Good afternoon to everyone,

We are continuing the main plenary session with a panel discussion on “NATO, Russia, Oil, Gas and the Middle East: The Future of European Security.”

Many very interesting things were said this morning. I think we are all looking forward to an open and frank discussion. I would like to ask the panelists to keep their statements short and sweet -as it were- to allow a fair amount of time for questions and answers.

Let me begin with a snap-shot of where we stand in the discussions on President Medventef’s and President Sarkozy’s proposals at least in terms of process from the perspective of the OSCE chair.

Although most countries are seemingly happy with the existing security arrangements, there appears to be widespread consensus that, to say the least, we need to engage in a dialogue on security issues.

Most, also, agree that the OSCE is the appropriate forum for such a dialogue to take place. I am glad to note that those countries who had initially expressed reservations about the OSCE have now accepted that it is the best structure available.

It goes without saying that -provided that there is agreement by all 56 OSCE participating states- Greece stands ready to organize meetings at any level that could launch, or more generally facilitate, such a dialogue.

Now, putting on my national hat and without wanting to prejudice our discussion in any way, permit me to quickly touch on five quick points:

First, discussions about European security usually begin with a reference to the fall of the Berlin Wall – and justifiably so. The world has never been the same since. It is a careless oversimplification, however headline grabbing and sensational, to speak of a return of the Cold War.

Second, let’s be frank. As the current crisis demonstrates we face common threats and common challenges. Needless to stress the significance if Russia, our partner in peace, in this panel. Therefore, the least we can do is to take Moscow’s proposal extremely seriously and engage in a meaningful and hopefully fruitful dialogue.

Third, the way things stand today dividing soft and hard security amounts to drawing a line in the sand. Security is a two-way road. Aristotle in his Metaphysics argued that “the whole is more than the sum of its parts.” Indeed, it is necessary to focus on the big picture and adopt a holistic approach. In light of current events, for example, would it be possible to ignore energy security?

Fourth, we have to look for our common interests and -why not?- common values. Respecting human rights, democracy and the rule of law, observing territorial integrity, refraining from the threat or use of force, are the cornerstones of our system and form the basis for our co-operative security. After all international law remains the most profound realpolitik.

Fifth and final, is that there is a new kid on the block: the European Union. Particularly in view of the new US administration, we must assess the global role of the EU. We need a self-confident Europe that speaks with one voice. I have no illusions that there are different views within our Union but I would like to see a Europe and a USA working together as equal partners.

In the meantime and as our discussions unfold we must not waste any time and move forward with the toolbox that we have in our hands. As Frank – Walter Steinmeier has said, diplomacy “cannot afford fair-weather institutions”.

On one hand, we should support the reactivation of NATO-Russia Council so that it reaches its full potential as soon as possible. We have plenty of potential areas of cooperation – one needs to look no further than the obvious: Afghanistan.

On the other hand, we must boost the EU’s neighborhood policy and our eastern partnership. We welcome the initiative of the Czech Presidency. After all, the European Union is the biggest and most successful post-war exercise in conflict prevention.

And of course, we need to intensify our efforts to deal with the so-called frozen conflicts, which, as shown last August in Georgia, can turn hot very quickly. We have two tools here: the EU as proven by the intervention of the French Presidency last August and the OSCE which finds itself in the unique position of being the only European Security Organization that can rely on the political will and the resources of all major stakeholders.

Here I would like to point that a major challenge for our Chairmanship is the continuation of the OSCE work in Georgia. Our focus remains humanitarian. We are convinced that the volatile situation on the ground requires more and not less OSCE presence.

Thank you for your attention. I very much am looking forward to the discussion that will follow.