Four speeches and some ire: NATO and Russia clash in Munich

By Nigel Chamberlain, NATO Watch

 
Cold cooperation or constructive engagement?
 
Speaking at the Munich Security Conference on 1 February, Secretary General Rasmussen welcomed the opportunity to discuss the relationship between NATO and Russia. He said that: “We face a clear choice. Between accepting cold cooperation. Or aiming for constructive engagement. And moving forward towards the strategic partnership which offers the common security we seek.” Rasmussen listed the following areas of positive cooperation:
 
  • provision of transit routes through Russia to Afghanistan;
  • efforts to prevent drug trafficking from Afghanistan;
  • development of technologies to stop terrorists attacks in the Metro or hijacking airplanes;
  • removing and dismantling old, dangerous weapons from Kaliningrad; and
  • supporting efforts to remove chemical weapons from Syria.
But he called for a more ambitious relationship to address challenges to fundamental shared interests and to seek regional and Euro-Atlantic stability. These include:
 
The need to stem terrorism, extremism and proliferation in the Middle East and North Africa which threaten all of us. And the need to deepen economic cooperation and trade between our nations in a globalised world.
 
He then cited areas where “we remain too far apart” and called for end to the hostility of the past:
 
  • deployment of offensive weapons systems such as fighter detachments to Belarus, Iskander missiles to Kaliningrad, or more military forces in the Arctic;
  • criticism of NATO’s missile defence system which is consistently, and falsely, described as offensive; and
  • antagonism in response to NATO’s policy of enlargement.
The Secretary General said that Russia and NATO “must refrain from threats against each other” and called for “a true strategic partnership” built on “confidence and transparency”. He said that, under the 1999 OSCE Charter for European Security, Ukraine has the right to choose its own security arrangements without external pressure. He added that democratic principles and the rule of law must be respected and an agreement on missile defence cooperation would improve protection for all, in Russia as well as in Europe.
 
NATO is prepared to be transparent and engage in discussions “on reductions in sub-strategic nuclear weapons” but “the Russian demand for NATO to remove all nuclear weapons in Europe, before we even start negotiations, will lead nowhere”. Noting that Russia has said it will never come back to the Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty, Rasmussen called for discussions on how to come to security agreement for all and for a return to reciprocal, regular exchanges on military exercises to increase trust and confidence. He concluded that:
 
None of this will happen overnight. But with political will, we can avoid the risk of cold cooperation. We can move forward towards constructive engagement. And the true strategic partnership we agreed to achieve.
 
Hope for a common European home unfulfilled
 
Speaking after Secretary General Rasmussen, Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov opened with the possibility of creating a ‘common European home’ after the dismantling of the Berlin Wall – a dream which hasn’t come true and seems unlikely to be fulfilled. Prior to the most recent EU-Russia summit there was an agreement to set aside pending business and focus on the strategic aspects of the relationship.
 
However, the search for mutually acceptable agreements was marred by differences over the violent and undemocratic street protests in Ukraine which are not condemned by many prominent European and US politicians but are actually supported by them. NATO’s Secretary General also spoke about the need to give Ukraine freedom of choice. “However, all of us understand how this choice was predetermined for Ukraine at the NATO summit in 2007”. The freedom of the Ukrainian people to choose is in fact imposed, something Russia does not want, and will not engage in, Lavrov added.
 
According to Lavrov, the European continent is not the focus of global politics any more. It should not be divided into spheres of influence. Cooperation between the EU, Russia and other European states should give the region comparative advantage. President Putin has recently confirmed that Russia would like to build cooperation with the EU on the basis of large, ambitious, equal and mutually beneficial projects and tasks. The goal of a common European home will remain unobtainable as long as “the logic of maintaining and deepening dividing lines, based on the principle ‘those who are not with us are against us’, still prevails”, Lavrov concluded.
 
The Russian Foreign Minister also said that military confrontation in the European continent has become unimaginable but the renewal of talks about the threat from the East is perplexing. He cited the following problem areas:
 
  • the growth of military infrastructure on the eastern borders of NATO;
  • the planning of larger military exercises based on Article 5 of the Washington Treaty;
  • the development of the European segment of the US ABM which is a test of readiness to build an equal security system in Atlantic Europe, is part of the strategic arsenal of the United States and an integral component of the entire strategic stability; and
  • the public questioning of Russia’s commitment to arms control, which need to be addressed within the framework of direct contacts in the NATO-Russia Council.
He cited the positive efforts to move away from bloc thinking in the Helsinki Plus 40 OSCE discussions, the breakthrough decisions reached in the elimination of Syrian chemical weapons, the convention of the Geneva-2 discussions and developments in Iranian issues. He listed many areas of historic and current cooperation which are based on the rule of law, international conventions and the central role of the United Nations.
 
NATO - the greatest peace movement in history?
 
US Secretary of State Kerry and US Defence Secretary Hegel spoke in a later panel discussion on transatlantic security. Here are a few statements from each, as they have a bearing on what Secretary General Rasmussen and Foreign Minister Lavrov had said earlier with regard to NATO-Russia relations:
 
Secretary Kerry:
 
The task of building a Europe that is whole and free and at peace is not complete. And in order to meet today’s challenges both near and far, America needs a strong Europe, and Europe needs a committed and engaged America.
 
So as a transatlantic community, we cannot retreat and we must do more than just recover – all of us. What we need in 2014 is a transatlantic renaissance, a new burst of energy and commitment and investment in the three roots of our strength: our economic prosperity, our shared security, and the common values that sustain us.
 
Plain and simply, our shared prosperity and security are absolutely indivisible. And in a shrinking world where our fundamental interests are inseparable, a transatlantic renaissance requires that we defend our democratic values and freedoms. Don’t for an instant underestimate how important that it is or that the difference that it makes to courageous people like those in the Ukraine who are standing up today for their ability to have a choice about their future.
 
Secretary Hegel:
 
The transatlantic partnership has been successful because of the judicious use of diplomacy and defence. Over the last year, John and I have both worked to restore balance, balance to the relationship between American defence and diplomacy. With the United States moving off a 13-year war footing, it’s clear to us, it’s very clear to President Obama that our future requires a renewed and enhanced era of partnership with our friends and allies, especially here in Europe.
 
And as we confront these [global] threats, nations such as China and Russia are rapidly modernizing their militaries and global defence industries, challenging our technological edge in defence partnerships around the world.
 
The centrepiece of our transatlantic defence partnership will continue to be NATO, the military alliance that has been called the greatest peace movement in history.
 
We must continue to hone the capabilities we’ve fielded [in Afghanistan] and sustain these deep and effective defence relationships. And NATO must continue to develop innovative ways to maintain alliance readiness as we apply our hard-earned skills to new security challenges.
 
We believe this collaboration offers a model – a model for closer integration with other allies and partners, including NATO as a whole, and it’ll influence US strategic planning and future investments. Sustaining and enhancing these cooperative efforts will require shared commitment and shared investment on both sides of the Atlantic. That includes United States commitments to a strong military posture in Europe.
 
An important posture enhancement is European missile defence in response to ballistic missile threats from Iran. Over the last two days, I’ve been in Poland, where I reaffirmed the United States commitment to deploying missile defence architecture there.
 
As President Obama told the American people in his State of the Union Address this week, our alliance with Europe remains the strongest the world has ever known. I have every confidence that our successors will be there 50 years hence to again celebrate the most successful and effective collective security alliance in history. But as we all know, it will require continued strong and visionary leadership, attention, resources, and strong commitment.