|
| Updated: 02-Apr-2004 | NATO Speeches |
| NATO
HQ
2 Apr. 2004 |
Press conference by
NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer
de Hoop Scheffer: Ladies and gentlemen, good afternoon. We just finished the first informal meeting, working meeting of 26 Foreign Ministers in the North Atlantic Council. We started our discussion on the fight against terrorism. You might have seen already - I hope it is the case, anyway - that we have issued a declaration on terrorism which, of course, I’m not going to read to you, but it shows what NATO is doing and what NATO will do. We have, of course, already been doing a lot, given our contributions in Afghanistan, in the Balkans, Operation Active Endeavour in the Mediterranean, but the Ministers agreed that more will have to be done so they agreed to develop an enhanced set of measures which should be ready before the Summit in Istanbul at the end of June, including subjects like enhanced intelligence sharing, developing Operation Active Endeavour to include Partners, Partner countries in the Mediterranean Dialogue, and of course also... a point made by Javier Solana, who was present in the meeting, the High Representative... of course even better NATO/EU co-operation in the fight against terrorism. The second subject Ministers discussed were the Balkans, where of course Kosovo was discussed and the smooth handover of the SFOR mission in Bosnia-Herzegovina, NATO SFOR mission under the arrangements of Berlin Plus to the European Union. Ministers agreed that it is necessary to bring the political message home to the Kosovo leadership that the standards should be further developed and that we need an important political message... give an important political message as far as the standards are concerned, and it was reiterated that what happened in Kosovo two weeks ago, the ethnic violence which happened, should not have as its price that the international community should or would change course as far as Kosovo is concerned. The third major subject we discussed, of course, was Afghanistan. Ministers reconfirmed what I have said many times before, that this is at the moment NATO’s highest priority and at the same time the biggest challenge. As you know, NATO has already done a lot. There are 6,500 troops in ISAF. We have the DDR process, we have security sector reform, and we have at the moment one PRT under ISAF command. We are on track for having five more PRTs under ISAF’s command. I can tell you that the operational plan prepared by SACEUR and having been approved by the military committee has been approved by Foreign Ministers just a minute ago. We had a very brief formal part of our informal meeting, first of all to accept and to approve the declaration on terrorism, and, secondly, to approve the operational plan for the phases one and two of ISAF expansion. Having said that, let me be very clear, on the other hand, Afghanistan is not Kosovo in the sense that NATO does not have the mandate or the intention to blanket Afghanistan with troops, nor is NATO the prime and first responsible to fight the enormous problem of the drugs and the narcotics in Afghanistan. NATO is supporting the Karzai government by expanding the PRTs, by providing the necessary back-up forces for the PRTs, by seeking more synergy between ISAF on the one hand and Operation Enduring Freedom on the other hand. Enduring Freedom assets will play a role in protecting the new PRTs who are going to be set up. Then we had a discussion on the Mediterranean Dialogue/the Istanbul Co-operation Initiative. Ministers agreed a framework for NATO to discuss greater co-operation with our Mediterranean Dialogue partners and beyond with an eye to Istanbul, which means that Ministers have approved a consultation process which is going to be held with the Mediterranean Dialogue partners and beyond. Of course, Ministers concluded that the general framework in which this outreach to the greater Middle East in the framework of the Istanbul Co-operation Initiative is going to take place should be done in a general framework based on what is going to be done on three different summit meetings; the EU/US Summit, the G-8 summit which will be held in June, and finally, at the end of June, the last summit which will be the NATO Summit. In other words, it was a solid and substantial meeting during which also the subject of Iraq was discussed, the transfer of sovereignty on the 1st of July. Ministers were updated on the situation by some Ministers of countries playing an active role in Iraq. In brief, it was a solid and substantial meeting. I think it was a demonstration that NATO, more than any other organization, is able to square the circle of multilateralism and effectiveness. Thank you so much. I’m ready to take your questions. Questions and answers Q: Secretary General, Robert van de Roer of NRC Handelsblad from the Netherlands. You have said frequently in the last few weeks that NATO could be willing to send troops to Iraq once there is a UN resolution. Can you tell us after the meeting of today how far we are away from that resolution? de Hoop Scheffer: Well, that's a bit difficult to answer in the sense that the preparation of this resolution is of course not an exclusive NATO affair, but may I say that within the NATO Alliance I see a lot of support for such a resolution. Of course, there are permanent members of the Security Council in NATO; there are non-permanent members as well. I get the impression, and it's more than the impression, I have the feeling that there is within the Atlantic Alliance a great deal of support for having a new Security Council resolution mandating, after the transfer of sovereignty, and of course always upon request of a sovereign Iraqi government, that's the key, after the 1st of July. It's not a coalition. It will be the Iraqi sovereign, the legitimate Iraqi government who has to ask the question. I see a good deal of support for a new Security Council resolution. Q: Secretary General, Latvian Television
(inaudible).... I have a question if... well Russians probably, as they
stated already, are going now in a NATO-Russia Council, demand that the
newcoming countries should immediately join CFE agreement. Well, what
is your response to that if we don't have a CFE agreement to join. de Hoop Scheffer: Well, on your last question, let's see what Minister Lavrov is saying. Let me repeat, again, what I said before. I mean, I'm very glad that Minister Lavrov is coming, within half an hour, if you'll give me the opportunity to formally greet and receive him. So I'm very glad about that, and I think the Alliance is glad, because I stress again, we need that partnership with Russia, and it is certainly NATO's ambition to develop that partnership. On CFE, you know the position. Certainly the adapted CFE treaty is one of the hard nuts to crack. But you know the NATO position on the adapted CFE, and you know better than I do coming from the country where you come from, what is the ambition and the intention of the relevant countries, vis-à-vis CFE, of course, as soon as they are in a position to sign the adapted CFE treaty. So I mean, there's no change in the position, and let's wait what Minister Lavrov will have to say in the NATO-Russia Council, which will start very soon. Q: Secretary General, I'm Mac Yusef from Nile News, Egyptian Television. In declaration, Mr. Secretary General, you said that NATO is ready to fight against terrorist, and in some other declaration before you were... you mentioned that all the attacks against the coalition in Iraq is a terrorist attack. Does it mean that you are ready to go to Iraq in any time you feel that it's fighting against terrorist, even without waiting for a UN resolution? de Hoop Scheffer: Well, let me explain, as you know, the situation. At the moment NATO has no role in Iraq apart from giving support to the Polish leadership of the multinational division. On the other hand, in Iraq, being not a NATO operation, 17 of the 26 allies are on the ground with their forces. What will be a possible role of NATO, I stress again, is up to the sovereign legitimate Iraqi government to decide. Not up to the Alliance. After the 1st of July we have a transfer of sovereignty, and they decide, the Iraqi government, legitimate government, will decide. I stress again, I add again, that if
I follow discussions, not only within
NATO,
but also
within other international
bodies, and Mr. van de Roer, your colleague,
referred to this. Q: Secretary General, my name is (inaudible) from BRD(?) Corporation. My first question is in relation to the enlargement. Why enlargement? And does NATO need a change? Is it because of this that you have more members? And my second question is that the scale of violence has been increased, and rapidly in Northern Iraq, has this got to do with the Kurdish issue, do you think? Thank you. de Hoop Scheffer: On that last question there is no formal role in Iraq. I'm not going to speculate or analyze. I mean, violence is bad, and violence should, of course, be prevented, but there's no NATO role in Iraq, so that means that the Secretary General of NATO has no formal position on what is happening in Iraq. Why enlargement? Well, a few hours ago on this same spot I had the privilege of being here with seven new foreign ministers of the seven new NATO members. Why enlargement? This is a unique organization, NATO; a value-driven organization, political organization, military organization, organization based on collective security and collective defence. An organization which is fighting terrorism, the proliferation of mass destruction. NATO's door is open. Look at
many other countries who
want to come
closer to
Euro-Atlantic structures.
So why enlargement?
I mean, my answer to you
would be the word, values, and those
values
are
so normal,
for
me, having
been born
in the Netherlands,
and having grown up in a
free part of Europe since the Second
World
War, and
the other
people had
so... had
to fight so
tremendously hard for those
values. Q: Laurent Zecchini, Le Monde. M. le secrétaire général, vous avez parlé de l'efficacité de l'OTAN, et évidemment c'est un message important au moment ou sept pays rejoignent l'OTAN, or depuis huit ans on apprend à intervalles réguliers que l'OTAN a monté une opération militaire pour capturer Radovan Karadzic et immanquablement celui-ci s'échappe. Qu'est-ce qui se passe sur le terrain et est-ce que c'est un bon message d'efficacité de l'OTAN? de Hoop Scheffer: En réponse, formellement la responsabilité pour attrapé Karadzic, Mladic et autres gens indictés par le Tribunal pénal à La Haye n'est pas formellement en responsabilité de l'OTAN. C'est une responsabilité national mais vous avez raison de dire que bien sur la SFOR en Bosnie-Herzégovine assiste aux opérations d'essayer d'attraper les 'war criminels' les criminels de guerre. Je suis désolé, vraiment désolé qu'on a pas réussi d'attraper Karadzic il y a trois jours. On fait un effort, j'espère fortement que dans un très brève délais on aurait du succès parce que je pense c'est très important. C'est pour ça que mes appels fréquents, les appels européennes, les appels de l'OTAN dans... pour les pays comme Serbie Monténégro comme Bosnie-Herzégovine de coopérer dans tous les facettes avec le Tribunal. Je serais un homme, un secrétaire général plus heureux si on aurait des succès d'attraper les gens parce qu'il est absolument nécessaire, qu'il soit transporter à La Haye. Q: You already mentioned the doors for the NATO are... for the new members in NATO are not closed, and I'm wondering, are you going to invite Croatia, Albania and Macedonia at Istanbul to join to NATO, and are you going to invite Serbia and Montenegra and Bosnia to join to the PFP at the same event? de Hoop Scheffer: Well that remains to be seen. I don't know yet. You know we have different programs on let's say what's called bringing those countries closer to our structures. We have MAP countries, Membership Action Plan countries. We have the Partnership for Peace. But I mean, to advance, you know, it is necessary to have reforms. Look at the long way the countries who have today... or last Monday I should say, in Washington, acceded to the NATO treaty have had. So I can't answer your question in the sense that then and then it will happen. Let me make one remark on PFP. Everybody agrees, be it NATO or the European Union that for PFP the very important yardstick is full co-operation with the ICTY and The Hague. And if I look at developments in Serbia and Montenegra, I do not see, let's say, developments in that direction. Rather on the contrary. So that doesn't make things easier. But the timeframe, unfortunately, I cannot give you now. Q: My name is Avid(?) from (inaudible) Dutch Daily Reformatorisch Dagblad. On the question of new candidates, has there been formal applications coming in already? de Hoop Scheffer: No formal applications, although you know that a number of countries have stated very clearly their intention that they want to become members of NATO. If you look at the MAP countries in the Balkans it is clear that they have the ambition to become members of NATO, Croatia, Albania and Macedonia. They... the Prime Ministers, as you know, were invited in Washington by President Bush last Monday a time frame I cannot give you. It is not, as we see at the European Union a country formally let's say handing over the documents for the application of membership. We have in NATO, as I said, the different programs from Membership Action Plan to Partnership for Peace. But again, a timeframe is very difficult to give. It depends on the countries concerned, how much progress they can make. But NATO's door is open. Let me restate that as a general principle. Q: (inaudible)... Secretary General, when you said that you felt that there is a full support for a new UN resolution on Iraq, are you implying perhaps that the feeling is that most of the countries are in favour of a clear UN political role in Iraq and the peacekeeping forces there? de Hoop Scheffer: My answer's yes. I think that has always been the case. I mean, the role of the UN... important role of the UN, vital. I mean, don't catch me for words, an important role of the UN. I understand that Mr. Brahimi, Lakhdar Brahimi, will be back in Iraq very shortly now in preparing for a possible UN role. We don't exactly know what that's going to be, but if you ask me politically do many applies consider a new resolution essential, my answer is yes, definitely. Q: Klaus (inaudible)... German Television. May I come back to Afghanistan, Secretary General? Could you shortly explain the Foreign Ministers approved phase one and two of ISAF expansion and other things? Does it mean we have heard today the new numbers of soldiers to be contributed by the member countries? Because there was a big lack as far as we understood. de Hoop Scheffer: There's not a big... there's not a big deficiency as we... as we call it. They have approved phases one and two, which means phases one and two of ISAF expansion, including the necessary force protection, that's the terminology we use. We are well on the way, let me say that when I read newspapers that there are big deficiencies and enormous... that's not the case. We're not entirely there yet, and I think it's important for the Alliance and that Ministers have also discussed, to translate the political commitment, the clear and strong political commitment the Alliance has made to Afghanistan should of course be for 100 percent be translated into providing the necessary resources. And we have come a very long way, but we are not entirely there yet. So if your question to me would be are you entirely happy, Secretary General? My answer would be no, I'm not entirely happy yet, but the approval of the (inaudible) plan is, of course, a very important step, because that means that the military authorities can further take on their planning. Q: Yes, (inaudible)... Kaufman, Financial Times Deutschland. Yes, and the question of Afghanistan and saying you're not entirely happy, but wouldn't that mean that NATO is facing an overstretch and wouldn't that prevent a real efficient action in Iraq once it comes to a decision given the problems you have right now already with Afghanistan? de Hoop Scheffer: I wouldn't say... I would not say or confirm that NATO is facing an overstretch. NATO is doing, indeed, a lot, you're right, in the Mediterranean, on the Balkans, in Afghanistan. Iraq, not being a NATO operation that doesn't belong in this summing up, but still, as I said, 17 NATO nations have provided forces for the stabilization force in Iraq. When I say to your colleague I'm not entirely happy you may take it meaning that as far as Afghanistan is concerned that bit we still need, and it's not much, to completely fill what is necessary for the phase one and two expansion as we say in our jargon, should be there, should be there shortly. But there's no, let's say, no risk of overstretch if I see what capabilities the NATO allies have when you talk about phase one and two of ISAF expansion in Afghanistan.
|
|||||||||
