Check against delivery
Speech by Alain Berset, Secretary General of the Council of Europe
Ambassador Doyle,
Professor Kaldor,
Général Trinquand,
Excellencies,
INTRODUCTION: SECURITY AS WE KNOW IT
No one asks what military security means.
It is missiles and drones, defence industrial capacity, the credibility of nuclear deterrence.
It is also measured in terms of money.
Hundreds of billions of euros committed to defence spending.
A Europe rearming on a scale not seen since the Cold War.
No one asks what energy security means either.
It is about power grids, pipelines, and a state’s ability to sustain its economy.
It is also power plants targeted by missiles, cities plunged into darkness, and people left to freeze.
I saw it in Ukraine just two weeks ago.
I. THE LANGUAGE OF SECURITY
Military security. Energy security. National security. Border security. Cybersecurity.
This is how we read the emerging global order.
Security has become the language of our time.
It justifies decisions abroad.
It reshapes politics at home.
It defines how power is exercised — and how it is defended.
II. THE ESCALATION IN THE MIDDLE EAST
Let me say a few words here about the escalation in the Middle East.
It shows that we are in a deconstruction phase of the international legal order where the power of the strongest are seeking to govern relations between states.
It also underlines the need for a common European legal framework at the level of the forty-six member states of the Council of Europe.
One that is capable of judging violations and the use of force and sanctions, while ensuring continuous, coherent decisions without paralysis.
This has become a matter of strategic imperative.
III. THE SECURITY REFLEX
So today, military security and other forms of security require no explanation.
But democratic security still does.
We question whether it is “real” security.
We wonder if this is the moment.
And with a war raging on our continent, a more aggressive Russia, strategic competition with China, and a disruptive America, this is understandable.
In times of crisis like this, the instinct is to retreat to military capability, strategic autonomy — everything that projects strength and independence.
IV. A VERTICAL MODEL OF SECURITY
We need to challenge that reflex.
Up until now, we have thought about security vertically.
Military alliances, deterrence, and strategic competition stand at the top.
Governments may disagree on levels or alliances, but not on what military security entails.
Then come elections, courts, and media regulation.
These fall under governance.
This is also where we tend to reduce issues like digital regulation and AI to technical questions.
Below that sit minority protection, civic participation, and equal access to rights.
They form the fabric of a stable society.
Yet they remain at the bottom of our security model, as if social cohesion had nothing to do with national security.
V. SECURITY HAS GONE HORIZONTAL
That architecture belongs to another era.
Today, security moves laterally.
A cyberattack on a hospital does not involve drones.
It can still shut down critical infrastructure.
Online radicalisation does not require training camps abroad, but it can end in violence in our streets.
And foreign information manipulation and interference is not a side issue.
It reshapes public debate, fuels division, and weakens democratic life.
As President Maia Sandu said here in January, “Europe faces two wars: one uses missiles, the other uses money, narratives, and manipulation.”
VI. Security Is a Choice
None of these examples fit neatly into traditional security boxes.
And yet, all of them threaten the stability of democratic states.
If security is understood narrowly — as military capacity alone — then institutions risk being treated as secondary.
Rights become negotiable.
Law becomes conditional.
If security is understood structurally — as the resilience of democratic systems under pressure — then armed forces and strong institutions reinforce each other.
Military power protects a democracy only if that democracy remains strong enough to control it.
VII. SECURITY BUILT TO LAST
For too long, we have underestimated the strategic value of social rights, health, education, and institutional trust.
We have dismissed them as “soft” security.
Yet security and stability depend on whether people trust their institutions and believe the system works for them.
Without democratic resilience, the so-called “hard” security begins to crack, even when it looks strong.
What Europe needs now is democratic security.
A security architecture that protects institutions, rights, and freedoms.
One that addresses cyberattacks, terrorism, disinformation, climate risks, and all the challenges confronting our democracies.
Democratic security does not replace military security.
It is what makes every form of security legitimate, sustainable, and accountable.
VIII. UKRAINE AS THE FRONTLINE
I will leave you with Ukraine.
Ukraine, where the Council of Europe is building accountability mechanisms where none existed before.
Ukraine, where every reform — in fighting corruption, preparing for free and fair elections, and strengthening judicial independence — is a building block of democratic security.
To rebuild institutions.
To secure democracy.
And to build peace.
Closing: What is Security for
The question before us is not whether security matters.
It does.
The question is:
Will we remember what security is meant to protect?
The answer will determine the kind of security that defines Europe.
I look forward to our discussion.
Thank you.