There was a mixed outcome for the Nato summit, which was held in Bucharest last week. Some decisions on enlargement were taken, others were postponed (due to Russian objections), a consensus was reached over a US missile defence plan in the Eastern Europe (ignoring Russian objections) and some progress was made over troop commitments in Afghanistan. The summit was also overshadowed by the fact that it was the last one for both US President George Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin ( a guest at the summit), both of whom wanted to preserve their legacy.
Nato, a 26-member Euro-Atlantic military alliance which includes both the US and Canada and stretches from Portugal to Iceland, to the Baltic states and Turkey, endorsed a communiqué backing a plan to base American missile defence bases in the Czech Republic and Poland. The communiqué points out that ballistic missile proliferation is "an increasing threat to allied forces, territory and populations" and that the defence system "will make a substantial contribution to the protection of allies".
Nato approval for the US missile defence plan is a rare foreign policy victory for President Bush, but nevertheless a significant one. Mr Bush always wanted the support of his Nato allies for the plan before he leaves office. Furthermore, the US has always maintained that such a defence system is necessary to counter potential threats from rogue states such as Iran.
In the past the alliance was divided over the issue amid strong Russian objections, so its go-ahead given in Bucharest is especially important. Nato has now even offered Moscow the chance to look at extending the defence plan to Russia itself.
On enlargement, Nato agreed to offer membership to Albania and Croatia, which will no doubt contribute to greater stability in the region. However, Nato leaders postponed a decision - against President Bush's wishes - over membership for Macedonia, Ukraine and Georgia.
The problem for Macedonia is that it has the same name as Greece's northern province and Athens believes that this implies territorial claims. So in a nutshell, Greece vetoed Macedonia's Nato membership prospects, but Nato made it clear that Macedonia will be able to join the Alliance once its settles its dispute with Greece. One hopes that a compromise is soon reached between the two countries, as Nato membership will help bring about stability in Macedonia, which has a large Albanian minority and which has struggled somewhat to maintain its integrity since independence.
The question of Ukrainian and Georgian membership of Nato is more complicated, as Russia has severely criticised such a possibility saying it would lead to a further deterioration between Moscow and Nato. Russia has unfortunately always opposed all Nato expansion waves, because it regards this as an intrusion into an area within its sphere of influence. Of course, these ex-communist countries, some of which were actually once part of the Soviet Union, are today democratic independent states and are free to decide for themselves which organisations they wish to join.
However, Nato was divided over membership for Ukraine and Georgia with Germany and France leading the 'No' camp and the US, UK and Canada leading the 'Yes' camp. Russian opposition to these two countries joining the alliance was extremely fierce; Moscow might have sulked when Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania - former Soviet Republics - joined a few years back but membership prospects for Ukraine and Georgia - also former Soviet republics -located on its south western borders and across key east-west oil and gas routes would have had far more serious consequences.
Germany and France did not want to provoke another crisis with Russia; Kosovo's independence and the US missile plan had already considerably strained relations with Moscow, so they thought that a cooling off period would be better in the circumstances, especially in view of the fact that Dmitri Medvedez takes over from President Putin in May.
They were also conscious of the fact that there is widespread public opposition to Nato membership in Ukraine, especially in the Russian-speaking east, and of the conflicts between the Georgian government and pro-Russian separatist movements in two regions of the country.
Naturally, both Ukraine and Georgia expressed their disappointment at being kept out of the alliance, believing Nato had succumbed to Russian pressure. However, Nato secretary general Jaap de Hoop Scheffer made it clear that the two countries would definitely become Nato members eventually, something Sergei Ryabkov, director of the Russian foreign ministry's department on European cooperation said would be "the biggest possible strategic error".
At the summit France agreed to send an additional 1,000 troops to Afghanistan, a very positive move, which will allow US troops to be redeployed to southern Afghanistan, where Canada has demanded that Nato reinforcements be sent.
Unfortunately Germany, Italy, Turkey and Spain still refused to send troops to the fight on the frontline against the Taliban, presumably because of domestic opposition to the war. In Bucharest, French President Nicolas Sarkozy also indicated that France would decide next year whether to return to Nato's military command structure, which it left in 1966 in protest at the dominance of US commanders.
Closer to home, Nato leaders welcomed Malta back into the Partnership for Peace (PfP) Programme. Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi addressed a meeting of the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council (EAPC), a forum that brings together Nato members and their PfP partners.
The PfP, set up in 1994, is a programme of bilateral co-operation between individual countries and Nato. It allows partner countries to build up an individual relationship with Nato, choosing their own priorities for co-operation.
I have no doubt that our PfP membership will enhance our security framework, help modernise our armed forces and allow us to contribute, in a modest manner, to peacekeeping and humanitarian exercises in Europe. It will also allow us to play a fuller role in the European Union's common security policy.