I'm well aware that Russia may not have shared the same approach or the same belief that I was operating on within minutes, but my order came from my chain of command, which included the North Atlantic Council, which are those NATO nations, including Canada. My directions came from that authority, and I made darned sure I stayed within the guidance I was given.
Let me state right from the start that while I was not confined by it, I was able to work to the maximum extent within the limits of the mandate that was given to me, and to this day I believe I stayed within that mandate because of the feedback I received and the communications we had.
We may have surprised Russia in the way we came about this. They may not have anticipated that course of action. So be it.
As far as Russia's relationship with NATO, it's one that needs to continue. It doesn't have to be an enemy. We have to cohabit. We have to share a part of the globe. How do we do that? NATO is a good balancing act and it can continue to bring them in.
There will always be points of friction. Georgia is a good example of that. Missile defence is another one, as we are well aware, and we have to work through this. A lot of this is bilaterally, but also collectively through our NATO effort. In the 1990s we saw a lot of effort with the Partnership for Peace initiatives and the dialogue that took place. I'm a believer that the more we talk to each other, the less chance we are going to have to revert to other less pleasant courses of action.
I will just close by saying that while Russia may not have appreciated the effort, Russia can help us in finding solutions. I firmly believe that Russia could help us greatly to deal with other issues in the Middle East. We could use their activity. In fact, the solution is through Moscow; it's not through NATO. Therefore, when do we act as NATO and when do we let others act? There is a chance for Russia and President Putin to show some international leadership to bring peace to other parts of the Middle East.