Official Opening
H.E. Jaroslav Baška: New and emerging threats coming predominantly out of NATO territory create new needs and requirements not only for military but also for civilian capabilities of NATO member states.
H.E. Miroslav Lajčák: NATO, which links our security with that of United States is our only real security guarantee.
1st Panel: NATO’s Strategic Concept 60 Years On: What Is Today’s Meaning of Article 5?
H.E. Imants Liegis: And I think its right that the events of 9/11 helped to clarify the meaning of Article 5.
Janusz Onyszkiewicz: Article 5 is not the only security guarantee.
Janusz Onyszkiewicz: So the first question we must face is to somehow discuss and clarify what we understand under the armed attack?!
2nd Panel: Cyber security as a Challenge for NATO
H.E. Jaak Aaviksoo: Cyber space is its own medium with its own rules.
Lt. Col. (Ret.) Robert Kosla: Operating systems, the new software and the new applications are designed the way to meet military and governmental requirements.
H.E. Jaak Aaviksoo: Cyber defence is first of all a national responsibility with all its complications on the national level, but there is a strong coordinated need on the level NATO.
Lt. Col. (Ret.) Robert Kosla: It was important for Vista, for Office 2007, it was the first time when NATO actively participated in security setting development.
H.E. Jaak Aaviksoo: As we reach out and connect more networks to each other, our vulnerabilities grow exponentially.
H.E. Jaroslav Baška: New and emerging threats coming predominantly out of NATO territory create new needs and requirements not only for military but also for civilian capabilities of NATO member states.
H.E. Miroslav Lajčák: NATO, which links our security with that of United States is our only real security guarantee.
1st Panel: NATO’s Strategic Concept 60 Years On: What Is Today’s Meaning of Article 5?
H.E. Imants Liegis: And I think its right that the events of 9/11 helped to clarify the meaning of Article 5.
Janusz Onyszkiewicz: Article 5 is not the only security guarantee.
Janusz Onyszkiewicz: So the first question we must face is to somehow discuss and clarify what we understand under the armed attack?!
2nd Panel: Cyber security as a Challenge for NATO
H.E. Jaak Aaviksoo: Cyber space is its own medium with its own rules.
Lt. Col. (Ret.) Robert Kosla: Operating systems, the new software and the new applications are designed the way to meet military and governmental requirements.
H.E. Jaak Aaviksoo: Cyber defence is first of all a national responsibility with all its complications on the national level, but there is a strong coordinated need on the level NATO.
Lt. Col. (Ret.) Robert Kosla: It was important for Vista, for Office 2007, it was the first time when NATO actively participated in security setting development.
H.E. Jaak Aaviksoo: As we reach out and connect more networks to each other, our vulnerabilities grow exponentially.
3rd Panel: What is the Future of NATO/EU Relations with Russia?
Eugeniusz Smolar: Compromise can be quite far reaching with one proviso: No one can compromise on values.
Edward Lucas: NATO was to keep the Germans down, the Americans in and the Russians out; the new Russian Security Architecture is designed to do exactly the opposite: to get the Americans out, the Russians in and to put the Germans up.
Eckart Von Klaeden: If we talk about strategic partnership, it is not longer defined as a partnership between Germany and Russia; it is defined as a partnership with the EU.
Igor Yurgens: We proved the great deal, we are not Stalinist Soviet Union any more, we are much more cooperative entity.
Igor Yurgens: Young educated Russians, they want to be part of the European family.
Igor Yurgens: We do not know sometimes how to deliver messages to the outside world.
Eckart Von Klaeden: At the end NATO and the European Union serve the same interests.
Igor Yurgens: The largest mistake of the Russian leadership until now, is to consider Ukraine as “Mala Rusja”, which is small Russia.
Eugeniusz Smolar: The biggest country of Europe is a small country in the world and we could strengthen each other.
Keynote speech: Crafting the new Strategic Concept: Ambitions, Resources and Partenrships for a 21st Century Alliance
Amb. Alexander Vershbow: The U.S. is firmly committed to a strong and relevant Alliance.
Amb. Alexander Vershbow: It is also important to reiterate that our commitment to each other as Allies is absolutely sacrosanct, and to guarantee that this commitment is credible.
Amb. Alexander Vershbow: The new Strategic Concept should not be a lengthy, bureaucratic document, but one that conveys the Alliance’s continued importance and raison d’etre to our parliaments and publics.
Amb. Alexander Vershbow: Consensus around collective defense cannot take place if there are perceptions that some members are true security providers while others security consumers.
Amb. Alexander Vershbow: We should underscore the importance of NATO’s cooperation with the EU and other institutions, and of combining NATO’s military strength with economic and other civilian contributions.
Keynote Speech: Vision of NATO in the Changing Security Environment
H.E. Anders Fogh Rasmussen: Leaving Afghanistan behind would once again turn the country into a training ground for Al-Quida.
H.E. Anders Fogh Rasmussen: The new Strategic concept will give us a vision of NATO in the changing security environment.
H.E. Anders Fogh Rasmussen: NATO’s core task was, is and will remain the defence of our territory and our population.
H.E. Anders Fogh Rasmussen: NATO and Russia together should assess what are the real threats to our security.
H.E. Anders Fogh Rasmussen: The main point is to make NATO more capable to cooperate with other actors on the international scene.
Eugeniusz Smolar: Compromise can be quite far reaching with one proviso: No one can compromise on values.
Edward Lucas: NATO was to keep the Germans down, the Americans in and the Russians out; the new Russian Security Architecture is designed to do exactly the opposite: to get the Americans out, the Russians in and to put the Germans up.
Eckart Von Klaeden: If we talk about strategic partnership, it is not longer defined as a partnership between Germany and Russia; it is defined as a partnership with the EU.
Igor Yurgens: We proved the great deal, we are not Stalinist Soviet Union any more, we are much more cooperative entity.
Igor Yurgens: Young educated Russians, they want to be part of the European family.
Igor Yurgens: We do not know sometimes how to deliver messages to the outside world.
Eckart Von Klaeden: At the end NATO and the European Union serve the same interests.
Igor Yurgens: The largest mistake of the Russian leadership until now, is to consider Ukraine as “Mala Rusja”, which is small Russia.
Eugeniusz Smolar: The biggest country of Europe is a small country in the world and we could strengthen each other.
Keynote speech: Crafting the new Strategic Concept: Ambitions, Resources and Partenrships for a 21st Century Alliance
Amb. Alexander Vershbow: The U.S. is firmly committed to a strong and relevant Alliance.
Amb. Alexander Vershbow: It is also important to reiterate that our commitment to each other as Allies is absolutely sacrosanct, and to guarantee that this commitment is credible.
Amb. Alexander Vershbow: The new Strategic Concept should not be a lengthy, bureaucratic document, but one that conveys the Alliance’s continued importance and raison d’etre to our parliaments and publics.
Amb. Alexander Vershbow: Consensus around collective defense cannot take place if there are perceptions that some members are true security providers while others security consumers.
Amb. Alexander Vershbow: We should underscore the importance of NATO’s cooperation with the EU and other institutions, and of combining NATO’s military strength with economic and other civilian contributions.
Keynote Speech: Vision of NATO in the Changing Security Environment
H.E. Anders Fogh Rasmussen: Leaving Afghanistan behind would once again turn the country into a training ground for Al-Quida.
H.E. Anders Fogh Rasmussen: The new Strategic concept will give us a vision of NATO in the changing security environment.
H.E. Anders Fogh Rasmussen: NATO’s core task was, is and will remain the defence of our territory and our population.
H.E. Anders Fogh Rasmussen: NATO and Russia together should assess what are the real threats to our security.
H.E. Anders Fogh Rasmussen: The main point is to make NATO more capable to cooperate with other actors on the international scene.
4th Panel: Impact of Economic Crisis on European Defence Budgets
H.E. Ljubica Jelušič: The economic crisis has one more or less common European answer: decrease of planed defence expenditures.
H.E. Ljubica Jelušič: We are less capable to follow so called fair share of burdens.
Marshall Billingslea: Today within NATO you have 6 of 28 countries that are at 2% work (GDP).
Marshall Billingslea: The most important consequence you will see is a significant and renewed debate on this matter of burden sharing.
Quentin Peel: There is a clear popular disinclination in Europe to spend anything like the sort of amounts of money that America seems to be prepared to spend.
Marshall Billingslea: The desire is to find the way to balance this significant economic downturn with the need for renewed investment.
H.E. Ljubica Jelušič: The economic crisis has one more or less common European answer: decrease of planed defence expenditures.
H.E. Ljubica Jelušič: We are less capable to follow so called fair share of burdens.
Marshall Billingslea: Today within NATO you have 6 of 28 countries that are at 2% work (GDP).
Marshall Billingslea: The most important consequence you will see is a significant and renewed debate on this matter of burden sharing.
Quentin Peel: There is a clear popular disinclination in Europe to spend anything like the sort of amounts of money that America seems to be prepared to spend.
Marshall Billingslea: The desire is to find the way to balance this significant economic downturn with the need for renewed investment.
5th Panel: NATO’s Military Transformation: Operations and Capabilities Development
H.E. Eimert van Middelkoop: We are trying to learn from history by identifying seven strategic functions that armed forces have performed over time; including deterrence, protection and intervention.
H.E. Eimert van Middelkoop: It is essential for all nations to process adequately equipped and trained deployable and expeditionary forces. Not only to participate in crisis management operations but also to support each other if the article 5 situation arises.
Damon Wilson: It is far more effective for us to have a NATO ally that is able to deploy a fairly large number of forces into a stabilization operation rather than have a defence budget that is drained away by supersonics for example if they are not able to sustain at the economic scale of the ally budget .
Jamie Shea: Success is also about having adequate resources. You can have the most beautiful strategy in the world but if you don’t have the capabilities if you don’t have the resources it is not going to succeed. Not being able to equal to US or to spend what the U.S. spends is not an excuse for not doing more and being a small country is no more an excuse to make those efforts than if you are a large country.
H.E. Eimert van Middelkoop: We are trying to learn from history by identifying seven strategic functions that armed forces have performed over time; including deterrence, protection and intervention.
H.E. Eimert van Middelkoop: It is essential for all nations to process adequately equipped and trained deployable and expeditionary forces. Not only to participate in crisis management operations but also to support each other if the article 5 situation arises.
Damon Wilson: It is far more effective for us to have a NATO ally that is able to deploy a fairly large number of forces into a stabilization operation rather than have a defence budget that is drained away by supersonics for example if they are not able to sustain at the economic scale of the ally budget .
Jamie Shea: Success is also about having adequate resources. You can have the most beautiful strategy in the world but if you don’t have the capabilities if you don’t have the resources it is not going to succeed. Not being able to equal to US or to spend what the U.S. spends is not an excuse for not doing more and being a small country is no more an excuse to make those efforts than if you are a large country.
6th Panel: New Nuclear Disarmament Proposals: Implications for NATO and the Transatlantic Relations
H.E. Ivo Daalder: The nuclear threat is one that we all face together, it is not one that the United States faces but it’s all of us.
H.E. Ivo Daalder: Present decision and the new program has nothing to do with Russia; it is neither directed at Russia, nor was the decision based on the desire to carry favour with Russia.
Bruno Tertrais: The world without nuclear weapons would not be at the disadvantage of the United States.
Nick Pickard: The proliferation of the weapons of the mass destruction is the direct threat to the NATO territory.
Bruno Tertrais: If we suddenly gave up on the nuclear weapons tomorrow, I think, the Iranians would be even more encouraged to have nuclear weapons.
Tomas Valasek: If the world goes down to zero it means that NATO would have to give up its tactical weapons based in Europe as well.
Karl-Heinz Kamp: How NATO can preserve deterrence under changed circumstances? The deterrence against terrorists, against non-state actors, against failed states
Bruno Tertrais: I think that the question for alliance members is where we gain and where do we loose if we withdraw them.
