Press briefing

JAMES APPATHURAI:  Thank you for coming. The Secretary General has decided to brief for you himself on the political directors' meetings that we've had today. Secretary General.

DE HOOP SCHEFFER: Thank you very much, James. I'm slightly pressed for time, so I cannot hang around too long. Two subjects in the reinforced North Atlantic Council with the political directors. We started with Afghanistan, where I sensed a strong sense of satisfaction, optimism, around the table, be it with the force levels. You know, they're up 7,000... over 7,000 since December. We see more money coming in for reconstruction and development. We see the security improvement slowly, but certainly improving, including in the south on the basis of the Operation Achilles.

The political directors concluded that we now see increasing coordination  between the members of the international community, the European Union, the United Nations, the G8. Important to see UNAMA expansion in Afghanistan, and of course, our own role in that as well, as we see a greater Afghan engagement.

So I think I can tell you that the word momentum is a right way to qualify the meeting of today. Does that mean that we are there? Of course not. We know what we need to do. We also know what we need to do more. Investing in Afghan capacity, endeavour to work more closely with other bodies, including civilian bodies, step up NATO's political dialogue with Pakistan.

I'll go to Pakistan before long. I've been invited, as you might know, by the Pakistani Prime Minister Aziz, Shaukat Aziz when he was here. I'll go to Pakistan. You know our military-to-military contacts are good. I think we need, and I think our Pakistani friends agree, that we need to match those military-to-military contacts in the so-called Trilateral Commission with the Afghans, we need to match that with a more mature political dialogue and that is what I'll do when I go to Islamabad.

It would not be fair not to tell you that there was, of course, a lot of concern around the table about narcotics. Not a prime NATO responsibility, as you know, but there was the recognition that what has been done until now has not been nearly effective enough. You know that there is, of course, prime responsibility for this with the Afghan authorities, the international community has a role to play, NATO in a supporting role according to our operational plan.

So overall a positive mood, to be continued—that goes also for the second subject I'll come to in a moment—to be continued in Oslo.  See this meeting as... in the run-up to the meeting of the Foreign Ministers of NATO at the end of April in Oslo. But I think on Afghanistan I can say overall a positive mood. Challenges ahead, many of them, but a clear sense that we have, as we speak traction, some traction and momentum.

Over lunch we discussed Kosovo. I think the most important message coming out of that luncheon is that the allies, all of them, like the Secretary General of the United Nations, Ban Ki-Moon, like the European Union, as said by the German presidency, are in full support of the Ahtisaari proposals and align themselves with the European Union and align themselves, as I said, with what Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon has said in his statement where he said that he, Ban Ki-Moon, expressed his full support for Special Envoy Ahtisaari's report and settlement report.

The second element I would like to mention from the luncheon is that all the allies agreed that this is an issue which is fundamental to European security. This is not a far away place. The future status of Kosovo is fundamental to European security. For all the allies. Perhaps not for everybody, but for all the allies. And on that basis fundamental European security, and support for the Ahtisaari proposals, there was a clear and strong sense of unity around the table.

I can say it in other words, this is about Europe's future. Let me say in this regard that it is, of course, not up to the Security Council, no direct NATO role, although NATO allies play, of course, a role in the so-called Quint and in the contact group. There was a clear understanding that there is no need for a rush to get this through the Security Council, but on the other hand, there should also not be unnecessary delay, as I heard the voices around the table. No unnecessary delay and no rush.

I should combine this with a strong call, made around the NATO table, that while this is now into the Security Council machinery, that there was a strong call on all communities in Kosovo to refrain from violence which would be counterproductive. That is the message I'll also delivery in Pristina when the North Atlantic Council will go under my chairmanship to Kosovo on the 2nd of April, which is  next Monday.

Any violence would be counterproductive. You've heard me say this before and that is a clear message.

The important element I should mention to you of the luncheon discussion is that there was a clear understanding, again, not new, but good to hear it once again, that NATO and the NATO allies, when we discuss the future status of Kosovo, that we do see that clearly in a regional perspective. Remember, Riga, remember the PfP discussion and the PfP decision, I should say. It is very important that, and I've tried to start that process by going to Belgrade and talking to President Tadic, talking to Prime Minister Kostunica.

We invest from our side, and we hope, of course, to see a lot of investment from the side of our Serb friends in the Partnership for Peace relationship, but more in general the discussion... also the NATO discussion on Kosovo, which is, of course, a specific issue, but has a strong regional overtone, and we want to make a success of the regional approach, first of all with Serbia, of course, given their position and given the fact that this is not easy, without any doubt, for Serbia, but that also goes for the other two PfP... new PfP partners, Montenegro and Bosnia-Herzegovina.

There was a shared view that Serbia's place is with us in the Euro-Atlantic community in the Euro-Atlantic family. And as far as the Atlantic part of that integration is concerned,  NATO will help to make that happen. That was a commitment I also made personally to President Tadic when I met him in Belgrade.

There was on Kosovo, finally, of course you've heard me say this before, the call that we should not have any security gaps in Kosovo, that it is important that KFOR, of course, but it goes without saying, almost, remains its present strength, is prepared for eventualities, but that nobody should think that violence should bring any solution any closer.

That is what I have to tell you on the two subjects we have discussed with the political directors.

APPATHURAI: I think we have about three minutes for questions, but I'll hang around afterwards if there are any. Mark.

Q: Mark John from Reuters. Whereas before you were saying there is support for the Ahtisaari process, now you're saying to the Ahtisaari proposals.

DE HOOP SCHEFFER: Yes.

Q: So I want to be clear, does that mean that there is clear, unequivocal support within NATO for supervised independence of Kosovo?

Second question, on the question of Italian hostages, is there anything you can tell us about that situation in Afghanistan?

DE HOOP SCHEFFER: The first part of your question I can answer with a yes. Like Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, like the European Union, the allies have clearly come out in support for the Ahtisaari proposals. And as you know, from the recent past, that is not entirely identical to supporting the Ahtisaari process. There's a clear understanding that we support the Ahtisaari proposals.

Again, it's up to the Security Council. As you know, needed to say where it ends, but this is a clear position taken by the allies, and that's the first time, so I think that is a very important message, the allies are sending to anyone who might like to receive that message.

On your second question, yes, this was discussed, the issue of the hostages. And the understanding, I said this myself as well, that everyone understands how difficult and complicated any such situation is, any hostage situation. I had the impression that also everyone understood that the actions of one country in this context can have implications for others, and that is why I heard more than a few voices calling for a discussion in NATO of an approach where it concerns cases of hostage taking. But I'll take this discussion forward, but I say again, this is not an easy one, it's a very complicated one. It as not done in the way that one ally was singled out. There was a clear understanding that this is difficult, but that what one country does can have implications for others, and can be in itself an incentive for opposing forces to do this again.

Q: Secretary General, can we then understand that there is no reservation from any NATO member state about the independence of Kosovo expressed before from some member states; so if NATO is united now. And is the KFOR prepared to react in any attempt, be it from provoked by Belgrade or by anybody else in the area where Serbs are living in (inaudible), be it in the north in Mitrovica or in the enclaves?

DE HOOP SCHEFFER: On the first part of your question, I think I've been  extremely clear, as clear as I can be. I mean, I can't sit here and say the allies support when there is no consensus. So there is consensus on this. That was the result of the luncheon.  

And secondly, but you know me hopefully by now, don't blame me if I'm not starting speculating on iffy questions. KFOR is prepared for all eventualities, but I'm not going into any specific hypothesis or detail.

Q: In relation with Afghanistan and (inaudible)... you have spoken of a positive mood, even though there are challenges ahead, that that situation is taking some traction but we are having the (inaudible) as we need, (inaudible)... of monies that we need. But doesn't look that we are losing the minds of the public opinion, a polarization's really taking in  Spain, shows that 51 percent of the population in Spain is asking for the troops to send back to Spain. There are problems in Italy. In Germany, even though the Bundestag is sending planes the public opinion is not very much on it.

Do you fear that...at least worried that after five years people, the public opinion is not watching improve much in the situation and that you could, we, (inaudible)... could lose the battle for the minds of the people.

DE HOOP SCHEFFER: you're right in saying that there are two hearts and minds issues here. There's the hearts and mind issue in Afghanistan itself, and there's, of course, as I've said many times before, the hearts and mind issue, i.e. public and parliamentary support for what we're doing in Afghanistan.

What was discussed this morning, but it was done in a positive mood, that the messaging from NATO to the Spanish, the Canadian, the Dutch, the German public opinion is as important as that other hearts and minds messaging we have to do.

We realize that we have 26 NATO allies and 11 partners who, of course, and quite legitimately have their own media approach and media campaign. But the mood this morning, around the table, with the political directors, was clearly, and i.e. I have to conclude with their political leaders, that there is not a shimmer of a doubt that we are going to sustain this operation in Afghanistan.

And I say again, I do know that in some nations it is more difficult than in others, but I also say that there is momentum, as I've seen myself recently. But I take your point. The public messaging is of the utmost importance, but there, and I told them, I think I'm the best judge because I visit all your countries, and I speak to all of you, that convincing public opinion in Spain I something else than convincing public opinion in Canada for that matter, because Spain is not Canada and Canada is not Spain.

But there was a clear understanding that we are going to sustain.

APPATHURAI: How much time do you have?

DE HOOP SCHEFFER: I think I have time for one more question and then I have to run.

Q: Secretary General, yesterday Serbian politicians rejected Ahtisaari proposals, all (inaudible)... rejected these proposals. So how do you think to deal with this if Serbia reject it like it is now, Ahtisaari proposal define(ph) the status of Kosovo, how it will be implicated with relations with NATO and PfP et cetera. And this is the questions without if... because we have threats from Kosovo that there will be violence if we will have a further delay in a status solution.

And on the other hand we have threats from Belgrade that the independence of Kosovo will provoke instability in region, and NATO is there and have militaries and you are there. You have responsibility also.

DE HOOP SCHEFFER: Oh definitely. This is not an iffy question. I can tell you, first of all, that let's start in Pristina, that the message that I'm giving them through you and I'm giving them on Monday. I said, no rush in the Security Council, but no unnecessary delays. And that means that it is , in my opinion, should be rather a matter of a number of weeks and a number of months before the Security Council. But again, that's up to them. I'm not on the Secretary General, neither am I able to influence that process. No rush, but no unnecessary delay.

Secondly, the message is to majority and minority alike, in Serbia, do not think please that with any form of violence you'll bring your preferred solution any closer, be you a member of the majority or of the minority. Violence can never be the question.

On your third question, I do fully realize, I'm a realist, this is extremely difficult for our friends in Serbia. Will it influence our relationship with Serbia and the PfP? No, it will not. Because we want to invest in Serbia. We want to invest in Serbia. And we'll see the Security Council process develop.

Do not think that because Serbia says no... It is not the preferred answer. I would rather have seen that Serbia would have said yes. That goes without saying. But the fact that the Serbs say no does not mean, because Serbia is an important player in the region, we have a regional policy, that I'll not go on, on behalf of NATO, and the allies will not go on investing in Serbia, investing in the Partnership for Peace relationship. It was not for nothing that we granted Partnership for Peace, which you know was a complicated decision. We also know that the ICTY conditionality is still there.

But at the same time we have decided to invest in each other, because this is about the region, this is about in my opinion, the Euro-Atlantic vocation, this whole region has, the Euro-Atlantic vocation. And at this critical juncture, at this very critical juncture, and that was also the mood around the luncheon table, at this very critical juncture it is of the utmost importance that we invest and we will invest.

APPATHURAI: Folks, I will stay.

DE HOOP SCHEFFER:This was the one and a half. The one leaves, the half will stay and will stay behind.

(LAUGHTER)

APPATHURAI: And answer any other question you might have.

DE HOOP SCHEFFER: Thanks very much, bye bye.

Q:Are you sure that we will stay?

APPATHURAI: Well yeah, you don't have to.

(LAUGHTER)

APPATHURAI: But if you have any other questions I'm happy to answer them. Go ahead.

Q: Yes, James, is it... so concerning Afghanistan, is it not strange so the SecGen's talk about reinforcing the Afghan capacities, is it not strange that NATO has no training mission in Afghanistan...

APPATHURAI: Has no what, sorry?

Q: Training mission in Afghanistan and has a formal one in Iraq, where there is normally no other NATO involvement? 

APPATHURAI:Don't mistake the lack of an academy for a lack of training. First, of course, one major ally is investing millions in training. Second, NATO has deployed operational mentoring and liaison teams, so we have embedded training teams in the Afghan Kandaks, the Afghan battalions.

Third, a whole range of NATO countries have contributed literally millions of euros worth of equipment, thousands of rifles, millions of bullets, tanks and armoured personnel carriers are on their way, so uniforms, helmets, radios, all of this has been or is being contributed. So we don't have an academy, but we've done a lot.

This is a bit sort of like a popularity contest. Go ahead.

(LAUGHTER)

Q: Tonight the Italian parliamentary is going to (inaudible)... Afghanistan mission, the financing of the Afghan mission. My question is, what would happen if there is a new crisis or (inaudible)... because of the issues of Afghanistan? (inaudible)... there would be consequences (inaudible)... on other allies?

APPATHURAI:You know that this is obviously ultra thin ice for anyone to comment on internal politics of any country, and I certainly don't intend to comment on them, except to say that the Italian governments, successive governments, have made very clear their commitment to this mission. The Italian political director today, in the meeting, confirmed the government's commitment to the operation. Italy has made an enormous contribution in its zone, and the allies, of course, take the government at its word and hope and expect that it will continue, as it has... as the Italian government has said very publicly it intends to do.

Q:I just want to (inaudible)... can you elaborate more about what the Secretary General was saying about the hostages. (inaudible)... Many member states are saying (inaudible)...

APPATHURAI: Well, I think that's exactly it. Everybody who spoke on the subject, and it wasn't all allies. One was, again, I hate to repeat myself, but that everybody understood that this situation was very, very complicated, very, very difficult for any government that would find itself in that position, and many have. Indeed, and now I say this off the record, one is facing a hostage situation right now in a very different context that is very complicated for them as well. Everybody understands this. 

In the context of Afghanistan, of course, and you have heard this publicly,  the allies that spoke to this subject said that they also... we as a group also had to recognize that the decisions taken by one have implications for everyone. And I can tell you that that was a view shared around the table.

Therefore, there were a few who called for a discussion within NATO about how to respond to situations like the one that the Italian government faced over Mr. Mastrogiacomo, and the Secretary General, you have heard him now, committed to take up that discussion. That's where we are.

Q: Pascal Mallet. Agence France-Presse. Je voulais te demander si on avait recommencé à demander des troupes, tous les gens qui se reposent dans le Nord, le Sud, l'Ouest de l'Afghanistan, qu'ils aillent se battre dans le sud? Ou si on avait abandonné ce combat-là?

APPATHURAI:Il n'y a eu aucune discussion dans la salle. Il n'y a pas un pays qui a demandé aux autres de changer leurs zones géographiques. Il n'y a pas eu de discussion de génération de forces, ni de caveat, sauf - et le Secrétaire Général en a fait référence - une satisfaction autour de la table des niveaux de force que nous avons maintenant en Afghanistan et un sentiment qu'en entrant maintenant en 2007 il y avait beaucoup de capacité et du momentum si ça se dit en français dans l'opération. Beaucoup d'ambassadeurs ou de directeurs politiques ont récemment visité l'Afghanistan. Ils sont tous revenus avec un sentiment d'optimisme. Et c'est ça qu'on a entendu autour de la table. 

Et je peux aller encore plus loin. Des gens qui n'ont pas eu ce sentiment l'année passée l'ont maintenant. Alors, c'était vraiment un sentiment positif dans la salle. 

Please.

Q: Yes, you talked this morning with high(?) representatives of the U.S. government about (inaudible)...  

APPATHURAI: Where... I don't know which discussions you're talking about. Today was Afghanistan and Kosovo.

Q: (inaudible)... Nicholas Burns and the Secretary General (inaudible)...

APPATHURAI: Well, there was a long discussion and I was present at the discussion between Nicholas Burns and the Secretary General, but missile defence was not one of the subjects of that discussion. It was indeed Afghanistan and Kosovo.

Q: But no new developments?

APPATHURAI: No new developments.

Please.

Q:(inaudible)...puissante.  

Q:  Votre dernier conseil (inaudible)...

APPATHURAI: J'ai rapporté sur la conversation en tant qu'elle était.  Évidemment, encore une fois le Secrétaire Général l'a souvent dit, il n'est jamais satisfait en ce qui concerne les forces. Mais on a beaucoup, beaucoup avancé  depuis le Sommet de Riga. Comme il a dit, plus que 7,000. Je pense que fin printemps nous aurons 39,000 soldats en Afghanistan. C'est une hausse de presque 9,000 en  quatre mois. C'est quand même assez important. 

Q:  By the end of (inaudible)...?

APPATHURAI: By the end of the spring there should be 39,000 in Afghanistan.

C'est...  Bien, je continue en anglais.

And there was certainly a sense around the table of satisfaction of how far we've come, of the capability that is now at the disposal of COMISAF. So could there be more in future? Quite possibly, and that's up to General Craddock, but that doesn't take away from the sense of satisfaction around the table of how much has been accomplished.