NATO HQ, Brussels 10 June 2005

Closing news conference by NATO Secretary General, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer after the Defence Ministers meeting in Brussels JAAP DE HOOP SCHEFFER (NATO Secretary General): Good morning ladies and gentlemen. We had a good discussion today in the framework of the APC. Let's not forget that if you look at NATO's operations-ambitions there is a really very important contribution of many partners. Many face great challenges in strategically important regions such as the Caucasus and Central Asia so it's important also at this level to work together let's say on the ground, in the operational sense, but also to have our political discussions like we had them this morning. So today, we focused very much on the nuts and bolts of transformation, on the tools NATO has which can help our partners transform their militaries, which is from time to time, of course, quite an endeavour. To make them- their militaries more modern, more affordable and more usable for modern missions. What goes for NATO very much also goes for partners in this respect of course. It does make sense everywhere and we're helping to make that happen through our partnership. Of course we had a good look at our cooperation in the field. Let me say that not too long ago as you know the North Atlantic Council visited Kosovo and I saw the soldiers from the partner countries standing and operating shoulder to shoulder there with NATO soldiers, sharing that important mission and sharing the risk. And that's a good illustration of how far we've come in making this partnership deliver real and concrete security; and we do see it of course already for quite some time in Afghanistan and, some of you might remember yesterday that for instance, the NATO support for the African Union Mission in Darfur is also favourably looked at by partners. We can do more of course. We discussed that today. We can have more cooperation in the fight against terrorism. We paid attention to the threat of drug trafficking in and around Afghanistan; a menace which ends up in the streets and schools of all of our countries. So let me say in concluding, it was a solid and useful meeting and a good demonstration of the value and the importance of our partnership. You know I have issued a chairman statement you might have in your possession. Thank you very much, I can leave it there I think. Q: Secretary General, it seems that the arrest of General Mladic is possible and it can happen any day now. The US administration gave a symbolic deadline by July 11th. In that case will you be willing to accept Serbia-Montenegro in PfP without any delay? And what would happen to Bosnia-Herzegovina then? DE HOOP SCHEFFER: I'm afraid you're rushing things a bit now because, let me not comment on the press reports and the statements I've seen on Mladic. It's crystal clear that the sooner he's in The Hague the better. That's a statement I've been making many times and what then will happen is quite another subject, and quite another matter. You know we cooperate with Bosnia-Herzegovina. I mean there's another name--Karadzic--as you know who is still on the run and should not be able to hide forever. So what will happen then I do not know. It is clear that full cooperation with the ICTY is of course the major stumbling block as far as Bosnia-Herzegovina's position and Serbia-Montenegro's position vis-à-vis the PfP are concerned but I mean, in your question there's a very direct link which I would not make at this moment. But let me not comment on what I read in the press about Mladic but let me express the hope that the sooner he is The Hague the better it is for international justice and for the position of Serbia-Montenegro as well. Q (BBC): I was just wondering whether even with help from NATO and the European Union do you think that the African Union peacekeeping force will really make much long term difference in Darfur? DE HOOP SCHEFFER: Oh I do. And I can tell you that I base my opinion on what I heard in Addis Ababa two weeks ago when I was there. I saw the presentation of the concept of operations--the so-called CONOPS in our jargon--of the African Union. I heard that where the African Union is in Darfur it makes a difference. The only thing is, as you know, that they do not have sufficient forces and they want, I mean, to increase the number of soldiers they have on the ground and for that increase they do need NATO so, if you ask me do they make a difference? Yes definitely, they do make a difference. Q (European Security and Defence): Secretary General how open is the door for NATO for the next accession round and have you discussed that with the PfP countries? DE HOOP SCHEFFER: No we have not discussed this but I can say in general, as you know, that that door is open but I add immediately that NATO is a performance-based organisation so it is not that much- if you look at the difference processes, be it the countries in the Balkans having Membership Action Plan or other let's say nations aspiring Euro-Atlantic integration, it is very much performance-based but to answer your question more directly, we have not discussed this. Q: Secretary General a follow-up on the Darfur question. There is some concern that the AU will have difficulty in delivering for its mission in Darfur, in other words, increasing the number of troops as it's promised. So- and that could be a problem down the road for NATO and the EU if that would happen. So, I mean are you concerned that the AU may not have the capability to actually give those troops? DE HOOP SCHEFFER: Well let's have a good look at what NATO's role is. NATO's role is two-fold as I said yesterday. NATO could be in a position to do some forms of training, as I said yesterday, and of course an important element is the airlift indeed as the European Union and NATO feeding into the cell in Addis Ababa. When and where that will happen depends, as you say, on when and where the battalions will be ready to be airlifted into Darfur. And as I said yesterday that also depends on what is there for them in Darfur when they are flown in because you can't just bring them in and you know that not NATO but other organisations are taking responsibility for setting up camps and so on and so forth. As I have heard, and as far as I know now, the African Union is preparing the battalions they need for the next phase of the increase in the number of their forces. As you know they will go up to around 7,000 and then later they have the ambition to go up to 12,000 in total. NATO is not proactive here in the sense that we will airlift the moment the battalions are ready. When they will be ready I would not know but my knowledge, as I speak to you, is that the African Union does have the battalions to augment their forces in Darfur. Q (Reuters): Secretary General a question on the drug trafficking issue in Afghanistan. Have you identified which of the surrounding countries are the weakest link in this respect and what was the discussion in terms of what concrete measures need to be taken to make sure that- or to try and reduce the amount of drugs coming out of that country? DE HOOP SCHEFFER: Well we haven't identified the weakest link. It was the United Kingdom Secretary of State for Defence who was the, let's say, the lead speaker on this subject. We've discussed it many times before, the UK, because the UK is leading in the G8 framework on this subject. The one who's leading in the first place is of course the Afghan government and President Karzai more in particular. Let me also stress that this is not the first responsibility of NATO-ISAF. It is definitely not but as you know we want to assist when we can. The gist of the discussion was more that this is the major problem. If you look at the figures they are of course very worrying, the first one to realize by the way is President Karzai. The solution for the problem is manifold and that includes bringing together all the elements by the international community under the prime responsibility of the Afghan government. Let me say, once again, if a farmer is making money by growing poppies, you can burn his poppy field but I mean the man has to earn his living for himself and his family. In other words, for me this is a very important element in what is called the post-Bonn Process--I would rather speak about the "Kabul Process"--in other words what will be the responsibility of the international community vis-à-vis Afghanistan when the Bonn Process formally comes to an end in September with the parliamentary and provincial elections? And I think the NATO input, the ISAF input, in that conference, because we now more or less know there will be an international conference--President Karzai has re-confirmed that when my deputy, Ambassador Minuto Rizzo, was in Afghanistan three or four days ago. During that conference the responsibility of the international community will have to be redefined and a major part of that redefinition including- including NATO's role but not as the prime responsible, will be important and as you quite rightly say in your question the position taken by the region, of course, there is also of importance. But we have discussed it in general terms, but Secretary Reid has once again given us the figures and those figures are very worrying as you know. Q: Secretary General I would like to ask you something on the Kosovo and the allotments(?) lately. In fact EU member countries are just lastly(?) their internal consultations led by Mr. Solana on what the EU role will be in Kosovo once the negotiation talks are concluded. According to us(?) that will take something by the end of next year and the consultations (inaudible) are aiming to find what shall be the EU role in terms of security as well once these talks are initiated. And my question will be to you, does NATO have all of the- or is thinking about the NATO reengagement of redefining its role in Kosovo once these talks are- and that Kosovo has its status resolved? DE HOOP SCHEFFER: You know I'm a great advocate of close NATO-EU relations but let me not go that far that I would speak on behalf of the European Union. Let me leave that to others and let me speak for NATO. And NATO's position is that our prime responsibility, as was discussed by the way yesterday as you know, by NATO Defence Ministers and this morning the important role of partners in Kosovo as I mentioned in my introductory statement was also discussed. NATO's responsibility, and the responsibility of partners by the way, is of course very much to keep up KFOR. To keep up the robust presence of KFOR in Kosovo now that Kosovo is entering this important period which will first, of course, address the so-called standards evaluation process. NATO is not politically directly involved as you know in that process; NATO is represented- follows I should say the contact group- extended contact group on Kosovo but NATO should do what it should do and that is having the responsibility for a robust military presence in Kosovo, overseeing security and stability and NATO is not discussing and will not discuss--that's not NATO's role--any elements of final status for Kosovo whatever. Although, as you know but I say that in the sidelines, one of the Permanent Representatives, Kai Eide(?) on the North Atlantic Council, is going to play a very important role in the standards evaluation process but that's what I can say about this and not more. Q: Mr. Secretary General, my question is about Uzbekistan. What's the future of the relations with Uzbekistan and can you confirm the information about the relation between the training camps for terrorists in Afghanistan and the crisis in Uzbekistan? DE HOOP SCHEFFER: No I cannot do that because I don't know. So I cannot confirm that. On Uzbekistan more in general, you know the position of the NATO Allies, it was discussed this morning by the way as well--you see a paragraph in my chairman statement under my responsibility. And what is the position? The position is that NATO supports the call by many other members of the international community including the UN and the European Union and others for this independent international inquiry and I still hope that President Karimov can be convinced of accepting this independent international inquiry. That's the position. Q: Could I follow this up. We know that, from yesterday, we know that there was quite a difference in opinion between NATO and Russia for example, what was the stance of the partnership countries? Were they supporting the call for an international inquiry? And do you regret that apparently the Uzbek minister was unable to enlighten you on his views on the situation? DE HOOP SCHEFFER: Yes I do regret that the Uzbek minister wasn't here because I would say that's what the partnership is for; to be able to discuss it face to face. We now have a virtual discussion which is not a real discussion and unfortunately it was the same position as Uzbekistan took in Are when we had the Security Forum there. You know, in Are, we discussed it rather substantially over dinner. The positions are that we have a difference of opinion with our Russian friends as I said yesterday, I mean that's a rather simple conclusion. They have a different approach than we have and I know that many partners with me would hope that this international independent inquiry will take place. Q (Macedonian Television): Mr. Secretary General, in the past two or three days, Greek media pronounced that NATO made some secret report of the situation in Macedonia. I want just- you to tell me it's true. Because in that report- secret exactly as the Greek media said, Macedonia's situation is assessed like- or slightly unstable country. What is your stand about this? DE HOOP SCHEFFER: If it was true and if it was secret I wouldn't tell you of course--but it's untrue. Q: Secretary General you mentioned in Vilnius the desirability of having from time to time NATO-EU ministerials, and I wonder if you see the value in having such a ministerial meeting over the issue of Darfur and if so when could it happen and what would be the burning issues to discuss there? DE HOOP SCHEFFER: It's not impossible that this informal NATO-EU ministerial might happen at a certain stage- rather soon. It was discussed informally during a dinner I had last week in Washington, you've heard about that- on invitation(?) Secretary Rice, in the presence of Javier Solana, the Luxembourg Foreign Minister Asselborn on behalf of the EU presidency, and Benita Ferrero-Waldner the Commissioner responsible for External Relations. It was an informal dinner without any agenda. We discussed it there. And it might well be that we'll have- I mean the principle has generally been agreed. The question always is when and where and that's a question which is also very much dictated by ministers' schedules as you know. But the principle has been agreed. I could very well imagine that when such a meeting would take place, Darfur could be one of the issues. Although on the other hand, I should say, that the decision-making processes have been finalized now as you know in good spirits and in good cooperation between NATO and the EU. So if such a meeting is gong to take place, it would certainly not be only devoted to Darfur, I mean if it's informal, I would not expect that you would see much of a formal agenda. But I agree with you that Darfur might be a subject which we could discuss but there are other subjects to be discussed as well but I do not exclude that at a certain stage we'll see such a meeting taking place.