Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,

I am extremely delighted to visit NATO Defense College today, which, with all due respect to all the other institutions, is undoubtedly the key academic institution of the Alliance. That has been demonstrated by its impressive history alone: the idea of such a college had originated with President Eisenhower and has been put into effect soon after the establishment of NATO itself. Looking back at its history, one gets an impression as if it reflects the history of the Alliance itself. Therefore, I have no doubts that the College is going to remain the forge of experts and the source of ideas on how to enhance our security.

There is no secret that as a former Minister of National Defence, I still feel a certain bond with the defence matters. Today I would like to share my insights about some of the new security challenges (for, there would not be sufficient time today to overview all of them) for the Euro-Atlantic, or, perhaps, even global community in a volatile geostrategic environment. The transatlantic family has markedly changed for the better over the recent 50 years; however, the final 20 years have been of special significance. German reunification following the opening of the Berlin Wall, dissolution of the Warsaw Pact, the collapse of the Soviet Union, and withdrawal of the Red Army from the Central and Eastern states as well as the Baltic States marked the end of the Cold War, which was not “the greatest political impediment” but rather the era of democracy, prosperity, security, and stability. A dozen of European nations, including Lithuania, have resolved to live in freedom and to consolidate the Euro-Atlantic community and its values. However, that was not, as Fukuyama claimed to be, the end of history with a happy and glorious ending.

We have been hearing more and more frequently about the development of geopolitical and geostrategic environment of the international relations. We must acknowledge that there are plenty of challenges on the globalisation menu: fight against terrorism is going on, concerns about nuclear arms development and climate change are growing, one could note a certain identity crisis of the State and international organisations; ethnic, religious, and military conflicts arise over and over again, and the list is supplemented with energy ad cyber security issues as well as manifestations of crisis of the global economy.

In this context, the ever more aggressive Russia’s foreign policy, which often disrespects opinions and rights of the others, causes great concern. Do not get me wrong, we do not have anti-Russian sentiment; we have quite a number of examples of good practical and efficient cooperation that could be developed if the ball was on our side; however, we cannot ignore and not take adequate decisions in the face of the use of the tool of energy supplies to the foreign policy ends, efforts to twist historical facts, incompliance with the international commitments, disproportionate demonstration of military power, and military aggression vis-à-vis small states.

Russia’s recent statements and actions demonstrate its intent to destroy, not to strengthen, the institutional framework of the Euro-Atlantic space, which is based on security cooperation and has already proved its efficiency. We can also see Russia’s efforts to drop its commitments to respect the sovereignty of its neighbours and ensure adherence to the European-wide standards of democracy and human rights. Today, relations with Russia are not “business as usual”.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

We should not, however, allow to shatter the unity of democratic Euroatlantic structures. I am deeply convinced that cooperation-based security should remain the guiding principle of different European organisations and trans-national relations, while Russia‘s professed “balance of power” philosophy has no place in the sphere of international relations. The existing institutional framework of Euroatlantic security is the backbone of safety and stability in Europe, with no other practical alternatives, to my view. Moscow should be prevented from a unilateral violation of the CFE regime and retraction of the assumed commitments with respect to the sovereignty of Moldova and Georgia and their territorial integrity.

EU response to Russia’s military aggression against George was fast and operative. The European Union demonstrated solidarity and determination by sending more than 200 observers to Georgia in a very short period of time. The deployment of the observers’ mission is a good piece of news for Georgia, its stability and future. Other good news is the new NATO-Georgia Commission. The international community must do everything that the August events in Georgia should never happen again in the proximity of the European Union. Russia has really overstepped “the thin red line” and violated the fundamental principles of peaceful co-existence, good neighbourhood and mutual respect.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

The crisis in Georgia has once again proved the old truth: transatlantic community unites in the face of serious challenges. Our strength lies in unity. Therefore I call unto you to stay unanimous in the process of making strategic decisions. I think Georgia and Ukraine deserve to be offered the NATO’s Membership Action Plan (MAP). I emphasize that it is neither a NATO membership nor a threat to someone. The Georgian and Ukrainian societies and politicians will eventually decide on the reforms they want and may introduce, but, in the meantime, they should be given a trusted shoulder to lean on. The upgrading of EU relations with Transcaucasian countries, Ukraine and Moldova provides a necessary impetus for further democratic and economic reforms and consolidation of these states.

In this context, we should not overlook enlargement of the European Union. In the immediate vicinity of the EU there exists a number of states that are knocking on the EU door and willing to join the European club: Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine in the east, Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina in the Western Balkans, Turkey further in the south – all the above states belong to Europe in the historical and cultural sense of the word. Those countries are a battlefield of ideas and expansion of democracy. Democracy cannot be built in a day. The purposeful efforts that we put into strengthening their civic societies and political institutions must be backed by a firm provision that democratic, stable and prosperous neighbours are one of the European top priorities. Though some signs of enlargement fatigue seem to be seen, I encourage you to resist this political fatigue.

Apart from geostrategic challenges, I want to draw your close attention to the new challenges that the Baltic States currently face. Political scientists have observed that the post-cold War concept of security has widened by including cyberspace and energy aspects. Cyber hooliganism has acquired virtual terrorism traits. Cyber attacks against Estonian government sites in 2007 or against Lithuania, Ukraine and Georgia in 2008 have shown the cross border nature of cyber attacks and threats. To this end, we need to adopt a coordinated approach to cyber defence and a multilateral response to this constantly growing threat within the NATO framework.

Life has been dictating new realia in energy security, too. Lithuania, along with other Baltic states, still happens to be an energy island in the EU. “Spiritually” – I mean, politically, institutionally, legally, and in terms of identity – we are Europeans and are part of the Western world, while “in flesh” – that is, in terms of energy links – we still belong to the post-Soviet block. I say it openly, as I know the way to change the current status. Lithuania has been pursuing energy security, economic competitiveness as well as sustainability. In 2009, following the decommissioning of the Ignalina Nuclear Power Plant, we will inevitably be bound to power supply from the East or to power made possible by increased gas import from a sole supplier: Russia. Electricity import routs are via Belarus, which doe not add to our security. Therefore, Lithuania seeks closer integration in the EU energy market through power bridges with Sweden and Poland, future LPG terminal, an increased share of the renewables in total energy balance, and energy efficiency programmes. We would not like to refuse a possibility of a slow decommissioning of the Ignalina Nuclear Power Plant as the last option ensuring reinforced national energy security. We trust that Euro-Atlantic community will understand the sensitivity of the Baltic situation and show solidarity in deeds, not only words.

We seem to be doomed to live in the world of changes. Sometimes I find the life of states or nations similar to that of the people. We become fitter in the face of challenges. What does not kill us, makes us stronger. Besides, we have to admit that global challenges call for global responsibility. I believe that the transatlantic community has enough will and expertise to turn problems into possibilities which will add to our security. Thank you for your attention. I will be happy to take your questions now.