BRUSSELS – When Javier Solana took over as secretary-general of NATO four years ago, some of his harshest critics were American congressmen who recalled how the Spanish Socialist fought hard – if unsuccessfully – to prevent his country from entering the Western military alliance.
But Mr. Solana quickly disarmed his antagonists by claiming his anti-NATO stand was a mild case of juvenile delinquency. The former physics professor said he had revised his thinking over the years and become a stout proponent of the alliance’s system of collective defense, observing that ”only idiots never change their mind.”
As he prepares to leave NATO headquarters this week to become the European Union’s new czar for foreign and defense policy, Mr. Solana observed Tuesday that the alliance, too, has experienced a dramatic transformation to stay abreast of the rapidly evolving security environment in the post Cold War era.
”The changes have come incredibly fast,” Mr. Solana said during an hourlong interview at his office. ”Just look at Germany. For years, the Germans believed they would never again send troops abroad because of their history. But today, we have a German general who will soon take command over all of NATO’s soldiers in Kosovo.”
During the tenure of Mr. Solana, NATO almost reinvented itself as a pan-European security organization after its original purpose – thwarting a Soviet invasion of Western Europe – became obsolete. Upon arriving at NATO in December 1995, his first task was to oversee the dispatch of NATO troops on a peacekeeping mission into Bosnia – the first time the alliance ever sent troops beyond its territorial domain.
He later presided over NATO’s incorporation of former Communist front-line states – Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic – and launched the Partnership for Peace program that established military cooperation with 28 countries, including special ties with Russia and Ukraine. The strategic concept of the alliance was revised and a streamlined command structure was set up.
But Mr. Solana’s biggest accomplishment was to preserve the political unity of NATO during the 78-day bombing campaign against Yugoslavia earlier this year. Many members were troubled by the legal justification behind the unprecedented attack by NATO on another country in the absence of a United Nations mandate.
Governing coalitions in Germany, Italy and Greece seemed at times in danger of collapsing. And the new members, who believed they were getting permanent security guarantees by joining NATO, found themselves going to war within two weeks of being formally inducted into the alliance.
”There were times when I became really angry,” Mr. Solana recalled. ”I was mad because some countries failed to realize that they can’t just take from the alliance, they have to live up to their commitments as well. But in the end, we all saw the need to stick together.”
Throughout the air war, Mr. Solana won almost unanimous praise for his political skills in maintaining consensus. As he embarks on his new job, he believes a large part of his time will be spent trying to resolve potential misunderstandings with the United States as Europe strives to assume greater control over its own security.
Some critics say the efforts of Europe to develop a common foreign and security policy could lead to the eventual demise of the trans-Atlantic alliance. Mr. Solana said he was dismayed by the suspicions and skepticism he encountered during recent consultations with U.S. policymakers.
”I realize a lot of people in the United States are very sensitive about what we are trying to do,” he said. ”If they want to disengage from military responsibilities in Europe, they should go ahead and do it but they should not use the European initiative as an excuse. I hope we can find ways to calm everybody down.”
Mr. Solana acknowledges that Europe needs to invest more money in several key areas, notably in acquiring large transport planes to enhance strategic lift, improving communications and reorganizing armies into rapid reaction forces. But many governments are reluctant to make that case to voters when there is no visible security threat and they are trying to impose austerity budgets at a time of high unemployment.
”The political will exists even if budgets are tight,” he said. ”We need to show the Americans that we can act on our own when they don’t want to go along. We will be able to take care of minor problems but you will have to give us the possibility of using some NATO assets.”
Looking ahead, Mr. Solana believes that the alliance may go through some difficult times if the United States proceeds with building a ballistic missile defense while trying to revamp the terms of the treaty that banned such systems.
”There is some concern about decoupling if the U.S. develops this technology,” he said. ”The big problem will be Russia because they see this as a threat to their last symbol of equality as a great power. We need to be very prudent in watching how this develops.”
The U.S. and Europe also confront a fresh debate over a second phase of enlargement toward Russia’s doorstep. With many eastern states, from the Baltics to the Balkans, clamoring for entry into the alliance, some NATO members will likely argue that the alliance needs to live up to its promises of maintaining an open door.
On the other hand, others believe that NATO must be cautious about expanding so quickly that it risks losing its military efficiency and becoming a bloated international bureaucracy. The decision on further enlargement is not expected before the next scheduled summit meeting of NATO leaders in 2002.
Copyright © Washington Post 1999
