Nations Seeking to Join NATO Back Allies' Action in Balkans

Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski speaks during a NATO anniversary ceremony. His nation, along with the Czech Republic and Hungary, joined NATO in March. Several other European nations are seeking membership. (By Ray Lustig – The Washington Post) Related Links Can Alliance Muster Will to Win? NATO Expands Security 'Map' Full Coverage of NATO Summit Summit Photos: Day 1 | Day 2

By William Claiborne
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, April 28, 1999; Page A28

If any of the European nations waiting for acceptance into NATO had misgivings about joining an alliance whose future could hinge on the outcome of a gradually escalating war in Yugoslavia, they were not apparent when their leaders came to Washington to participate on the fringes of the 19-member NATO summit.

With degrees of enthusiasm ranging from strident and downright hawkish to measured and circumspect, leaders of prospective NATO nations said they support not only the bombing campaign in the Kosovo conflict, but the introduction of NATO ground troops if it comes to that.

Some offered refinements – such as the need for a U.N. imprimatur to any deployment of NATO ground troops – but the overwhelming consensus in interviews with the heads of government of candidate-nations was that the future of European stability depends on NATO's ability to deal swiftly and conclusively with Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic and his efforts to "cleanse" Kosovo of ethnic Albanians.

The leaders of the would-be NATO nations came to the summit armed with glossy promotional brochures touting their countries' qualifications for NATO membership and English-speaking aides to brief reporters at the international press center on the depth of their commitment to NATO military success in Yugoslavia.

The outcome of the Kosovo crisis has assumed an added dimension because of the widely-held view that if NATO fails to meet its objectives in Yugoslavia, the impetus to expand the alliance would probably collapse; NATO would move to the margins of European defense strategy and some of the candidate nations would lose interest in joining the compact.

Even Slovakia – which was excluded from the first expansion group of NATO applicants in 1997 because of a lack of commitment to democracy under its authoritarian prime minister, Vladimir Meciar – has embraced NATO's principles and objectives under its new premier, Mikulas Dzurinda.

"If ground troops will be necessary, we will always stay on the side of NATO," Dzurinda, who defeated Meciar in September, said in an interview yesterday. "Milosevic cannot win. It would be a very dangerous precedent."

Stressing that "Slovakia after the election is a new country," Dzurinda noted that his government had opened Slovak airspace to NATO warplanes and agreed to to give the western alliance ground access through a rail and highway corridor as well. The transport routes would connect Slovakia's western border with the Czech Republic to the Hungarian border in the south. Both the Czech Republic and Hungary joined NATO last month.

"You can observe that Slovakia is not yet a NATO member, but our actions make us a de facto member," Dzurinda said. "We behave as if we already were a member.

Nonetheless, Slovakia continues to be viewed as being at the bottom of the eligibility list for NATO expansion, Dzurinda acknowledged.

Lithuania, which along with Slovenia is most often cited as being at the top of the list for the next expansion round, also pledged its backing of NATO in the war effort.

President Valdas Adamkus said in an interview that Lithuania is on an "irreversible course" to join the alliance no matter what happens in Kosovo. He said his country supports not only the use of NATO ground forces, if necessary, but a naval blockade to shut off Milosevic's oil supplies and whatever other measures are required.

"NATO has to use every avenue to stop the resistance of Yugoslavia's forces," Adamkus said. "Whatever means it takes should be used, with no restrictions, to save human lives."

Adamkus, who immigrated to the United States after the Soviet Union retook Lithuania from Nazi Germany in 1944 and who returned in 1997 to make a presidential bid in his homeland, said he sees a bleak future for Europe if NATO fails in Kosovo.

"If this is the case, then I don't see any future for the democratic process in Europe as a whole," Adamkus said. "Whenever a condition will dictate, you can expect a new dictator to get up and destroy the order among peace-loving people. . . . Because if NATO fails, the field is wide open for any crazy individual."

A similar note was sounded by Latvian President Guntis Ulmanis, who said in an interview, "I see no alternative except for NATO, and I think we can only guarantee security for Latvia through NATO in the future."

Ulmanis said most Latvians empathize with the ethnic Albanians of Kosovo because of their own deportations at the hands of the Soviets. "It rings distant bells," said Ulmanis, who was exiled to Siberia in 1941 for six years. "We have been refugees ourselves."

Latvian Foreign Minister Valdis Birkavs boasted that Latvia has been so pro-NATO that the Latvian diplomatic mission in the Russian city of Pskov, where NATO countries have no diplomatic representation, was singled out for a demonstration last month protesting the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia.

The prime minister of Slovenia, Janez Drnovsek, said that in the absence of a diplomatic solution, which he acknowledged would be "difficult" to achieve, he expects a steady escalation of the war, ending with the deployment of ground forces. But he said the war would shape NATO's role for the future and deter other nations from following Milosevic's path.

"This kind of role with military intervention is to protect human rights, military rights and prevent human catastrophes," Drnovsek said in an interview. "This should, of course, prevent other dictators from doing such things."

The president of Estonia, Lennart Meri, said he would support the use of ground forces "without hesitation" because Milosevic's behavior had been tolerated for too long, and that "there is no room for compromise because a compromise will mean that it is only a matter of time [before] a new crisis like this crisis, which has cost so many people's lives."

Asked whether the war had diminished his resolve to join NATO, Meri said, "On the contrary. We know what it means to be displaced. . . . Europe must be a democratic continent, which means that Europe cannot tolerate a small island of totalitarianism where the rule of law is being neglected in a most cynical way."

Staff writers John W. Fountain, Debbi Wilgoren and Yolanda Woodlee contributed to this report.