Press briefing

Ladies and gentlemen one minute after eleven.  So by NATO standards, that's a little bit late.  So let me start very quickly.  This shouldn't take too much time to bring you up-to-date on where we are from this morning's conversations. 

I was frankly hoping that I could begin an update to you without talking about Afghanistan first.  But unfortunately Afghanistan was indeed the major topic of discussion this morning, along with Kosovo.  Why? Because Kosovo was discussed extensively at last night's transatlantic dinner.  You are familiar with what has taken place because Minister De Gucht has briefed relatively extensively on that. 

Let me deal with Afghanistan first and then come to Kosovo.  A lot of discussion on Afghanistan around the table.  Of course, these are Foreign Ministers and not Defence Ministers.  They did not, as you could expect from Defence Ministers, discuss the number of helicopters, maneuver of battalions, force generation.  That was not the issue. 

Here, Foreign Ministers took a political look at what is happening in Afghanistan in the future of course of the NATO engagement.  A number of points to mention.  One was the theme of long-term commitment.  This is a long-term commitment from the Allies that was repeated by many ministers and is an important point. 

Second was the importance of "Afghanization".  In other words, that members states of NATO wish to see that the progress that is being made on strengthening Afghan capacity, not only continue but to be reinforced.  And that is both on the political side and on the military side. 

Certainly, on the military side, there was a sense that the investment that is being put into Afghan National Security Forces - in particular the Afghan National Army - is starting to bear fruit. 

And that we can see now after such heavy investment in particular by the United States in their capabilities that they are increasingly capable of conducting operations - and as we've started to see - taking the lead on operations  as well. 

So that was something that was welcomed.  But there was a discussion and that was led by the Supreme Allied Commander of the need for greater efforts when it comes to training and equipping the Afghan National Security Forces.  This is in the larger context of all of the Allies wishing to empower to a greater and greater extent Afghan authorities across the civilian and military spectrum because, of course that is the future of what we are trying to do in Afghanistan.

Finally, there was a long discussion of the need for a stronger civilian effort on the part of the international community.  And that means the United Nations. It means the European Union.  And for greater coordination between all the moving parts of the international communities efforts.  That means NATO, EU, UN and all the other international bodies and countries that are investing so heavily in supporting the Afghan effort. 

That was Afghanistan; let me turn quickly to Kosovo to confirm what Minister De  Gucht indicated last night. 

The discussion around the table this morning is not concluded.  But I believe that we can say that it has confirmed that for the Allies there is complete unity when it comes to Kosovo.  When it comes to the mandate, Allies agree that UN Security Council Resolution 1244 provides a platform for the continuing presence of NATO forces in Kosovo. 

Second, that they commit to maintain the force levels of KFOR at the levels that we have them or to adjust them as necessary.  That includes, if necessary, reinforcement. 

Third, that there will no new caveats placed on the movement of these forces.  Not that this was an issue to be debated, but simply something that was important to confirm for the planning purposes of our military authorities. 

Fourth, that now, and this is from a more political sense, there is the need for the status process to go forward in a managed and controlled way.  And that stagnation can only lead or has the risk of leading to greater instabilities.  So there was a desire for progress for this issue, the status issue to move forward; but as I say, to move forward in a managed and controlled way. 

Finally, let me discuss enlargement.  This was raised as an issue by Ministers.  But many ministers not discussing names of countries but the process of how we will go as an Alliance from now until the Bucharest Summit.  No rankings were given; no tickets were punched. 

But Allies reconfirmed a) of course, that NATO's door remains open.  And there was really a strong sense that there is no enlargement fatigue in this Alliance.  The member States do wish to bring new members into NATO.  But the three countries that are formally candidates are still in the middle of a cycle of what we call the Membership Action Plan.  They're pursuing their reforms.  We are assisting them in pursuing those reforms. 

And that process will come to an end, this particular cycle of the Membership Action Plan will come to an end just prior to the Bucharest Summit.  So Allies do no wish and are not in a position, in a sense, to provide their views on which countries if any or if all should be brought in because this Membership Action Plan is still underway. 

That's all I wanted to raise from this morning's discussion.  I'm happy to take questions on any subject of interest to you.  And the first question here will go across the crowd.

Q:  Oui, bonjour, Khaled Alarabi  from Russia Today Arabic.  Ma question  sera en français si vous permettez.  Est-ce que les pays membres de l'OTAN se sont mis d'accord sur une position commune si le Kosovar annonce l'indépendance de Kosovo après le 10 ou bien dans quelques jours?

APPATHURAI:  Les pays de l'OTAN n'ont pas discuté ce matin cette question: s'il devait y avoir une position commune des pays de l'OTAN, qu'est-ce qu'ils feraient s'il y avait une déclaration d'indépendance à un certain moment?

Ce n'est pas pour l'OTAN en tant qu'organisation de reconnaître l'indépendance ou pas d'un pays ou un soit-disant pays.  C'est pour les pays membres de le faire.  Mais il n'y a pas eu de discussions à cet égard ce matin. 

Q:  You said a need for the status process to move forward in a controlled and managed way.  Is that something that the Allies intend to underline with Minister Lavrov later this morning?

APPATHURAI:  We will see how the meeting goes with Minister Lavrov.  I'm absolutely certain that the Kosovo issue will come up.  And the Secretary General will be here at one o'clock to brief you on how it goes.  So we will see how it comes up.  

Q:  On Afghanistan, did you discuss a new civilian coordinator, the possible appointment of...?

APPATHURAI:  I didn't.  But did the ministers...?  Did this issue come up?  Yes, this issue has come up.  The ministers have exchanged views on this particular issue.  I don't want to give obviously national positions on this issue because I can't. 

What I can say however is there's a general sense around the table that there is a need for a higher profile for those who are leading the international civilian effort in Afghanistan; that there is a need for greater coordination of all, in particular of the civilian aspects of the international effort in Afghanistan; and greater coordination between the civilian aspects and the military side as well. 

So in that context or on those issues, certainly I can say around the table there is consensus.  As to the specific issue of the super-envoy, that I will leave to nation-states to discuss themselves.

Q:  Yes, David Brunnstrom from Reuters.  You mentioned there will be no new caveats.  Can you give us an idea of the extent of the caveats that there will be remaining?

APPATHURAI:  The view of the operational commanders is that in essence there are no caveats representing any significant obstacles to the operations of forces in Kosovo at the present.  Of course, every nation has in every operation without exception some restrictions on what they can or cannot do.  Some for constitutional reasons; some for others. 

But in the case of Kosovo, since 2004, a significant number of caveats and the key ones have been removed.  The operation has been restructured to a, what we call, Taskforce Structure which means it has maximum flexibility.  COM-KFOR can do what he needs to do.  The caveat issue for Kosovo is not considered to be by the operational commanders operationally constraining in any significant way. 

Q:  James, NATO six months ago supported Ahtisaari's plan.  Secretary General said this on behalf of NATO.  Then, you had to pretend that you still believe in negotiations led by Troika that they will produce agreement.  Now, this process is over.  Does NATO now still support Ahtisaari's plan and proposal for the Kosovo status?  And second, did any of the ministers or anybody from NATO comment the recent statements by the adviser of Prime Minister Koštunica that war is a legitimate measure that Serbia can take if Kosovo becomes independent?

APPATHURAI:  To answer the second question first:  No, there was no discussion of this comment which I don't think deserved serious comment. I can leave it to the reaction from the Serbs themselves which as I've seen from press reporting was harshly critical of this comment from Belgrade itself.  But as I say this was not worthy of comment by NATO Ministers and it did not receive any. 

In terms of Ahtisaari, you have seen the position of many NATO nations. They have been very public in saying that they believe that "faute de quoi" without any other resolution between the parties or agreement between the parties on this, they believe that the Ahtisaari plan is a) the only plan on the table; and b) the most viable route forward.  That is the position of many NATO nations.  There's no agreed NATO position as far as I'm aware on this. Formally no. 

Q:  Although the Foreign Ministers did not discuss force generation, were they any added commitments or promises made for Afghanistan this morning?

APPATHURAI:  This was certainly not a force generation conference.  A number of ministers mentioned the increased contributions that they will be making.  I can give, for example, the Czechs who will be putting in place a Provincial Reconstruction Team in Lowgar province.  So they will be significantly increasing their contribution. 

Minister Sikorski also set out what will be an increased Polish contribution, including attack and transport helicopters and a significant number of troops, even more than we had seen.  But these are not new announcements.  But this would never be the place for Ministers to announce new announcements for Afghanistan. 

Q:  James, back on Kosovo, can you just clarify the situation of the reserves?  How many battalions are we talking about and how many troops altogether?  And what state of readiness by when?

APPATHURAI:  Well, the military wouldn't not want me to go into great detail about state-of-readiness.  But we do have, let me say, a number of reserve battalions on varying states of readiness.  There's one reserve battalion - and this is no secret - that has deployed on exercise already into Kosovo. This is not a deployment that was made for any other reason than as part of a regular rotation of training exercises for reserve battalions.  There may be more such rotations on exercise of reserve battalions. 

The bottom-line is this:  there are significant forces available that can be deployed at very short notice.  We have demonstrated that in March 2004 when within 24 hours there were battalions flowing into Kosovo.  We can do that again.  And the number of forces that are necessary will be provided.  That being said, we do not anticipate, do not expect violence.  We are prepared for everything, but no moves that we make are because we expect.

Q:  Yes, just to be completely sure.  You say UN Resolution 1244 is a platform even if the Kosovars declare independence unilaterally.  Because I know that NATO doesn't have any position on accepting that or not, but anyway the resolution stays valid.

APPATHURAI:  In essence, unless the UN Security Council agrees on a new resolution, then 1244 will remain in place and 1244 will be a platform for NATO forces to remain.

Q:  James, you speak of great unanimity among the members over Kosovo.  Some of the members have their own internal domestic separatist pressures, Spain, France to name a few; don't you get different vibes from such governments?

APPATHURAI:  It's important to in a sense compartmentalize how we look at Kosovo.  There is a question of how one deals with a declaration of independence managed and controlled.  And that is of course for nation-states to decide.  But there is also a security question that needs to be addressed. 

And all the NATO nations recognize that we have to, as an international community, maintain a safe and secure environment in Kosovo, because the security implications for the region are very clear.  The security implications for wider Europe are also very clear because we went through it just a few years ago. 

So I think the nation-states have quite rightly focused here at NATO on NATO's job.  The NATO's job is security; 1244; force levels will remain; no new restrictions on forces.  And there are no significant or operationally significant restrictions on forces.  That is a very strong platform for us.  And others issues will have to be dealt with in another form.

Q:  Thank you.  Did the Ministers discuss a suspension of CFE by the Russian side?  How is it going?

APPATHURAI:  CFE will be discussed principally with Minister Lavrov.  They wish to have that discussion at 27 first and foremost because that's the forum for it.

Q:  Regila Dupied.  You said there hasn't been a formally agreed NATO position on Kosovo.  Will there be one later today?

APPATHURAI:  In terms of recognition or...?

Q:  Either...  Do we expect a statement, yes?

APPATHURAI:  Yes. There will be a communiqué released at a certain stage.

Q: On security?

APPATHURAI:  On all issues.  And it will certainly have a chapter devoted to Kosovo, an agreed NATO position.

Q:  Italian News Agency Chronos.  Just to clarify, since you mentioned there were possible reinforces.  Were you meaning reinforces within the scope of the reserves, or did they discuss the possibility of increasing if necessary the force on the ground in Kosovo?

APPATHURAI:  Well, that is kind of the same thing.  We have a force on the ground of around 16,000... 16,450 the last time I heard.  And we have reserves in place that can be brought in to augment that force.  That's the way it works.  And if we need to we will.

Q:  Yes, James, going back to Afghanistan and the super-envoy.  First of all, was there any discussion today of personalities who might be appointed to that position.  And is there an agreement with NATO as to how many hats this person will wear?  Will it unite the three NATO-EU-UN positions or some other combinations of those?

APPATHURAI:  There was no discussion of names.  First point.  On the issue of how many hats?  Certainly, and this comes back to what I said before, Allies believe that there is a need for greater coordination across the spectrum of the civilian effort.  And I think that should come close to answering your question.  Am I being too oblique?  No, I think that's fine. 

Q:  Just to understand you right, will that mean that KFOR remains a NATO-led operation?  And wasn't it quite originally the plan to transfer that responsibility to the European Union some months ago?

APPATHURAI:  KFOR will remain a NATO-led mission.  If anything, KFOR will be renamed as an international military presence, though I think it will probably keep its name.  But under no circumstances that I can envision for the foreseeable future, will this operation be anything but NATO-led.

Thank you!