James Hubert (Eubie) Blake, an American ragtime pianist, commented, on reaching 100 years of age, that had he known he was going to live that long, he would have taken better care of himself. When I look at the world today, with its dynamic environment and uncertain future, is that a charge we can level against NATO as it approaches its 60^th anniversary?

It is true that there are some who are surprised that NATO has survived this long, but I would argue that they should have known all along that NATO, as an organisation, is far more than the sum of its parts and certainly far more than an Alliance built around a defensive agreement. Article 5, the cornerstone of our Alliance for so long, is still as valid as ever, but we have moved considerably further on from considering conventional threats to our members as our only raison d’être.

I read articles in the newspapers and hear media experts announcing the impending failure of NATO because current operational activity in Afghanistan, the Balkans and in Iraq is not always comprehensively accommodated by NATO’s formidable military capabilities. Firstly, let me underline that 60 years of NATO has been 60 years of unbroken success. If we were writing NATO’s Annual Assessment, would we ignore the first 11 months of the year and only focus on the last 4 weeks? We would want to look at how it has performed throughout the whole period. We have never failed in the tasks placed upon us by our political leadership over the 60 years. And this one aspect of our constitution reminds us all that NATO is first and foremost a political Alliance for collective defence, not simply a collection of military forces.