As costmary an outgoing NATO ambassador holds a personal farewell speech during the last Council meeting. In his speech Ambassador Traavik touched upon several areas where Norway has made a particular effort over the last years (the Balkans, disarmament and raising NATO’s profile).
Below is the speech made by Ambassador Traavik in the Council on 30 June.
-------------------------------------
Many thanks for your kind and generous words, secretary general.
My time is nearly up, and what a great time it has been. I would even add a word which is rarely mentioned in this room: what fun it has been - for the most part, anyway.
Being a part of the tight-knit NATO community has been a privilege and a pleasure.
Over the last four years we have achieved significant results and witnessed milestone events.
One of the first, and to me one of the most poignant, was the decision at the 2006 riga summit to invite Bosnia-Herzegovina, Montenegro, and Serbia to join the partnership for peace.
And for someone with a long-standing involvement in the Western Balkans, the Bucharest decision to bring Albania and Croatia into the alliance was a memorable occasion in the true sense of the word.
But the absense of FYR Macedonia at this table underscores something which colleagues have heard me say before: NATO, and the cause of security and stability in Europe, has unfinished business in the Western Balkans.
I hope and trust that the alliance will remain committed to the Euro-Atlantic destiny of this region, and that it will have the clarity of vision and the sense of historic urgency to bring the nations of the Western Balkans as close to the alliance as possible, as quickly as possible.
Let me briefly highlight two other issues on which the Norwegian delegation, under my watch, has – in all modesty – has made a difference.
First, I am pleased that we have played a role in raising NATO’s profile and ensuring its relevance in our own countries. Our point was not that there should be less emphasis on operations. Afghanistan obviously remains our number one priority.
Rather, we were concerned that, in order to remain strong and relevant, nato also needed to pay more attention to its core tasks. Today, two years later, i think there is broad if not universal support for this view around this table, as reflected also in the report of the albright group.
Second, I am pleased that, in close cooperation with our German friends and other likeminded allies, we have played a role in raising NATO’s profile in arms control, disarmament and non-proliferation.
To be sure, NATO is not a disarmament organisation. It is a military alliance, the core purpose of which is to safeguard the security and territorial integrity of its member states. To this end a strong military is obviously indispensible. In a dangerous and unpredictable world, the alliance needs to remain strong.
But security and stability can and must be shored up also by non-military means, including arms control, disarmament and non-proliferation. I can think of no better presentation of this argument than president Obama’s 2009 Prague speech.
We are indeed fortunate to be working with an american administration, and an American NATO ambassador, strongly committed to multilateral arms control and disarmament processes as a means of achieving a safer world.
For the rest, i will resist the temptation to regale you with my musings about the great political issues facing the alliance. I hope that, after four years, you have a fair idea about where my government and i stand. If not, it is obviously too late to do anything about it.
Let me instead use the remaining minutes before your minds start wandering and your eyes start glazing over to share with you a few reflections about the functioning of the nac, as i have seen it.
The NAC is obviously at the heart of the alliance. It is the only body explicitly referred to in the Washington treaty. If the council doesn’t function optimally, the effects will be felt elsewhere in the organization.
On the whole, i think, the NAC is doing quite well. This is largely attributable to the collegiality and friendship that hold us together and which to my mind are key to the success of the alliance. But at the same time we need to be vigilant about developments that could undermine our cohesion and effectiveness.
First, during my time here there have been periodic attempts to cut corners by settling key issues among a few allies and behind the proverbial closed doors. This may be understandable in view of the time it sometimes takes to reach consensus at 28, but it is also divisive and hence likely to back-fire.
George Orwell’s observation that some animals are more equal than others is of course not completely irrelevant at NATO. However, the notion that all around this table have the same rights and obligations is fundamental to the good functioning of the alliance and as such should be diligently adhered to.
Second, I am uneasy about the increased resort to senior officials groups. In some exceptional cases capitals-based groups can serve a useful purpose. The command structure may be a case in point. But i am concerned that they can be seen as an abdication of responsibility on the part of the NAC.
Like others, I came here vested with full powers to deal on behalf of my government with any issue before the council. And i assume that we all have unlimited access to ministers if need be.
Hence, it is hard to see why the nac should not normally itself be able to perform the tasks given to capitals-based groups, in accordance with the role set out for it in the washington treaty.
Third, of late we have spent an inordinate amount of time on matters that are at best inconsequential, not to say trivial. Committee travel comes to mind. The cost of the time and resources devoted to this issue in recent weeks is truly amazing.
To me the issue of committee travel illustrates a very fundamental point: although the financial crisis is real and savings can and must be made, savings are not and cannot be an end in and of themselves.
To my mind we have come perilously close in recent weeks and months to behaving as if they are just that. We must take care lest we irreparably impair our ability to fulfil the tasks we set for the alliance. Or to paraphrase anders: lest we end up cutting muscle and not just flab.
Hence,we would all do well to bear in mind that nato’s common-funded budget lines amount to as little as a third of a per cent of the sum total of allies’ combined defense expenditure. The bottom line is that the alliance is not an automobile dealership. It is the linchpin of Euro-Atlantic security.
So let us get our priorities right: first we must determine what it is we want the alliance to accomplish, and then we must come up with the necessary resources. It cannot be the other way around.
It is time to conclude. But before doing so, thanks are due, to all those who in one way or another have contributed to making the last four years the most rewarding and satisfying experience of my professional life.
Thanks first of all to our secretary general, for his strong leadership and keen sense of political direction. In particular, anders, I applaud your determined efforts to mend our somewhat tattered relations with Russia.
This is an important task, but not an easy one. As lord robertson put it, “it will involve walking through glue at times”. But anders’ illustrious predecessor went on to say that history would judge the alliance harshly if it let the opportunity to strengten relations with russia slip. I agree with that, anders, and so, i think, do you.
Thanks are due also to my friends and colleagues of the nac. You are all great, and you are all great in different ways, which is why the NAC is such an interesting and amusing place to be. I have deeply appreciated your friendship, cooperation and good humour, as well as your indulgence when i spoke too often or too long, or both.
Let me also thank deputy Secretary General Claudio Bisogniero, whom I first met in this very building more than twenty years ago,for his friendship and support, as well as our outstanding chairman of the MC, Giampaolo di Paola, for his consistently wise military advice.
Thanks are due also to our able and hard-working international secretariat and our excellent interpreters, as well as to the dedicated and loyal members of the IMS. NATO would not amount to much without the HQ staff. They are our most important resource, and we must take good care of them, not least by being responsible and predictable employers.
Throughout my tenure, I have been blessed to have an outstanding team at the Norwegian delegation, headed by my deputy and old friend Øystein Bø. I thank them for their professionalism, dedication, creativity and unswerving loyalty, for having supported me so effectively and for bearing with my impatience and excitability.
Let me end by paying tribute to our brave men and women in uniform, who on a daily basis find themselves in harm’s way, who must be prepared to make the ultimate sacrifice and - regrettably and tragically - with increasing frequency do. We Norwegians were reminded of this two days ago, when four of our finest soldiers lost their lives in Northern Afghanistan. Our grief is profound, but our resolve remains unwavering.
Secretary-general, colleagues,
I will miss this place and all of you. Thank you, and goodbye."