170 likes | 353 Views
Partnership for Peace & Euro-Atlantic Integration. Arpad Hargita Deputy Director, NATO Departament Ministry of Foreign Affairs Hungary. Szeged, 29 Januárr, 2003. Why not alone? Why integration?. A small country - third way > gray zone The eastern modell - CE, EU, NATO
E N D
Partnership for Peace & Euro-Atlantic Integration Arpad Hargita Deputy Director, NATO Departament Ministry of Foreign Affairs Hungary Szeged, 29 Januárr, 2003
Why not alone? Why integration? • A small country - third way > gray zone • The eastern modell - CE, EU, NATO • Memberstates - big or small - have the same rights and perspectives (consensus) • One for all - all for one • National soveregnty and integration • Without work - no result
NATO-EAPC- PfP • NATO has no enemies only partners • EAPC: framework for consultation +cooperation • PfP: pragmatic military co-operation(contribution to peacekeeping by common planning, trainig and exercises, transparency at defence planning, budgeting, democratic controll)
Interest of Hungary • BH reintegrated to Regional and European structures • General conditions for stability improved • Key conditions for prosperity at place • Same level of security for the region • Accelerated integration process for BH • Lessons and experiences: do not repeat our mistakes
Partnership for Peace • Security of the Euro-Atlantic area is non divisible (“grey zones”: undesirable) • Common values, common actions • Joint responsibility for peace and stability • Transparency of plans, procedures, actions • Direct link to NATO (EAPC: copy intra-Alliance co-operation) • Inclusiveness, self-differentiation
Questions to be answered at the outset • Future status of the country (neutral / non aligned? allied? or?) • Purpose of PfP / EAPC membership: serve your future • Programmes to be built accordingly • Clear vision - better chance to be assisted • Decision made? Structure the steps
Requirements, conditions? • Basic commitments to Euro-Atlantic values • Similarity to UN, OSCE, CEI, other regional arrangements • Supposed to serve modernisation, reforms, stability, capability building • Effects the entire state & society • No silver bullet solution! May be long way
Early Hungarian Dilemmas • Neutrality? NATO membership? Third way? • To give up part of sovereignty? • Where are the enemies? • Too expensive to rebuild defence structures! • Is it an offer instead of membership? • Does it help if things go wrong in the neighbourhood?
A Hungarian Roadmap • Main objective of PfP membership - vision on the future • Plan defence reform - introduce capable leaders for implantation • Introduce civil control on the military • Separate the functions of different military organisations
A Hungarian Roadmap (2) • set up an interagency steering body - to guide the accession, lead the preparation, control the substance of participation, plan tasks, look after harmonisation of steps within different agencies of Government • Relevant units / departments to be identified in the Government agencies concerned • Prepare and man a mission in Brussels
A Hungarian Roadmap (3) • Legal: • Review the list of laws and other legal acts to be amended or drafted • Draft a decree on the tasks (projects) to be implemented on yearly basis • Build a training programme for military, civilians, politicians, support expert teams - takes years, but can get support from abroad
A Hungarian Roadmap (4) • Financial: • Allocate a budget for the projects - at least on yearly basis • Implement a planning and financing system according to PARP standards • Security • Identify the national contact point for co-operation with NATO (PfP)
The Aim of the Seminar • What PfP / EAPC is good for? (Still not an Aspirin!) • Help preparing decisions on the agenda of BH • Learn from You - good for NATO, HU • To see what neighbours can use • Strengthen mutual confidence • Tasks ahead: to find solutions for open questions
Any Questions ? • Thank you
Security Issues To Be Dealt With- SEE • Secessions - historic justice or security issue? • National agendas or integration-approach? • Zero sum game, or win-win situation? • Relatively weak internal conflict resolution mechanism, structures, safety nets • Relatively disadvantageous economic situation • Relatively high presence of organised crime + parallel srtuctures
Security Issues To Be Dealt With- SEE (cont.) • Borders open for trafficking or for cross-border co-operation? • Too many weapons, too little control • IC’s role: Correct? Mistaken? • Responsibility for building the countries - regional ownership? • Very encouraging signs • BH: very good potentials