NATO Speech: Press briefing by the NATO Spokesman

NATO HQ
Brussels

17 May 2006

Press briefing

by the NATO Spokesman

Multimedia
	Audio file (.MP3/20371kb)

Biography
	James Appathurai

JAMES APPATHURAI (NATO Spokesman): Friends and colleagues, thanks for coming. Let us get straight into it. I have five or six points that I'd like to bring to your attention and then I'm happy to take any of your questions.

Let me start with the visit this morning of President Martti Ahtisaari to NATO Headquarters where he met with the Secretary General in a bilateral meeting and then with the full North Atlantic Council.

President Ahtisaari briefed, again the Council and Secretary General, on progress in the status talks, his upcoming travel, including to Russia and China to engage on these issues, but also his assessment of the progress that is being made and further steps to be taken.

I think the points that you might have heard in the press conference were certainly points that were made behind closed doors, and that is, that further progress has to be made when it comes to implementation of standards; that the Kosovar Serbs need to engage fully in the process and that Belgrade needs to take the steps necessary to allow for that to happen.

President Ahtisaari also stressed that whatever the result of the status talks will be, there will be a requirement for an ongoing international presence. And that both parties, both the Kosovar Serbs and the Kosovar Albanians see the importance of the continuing presence including for NATO, for example, for the protection of minorities, for the protection of cultural and religious sites. He also said there was a role for NATO to play in training the province's security forces.

The Ambassadors of course, all shared their various perspectives on this issue and the Secretary General made it clear that of course NATO is going to maintain its combat capability at current levels throughout this year. In other words, the number of manoeuvrable battalions and their capabilities will remain at current levels.

The process by which NATO has moved to a task force structure--you all know NATO was moving into this more flexible mobile task force structure--that is complete, I believe NATO will continue through this year in this task force structure which is more mobile, more flexible, more present in the field and better capable of gathering intelligence as well.

So that was, I think, in sum the Ahtisaari visit.

Let me turn to the second issue which his LIVEX, i.e. the exercise, what we call Steadfast Jaguar 2006, the NRF exercise. This will take place, just to update you, again, between the 15th and the 28th of June. It's designed to provide a proof of concept demonstration of the NRF design. In short, the exercise will demonstrate NATO's ability to tailor, plan and prepare and sustain expeditionary forces in an austere environment at a strategic distance and to command and control operations in remote areas.

I don't want to go into more detail of the exercise now as you'll receive more detailed briefings as we get nearer to the event, but I do want to mention again that there will be an arranged media opportunity, media day which the Secretary General and SACEUR will both participate in. There will be air transport from Brussels , to and from the exercise area on Cape Verde courtesy of Joint Force Command Brunssum and SHAPE. I know that those of you who are thinking about coming have busy schedules, so let me help you.

The outside dates for the trip are the early evening... these are the outside dates, early evening of the 21st of June and returning the early hours of the 24th. But these are the outside dates. What we plan for is to have just one overnight stop on Cape Verde , but we're fine-tuning the exact flight timings. If you are interested in getting a seat please contact Commander Jose Goyanes at SHAPE directly or if you get in touch with my office later we will put you in touch with the right people.

I should stress that this exercise, of course, is being done at the invitation of and with the full support of the authorities and the people of Cape Verde . There should be no doubt of that, but I wanted to make that clear.

Let me turn to the NATO-Russia rally which is taking place now, as you know, from the 11th to the 28th of this month. It's a travelling public diplomacy exercise which brings together NATO and Russian experts. It has been kicked off. It is working, I have to say, very well, and I did myself a little video conference with Volgograd .

Tomorrow is an important stop and that's the Moscow stop. What we are planning currently, this is principally for those of you who have colleagues in Moscow . The NATO Secretary General will be doing a video link to a large group of diplomats, students and also journalists in Moscow to talk about NATO issues.

Next subject: Pakistan . Let me update you on the discussions that the Deputy Secretary General had in Pakistan when he visited just a few days ago. He was accompanied by the senior civilian representative Hikmet Çetin, Minister Çetin, who is NATO's senior civilian representative in Afghanistan , who came to join him on the trip. They met with President Musharraf, as well as other senior officials of the defence and foreign ministry and the intelligence services.

In essence the conversation had the following points. First, of course, President Musharraf thanked NATO for the support that the Alliance had provided just after the earthquake. The Deputy Secretary General and the President discussed, turning to current issues, of course, Afghanistan , and NATO is, of course, heavily engaged there, and as the Alliance moves, in particular south, Pakistan plays a very important role.

So it's important that we do have these political and military ties. President Musharraf and the Deputy Secretary General discussed the security environment, but they also discussed as I mentioned, the importance of building links between Pakistan and NATO and as a result, for example, discussed the possibility of opening NATO schools to Pakistani military personnel and also that NATO could, and likely will, deploy a liaison officer to Pakistan to work with them as NATO expands. Obviously this is an important link.

Finally, the discussions on the agreement that is now in development between NATO and Pakistan on lines of communication was raised and hopefully that will be addressed soon. Lines of communication, for those of you who don't know NATO jargon, is that implies transit for forces or equipment through Pakistan, NATO forces and equipment, to support ISAF, and we've been working on arrangements with the Pakistanis to allow for this to happen.

Let me turn now to a little bit of advertising for something that will happen on Friday. NATO as you probably know has two Supreme Commands. One is the Operational Command here at SHAPE; the other one is the Transformation Command based in Norfolk , Virginia and it is headed up by General Lance Smith, who is the Supreme Allied Commander Transformation. He's also the Commander of U.S. Joint Forces Command, which is the brain trust, in a sense of the United States Armed Forces when it comes to joint forces and experimentation.

Joint Forces Command and Allied Command Transformation together have been conducting what is called a multinational experiment for senior leaders. Now this is the fourth one of its kind and it is a multinational experiment. Eight countries are participating in it and what it has done, and this is a bit generic, but it is designed to explore concepts... I'll use the jargon first, and then interpret it for you. Concepts and supporting tools for the entire range of an effects-based approach to multinational operations within a coalition environment.

Now, in English what does this mean? It means that everybody recognizes now that operations that we conduct are multinational first, and second, engage more actors than just the military. So it's not just military multinational, it also engages civilian actors. Like development organizations, like non-governmental organizations, and all of us will face similar, will have to deal with the effects of events in a broad-based way.

And this multinational experiment is designed to exercise the way in which countries work together and different actors, military and civilian, work together in the context of the full spectrum of activities, from conflict to post-conflict stabilization.

What would you do if? How would you react if the following happened? You the military. You the civilians. You the NGOs. And how would we do it best together?

Now I don't want to go any further than that for two reasons. One is I don't know any more than that, and second, General Smith will be holding a media availability at the Conrad Hotel. Background briefing for local media will begin at 3:45 at the Conrad on Friday, to be followed by the media availability at 4:15 . I don't really know what the difference is, but if you're there at 3:45 I'm sure that'll be fine since you're all local media. And General Smith can brief you on that.

If you're interested in participating you should please contact Lieutenant Jim Krohne, and I suspect he's sitting here somewhere. Right back there. He is U.S. Joint Forces Command Public Affairs. I'll give you his number now, though he's sitting right there. It's long distance 322 or 02, 542-4636. But I do need to add anything to this, Jim?

LT. JIM KROHNE (Public Affairs, U.S. Joint Forces Command): No sir.

APPATHURAI: I like that answer.

Finally, let me mention Darfur . You all know that the UN Security Council has now passed a resolution on Darfur which calls on regional organizations, other organizations to support the overall peace process in Darfur .

You also know that NATO has already made preparations to stand ready, if the African Union chooses to call on NATO for more support, to be ready to provide it to the end of September.

What I can tell you is two things. One is that the Secretary General has spoken to the head of the African Union, Mr. Konare. He spoke to him last Friday. He expects to speak to him in the coming days on precisely the possibility of NATO support to the AU, the Deputy Assistant Secretary General for Operation, one of the two, Maurits Jochems, is now in Addis Ababa, not on a permanent basis, but on a temporary visit for a few days to establish liaison with the African Union, but also with other actors there on the ground, including the European Union.

So the two new developments, aside from the UN Security Council resolution are the deployment of Ambassador Jochems, as I say, for a limited number of days, and the contact that has now begun, and I'm sure will continue between the Secretary General and M. Konare.

That is all I have. And I'm happy to take any questions that you might have.

Q: I have a number of questions on Pakistan .

APPATHURAI: A number of questions!

Q: Yes.

APPATHURAI: Okay.

Q: A series. The first is, can you confirm reports that NATO has offered a strategic partnership to Pakistan ? And second is you said that they're going to open NATO schools, I mean, excuse my ignorance, but where are these schools based? And the third one is when will you send this liaison officer to Pakistan ? And the fourth one, last one, is that press reports are saying that there's still 1,100 NATO light engineers in the Pakistan side of Kashmir .

APPATHURAI: I can answer the first question, I think, authoritatively that there are not 1,100 NATO engineers. In fact, I can virtually guarantee there are no NATO engineers. Certainly not NATO engineers or any other NATO personnel in... in Kashmir . I think I can be definitive on that subject.

Second, I do not know when the liaison officer will be sent. I have to say that will be up to the military in consultation with the Pakistani authorities, when that will happen.

The NATO schools, there are three principal NATO schools. One is in Rome . That is the NATO Defence College . One is in Oberammergau in southern Germany , near Munich , about two hours south of Munich and there is a Joint Warfare Centre, as we call it, in Stavanger , in Norway . Those are the three facilities, I think.

In terms of a strategic partnership, I think what is important, or that the essence of the relationship will be pragmatic and that is, we do need technical discussions, technical cooperation. Specifically related, principally, to support when it comes to the Afghanistan mission. And I think that is the character of the relationship. I have seen the press reports and I wouldn't want to characterize, you know, nice words to characterize, I wouldn't want to try to come up with words to characterize. It will be a pragmatic... it will continue to be a pragmatic relationship, based primarily on our shared interest in helping Afghanistan to find stability.

Q: I was just wondering, because you mention this, the arrangements for troop and (inaudible). Could you give us a little bit more detail as to what that exactly means and specifically, I mean I'm assuming now the Americans, you know, in the East must have some agreements with the Pakistanis. I mean, there's already this relationship, would be extending it to NATO or is it something totally different? And, as of today nothing existed of that sort before?

APPATHURAI: Yeah, exactly.

The first point is obviously you know I can't speak for the Americans, and again, not least because I shouldn't, because I don't know what arrangements they have with the Pakistanis. But what I can say is that NATO does not have any arrangements at present for transit of forces or equipment through Pakistan , NATO as an organization does not have these, in support of the ISAF mission.

We do, for example, have an arrangement like that with Serbia , you might remember. This was signed for the support of the KFOR mission, which governs, of course, their legal status in the country, it covers the issues relating to cost, issues relating to customs. All of these are of course very basic, but essential elements for the transit of forces and equipment through any country.

Pakistan , of course, wants ISAF to succeed. They have the same interest that we all have in having ISAF succeed. And they're certainly looking at this in a very positive sense, so I expect these to be concluded without too much delay. But it would certainly be a first for NATO in the context of Pakistan , but not the first at all in the larger sense. We do conclude these on a regular basis.

APPATHURAI: I'll plead ignorance here. I'm not aware that a status of forces agreement is in discussion with Pakistan . Maybe we have one and I don't know about it.

UNIDENTIFIED: (inaudible)... humanitarian operation there was (inaudible)...

APPATHURAI: Yeah, maybe for the... I'll look into it, I'm sorry, I don't want to speak out of turn. I will look into it and we'll get back.

Sorry, Brooks.

Q: Change of subject, Darfur . I'm just wondering what possible changes in NATO support are being looked at between now and September 30th? I mean, the EU, for instance, we already know what those sides(?) have already provided. The EU, for instance, mobile generators and dry meals and a lot of planning and training. They're thinking about perhaps setting up a joint operation centre (inaudible)... no, because it's been rather disastrous there within the country.

But also second and more important question, I know the EU has received some rather outrageous requests from the AU, including attack helicopters etc. which have been rejected out of hand, and I was just wondering if they're turned to NATO with similar kinds of un-needable requests. Thank you.

APPATHURAI: To answer the second question first, as I had already indicted, NATO has not yet received a formal request for the AU for an extension of the support that we are currently offering. But I expect that that request will come because of course the UN Security Council resolution is now in place and there's a peace agreement.

What NATO is envisioning, because I can't speak for what the AU might request, but what NATO has indeed agreed amongst the 26 to provide, is support in the same nature as what we have provided until now, and that means airlift of AU personnel. It means capacity-building.

Now what does capacity-building mean? It will have to be defined. Until now that has meant, for example, and many of you have heard this before, providing training to African Union personnel on how to conduct large multinational operations effectively. This is where NATO has expertise, for example, when it comes to planning, when it comes to logistics, I might add, are very, very important. When it comes to what we call MAP exercises, to be able to learn the environment in which your military forces will be conducting their operation. NATO has already provided that to the AU.

Now if that kind of support is extended could it include new kinds of capacity-building? That is a possibility. But what I don't envision is this kind of either request coming in, attack helicopters or something else, or that NATO would be providing it. NATO has defined the way in which it is ready to provide extended support. That's already quite clear from our point of view.

Do you have a follow-up?

Q: But not surveillance and detection, because it's a very large area. If the peace plan is going to be implemented how is the peace plan going to be surveyed?

APPATHURAI: A good question, and I think there are many parties to this--the AU, the UN, the EU, and of course individual nations. So there are many parties here. But as I say, NATO's role, or the possibility of an extension of NATO support has been defined, and defined in the ways that I've said to you.

Q: You've answered one of my questions, so that's... I only have one left.

APPATHURAI: Good.

Q: And that's right at the beginning, the Ahtisaari visit. Unfortunately I wasn't at the press point this morning. The results, since we're talking about results, did he mention any specific results that were achieved, you said some positive results? And also he mentioned the future. Thank you.

APPATHURAI: Let me say this on results, because I certainly cannot speak for President Ahtisaari, but I think he indicated that there has been, for example, progress in standards implementation. And that is one example that I think I can use. And he of course did talk about the future and the importance of a continued international presence, including NATO's beyond the conclusions of status talks. But that's about as far as I can go on this.

Q: On Darfur , two questions which I suspect are pretty closely linked. The first one, if I understand it, NATO's aid, or help to the African Union came to an end in March or April and NATO offered to extend it. The African Union hasn't taken up that offer so there is no more assistance. You're not flying them in, you're not doing any training, it's over for the moment. Is that right?

APPATHURAI: No, that's not quite right. One element of the training came to an end on the 31st of March. The second element comes to an end the 31st of May. The capacity-building came to an end on the 31st of March. Airlift continues until the end of this month.

Q: Okay. And the second question is: It seems there are certain... there are at least two European members of NATO with certain influence in Africa, who would prefer the European Union to do this job, rather than NATO, and the fact that there seems to be this delay, Konare's not coming... you know, it'll be a long time before the Secretary General managed to speak to Konare. Now they've spoken, but there's no kind of decisive request coming from the African Union. Is this a practical problem or is this a political problem now? Is there a decision that has to be made here whether the European Union or NATO does this job and are there problems in deciding who's going to take it on and who's going to make those decisions?

APPATHURAI: I think you're right that the political considerations have been important, but they're not NATO-EU political considerations. They have been political considerations within the African Union and in the UN. The African Union... there needed to be not only a peace agreement, but also a decision by the Peace and Security Council of the African Union for the AU to move forward. They defined that for themselves. The United Nations, based on that agreement, has now passed a Chapter 7 resolution which calls on regional organizations to support the mission.

So there is a sequence, a political sequence of events, which has to take place. That is the simple political reality.

I think what we have seen, up until now, is that in support of the African Union there is work enough for the EU and for NATO. The EU and NATO work perfectly well, side by side, until now, in supporting the African Union. They have done a great job, but this mission is going to ramp up. They will need not less support, but more support. The UN will also need a lot of support. And NATO and the EU don't always do the same things. As Brooks mentioned, for example, the EU has a significant role to play on the civilian side, which NATO doesn't have.

So all this to say that I have not seen this to be at all a NATO-EU issue. I think there has been a logical sequence of political events, which unfortunately for the people of Darfur , take time, but we are now seeing progress in the AU, in the UN and NATO stands ready to play its role alongside the EU.

Q: (inaudible)... The decision that the NAC made to offer that extension of the support, surely that didn't need a Security Council resolution for the AU to take that up and just say, yeah, just do the same thing you've been doing for a little bit longer. Surely the African Union could have accepted that without having to go to the Security Council?

APPATHURAI: I certainly can't speak for the African Union, but the African Union has always said, very publicly, that it wanted a peace agreement, the Abuja talks to reach their conclusion before the UN would take its next steps.

So they have their own perspective. They have taken the steps that they see fit to take in their leadership. NATO has done what it can do, which is to say that we're ready to go, but I can't speak for the African Union, of course.

Q: Just you know, the (inaudible)... came back from the rally just now, and your impression on that. I'm just curious, do you succeed(?) how interested the Russian public is in speaking to NATO and with NATO and do you succeed(?) overcome sometimes some kind of misunderstanding or even hostile attitude from Russian population, and was the Ukraine a subject during discussions? Thank you.

APPATHURAI: You're on.

ROBERT PSZCZEL: Well, first point, I mean, it's really a very interesting event, I have to say, but unusual, because well, obviously the Russian Federation is a very large country and if you want to travel across, as we are, that takes a bit of time. That's why it's two weeks, the rally, with nine stops on the way, from Vladivostok to Kaliningrad .

Second point, to make it very clear, this is not a NATO event to publicize NATO and explain it. This is... the aim is to publicize, explain what we are doing together with Russia . That's why it's a joint event, I want to stress this. Our partner is the Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs, and we have local officials, universities. I admit that our primary sort of... the people we'd like to spend most time talking to are the students, their generation and of course other... we have, for instance, cadets from the Russian Pacific Fleet School in Vladivostok turning up in large numbers.

So it's not something which has a defined goal and it would be too ambitious and it's something which I think one should look as a contribution to discussion. We want to tell the story because we think it's a good story. It's not always, let me put it mildly, reflected fully in all the media in the region and we want to do our bit.

And judging by the intensity of the discussions, it's been a very good experience. The rally today has reached Volgograd and James has addressed the students there by videolink and tomorrow it's going to be in Moscow . So... well, we have demonstrations, but we also had extremely large numbers of people, with the young people turning up. (inaudible)... is clear from some of the slogans that the demonstrators shouted out there, but also the quality of the questions and the interest shown by all the participants, and I stress we're talking about Russian participants from the civilian and military, academic community, is such that perhaps immodestly you would say that the subject does merit a good debate, discussion and we've already... some new ideas emerging. We might have a NATO-Russia website, for example, in the future, and I'm sure we'll do various other things.

And of course, all this is not just public diplomacy event taking place in a vacuum, because we are doing various things, whether it's in the Mediterranean Sea, whether it's Theatre Missile Defence area, and so on.

So the idea is to tell the story, the real story about what is actually happening in our relations.

Q: (inaudible)...questions about Ukraine (inaudible)...?

ROBERT: Well, you got all sorts of questions. I mean, the geographic span, if I may put it this way, is very wide-ranging, almost all corners of the world. In Vladivostok there was a very strong interest, for instance, about the Pacific region. In other places the whole Euro-Atlantic area, and of course, the countries which are neighbours of Russia, the relations between Russia and these countries and NATO's relations, of course, a subject of great interest. So definitely there was a question... there was always a question related to Ukraine as well.

APPATHURAI: I should tell you that my Deus ex machina Carmen has usefully, again, sent me a text message to answer the question that Nick asked. The discussions with Pakistan have revolved around lines of communication, but no discussions about status of forces agreement, to confirm.

Q: (inaudible)... what... can you explain what is status of forces agreement?

APPATHURAI: Status of forces agreement relates primary to the stationing of forces that are present in another country, rather than transiting through to go elsewhere. For example, we have, my own country, Canada , has a status of forces agreement with all other NATO countries for when they come to train. The legal protections or obligations that they have, I think that's the essence of it. But its' for the stationing or exercising of forces in a non-... in a foreign country. But that's not the intention, of course, with Pakistan , which is principally... which is entirely for transit of equipment or personnel into Afghanistan to support the ISAF mission.

Please.

Q: James, coming back to Pakistan , I'm interested in NATO school you're talking about in Pakistan . Is it a kind of school that you intend to place program also in relation to Afghanistan ? Or is NATO intending to make the school a more permanent nature, to build up some sort of relationship with Pakistan .

APPATHURAI: Yeah, I think I clearly need to explain this. What we're talking about is about opening the NATO schools in Europe to the Pakistanis. Not in any way opening up any facilities in Pakistan . That is never the idea... that is not at all the idea.

These NATO schools have been open, for example, not only to NATO personnel, military and civilian, also to everyone across Europe, through the Caucasus and into Central Asia, all of our partners, but also countries from North Africa, the Mediterranean Dialogue countries, countries from the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative in the Middle East, the Gulf Region and now also to Pakistani military personnel. I suspect other non-partner militaries have also come, Australians, New Zealanders. I'm just guessing, but I suspect that that's also the case.

Do these schools focus on Afghanistan ? Not exclusively, but absolutely, yes. They do do that. I personally went, in a previous job, sent down and participated in whole day sessions on... precisely on Afghanistan . So it only makes sense that Pakistanis would participate in this, if they choose to do so.

Q: On a different subject, this Russia rally made me think of the... I haven't followed this much, which is why I want to ask. Isn't Russian putting together a rapid reaction battalion to work with NATO? And is it doing that in consultation with NATO, one? And if so, what's the status of that? Is it finished? Is it ready to go, or... where does that stand?

APPATHURAI: Let me start and if I get it wrong, Robert will correct me. Russia is developing an interoperable peacekeeping battalion. In other words, interoperable with non-Russian forces, not exclusively NATO, but simply able to work with others. My understanding is that it is still under development but soon to be ready. Did I get anything wrong?

ROBERT: (inaudible) Russia , it's a country with a very large military potential, so there are different cooperative activities in the framework of the NATO-Russia Council. I mean, you refer to something which of course it's Russia to decide which units it wants to put forward, but I mean, we have other examples, be it in the naval forces for example, be it in relation to various exercises that are planned, which might include, for example, this year's special forces and so on. So it's a whole range of issues, but ultimately, the interoperabilities will include very specific units.

APPATHURAI: Well indeed. There is a battalion... and I think one of the points that has come or resurfaced in a sense, as we look at this NATO-Russia rally, is precisely what you're getting to and that is the importance of more practical cooperation on the ground where it matters.

I mean, we have Operation Active Endeavour. You know about this first exchange of classified information between a NATO and Russian vessel ever has taken place. We're going to have later this year a joint Theatre Missile Defence exercise, NATO and Russia , together. The first time that that would have ever happened.

But, and of course we have less military endeavours such as the joint training of counternarcotics personnel in Afghanistan and in interested Central Asian countries. So we do do things together. But the ability to send soldiers together into an operation, to work together, is not only a good symbol of a partnership, it's also the best way, I think, to get shared views of a particular problem and address it together. So I think there's a great political importance to this as well, as a military value.

So I share the same interest that you do in this issue.

Q: Has Moscow given any indications how they're going to use this peacekeeping battalion?

APPATHURAI: The peacekeeping battalion is like any battalion in any armed forces. They can use it the way they wish. This one will have the particular characteristics, and as Robert indicates, this will probably be extended more widely, but it will have a particular ability to work with others, and that is not something that one should take for granted.

The Russians have quite a bit of experience of working with others, but I can tell you, for example, the Chinese armed forces do not have that kind of experience. They have a few personnel that have been posted, for example, to Africa , and they have some UN peacekeeping experience, but in the large scale, when it comes to technical interoperability, to language skills, that is a country that has not yet taken those steps. And the Russians are developing the capacity to do it.

Of course, in NATO that's what we do all the time. So we do have some experience to offer to other countries and we do that with our partners.

So all this to say, they can use it the way they want, but it will have the added capability to be able to work easily with non-Russian forces.

Q: Another one on Pakistan . (inaudible)... NATO's growing ties with Pakistan is bound to be looked with concern on Pakistan's neighbours like India and Iran, so are you going to have any contact to these countries to explain to them your closer ties with Pakistan?

APPATHURAI: I think the first point is no one should look at these relations with concern because they are very practical. They flow from very obvious shared interest and that is to help Afghanistan find its feet. But you are quite right that all of Afghanistan's neighbours, I think, have the right to information about what NATO's doing in Afghanistan and that the Alliance should explain and be as transparent as possible.

NATO has agreed, has decided that it should indeed engage the neighbouring countries to explain what it is doing and NATO is doing that in a variety of senses. As I say, NATO's cooperation with Pakistan stands on its own merits and is threatening to no one, but NATO is endeavouring to explain what we're doing to all of Afghanistan 's neighbours.

Q: Still Pakistan , James. Can I consider these steps that you are now taking are an initial step of the enlarging Istanbul Cooperation Initiative? Or is it rather bilateral necessity that leads to this direction?

APPATHURAI: I think you should certainly not link this in any way to the ICI. This is a sui generis relationship based entirely on of course the practical importance of cooperating over Afghanistan and the good relations that we built up particularly since the unfortunate earthquake, but it is very simply a very practical, and I have to say relatively low level relationship between NATO and Pakistan.

Q: James, you say that NATO is going to contact the neighbouring countries of Pakistan . Has there already been any contact with Iran , or is NATO going to send officials there. What are you going to contact, the neighbours?

APPATHURAI: I have to say I don't believe there has been any contact with Iran . But for example, we mentioned India . I know that there is an intention to engage with the Indian government precisely on this issue, to explain what it is that we're doing and why we're doing it. And of course, there are many countries neighbouring Afghanistan with whom NATO has already very good relations through the Partnership for Peace, so they are perfectly well aware of what we are doing.

But it is certainly a policy of NATO that where appropriate the Alliance should explain what NATO is doing to neighbouring countries.

Q: Iran is a major neighbour of Afghanistan and Pakistan .

APPATHURAI: Indeed.

Q: So why not any contacts? Why are you shy of having contacts with Iran ?

APPATHURAI: It has not yet become an issue.

Thank you.

Q: James, could you explain where NATO is towards Belarussia. Is it still reviewing its policy?

APPATHURAI: The Alliance continuously reviews its policy towards Belarussia, but the policy... the decision taken by the North Atlantic Council after the elections in Belarus has not changed. The Alliance remains deeply concerned with the state of democracy and fundamental values in Belarus .

The Alliance still, of course, wants to encourage those elements within Belarus and anywhere, who are promoting... working to promote democracy in Belarus, but certainly the Alliance has, as you know, now only the bare minimum of high level, and certainly no high level political contacts at present with those responsible for the flawed elections, and that policy has not changed.

Q: Just one thing (inaudible)... sorry, a possible conference in London to talk about NATO's role in energy security. Has there been any more developments on that front?

APPATHURAI: No. In other words, we don't have a date that fits with the international calendar. My feeling is that it may well be soon after the summer, but we will have to see. Right after the summer break, but we'll have to see. I'll definitely keep you posted. Thanks.