Text Only | Disarmament Diplomacy | Disarmament Documentation | ACRONYM Reports

Disarmament Documentation

NATO Defence Ministers informal meeting, February 10, 2005

Press conference by NATO Secretary General, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer following the informal meeting of Defence Ministers, February 10, 2005.

This meeting of NATO Foreign Ministers in Brussels being also, in a certain way, preparation for the important NATO Summit on the 22nd of February.

Of course yesterday's meeting with Foreign Ministers focused on political discussions and demonstrated NATO's enduring values as a forum for allies to share political views and perspectives. And as I said, and was confirmed by many others, it was a very good meeting yesterday, and so was today's, in fact.

What we did was, of course, in the discussions aiming to improve on NATO's other strong suit; it's ability to deliver effective, enduring multinational military operations whenever and wherever required.

What we did this morning was that on the basis of a briefing by General Jones, SACEUR, and the operational commanders of NATO's operations and missions, we looked at the operations and missions, and we began with Afghanistan. And I think our discussions today confirmed that indeed we have the resources we need to expand ISAF, the International Security Assistance Force, not operating, as you know, in the north, also to the west, Herat and surrounding provinces. And that we reconfirm that we'll also certainly support the upcoming National Assembly and other elections in the spring in Afghanistan.

As we expand in the west, and as we receive, in principle, good signals about at a later stage further ISAF expansion, we also discussed the relationship between ISAF and Operation Enduring Freedom. And I believe we have come a long way this morning to address some of the issues necessary to begin expanding to the south, and to see what the relationship and the greater synergy between ISAF and OEF should be as we expand.

As you might know, General Jones had presented, on the basis of the Defence Ministers, meeting at Poiana Brasov last fall, prepared an options paper. Ministers discussed the options and will certainly work on the options when we return to Brussels.

But I can say that I'm very confident that indeed, in an incremental way, we can improve the synergy, enhance the synergy, I should say, between ISAF and the Operation Enduring Freedom.

Of course, ministers shared the view on the long-term perspective for Afghanistan. The international framework we need when with the parliamentary elections the Bonn process will formally come to an end. Of course, on the basis of Afghan ownership we have had successful presidential elections. There is an Afghan government. So this was also very much discussed by ministers about Afghanistan.

Let there be no doubt, NATO is committed to Afghanistan for the long term. And our support will continue to grow in the sense that ISAF, I'm sure, will further expand.

With respect to the Balkans, the second important operation, we discussed the political and security situation in Kosovo. Again, the Operational Commander, General Py in Afghanistan, General de Kermabon were there, to brief us, and NATO, and KFOR in particular, will play its part in moving the political process forward.

The Alliance will maintain its operational capability to make sure we can continue to make our essential contribution. No need to explain to you that Kosovo is in a very crucial period. We have the standards evaluation in the middle of this year, and we have, let's say, the beginning of the continuation, I should say, under UN leadership of the political process. KFOR will be there to ensure security and stability.

Of course, ministers also discussed the NATO training and equipment mission in Iraq. Now that we have seen the very successful elections, the NATO governments, all NATO governments are looking forward to see how we can best support the new government.

Of course, we discussed the present state of affairs in the NATO training mission. Our ministers discussed moving to the next stage, which is, as you know, the establishment of an Iraqi Training, Education and Doctrine Centre, TEDC, just outside of Baghdad, later this year.

Let me stress, here again, that our goal and our intention remains unchanged, to train over 1000 Iraqi officers per year and that will happen, as you know, inside Iraq and outside Iraq as well. And we'll also continue to help equipping the Iraqi forces.

You know that it is my intention and allies' intention that by the date we have the Summit on the 22nd of February all NATO allies will support the training operation, be it by training inside Iraq, training outside Iraq, or contributing to the trust funds for the funding we need for the training mission.

We also discussed the NATO's operation in the Mediterranean Operation Active Endeavour. As you know, an Article 5 operation and a counter-terrorist... anti-terrorist, I should say, operation, which was very useful, I think, to do this morning.

Apart from the operations and missions, we had, yesterday over dinner, which took place in an informal setting, and just an hour ago over lunch, which was also relatively restricted, we discussed NATO's transformation agenda; a very important part of Defence Ministers' responsibilities.

What did we do? We looked of how to ensure deeper consultation on possible future operations to ensure the broadest possible political support for those operations. We discussed established a longer term and more comprehensive approach to Force Generation, to ensure more predictability in what forces are available when we need them. And if we need them, the forces we have available should be, excuse me for the jargon, should be useable forces. Forces we can really need in our operations.

Now this whole discussion is, I think, an essential element of NATO's military transformation agenda, and I think we can do better there. A lot has happened, but we can do better. We can do better in the usability discussion, we can do better in getting the forces ready when we need them. We can do better in transporting them and deploying them... transferring them from A to B.C. and deploying them in theatre, and sustain them. Because if I talk about Afghanistan or Kosovo, you'll agree that neither... these are not operations of a year, or even two years. These are longer-term operations.

So that was the key as far as the discussions on the transformation agenda was concerned.

We also looked... ministers also looked, which is another important part of their discussion, at adapting our funding arrangements, common funding arrangements, to the more demanding character Alliance operations have in the 21st Century. This is also not a question we'll answer here and today, but it is clear that we need new funding arrangements as far as our operations are concerned.

As you know, the day is not yet done. In a moment I'll have a bilateral meeting with the Russian Defence Minister, Sergey Ivanov, followed by a NATO-Russia Council on which you'll be briefed after that meeting.

In brief, I think it was a very useful meeting. It has helped to set the stage, as I said, for the upcoming Summit meeting on the 22nd, to cap a very busy schedule of high level transatlantic meetings in the month of February.

Let me leave it here, and I'm ready to take your comments and questions.

Thank you so much.

Questions and answers

Q: Peter Spiegel with the Financial Times. Can I ask about your goal to, by the 22nd, announce all 26 nations participating in one way or the other in the Iraq mission, the French are very insistent that their offer of cooperation on the gendarme training is Qatar is a bilateral arrangement between France and Iraq. In your mind, would that satisfy... I know it's a bit of a semantic issue, but would that satisfy, in your mind, French participating in a NATO operation in Iraq?

de Hoop Scheffer: I was going to use the word semantic as well, but you are a bit quicker on the mark than I am. I think what is important here is that the Iraqi government, which has made training its very first priority... A month ago, remember the Alawi letter I got before the Istanbul Summit where 26 NATO allies decided politically to have this training and equipment mission.

So I mean, who does what exactly, and we know there are allies training inside and allies training outside Iraq, is I must say not of great concern to me. I hope that by the 22nd, let me repeat my phrase, that all allies will participate. It is a mission which has been political supported by all allies, 26 in total by either training inside, training outside, or participating in the trust funds. And I can add even better of course, is a combination of these three elements.

I mean, if you're training inside Iraq I hope it will not stop an ally to say I'll train in Iraq, so I'm not contributing to trust funds.

I mean all allies can participate, if they so wish, to the trust funds. We are still building them up. We're not there yet. But it's not the 22nd of February.

Q: Secretary General, Paul Ames from the Associated Press. Given that you say that NATO is now ready for the expansion of ISAF into the western sector, and you've made progress on the southern expansion, can you give us your idea of the timetable for both those moves? When do you expect the boots to be on the ground in the west, and in the south, and when do you see the fusion or the integration or the synergy of Operation Enduring Freedom and ISAF actually coming together?

de Hoop Scheffer: I mean, there's a political world behind your qualifications of fusion, integration and synergy. We should, to start with the latter part of your question, I think I used the word "incremental way". We need, all allies agree, we need more synergy between OEF and ISAF. And that's, I think, a logical consequence, or logic consequence from the fact that we are expanding ISAF.

How that synergy exactly will be formed, that is a matter for further discussion in Brussels, but I think, if I may underline the notion, which was very much on the table this morning, that was the notion of unity of command. It is crystal clear that when you have two distinct missions in Afghanistan, because we should not forget we are talking about two distinct missions, the end state of one single mission I cannot judge now, because that will, to a large extent, depend on the development of the security situation in Afghanistan, and more specifically, of the security situation in the southeastern part of the country.

But for the moment, we had options presented to us and it is clear, after the discussion this morning, where we had, by the way, no difference of opinion at all about how to create this greater synergy, on the basis of two distinct missions, that we are going to work in an incremental way and start with some form of unity of command.

But if I say some form of unity of command that does not mean, and that's what I meant by the sentences I just spoke, that you have unity of command at the highest level. You can have unity of command at other levels as well.

This is what we're going to work on. This is what the NMAs, the National Military Authorities, are going to advise the North Atlantic Council upon and this is the discussion the Council will have at a later stage.

But I think we have set a useful scene, ministers have set a useful scene this morning, realizing that more synergy is necessary. How that exactly will take share is to be discussed in Brussels.

And sorry, on the first part of your question, my answer would be, as soon... as soon as feasible, and as soon as possible. You know we are discussing now one forward support base in Herat, and four Provincial Reconstruction Teams in four western provinces. Two American PRTs already existing at Herat and Farah, they will switch to NATO, to ISAF. We have two new PRTs, one in Chaghcharan, the capital of Ghor province, and another PRT in Qal'eh-ye, which is the capital of Badghis province.

If you would ask me, which you didn't do, but nevertheless I'm going to answer, how many people are involved? I think in total 900 personnel, of which 500 new, because there were also a certain shift from Kabul into Herat. I hope that the boots will be on the ground as soon as possible, but I may say that for instance, Chaghcharan, which is a PRT fairly high up in the mountains, is logistically quite an exercise.

May I once again use this opportunity to commend, extensively commend Lithuania, because Lithuania will, with support of other allies, is going to be responsible for the PRT in Chaghcharan, showing that the smaller ally can make a lot of difference.

I mean, we're very happy with the other allies. Very happy that Spain and Italy are going to take the responsibility for the forward support base, but let me highlight the Lithuanian effort here, which makes a big difference, political, psychologically, but also as far as taking responsibility for a difficult PRT is concerned.

I will say, as soon as possible if you ask me exactly when. My drive would be as soon as possible.

Q: Yeah, Luther Umber(?), Germany. You mentioned a figure of a thousand people per year for training. I think that's a rather low figure.

de Hoop Scheffer: Well, you may find it a low figure. This is the ambition which has been set by NATO on the basis of the NATO training mission we are in the process of setting up. So you may find it low or high, but it's the figure... it's the ambition NATO is fulfilling.

Q: Okay, but if you take the whole country, it's really a minor figure.

de Hoop Scheffer: Well, I mean, it's... it's a start. It's... are you going to compare it with what? A thousand offers of leadership trainers a year is, I think, quite substantial, and this is our ambition and this is the way we are setting it up.

What will happen at later stages I do not know. I said, and I underline again, that training is the number one priority of the Iraq government.

Q: (inaudible)...from Reuters. Secretary General, could you explain to us the significance of the figure which is often cited in Iraq, for the number of trainers you need for the next phase? That is this figure of 159 to 160. What will reaching that figure allow you to do, which you cannot do at the moment? And how far are you at this present stage from reaching that figure?

de Hoop Scheffer: Well, you have your figures fairly right. At the moment we have around 110 trainers in Iraq. And that... and when we go to the next phase by the end of February we would have a total, a grand total, of 360, to be exactly 361, of which 100-plus trainers. But if I mentioned 361 that is including the force protection we need, of course, for the trains. That is the situation. At the moment it's 109.

Q: And what can you do with that (inaudible)...when you get more trainers?

de Hoop Scheffer: Well, if you get more trainers you can train more people. That goes without saying. But you know, the phase of setting up the Training, Education and Doctrine Centre in Ar Rustimaya, which demands some infrastructural work on that complex. I've seen that last fall. I mean, the grand total of our activities will then be, as I told your colleague, having an output of 1000 Iraqi officers a year.

Source: NATO, http://www.nato.int.

Back to the Top of the Page