Statement by Alexandr Vondra,
Deputy Prime Minister for European Affairs
October 17, 2007
Prague, palace Žofín
Ladies and gentlemen, it is an honor for me to speak in this gathering that reminds us every year of the shared destiny of the US and EU. Today I will address a topic which has been on the top of both European and American agendas and has provoked heated international discussions – the anti-missile defense system and its added value for the euro-atlantic bond.
IMPORTANCE OF THE EURO-ATLANTIC BOND
• All too often the discourse between the European Union and the United States consists of ritual evocation of the importance of the transatlantic relationship, without further elaborating on its strategic dimension. I would hate to fall in the trap of repeating empty phrases, but I would still like to insist that:
1) there is no plan B for a functional transatlantic relationship,
2) that the Euro-Atlantic tie was not a simple function of East-West confrontation that has lost its raison d´etre after the fall of the iron curtain,
3) that we have built something new – a new historic, political, economical, cultural and even geographic synthesis which has replaced the pre-1914 balance in international relations.
• The euro-atlantic relationship is a rich and structured one – it has not only a security dimension, but also an axiological, cultural and economic dimension:
1) VALUES
• EU and US share common values. Both Americans and Europeans are children of Enlightment. We cherish above all personal freedom, democracy, human rights and rule of law. In this sense the Euro-American synthesis of guiding principles of our cultures remain the foundation for modern democratic transatlantic society. Our cooperation is of strategic importance if we want to succeed in universalizing our perception of these values.
2) ECONOMY
• Our economies are growingly interconnected. American-European cross-border mergers and acquisitions are increasing in numbers and volume. The transatlantic market is the largest bilateral trade and investment relationship in the world, providing employment for up to 14 milion people, accounting for about 57% of world GDP and for 40% of world trade. Our relationship is the twin engine of the world economy and a strategic asset in succeeding in the global competition.
3) SECURITY
• For over 50 years the military relationship between Europe and US, embodied in the North Atlantic Alliance, has been the pillar of both American and European security and stability. In the past the American military presence guaranteed peace in the European continent and enabled the emancipation and uniting of European States in the EU. Today it is our task to take over part of our responsibility for both our security and global development. Participating in the AMD is the least we could do for that.
AMD AND THE TRANSATLANTIC BOND
• The events of September 11 were a grim reminder that we are living in a time of change which began long before the attacks on Washington, New York, Madrid or London. Let me highlight some of the fundamental shifts that have occurred over the last decade
1) There has been a significant change in the number of international players and their nature. The events of September 11 were prove that non-state actors and even individuals can seriously threat national and international security
2) Our open societies are increasingly vulnerable. Cyberspace attacks on public utilities or communication systems, biological and chemical weapons or guided missiles have moved from the range of science-fiction to everyday reality. In the light of these new hazards we need to concentrate more than ever on nipping problems in the bud at an early stage.
3) Geographical distance from a crisis is increasingly irrelevant. We can no longer think of security in terms of merely defending our borders
• It is in this light that we have to view the project of AMD. The first American President George Washington said: To be ready for war is the most effective way to preserve peace. Today there is agreement among NATO nations that the ballistic missile threat exists and is increasing. Diplomacy, non-proliferation and arms control agreements as well as deterrence all have an important role to play in our response to the spread of ballistic missile technology. But it is clear that these measures have not succeeded in important cases: Iran´s ongoing nuclear programme as well as increasingly ambitious tests of Iran´s missile programmes suggest that this regime is determined to acquire these capabilities in the face of significant international opposition and is willing to endure diplomatic criticism, sanctions and material hardship to do so.
• There is an additional aspect to this. Although AMD is in the interest of Europe as a whole, countries of Central and Eastern Europe are particularly motivated to contribute to its creation. History has taught us a bitter security lesson and keeping USA engaged in the European territory will always be an overriding priority for those countries once behind the iron curtain. It is absolutely indispensable, that all allies within the North-Atlantic area enjoy the same level of security. We all need to benefit of the protection of the anti-missile umbrella. The contrary would mean to abandon the basic principle of the post WW2 euro-atlantic security relationship.
• The growing ambition of Russia not only to return among superpowers, but also to regain influence in the Central European area which it considers to be its backyard provides additional impetus to this action. AMD is by no means directed against Russia, nor is it intending to threaten its security. But it does further consolidate the transatlantic bond and thus provide Central European countries a guarantee, that the current geopolitical setting is going to persist.
CONCLUSION
• Since the end of the cold war, Europe and USA have been searching for a new definition of their relationship. The fall of bipolar world has set off a new American dynamism and boosted the awareness of the unique military as well as economic superiority of the US. This has sometimes led to controversies between Europe and US i.e. on principles of international law to be used in international relations, protection of personal data, as well as to occasional flaring up of American-European trade, monetary or financial conflicts. These disagreements however should be viewed more as labour pains of a new post-cold-war transatlantic relationship rather than its death toll.
• History and relationships are shaped by people as much as by events. In Europe, we are now entering a phase of political conjuncture of new atlanticism with, on one hand, Germany of Angela Merkel reassuming its traditional role of backbone of the euro-atlantic relationship and relaunching interesting ideas such as the New Transatlantic Economic Partnership. And with France of Nicolas Sarkozy on the other hand, who is probably the most pro-atlanticist French president ever. Last but not least, with Central and East European countries, who have always been keen on strong euro-atlantic bond.
• For our future it is crucial that Europe senses itself as part of the transatlantic synthesis. Not as a competitor or alternative center of power, rather as an equal partner. Despite occasional disagreements we have to keep the big picture in mind – not a single problem in the world can be solved if Europe and the United States are at odds. The trees of individual disputes should not hide the woods of our overriding common interest and collective responsibilities. The transatlantic partnership is a key factor for stability and security throughout the world. Therefore we should do our best to keep this bond strong.