What made NATO the greatest force for peace and stability in modern history.
Anders Fogh Rasmussen
Founding Chairman of Rasmussen Global and Founder of the Alliance of Democracies Foundation
Throughout my time as NATO Secretary General, this Defence College has always been an inspiration. It embodies the very purpose of NATO – to prepare our defences in the pursuit of peace, to invest in our leaders and our future, and to deepen bonds and friendships throughout our Alliance and with our partners.
Because - above all - NATO is much bigger than the sum of its parts. It’s not about its Secretary General, its Headquarters or its heads of state. NATO is an Alliance of people, brought together under a common purpose of promoting freedom, peace, and democracy.
It is an Alliance tied together by bonds of blood and water. Blood that our heroes and comrades have spilt defending our freedom. And water across an Atlantic Ocean that is bridged by our common values.
The NATO Defence College is almost as old as NATO itself. And the College’s evolution has followed the evolution of the NATO Alliance. Tomorrow’s conference asks whether – at 70 – NATO should retire. My answer is clear: No, a security alliance of democracies does not get to retire.
Times have changed – that is indisputable. However, NATO’s core mission is as relevant today as ever. And the work of this College is central to that mission.
In 2011, I had the privilege – as Secretary General – to address the College for its 60thanniversary celebration.
At the time, I suggested some of the future challenges that NATO would be called upon to tackle.
They included helping North Africa and the Middle East manage change, global terrorism, cyber and energy security.
The world of 2019 has moved on a lot from 2011.
Brexit, Syria, election meddling, China’s strategic challenge, technological disruption, internal disputes across the EU and the Atlantic.
It is easy to look at these challenges and to believe that the world is upside down. Indeed, in my view the world is on fire. But I have faith that we can right it again and douse the flames. We have an obligation to act.
Because freedom, peace, and security are not God-given rights. They are privileges that we defend every day.
Every time NATO’s obituary is written a new challenge arises for which it must develop a response – from the Cold War to the Balkans, Afghanistan, Libya and - today - revisionist powers deploying hybrid threats.
I believe the three basic principles to which we must recommit are:
- determined American leadership;
- transatlantic cooperation;
- and NATO’s role in nurturing a global alliance of democracies.
Let me start with the first – determined global American leadership.
In an ideal world, we would need no arms.
But sadly, that world exists only in the John Lennon song.
The world needs a policeman.
Because we’ve seen what happens when the US decides to step back – the bad guys step forward.
Look back at history.
The major calamities of the 20thcentury were preceded by periods of American isolationism.
In 1915, US President Woodrow Wilson delivered a speech declaring ‘America First’ as his justification for non-intervention in the First World War. 18 months later, Germany brought the war to America. In the 19 months that followed, 117,000 brave US soldiers lost their lives.
A generation later, US isolationism had returned, and the so-called America First Committee opposed US intervention in Europe’s war. Again, the enemy brought the fight to America, leading to the loss of 419,000 American lives, alongside the tens of millions who perished in World War Two.
It is facile to argue that US intervention comes with costs. All military action does. It can never be entered into lightly. But, we saw in the last century the costs that come from inaction.
Bad guys – dictators - do not stay in their neighborhood.
And we’ve seen the costs of inaction in recent years – not least in Syria. One of the greatest calamities of our generation.
With power comes responsibility and with hegemonic power comes the role of global defender of the world order. No other country has the reach, wealth and firepower to step up.
And the confluence of American greatness and relative global peace did not come about by accident.
Visionaries like Truman, Kennedy and Reagan built and sustained the foundations of an international rules-based order – that included the UN, GATT (not the WTO), and NATO.
That is what made America great, and restoring those foundations is what will make it great again.
But a strong America should also be able to rely on its transatlantic partners. That’s the second basic principle.
As NATO’s first Secretary General Lord Ismay once said, NATO’s mission was to “keep the Soviet Union out, the Americans in, and the Germans down.”
The Soviets were kept out. The Americans are still in. And - in terms of military spending - the Germans are too far down!
Today, I would summarize the purpose of NATO as to keep the Russians out, keep the Americans in and keep the Europeans engaged.
Sometimes, we lose the bigger picture on both sides of the Atlantic.
Because the measurement of our self-interest must not only be trade surpluses or defence spending, but our common ability to defend the freedom-loving alliance.
We united when the US was in its hour of need – 9/11. The only time NATO’s 70 years that Article 5 has been invoked.
I came to office as Prime Minister of Denmark a month after the start of War in Afghanistan.
Within weeks, Denmark had joined that war.
To me, there was no question about it. Our friend had been attacked. You cannot walk past on the other side of the street.
Denmark suffered the highest loss of life per capita within the coalition forces – 43 soldiers.
Why were we prepared to make such a sacrifice?
The Battle of Britain an RAF Squadron manned by Polish pilots carried a motto: ‘For your freedom and ours.”
And that is why we joined the war in Afghanistan – because our Allies’ freedom is also our own.
And the sacrifice that those brave men and women have made for our freedom must be honored every day.
-
And that brings me to the third basic principle – the role of NATO to sustain the global alliance of democracies.
Last year, my political foundation – the Alliance of Democracies Foundation – conducted the world’s biggest single poll into perceptions of democracy. The Democracy Perception Index.
The poll showed that – generally - people living in autocracies feel better served by their government than those living in democracies.
The alarm is ringing – and we cannot continue pressing the snooze button.
There are many reasons for this decline in democracy, including technology, outside spoilers, and the failure of our own mainstream politicians.
Technology has revolutionized our lives for the better and erased barriers between citizens, representatives and leaders. But it has also empowered malign actors.
Spoilers from Moscow and St Petersburg, Tehran and Beijing are seeking to meddle in our elections and exacerbate voters’ fears. Technology has removed the filters of mainstream media.
But we cannot blame democracy’s decline solely on Russian disinformation, or the failures of tech platforms.
Mainstream politicians should look in the mirror and ask how they – we - have failed as well.
Have they promised more than they could deliver? Have they refused to listen to concerns about immigration and living standards?
This should not be a blame game. We should only look to the past to learn lessons for the future.
Because, while NATO may be strong at 70, democracy is decaying around the world.
NATO Allies have a role to play here.
Yes, NATO is a military alliance. But it also represents a billion people from democratic states.
Only we have the collective strength to defend our norms and values.
Because Article 5 is important as an insurance policy against attack, but it cannot protect us from all of the creeping economic and political hazards.
Such as China’s efforts to revise the rules of international commerce or establish economic client states through state-backed strategic investment.
Or its takeover of 5G and the rules and standards of the next industrial revolution.
Not to mention Russia’s efforts to maintain European dependence on its gas supplies, aided naively by Berlin.
In facing these challenges and others, the world’s democracies must unite in defence of common values and wider interests.
This is why – as Secretary General – I sought to extend NATO’s cooperation with other major democracies – in particular Japan and Australia. But I think we should also focus on partnerships with India, South Korea, New Zealand and other democracies.
Because NATO is the only organization, other than the G7, that contains democracies alone.
The backbone of the world’s democracies must be stiffened. Democracies must not become subjugated to those who oppose our values, just for short term gains.
Democracies should discover the bigger picture, that if we stand together, our values will continue to prevail.
Because the desire for individual liberty is the strongest force in the world. If we put narrow interests first, we will be picked off one-by-one.
NATO allies have a responsibility to take a lead in defending these values. And to corral our democratic allies around the world.
-
Ladies and Gentlemen, The Western Alliance has shown that there are no insurmountable challenges - And no threat - we cannot face down by working together.
We face trials from within our Alliance, and dangers from without - in a world that is geopolitically on fire.
As these challenges and threats grow increasingly complex and hybrid in nature, we sometimes need to strip these discussions back to the core of our Alliance.
Why were we formed in the first place, and what made us so successful for all of these years?
- Determined US Global Leadership
- A Transatlantic family bond that transcends bickering
- And leadership of a global alliance of democracies.
These are the principles that sustained our freedom-loving family for seven decades.
If we stay true to them, I have no doubt that NATO will celebrate 70 more years of success, freedom and peace.
Thank you
Student.
3 年Anders Fogh Rasmussen
President at Corvus LLC
5 年Lets get real. NATO was designed because of fear that the Soviet Union might drive to the English Channel. No one thinks that now. The Russians are menace, a threat to security, ?but a much smaller menace than the USSR. Germany needs to pay its bills to make a modern NATO work. They refuse.?