Following is a commentary of Mark Brzezinski, published in the Comment&Analysis section of Financial Times. Mark Brzezinski was director for south-east Europe on the National Security Council during the Clinton administration.
George W. Bush flew to Warsaw last June and declared that "the expansion of Nato has fulfilled Nato's promise. And that promise now leads eastward and southward, northward and onward."
That was a remarkable statement from a president who is not thought of as a great multilateralist. Was he speaking of Romania and Bulgaria? At least some Nato members believe he should have been. On February 13 in Istanbul, the foreign ministers of Greece and Turkey joined their counterparts from Romania and Bulgaria to declare that Nato's expansion of the zone of security and stability must include Romania and Bulgaria. This declaration is the practical application of Mr Bush's call for Nato to expand "from the Baltic to the Black Sea". That goal cannot be achieved without admitting at least one of these two south-east European countries.
In Prague in November, Nato will decide officially which nations will be invited to join the alliance. In Washington and other Nato capitals, the process of consideration is well under way. Membership of the Baltic states and Slovenia is all but guaranteed. Romania and Bulgaria do not know what fate awaits them but their commitment to embrace Nato's values and strategic vision is beyond doubt. They are the next order of business.
As November approaches, Europe and the US will turn to consider the southern dimension - but Nato members must do more than say "yes" or "no" to candidates. They must accept the challenge to study the candidates and make informed choices about who should join the alliance and why. There is growing consensus on both sides of the Atlantic that a larger Nato is desirable but there must be a more realistic examination of the assets that each aspirant nation brings.
Americans and Europeans will ask: who will make Nato stronger as a military alliance and as an embodiment of its members' common values? A thoughtful, objective answer must include Romania and Bulgaria.
Nato's expansion into south-eastern Europe would offer the transatlantic alliance the prospect of making progress in three priority areas: enhancing regional security; promoting stability and democracy; and fostering growth and integration.
First, Romanian and Bulgarian membership would enhance security because they are the biggest and most populous of the Nato aspirants and they have proved loyal partners in the conflicts in Bosnia and Kosovo and in the war against terrorism. Even now, they are providing support to Nato forces in central Asia. Romania has sent a military police platoon and a Her-cules C-130 aircraft to take part in the United Nations-mandated International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan. Bulgaria has provided airbase and overflight support.
They would also form a bulwark against the Black Sea region, serving Nato's traditional strategic interests and the pressing security needs of the alliance. And they would provide a fully contiguous link to Hungary, Turkey and Greece and would further shelter Italy, Spain and France.
Second, Romania and Bulgaria would strengthen regional stability and democracy and reduce potential for conflict. Romania, for example, is an established democracy and has reformed its military by halving the number of its troops and allotting 2.5 per cent of its gross domestic product to a modern force that would complement Nato forces. Romania has soberly examined its culture and embraced tolerance backed by law. It is dealing frankly with the grim history of past Romanian regimes' treatment of Jews and other ethnic minorities.
Last, looking south to Romania and Bulgaria would enable the alliance to foster growth and integration in what has so far been the missing piece of the alliance's European jigsaw. Nato enlargement has stabilised the economic environment in new member states and created opportunities for European and US companies.
South-eastern Europe is ripe for the same Nato-driven growth, which could help all the nations of the often war-ravaged region, including the Balkans. A growth rate of 1.6 per cent in 2000 and an estimated 4.8 per cent in 2001, according to the International Monetary Fund, gives Romania the second most dynamic GDP among European Union candidate states. The Romanian economy is expected to grow 4.6 per cent this year, the highest rate of growth in the region.
After September 11, Nato stated that an attack on one member was, in effect, an attack on all. With that, the alliance made manifest what has long been true: Nato today is a security organisation, not simply a defence alliance. Now it must embrace the opportunity that lies to the south in a wide, contiguous Nato - strong, free, forward-looking and confident in its future.
Send to Kindle
