|
| Updated: 01-Aug-2006 | NATO Speeches |
Kabul, 20 July 200 |
Press point by NATO Secretary General, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer
There's a mandate, let me repeat it, to support the Afghan government to extend its authority, like any normal country, over all of its territory. What I repeat is that the ISAF Forces, NATO ISAF Forces are coming in on the basis of a set of rules of engagement on the basis of which they are fully allowed, and the commanding officer will decide, to confront spoilers. That does not mean, however, that there is no difference between the counter-insurgency, counter-terrorism mandate of operation Enduring and ISAF. The difference will stay but these spoilers should never make the mistake that now NATO ISAF is coming in, it will be easy with them, they are testing us already, and they're testing public opinion in those nations who are sending forces into Afghanistan, and they'll not succeed. Counterterrorism is, in military terms, something else than antiterrorism. The counterterrorism mandate that is actively hunt is an OAF mandate. The mandate of ISAF and the rules of engagement of ISAF make it possible that when spoilers as I call them because they can come from many angles -it can be Taliban and you have seen president Karzai liked the word spoilers; it can be drugs related, it can be normal criminals, war lords. But if those spoilers try to frustrate the mission of ISAF, ISAF... NATO ISAF will act. And how it will act and when it will act exactly, I cannot decide from behind my desk in Brussels; parliaments cannot decide from their seats; government cannot decide from their seats... That is why we have trust on our commanders on the ground. That's why we have full confidence in their professionalism, and let me add that we have arrangements, as you know, to "deconflict" as the military call this, to separate the OAF from the ISAF by the fact that we have a double-hatted deputy commander which has its link to Operation Enduring Freedom and its link to ISAF. What became clear in my conversation with president Karzai this afternoon was that... that he also has full confidence in NATO ISAF. Um... You hear me saying NATO ISAF because I think NATO should do a better job in what's called branding. I mean, nobody links ISAF with NATO. I speak about NATO ISAF and... if you would see me and listen to me or we have a discussion on Kosovo, you would hear me speak about NATO KFOR. I think the president has full confidence on the basis of what he has seen up 'til now, which is formerly not yet ISAF as you know, because it's still before the transfer of authority. But what is the political importance of this third stage, as we call it and I hope that the fourth stage and the final stage will follow suit -I don't know exactly when but I hope that it will follow rather quickly- is that... that a: the Afghan government is confident that NATO can do the job, and b: that NATO shows the South... As some of you colleagues was asking me this afternoon, that it is possible, despite the fact that the situation in the South is complicated, uh... that NATO will prove that you can set up a Provincial Reconstruction Teams, you can try and start reconstruction and development, even if from time to time you have to confront the spoilers. So I think it's effective political importance. Let me say at the same time that the interesting thing of the visit this afternoon to the training site of course was that training -and I add equipping the National Army is of course for the Afghans very much part of an exit strategy for the international community. Well, that's not directly related to the commitment of NATO. Why... why do I use these words? Because Afghanistan is... but you... let me say this also many times is the priority number one for NATO, it's NATO's most important, also most complex operation... But let me say once again, I think that the international community could and should approach Afghanistan with more prominence; that was the background of my (inaudible)... in many newspapers... I think that when NATO does its job, and that is providing a secure and stable climate, we... we should see an immediate follow-up by the international community. And who are the international community? The G8, the bilateral donors and also very much, here in Afghanistan, UNAMA and the European Union. And I hope, and when I say I hope, you hear some doubts in my voice indeed, that that commitment will be as strong and as long-lasting as the... as the Afghanistan compact we all agreed in London, in the beginning of this year (inaudible)... So I'm not saying that the UN or the EU are running away but they should realize that there is no military solution for the development of this nation, there is no military solution; there's never a military solution for development. And that's relevant anywhere and... a fortiori it's relevant in Afghanistan. We have 19 members in common; 19 EU members are sitting around the NATO table and... and you see it in the mirror at the European Union table. If you... if you sent your forces -and in NATO we have a plus: we have the Americans, Canadians- if you sent your forces into harm's way in Afghanistan, why is it then that not automatically a full commitment for the development of this nation would follow? Because... what... what is the argument? If you think that you can... you can solve this nation's problems by being engaged militarily, you're hunting illusions, you're really hunting illusions. Military can do what the coalition has done: you can chase the Taliban away, you can create a climate of security and stability. But it's an illusion to think that there is a military solution for... for Afghanistan. Well the international community... international community has community has committed in the framework of the compact. It has committed. Uh... If I see the -and I can understand that to a certain extent because if you look at the world at the moment, if you watch television now you see a lot of things happening in the world- and I do know and I do realize that there are other theatres of interest, but my plea is do not forget Afghanistan. And I'm not only saying this because I'm now speaking to you here in Kabul, you've heard me say this much more frequently, because the consequences of not doing what we should do... And the commitment is there -I'm not doubting the commitment of the international community- the commitment is there. Failure of the international community in Afghanistan, and there the government has to play a role. I mean, there was also -I hope that you (inaudible)... a message to the Afghan government, to the president in my... in my (inaudible)... this afternoon... When I say it takes three to tango, it means NATO, the international community and one would say first and foremost the Afghan government itself, where... which also bears an... a very important responsibility of nominating the right governors and the right police chiefs and fighting narcotics and fighting corruption. So what are you trying to achieve? I hope and I trust my voice will be heard... Well as NATO Secretary General, as NATO, as an alliance, there's not an awful lot we can do. Alliance members is... is of course a different thing. I mean, if there's tension in the Pakistani - Afghani relationship, and there is -this comes as no surprise to anybody- it is of the utmost importance. But here again it's a matter of how much attention do you pay to these things, let the international community, including NATO allies, pay attention to the fact that there is clearly a problem to solve here. But as NATO Secretary General, I mean NATO of course; my deputee was in Islamabad twice; Minister Çetin, the NATO Senior Civilian Representative has been in Pakistan many times. It's in his mandate, by the way, the SCR of NATO to look after the relationship. We are discussing with the Pakistani government, I think it's called (inaudible)... of Communication Agreement, because Pakistan is important for the... the (inaudible)... of oppression. So it's another political attention here if you talk about the borders. NATO will not and cannot seal the borders; that's not NATO's job. NATO's image and NATO's performance after the earthquake, I think did a lot to improve the perception the Pakistan from and about NATO. This was a strictly humanitarian affair, as you know; it had nothing to do with politics, but the positive side-effect was that they saw, the Pakistani people saw, NATO soldiers coming in with hospitals, helping them, treating them, clearing the roads, ferrying their people from the hills with helicopters. I speak from time to time to the Pakistani Foreign Minister; my deputee saw President Musharraf; Minister Çetin has a good relationship with president Musharraf. So within... within that framework we do what we can. But if you ask me: what can you do officially as NATO, I think that's the wrong question. I think to start with your... you last... last part of your question, I think in the Netherlands and Germany, people do realize very well -that goes certainly with the Dutch Parliament but also with Bundestag, that is not easygoing, that this is not an easy patrolling of a border or an easy police type of peacekeeping approach. I think people realize very well, and certainly in my native country, where I think the most fundamental debate has been held about... about this oppression, with the final result as you know that 75-80 percent of Parliament supported, if... if you read what's discussed there it was clearly very much focused on the scenario you're just giving me. But let me... let me make it clear again: this is not the object of NATO ISAF going in, but the consequence of an ISAF action can very well be -let's not beat around the bush here- can very well be that NATO ISAF will confront people people who have tried to confront them. You cannot expect any PRT commander waiting for the spoilers to march in... his PRT and start killing people. That's why we have those robust rules of engagement. But do not forget the mandate, do not forget that... that the object of NATO ISAF is very much -and as a priority, winning the hearts and minds of people- and seeing that they see their standard of living improve because NATO or NATO ISAF came, and I think that's doable. But we should not shy away from the second part of your scenario, that there might indeed be confrontations. But I say again, I have trust in the military commanders, I have trust in General Richards, I have trust in the commanders on the ground, that they, at a certain stage, will not take their decision easily. And I've said before and I repeat that everybody should realize -and I think that's a message which has come across in the Netherlands very well- that is an operation not without danger and that's... ever life lost is one too much or one too many. Well there has been... there has been some fighting and... you know much better than I do, representing of the leader newspaper in the Netherlands that has been reported in the newspapers, that has not led to all kinds of corruptions of the political debate... We have not seen the transfer authority yet; we'll see that hopefully very soon. I trust, if everything goes right -and there will be no road blocks but you'll have transfer of authority by Friday the... for the eighth of July- and then it is NATO ISAF and it's General Richards and the commanders who command. That will not immediately change the situation in the South but I have confidence in... specifically about the Dutch about the situation in the... The fact that we're now heading in the direction of transfer of authority for stage three means... that's... the Combined Joint Statement Of Requirements -you've never heard that word before, it became (inaudible)... the CJSOR -see, I mastered the jargon by now- what is necessary and needed on the basis of the military planning and analysis, we have that in place. So we can have (inaudible)... of the third phase. I would hope, if you talk about Rega, that by Rega, we would have phase four. Phase four, as you know, is in that respect -and put it if you report it between quotation marks- "relatively easy" because phase four means the Americans, the US. The US, as you know, have not only a lot of forces but only a lot of hardware in fixing the aircraft and helicopters which they will then bring into... bring into ISAF. In other words, I would... I would hope that if you mention Rega, that by the time the heads of state meet in Riga that we have the phase number four behind us. |
|||||||||||||
 |
||||||||||||||
