Security Conference in Munich

Merely Superficial Consensus on how to Shape the New World Order

By Karl Müller, Germany

From 6. to 8. February the 40th conference on security policy was held in Munich. This year's topics were the future of NATO, the Middle East, NATO's relationship with Russia and the EU and the West's relationship with the Islamic world.
Whereas the open conflict about whether the war against Iraq was justified had set the tone of last year's security conference this year the conference's participants underlined the new agreement between former war opponents and advocates. Even the Russian defense minister started his speech by emphasizing the common interest of Russia and the NATO-states in the fight against terrorism and made it clear that Russia too wished 'the USA's and their allies' success in Iraq' and that his country was ready to co-operate more closely in order to appease the region politically.

Germans Favor Political Approach

Whereas the US secretary of defense focused the larger part of his speech on the 'blessing' of American-led wars for the world and declared past wars against Germany, Japan and Northern Korea models for present wars, the German Minister of Foreign Affairs Joseph Fischer stressed the thesis that 'with military means alone we cannot successfully cope with this new totalitarianism.' (Fischer spoke of 'Jihad-terrorism').
Fisher even included the countries of the affected region when presenting his detailed planning of international conferences and treaties for the future: 'The West cannot find the answer on its own. By assuming a paternalistic attitude we would land ourselves with the first defeat. Instead we must offer serious and genuine co-operation with the states and societies of the region.'

Cultural Wars Rejected

Fischer explicitly rejected the notion of cultural wars, but perceived such an interest on the side of the terrorists. This was contrasted by the words of the Pakistani foreign minister, who pointed out that there are deficits in understanding the causes of terrorism: 'Religious extremism and militancy have grown because a deep feeling of injustice and powerlessness prevails in the Arabic and Islamic world. There is the conviction throughout the Muslim world that the Islam has unfairly been targeted and attacked. Unfortunately those theories that predict a clash of cultures have revived this conviction.'

NATO members in the Caucasus and Central Asia?

The US Minister of Defense Donald Rumsfeld enlisted a series of alleged successes in the Middle East, in particular the elections that had taken place in various countries. He then quickly came to the topic of Georgia. For Georgia's new leader and the Georgian people the democratic progress in the country had been inspired by their desire 'to turn West and become a member of NATO and of the community of free nations.' And he went on: 'Other leaders in the Caucasus and Central Asia have expressed a similar desire to forge closer links with NATO and eventually join the Alliance.'
This was contrasted by the Russian minister of defense who enunciated his government's clear position: In his introduction he underlined that no state or group of states had the right to wage war on terrorism unilaterally without the mandate of the UN Security Council. Georgia, he said, was an example of a poor international co-operation against terrorism; from there Chechnian terrorists were still being supported. Iwanov complained about the lack of progress concerning the co-operation between NATO and Russia, in particular with respect to disarmament and armament control. Even more important were Iwanov's statements on the NATO enlargement: 'I would like to draw the attention of the Alliance representatives to the fact that with the NATO enlargement, they start operating in the zone of vitally important interests of our country. They should--in deeds, not only by wording--take into account Russian concerns both in the political as well as in the security spheres, preempting, of course, the Alliance is truly striving for partnership.' And quite clearly he asked: 'Who could kindly explain, to counter terrorism in what region specifically the new NATO military facilities in Poland and the Baltics are planned upon?'

Russia 'vital interests' affected

He spoke out clearly on the CIS states: 'One of major priorities of the Russian foreign policy is our relationship with the closest neighbors--countries of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). [...] In the CIS region Russia has vitally important interests.' This had nothing to do with neoimperialism but was imperative for the security and stability of Russia.
In this context Iwanow complained about the development in Afghanistan. Afghanistan had again become a major source of international drug trafficking. 'It is understandable that by allowing drug peddling in Afghanistan the Alliance ensures loyalty of warlords on the ground and of some Afghan leaders. Nevertheless, the drug flow from Afghanistan is posing a serious threat to the national security of a number of Central Asian CIS States and Russia. It results from the absence of a truly international approach towards stabilization in Afghanistan. [...] The situation where international terrorist communities merge with drug lords and organized crime (we witness such symptoms not only in Afghanistan but in Kosovo, too) is extremely precarious.'
Speakers and participants of the conference were: Abdullah II., King of Jordan, Michèle Alliot-Marie, Minister of Defense, France, Giora Eiland, Director of the National Security Council, Israel, Joseph Fischer, Minister of Foreign Affairs.