Brussels
18 Oct. 2006 |
Press Briefing
Weekly press briefing with the NATO Spokesman James Appathurai
JAMES APPATHURAI (NATO Spokesman): Thank you for coming, and why don't I get straight to it and then I'm happy to take your questions. Let me start--and there's a few issues to mention--let me start with Kosovo and I think many of you were there this morning when President Ahtisaari, who is leading the Standards Process, came to meet both the Secretary General and the North Atlantic Council, and they both gave a press conference afterwards, so there would be no too much news here.
I think the three points that I would stress, and I think you heard this at a press conference: One, that President Ahtisaari stressed that he is planning to stick to his schedule in terms of the completion of the process, which he has undergone, to present to the Contact Group and through the contact I presume to the UN Security Council, his conclusions on the way forward for Kosovo.
Of course, the ambassadors discussed, as the Secretary General did, with the President, the current state of his thoughts, and discussions including with the Contact Group, and they look forward to the security aspects of a post settlement Kosovo. The Secretary General said in his press conference that he could potentially envision, if President Ahtisaari were to put these ideas forward, a potential role for NATO perhaps in training or mentoring, but we will see where that goes.
The clear message, certainly from the NATO Secretary General, was that it is up to President Ahtisaari to steer this process. NATO will maintain its combat capability during the status process. Clearly NATO will maintain a robust presence in the immediate aftermath of a settlement decision, and NATO will also look to work with other bodies to determine what role NATO might play in a post settlement Kosovo.
The second thing I wish to mention is that later this afternoon the Secretary General will leave for London. Tomorrow he will meet with Prime Minister Blair, and he will... first he will meet with Prime Minister Blair to discuss two main topics.
One is NATO's ongoing operations, and you will not be surprised that Afghanistan will be at the centre of those discussions. The U.K. is making a very important, very valuable contribution to the overall NATO effort, and the Prime Minister and the Secretary General will certainly want to discuss again, the current state of the operations and the way forward, and I'll come back to current operations in a moment.
Secondly, the Secretary General will be hosting what we call the Successor Generation Conference, the NATO Secretary General's Successor Generation Conference. The idea being to bring together younger people, not young as in 16, but young as in older university students, graduate students, not only from London, but also video links to other institutions.
For example, in the morning there will be a video link to the Institut des études politiques in Paris when the Secretary General gives his speech--that speech will be on the web, by the way, 15 minutes after its finished.
The first panel will be called 21st Century Challenges for the Transatlantic Alliance. The panellists will be Dr. Espen Barth Eide, who's the State Secretary of the Royal Norwegian Ministry of Defence; Jonathan Marcus, the Diplomatic Correspondent of the BBC; moderator will be a professor from the LSE.
The second panel will focus on Energy Security, video linked to St. Gallen University in Switzerland. The Polish Minister of Defence will be a panellist, as will be the Chairman of Goldwyn International Strategies, and an Energy Security Specialist, Mr. John Roberts.
The third panel is called Meeting Global Security Challenges Together. It will be linked to Harvard. The Australian High Commissioner to the U.K. will be a panellist, as will be the High Commissioner of Pakistan to the United Kingdom, Dr. Sergey Rogov, who's the Director of the U.S.A. and Canada Institute in Russia and whom I'm sure you know, and Dr. Makio Miyagawa, the Director of the Japan Institute for International Affairs.
Finally, Michael Snyder, the Chairman of the Policy and Resources Committee of the City of London Corporation will be there. And Geoff Hoon, the U.K. Secretary of State for Europe, will give the final closing keynote address.
There will be a few journalists invited to participate in it. We are contacting people, obviously, in London, throughout the process, but it will otherwise not be fully open.
The purpose of this, and then I will stop on this subject, is to do what the Secretary General believes is very important, and that's to engage with young people. They are the future of support for NATO and these are a number of, I think, interesting issues that are on NATO's agenda.
It will be on something called The Plaisterers Hall. Apparently the United Kingdom or London has these guilds who... and this is the guild of plasterers, and apparently the plastering in the building is wonderful, so I will see tomorrow when I go.
Afghanistan. The Secretary General's conference will concentrate, of course, on that. There's a couple of points, other points that I would like to make.
One is that we have now with the expanded NATO mission 24 Provincial Reconstruction Teams. I can tell you that in the next four weeks Turkey will formally start to put in place a Provincial Reconstruction Team in the east of the country, bringing the number of 25. No precise date yet. We will leave that to the Turks to announce.
Second point, is and you will have seen this perhaps yesterday, that the Afghan government, alongside or working hand-in-hand with NATO, is due to begin a major operation throughout Afghanistan to create the conditions for reconstruction and development in the upcoming period.
This operation entitled Oqab, O-Q-A-B, which I believe is eagle in... actually, I don't know in which language, so I'm sorry. I can't tell you that. Sorry?
Q: (inaudible)... Arabic, Pashtu...
APPATHURAI: Okay, good. Several languages, it means eagle. (Laughs). It is a security plan to conduct security operations in all regions across Afghanistan. It will be the first ever country-wide joint Afghan national security forces, and ISAF operation together. I will not obviously give operational details, but it is an Afghan-led operation, Afghan National Police will be fully integrated into it and ISAF units will act in support of Afghan national security forces.
The purpose of this integrated security operation is to allow and encourage reconstruction and development to take place across Afghanistan.
And I think that's what I need to know. It will take place throughout the winter months that are coming.
Finally, let me respond briefly to comments that I have seen from the UN agency responsible for drug issues. I have seen reports that once again NATO is being called on to conduct military operations against drug labs, against convoys, and other... and to burn poppy fields. I think we have to be very clear here that this is not in NATO's mandate. It is not what the Afghan government wants of NATO, and it is not in NATO's planning to take on a greater role for counternarcotics than that which has been assigned to us by our mandate and that which his enshrined in our operational plan.
And that is a supporting role. It is a robust supporting role, where NATO provides intelligence to Afghan counternarcotics personnel. NATO provides logistical support, including in terms of transport. NATO provides in extremis support, for example, providing emergency medical care to any Afghan counternarcotics officials who might be injured in the course of their duties. And NATO provides training, not only to Afghan counternarcotics officials, but to counternarcotics officials in neighbouring countries. Something we do in cooperation with the Russian Federation.
But there is no NATO intention nor plan to take on a greater role than the role that has been given to us.
Let me turn now to two more thematic issues, and then to the upcoming schedule. One is Georgia, one is Darfur.
On Georgia let me just tell you that NATO ambassadors have had an extensive discussion on the ongoing situation in Georgia, and of course, in relations between Georgia and Russia. NATO's clear sentiment is that both parties should take every step, A) to moderate the language that they use in regards to the current tensions, and B) to take active steps to deescalate what is a very tense situation and that those steps should be taken as quickly as possible.
In terms of Darfur, I'd like to mention two things. One is that, and this you already know, NATO has, or is continuing the rotation flights of African Union troops in support of the African Union and intends to continue those throughout the year. But certainly there is concern and that concern was expressed today in the North Atlantic Council about the deteriorating security situation and of the reports that we have seen in the press of active participation by... possible active participation by Sudanese Air Force in attacks against minorities in Darfur.
The security situation in the country is obviously something of great concern to all NATO allies, and all NATO allies hope to see, as quickly as possible, agreement that the United Nations can take over from the African Union at the end of the year as the UN has taken on to do.
Finally, let me turn to the upcoming schedule of the Secretary General. For your interest, on the 23rd of this month the Secretary General will go to Budapest to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the Hungarian Revolution. There will be a ceremony at 10:00 a.m. at Kossuth Lajos Square--I'm sorry to the Hungarians if I pronounce that incorrectly--and there will be a number of ceremonies that take place throughout the morning.
The Deputy Secretary General will visit Israel beginning the 22nd of October, where he will meet with a long series of high level officials and participate in a conference.
The NATO Secretary General, will fly to Berlin on the 25th of this month. He will have a bilateral meeting with Chancellor Merkel. He'll also meet with the Minister of Defence, Mr. Jung, and I believe is intending to meet, if possible, the Bundestag Defence Committee. I think the subject of discussions will be, again, Afghanistan and preparations for Riga.
Oh, and by the way, preparations for Riga should also be added to the list he will discuss with Prime Minister Blair tomorrow. I forgot that second part.
He will then fly straight on to Moscow, where he will meet on the 26th with the senior leadership of the Russian Federation, and that includes President Putin at 13:00, for the moment, the time is planned for 13:00 on Thursday.
Q: Thirteen hundred Moscow time?
APPATHURAI: Thirteen hundred Moscow time. And meeting with President Putin.
Let me see if I have forgotten anything. Yes, I have. Two more visits. On the 27th of October the Secretary General will visit Romania. I'm sorry, I don't have any more details on who he will meet. That will come.
On the 30th he will go to Slovakia and the Czech Republic. In Slovakia he'll meet with the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Minister of Defence, he'll meet with the President and with the Prime Minister. The details for the visit to the Czech Republic I do not yet have.
Now I think, unless Carmen is going to send me a text message at any moment, I have covered the things I need to cover, and I'm happy to take your questions.
Please.
Q: Can you comment on media reports today saying that NATO planes bombarded two villages inside Pakistan yesterday? And shall I continue...
APPATHURAI: Well, go ahead, yeah.
Q: And my second question is, what about Israel? On Monday the NATO and Israel signed an agreement, you know, to patrol the Mediterranean. Have you signed similar agreements with other seven partners of the Mediterranean?
And my third question is, what is the purpose of the visit of the Deputy Secretary General to Israel you said he is visiting? Thank you.
APPATHURAI: To answer the first question, I have seen those same press reports, and while I can never be a hundred percent definitive, I have checked with all of our military authorities and until this moment I have no information that anything like that has happened. In fact, I am told by everyone in uniform that that has not happened.
So for the moment I certainly could not confirm it and I think I could lean towards denying it. I don't think that that report is accurate.
Q: Sorry, James, the question wasn't clear...
APPATHURAI: Oh, I'm sorry... that's Carmen. Ah, I'm sure I got something wrong.
Oh SecGen's not going to Romania, that's true. SecGen's not going to Romania. I take that back. Thank you, Carmen. That's true.
The question was, there have been reports, I think in the Pakistani press first, and then picked up in... on ITAR-TASS actually, that ISAF aircraft had crossed the border and bombed two villages in Pakistan. The answer to that, from everything that we have seen this morning is that that is not the case.
In terms of the Mediterranean Israel... yes, many countries in the Mediterranean Dialogue, of the seven countries in the Mediterranean Dialogue, are supporting Operation Active Endeavour. Not necessarily by sending ships, but by providing logistical support, by providing intelligence and by cooperating with the overall operations.
For example, as you well know, the NATO policy is not to do non-compliant boarding. It is not to board the ship against the resistance of the captain. But if the captain does not wish to be boarded the captain of the suspicious ship, NATO forces, for example, will follow that ship and alert the port in which it is coming to rest that the authority should, and they do have the right, by every legal authority, to check it.
All of the littoral countries, I think, without exception, are in some way or another supporting this operation.
Q: But have you signed similar agreements (inaudible)... Have they signed similar agreements, like with the (inaudible)...?
APPATHURAI: I will have to check. I know that they are participating or supporting this operation. The actual papers that have been signed I would have to check.
The Deputy Secretary General, I will get the details for you, right now, of his trip. It is certainly to be seen in the contest of the regular series of exchanges at high levels between NATO officials and all the officials in NATO... there's a working dinner. I'm quite sure there's a conference. But he is certainly meeting with a series of high level officials. Including the Vice Prime Minister, the Minister of Foreign Affairs. He'll be giving a dinner speech, and meeting with the Chairman of the Foreign Affairs and Defence Committee. So I think it should be seen simply as another in a series of visits. He has many to the country. He'll be giving a speech and meeting with high level officials, but all simply in the context of the Mediterranean Dialogue relationship.
We'll just go backwards.
Q: Amina Sabalic from Croatian Press. There are some articles today in two leading daily papers that President Bush said that he is very much for that Croatia enters NATO in 2008. Could you please comment it and maybe more broadly on Adriatic Chapter countries?
APPATHURAI: Well, I have seen the same reports, and of course, I don't know what was actually said between the two leaders. What I can say is, of course, it is a consensus decision of 26 if a country is to be admitted into NATO. Croatia has been for many years in the Membership Action Plan, has made great progress in terms of defence reform, and has also, of course, taken the very important step of full cooperation with the International Tribunal with the arrest of General Gotovina.
There are other issues, of course, that remain in terms of building public support, and I think that was mentioned in the context of the visit to President Bush. So there is still work to be done, there are still standards that have to be met, but I think it's safe to say that NATO Heads of State and Government, NATO governments all firmly believe that the enlargement process should go forward. There is no enlargement fatigue in NATO, as there might be potentially in other organizations, so you will see, I believe, in Riga, a very clear, I think, and forward-leaning statement on the NATO enlargement process. Which of course, will directly relate to Croatia and the other countries in the Membership Action Plan.
I think that's the most I could say for now, I think.
Q: This is not... this is going to be, as stated before, a consolidation summit, or...
APPATHURAI: You will not see invitations issued in 2006. You will see a statement looking forward, potentially to the next summit. I have to say there is no yet formal agreement, even on a summit in 2008, though I fully expect that it will happen.
Q: Is Riga... the discussion on Georgia, there were some calls from Georgian leadership for the withdrawal of Russian peacekeepers and for some other force to take their place. What is the position of the council?
APPATHURAI: There has been no discussion in NATO of replacing Russian peacekeepers with NATO forces, as far as I'm aware.
Q: So... so what's your comment on these calls of Georgian leadership? They should stay there?
APPATHURAI: I think the first thing we should do is leave the process to the organization that has the lead in this issue, and that is the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, which is obviously playing, under Minister De Gucht, quite an active role these days in the issues relating to Georgia, and I think in a very positive way.
So as far as I'm aware there is no NATO position on these calls, and NATO would defer to the leadership of the OSCE in this regard.
I think over here, and then there.
Q: Turning to Afghanistan, there've been some pretty heavy fighting in recent years Nuristan province, Paktia. Is there a trend developing there, that's noticeable for NATO. And one other aspect, if I could get perhaps your thoughts on it, some of it's near North Waziristan where this famous deal was done with the tribal leaders. Do you have any reflections then on what... whether that was successful or is having an impact?
APPATHURAI: Well, in terms of trends, trends go up and down in Afghanistan, so I don't want to comment on that. What I can say is of course, in different regions at different times we see upsurges or downsurges of attacks on NATO forces.
The big picture, and on Afghan forces, and on the Afghan population as well, I would say two things. One is the big picture is important in that on any given day there are going to be attacks somewhere in Afghanistan. But we can't forget that over the past few months and years we have made a lot of progress in putting in not only NATO forces, but Afghan forces, into places where they were not before. And as a result you get, by pushing into this ungoverned territory, attacks.
So my basic point is, don't see these attacks as only a sign of continuing instability, which they are in the regions where they take place, but also in some cases, a sign of how we're moving forward.
In terms of that agreement I think it's safe to say that all the NATO nations and NATO as an organization, is looking carefully at that region and hoping and anticipating that that agreement will deliver results in terms of in some way reducing the amount or the number of insurgents crossing the border, or support for the insurgents and the Taliban crossing the border from Pakistan.
It will be vitally important for NATO that the border issue is dealt with in an effective way, if we are to achieve, as an international community, and for the Afghan government in support of the Afghan government success in establishing the conditions for reconstruction of development. The border is essential.
So it will be very important that the two governments in particular work together, and that that arrangement that has been put in place, is successful. You know that President Karzai is moving forward with his own initiative to try to deal with security in that border region. And NATO has supported it, not in a practical sense, but just philosophically supported it. And you can be sure that through the Tripartite Commission, which is the body that brings together the commander of ISAF and his counterparts from Pakistan and Afghanistan. They will be looking very closely, and I mean, on a regular basis, at the border issue.
Q: On the Balkan three aspiring countries, there is an impression that NATO members are interested to have the both... the three countries at the same time. That's the impression which you are getting from the outside.
But when you take, for example, Croatia, Croatia has a political and economic stability, but it lacks a little bit perhaps in comparing to Macedonia when it comes to the personnel in the army, in terms of any of the former type of the army and (inaudible) new one, professional one. When the Macedonia is a little big advanced on that issue, but it's still lacking behind Croatia in terms of political and economic stability. And if you take Albania, for example, it has too bad elements from each country in terms of delays. So are the (inaudible) considering these kind of elements? And eventually not exclude the possibility that not all three of them might get invitation in 2008 or perhaps pick on one or two of them which are most advanced in all combined issues?
And then I'll go up with another question on Kosovo.
APPATHURAI: Go ahead, or...
Q: Yes, on Secretary General doing the press point with President Ahtisaari, mentioned the northern part of Kosovo, speaking about the continuing strength of the KFOR in Mitrovica. But we are always getting these messages from Secretary General, that NATO is there to stay there, and (inaudible)... stay there is always ready to go to the streets in case something happens.
Now we are always getting the message that NATO is not only a military alliance, but is building up its political image as a whole organization. The question will be, is NATO discussing with local population, in this case with northern Mitrovica, their population, and the authorities in Belgium, that in an eventuality, if Kosovo is likely to be independent, or whatever, prevent these kind of intervention before it happens. And establish a dialogue. Where are the problems and how can these issues can resolve without showing the (inaudible), if you want?
APPATHURAI: To...
Q: (inaudible)...
APPATHURAI: I'll repeat it. Did you....
Q: And yes, on discussion of the main topic of discussion that Ahtisaari had today with NAC ambassadors, I presume it was the possible or the follow-up of KPC what will be the security force look like. But we are having here impression of like ping-pong between Ahtisaari, the Contact Group and NATO. Everybody says, no, it's up to them, and then both the other side, no it's not to me. But I presume Ahtisaari is not allowed to propose something which is not going to be agreed by the member countries, because at the end of the day it's NATO who's going to take the mandate of really something, which would be the case. So what are the (inaudible)... NATO countries? What should be the headlines or the paragraph of his proposed (inaudible)... force, in Kosovo?
APPATHURAI: Thank you for those questions. Ah and the three...
Q: (inaudible)... difficult questions, but you see I can't keep my word.
APPATHURAI: The three questions are... is NATO basically willing to split apart the three aspirant countries if one is farther ahead in terms of membership? Second, what is NATO doing to engage with the parties in Belgrade and the north of Kosovo to prevent destabilisation in the event of independence or something like it. And finally, what advice is NATO giving, I think this is a summary, to President Ahtisaari as to what it wants to do in Kosovo afterwards.
Do I correctly summarize?
Q: That is my (inaudible)...
APPATHURAI: It's excellent. NATO's policy, and I think it's a policy that stands on enlargement, is that each country will be judged on its own merits, and I think that that is true, and I can tell you that when in our internal discussions the countries are discussed, and assessed, they are assessed individually and on their individual merits.
The political decision as to how they're admitted is one that will have to be left to our Heads of State and Government and has to do with many factors, including, for example, ratification processes, etc. So of course, it's not simply based on how they do in the Member Action Plan assessment cycle, but it is a political decision that has to be taken by our leaders as to how they wish to approach it.
But each country is being judged on its own merits.
In terms of the north, first I should reiterate what the Secretary General has said, because it is true that we have brought in, as you know, an extra German battalion which has been conducting operations throughout Kosovo, including in the north. Facilities have been opened in the north. Nothing Hill, I believe it's called, precisely to establish a presence there for NATO in the event of any instability.
So no one should doubt NATO's capability and its intention to ensure that there will not be violence in Kosovo and that the conditions are right. I should stress that President Ahtisaari specifically noted that KFOR's presence there is absolutely essential to create the conditions for the political process to go forward and that is certainly how NATO sees it as well.
However, to answer your two questions specifically, you will have to speak to KFOR to see what... I'm sorry, because I don't know exactly what they're doing in terms of speaking to the individual communities. I just don't know.
In terms of what NATO is providing in terms of support to President Ahtisaari, you know that James Pardew, Ambassador Pardew, is in regular contact with President Ahtisaari and his team and is also participating in the Contact Group Plus meetings. NATO has two liaison personnel, one military and one civilian, in President Ahtisaari's team. So he has a direct channel to NATO and we have one to him and we use it on a regular basis.
Also you know that many NATO countries are in the Contact Group. So there is no absence of counsel between NATO countries, between NATO and President Ahtisaari as we go forward. But he will put into his report, and he made this very clear today, what he thinks is the right solution. That is his mandate, and he will do it, and then it will be up to the international community to find ways to implement that. But he is his own man and he will put his own ideas down and that, I think, he made very clear to us today.
Q: I would like to come back to a question on country by country judging by NATO and on Macedonia, can the lack of consensus between the opposition Albanian party and the government concerning the reform legislation such as police law, can it affect the signal in Riga?
APPATHURAI: I think that the signal will be based on an assessment that will take place in every capital and in NATO Headquarters, of the progress in implementation of reforms. Police reform is obviously one of those issues which we mention publicly on a regular basis.
Beyond that it's difficult for me to... well, I think that's what I have to say. Everyone will be looking at all of these issues. They're all quite clear. Police reform is certainly one of those issues. And the efforts that are being made for concrete progress in that regard will certainly be... not that regard, but all of these issues, will be looked at very carefully in capitals, as we begin drafting language, which as NATO nations begin drafting the language of the signal that they intend to send. That process will start very soon because the summit is not far away. All right.
Mark.
Q: Mark John from Reuters. Two questions on Afghanistan. I just wondered, how differently this Operation Oqab is going to look to activities already taking place, given precisely that what ISAF is there to do at the moment is to support Afghan authorities to bring the security needed for reconstruction and development? Are we talking about any new resources being added to this drive here? Will it mean new activities? Would it look fundamentally different to what they're trying to do at the moment?
And secondly, perhaps I missed this, but I haven't seen any NATO readout from General Richards' discussions with Musharraf, I think it was last week now. Does NATO agree with the Pakistani interpretation of the discussions that, in fact, both agreed that the problems fundamentally stem from developments inside Afghanistan, rather than there being any major problem that needed sorted out on the Pakistani side of the border?
APPATHURAI: To answer the first question, it will look different in, I think, three ways. One is it will be national. Covering the entire country. Before expansion to Stage 4 NATO was not in a position to do that, because of course we had operations only in three-quarters of the country until very recently.
Secondly, it will have a very prominent Afghan security forces lead because their capacity is getting better, they're much better able to lead and conduct those kind of operations.
So I think in these two ways, one in a sense qualitative, and one in a sense quantitative, in terms of greater area, and unity of operations, they would be different.
Third, the focus will very much be on, and there perhaps there isn't as great a difference, but on creating the conditions in a very focused way for reconstruction and development to take place.
There, I think that you're right, that that's an extension of the kind of things that we've been doing before, but it will try to do that in areas right around the country.
Second, in terms of the discussion between General Richards and the Pakistani government, I certainly don't want to characterize those discussions because I wasn't there. What I can say is, and I believe this is certainly the view of the Secretary General, that both governments have a job to do. There are challenges on both sides of the border. One of those challenges is the border. And both Afghan authorities, NATO frankly as well, and the Pakistani government, all need to make greater efforts to take the steps necessary to... to put down the Taliban, and that's what it comes down to. And terrorist elements as well.
It is not a job just for the Afghans. It's not a job just for the Pakistanis, and it's not a job just for NATO. It's a job for all three together, and I would not be in a position, I think, to try to give percentages as to who has to do a little bit more and who has to do a little bit less. You might want to ask General Richards about the actual conversation?
Yeah, yeah.
Q: Just quickly, I mean, is NATO working on the assumption that there is a significant Taliban support, support for the Taliban coming from Pakistan that needs therefore to be stopped?
APPATHURAI: There is certainly... there are certainly concerns in many circles that there is support for the... what the Secretary General calls the spoilers, but I think that means in particular Taliban coming from across the border.
In fact, I think that is hard to deny. That border needs to be addressed, as I've said already many times. And it is for both governments in the first line and for NATO supporting them to try to address it. But yes, there is concern about support that might be coming across that border.
Q: (inaudible)... News Agency of Ukraine. James, in the framework of Riga summit, chief of states and government are going to look through financial issues concerning the overseas operations, among others. So that my question is, is there tabled any proposals for a fixed contribution of the member countries for financing operations like in Afghanistan, for example?
And the second part of the same question...
APPATHURAI: Yeah, I don't think I understood that. Could you start again?
Q: Yeah, sure.
APPATHURAI: Sorry.
Q: We're... you mentioned, you personally mentioned that there will be a question... one of the questions considered during the Riga Summit concerning the financial...
APPATHURAI: Yeah, yeah...
Q: ...financing the overseas operations.
APPATHURAI: Yeah.
Q: Like in Afghanistan. So that my question is, are there tabled an proposed for a fixed contribution of a separate member countries?
And the second part of the same question, are NATO going to review or maybe to modify the fixed minimum defence expenditures for each member country? Thank you.
APPATHURAI: Thank you. To give a quick snapshot to those who don't every day follow NATO financing, there is now a recently agreed cost share for each country. All the nations have signed up to it. It is fair. It is based on a complicated formula which basically comes down to your gross domestic product.
So that's quite reasonable and there's no controversy about that. Where there is discussion is about whether or not more elements of operations which are used by everybody, or by many countries, could come out of the common funded budget, which does, have, indeed, this agreed cost share, rather than from the individual national defence budgets of whatever country happens to be setting it up, for example... or using it at the time. So there is that element. In other words, can we common fund more of what we do?
And second, is can there be common funding for arrangements for short notice deployments for operations, in particular the airlift, and/or for the NATO Response Force? All these things are now on the table and there are extremely complicated discussions going on about exactly how you would, for example, provide common funding for airlift, without providing a disincentive for countries to buy their own aircraft.
In other words, if someone's going to pay to do it anyway, someone else, would you buy your own aircraft? And you would find fewer and fewer countries actually buying their own aircraft within NATO and that's not something we want to do.
So this is the kind of discussion that has to go on. But the principles, as you quite rightly point out, of expanding what cup falls under common funding, and common funding potentially short notice deployments including of the NRF, those are very much on the table for Riga.
Q: On Serbian PfP in Riga Summit, there have been quite a long... since a long time discussion among the member countries about what kind of message, what to do with Serbia in Riga Summit.
Now the Secretary General today at the press point said something that he was (inaudible) in terms of what does it mean to deliver. But here we have unclarified statement saying that someone says delivering or full cooperation putting Mladic into The Hague. Somebody says well, that might not be the necessary.
So what will happen in Riga if Mladic is not arrested before that time? Will Serbia be agreed for PfP membership?
APPATHURAI: That's a good question and the Secretary General you said was unclear precisely because the situation is unclear. I think he quite accurately put out what the considerations are, which is one the one hand, that countries don't want to see a black hole in the centre of Europe, they don't want to see Serbia isolated. They want to engage with Serbia and he sees, and I think most of our countries see Serbia as integrating, eventually, into NATO and the EU.
On the other hand, full cooperation with the International Tribunal, however we define it, Carla Del Ponte was very clear yesterday that not only was Mladic not in The Hague, but in her assessment, Serbia was not making concrete and substantive efforts actually to have him arrested.
So she gave quite a negative assessment in her press conference in Luxembourg, I believe it was. So wherever that fine line is in the view of the prosecutor, from what I read yesterday, she didn't think Serbia was even close to full cooperation with The Hague.
Q: Now, if you go back look to the side of the relation of Mr. Kostunica, he said that his government is doing something.
APPATHURAI: Indeed.
Q: At least targeting the support network, they have arrested about ten people and just last week the trial against them. But you can't deny that inside the NATO countries, there are countries, I will not mention one of them, or two perhaps, who are pushing to have this PfP membership...
APPATHURAI: Of course.
Q: ...without...
APPATHURAI: Exactly. Which is why the Secretary General was not clear and why I can't be clear either, because that discussion hasn't happened yet. But I can tell you, of course, again, repeating what Mrs... Chief Prosecutor Del Ponte said yes... she called it smoke and mirrors, this plan, almost smoke and mirrors, I think she said, a plan without action. And that... and that's where we stand right now. That is her assessment and that will be a formidable obstacle to overcome to bring Serbia into PfP by the time of the Riga Summit.
Bosnia is another issue. Again Mrs. Del Ponte's... Chief Prosecutor Del Ponte's assessment of this will be very important.
In the end it is a political decision for the Heads of State and Government to take. What I can say is this issue of Partnership for Peace for Serbia, for Bosnia-Hercegovina, but also for Montenegro, will very much be on the agenda as they go forward.
Q: (inaudible)...
APPATHURAI: (inaudible)...problem. It doesn't have an (inaudible) problem...
Q: So... they're not... (inaudible)...will member countries are not disputing with?
APPATHURAI: I don't think anyone has a dispute with Montenegro membership in Partnership for Peace. The question is when and how it's done. But I don't think... from my point of view there are no political... |
