Background briefing on the upcoming meeting of Defence Ministers

MODERATOR: Dear colleagues thank you for coming. I hope that this will not (inaudible).

Our Assistant Secretary General for Defence Planning and Policy, John Colston, is going to brief you on the upcoming Ministerial. So John you have the floor. It's on the record.

JOHN COLSTON (Assistant Secretary General for Defence Planning and Policy): On the record. Thank you very much.

Ladies and gentlemen good afternoon; good to see you all here. Just by way of introduction I'm going to take you through the sequence of meetings and the key issues that I expect to see addressed at each of those meetings and then open up the discussion for your questions. You'll recall that this is the sequence of meetings which takes place once a year, usually in June, and it is the formal meeting of NATO Defence Ministers. This means that there will be a communiqué. This means that in certain areas there will be decisions which are taken.

The sequence of meetings will start on Thursday morning this week with a meeting of the 26 Allies which will address issues of defence transformation; looking at the decisions which were taken in Prague, Istanbul and Riga; looking at how the comprehensive political guidance that was published in Riga is being implemented. There will be a number of particular issues on which Ministers will want to concentrate. On missile defence we're hoping that they will take a specific decision that the future work on a possible future NATO missile defence system will take into account the implications of the U.S. proposals to base interceptors in Poland and radars in the Czech Republic.

I'm also expecting that they will want to review progress in the NATO Response Force. How are we doing in ensuring that we maintain the capability of this key NATO asset? They will want to look at the further reform and review of the NATO military command structure. And they'll want to look at a range of initiatives designed to support our capacity for deployed operations, including the interest of a large number of nations in acquiring C17 aircraft.

We will then have a working lunch with the Ukrainian Minister of Defence, Minister Grytsenko, and that will be an opportunity to focus on the progress which is being made in the areas of defence and security sector reform in Ukraine. Minister Grytsenko will brief his colleagues and the Deputy Secretary of the National Security and Defence Council will brief Ministers on progress which is being made in security sector reform more generally.

There will then be the first meeting between the Allied Defence Ministers and the new Minister of Defence of the Russian Federation Minister Serdyukov. I'm expecting that to be a rich debate. Amongst the subjects likely to be discussed are missile defence, the adapted CFE Treaty, and those will no doubt give rise to some lively debate. There will also be an opportunity to focus on the many positive aspects of NATO-Russia co-operation. The recent ratification of the Status of Forces Agreement, the program of co-operation in relation to logistics, transport, support for Afghanistan; the program of co-operation in relations to counter-narcotics training focused on Afghanistan, the second Russian contribution this year to Operation Active Endeavour, as well as a broad range of military and defence activities.

We will then have a meeting of the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council. That's the Allies and all 23 of our Partnership for Peace partners. This is going to be the first meeting where representatives of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro and Serbia attend. So it will be an important meeting from that respect. We'll have an opportunity to discuss the ways in which Allies and Partners work together in operations and the contribution of Partners to current NATO operations is very significant indeed and therefore of great importance to NATO Allies. It will also be an opportunity to discuss those operations in which many Partner nations are engaged; Afghanistan, and perhaps particularly in relation to Kosovo, because in addition to the NATO Allies, in addition to Russia, all of the neighbouring countries will be present.

On the evening of Thursday the 14th of June, the Allied Ministers, the 26 Ministers, will have a working dinner at which they will discuss Afghanistan and Kosovo. On Afghanistan I expect them to be focusing on the need to ensure that the NATO-ISAF Force has the right capabilities and the flexibility to use them to meet our mission. I expect them to talk about the need for continued support to the Afghan national security forces - the Afghan National Army and the Afghan National Police - to talk about how we can best support the Afghan government in their counter-narcotics efforts and to look at the need for improved co-ordination, better communications in relation to the Afghanistan mission. They'll also talk about Kosovo and not least how to ensure that we continue properly to bring security and stability to Kosovo over what is likely to be a sensitive and challenging period.

On Friday morning the 25 Allies who form the Nuclear Planning Group will come together for a short meeting when they will receive briefings from the United States and the United Kingdom on their new respective nuclear weapons programs. They will have the opportunity to reflect on training exercises, consultations in the nuclear policy area, and perhaps to reflect also on the developing nature of deterrents in the 21st century.

The same 25 Ministers will then go on to hold their meeting of the Defence Planning Committee, which is the opportunity for the 25 Allies who participate in NATO's force planning process to review the progress which has been made against the comprehensive political guidance and against the ministerial guidance which was agreed last year in terms of the continuing transformation and development of their forces.

And finally, on Friday morning the last meeting will be a meeting of the North Atlantic Council with those nations who are contributing forces to NATO's International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan and with Minister Wardak, the Afghan Minister of Defence, and that will be an opportunity to consider in rather more detail how best NATO, NATO's partners and the Afghan authorities can work together to achieve our common aims in support of the Afghan government.

So about eight meetings. I think it's eight. You may have counted as you've gone through. So a busy two days work and a lot of critical issues to be addressed. With that by way of background let me open the floor for your questions.

Q: Paul Ames from the Associated Press. I have two questions.

Firstly, NATO has long wanted the EU to take a role in police training in Afghanistan. Now that the EU is going to do that, how confident are you that NATO is going to be able to provide the force protection for them given the reservations which Turkey has raised on this issue?

And secondly, have you had anytime so far to look at… evaluate President Putin's suggestion of a radar base in Azerbaijan? Is this something you expect to be discussed at the meeting and in what way do you see that discussion going?

COLSTON: Okay thank you very much. In relation to police training in Afghanistan, as you say this is not a primary responsibility for NATO, but it's an area in which NATO has a very close interest because there is reasonably well-founded perception that the development of the Afghanistan National Police has not been making the kind of progress that either the Afghan government nor the International community would wish. The ambition is to have around 82,000 police officers within the Afghan National Police. At present there are only about 40,000. So we very much welcome the decisions taken within the European Union to establish an ESDP mission and we want to see that succeed.

We hope that it's possible to define ways of supporting the ESDP mission in Afghanistan which meets the interests and concerns of all of the Allies. We are cooperating in Afghanistan with a wide range of United Nations and other agencies and I can see no reason in principle why we should not be able to work satisfactorily with the ESDP police mission as well. We are following this through very carefully. We're aware of certain national sensitivities. The Secretary General will be in Turkey tomorrow and this may be one of the issues which is addressed there. But given the importance of the task, given the importance which all the NATO Allies place on the development of the police in Afghanistan, I am confident that we will find a way forward.

In relation to President Putin's proposal about the placement… the possible placement of a missile defence radar in Azerbaijan, it is genuinely too early to offer you any kind of definitive answer to that. We would have to look, and I saw we - of course I need to remember, you need remember, that the missile defence system which is being discussed here is a United States national program in which we have a close interest, but it is a United States program. It's too early for me to offer a technical evaluation about whether a radar in Azerbaijan might be able to undertake or contribute to the infrastructure of a missile defence system based in Europe.

What I would say however is that it is very welcome that President Putin and the Russian Federation seem to be moving on from the rhetoric of confrontation to the rhetoric of co-operation. As you will be aware, the United States put a whole range of detailed proposals the Russian authorities back in April this year over areas in which the United States and Russia might co-operate on missile defence. So it's pleasing to see that Russia is beginning to come to identify some ideas of its own on how such co-operation might take place. And it's pleasing to see as well that our Russian colleagues are moving together with us into examining some of the scope for co-operation on theatre missile defence under the auspices of the NATO-Russia Council(theatre missile defence the shorter range systems).

Q: (Inaudible)…

MODERATOR: Can you identify yourself please?

Q: (Inaudible)… Talking about Ukraine, you mention only (inaudible)… of Defence (inaudible), but you do not say nothing about NATO-Ukraine Commission. (Inaudible)...

COLSTON: No, no. The working lunch is a meeting of the NATO-Ukraine Commission. It's just that we get the chance to eat as we are holding our meeting. With eight meetings in one and a half days, it's necessary to combine some of these. In just the same way that the working dinner which the Allied Ministers have in the evening will be a formal meeting of the North Atlantic Council even though it is held at a table where they can eat as they talk. This is formal meeting of the NATO-Ukraine Commission which will be taking place.

Q: Do you see any moving in Russian rhetoric on Kosovo from confrontation towards co-operation? And what is NATO going to prepare for the situation when we might end up to have Kosovar independence without the resolution of Security Council? President Bush yesterday said in Tirana that time is coming sooner rather than later to say enough is enough and Kosovo is independent. So the Americans are not excluding that in case of the Russian veto there will be an independence of Kosovo without resolution. Is NATO prepared for this scenario?

COLSTON: Thank you very much. Let me say first of all that NATO Allies are hopeful that we can reach a Security Council resolution which can take into account President Ahtisaari's proposals on status and offer us a stable and secure way forward; a way forward for Kosovo, but a way forward also for Kosovo's neighbours in the Balkans including Serbia. I think you will see from Ministers two linked messages. One, a message for the Kosovars encouraging all nations to support a Security Council resolution on the basis of President Ahtisaari's proposals. And one for Belgrade reiterating the fact that NATO Allies do see and do support Serbia's progressive integration with European and Euro-Atlantic institutions. We want our friends and colleagues in Serbia to be part of the broader family of European nations, not to be an exception from it.

As to speculation about what would happen if a Security Council resolution was not reached, let me first of all say there is as yet no Russian veto. We've all heard the words which have come from some Russian leaders, but there is no Russian veto as yet and we're continuing to work and will continue to work over the coming days and weeks to see if we can reach a negotiated settlement.

Secondly, there is no plan B. We are not preparing for failure in this respect. But thirdly, of course we are monitoring the position on the ground very closely and everyone in Kosovo needs to be aware of NATO's determination to maintain security in Kosovo and that we will not tolerate threats from whatever quarter to such security. We are therefore determined to maintain our mission; to maintain it effectively; and to ensure that the security of Kosovo is maintained for the benefit of all its inhabitants until such time as we hope we can transition to a new status under a new resolution in providing the international military presence in Kosovo.

Q: So do you thick that President Bush was speculating when he said that the time will come to say enough is enough and to make Kosovo independent if we see that we cannot achieve common position. I'm quoting him.

COLSTON: Certainly it will be up to each individual ally to decide how it wishes to proceed if the process fails. My message is that the process hasn't failed and we're continuing to work hard to try to ensure that it doesn't fail.

Q: (Inaudible)… Lithuania Radio and Television.

When you say that you are showing strong interest on the missile defence, the U.S., Polish and Czech, and that NATO will take into account U.S. proposal, could you be more clear about that? Does it mean that NATO is planning in some future when it happens to make these installations… take these installations under the NATO umbrella, not leaving on the bilateral level?

COLSTON: Thank you for that. If I can just take one step back; at Prague NATO heads of state and government commissioned a technical feasibility study and a set of related policy reviews to examine the possibility of NATO acquiring and developing its own continental missile defence system. Took no decisions on whether it would do that, but it commissioned the various work which might prepare a future decision.

In Riga that feasibility study was presented. It ran to some 10,000 pages and there was an accompanying assessment of the policy implications of a possible future NATO missile defence system. Since Riga we have had of course the formal confirmation of the United States opening negotiations with the Polish authorities and with the Czech authorities about the possible location of elements of the U.S. missile system n Europe

Now what I expect to see later this week is an agreement by the Allies that we're going to look at the implications of the United States proposals for the future of development of the NATO system. It's quite possible that the United States capability could be one complimentary element of our approach to missile defence in the future. This is not bringing the U.S. system under NATO control, but it is recognizing that the United States' system would be likely to provide a very substantial degree of coverage of the European continent and therefore it does make sense for us to examine the United States system alongside possible potential future NATO elements. But let me say no decision taken now and no decision expected in the near future on whether or not NATO would want to proceed with its own missile defence system. That is a decision for the future.

Q: Nick Fiorenza, Jane's.

One question on the state of play on a couple of things you mentioned. For the C-17 are you still talking about three aircraft being leased?

The logistics and transport… you mentioned for Afghanistan an agreement on logistics and transport with Russians. I don't know if that's the same as SOFO(?) or if it's related.

And then what is the state of play for the command structure? I know there's been talk of a PE, a personnel establishment review, but maybe you can explain where we are on that.

And then finally, there was a BBC report this morning of the use, or at least having found a shaped-charge IED, in Afghanistan. I think in Helmand Province. I mean is that the first such shaped-charge IED that was found in Afghanistan and is that going to be discussed at the meeting?

COLSTON: Thank you very much. On your last question I'm afraid I'm aware of the report… I don't have an answer to it. It is something that's being examined at the moment by our military authorities.

On the other three issues, the C17's, yes we're still looking at three. Most recently we've had a strong expression of interest from Finland alongside Sweden to become the second partner nation to join the 15 Allied nations who are examining the scope for the purchase and operation of the C17's. We still haven't worked out all the details on how we're going to do this and we would like to conclude that work this week, but it continues for the time being.

On Russian support in relation to Afghanistan; yes it is related to the Status of Forces Agreement in that the conclusion of the Status of Forces Agreement should make it much easier for Russia and NATO nations to work together in such areas. What we're doing, not only in preparation for this week's meetings, but also for… in preparation for the events in St. Petersburg and Moscow which will mark the 10th anniScriptVersionEditor=6.147