nations, to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe [OSCE], and to the Stability Pact are all steps toward this goal.

This is a crucial time: we must support the positive steps and urge the new government to act on its commitment to change. Canada has lifted its sanctions against the FRY and announced $10 million for democratic development and humanitarian assistance -- focussed on immediate needs in preparation for winter and assistance to displaced people. In the coming months, we will be building up our bilateral dialogue with the new regime.

NATO, too, has a role to play in promoting the shared values that are the bedrock of this Alliance. While it may take time for the Yugoslav people to embrace NATO as a friend, we must maintain an open door ready to respond to the slightest overture. NATO's approach should be consistent with the policies that each of us pursues bilaterally with the FRY and with the positions we are taking in other international organizations. The time has come to consider how and under what conditions NATO could co-operate more closely with the FRY.

NATO plays an essential role in the region -- in continuing to ensure a secure environment for the citizens of Bosnia and Kosovo, in helping return refugees to their homes and in arresting indicted war criminals. The vulnerabilities in the region require NATO's continued presence and involvement.

I would like to highlight the key challenges I believe we will face in the coming months.

With respect to Kosovo, the strong support shown for the moderate candidate Ibrahim Rugova in the recent elections is encouraging. However, election platforms, as well as the recent violence and tensions in the Presevo Valley, underscore that aspirations for independence are far from dormant. Managing these aspirations will be a challenge, both for Belgrade and for NATO. We must be firm. Violence and terrorism cannot be tolerated. On this point, Canada stands by UN Security Council Resolution1244, which states that the future of Kosovo will be determined by a political process.

While Canada no longer has troops in the field in Kosovo, we remain strongly committed to supporting the development of the democratic institutions essential for long-term peace and stability. Some 100 Canadian police are working in Kosovo, and we have provided financial support for UNMIK [the UN Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo] and OSCE programs in the province, as well as $112 million in humanitarian and emergency assistance.

In many ways, Bosnia is a microcosm of the region. Ethnic tension, nationalist politics, economic collapse and weak state institutions are just some of the problems that leave Bosnia and her neighbours isolated from the European mainstream. Despite some important achievements, security remains fragile. The prospect of self-sustaining multi-ethnic democracy is still more a vision, than a reality. With a Canadian in command of Multinational Division South West, and some 1700 troops in theatre, Canada remains fully committed to peace and stability in Bosnia.

To weaken our support prematurely risks losing the considerable investment we have already made. A more vigorous approach now, could help secure our achievements and pay long-term dividends. We need to maximize the efforts of the international community in a co-ordinated fashion, at a time when we have the greatest leverage. We must impress on the local authorities the need to implement fully the Dayton Accords. Too often, Bosnian leaders have abdicated responsibility and failed to rise above their ethnic allegiances. We must do everything we can to support a new generation of leaders and encourage them to put the war behind them. Bosnia must function as a normal state, governed by Bosnians themselves. Only then would any withdrawal on our part be possible.

Let me also touch briefly on broader regional issues. None of the problems facing the region can be solved in isolation. Lasting peace in both Bosnia and Kosovo will depend at least in part on relations with neighbouring countries. We need to identify points of instability and consider how we can act collectively to promote regional solutions.

We must encourage Montenegro to work out an acceptable constitutional arrangement with Belgrade. It must be clear that the international community will not support moves that undermine stability in the region. At the same time, we must reassure Montenegro that we will continue to provide the support it needs to rebuild its damaged economy.

Both Albania and Macedonia played vital roles in support of NATO's efforts in Kosovo. We must remain engaged and continue to encourage the process of reform, with a view to strengthening long-term stability throughout the region.

European Security and Defence Policy

I would like to be clear, right at the beginning, about one thing: Canada supports a stronger European contribution to Euro-Atlantic security and defence. This is clearly in the interest of all of the countries around this table.

This week, the Nice Summit made a number of proposals as to how we can work together to better manage crises in Europe. I welcome these proposals as a substantial contribution to future negotiations between NATO and the EU. I appreciated the reference to Canada, and the EU's intention to work out consultation and participation arrangements with us, for EU-led operations. Though the Nice outcomes were a "work in progress," they were broadly positive and should help us move forward at NATO as well.

It is crucial that our meeting today send an equally positive signal. Many of our earlier differences have already narrowed significantly, and we now have a clear sense of what the arrangements between NATO and the EU should be and can be. A positive signal from this meeting will demonstrate our commitment to transparency and co-operation between the two organizations.

But let's be clear about one thing: we cannot afford to get ESDI [European Security and Defence Identity] wrong. We cannot and should not agree to anything that erodes NATO's effectiveness. In our view, this Alliance will remain the organization of choice in dealing with conflict and collective defence in the Euro-Atlantic area. NATO's comparative advantage is, and will always be, its huge deterrence effect. NATO's capacity to deter conflict, and to deter violence directed at our peace-keeping troops, should always make it the preferred option.

Of course, the EU has its own comparative advantage, not least the range of economic, political, and security levers it can bring to bear in seeking to resolve a crisis. A NATO/EU partnership, based on transparency and co-operation, would enhance the effectiveness of both organizations. Surely that is self-evident.

Today, our task as foreign ministers is to chart a way forward for NATO/EU relations. Much preparatory work has already been accomplished. What we need is a mechanism that will provide the quality of meetings we want when they are needed. The changes that are taking place in Europe's defence architecture affect the security of each of the 23 members of NATO and the EU. It is a sine qua non that the security of each country has to be respected. Flexible and transparent consultations between NATO and the EU will enable each country to be heard when its security is affected by emerging crises. This itself is a confidence building measure. That is why I believe it is important for the Secretary-General to have the authority to call for meetings with the EU when there is a clear need.

Such consultations will be enhanced if they are based on a shared understanding of the possible options for crisis response. By giving the EU assured access to NATO's planning staff for the preparation of operational plans, we all benefit. NATO is kept in the picture, while the EU can be sure it has the support it needs. So-called "assured access" is the other side of the coin to flexible, meaningful permanent arrangements.

Let me now turn briefly to Canada's unique situation in these times of change. Last week my colleague, Art Eggleton, described our stake in this organization as something like a shareholder in a large corporation. In fact Canada is the sixth largest shareholder, and has contributed to this corporations's holdings, its assets and capabilities, for over 50 years. We are in fact the third largest contributor to the AWACS [airborne warning and control system], which are but one of the important capabilities that NATO will provide to future EU-led missions. This is why we have been so insistent on proper consultations between the two organizations. Only with complete transparency will we be in a position to take a decision to release assets and capabilities for use in EU-led operations. It is also why we intend to take up the EU's offer to negotiate arrangements that will recognize our status as an ally and as a net contributor to European security. We will be counting on your support to achieve progress on this issue during the Swedish EU Presidency.

NATO Review of Non-Proliferation, Arms Control and Disarmament Policies

In 1999, in Washington, our leaders tasked the Alliance to consider -- in the light of overall strategic developments and the reduced salience of nuclear weapons -- options for confidence and security building measures, verification, non-proliferation and arms control and disarmament. Over the course of the last year and a half, Canada has played a leading role in this review of NATO policy. We were motivated by the fundamental premises that non-proliferation, arms control and disarmament are central to our security as an Alliance, and that NATO as a forum for consultation and collective action has a key role to play in supporting further progress in this area.

The Allies have an enormous stake in the continued viability of the global non-proliferation and disarmament regime. NATO members played a major role in achieving the successful outcome of the NPT [Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty] Review Conference this spring. The Alliance should be similarly engaged in implementing the commitments made there. Flowing from our NPT obligations, Canada believes it is necessary to devalue the political significance of nuclear weapons and avoid ascribing to them new roles or purposes. In this context, I wish to reiterate that the Canadian government's understanding of nuclear deterrence is that "the only function of nuclear weapons is to deter the use by others of nuclear weapons, notwithstanding that nuclear weapons may have a deterrent effect in the mind of the potential aggressor.

The report that has emerged from the review provides an excellent overview of the significant developments since the last NATO Comprehensive Statement on Arms Control and Disarmament in 1989 and usefully identifies initiatives for the future. The report provides a post Cold-War description of what we think about non-proliferation, arms control and disarmament -- and what we plan to do to advance these objectives. The report sets out some concrete proposals for confidence and security building measures. It acknowledges the need for NATO to be more engaged and open in our discussions with NGOs and the concerned public. And, most importantly, it has served to deepen consultations among ourselves on these issues, as well as with our Partners.

This report marks the end of this particular process mandated by leaders at the Washington Summit. But it also marks a beginning. We must now follow through on its recommendations. At the same time, the security environment continues to evolve. And therefore, as the Strategic Concept points out, we will need to keep our security and defence policies under review.

In the field of multilateral arms control and disarmament, Canada will face a particular challenge as we assume next month the Presidency of the Conference on Disarmament [CD]. Regrettably, the CD is entering a third year of gridlock. I would ask for the assistance of all allies in overcoming the paralysis of "linkage politics" and for help to get this important forum back to work.

Thank you