NATO HQ, Brussels 13 Feb. 2006

Video Background Briefing by the NATO Spokesman Multimedia Audio file .MP3/ 8185Kb Video interview Biography James Appathurai JAMES APPATHURAI (NATO Spokesman): Hello and welcome to the latest in our series of monthly briefings on what's taking place at NATO Headquarters. We have just finished, at the time that I'm recording this, an informal meeting of Defence Ministers in Taormina , Sicily , hosted by Defence Minister Martino of Italy . An informal meeting, for those of you who don't follow NATO on a day-to-day basis, is a meeting where Defence Ministers come together to talk, but not necessarily to take any decisions; not to concretely move forward the agenda with hard and fast decisions. It's to simply have an opportunity to converse. And in this case, of course, Taormina , this informal meeting of Defence Ministers, was designed also to be a building block for the Summit that will take place in Riga in November. Even though it was an informal meeting and therefore not one that required decisions, it was a good meeting and an important one for a variety of reasons; one of which was the operational discussion that took place in the first session; that is the evening session of the first day. In fact, the evening session was intended originally to focus on military and political transformation. The Secretary General decided to switch the sessions and begin with operations; not least because of events that took place in Afghanistan , which many of you I'm quite sure would have followed in the news. Flowing from the protests around the world, or almost around the world, because of the editorial cartoons that were published in Denmark and in other places, there were protests, similar protests, in Afghanistan . On one day Afghanistan experienced protests in many parts of the country. And one of the focuses of this protest was in Meymaneh, against a Provincial Reconstruction Team, a NATO Provincial Reconstruction Team, which included both Norwegians and Finns. And of course, Norway is one of the countries in particular that has been targeted by protesters. This quickly became a relatively serious situation, in that there were 60 or so personnel inside the Provincial Reconstruction Teams, as I say, Norwegians and Finns, and about 1200 people trying to get in and attack the Provincial Reconstruction Team. They were attacked by live grenades, by live fire, and it was obviously a very, very tense situation for them. It turned out reasonably well in the end. The NATO forces were very much relying on their training and equipment in crowd and riot control, rather than on the use of lethal force. They used tear gas, CS gas, as we call it, they fired warning shots, and NATO deployed shows of force, F-16s and other shows of force to fire above the heads of the protesters. In the end, as I say, the situation calmed down, but there was a very strong lesson for NATO, and this is one of the things that was discussed first in Taormina. And the lessons that were drawn from this episode I think I can share with you. One of them is, that the Norwegian and Finnish forces in particular, but all the ISAF forces, demonstrated enormous restraint in what must have been a very difficult situation for them--and all the Ministers said this around the table--and great professionalism in relying on, as I say, their expertise and their equipment in crowd and riot control rather than resorting to the use of deadly force. NATO also flew in reinforcements, our quick reaction force, to support them and Ministers looked at how that process worked and how, of course, in future it might be even strengthened or improved. It did work, but it can always work better in future. I think overall this operation showed, this day showed very much how much NATO has transformed, and I think it was a useful illustration for the discussions that took place the next day. It showed a NATO that is projecting stability far away from home in Afghanistan, so the strategic reach that the Alliance has given itself over the past few years was demonstrated. That NATO is, of course, there in the country to take on one of the new threats, and that is terrorism, but also that these great strategic changes in the Alliance are reflected at the level of the individual soldiers; soldiers that are no longer only trained in the kind of Cold War heavy combat tactics of the past, but also in the new requirements of the modern security environment, to be able to do not just the high end, but also the low end, and to be able to deal with what is a very, very strenuous situation with the utmost restraint, the utmost professionalism in a way that is appropriate for the situation in which we find ourselves in Afghanistan. Also the fact that NATO could and did rapidly deploy multinational reinforcements within the country was a demonstration that the arrangements that we have in place, while they can be improved, work. And so it was a good test for us. It was also a test for the Afghan National Police and the Afghan National Army, both of which stepped up and played an important role in restoring calm. These are both forces that are being trained, either by NATO or by other organizations, or individual nations. And their training is paying off. This is the kind of operation that they would not have been capable of carrying out even just a few years ago. So there's an upside, a silver lining, to this whole event, also when it comes to training and the development of indigenous Afghan capabilities to be able to take care of their own security. Ultimately our goal, our exit strategy as an international community, is of course, for Afghanistan to be able to take care of itself. And in that country, as much as anywhere else, maybe even a little more, security is the foundation. So it was edifying to see that the Afghan National Police and the Afghan Army could play their role. It was an important role and it was effective. So there was some good lessons to be drawn for this, and I think most of the lessons were positive. Let me mention two other operations, very briefly, that were also discussed at the ministerial meeting. One was Pakistan. The NATO relief operation to Pakistan is now well over. Not only have NATO forces left the affected area of Bagh, but in fact at the time that you see this I suspect all of the NATO personnel will have left the country altogether. Some countries have left behind assistance on a bilateral basis. The French have left a fuel farm. The Germans have left helicopters. I know the Dutch have left behind a hospital which NGOs, and I think government officials are using as well, and of course, the United States is still there, but will also be leaving behind when it pulls out from this operation, some equipment for the Pakistanis to use. So individually individual nations have left behind capabilities, but the NATO operation per se has formally come to a complete end after our engineers, doctors, have played their role on the ground, and the very significant airlift of over a 180 flights, having taken some 3500 tonnes of relief supplies to Pakistan, has also come to an end. I have just seen, a few minutes before coming here to record this message to you, a letter from the Pakistani Prime Minister to the Secretary General thanking him for NATO's role, and I can tell you that Ministers all echoed the sentiment that while NATO is not and does not see itself to be a humanitarian organization, we were all glad as a community, a community of nations, that we were able to answer the call from the UN, from the Pakistani government, to help where we could the Pakistani people, in what was obviously an hour of need. Finally, let me mention Darfur. There is, as you know, a discussion going on, and, indeed, growing in the United Nations in particular, for the UN to consider taking on a greater role in Darfur. The African Union, at present, has carried out a very important operation, and NATO has airlifted in seven battalions of African troops and has helped the African Union to develop its capacity to run large operations when it comes to logistics, when it comes to planning. There is a discussion in the UN to take over from or build on the African Union's operation. And that has been shared with us here at NATO, including by Jan Pronck, who is the UN official, in a sense, responsible for what is going on in Sudan, as well as by Jean-Marie Gu é henno who heads up UNDPKO. For the moment NATO is doing what it has been asked to do and that is to extend our airlift and capacity-building operation. And that is taking place. NATO will continue to rotate in and out African troops, African battalions, for the African Union and to continue to support the African Union's ability to develop its own capabilities until the end of May. That was the essence of the discussion from Taormina, from the ministerial meeting, when it comes to operations. Let me turn now to the discussion of transformation which took place the next morning. This has a few key "volets", to use the French word. One is the NATO Response Force. The NATO Response Force is in development. Elements of it have already been used for the Pakistan airlift, and also for the airlift after Hurricane Katrina to the United States. But it is still under development and it needs, of course, to be fully resources to have what we call full operational capability by the time of the summit that will take place in Riga in November. Ministers discussed the importance of the NRF, both as a capability, which can do the full spectrum of military operations, from humanitarian relief to as a force for initial entry, to acting simply as a show of force. That's one necessary capability that the international community and the NATO community needs to have. And secondly, as a transformational tool, to float higher all the boats of NATO forces by bringing together all of these forces to learn the latest doctrine, to develop the latest capabilities. That is the second transformational role of the NRF, so it's very important that it meets its full operational capability by the Summit. There will be an exercise of the NRF this summer in Cape Verde to exercise its strategic reach, to see which capabilities, and hopefully all of the capabilities meet the requirements that have been set out for the NRF. So we will see how that goes. but Ministers certainly reiterated their commitment to resource fully as necessary the NATO Response Force. There was a second discussion on funding, and those of you who follow this monthly briefing or follow the NATO website, now that this is a very lively discussion here at NATO. How to spread the costs of certain things that NATO does in a way that demonstrates more solidarity and that helps ease the burden on countries that have purchased equipment, often very expensive equipment, paid for the transport of that equipment, and could use the support in paying for the transport, for example. And one area where this has become very clear, where the requirement for this has become very clear is, for example, on the initial deployment of the NRF for long range strategic air transport. The countries that happen to be in the rotation of the NRF during the six-month period when the NRF is called for incur a heavy financial burden if that operation is far away from home. So there is, and was, at Taormina a discussion amongst governments to see how we might broaden what is the existing list of areas or activities or functions covered by NATO common funding to include potentially that element or potentially others. I can tell you frankly that there was no conclusion at this meeting. There was no particular meeting of minds. This discussion is going to have to continue as we go forward towards Riga. That, in essence, was some of the transformation discussion. Let me turn now to two other elements. One was the meeting in the NATO-Russian Council of Defence Ministers from the NATO nations and Russia, and the second, which I'll turn to in a moment, was a luncheon with Ministers from the Mediterranean Dialogue countries. First, Russia. There was a meeting, as I mentioned, of the NATO-Russia Council. That is the body that brings together the 26 NATO nations and Russia all around the same table to speak as equals with no pre-cooked positions on either side and develop our cooperation. The meeting focused very much on practical issues. Practical issues relating to NATO-Russia defence cooperation. Focusing on interoperability, on the potential of a Russian peacekeeping battalion working with NATO, on cooperation in countering the flow of narcotics from Afghanistan, both in Afghanistan, and in offering training to border guards and other officials in neighbouring countries. And perhaps most of all, the impending support by Russia to NATO's Operation Active Endeavour, our anti-terror naval operation in the Mediterranean, Russia will be sending two ships to participate in that operation, to support that operation, and the NATO Secretary General in Taormina took a helicopter and flew to land on the... or flew to land next to, and then board the flag slip of the Russian Black Sea fleet, the Moskva, on which NATO personnel have been stationed, as well as Russian personnel, for the past few weeks, where these personnel have been learning interoperability, have been learning to use NATO communication equipment, so that when Russia formally becomes part of... formally begins supporting this operation with its ships sailing side by side with NATO ships, they will be able to do that. It has been a little while since the intention was made obvious by Russia to support this operation. Now it is becoming real, and we certainly welcome that. It is a concrete demonstration of how all 27 countries recognize that we face the same threats, and that is terrorism, and that it is important that we work together. This is an historic first. I believe it was the first time that the NATO Secretary General has ever set foot on a Russian military naval vessel. It may well be the first time a NATO Supreme Allied Commander has set foot on a Russian military naval vessel as well. It is certainly the first time a NATO Spokesman has set foot on a Russian military vessel. So it was historical for many reason. And certainly very welcome by all the Ministers gathered around the table, and indeed, those on the ship as well. Finally, let me mention the Mediterranean Dialogue lunch. This was the first time that NATO Ministers have met with their counterparts from the Mediterranean Dialogue countries. That is, Arab countries of North Africa, and Israel, as well as Jordan. It was a very productive meeting, a very open meeting. As you might expect, not only did the discussion talk about practical cooperation, and I should mention in that regard that three Mediterranean Dialogue countries made clear their strong interest also in supporting Operation Active Endeavour. But it is not a surprise that the cartoon issue came up. I think the general theme... it did not just come up at this particular... not just come up at the Mediterranean Dialogue luncheon, but also in the context of the NATO-only meeting. I think the theme coming out of that discussion—the full discussion at Taormina—was quite clear, and that was that it was very important that we pursue a de-escalation of tensions. All Ministers, Mediterranean Dialogue Ministers, NATO Ministers, all wish to see, of course, the discussion over this issue continue as discussion and that there should be a de-escalation of tensions over this and we should move to put this issue behind us. And certainly that there is no cause for violence. That, in sum, were the conclusions that I would draw from this informal Defence Ministers meeting. It was a good meeting. It helped, as I say, move the yardsticks forward as we look forward to the NATO summit in Riga which will have all of these elements—operational and transformational—as the foundations for the summit. So next month I'll tell you how