"NATO and Russia need each other to fight and win the war against terrorism, to halt the spread of weapons of mass destruction, as well as to promote security and stability throughout the world more generally," U.S. Ambassador to the Russian Federation Alexander Vershbow said October 17, adding that Russia is "key to the new agenda" the Alliance will be considering at the NATO Summit in Prague next month.

"Prague will highlight this fact, making clear how important it is that the Atlantic Alliance has a mechanism to confront today's global challenges together with and in cooperation with Russia," Vershbow said in remarks at the Conference on Regional Security and NATO Enlargement in Pskov, Russia. After describing the improved state of U.S.-Russian relations, he said the United States views the Prague Summit "as being as much about new threats - and the new capabilities and new relationships required to deal with these new threats - as enlargement. NATO and NATO-Russia must develop new capabilities to meet today's threats to our peoples - Americans and Belgians, Czechs and Brits, and, yes, Russians, too - threats that unfortunately are all too real, as we discovered on September 11, 2001."

Noting the general agreement that European members of NATO "as equal partners with America, must do more to bridge the growing gap in our military capabilities," Vershbow said: "Our allies must succeed in refocusing their defense efforts so that they have flexible, sustainable forces capable of deploying quickly. The same arguments also hold true for Russia." The new NATO-Russia Council is "just one part of the integration process that has been the primary goal of U.S. policy since the end of World War II," he said. "What applied for our traditional allies in Western Europe also applies to Russia: We want Russia to join with like-minded nations, in a variety of organizations and contexts, to promote democracy, free trade, human rights, freedom of press and religion, and the rule of law," Vershbow said.

NATO enlargement, far from constituting a threat to Russia, means that "any new members of NATO will become allies of a sort of Russia's, as well, as the NATO-Russia Council grows in size. "The fact is that Russia, the traditional allies, and the new invitees, are all faced with the same threats to their security - in particular those new threats that emanate primarily outside Europe, such as international terrorism."

Good evening. I'd first like to thank Mikhail Margelov once more for giving me the opportunity to speak to this august gathering that happens to include some of my old friends, including Ambassador Karel Kovanda of the Czech Republic. This is indeed an opportune time for our meeting, just a few months after the creation of the NATO-Russia Council and a few weeks before the Prague Summit. My assigned topic today is "NATO-Russia-U.S." relations, though I will be approaching this, not surprisingly, from an American viewpoint. Actually, I'd like to begin by looking at bilateral U.S.-Russian relations before discussing the broader NATO-Russian relationship. Then I will move on to the big picture of Russia's integration into northwestern Europe and Europe as a whole.

We all grew up and lived through the Cold War, a time when the phrase "Mutual Assured Destruction" and throw weights were, sadly, a basic part of our vocabulary. Thankfully, however, that time is past. The world has changed, and we have been fortunate enough to see a remarkable transformation in relations between the United States and Russia in the past few years. As I have said many times in the past, the United States and Russia are closer today - politically, economically, and militarily - than at any time in our history. Just think about it. U.S. companies are investing huge amounts of money in Sakhalin and the Caspian Pipeline Consortium, just as Russian tankers are delivering oil to American ports, helping us diversify our energy sources and allowing Russia to find new markets. American and Russian troops are cooperating in the Balkans and in Afghanistan. The U.S. Secretary of State and the Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs speak on the phone almost daily to discuss the Middle East, tensions on the Indian subcontinent and the gamut of other international issues that we read about in the papers each day. Our two presidents also converse regularly.

Many point to September 11th and say that those tragic events are what brought our nations closer together. I have always argued that those attacks, and Russia's decision to join the campaign against terrorism, merely sped up a process that was already underway. Presidents Bush and Putin had already recognized when they met in Ljubljana and Genoa in June and July of 2001 that a new era was at hand, that they could move their nations, and the world, beyond the old Cold War way of thinking and build a new relationship.

By the time of the terrorist attacks in the United States last September, President Putin had thought through and understood the strategic situation. He was the first world leader to call President Bush to express his condolences after the attacks. Furthermore, he seized the historical moment and recognized the necessity of fighting against terrorism, offering the use of Russian airspace to coalition aircraft, sharing sensitive intelligence with the United States, and supporting humanitarian efforts to rebuild Afghanistan. We truly had entered a new era.

This does not mean, of course, that Russia and the United States always are in agreement. Russia opposed our withdrawal from the ABM Treaty in December of 2001, and President Putin and Foreign Minister Ivanov were not hesitant to tell us as much. Yet just a few months later Vladimir Putin and George Bush met in the gilded halls of the Kremlin to sign the Treaty of Moscow, promising the most radical cut in history in our strategic nuclear stockpiles. Perhaps even more important, however, they also agreed to a New Strategic Framework, a political declaration that redefined the U.S.-Russian agenda, with a new emphasis on cooperation and joint action to face the common problems that confront us in the new millennium.

More recently, the Energy Summit in Houston highlighted our growing economic ties, which truly demonstrate that break with the Cold War past. Indeed, as Secretary Powell said at a meeting of the U.S.-Russia Business Council in early October - and I know Chairman Margelov will remember this: "[The] center of gravity of our relationship with an increasingly democratic Russia inevitably will shift - and should shift - toward issues of economics, trade, and investment. The greater the shift, the more normal our bilateral relationship will become."

This transformation of the U.S.-Russian relationship - from one of hostility and managed competition during the Cold War, to friendship and cooperation - is mirrored in the development of the wider NATO-Russia relationship over the past few years and, indeed, the integration of Russia into our current security structures and strategy. We all had high hopes for NATO-Russia cooperation after the signing of the Founding Act in 1997. Having been the U.S. Ambassador to NATO virtually from the start of the work of the NATO-Russia Permanent Joint Council, I would be among the first to admit that early attempts at cooperation between Russia and the Alliance did not live up to expectations - mainly because of disagreements over the Kosovo crisis. However, cooperation among our forces involved in peacekeeping in the Balkans was - and remains - excellent, and no doubt has helped to allay feelings of mistrust. Moreover, as the Russian economy improved in the wake of the 1998 crisis, the Russian people once again grew confident of their country's place in the world.

At any rate, following the terrorist attacks of last September, the logic of increased, improved cooperation between Russia and NATO became more obvious to all. President Putin had come to recognize, long before many others in his country, that the national interests of Russia and the goals of western nations, and of NATO as a whole, do in large part coincide. Indeed, in cooperating with the west, Putin was not abandoning Russia's strategic goals but was simply championing what he called the "logic of common interests." So it was indeed a truly historic sight when, less than five months ago, President Putin and nineteen leaders of NATO countries met in Rome to launch the NATO-Russia Council.

Within the new NATO-Russia Council we already see that spirit of flexibility and compromise at work. The NRC, like NATO itself, relies on consensus and nurturing the same "habits of consultation" and "culture of cooperation" that have evolved among the NATO allies over the last 53 years. Unlike the Permanent Joint Council, operating as 19-plus-1 - whereby NATO members always coordinated their positions before talking to Russia - the new NATO-Russia Council allows for discussions among the 20 individual countries. When joint actions are decided, the members assume joint responsibility for those decisions. This new mechanism of NATO-Russia cooperation will allow joint decisions and joint action in areas of mutual concern, such as counter-terrorism, non-proliferation, peacekeeping, responding to civil emergencies, and military-to-military cooperation.

There are few examples from history where we can see such a radical change in relations among nations. One might recall the transformation of Germany, Italy and Japan - enemies of the freedom-loving nations during the Second World War - into some of the closest allies of the United States and its other former foes, and into stable, prosperous democracies. The change between Russia and NATO is just as incredible, although I would want to be quick to point out that Russia did not lose a war. It was never occupied by troops of the "other side." It was not forced into joining this new Council. Instead, Russia decided, willingly, to join together with its former adversaries to strive to create together - through active cooperation and consensus-building - a more peaceful, stable, prosperous world.

Already the new NATO-Russia Council is off to a good start. Russia's voice is being heard in deliberations as an equal member of the club as the NRC examines and debates a long list of topics, some more controversial than others: assessing terrorist threats, crisis management, missile proliferation, missile defense, search and rescue operations at sea, airspace management, and joint training exercises. NATO is an organization based on activities and actions, not a talk shop, and we are pleased with steps the new Council is taking to work on concrete projects for NATO-Russia cooperation.

Of course, the upcoming Prague Summit is looming large in the minds of many and I'm sure that most of you are curious to see which nations will be invited to join NATO. Some critics within Russia are sadly still gripped by "old think" and see some sinister plot in the enlargement of NATO. I would point out, however, that any new members of NATO will become allies of a sort of Russia's, as well, as the NATO-Russia Council grows in size. The fact is that Russia, the traditional allies, and the new invitees, are all faced with the same threats to their security - in particular those new threats that emanate primarily outside Europe, such as international terrorism.

Let me stress that, for Washington at least, we see the summit as being as much about new threats - and the new capabilities and new relationships required to deal with these new threats - as enlargement. NATO and NATO-Russia must develop new capabilities to meet today's threats to our peoples - Americans and Belgians, Czechs and Brits, and, yes, Russians, too - threats that unfortunately are all too real, as we discovered on September 11, 2001. Today's news that North Korea has confessed to having a secret nuclear weapons program is another reminder that there are real threats in today's world.

We must look at how all of us can contribute our fair share to solving these problems. Indeed, there is general agreement that the European members of NATO, as equal partners with America, must do more to bridge the growing gap in our military capabilities. Our allies must succeed in refocusing their defense efforts so that they have flexible, sustainable forces capable of deploying quickly. The same arguments also hold true for Russia.

The Summit will additionally take up the question of deepening and strengthening NATO's relationship with Russia and other partners. Clearly, if there are new threats in this brave new world, then we also need to find creative ways to work with our partners to deal with them. Put simply, NATO and Russia need each other to fight and win the war against terrorism, to halt the spread of weapons of mass destruction, as well as to promote security and stability throughout the world more generally. Russia is key to the new agenda. Prague will highlight this fact, making clear how important it is that the Atlantic Alliance has a mechanism to confront today's global challenges together with and in cooperation with Russia.

So, the concerns of the Prague Summit are threefold: yes, new members, but also new capabilities and new relationships. Through your country's participation in the NATO-Russia Council, Vladimir Putin is ensuring that Russia's voice will be heard loud and clear in all future deliberations on matters of mutual concern involving security. In taking the bold step of helping create the NATO-Russia Council, however, President Putin was not just making a decision related to security. He also committed Russia once again to the values that we all share in common - democracy, liberty and the rule of law - and he took a bold step toward full membership in the Euro-Atlantic community. Indeed the formation of the NATO-Russia Council is just one part of the integration process that has been the primary goal of U.S. policy since the end of World War II. What applied for our traditional allies in Western Europe also applies to Russia: We want Russia to join with like-minded nations, in a variety of organizations and contexts, to promote democracy, free trade, human rights, freedom of press and religion, and the rule of law. Of course, by integration I am not talking about homogenization. Nations do no lose their history, their sovereignty, their national interests by joining with NATO or the EU.

This process of integration is well under way. Russia has already proven itself an important partner for peace and stability during these first years of the 21st century: in post-Taliban Afghanistan as part of the coalition that has helped that country begin to transform itself into a viable nation; in the Middle East where as a member of the Madrid Quartet it is seeking to end the cycle of violence and reprisal. In the economic sphere, the U.S. Government and the EU have recently recognized Russia as a market economy, and Russia is on its way to becoming a full-fledged member of the G-8. Russia is also making progress toward entry into the World Trade Organization. And Russia is working in close collaboration with the United States and other countries against narcotics trafficking, trafficking in human beings and organized crime.

Through active participation in specialized European and international bodies, such as the Arctic Council (of which the U.S. is also a member), the Council of Baltic Sea States, and the Barents Euro-Arctic Council, Russia realizes the benefits of international partnership. In these fora, personal and institutional links can thrive, free from old political animosities, and dedicated to solving common problems.

More narrowly, looking at Russian integration into northwestern Europe and Europe as a whole, we have seen that many positive steps already have been taken, although there is also the potential, of course, to do much more. As I stated in a speech at St. Petersburg University back in February, the new reality is that the Baltic States and Russia must now see each other as partners in increasing regional trade, in attracting investment, in building stable democracies, in cleaning up the environment, and in fighting crime. The U.S. government's policy framework for the Baltic Sea region, the Northern Europe Initiative, seeks to build regional cooperation by supporting projects that address important cross-border issues.

Let's take a look at the environment, for example. The Russian Federation, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania obviously all have access to the Baltic Sea, but they also share watersheds as well. Since 1998 the U.S. has been working with Russia, the Baltic States, Sweden, and Finland to encourage the development and implementation of environmental protection strategies in selected watersheds in Kaliningrad and Northwest Russia. In the area of law enforcement, the Russians and the Baltic States are working together to combat corruption and money laundering.

Our Northern Europe Initiative also takes in the critical area of public health. Russia, the Baltic States, the European Union and the U.S. are all striving together through the Council of Baltic Sea States to combat HIV/AIDS (and drug-resistant tuberculosis) in this area.

Consistent with our belief that trade and economic issues are steadily becoming more important for Russia and her partners, we also support programs that bring together Russians, Belarussians, and individuals from the Baltic States for training in economics and entrepreneurship, as well as international networking.

And notwithstanding the current debate over Kaliningrad, Russia, is also expanding its connections and activities with Europe through the European Union. The EU is not just providing technical assistance through TACIS but is also working closely with Russia on energy, on crisis management, on the creation of a "Common European Economic Space," and on mechanisms to resolve trade disputes. The United States supports a strong Russia-EU relationship, just as it supports a strong NATO-Russia relationship. We support EU enlargement and NATO enlargement as means of strengthening stability, democracy and prosperity on the continent. We support a strong EU, just as we support a strong Russia.

Once again, I'd like to highlight the leadership and vision of President Putin who recognized early on that Russia's future economic growth and political influence could best be assured through closer cooperation with Europe, as well as the United States. A strengthened NATO-Russian partnership can play an essential role in helping to maintain stability in regions of Europe that have long suffered from political and social upheavals. Our new partnership can erase the arbitrary lines of division in Europe and bring us closer to, in President Bush's words, "a Europe that is whole, free and at peace for the first time in history."

Thank you very much.