President Kempe,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Thank you for inviting me to this forum. I am proud to be speaking as a first European politician in the Global Leadership Series on the future of the EU – US relations, since the US elections. I am glad to note that the Atlantic Council will host the new Bronislaw Geremek Distinguish Lecture Series to start next year. Bronislav Geremek was the one who first brought me to the Foreign Ministry, who was my boss for three years. And his departure is a very sad loss to Poland and to the transatlantic community and I’m glad that he will be commemorated this way.
Much of your campaign was dedicated to financial gyrations that are felt not only in the United States but also in Europe and Asia. The economic crisis shows once again the interdependence between our countries. But, empathy in this regard has its limits, as Ronald Reagan used to say: “Recession is when your neighbor loses his job. Depression is when you loose yours”.   
Let me congratulate you on electing your new president. The campaign beat every record in generating interest in political debate and the voters’ mobilization. I was privileged to speak with both candidates during the campaign and I agree with The Economist, which welcomed the choice of the candidates on both sides with the words: “America at its best” . Yes, both of them represented the best qualities of dignity, talent and ideas that America has to offer. The outcome of the elections was generally met with a cheerful reaction across the globe including in Poland. America’s image, America’s authority and America’s capacity to lead have been restored.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Much has recently been said about the transatlantic partnership. To me, it seems that the cornerstone of this relationship is our joint faith in freedom and human rights. Because of our history and our experiences Poland and the United States are countries that feel this in their bones. I come to you from the land of Solidarity and would like to thank you again that you stood by us in our hour of darkness.
America and Europe should remain advocates of freedom at home and beyond their borders. Of course, in the increasingly interdependent world we have to be prepared to deal with issues with prudence. At times it requires pragmatism and flexibility. But because we are strong in our principles, we can seek compromises without undermining our values. America can count on Poland in promoting liberty in the contemporary world.
Despite our misgivings, we supported the United States in Iraq, which was unpopular. Both domestically in Poland and in Europe as a whole. Altogether, we sent 15 thousand of our troops during five-and-half year, which was longer than US participation in the Second World War. We took command over one of the stabilization zones, and we led the International Division Central South with troops from 24 countries. We are proud to have completed our mission and to have handed over a secure area to Iraqi authorities.
Today we face: global economic distress, new challenges to security, an adverse impact of climate change, to name just a few. They call for quick and decisive steps to prevent fundamental disorder. The world urgently needs stabilizing forces. Together, the United States and Europe, acting on the basis of a renewed partnership are such a forces.
We can pursue our policies successfully only when we colaborate across the Atlantic and keep our Alliance solid. We, Europeans, share a strong belief that the transatlantic partnership, firmly rooted in our history, reflects our common future. It remains the key factor in safeguarding not only our security and well-being but also the security and well-being of other nations around the globe.
Therefore, vision and resolve are badly needed on both sides of the Atlantic. Americans and Europeans should think in terms of common goals. Both hard and soft power assets are at our disposal to deal with global challenges. Coordination of policies will enable us to meet them effectively. There will be differences of views and there will on occasion be competition, as is natural among free nations. Nevertheless, we must not let these differences be played-off against us by others.
On numerous occasions, your president-elect emphasized his deep understanding of the need for a close cooperation with the Allies. He reiterated that “America cannot meet new challenges alone” and he underscored that “the world cannot meet them without America”. In Europe, we agree.
Some people in this town used to talk about a unilateral moment, or even in a more hubristic term, of an unilateral era. That was hubris but Europe does need America as a leader who sets high standards for policy and conduct. Barack Obama, speaking as the Democratic candidate, said that, “To lead the world, we must lead by example. I will make clear that the days of compromising our values are over”. The unilateral moment may have passed, but the dawn of an Obama presidency could be a transformational moment, when things that are impossible in ordinary times become possible. It should be seized.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Over two weeks ago, the chief diplomats of the EU countries and high-ranking EU officials met in Marseilles and agreed on a package of proposals for co-operation with the next administration. Poland participated in crafting these proposals. Europe has agreed to assume its share of leadership and responsibility for the most complex and challenging issues. Poland combines its traditional affinity to the United States with a strong European identity. Anti-Americanism is alien to my country. We have stuck with the US even in difficult times. This makes us a natural advocate for a strong link spanning the Atlantic.
Middle East remains the main source of security concerns. Iran’s ongoing uranium enrichment program constitutes a threat to stability in the region and undermines the international system of non-proliferation. As long as Iran refuses to act responsibly, we have to exercise pressure.
We have no time to waste in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The stakes are high. As Americans and Europeans, we share the same goals and should join forces in helping to build a viable Palestinian state as well as to enhance the security of Israel. The upcoming presidential elections in the Palestinian Autonomy pose an opportunity for the EU to step in with new practical measures to strengthen the moderate forces within the Palestinian political leadership. At the same time we Europeans strongly believe that there is a need for an early and full engagement by the new American president.
Afghanistan. We know that the situation in that war-torn country is severe. There is an urgent plea on coordinating allied efforts in order to use our resources efficiently. Europe needs to be ready to respond to the American expectations. It can also support the American military efforts with its experience in reconstruction and our resources of soft power.
Even though, unlike some allies, we have no national interests in the region, Poland has contributed to the NATO–led ISAF operation. This year, we have increased the size of our contingent from 1200 to 1600 troops and send additional helicopters. Our engagement derives from the understanding that NATO’s credibility is at stake. When NATO goes to war, NATO has to win.
We all know that military means are not sufficient to achieve a satisfactory settlement. The key to success lies in our ability to persuade the Afghan people that our aim is to bring them security and improve their living conditions. The international assistance in building roads, schools and water treatment plants should accompany the military and political efforts on a larger scale. It should be targeted politically with the aim of co-opting regional elites to the project of democratic Afghanistan. There is a need to seal the borders and dedicate more forces of military police to train the Afghans.
I have suggested to my colleagues, among other things, that the way to engage by Europe in Afghanistan is to create more Provincial Reconstruction Teams under EU supervision.
Let me turn to what we in Poland see as one of the greatest challenges for the Transatlantic community, which is our neighbor to the East - Russia.  Over the last years Russian leaders have tried to reconstitute Russia as a major world  power. That in itself doesn’t have to be a problem for Russia’s neighbors. But it all  depends on what means are used: 21st, or 19th century.
As you know, Poland had difficult, sometimes very painful relations with Russia in the past. But, we don’t want confrontation with our neighbor.  The government of Donald Tusk has restarted a pragmatic dialog with Russian authorities. We lifted objection on Russia negotiating its entry into OECD. We think it would be good for Russia and for all of us for the accountancy, rules to apply there for Russian companies, Russian government statistics to be more transparent. Poland was helpful in restarting the PCA2 talks, against some significant internal opposition in our country. I have already visited Moscow twice. Warsaw was the first NATO capital visited by the Russian foreign minister after the war in Georgia. We had good, frank discussions. We have a number of bilateral issues to deal with. While searching for opportunities to cooperate on the international level, we clearly communicate to the Russian partners our interests and we don’t shy away from defending them. We will put shortly forward written proposals for confidence building measures related to Missile Defense, on the basis of transparency and reciprocity. We would like Russia to have the confidence that whatever we declare might happen in this facilities is indeed the case. I think the best early example of this was the decision by the governments of Poland, Czech Republic and US to publish the agreements the we have signed on the internet. Our bilateral trade amounts to 14 bn. dol.
In fact Poland is the last country on Earth that wants a return of the age of East –West confrontation. That was not a happy time for us and we know that a return to such a confrontation would mean that Poland would pay a price. On the contrary – we would like to see Russia as a partner, a member of a broadly defined West in dealing with issues to do with the North South divide. We want Russia to become a stake holder of the European stability and prosperity on the basis of a genuine partnership. It could be a crucial partner in preventing the spread of weapons of mass destruction and tackling international terrorism, as well as other global challenges.
Nevertheless, we cannot pretend that nothing has recently happened, when the Russian president, just a day after the American elections, threatened to deploy Russian missiles as a countermeasure to the plans to field the elements of the US Missile Defense system in Poland. We cannot turn a blind eye on Russia’s actions in Georgia.
The recent developments in South Caucasus demonstrated a breach of  international law and commitments that Russia undertook within the OSCE process. More worrying even then Russians activities is their justification. The Russian President stated his doctrine as follows (if I’m summarizing it correctly): Russia will protect its compatriots and infrastructure projects outside its territory, if necessary, by force. That justification has been given in the case of Georgia. This is not new. Searching for a rationale for invading Poland in 1939, Moscow claimed it had to protect the non-Polish residents of Eastern Poland. In 18th century, Russia invaded Poland under the pretext  of  rescuing religious minorities.
The Medvedev doctrine has implications for many of the former Soviet republics and can have far-reaching consequences. We should take the Russian leaders seriously because it seems that they mean what they say. In April, the previous Russian president, Vladimir Putin, speaking at the NATO-Russia Council in Bucharest, alluded to Ukraine as an artificial creation with a large Russian-speaking minority on its territory. Should the Georgian scenario be emulated in Ukraine, we would have a large-scale European crisis. The security of Europe would be shattered. Georgia is a pivotal energy corridor but Ukraine is more than that. Ukraine is a genuine, if messy democracy, but it’s also a swing country for the balance of power on the Eurasian landmass. Professor Norman Davies, the British historian, put it: Russia plus Ukraine equals the Russian Empire.
Poland would not be able to ignore such a development. So, here's a doctrine for a doctrine: Any further attempt to re-draw borders in Europe by force or by subversion should be regarded by Europe as a threat to its security and should entail a proportional response by the whole Atlantic community.
We cannot afford to sit back in complacency, when the post-Cold War European order is being questioned. Russia started with contesting the OSCE, then withdrew from legally binding obligations under the CFE Treaty; then it suspended its commitments under Hague Code of Conduct; recently – invaded Georgia. Step by step, there is a constant attempt to undermine the cornerstones of the European security. Now, the Russian President offers a new security architecture that should replace the existing one. If it means a good strategic discussion with Russia than we should grab it. But I hope it doesn’t mean replacing the Atlantic Alliance. We heard President Miedviediev saying that NATO had no longer the capacity to provide security of the European continent. The Russian leadership does not hide from the fact of its preference for pushing America out of Europe. We should prevent this scenario from happening.
Russian power has been like a glacier cast over Eastern Europe for the last several centuries. Sometimes advancing, sometimes withdrawing, always leaving behind a debris of ill-feeling, tragedy and missed opportunities. The glacier may not advance again – after all we are supposed be facing a global warming. And glaciers are supposed to disappear. On the contrary, we wish the Russian people for their glacier to melt away. From underneath it, a green land can emerge, a Russia that is a part of the broadly defined West, that inspires respect for its wealth, for its culture, for its scientific prowess and not the fear for its tanks.  
As the West, do we have any means to discourage Russia from reconstituting itself as an empire on 19th. century principles? Well, at the EU level we have powerful instruments to use, if only we choose to do so. We are 400 mln people and the largest economy on earth, we create 12 trillion Euro of GDP – between ten and fifteen times more then Russia. And we compose together the biggest market for energy, also for Russia. We should be able to regulate, because EU excels in regulating access to its internal market. If we can regulate Microsoft, why shouldn’t we be able to regulate Gazprom?
We expect the European Commission to negotiate the new Partnership and Cooperation Agreement with Russia that ensures reciprocal rules for the transit of energy from and through Russia.  The result of the negotiation should be equitable for Russia and Europe, for industry and consumers. PAC2 (as its known in the jargon) will be approved unanimously by the EU Council and ratified by parliaments in all member states.
NATO has been the cornerstone of the Transatlantic partnership for nearly sixty years. Not only was the Alliance successful in deterring the Soviet Union, but also helped in reintegrating the former captive nations  with the Western democratic community.
For the last fifteen years NATO has transformed itself to meet new challenges for the security of the transatlantic community. It has expanded its mission beyond the treaty territory taking on new commitments in places like the Balkans, Iraq and most notably in Afghanistan. Developing new expeditionary capabilities has been part of NATO’s transformation. Poland supported these efforts, understanding that it is the right thing to do in the face of new threats.
While we are ready to continue our engagement in Afghanistan, we feel the time has come to renew the essential role of NATO. NATO should recover its traditional role not just as an Alliance but as a military organization, and once again devote a portion of its energy to the treaty area. What made NATO different from alliances of the past, was that it had its own Military Committee, its own staff and its own intelligence assessing instruments. A part of NATO’s strength stemmed also from common exercises, so that the military personnel knew one another. We need sound intelligence and gaming and; we need contingency planning that is not immobilized or guttered by political correctness. We need to make the NATO guarantee credible again.
Since the nineties, we had acted as if there was no possible threat that would require action on the basis of Article 5 provisions. With Russian tanks rolling into the Georgian territory, we have seen this era come to end. NATO should continue to fulfill its primary responsibility of providing security for its members. A sober realization that the rules of the game have changed makes a compelling case for launching a serious debate about NATO collective defense capabilities, the debate that seems to be long overdue. It must lead to a new Strategic Concept of the Alliance.
The 60th anniversary of NATO provides a good opportunity to come up with new ideas for the Alliance, so that it will be better equipped to meet the security challenges of the 21st century.
Regaining Central and Eastern Europe for democracy and market economy has been one of the greatest achievements of the Transatlantic co-operation, a success of historic proportions. Next year we will be celebrating 20 years of the “autumn of the peoples”. Twenty years ago if you asked me whether it was possible that Eastern Europe would not just be free and democratic but also the members of the EU of NATO it would seem to much to hope for, and yet here we are. We have achieved it. This was a successful policy and this policy should be continued in the future and we hope that the new administration will commit itself to bringing the rest of the region closer to Euro-Atlantic institutions. It is important for NATO to continue its “open door policy”, which has already proved to be so successful in changing the geo-political landscape so profoundly.
The EU also has peaceful instruments to shape relations with the neighboring countries, as for example the European Neighborhood Policy. Poland together with Sweden, conceived the idea of Eastern Partnership, which aims at deepening and accelerating integration with the EU of the six Eastern partners: Ukraine, Moldova, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia and hopeful Belarus. Russia would also be welcomed if she so wishes. Since the political situation in Eastern Europe and Southern Caucasus has changed, there is an urgent need to put forward far-reaching projects of cooperation that will help “the Six” or more to better prepare for the EU acquis.
The EU can play a crucial role in helping to introduce stability and prosperity in these countries through promoting European values, standards and norms. One of the key issues is to base the Eastern Partnership on two strong pillars: deepened bilateral cooperation between the EU and its Eastern partners, and multilateral co-operation between the EU and the East European region, complementary to the existing regional cooperation schemes. As part of the Partnership, we hope for a deep Free Trade Area will be created, visa-free regimes agreed and a structure supporting partners in adjusting to EU standards.
We gratefully remember that the US Government has been a champion of stabilization and development of Eastern Europe since the collapse of the Soviet Union. I hope that the Barack Obama administration will continue this successful policy.
I would like to conclude by saying that Poland negotiated a deal regarding the building of a base of Missile Defense interceptors on our territory in response to an American request. Naturally, we would like to see this project to be continued, but we understand the American internal ramifications. We see our participation in the project as an opportunity to enhance Polish-American strategic and military cooperation. It can enhance the American presence in Europe and produce strong ties between Central Europe and the US. Let me also note that NATO has agreed that such a system will be useful for the protection of Europe against a possible ballistic missile threat. In fact, we in Poland think we are doing a favor to the entire Transatlantic Community by exposing our territory to greater risk for the sake of greater security for all.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Barack Obama put in his victory speech: “the true strength of our nation comes not from the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from the enduring power of our ideals – democracy, liberty, opportunity and unyielding hope”. We, in the transatlantic community, strongly agree. This constitutes the basis for a new era of collaboration between Europe and the United States. After all, as the European Security Strategy phrases it ‘Acting together, the European Union and the United States can be a formidable force for good in the world”. We look forward to working with the new administration to make this promise a reality.
Thank you very much.