"September 11 delivered a central lesson -- not just to Americans but also to Russia and our NATO partners -- that we all need our friends and allies more than ever in an increasingly dangerous world," says Alexander Vershbow, U.S. Ambassador to the Russian Federation and a former U.S. ambassador to NATO. "Today I believe we are witnessing a dramatic redefinition of the relationship between the West and Russia, based on a recognition of our common security interests and our shared commitment to the values of democracy, the free market, and the rule of law."

The past dozen years have been extraordinary ones for the development of democracy, human rights, economic liberty, and free markets around the world. But the events of September 11 remind us that not everyone shares our belief in or commitment to these values. We were reminded on September 11 that the values and principles we live by are also ones that we may be called on to shed blood to defend.

A new set of dangers today -- among them extremism and global terrorism -- imperils our future as democratic nations. There is no question that we have underestimated the magnitude of these new challenges for our generation -- perhaps because, after the end of the Cold War, the world seemed -- and indeed was -- a vastly safer place than it had been for a very long time.

For Americans and, I believe, for the rest of the world, the terrorist attacks against the centers of U.S. financial and military power and the deliberate murder of thousands of innocent civilians changed all that.

September 11 delivered a central lesson -- not just to Americans but also to Russia and our NATO partners -- that we all need our friends and allies more than ever in an increasingly dangerous world.

Today I believe we are witnessing a dramatic redefinition of the relationship between the West and Russia, based on a recognition of our common security interests and our shared commitment to the values of democracy, the free market, and the rule of law.

Much has been written about the close personal relationships that [Russian] President [Vladimir] Putin has established with Western leaders such as President George W. Bush, British Prime Minister Tony Blair and German Chancellor Gerhard Schr��er. The new relations between the West and Russia that I am referring to, however, are not simply a matter of personal chemistry among world leaders, but an appreciation of the fact that the future of every nation in the European-Atlantic community is intertwined with that of every other. This fact has certainly been driven home to us by the events of the past several months.

Indeed, as we begin the 21st century, it is clear that all of our countries -- in North America and across Europe -- face similar challenges to their security. These include transnational threats such as global terrorism and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, as well as continued dangers flowing from regional instability, militant nationalism, and "failed states." All of us, and all of the multinational institutions on which we rely, must continue to adapt to meet these threats.

The NATO Alliance transformed itself over the past decade -- taking on new missions and new members, and developing a range of tools for extending security and stability through cooperation and partnership in the political and military spheres. But September 11 was a reminder that NATO will need to continue to redefine its mission to cope more effectively with new threats, and -- even more importantly -- that the Alliance must equip itself with the capabilities needed to fulfill that mission. NATO must also continue the complex effort to forge cooperative links with the European Union, given the EU's growing role in foreign and security policy and its comparative advantages over NATO in some areas. But all the allies recognize that NATO's efforts to deal effectively with 21st century threats will be far more successful if they are accompanied by closer cooperation with Russia.

Many observers have referred to the September 11 terrorist attacks as a turning point in the nature of relations between the West and Russia. But I believe that even before September 11, President Putin had made a strategic choice: he had decided that Russia's future security, economic growth, and political influence could best be assured through closer relations with Europe and the United States, rather than through the competitive, confrontational approach of the Soviet past.

I think that it is more useful to see the September 11 attacks as lending urgency to efforts by the West and Russia to build a stronger, more solid partnership. In the U.S.-Russian bilateral relationship, Russia's valuable support for the anti-terror coalition was accompanied by an acceleration of work on a broad range of issues: deep cuts in strategic nuclear weapons, developing a new strategic framework to deal with new threats, efforts to expand our economic and commercial relations and accelerate Russia's entry into the World Trade Organization, and expanded cooperation on many political and regional issues.

The strategic choice by President Putin to join the anti-terrorist coalition has had a dramatic effect on Western views of Russia. His decision made clear that the United States and other Western democracies could work with Russia not just on the basis of tactical necessity, but by following what President Putin has called the "logic of common interests."

Russia's relations with NATO should also reflect this logic of common interests. NATO and Russia have had some success in their first efforts at cooperation over the past decade, especially through our joint peacekeeping efforts in the Balkans. But I think that both sides would agree that our cooperation has not fully lived up to the promise embodied in the NATO-Russia Founding Act signed in 1997. Our common task is to get the relationship right this time: to devise new mechanisms for cooperation, coordinated action, and joint decisions that can integrate Russia more closely in NATO's work, while respecting NATO's and Russia's prerogatives to act alone if necessary.

The idea discussed between Presidents Bush and Putin at their Summit meeting last November, and endorsed by NATO and Russian Foreign Ministers a month later, is quite simple: to create a new forum in which NATO's 19 members and Russia work together as a group of 20 equal partners on issues where our shared interests make it sensible to do so. Areas for joint action "at 20" might include counter-terrorism, non-proliferation, or responding to future regional conflicts. They might also include concrete projects that build a climate of cooperation and transparency between NATO and Russia -- politically and militarily.

We hope that the proposed new mechanism will be operational before the May meeting of NATO Foreign Ministers in Reykjavik and before President Bush's visit to Moscow and St. Petersburg. It will be a qualitative step beyond today's 19-plus-one format, in which NATO always formulates its position before engaging with its Russian partners. The concept now will be to formulate positions on specific issues and projects through early engagement of the 20 nations meeting together.

This NATO-Russia Council "at 20" can potentially lead to a fundamental and historic change in NATO's dealings with Russia -- a move toward a more substantial partnership and genuine collaboration. Of course, it is not back-door membership nor does it mean a veto for Russia over NATO's own decisions. A better metaphor would be to view it as an "alliance with the Alliance" -- a joint venture between two powerful, independent entities in areas of mutual interest. While working more closely together, NATO and Russia will maintain their prerogative of independent decision and action. It is, however, our hope that -- through concrete joint projects, joint discussions, and eventually even joint decisions -- NATO and Russia will more and more be able to take responsibility together for dealing with some of the new challenges to security that threaten peace and stability in Europe and beyond.

For it to work, Russian diplomacy will need to acquire the spirit of flexibility and compromise that is essential to reaching a consensus among nations with differing security perspectives and priorities. This is the way NATO works, but it has not always been a hallmark of Russia's approach to NATO in the past. Put simply, Russia still needs to overcome a legacy of mistrust and competition in its dealings with NATO. For its part, NATO needs to be more open and more flexible in taking Russia's views into account. What is crucial is that we get beyond the zero-sum relationship of the past and develop what we Americans like to call a win-win relationship.

The current war against international terrorism provides an obvious area in which we can put this new cooperative relationship to work. NATO and Russia must work together with other nations to counter terrorists who respect no national boundaries or alliances, and to prevent the spread of weapons of mass destruction that could give terrorists -- or states that support them -- an even greater capacity to attack our societies.

NATO and Russia are already working on a range of initiatives in the area of counter-terrorism, including the regular exchange of information and in-depth consultations on issues related to terrorist threats, civil-emergency planning, and the role of the military in combating terrorism. In the future, we hope that NATO and Russia can work on a common intelligence assessment of terrorist threats, and develop programs that enable NATO and Russian military forces to operate together in counter-terrorist operations.

Missile defense is another potentially fruitful area for NATO-Russia cooperation. All of our nations must face the fact that efforts to prevent the proliferation of technology for ballistic missiles and weapons of mass destruction have not been fully successful. NATO-Russia cooperation on missile defense would be a way to deprive rogue states of the ability to attack or blackmail us with long-range missiles equipped with WMD capable of attacking our cities or our deployed forces. This could include joint early warning, joint exercises, and even joint industrial development of missile defense systems.

Counter-terrorism and missile defense are just two examples of ways NATO and Russia can cooperate in support of our common interests. If our joint efforts are successful, NATO-Russia cooperation can become one of the central pillars of the global security system of the 21st century.

A stronger NATO-Russia partnership would complement NATO's other efforts over the past decade to extend security and stability across the entire Euro-Atlantic area through cooperation and integration in the political and military spheres. The establishment of the North Atlantic Cooperation Council, the Partnership for Peace, and the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council were important initiatives to this end, as was NATO's admission of new democracies willing to assume the full responsibilities of membership. We hope that a new spirit of cooperation "at 20" will help complete the historic process of Russia's full integration into the Euro-Atlantic community.

Russia and NATO -- working together as close partners with other freedom-loving nations of the world -- have the opportunity to make the decades ahead an era of peace and progress. This does not mean that there will not be problems that will test our relationship. There is continued concern, for instance, about the actions of Russian troops in Chechnya and recent steps that threaten the future of independent mass media in Russia.

Nevertheless, I believe there is a solid foundation for a new relationship between Russia and NATO. Our cooperation against terrorism and the ongoing talks about new areas of collaboration have created a dynamic in which we can seriously begin to think about Russia and NATO as allies in meeting the challenges of the 21st century. Our common challenge is to make this "alliance with the Alliance" a reality.

Back to top | Contents, U.S. Foreign Policy Agenda, March 2002 | IIP E-Journals | IIP Home