Years ago, Martin Luther King, the famous black American leader, gave his well known speech “I have a dream” and in so doing, he put a personal human face on the struggle of black Americans for freedom and equality which resonated with black and white people alike, and not just in the United States. 

Something similar happened at this 55th ATA Assembly. There was an emotional quality about this event which took us well beyond abstract consideration of geopolitical issues, neutral reporting of current concerns, or intellectual speculation on future challenges.

From the opening press conference in which Dr. Lamers started with a description of the incredibly emotional atmosphere of the Orange Revolution, when he spent the night with students in their tents; when General Grechaninov talked movingly about how the situation in his head was changing as he went from being a Soviet general to being a Ukrainian general; to the celebration of the ATA’s 55th Anniversary at the opening ceremonies, when Oleg Kokoshinsky talked about his dream of Ukraine’s one day being part of the ATA family and hosting the Annual General Assembly in Kyiv and Dr. Burkhard Theile recollected his fear that the Berlin Wall would not come down in his lifetime, and then came that unforgettable night of November 9, 1989, when ordinary people, members of the civil society, took their sledgehammers and other tools to break down the wall that symbolized the divide between East and West.

It was that reminder that it is all about the people, the civil society, that prepared our minds for the theme of this Assembly, “Security for Civil Society in the 21st Century.”  Security is not an abstract idea that is an end in itself.  It is not a make work project for the military, as they will be the first to tell you. It is to create the circumstances that allow mothers and fathers to dream dreams for their children and to see them grow up to realize those dreams.

The opening addresses set the scene for this theme. Dr. Lamers described the mutual trust, shared values and aspirations, and strong partnerships that characterize NATO and the ATA, and will help us to deal with the challenges of today’s volatile security situation.  President Yuschenko in his welcome address talked about the ATA’s role in involving the public as real participants in the evolution of their future. Kostiantin Yelisieiev, Ukraine’s Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs, again emphasized the human focus when he used the image of a father and a mother to describe the security that father NATO can provide that will allow mother European Union to focus on the economic and cultural well being and prosperity of people, as he expressed the aspirations of Ukraine to take its place in the European family. Jean François Bureau challenged us all to provide input for NATO’s new Strategic Concept.  It is not to be an “esoteric dissertation”, but a document that will be meaningful to ordinary citizens.

And that is exactly the way the discussion continued this morning, when the first panel addressed the issue of crafting NATO’s new strategic concept. Sir Stewart Eldon emphasized that it is to be the most inclusive document ever.  At this point, NATO is prepared to listen and to receive input from everyone, especially the civil society.  While Article 5 will continue to be the fundamental basis of the Alliance, how it can best be supported will no doubt receive consideration.  That brings in, once again another one of the key themes that ran through this Assembly: the theme of partnerships. Sir Stewart emphasized that partnership is the key enabler of NATO’s operations. The new NATO term for this is the “comprehensive approach.”

His Excellency, Mr. Stefan Füle continued both themes: the involvement of civil society and the need for partnerships.  In the context of NATO enlargement, he described the setting of NATO standards as one of the greatest contributions to NATO’s partners, and emphasized that whatever may be NATO’s involvement with Russia under the new Strategic Concept, it must never come at the expense of these NATO values. Ambassador Káčer described how NATO’s operating in a consensual manner with the basic values of cooperation, trust and transparency, has had a trickle-down effect on the development of civil society within new partner and member countries. He emphasized that it is like a family in which everyone has to contribute to a common cause.  It can never be a one-way street. 

The lively discussion centred on these same themes. There were many questions on NATO’s interaction with Russia, whether partnership with Russia was compatible with NATO’s goals, and the answer was consistently that there is no contradiction.  NATO is not against Russia, but for collective security wherever the threats arise.  That means that in the NATO-Russia relationship, the focus is on common interests and common concerns and how best to address them in a way that does not diminish the NATO values.

The emotional, human element was strong again in the consideration of the “Way Ahead for Afghanistan”.  Tahera Qurban Ali had set the mood at the YATA opening session, and with her impassioned plea at the Council meeting for NATO countries not to withdraw their military and economic support from Afghanistan.  That support gives life and hope to ordinary Afghan people. Jean-François Bureau outlined the four priorities of the international community which are led or supported by NATO: 1) protect the civilian population and build a relationship of trust; 2) help the Afghan National Security Forces to be able to take over the lead for security in their country with the support of ISAF; 3) continue agricultural initiatives in order to reduce the poppy cultivation (a support role for ISAF to provide security); and 4) to improve stability in the region.  He described a major IT initiative to connect Afghan universities with the world, and emphasized that there is a strong role for the ATA in getting out the message about why we are in Afghanistan.  He ended by bringing it back to the reality: International soldiers and aid workers have suffered in Afghanistan, but so have Afghan soldiers and civilians. They also want to live a life of peace and fulfillment of dreams.

Mohammad Tariq Ismati, Executive Director of the National Solidarity Program of the Afghan Ministry of Rural Rehabilitation and Development, told us how important it is for the long-term security and development of Afghanistan that the international community provide more support to the Afghan Government to take the lead in development initiatives. Lack of transparency and accountability should not prevent cooperation with the Afghan government, if it is done in the right way. In the long run, it is much more efficient, less expensive, and far more conducive to capacity building in Afghanistan to help the Afghan government to implement programs like the National Solidarity Program that brings hope and pride directly to Afghan villages, and teaches them a democratic approach to local decision making which has great potential for the development of true participatory democracy.  The program has been designed so that there is no opportunity for corruption, and it has put over 600 million dollars directly into village bank accounts for infrastructure projects for more than 29,000 villages.  It is making a practical difference in the lives of ordinary people, while at the same time teaching them about civic government, project management and accountability. It is a program that benefits greatly from ISAF support for security, but can also create its own security space to help ISAF. Time and continued support is needed to expand this program throughout the country.

Larissa Blavatska of the Canadian Embassy described Canadian efforts in Afghanistan, both the military contribution to ISAF, and the civilian contribution which is particularly tied in with capacity and infrastructure building programs such as the NSP described by Mr. Ismati.

During the discussion, Mr. Ismati pointed out that the widespread, small scale corruption is primarily a function of extreme poverty, which suggests that economic development should improve that situation considerably over time.  There was a general consensus among the speakers that the future of Afghanistan is up to the Afghan people.  Only they, not the foreign community can decide with whom they can negotiate and how their country can move forward, but they need time, support, and encouragement, and that the international community can provide.

In the final plenary session with Dr. Celeste Wallender, and Mr. Marcin Koziel, the theme of partnership again figured prominently, both in a general discussion about the purpose of NATO enlargement, and in the specific focus on Ukraine’s potential membership.  It was made clear that this accession to membership is not an event, but a process. For Ukraine it is a process of development of NATO values and culture, and the choice for the kind of civilization Ukrainians want to live in. This is something Ukrainians must decide for themselves, as did citizens of other countries before. Dr. Wallender drew an interesting comparison between the role of NATO in transforming West Germany into a democratic state, and what is happening in Ukraine today as a result of the Annual National Programme. Ukraine should not be influenced by any other country. At the end of the day, Ukrainians, themselves, have to establish clear priorities for their national agenda, and this must involve the civil society.  NATO’s door is open. Ukraine’s actions will determine when it will step through that door.

During the discussion, it was made clear that there is no disagreement within the NATO community about the eventual accession of Ukraine and Georgia. NATO’s wish to engage Russia constructively, will not affect the discussion about Ukraine and Georgia.

It was also made clear that while the new Strategic Concept will be decided by the Member countries, Partner countries will have plenty of opportunity to provide input. This means that the ATA members in Partner countries must also play a strong role in informing their civil societies about NATO and communicate with their governments to provide input into the new Strategic Concept. As Dr. Celeste Wallender said, “Never underestimate the role of civil society in influencing policy.”

The parallel panels offered an opportunity to focus in detail on three other issues. It was the consensus of all the speakers on Energy and Financial Security, that more diversification and less dependence on one source of energy were needed to provide greater security.  Here again the theme of partnership surfaced in the recommendation for a more regional rather than bilateral approach.  There was also a concern that the market needs to be more regulated to create more stability.

In the session on Public Diplomacy it was posited that it is impossible to achieve a government’s goals without public diplomacy support. The role of public diplomacy is to show the citizen that the government’s goals are present in everyday life. A new development in public diplomacy is communication that reaches every citizen, and this means using a wider variety of strategies and media. The biggest achievement of Public Diplomacy today is that the debate on foreign policy and security issues is going on, but there are many myths, misinformation, and lack of information that make it challenging to promote a positive image of NATO. There is also a role for the private sector to support public diplomacy with resources for research and analysis. In identifying and providing accurate information to the public, public diplomacy is a tool for security.  We have seen its importance in winning over the public to help NATO do its job.   New polls show that more information about NATO improves sentiment towards it.

In the session on current security and political developments in Ukraine, it was pointed out that many of the countries in the region have similar security and political aspiration, however, Russia’s continuing view of itself as having a sphere of influence in the region has led to conflicts both internal and external to the countries. It has had a detrimental effect on the fostering of trust within the region. Russia has offered a new security model, but the question is still what will be the conditions of this new security architecture. It was also pointed out that it is important to have the cooperation of civil society with NATO members not just on military issues. The intention of creating better relations with Russia should not affect NATO values. The discussion came full circle with this emphasis on values and the role of the civil society.

This was an Assembly with a human face.  We have all become a little more aware of each other as people with dreams, hopes, and ambitions for ourselves (for the younger among us), and for our children and grandchildren (for the older ones), and we have learned that we need to work together to realize our dreams. We have our marching orders.  As our President said at the end of his opening statement, “If you can dream it, you can do it.”

• print this page

autor: Slovak Atlantic Commission