09 April 1998
(Letter to the Editor in The Washington Post April 7) (590) (The following Letter to the Editor written by Alexander Vershbow, Ambassador to the U.S. Mission to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization in Brussels, appeared in The Washington Post on April 7, 1998. The letter is in the public domain, and there are no restrictions on use.) Critics have sought to give the impression that serious debate about NATO enlargement has never taken place and that the United States and its allies have failed to address important questions about Russia and the future security environment in Europe. More than 1,000 articles published during the past year and a half have covered all aspects of NATO's evolving role. More than 300 conferences on NATO enlargement have been held in Europe and North America, including several in Russia. Twelve hearings before Congress in the past six months -- with more than 550 pages of testimony -- have explored the details of NATO's mission and membership and examined arguments from every point on the political spectrum. Critics charge that NATO enlargement will poison relations with Russia. This might be true if NATO were seeking to isolate Russia, but the opposite is the case. Through the Partnership for Peace and the newly established NATO-Russia Permanent Joint Council, NATO has created a network of security cooperation that has engaged all the states of Europe -- even former neutrals. The new NATO gives Moscow a chance to move away from the old Soviet pattern of confrontation to one of real partnership in Europe. NATO-Russian relations are better and show more promise today than they have at any time in the past 50 years. They encompass everything from planning for joint action in civil disasters to joint military operations in Bosnia. And they are still developing. How counterproductive it would be if we undercut Boris Yeltsin's courageous decision to cooperate with NATO by bowing to the pressure of Russian hard-liners. That would strengthen the anti-democratic elements in Russia and encourage the belief that the Allies, in the face of Moscow's bullying, had returned Central Europe to a gray zone of instability and limited sovereignty. As we work to adapt NATO to better fit the security environment of the next century, we understand that we must preserve the essential feature that has made this the most successful alliance in history -- the integrated military structure and its capacity for collective defense. The three new members we have invited will significantly improve the alliance's defense capabilities. And having so recently regained their freedom after decades of totalitarian oppression, they can be counted on to stand with us, not just in defense of NATO territory but when the values we share are threatened -- as they did recently during the confrontation with Iraq. In postponing the vote on ratification for several weeks, Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott declared that his intention was to "get a focus on the issue." It is proper to ensure a fair debate of the issue, but as Sen. Jesse Helms noted in sending the bill to the floor of the Senate, now is the time to act. No one who favors democracy should want to keep the lines of security drawn in Europe where Stalin marked them in 1945. NATO enlargement is the right policy for the United States and the right policy for the future of democracy in Europe. Alexander Vershbow, Ambassador U.S. Mission to NATO Brussels