Europa > European Union in the World > European Union @ United Nations > Lecture by EU HR Javier Solana on "Global challenges for the EU's CFSP"

Site map | A-Z Index | Internships/Jobs | Links | Contact us

English Español Français

 

 

Lecture by EU HR Javier Solana on "Global challenges for the EU's CFSP"

I.

Mr. President, Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,

I consider it a great honor for me to address you at this prestigious occasion.

I am delighted to see so many friends here. We meet quite often, Mr. President, dear Minister, and I am grateful for the deep sympathy I meet at each of these occasions.

A Polish writer, Ryszard Kapuscinski, said that the best way to know a country is through friendship. I may say that this is exactly the way I got familiar with Poland.

It is more than a fortunate coincidence that the Diplomatic Academy of the Republic of Poland is created at a moment when Poland is very close to the realization of its top national objective: Becoming again an active member of re-united Europe.

Poland has always been a pioneer for the European identity. Let me give only two striking examples which, in my view, are linked to each other:

• Back in Renaissance, Poland was the first country in the world to practice tolerance between different religious convictions within the same state.
  
  
• Less than twenty years ago, the Polish people paved the way for freedom and democracy in Central and Eastern Europe.

As Secretary General of NATO I had the privilege to work actively for the first big step in Polish foreign policy after the re-establishment of democracy, Poland's membership in NATO.

I will never forget the ceremony of Poland's NATO accession in March 1999. My old friend Bronislaw Geremek expressed what everybody felt at that moment:

"Poland forever returns where she has always belonged: to the free world."

I feel equally moved now that we are so close to another fundamental step for this country and for the re-unification of Europe. I accompany your accession to EU with the same deep conviction I felt at the moment of Poland's NATO accession.

I am very much aware that this time the atmosphere in your country seems to be more sober, less euphoric than four years ago. Does this mean that the accession to the EU is less important for Poland than the accession to NATO? No, certainly not. The difference lies in the character of the two organizations.

NATO's task is to ensure the collective defense of its members. Through its NATO accession, Poland could feel secure for the first time in many centuries. This had an enormous psychological impact.

The EU is covering a very broad range of issues and policies. They are important for our daily life, but some of them are very technical and down to earth.

Let me say quite frankly: It is normal that the discussion about milk quota or the administrative requirements of an "objective one" region does not foster enthusiasm.

I would like to compare the EU accession process to the situation when you build a new house: First, you are very euphoric when you see the drawings by the architect. However, after some time you get aware of the details you have not taken into account. You get annoyed with the craftsmen. There is some unforeseen expenditure. You suffer delays because of bad weather. And your bank is perhaps not as helpful that you initially thought it would be. But in the end, once you have moved in, you are relieved and happy.

As you know, the European Council will meet in Brussels next week in order to finalize the common positions of the EU on the hard core of the accession negotiations. Between the meeting in Brussels and the European Council in Copenhagen in December we will continue to have intensive and, no doubt, difficult negotiations. But the struggle about thorny details should not allow us to forget that we are approaching a step which will be considered a milestone in the History of Europe.

As a Spaniard, I remember very well the long and sometimes frustrating transition of my country from candidate to full member status. Spain too came out of a long period of authoritarian rule and placed the hope of its renewed democracy in membership of the European Community. Nearly seventeen years after Spain's accession, I can only tell you: It is worth the effort. In economic terms, in political terms, in terms of the society in general. And last but not least in terms of international influence.

To put it in the words of the Polish political writer Adam Krzeminski:

"For the first time in several hundred years, Poland's geographical situation is no longer a handicap, but an opportunity."

II.

Poland's traditional attachment to the defense of European values makes it a natural frontrunner of the European Common Foreign and Security Policy.

By the way, CFSP is the EU policy with the highest popular support, even in countries which sometimes may hesitate on further steps of European integration. Europeans may differ on a lot of things, but not on the strong conviction that Europe has to be the safe haven of democracy and peace.

In this respect, the global role of Europe has reached a watershed:

For centuries, Europe was the scene for conflict between changing alliances. Europe, for all its power and civilization in the world, was deeply disunited. Moreover, Europe exported its rifts and quarrels to other parts of the globe. In the 20th century, two World Wars were started in Europe. The continent suffered the dreadful experience of Nazi oppression and the confinement of its Eastern half in Communist dictatorship. Many brave Poles paid a dreadful price in the struggle to restore or to preserve Poland's traditions of freedom and human rights. I rejoice in the fact that Poland is on the threshold of joining a Union committed to the defense and promotion of those same values of freedom and human rights.

Today, the European continent is for the first time in History a net exporter of peace and stability.

We are no longer in a situation where we have to fear savage attacks by our neighbours. Our views may still differ, but we solve our differences peacefully within given institutional structures.

Even in Southeastern Europe, where awful crimes against humanity were committed only a few years ago, peace has its chance. Of course, we need to remain vigilant. We have to explain and to warn again and again that nationalism and the manipulation of ethnic differences breed conflict. We have to demonstrate the enormous benefits in terms of wealth and stability of tearing barriers down. But we can be confident that Europe is now clearly beyond the point when security threats came from European neighbors, and cumbersome military capacities had to be built up in order to keep those neighbors in check.

III.

Today, the challenges and the responsibilities of European foreign and security policy are becoming increasingly global.

This has nothing to do with the old imperialist temptations of European powers in the past. Nor with what some my call a new humanitarian interventionism.

Our role in the world is, on the one hand, the logical consequence of our own interests. Europe's wealth and stability depend at least in part on what is happening beyond our borders, in the Eurasian region, in the Middle East, on the south bank of the Mediterranean and elsewhere. Global markets have brought us enormous opportunities. But globalization has also made us more vulnerable insofar as we depend on the good functioning of far-reaching communication, transport and energy networks.

Our role is also linked to the perception of the European success story. In the eyes of the world, we are not just a giant in terms of economic wealth but also a unique example in terms of political stability, co-operation and integration. Let us not be afraid to admit that, in the eyes of many, Europe is a model, a reason for hope.

Whether we want it or not, Europe is a powerful factor in international relations and will become even more so after enlargement. The reunification of Europe has enormous geopolitical consequences. When all current candidate countries are EU members, the EU will have a population of 500 million; it will share borders with Belarus, Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Iran, Iraq and Syria.

The threats to European security seem to be less frightening today than in the days of the Cold War. However, the new challenges are perhaps more complex and more difficult to foresee than the old ones.

New security threats are emerging from the gray zones of the sub-state level, from failed states and transnational fanaticism.

11 September has been called the nightmare of globalization. But unfortunately, the nightmare is not over. The terrible attack in Indonesia last weekend demonstrates pitilessly that international terrorism continues to be a real danger.

IV.

Responding to these new challenges is not easy. We have to react energetically against aggression, and the more so if aggression is directed against innocent people.

But we have also to analyse and to address where those threats spring from. The causes of conflict, of extremism, of terrorism are complex.

Poverty is certainly a factor. Poverty promotes envy and hatred. The EU and its Member States have always sought to share the benefits that peace and prosperity brought to them.

The Union and its Member States together represent more than half of all financial aid to developing countries. This aid takes a variety of forms: grants, loans, technical and humanitarian assistance. It has sometimes to be recalled that even the financial assistance paid out by international institutions like the IMF or the World Bank is to a very large extent European money. The US is the largest single member country in these institutions, but the EU is the largest payer.

This does not mean that we could not be more generous. We certainly should be more generous, and the EU has subscribed to the commitment of the Monterrey Conference last March to make finally significant steps towards increasing development assistance.

When speaking about development we must also tackle the issue of the sustainability of development in terms of the environment. Shall we wait until the lack of drinking water becomes a serious source of conflict? The EU is a driving force when it comes to sustainable development, the heritage we will transmit to future generations. We would have preferred to go further at the Johannesburg Summit, but others still refrained from recognising the scope of the problem.

It is a conventional wisdom that ethnic and religious dividing lines are often at the heart of conflict. However, a researcher from the World Bank has claimed a bit provokingly that most civil wars in the last fifty years did not break out because of ethnic or religious heterogeneity but because of potential economic gains for warlords. Conflict can be a profitable business for those who fuel nationalist and xenophobic sentiments.

Security is nowadays a much broader notion than it used to be. This is to some extent an advantage for the European Union. The EU is an organization covering a broad range of issues and policies. It can react to a variety of different aspects of a security challenge.

This is quite obvious with regards to the fight against terrorism. After the 11 September, the EU could carry forward very quickly initiatives in different fields: the fight against money laundering, rules for extradition of suspected criminals, the strengthening of Europol, insurance arrangements for the particularly affected airlines sector. We focused also on anti-terrorist co-operation as an important element of our relations with third countries.

V.

However, I admit that the set of foreign policy instruments at the EU's disposal is still incomplete at this stage. With the Treaty of Amsterdam, the EU defined its operational scope for a security and defense policy, the so-called Petersberg tasks. These tasks include humanitarian missions and rescue operations, peacekeeping and peacemaking operations.

After my appointment as High Representative for CFSP and the European Council in Helsinki the concrete work began. The preparatory structures for civilian and military crisis management are in place and active. The identification of appropriate military and civilian capabilities is making good progress. A first stage of operationality was reached at the end of last year. The first EU crisis management operation will be the Police Mission in Bosnia as from the beginning of next year. A EU peacekeeping mission could become reality quite quickly as soon as the single outstanding political problem between two NATO Member States is solved. A European rapid deployment force of 60.000 soldiers will be operational from next year.

An important and encouraging result of the last three years was also the greater visibility and the improved co-ordination of EU action in crisis regions.

Macedonia is a good example. The country had moved close to the abyss of civil war. But we did not want to repeat our mistakes from the past. We bundled our capacities, the Commission, the Member States, the Special representative in Skopje and myself. We assumed EU leadership for crisis management and conflict prevention in a region close to our borders. We co-operated constructively with other actors like NATO and OSCE in order to reach our common goal: To stabilize the situation. I think we did also a good job in putting Macedonians themselves in front of their responsibilities. In recent elections, the people of Macedonia proved their ability to practice democratic change. This is good news, we need no benevolent protectorates in the Balkans.

One cannot speak about challenges in international relations without addressing the Middle East. As you know this is an old conflict with a very specific constellation where no external actor, not even the key US player, has been able to provide effective crisis management so far. The EU is playing an increased and constructive role in the "Quartet" together with the UN, the US and Russia. We have submitted a plan for the period between now and the end of 2005 for getting the peace process on the rails again.

These examples of involvement in major international issues show that the EU is not crowding out anybody else, but that it's aim is to create added value.

We believe that multilateral institutions and the rule of law are the key to peace and stability in the world.

• That is why we want to help and strengthen the United Nations.
  
  
• That is why we give full support to the International Criminal Court.
  
  
• That is why we want to increase the effectiveness of multilateral regimes of ban or non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

It is sometimes necessary, in particular in front of Central European audiences, to disperse concerns about some sort of rivalry between NATO and EU. A few weeks ago, the Head of State of a country which is on the verge of joining both EU and NATO asked me if the possible creation of a NATO rapid reaction force suggested by the US would mean a duplication of the necessary effort in relation to the EU crisis management force. I could give the re-assuring answer that no European country can afford two armies. The bulk of NATO effort will remain collective defense. A majority of present and future EU Member States has conferred their collective defense to NATO as the most effective security organization in European History.

When it comes to crisis management beyond our borders, the required capabilities can be used over the whole range in either EU or NATO or (most likely) a combined context.

For Europe's Foreign and Security Policy, EU and NATO are no substitutes, but complementary.

VI.

You will perhaps miss in my address here today some references to the institutional future of European foreign policy. If you read certain newspaper articles you could get the impression that it is more important which politician is getting what job than how the work in favor of peace and security is done. I must confess that I am a bit agnostic about institutions, bodies and persons. This is for the European Convention, the future Intergovernmental Conference and future European Councils to judge.

What counts for me is that European Foreign and Security Policy advances

• in terms of effectiveness of its conception and implementation
  
  
• in terms of credibility for its partners in the world
  
  
• in terms of legitimacy in the eyes of the Union's citizens.

I am convinced that Poland will make a valuable contribution to this process. Your experience and outstanding credibility will help to build bridges from the European Union to the East. Your untiring commitment to freedom and human rights will help others to develop democratic values and political culture.

I am sure that the institute you are creating today will help guarantee that Poland's future contributions will be of an equally high quality as in the past.

The European house of the future will also have Polish architects.

Let me express my best wishes for the work of the Diplomatic Academy of the Republic of Poland.

Thank you very much for your attention.

| Top |

Advanced search