NATO and the Greater Middle East

U.S. NATO Ambassador R. Nicholas Burns The challenges of bringing democratic reforms to the Greater Middle East have launched an important set of discussions between and among international institutions and individual nations. There are many voices and many languages involved in this discussion, including those of the countries in the region, the United States and our NATO allies in Europe. With the publication of Diplomatia’s edition on the Greater Middle East, Estonia joins in that important international discussion.

The most compelling observations to spark the discussion were made by Arabs themselves in the 2002 and 2003 reports on Arab human development published by the United Nations Development Program. In those reports, experts from across the 22 countries in the Arab world took a sympathetic but critical assessment of the region and determined that, despite the progress in recent years, a number of deficits still remain: deficits in freedom and good governance, empowerment of women, and acquisition of knowledge for human capital. Statements issued in Aqaba last year and Sanaa this year, and at the Alexandria Library in March of this year at an historic gathering on civil society, have added to the focus on reforms and modernization needed in the region.

Some reforms are in fact already taking place in the Greater Middle East, and a number of states are clearly committed to economic and political progress, and developing representative governments to protecting individual rights and freedoms. However, notwithstanding the changes underway in Qatar, and in Bahrain, in Jordan, and a few other countries across the vast region of the Middle East, there is widespread agreement that much more can be done. The magnitude of the challenges facing the Arab world requires that Europe, Canada, and the United States work together with the countries in the region for a better and more peaceful future.

That is why President Bush launched the Middle East Partnership Initiative in May 2003, and the United States is already doing much to support freedoms in the region. Under the initiative, we are working to support good governance and democratic institutions, reinforce the rule of law, encourage the participation of non-governmental organizations in society, further the empowerment of women and reform economic and educational sectors.

Other cooperative efforts advance the same goals on a somewhat narrower geographic basis. For example, the European Union’s Barcelona Process has nine years of experience in supporting political, economic and social development in the Middle East. And Europeans and Americans have been working with countries in the region since 1994 in NATO’s Mediterranean Dialogue.

President Bush, in a speech at Whitehall in London last November, articulated his vision of a forward strategy for freedom in this region. He said that people in the Middle East, like people everywhere, deserve to live in freedom, deserve the benefit of democracy, and that the United States will thus support reformers and reform in the region.

The President put it this way, "As we watch and encourage reforms in the region, we are mindful that modernization is not the same as westernization. Representative governments in the Middle East will reflect their own cultures. They will not, and should not, look like us."

We believe that genuine democratic reforms and advances toward pluralistic, inclusive societies will emerge from within the region in forms suitable to each country. I have served in three countries in the region – Mauritania, Egypt and Israel – and I know first-hand that there is no uniform, one-size-fits-all reform plan for all the countries in the Greater Middle East. Each nation will have to come to its own conclusions about the pace and the direction of change. Change cannot be imposed from the outside by anyone.

Nor should anyone expect that this would happen overnight. We in the United States have been evolving our own democracy for 228 years, and that evolution continues today. We understand that such a challenging and complicated process will take time.

The United States is also well aware that supporting reform in the region is not a substitute for our engagement in the Middle East Peace Process. As you know, we are encouraged by Prime Minister Sharon’s plan to evacuate all settlements in Gaza, and four on the West Bank; we see this as a major step toward an eventual settlement and President Bush’s vision of two states, Israel and Palestine, living side-by-side in peace and security. However, as Secretary of State Powell said, “it is not the end of the process; it’s just the beginning of the process…. There is more work to be done.” The issue of return of Palestinian refugees – and indeed, all final status issues -- will be decided in direct negotiations between the two parties.

The pursuit of Middle East peace and pursuit of reforms in the region are, in our view, mutually reinforcing endeavors; both are vital for our common future and for our common security. But it is also true that the lack of full peace between Israel and its Arab neighbors cannot be used to excuse or delay needed reforms or to delay the beginning of a new relationship between NATO and the Arab countries.

One thing is clear: many leaders in the Middle East, and virtually all of civil society, have come to the conclusion that reform is essential. They want the continued engagement and support of the world’s democracies. Only by bringing together the combined resources and experiences of the region with those of Europe, North America, and others of the international community, can we hope to make an impact in support of reform across the Middle East. If we agree to work together, we can use the three summits coming in June of this year -- the G-8 summit, the U.S.-EU summit, and NATO’s Istanbul summit -- to respond to ideas from the region for reform. Reform in the Arab world is a major strategic imperative; therefore our responses must be equally ambitious.

All of us agree that political, educational, and economic reform efforts necessary for development of the Greater Middle East can only flourish in an atmosphere of regional security and stability. And in creating such an atmosphere, NATO can play a very important role.

Some of you may ask what role a 55-year old institution created in the aftermath of the Second World War to defend western Europe from Communism can play in the Middle East? In fact, NATO is a vastly transformed institution itself. NATO has become the world’s most effective peacekeeping organization. In both Bosnia and Kosovo, NATO intervened on behalf of Moslem populations to stop war and to preserve the peace.

Over the past decade, NATO has transformed its mission and military capabilities, its membership, and its relationships with Russia, the Caucasus, and the states of Central Asia. Our democratic alliance now extends to 26 allies, who are engaged in peacekeeping and security operations within and far beyond Europe’s borders. We also are engaged in security cooperation with 20 countries extending from Ireland to Russia and Tajikistan in the Partnership for Peace.

Since the September 11, 2001 attacks in the United States, Allies agreed that NATO must be prepared to operate on the front lines of the world’s crisis regions, well-beyond Europe, because that is where many of the 21st century challenges to world peace originate.

There is a saying in the United States, “We all live downstream.” In an era of globalized threats, no matter where we are in the world, we live downstream, because what happens in one region of the world affects the rest of the world.

In response to these new challenges, NATO has transformed from a static military alliance to a more flexible, agile force able to respond to threats from beyond the European continent. And last summer, NATO took command of the International Security Assistance Force in Kabul, Afghanistan, and is working to extend the sphere of security beyond the capital so that the Afghan people can rebuild their country.

As President Bush said in his press conference on April 13, NATO is also providing support for the Polish-led multinational division in Iraq, where 17 NATO allies are contributing forces to maintain security. He also noted that Secretary of State Powell and Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, along with a number of NATO’s foreign and defense ministers, are exploring a more formal role for NATO in Iraq, such as turning the polish-led division into a NATO operation and giving NATO specific functional responsibilities.

European critics who complained that the U.S. showed insufficient interest in NATO after the September 11 attacks should consider this fact. Now it is the U.S. that is proposing the most ambitious multilateral missions for NATO – in Afghanistan, in Iraq, and in long-term outreach to countries of the Greater Middle East.

The U.S. has supported for the past ten years NATO’s commitment to improve relations with seven countries in the Mediterranean Dialogue. The countries participating in the Mediterranean Dialogue are Algeria, Egypt, Jordan, Israel, Mauritania, Morocco, and Tunisia. While this is a valuable framework for cooperation, we believe there are opportunities for even more fruitful cooperation with Arab countries in a wider, more energetic and active initiative.

NATO’s Heads of State and Government will gather in Istanbul two months from now, on June 28 and 29. At that meeting, the United States hopes that NATO will do its part to support the broad movement for reform in the Greater Middle East by announcing an “Istanbul Cooperation Initiative.” NATO’s initiative should complement the other elements of support for indigenous reform in the Greater Middle East by engaging interested countries in the region to foster security and stability.

At NATO, we have identified a number of security goals that Europe and North America share with many countries across the Greater Middle East: fighting terrorism, stemming the flow of weapons of mass destruction, improving border security, and stopping illegal trafficking of all kinds. Our focus should be on outcomes achieved through practical cooperation on these and other issues with those countries who wish to have this kind of a cooperative relationship with NATO.

What NATO has to offer is depth of experience in these areas. Over the past 10 years, NATO has worked cooperatively with nations in post-cold war Europe to enhance their security and stability. The U.S. believes that this experience could be helpful to countries in the Greater Middle East to meet shared threats.

This new effort should complement NATO's Mediterranean Dialogue. In fact, at their informal meeting on April 2nd, NATO Foreign Ministers agreed to – as a starting point for consultations with countries in the region – discuss with Arab countries and Israel a set of proposals for the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative as well as a deepened Mediterranean Dialogue.

Shared ownership of these proposals is essential for their success. NATO is just beginning the process of consulting formally with our Med Dialogue partners and with other governments in the Greater Middle East on these proposals. We seek the advice and input of countries in the region, as allies debate and discuss how to move these proposals forward. The pace and extent of cooperation will vary according to the interest and response of individual states.

An example of cooperation to address common threats is NATO's Operation Active Endeavor, a joint naval interdiction operation underway in the Mediterranean to fight terrorism. We should invite Arab countries to join this initiative – it’s the kind of mutually beneficial cooperation that we have in mind. Another area of NATO expertise is in civil emergency planning and training, which could help interested countries prepare for natural disasters such as the recent earthquake in Morocco.

We would also like to see enhanced military-to-military cooperation to improve the ability of countries to contribute to NATO-led peacekeeping operations. Partnership for Peace could serve as a model and offer possible tools to build our cooperative relations with countries in the Middle East. If there is interest, NATO could also offer tailored advice on defense modernization, defense budgeting and defense planning.

We in the U.S. believe there is now -- in a post-9/11 world -- a logical intersection between NATO and the Arab World. We look forward to working with Qatar and other Arab countries on this initiative in coming months.

NATO continues to occupy a central place in the U.S. National Security Strategy. For 55 years, NATO has been our bridge across the Atlantic, our principal forum for working with Europe, and our mutual protection in a dangerous world. On June 28 and 29, Turkey will welcome the NATO Heads of State to Istanbul, that beautiful city astride the Bosphorous. As NATO faces new challenges, and takes up missions and tasks never imagined by its founders, it is fitting that we will gather in Istanbul. In a city straddling antiquity and modernity, Islam and Christianity, Europe and Asia, we will consider new ways to chart the future of our great alliance and the future of our outreach to the Greater Middle East.