Speeches
Search in Speeches:
 
printer friendly document

The President of the Republic of Estonia at the Royal United Services Institute London, March 10, 2000
10.03.2000

Estonia's Security and Defence Policy - New Steps towards NATO Membership


Mr. Chairman,
Director,
Ladies and Gentlemen,

I thank you for the opportunity to speak once again at RUSI, one of my favourite places in London. It is gratifying to see so many familiar faces in the audience. I would like to speak to you today about NATO, specifically about how I see the Alliance evolving in the run-up to the next Summit, set for the year 2002. But before I do, I would take you on a brief, guided tour of what Estonia has been up to since we last met here two years ago.

In the last couple of years, the Estonian economy has grown stronger. It has had remarkable success, for instance, in the field of information technology, a special hobby of mine. Our exports are up, and this contributes, in turn, to the health of the economy as a whole.

In the last two years, Estonia has become further integrated into the world economy. In Europe, for instance, we rank first in the relationship of exports to GDP. As we have done ever since we were able to do so starting in 1991, we continue to embrace a liberal economic policy. More than 60% of Estonia's total trade turnover is with European Union countries, and the EU's share of total direct investments in Estonia is even higher than that. We do not exaggerate when we say that Estonia now functions as a normal part of the global economy, especially where the evolving EU is concerned.

Our negotiations toward joining the EU are moving along as well. We have had our ups and downs, and it is certainly fair to say that Estonia has plenty of hard domestic work ahead of it. But if in 1998 we were only starting out, then today we are beginning to see the light at the end of the tunnel.

In addition, last year Estonia realised a long-held goal of our foreign economic policy: we joined the World Trade Organisation. As members, we now have a voice in shaping global economy policy, a game that before 1999 was one we watched only from the sidelines.

These economic and political successes lend wings to the imagination and give rise to the high hopes of my people. But I have always believed that my job as President, first and foremost, is to enhance the well being of all of Estonia's residents. That includes creating a more secure environment for our children and grandchildren. In other words, there is another, very important item on our agenda, and that is NATO.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

When I was last here in March, 1998, I spoke about Estonia's hopes for the NATO summit that would take place in Washington the next year, and of our conviction that the Baltic issue would become an important point of discussion there. I also said that the reason Estonia wants to be a member of the Alliance is the same reason current members remain. That is because the transatlantic link provides the best - no, the only means of achieving security for the continent.

Today, our desire to join the Alliance is undiminished by the two years that have passed. The Washington Summit gave us good reason to be confident about what lies ahead.

NATO itself seems clearer and more confident of its chosen path, as well. The enlargement strategy of focusing on the capabilities of applicant countries is the right one. This makes sense. NATO member states themselves are also undergoing a kind of measurement through the Defence Capabilities Initiative. In a wider sense, this focus on capabilities will ensure that NATO will expand in strength, and will not weaken the Alliance, as some critics of enlargement have charged.

One new and dynamic element to emerge from the Washington summit was the Membership Action Plans, or MAPs. When NATO first launched the MAP idea, critics charged that the Plans might become too politicised. A year's time has demonstrated, however, that the MAPs have been wildly successful. They have allowed the Alliance to assess readiness in real, no-nonsense terms, and have provided candidates with a clear-cut set of tasks through the Annual National Programmes, or ANPs.

Estonia, for one, sees its MAP as a real roadmap toward NATO. We take this document, and the discussions with NATO about the MAP, very seriously. In two weeks, Prime Minister Mart Laar will meet in a nineteen-plus-one format with the North Atlantic Council ambassadorial level to discuss our Annual National Programme. Estonia is the first among candidate states to undergo an assessment of our ANP - we take this as a good sign.

Estonia has taken serious steps over the past year to increase our defence expenditures. I am talking here about raising our spending to reach two percent of our GDP, a level prescribed for NATO membership. This has not been an easy goal for the Government to set, let alone to attain, either in a fiscal or a political sense. But in the run-up to our parliamentary elections last year, in direct response to an appeal I made as President, political contenders of all stripes reached a consensus that defence policy is simply non-negotiable.

As a result, the governing coalition took the decision last year to raise Estonia's defence budget by point two percent each year until we reach the two-percent-of-GDP level in the year 2002.

As you may know, Estonia's Constitution mandates a balanced state budget. This means that the spending hikes I am talking about are not just increases on paper, but reflect real allocations in real money. The increased budget itself sends the indisputable signal that Estonia takes the matter of defending itself very seriously, indeed.

Estonia has concrete plans for channelling these funds. It plans to use the money in three ways: to improve the quality of life for our men and women in uniform; to streamline communications; and to strengthen our air surveillance and defence systems.

This last named item is of special interest to us right now. Recently Estonia embarked on a large-scale purchasing program intended to equip us with modern air-surveillance systems. We may be late in starting, but as a result we can now choose the most modern technology available without having to worry about integrating older systems.

We are well underway in implementing the decisions taken in Washington. This is a fitting place to thank the United Kingdom for assistance rendered in helping us meet those tasks. Language training and staff training are but two of many areas where UK instructors have been active. The United Kingdom has also played a central role in joint Baltic defence projects as well as in the so-called BALTSEA initiative, which has united numerous countries that have provided practical military support to the Baltic countries. The Baltic Defence College which was opened last year in the presence of then UK Defence Secretary George Robertson was established in Estonia to provide the Baltic states with officers trained in NATO standards.

In summary, we are pleased with the results of the Washington summit, and are now looking ahead to the next gathering of NATO leaders.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

In Washington, NATO leaders agreed that they would meet again no later than 2002. This date is just around the corner, and requires serious consideration right now. Permit me to outline what I believe to be the key issues for the 2002 Summit, if it is to achieve its aim of strengthening transatlantic security.

First, the Washington Summit made clear that the next meeting would also deal with the continued enlargement of the Alliance. The 1999 meeting also recognised nine countries as candidates for membership. Provided that these countries live up to their MAP requirements, as Estonia is determined to do, their membership ought to be given serious consideration.

In the year and one half remaining, there will be plenty of opportunity to assess the plusses and minuses of approaching NATO enlargement piecemeal, or in waves, or how many waves, and so forth. This discussion over the Big Bang or the wave approach or some other metaphor means that for applicant countries, NATO membership status could take on the form of a mirage, perpetually escaping them, just as they seem to approach it.

In this context, I would point out that seven of the nine countries named in Washington as NATO candidates are also future members of the European Union. Some, like Estonia, may be close to actually joining the EU by the time the summit takes place.

In the EU context, I would also mention that our understanding of security does not differ from that of current EU members. Like them, Estonia aims to further shore up its sovereignty and to combat new international risks and dangers as they arise. As far as the EU's evolving defence capability is concerned, Estonia sees European defence as being tightly integrated with NATO. At the same time, in non-Article Five matters, we see no reason to fear moves toward developing a specifically European capability. Such moves would mean additional investments into the defence of the continent and, from our perspective as outsiders for the time being, a reduction in the capabilities gap.

My first point is this: the time for NATO to start thinking about 2002 is now; the time for candidate states to prepare for that eventuality is also now.

My second point is that the Summit in 2002 will be instrumental, like it or not, in charting the future of NATO-Russia relations.

The NATO-Russia relationship today is already shaped by the presumption that the Baltics will be members of the Alliance. Many Russian analysts have also started to admit publicly that the Baltic states will join NATO, regardless of what are Russia's thoughts on the matter. These same analysts have argued that given this situation, Russia should prepare to accept the circumstances and get on with the task of building a working relationship with the Alliance. It may be a radical thought, but I submit to you that non-inclusion of the Baltics in the next round of enlargement would raise more eyebrows in Moscow than inclusion!

Any discussion of Russia today must include concern for that country's confused state of affairs, including in Chechnya. In a few weeks' time the Russians will be electing a new president. Unless anything significant changes, the new president will be Vladimir Putin, who has raised his ratings with the public as a result of his stand in Chechnya.

That Chechen war, with its concomitant human rights violations, restrictions on press freedom, use of xenophobic and chauvinistic rhetoric in politics and aggressive international behaviour would not seem to be a harbinger of a bright future.

For this reason, it is vital that the West makes clear to Russia that its behaviour in Chechnya will not be without consequence. It is the duty of the outside world to help Russia steer a clear course towards the establishment of a true democracy where journalists do not disappear any more. We should, of course, give Mr. Putin the benefit of the doubt. But the rules of the game and the conditions for stronger Russia-NATO relations must be made crystal clear.

But Russia is not the only state to have emerged from the Eurasian transformation, and this brings me to my third point. The 2002 Summit will also have to take into account the interests of Georgia, Ukraine and other countries of Eastern Europe that will not be joining NATO.

The Caucasus is a volatile area today and will remain so for the foreseeable future. Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan are independent countries that seek their own paths of national security, and have every right to do so. Georgia's security in particular concerns us. It is in our interest, indeed it is our duty to help these countries get a firmer footing. This is important not only for their sake, not only for the sake of the Caucasus region, but also for European security as a whole.

Ukraine also deserves our strong commitment. It is a central player in its part of the world, and, to quiet but widespread applause in the West, acts as a stabilising influence in the entire region. For this reason, it is in our common interest to strengthen Kyiv's hand, in helping where we can.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I have outlined for you what Estonia is doing to be ready for NATO membership in 2002. Likewise, I have mentioned three points that I think are important to keep in mind as we prepare for the next summit and enlargement.

The most important point with regard to the upcoming summit, however, is that it marks an ongoing process. By the time the summit takes place, moves toward enlargement, in one form or another, will have been going on for close to ten years counting. It is upon this momentum that Estonia places its hopes.

Thank you for your attention.

 

back | archive of speeches | main page

© 2001 Office of the President of the Republic
Phone: +372 631 6202 | Fax: +372 631 6250 | sekretar@vpk.ee
Reden Kõned Speeches Statements Interviews