EDITORIAL: The NATO nexus (03/02/97)

EDITORIAL

The NATO nexus

"We are opposed to NATO enlargement. Our task now is to stall it as long as possible," President Boris Yeltsin said last week. Other Russian officials have accused NATO of harboring a secret "anti-Moscow" agenda. Both comments reveal just how nervous Russia is about NATO's eastward expansion.

So, it is not surprising that Russia is doing everything it can to halt NATO before it reaches its borders. Some of the most recent examples include the warning issued in mid-February by the president's office to all three Baltic states - who are not even in the first tier of states eligible for membership - that their membership in NATO would create a "serious barrier" and would have a "most negative impact" on long-term cooperation. Russia, you see, would prefer that the Baltic states serve as a buffer zone against NATO expansion. As well, Poland's Internal Affairs Ministry reported in mid-February that Russian secret agents are preparing provocations to sabotage Poland's efforts to join both NATO and the European Union. As regards Ukraine, Russia has lately started to accuse NATO of trying to drive a wedge between the two states.

But, the West is firmly committed to expansion. And - Russian opposition notwithstanding - NATO will expand. The decision will be made in July in Madrid on how many countries will be invited to join NATO by 1999, when the alliance observes its 50th anniversary.

At the same time as NATO considers enlargement, it is looking to sign a separate charter with Russia to allay the latter's fears. During her recent European tour Secretary of State Madeleine Albright stressed that today's NATO is not the NATO of the Cold War. She gave two proposals: a NATO-Russia Joint Council that would serve as a forum for discussion and consultation on European security, peacekeeping and cooperation in the realms of terrorism and the environment; and a NATO-Russian military unit that could be used for peacekeeping but with a permanent command structure. But for Russia that is not enough. Russia seeks a charter on security relations that would have a "binding mandatory charter," according to Russian Foreign Affairs Minister Yevgenii Primakov. That position, however, is quite rightly rejected by Washington as, in essence, it gives Russia a veto over the alliance's military activities.

Ukraine, meanwhile, will have its own special deal with NATO - one that, as was underlined by a U.S. congressional delegation headed by Sen. William Roth (who also happens to be the president of the North Atlantic Assembly) is not dependent on any agreement with Russia. "Ukraine is not being held hostage to a Russian charter," he stated in Kyiv. That must have been good news to Ukrainians as Antin Buteiko, first vice minister for foreign affairs, was recently quoted in The Wall Street Journal as expressing trepidation that U.S.-Russian bargaining might produce a Yalta II - a repeat of the 1945 Yalta Conference that gave Stalin a free hand in Eastern and Central Europe.

Security is the main reason Ukraine welcomes NATO's eastward expansion. As Ambassador Yuri Shcherbak noted recently, "We will have 7,500 kilometers of mutual borders with member-states if the next tier become members." And these are borders with good neighbors and allies. "We support Russia's relations with NATO, but we do not want to be left in the gray zone of security," he underlined.

The new Russia, should be willing to accept a new NATO. Or to put it another way, let us quote Zbigniew Brzezinski: "NATO expansion will help a democratic Russia and hurt an imperialistic Russia."

| Home Page |