NATO HQ 13 June 2003

Statement by NATO Secretary General, Lord Robertson, following the NATO-Russia Council Meeting at the level of Defence Ministers Good morning Ladies and Gentlemen, After a busy and productive day yesterday, we resumed today on a high note with the second meeting of the NATO-Russia Council of Defence Ministers. All twenty participants in the NRC gave high marks to the achievements of this forum in the first year of its existence. Defence Ministers can take justifiable pride in their contributions to this success. We have made real progress on such key defence issues as terrorism, theatre missile defence and military reform. Today’s meeting was devoted primarily to providing direction to our future cooperation. There was no shortage of topics or ideas, including enhanced interoperability, better modalities for operational cooperation and upgraded liaison arrangements. The successful cooperation between NATO and Russian forces in the Balkans, which comes to an end in August, and joint exercises such as Baltops 2003 now under way in the Baltic, have provide very important lessons on which to build. Ministers also discussed the current international situation and their common security concerns. The situation in Afghanistan featured prominently. Ministers agreed on the importance of stability and peace in that country. As you know, NATO will be take on a leading role in ISAF in Kabul from August. Russia is extremely supportive of this difficult undertaking and we are very grateful for that open and positive attitude. This has been another practical and valuable NRC meeting. In one year, we have turned the unthinkable into business as usual. Today, Sergey Ivanov and his NATO colleagues gave further impetus to this work, strengthening this solid partnership between 20 countries with a shared vision for the future. Thank you. MODERATOR: Questions, please. Q: John Chalmers, Reuters. Did the Russian minister specify what kind of support the Russians would give to the ISAF operation? ROBERTSON: Well, we’re still discussing what kind of support might be available outside of Afghanistan by Russia to our mission. The support has been principally political. They understand why we’ve taken this over. Stability and certainty in Afghanistan in relation to ISAF is of concern and importance to Russia, as well as to the NATO nations. So we’ll obviously look at how we can help each other in that common objective. After all, NATO will be operating within a U.N. mandate and Russia is, of course, a permanent member of the Security Council. Q: Two questions, if I may, the first on Russia. Could you be a little bit more specific when you say: We’ve made real progress on terrorism, theatre missile defence and reform, specifically on missile defence, could you be a little bit more specific on what exactly the discussion is on, what part of it is being made? Second question is following Secretary Rumsfeld’s comments yesterday: What is exactly - considering that the U.S. has a considerable contribution, financial contribution to the future headquarters of NATO - what exactly will it mean that they suspended the funding for the construction of the headquarters? ROBERTSON: On the co-operation with Russia, we’ve got working groups, expert groups working across a wide range of issues, including terrorism, common threat assessments, proliferation of weapons and we’ve got a serious project underway. Indeed, it’s almost a flagship of the NATO-Russia Council, on theatre missile defence. So we are co-operating both in terms of the threat, but also on the way forward and we’re approaching the point where project definition is now under way, where financial contributions have to be predominant, in order to establish feasibility studies. So this is not something just rhetorical. It’s actually built on a solid basis of co-operation, given that we all recognize, all 20 countries recognize that there is a threat from the proliferation of ballistic missile technology and that we all need some defence for that. So theatre missile defence was something NATO was working on before, and which we now would like to be working with Russia on. In terms of the new headquarters, as you know, we have published the winning designs from the international architectural competition. We are working now, with the architects and with those in charge of the project to move forward on this. The Americans have made it clear that they will not allow any expenditure... of their expenditure during the next six months. And well, obviously, one can see what implications that would have for the project as a whole. But we’re not at the building stage yet, so it may not have a huge impact. What I would say is that this is not a bilateral argument between the Americans and the Belgians. American individuals have found themselves places in a difficult situation and therefore, it’s sharper for the Americans. But the issue here is a bigger one than just one country in the Alliance. The Alliance, the European Union and the other international organizations in Brussels need to know that people can come and go to meetings and therefore, I welcome the discussions that have taken place between Mr. Rumsfeld and Minister Flahaut last night, and other discussions that will take place in the next few weeks, and I’m sure that a mutually convenient solution can be found. Q: Yes. Have you agreed with Russians on keeping Russian military reps in shape after the mission, Russian mission on the Balkans, is over, or they will leave. ROBERTSON: No. We’re discussing at the moment the creation of a Russian military liaison mission here, something that is provided for under the original founding act between NATO and Russia. So we’re simply discussing the modalities of that at the moment and I’m absolutely confident that that can be quickly sorted out. This is a big move forward, to have a military liaison mission of Russia, here in the NATO and SHAPE organization. And it will mirror the arrangements we have in Moscow now. So we are institutionalizing this co-operation in a serious way and I very much welcome the moves by Defence Minister Ivanov to put this on a formal basis, in line with what the founding act set out. Q: To what extent can be useful the contribution of Russia to the mission of NATO in Afghanistan, and would you prefer to have troops, Russian troops in Afghanistan, rather than only political support and logistic support from Russia? ROBERTSON: The Russians have made it clear that there will be no Russian troops in Afghanistan at all. That is completely precluded by their choice and that is a fact that we simply take into account. NATO is in the very early stages of planning for what is a big mission by NATO in Afghanistan. So we’re not in a position yet to ascertain what help might be given by the neighbouring states, by other countries outside of NATO and the Partnership for Peace. You know, there are countries outside these organizations involved in ISAF at the moment. So these are early days before we can see what other help we might require. There’s detailed planning going on and that will have to be fleshed out much more before we can actually plug in other contributions that might take place. But the Russian authorities have said that they give their blessing to the operation, commend NATO for doing the operation, stand ready to help in certain ways, like overflight and transit rights in the Russian Federation, but we haven’t yet explored any other possibilities of co-operation. MODERATOR: Last question to the gentlemen. Q: Interfax News Agency from Russia: What are the prospects of deepening military co-operation between NATO and Russia in terms of joint arms production, other such prospects? Thank you, sir. ROBERTSON: Well, these are things that will come out in the future as co-operation extends. But clearly, one of the areas that is of interest to the NATO nations at the moment is the Russian capability in outsized airlift, the large airplanes required now to take troops and equipment on a long distance. So we’re looking at that carefully at the moment. And who knows? There may well be other areas where defence production might be sensibly done on a co-ordinated and co-operative basis. MODERATOR: Thank you very much. Merci beaucoup.