Q&A session

after the Opening of the Plenary meeting at the EAPC Security Forum

DR. JAMIE SHEA (NATO):Deputy Prime Minister many thanks indeed for the very encouraging report on developments in this country that of course bear the name of Ohrid. As I hoped and expected, keynote speakers have been very disciplined. They've given you a great deal of substance, but they have left lots of time I'm glad to say for the discussion. That's what we're here for. The Security Forum is meant to be interactive, so I'm counting on all of you to make that happen.

So what we'll do is I will ask the panel, the speakers, to kindly activate please their microphones. They'll remain seated and I would be grateful if you could keep your questions short because then of course we can have a maximum number of people intervening. And could you please make it clear to whom your question is directed because I think that will help proceedings as well. And people at the back are as invited to ask questions as people at the front; just raise your hands high so that I can see you as this room is quite large.

So who would like to be the first person to ask a question?

(PAUSE)

This I do not believe. Let's start. Thank you. Yes, the gentleman there please. There should be some microphones coming, so I'd be grateful if you could stand up please. If you stand up please, it will be easier for the person to come with the microphone. Then we can all hear.

Q: Haquat(?) Karzai from Afghanistan. The question is directed to the Secretary General.

You mentioned in your speech the casualties, particularly the innocent casualties, that have been occurring. As you know, in the last couple of weeks, particularly the last two weeks, the numbers have increased. In one instance there were 150 innocent casualties from the coalition forces, particularly ISAF, attacks. You also mentioned that there are particular measures that you will try to implement. What are those particular measures? As you're aware, it is a deliberate strategy now by the Taliban to go into areas and to use those innocent casualties as political oxygen. So I'm just sort of curious as to what are your particular strategy and policies not for this to happen again?

Thank you.

SHEA: Okay. Thank you for that. Secretary General?

JAAP DE HOOP SCHEFFER (NATO Secretary General): Thank you very much. Let me start by repeating what I said and what you say and that is that the Taliban and other opposing militant forces, OMF as we call them, are fighting on two fronts. They are fighting on their own front of course in your nation we would like to see at peace and then stability. And they also have a second fight and that is the fight with public opinion, political and parliamentary support in those nations who participate in Afghanistan with their forces; 37 in total as we speak, as you know, 26 NATO Allies and eleven Partners. And they know that the discussion we are having, and the Ambassadors here present know that we have this in the North Atlantic Council in permanent session in Brussels as well, that this discussion on innocent civilian… the loss of innocent civilian life is eating into those debates in our nation and that is why we have to be fair and honest with ourselves. Every innocent civilian killed is one too many. That should be a basis for everything we say or we do.

Point number two. NATO-ISAF, and the same goes for the coalition, will avoid and is avoiding making civilian casualties. But as you said already yourself, in the circumstances as we are confronted with an Afghanistan, and that's why I said let's also not forget to be behind the men and women in uniform and that goes for the Afghan National Army as much as for the foreign forces in Afghanistan. Let's support them because they are from day to day confronted with very complicated and difficult questions.

I'll give you one example. I saw a detailed report on what happened in Chora in Uruzgan, a detailed report. You are much more aware than I am of the extreme atrocities, the extreme atrocities, our opponents use in making their point. Extreme atrocities vis-à-vis your people, the Afghan people, and that our military are in the middle of that more than once. And that is why I'm saying we will avoid it at all costs. We will permanently look at our procedures. I do not think it's a matter of changing strategy, but we have to look at our procedures. We have to look at a seamless co-operation between NATO-ISAF Operation Enduring Freedom and, first and foremost, your authorities, the Afghan authorities, and to avoid it as much as possible.

Entirely avoiding it, giving a guarantee here from the states that there will be no more civilian casualties, I'm afraid that is not possible. But we will avoid it at all costs because we do not want to lose the hearts and minds of your people and we do not want to lose the hearts and minds of our own people who are instrumental to keep our mission going because I want all those parliaments and public opinion in those nations to support the ISAF mission. But I say again, every innocent loss of life of civilians is traumatic and any single loss of life is one too much or one too many.

SHEA: Okay. Secretary General thanks. Second question please. Yes, I see Solomon Passy there. Solomon could you stand up please for the microphone to reach you? It's on its way.  Good. Thank you. Go ahead please.

Q: Thank you Jamie. This question to the Secretary General.

We remember very well previous to Alliance of NATO with Vyšehrad three and the Vilnius seven. In both of these cases the split of the group, of the two groups, seemed and proved to be unrealistic. I would like to ask the Secretary General now with this third enlargement of NATO which we're expecting, how realistic is the three countries, the Adriatic three countries, to be separated, one of them… or two of them to be invited and one not to be invited to receive invitation during the summit in Bucharest next April?

Thank you.

SHEA: Okay. Secretary General?

SCHEFFER: Let me answer my friend Solomon with whom when he was Bulgarian Foreign Minister I drove around in a trabante around his Ministry so then you would know something about his background.

Solomon I think the key principles as you know them so well will apply also in this case. That means that, and it's a mantra well known to you and to me and to all of us, that each and every single individual nation will be judged on its own merits. There will be no packaging. There will be no packaging. So I think in principle you cannot say because one would qualify, the others would automatically come in. So I think we really, and I think that is what heads of state and government will do, should judge the individual merits of the single and individual nation.

I discussed it with the Prime Minister yesterday (transmission breaks)… what we've heard many times from you. And I said excuse me Prime Minister, but this is what you'll hear again because it is the best incentive Solomon. It is the best incentive for all the three individual nations knocking, knocking hard, knocking harder on NATO's door, to see that the necessary reform will be implemented.

So I would say that I attach great value to the A3 concept and I think a lot has been done in the framework of the A3 to promote their case and to promote their cause, but at the end of the day it will be an individual approach, individual judgement of the performance, and then decisions in Bucharest potentially.

SHEA: Although the question was addressed to the Secretary General, obviously we have three panellists and they are all entitled to speak. Prime Minister do you want to say something on that question because clearly you have an interest in that as well.

NIKOLA GRUEVSKI (Prime Minister, Republic of Macedonia): Okay. I would agree with the General Secretary that at the end of the day all the three countries has to be good prepared and deliver a performance that is according to the Action Plan and we are fully aware of this. We are preparing ourselves working and over the coming 10 months to be successful in the running of the last miles to the purpose. So I agree that all the countries have to be well prepared; to be focused on their own reforms; and to be successful in these reforms. Macedonia will be prepared until Summit of Bucharest with the necessary reforms to reach the standards which are necessary for sending an invitation. Fully aware and fully dedicated to this issue.

SHEA: Prime Minister thank you. Right let's go to the next question. Yes, the gentleman there please. Thank you very much. Microphone is on its way.

Q: Thank you. Barnett Ruben, New York University. This question is for the Secretary General.

Mr. Secretary General in your remarks on Afghanistan you did not mention narcotics. As you know within the last week UNODC has issues its short report on this year's harvest indicating that once again there is a record harvest of opium poppy in Afghanistan. This is generating pressure from the United States in particular for accelerated crop eradication during the planting season this fall, a policy which, as far as I know, is opposed by the Afghan government and people, and about which other troop contributing nations have great reservations.

Second, there is pressure from the Afghan government in fact for NATO and the coalition to undertake more interdiction efforts which they have not done thus far. How will NATO handle these conflicts for its mission in the future?

SHEA: Professor Ruben very nice to see you again. Thank you for that question. I call on the Secretary General.

SCHEFFER: Thank you very much professor. First of all, why I didn't mention narcotics, because I of course agree with you that it is one of the major issues at stake in it for Afghanistan. But I more or less deliberately did not mentioned it and the reason is that I was trying to list those elements in Afghanistan where NATO has a role to play and has a primary role to play.

Now you'll say: you cannot say Secretary General that NATO has no role to play at all in fighting the coalition. And you're right, because in the o-plan, in the operational plan which is guiding our operations in Afghanistan, there is a supporting role for NATO in this regard, but not a primary role and not a prime responsibility. And I do not think that NATO should take on the Provincial Reconstruction Teams or the ISAF forces should take that responsibility. There are others more qualified to do that.  We have the lead nation in the G8 framework, which is the United Kingdom. We have first and foremost the Afghan National Government.

So from a NATO Secretary General you will not hear, for the reasons I indicated, what should be done, what kind of spraying, what kind of eradication, as far as narcotics are concerned. What we can do based on a counter-narcotics strategy, and I from time to time think that international community could do better, in having a uniform counter-narcotics strategy. That on the basis of that strategy and within the limits of NATO's operation plan, our op-plan, NATO can support, including professor, in interdiction. Because you are right in saying that interdiction is an important element, but let the NATO forces and let the NATO Provincial Reconstruction Teams first and foremost focus on what they are there for.

And let's not forget that the NATO-ISAF mission basically is a mission which is focused on reconstruction and development. That is the mandate of NATO-ISAF. I know and you know we are doing counter-insurgency. I know and you know that unfortunately in certain parts of the country, we'll have to fight and as we speak we fight. NATO is in combat in Afghanistan because there are unfortunately many who want to spoil and frustrate that reconstruction process.

I take you point, but a counter-narcotics strategy is of prime importance. I also think that the Afghan government itself has a very important responsibility there. NATO, within the range of the op-plan, will help and will assist where we can.

SHEA: Thank you. We go next see the gentleman at the back there sir. Yes, you sir. Absolutely. Thank you for standing up. Microphone again is on its way.

Q: My name is (inaudible); I'm from Kosovo.

Secretary General what is the current state of affairs between NATO and Russia in relation to the issue of Kosovo?

Thank you.

SHEA: Okay thank you very much. Secretary General?

SCHEFFER: The state of affairs is that three days ago sir I had a two hour conversation with President Putin in Moscow where we were very generously hosted by our Russian friends and Partners, and where we had a meeting of the NATO-Russia Council, as you know, in the presence of Foreign Minister Lavrov of Russia, celebrating 10 years of the NATO-Russia relationship.

I can tell you that I had a very interesting conversation with President Putin. I cannot tell you that we did agree on everything concerning the subject of the final status on Kosovo because the remarks I just made on Kosovo from the rostrum I think will not be entirely agreed upon by our Russian friends and Partners. That's point number one. So President Putin and I did not agree on this subject.

Secondly, let's realize that the process, hopefully leading and hopefully leading sooner rather than later, to a solution for the Kosovo status issue is not in the hands of NATO. It is in the hands of the Security Council of the United Nations. That is where the action is, or some would perhaps say where the action should be, and that is the body, the United Nations, which should now give us a path to a final status of Kosovo.

Second remark would be, let me repeat what I said a moment ago, KFOR, and again I'm going Pristina this very afternoon, KFOR is there to see that this political process can take place in the security and stability which Kosovo needs. Very much needs so that the process can run its course and that we do not see people from whatever angle they come who think that they can have it their own way. Let's now leave it and give the United Nations Security Council a chance, I say again, without unnecessary delay, without unnecessary delay, to find a solution for the status of Kosovo. Because it is still absolutely essential that we find a solution for the status, not only in the interests of Kosovo and Kosovars themselves, but also in the interest of stability in the region.

SHEA: Secretary General thank you. Everybody is working the Secretary General very hard. He is used to that, but we also have the great good fortune of course to have the Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister with us today. So let us please take advantage of their presence. We still have a few minutes left for questions so who would like to be next?

Yes, thank you. Sir please.

Q: My name is (inaudible), Sweden. I would turn to the issue of missile defence and ask the Secretary General will it be needed, where should it be placed, and how would you see the further process in this case?

SCHEFFER: Prime Minister?

(LAUGHTER)

SHEA: Good try, good try.

SCHEFFER: I felt with all due respect to the Prime Minister.

Let me answer you along the following lines. The NATO heads of state and government in Riga decided that we in NATO should continue our threat assessment as far as the dangerous proliferation of missile technology and more specifically missile technology in combination with weapons of mass destruction is concerned. And I think the Allies do agree that there is a threat and we'll continue to discuss that threat. We won't do that for the first time; missile defence was already discussed at the summit in Prague in 2002 and a study was made in the meantime concluding that it is feasible to do missile defence.

What happened in Riga? Heads of state and government took a decision concerning NATO's role in missile defence. Since then, the discussion has changed in that regard; that the United States is in contact with our Polish and Czech friends to install interceptors and an X-band radar system in respectively Poland and the Czech Republic giving cover for a large part of continental Europe against missiles fired by rogue states, but not all of Europe.

So the NATO tasking, as we call it in our jargon, the instruction the heads of state and government gave to us in Riga did not yet take into account the U.S. third site in Europe. So what we're now trying to do is while the process between the U.S. and Poland and the U.S. and Czech Republic is running its course (I'll not enter into that), but we see how we can come at the end of the day - but we have not made any decisions yet, this is in the state of deliberations - how we can come at the end of the day to a system where you have a bolt-on of a NATO system for the medium and shorter range threats to continental Europe in a bolt-on to the U.S. system. I say again no decisions have been taken, but this is the kind of deliberations we have. And there I think we have a subject which we should, as your question proves, not only discuss in a NATO framework which is certainly also a subject we could discuss with our Partners.

If you say there is no threat then you don't need the discussion. But we think there is a threat. This is by the way also was one of the more interesting subjects I was able to discuss with President Putin in Moscow and I'm sure that the Presidents Bush and Putin will discuss this in Kennebunkport in Maine in the coming days. NATO is in the phase of deliberations and discussions, but, given the fact that we have had a Defence Ministerial meeting and a Foreign Ministerial meeting of NATO, I do think that we'll see this discussion going on on the basis of the nation there is a threat.

SHEA: Secretary General thank you. We have time for one final brief question. There's the lady there in the middle who has volunteered and so the microphone is coming your way. Microphones always seem to come from a very long distance, so thank you for your patience. It's almost there. Thank you. Please go ahead.

Q: My name is (inaudible). I am from Tajikistan. First of all I would like to thank the organizers and the host nation for inviting us Civil Society representatives.

SHEA: Thank you for coming.

Q: My question will not be about Central Asia. I will ask my question to the panel. I want to ask questions to young, energetic leader from Macedonia if I can.

SHEA: Please. To the Prime Minister.

Q: I know that you had some disorder I think in 2001/2002 in (inaudible) with your Albanian diaspora. How is the situation right now and how do you manage to resolve this conflict and maybe you will share some secrets of living in peace?

SHEA: Some secrets or insights. Okay thank you very much. We have that question for Mr. Deputy Prime Minister. We don't have much time unfortunately, but please I'd be grateful if you could answer.

GRUEVSKI: As you said, 2001 there was conflict in Macedonia which was finalized with signing of the Ohrid Framework Agreement and after that implementation of this Ohrid Framework Agreement which is in the all these years behind us and still some parts are in the phase of implementing. So this is the key. The key was the willingness of the country to live in peace, stability and prosperity, of the political leaders and the help from the international community in that period, from NATO and other Allied Partners which were included in this phase.

So in the last period the implementation of the Ohrid Framework Agreement became priority of government and this is giving good results because we don't have such problems, such serious problems. We are living in a normal situation. We are working on the reforms in all sectors. We are working on the increasing of the economy and we believe that very soon the country will be invited next year in NATO and we are a country candidate for the European Union already. We believe that next year we have the date... we will receive the date for starting negotiations for full membership in European Union.

So, the things are normalized after several months of problems in 2001 and signing of Ohrid Framework Agreement, implementing of this Ohrid Framework Agreement, dedication of all important political parties in the parliament to this implementation and strong political will this to be finalized and to be behind us.

SHEA: Thank you. Deputy Prime Minister you would like to say words on that. I presume you agree with the Prime Minister?

IMER ALIU (Deputy Prime Minister, Republic of Macedonia): Of course I agree with. I will speak in Macedonian.

(Speaking in Macedonian)

SHEA: Deputy thank you. That brings us to the end. We've had three first class speakers. Let's show our appreciation.