Residence Palace Brussels 11 July 2005

Question & Answer session with NATO Secretary General, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer at the WIIS Conference, Brussels, 11 July 2005 Event 11/07/2005 NATO: New Tasks and Responsibilities MODERATOR: Thank you, Secretary General for your very inspiring and thought provoking presentation. You talked about a full plate and I am pretty sure, I mean- that's describing the long list of things to do for you and for NATO, has provoked a number of questions and comments, and also, I know that you never shy away from having a good debate. So we still have some fifteen minutes left if I'm not mistaken and I would like you to join us for questions and answers and if I may ask you to identify yourselves. Yes, Mrs. Short. Q: My name is Clare Short, I'm a Member of Parliament from the UK. I really don't envy you your challenge. I mean, every institution and conflict in the world is reshaped and you're trying to reach out and have a role in that. But I think we've got a terrifying incompetence in our international institutions and if we just take some of the issues that you used as a list of where NATO is intervening. Personally I'm glad about the engagement with Darfur but I think, there's two million people displaced in Darfur, there's still horrendous death and rape and hunger. The prospects of them going home and getting back to agriculture look very weak. So I think we're coming way from behind, way too late, it's probably going to get worse and now NATO is going to be implicated, if I'm right? I think it needs a UN resolution to give peace enforcement powers and a much stronger African Union force but my point is there's an enormous worry and a possibility of a kind of failure or continuing mess. I think, Kosovo, the failure to have any kind of final status solution and the continuing violence and economic need and unemployment is extremely worrying and looks like failure to a lot of Kosovars. I think Afghanistan is enormously worrying. It's now a "narco-state", the warlords are all over it, there is not a competent country that can bring order and therefore development to one of the poorest countries in the world. And Iraq is a quagmire. So I understand that you have to reach out and be part of the crises of the world but aren't we just seeing a spread of incompetence and NATO's engagement implicating NATO in our incapacity to deal with the New World Disorder? DE HOOP SCHEFFER: Thank you very much Mrs. Short for those remarks. I think my answer should start with what is a definition of "implicating NATO". Let me start with Darfur. It's quite a step that NATO now has some form of footprint in Africa. But you do know Africa from your personal past. I do know Africa. You know this is fairly complicated. We say, 'African solutions for African problems.' The AU has taken up the challenge because the Security Council, as you know, is divided on Sudan, on Darfur, so that's the reason there is no peace enforcement resolution and I think it's not politically possible at this stage. So what the African Union has done is they have rang our doorbell and said 'NATO could you please assist us in at least increasing the number of our forces.' from the tiny 3,000 they have--in the end up to 12,000. Will that be- will that prevent the dying, the rape, the burning and the pillage in Darfur? I'm afraid I have to agree with you and say no. But if you say NATO is implicated, NATO, yes, is implicated in doing what it can for the solution of the Darfur problem per se- as such I should say. More is needed than NATO, and I think first of all what is needed is indeed giving a boost to the African Union and perhaps in the longer run let's say a Security Council Resolution. On Kosovo, there indeed again NATO is implicated, yes. But NATO is not an organization which should eat everything, if I may use that expression. Now though in other ways, we have an 18,000-strong presence there. The Standards Evaluation Process is going on now and I agree with you that if that Standards Evaluation Process would lead to the conclusion that status talks could begin we should have them but let's first see the way the Standards Evaluation Process is going. NATO is there under UN mandate to see that the majority and the minority don't get at each other's throats and the proof of the fact that the situation is very fragile was given last March as you know, when suddenly huge ethnic violence erupted. I can say, on behalf of NATO, we're doing our best. We're doing the best we can to see that this political process in Kosovo can take off. On Afghanistan I'll not be too long. Indeed, if we are not very careful it will develop into a "narco-state" indeed and that's why counter-narcotics is by far the greatest challenge apart from the security situation. What is NATO doing? NATO is expanding the so-called Provincial Reconstruction Teams, you know all about them, going west, going south, seeing that a minimum of security, and stability, and nation-building by the way, can be guaranteed in those regions. Where I think, in the modern way, again looking at your personal past, we see a beginning of integration between foreign policy, defence policy, development cooperation embedded in the Provincial Reconstruction Teams. Are we there? Not by far. Where is the prime responsibility? I think with the Afghan Government, with President Karzai. What are we going to do? We're going to support the elections on the 18th of September by flying in extra battalions to make sure that the Afghan National Army can be supported and make those elections into a success. As far as Iraq is concerned. What do we do there? We answer- we try to answer what is according to the Iraqi Government the most important priority and that is 'Please train our security forces so that they can take the fate of our own country into- that we can take the fate of our country into our own hands.' That's what NATO is doing, on a limited scale, I agree. I agree on a modest scale but we are there. We are in the Mediterranean. In other words, you'll not hear me say it is incompetent leadership in those organizations for the good reason it would implicate myself and I can say a lot of things of myself but I'm trying to run this organization to the best of my ability. That may not be good enough but that's for other people to judge. But I think the modern- the new NATO, is trying to do everything it can in bringing some form of security and stability to these parts of the world. Are we there? No we're far from there yet I'm afraid. MODERATOR: Secretary General, I have a number of names on my list. The first one is Chantal. Q: My name is Chantal de Jonge Oudraat. I'm very happy to hear you're going to the UN in September and wanting to establish a more institutional relationship with the UN and if I may, I would urge you to be ambitious (inaudible). But my question has to do with something else... DE HOOP SCHEFFER: I have the impression that the microphone does not work. Q: ...I was saying that I was very happy to hear the Secretary General mentioning increased cooperation with the UN and I was urging him to be ambitious when he goes to New York and to greatly increase particularly the human presence of NATO in New York. But my question has to do with something else. You talked about the partnerships with countries around the world, in particular the Caucasus, and I wanted to ask you after the 2004 expansion of NATO how do you see further expansion of NATO membership? Is there any kind of possibilities for new rounds of expansion? What would be the time framework for that? Thank you. DE HOOP SCHEFFER: The timeframe is very difficult to give. NATO's door is open. There's clearly a number of countries with ambitions for what we call in our NATO-EU speak "Euro-Atlantic Integration", read in more plain speak at a certain stage they would like to become members of the European Union and of NATO, but since this is a performance-based process it's very difficult to say when. It's clear, I mentioned Ukraine in my speech, that the present Ukrainian Government has that ambition. NATO will assist in that process. You know that also goes for Georgia. Let me mention that in the Balkans we have three countries at the moment--Croatia, Albania and Macedonia--who have the so-called Membership Action Plan. In other words, they have- they are in fact one step ahead, or perhaps two steps ahead, on their road to NATO membership. So my answer is the door is open. I can't say when and where. I can't say whether it will be, what in European Union terms was called a "Big Bang", if we will see a number of nations acceding to the Washington Treaty together or that nations might at a certain stage enter one by one, I do not know but NATO's door is open. Article 10 of the Washington Treaty clearly states that all European democracies fulfilling certain conditions are let's say in a position to enter NATO so I think we have not seen the final round of NATO enlargement last year, certainly not. But since it's performance-based, it's very difficult and I always say, with Paul McCartney, 'It's a long and winding road to NATO membership' and I think- I mean, countries should, nations should fulfil the conditions. I mean I see Ambassador Damusis, Lithuanian Ambassador sitting here, she knows better than anybody perhaps how difficult it is; but she also knows that if we would have sat here a number of years ago our Baltic friends in NATO, people would have said, 'That's a dream and it will stay a dream' and look here she is and here are Lithuania and the other Baltics and Central Europeans are. So let's never say it is impossible but let's keep the process performance-based. On the UN, I'm glad with your encouragement, it does not mean of course that the North Atlantic Council will transfer decision making power--it will always be the NAC, the North Atlantic Council who decides, but I think we should enter into a closer relationship with the UN. MODERATOR: The next one on my list is Professor Helga Haftendorn from Free University in Berlin. Q: Thank you very much. Mr. Secretary General, you just argued in favour of a strategic relationship... DE HOOP SCHEFFER: Where are you professor? You're there, okay. Thank you. Q: Is it working? DE HOOP SCHEFFER: Yes but it's always nice that I can see the one who... Q: ...you were arguing for a strategic relationship between NATO and the European Union. In another speech at Humboldt University a couple of months ago, you argued for creating a third axis: EU-United States-NATO. So if you think this through this is a triangular relationship. How should this triangular relationship work? There are a couple of overlaps but there are a couple of complimentary aspects. I personally think it's a very interesting perspective because we do need close relations between the United States and the European countries in various forms so maybe you could comment on one of your earlier ideas Mr. Secretary. DE HOOP SCHEFFER: Thank you professor. If it will be a triangle I do not know for the simple reason that the United States are in NATO. So what I tried to say in Humboldt was the following, and it all started of course- it all started with the speech of the German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder in Munich in February where there was initial confusion, also with me I must admit, because I think- I thought initially he was promoting a third structure apart from the European Union and apart from NATO to create a sort of transatlantic third--and I think that's not good. Where he was right, as I have been advocating as well, where he was right is that we have a number of subjects which are perhaps not entirely adequately dealt with in the transatlantic relationship be they discussed in NATO or be they discussed in the framework of the European Union. The US is a member of NATO so the US will always need NATO and use NATO as its primary inroads with its European Allies. I mean the US will not become a member of the European Union and for that reason the EU and NATO will stay two completely different animals. But given the fact that the United States administration--look at what President Bush did on the 22nd of February--has recognized the EU as an independent act- as an independent actor. He went to the Commission, he went to the Council, he went to the Troika. It is crystal clear that in the NATO-EU relationship we need more than we have. What could that more be and what has now been informally agreed between the European Union and NATO? That is that we should have informal foreign ministers meetings between the EU and NATO so as to have also the EU non-NATO members involved and the NATO non-EU members and I'm sure that in the second half of this year we're going to see the first informal foreign ministers meeting NATO-EU. Why? We have a number of subjects discussed in the EU. NATO is not going to discuss Airbus/Boeing subsidies, NATO is not going to discuss the death penalty, NATO is not going to discuss Kyoto. That's not NATO's mission but there are a number of subjects which overlap. And that is the structure I was trying to introduce in my Humboldt speech in Berlin. So if it will become triangular, I do not know because two parts of the triangle are already embedded into NATO and I do not think we should devise new structures but I think we should have, on a number of subjects, a closer relationship. I give you two examples. It is of the utmost importance that as far as the Balkans are concerned, EU and NATO give the same kind of political signals to those nations. That goes as well for the Caucasus, that goes for Ukraine. I mean I do not know, given the present situation in the EU after the referenda what the pressure will be or perhaps the lack of pressure on the whole further EU enlargement process. It's not up to me to decide. It's not up to me to participate in that debate because it's up to the European Union. But you will agree with me that in those areas where it is important and who are of strategic importance, it is important that we give the same kind of political signals. So that's why I think those areas should be discussed between NATO and the European Union. NATO is present more prominently in its partnerships in Central Asia and the Caucasus to a certain extent. In the Balkans the EU is very much present. NATO is present with KFOR in Kosovo and is still present in Bosnia-Herzegovina. In Ukraine, it's the Neighbourhood Policy of the European Union and the Intensified Dialogue NATO has with Ukraine at the moment. Let's try to give the same kind of political signals and let's try to have, let's say, a broad political dialogue between all the relevant actors. That was the background of my Humboldt speech professor. MODERATOR: Secretary General, you still have some time for taking on one or two questions or are you? DE HOOP SCHEFFER: I do not know I have to refer to my... two more? Okay. MODERATOR: The young lady with the white jacket here, if you can identify yourself please? Q: Thank you. I'm sorry I have a cold. I'm Catherine Gegout, I'm a researcher of the London School of Economics. You talked about the necessary partnership with Central Asia and the Broader Middle East and you also mentioned the role of NATO in Darfur. I was wondering are there any discussions at NATO to have a partnership with the African Union or with African regional security organizations? If yes, under what form and if no, would you be in favour of such a partnership now? Thank you. MODERATOR: All right and then we take a final one. Q: Good morning Secretary General, Adrienne Baughman with Jane's Defence Weekly. You recently asked Jesper Vahr, Ambassador Vahr, to investigate and report back to you on a NATO reform initiative and I was wondering what are your goals with that and when might we see some results? And secondly, if I may, you visited Israel last spring which is a Mediterranean Dialogue partner and now you've sent a representative from your office to Palestine. Are you planning to keep a dialogue up with the Palestinians and have they asked NATO for anything? Please. DE HOOP SCHEFFER: On the first question. We are not seeking at the moment a partnership with the African Union but in the framework of Darfur I for instance, as Secretary General, I have intensive contacts with President Konare who is heading the Commission of the African Union as you know. I wouldn't say that it is NATO's ambition to have partnerships with all kinds of regional organizations. We don't have them for instance with regional organizations in Central Asia, we have the PfP which is focusing on individual countries combined in the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council. You never know what will happen in the future but at the moment we have our contacts with the African Union and we limit those contacts to our supporting the African Union in Darfur. And there has been, let's say, no ambition shown at this moment by the African Union for instance. But again if you would've asked me half a year ago when I had come here, 'Would NATO support the African Union in Darfur?' I would've answered you quite honestly that the chance of that would be very remote. So, what can we say and what can we predict? I do not know. We take the African Union seriously and they do take NATO seriously apparently because they have come here to ask for our assistance. I'll not comment publicly on the inter- what is an internal reform process of NATO as you refer to. It's Danish Ambassador Vahr who is running this process. I hope to present results to ministers, to Foreign Ministers, in December this year but since this is an internal process I'll not comment on this publicly. As far as the Middle East is concerned, indeed, as you rightly said I have sent an emissary, my directeur du cabinet, Chief of Cabinet- Chief of Staff to the Palestinian Authority. Why? Because some months ago in Madrid I ran into Mohammed Dahlan and (inaudible), two key figures in the Palestinian Authority. They had seen my visit to Israel, they had seen it in the papers, in the television of course, the radio, what have you and they asked me, 'Secretary General, could you inform us, the Palestinian Authority, about what's going on in this Mediterranean Dialogue?' Because it concerns, as I said, the countries of North Africa, Israel and Jordan. And I discussed this with the NATO Ambassadors and they said, 'Yes, why not.' So he has gone, he is informed about the Mediterranean Dialogue and we'll have to see if this leads to further contacts. The first contact has been established. What the nature of further contacts will be I do not know yet. We'll see at a certain stage and we'll pick up that discussion after the summer break and after Gaza disengagement. MODERATOR: All right. Thank you a lot Secretary General. And let me ask you to join me in a warm applause for the Secretary General's answering questions here in a usually very candid and very comprehensive way. Thanks a lot Secretary General for being with us. (APPLAUSE) If I may just add a sentence and I would like to say so not only as a member of your staff but also as a member of WIIS. It was indeed very important and very valuable to have you with us. So I hope I can continue counting on you for further endeavours and I know you have a pressing schedule but, I mean otherwise, we would have very much have liked you to join us for a cup of coffee.