Press Conference

by NATO Secretary General, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer

JAAP DE HOOP SCHEFFER (Secretary General of NATO): Good afternoon. I apologize for being late, but it's the result of the very interesting exchange of views the Ministers and I have had this morning. So basically I'll not start with an apology because that is, I think, what these meetings are all about.

But a good afternoon, nevertheless.

As you know, in essence the meeting of the Foreign Ministers, the informal meeting of the Foreign Ministers, had two main themes. First enlargement and outreach, as we could qualify it, and second, NATO's operations as one can expect a particular focus and emphasis on Kosovo and Afghanistan.

With regard to the enlargement discussion you knew and you know, and if you didn't, you know it now, that this was not a meeting to take decisions. But it was an opportunity for Foreign Ministers to prepare their Heads of State and Government for the summit in Bucharest which is basically around the corner and to share views how they see the enlargement process move forward.

But if your questions would be were any decisions taken, who will get an invitation, who will not get an invitation, I have to disappoint you from the outset because I cannot answer that question because decisions have not been taken.

It was a well-informed discussion. You know that the annual cycles—excuse me for a bit of technique—of review for the Membership Action Plan countries, have been completed. The assessments of the efforts they have made in the framework of reform are in, and although no decisions have been made today decision time is, of course, approaching.

The flavour of the discussion on enlargement, I think I can qualify that there's certainly no enlargement fatigue in NATO. I hope, but I can only say I hope, not to be in contradiction with myself, that by the time of the summit we'll be able to say that the NATO family is growing again.

When I address enlargement we have our three Membership Action Plan friends, aspirants in the Balkans, but there was also a discussion on the Balkan region in the wider sense. And I think it's very right and correct to do that, because a regional approach is important. So there was also a discussion on our relationship with Bosnia-Herzegovina, with Montenegro and with Serbia, for that matter, because Ministers clearly were of the opinion that Euro-Atlantic integration for this region at the end of the day, that we don't exactly know where the end of the day will be.

At the end of the day Euro-Atlantic integration is the recipe for security and stability, so in Bucharest you'll not only hear the Heads of State and Government discuss the nations who are aspiring membership, but also paying a lot of attention to the region more in general. And despite the difficult situation that also is relevant for Serbia, I think it is important that we keep a good relationship with Serbia. After all, not that long ago the decision was taken to have Serbia in the Partnership for Peace. And I can tell you that I'm in fairly regular touch with the authorities in Belgrade as well.

You'll not be surprised that there was also an in-depth discussion on the request by Ukraine and Georgia to join the Membership Action Plan. Here as well no decisions have been taken. A discussion was held. You know the principles. NATO's door is open and who finally passes through that door is decided by the NATO allies. And only by them, and not by any other nation. There are no vetoes, or in French "droit to regard" in this connection.

My second point is that allies have clearly recognized the aspirations of Ukraine and Georgia given the fact that both countries are in the Intensified Dialogue. And that was clearly restated this morning.

Point number three, there was this discussion on Ukraine and Georgia that has not, or not yet, like on the enlargement issue, led to decisions and any firm conclusion. But I underline the words the open door. I underline the words no veto, or droit de regard. It is a discussion which will be continued between now and the Summit in Bucharest.

There was also a discussion initiated by me as Secretary General about the relationship between NATO and the European Union. That was a good discussion and I think I can say that all the Ministers realized that on the ground our cooperation is very good, is excellent, but that we also need to continue the discussion, and not only here in this building, but very much also on the European Union side to see how we can improve this relationship. And we need this relationship badly, be it only for our operations and our close cooperation in operations like Afghanistan and Kosovo.

Speaking about Afghanistan and Kosovo, that was the second important agenda item, operations. As I said, Kosovo and Afghanistan. There was a substantial discussion on Kosovo. You know the NATO position. KFOR has a mandate. Resolution 1244. And KFOR is there to see that there is security and stability all over Kosovo, I repeat, all over Kosovo, on the basis of KFOR's mandate. And KFOR does that, of course, in cooperation with the Kosovo police force and UNMIK. KFOR is not a first responder. KFOR is not a police force.

Ministers were encouraged by the political maturity shown by the authorities in Pristina, and by the people of Kosovo, and they stressed that everyone in Kosovo and outside Kosovo should continue to show moderation and to resist any provocation to violence. And that includes all parties, of course.

We have seen, up till now, no inter-ethnic violence. We have seen no attacks on patrimonial or religious sites. We have not seen strong streams of flows of refugees, up till now, and I think it is moderation which would be the key word, and as far as NATO is concerned, KFOR has its mandate on the basis of 1244 and that is what KFOR will do. NATO is not in the recognition business. KFOR has its mandate and it will perform its mandate.

On Afghanistan, you might know that we have in preparation for the Heads of State in Bucharest a public statement, public declaration on Afghanistan. You know we have this big meeting, one of the centrepieces of the summit, where we have the 26 NATO allies, all the non-NATO members who are contributing to ISAF, major donors and last, but not least, the United Nations, the European Union and the World Bank. That... and President Karzai. I should have started with President Karzai and the government of Afghanistan.

That is one of the centrepieces of the Summit and we are in the process and we got political guidance, I got political guidance with the ambassadors around the NATO table, how to proceed on this declaration our Heads of State are going to make in Bucharest.

There was also a strong plea, and it's not the first time I addressed this issue, there was a strong plea for as strong coordination as possible on the ground in Kabul between the different members of the international community.

This was basically the meeting. We did it in two parts. First on the enlargement and related issues, and the second part on the operations. And then as you might have noticed, the Ministers and I had a session, Ministers-only, to go through a number of important points of our agenda this morning, as well as on the operational side, as on the enlargement side, and that's where we ended a moment ago.

This was what I have to tell you and I'm open to your questions.

JAMES APPATHURAI (NATO Spokesman): The first question is there in the front row.

Q: (Inaudible)..., Belgrade. I would like to ask you about Serbia. What will be your politics in the future towards Serbia, and can Serbia become some kind of Russian version of Georgia and the Ukraine related to the aspiration of enlargement of the NATO.

Thank you.

DE HOOP SCHEFFER: You make it too complicated, I think. What will be the NATO relationship with Serbia, that is, of course, decided in NATO, but very much also on the Serb side. A lot will depend on what position Serbia will take. Serbia is in the Partnership for Peace. I think that was an historic and important decision the Alliance took and we're working together in the framework of the Partnership for Peace.

How that relation will develop is, of course, also not only up to NATO, but very much up to the authorities in Belgrade. The gist of the meeting was that there is a clear ambition and a clear wish on the NATO side, realizing that Serbia is an important player, to have not only a good relationship with Serbia, but also to see where we can improve that relationship, but I say again, it is also up to the people in Belgrade to see if and how they want to answer this NATO position.

But it's crystal clear that Serbia is a very important player, and despite the present difficulties, and despite from time to time unhelpful rhetoric from Belgrade, I think there is an ambition with the allies, and I hope—let me express my personal hope—also in Belgrade that we can build on this relationship.

APPATHURAI: Here.

Q: National News Agency of Ukraine, (inaudible).... Secretary General, have Ministers considered the internal political split in Ukraine around the MAP issues? And what are the main messages could Ukraine draw from the ministerial meeting today?

Thank you.

DE HOOP SCHEFFER: There were no analyses. I think that would not be entirely appropriate. It's up to Ukrainians how they want to conduct their policy, be it foreign policy, be it their internal policy.

But you know that quite recently I spoke to relevant Ukrainian interlocutors, and Ministers do as well today as we speak, because Prime Minister Tymoshenko is in town, as you know better than I do, so we do not comment on or discuss internal politics.

But as I said, the letter sent to us, signed by president... Prime Minister... speaker of the Verkhovna Rada was discussed, the relationship to the Membership Action Plan, but no decisions were taken.

APPATHURAI: The next question is here.

Q: Monsieur le Secrétaire général, est-ce que vous avez le sentiment qu'il y a un rapprochement des positions sur la question du veto grec sur la question de la Macédoine? Et si ce veto se maintient, est-ce que vous pensez qu'il serait plus sage pour l'OTAN de retarder l'adhésion de l'Albanie pour ne pas laisser la Macédoine à l'écart de ce processus?

DE HOOP SCHEFFER: Je peux vous répondre que... à l'OTAN, je ne connais pas le vis-à-vis le mot "veto". Le mot "veto" et l'OTAN, ça ne va pas ensemble. Ceci dit, il y a bien sûr... Et j'ai fait des commentaires quand j'ai été à Athènes il y a quelques jours, il y a bien sûr un problème qui n'est pas premièrement ou d'abord la responsabilité... une responsabilité OTAN-ienne. Il y a un problème bien sûr.

Et j’ai dis à Athènes, et je peux le redire ici: Il faut se rendre compte qu'on a un pays qui aspire être membre de l'Alliance. Il y a un autre pays qui est déjà pendant des années un membre de l'Alliance.

Je peux ajouter que j'espère, comme je l'ai dit à Athènes, et je pourrai le répéter maintenant que j'espère qu'entre maintenant et Bucarest on va trouver une solution pour ce problème. Mais le "bottom line" pour le dire en bon français, c'est bien qu'on a un allié et on a un pays qui aspire. Et ce n'est pas exactement le même.

Et après tout, et là, je suis d'accord avec vous... après tout, il nous faut ajouter, l'OTAN décide sur la base du consensus. L'OTAN n'a pas un vote par majorité. A l'OTAN, il nous faut avoir le consensus. Et c'est un principe sacré à l'OTAN.

APPATHURAI: Right in front.

Q: From BBC Afghan Section. A unit from Afghan government to take more responsibility for most activities in Afghanistan, do you think this government has enough capacity to do this?

DE HOOP SCHEFFER: Oh yes, I think so. I think that if we prepare the Summit in Bucharest and the meeting where President Karzai will play a very prominent role, and you know that the ambassadors and I were in Afghanistan only two weeks ago, the terminology or the term Afghanization, an Afghan face, I mean it's your nation. It's your nation. It's not owned by the international community. Afghan is owned by its own people.

So an Afghan face, Afghanization will be one of the key elements you'll find in the declaration, as I've seen it in draft, basically I drafted it, we drafted it, so let me be not too modest.

(LAUGHTER)

But anyway, we got political guidance on this declaration. Afghanization, Afghan face is very important. What's also important is that given the fact that you own your own nation, on a number of key issues there is also an important responsibility to be taken by the Afghan government. May I mention counter narcotics, the fight against corruption, to have non-corrupt governors and police chiefs appointed. And if we say, and we do, that NATO should do more, the EU should do more, the United Nations should do more, the donors should do more, I add the Afghan government should do more.

You're in the same orchestra in that regard.

But I trust in President Karzai that he has taken that responsibility.

Q: Secretary General, why does NATO continuously insist to have good relations with Serbia, having in mind that Serbia doesn't want to have good relations. It stopped relations with 16 allies, and God knows how many members of Partnership for Peace.

In case this trend goes on until Bucharest can the decision on launching of Intensive Dialogue happen only with Bosnia and Montenegro and exclude Serbia for the time being?

DE HOOP SCHEFFER: The second part is the famous iffy question so I'm not going to answer that. You know my position on iffy questions. But the first part I can answer.

Could you imagine a NATO Secretary General, despite all the difficulties, despite Kosovo, could you imagine a NATO Secretary General, or NATO allies, I shouldn't even say the NATO Secretary General, NATO allies saying, we are not interested in having a relation with Serbia? Even if you have... even if you have difficulties and differences of opinion? Even if you hear from time to time, as I qualify, unhelpful rhetoric? That would be very odd, I think.

But, and there comes but, as I answered your colleague a moment ago, it takes two to tango and it is of course also very much to the government in Belgrade to decide if they want any pace, and if they want any pace what that pace will be.

But I can tell you that I'm in touch on a regular basis, but I'll continue saying that is the position taken by the allies. If we discuss the Western Balkans it, of course, very much includes Serbia.

APPATHURAI: Time for two more. One here, one there.

Q: Monsieur le Secrétaire général, quand vous dites... quand on imagine que la Macédoine pourrait rester en dehors du groupe des trois et ne pas avoir d'invitation à cause d'un problème bilatéral avec la Grèce, est-ce que ça veut dire que la question du nom rentre dans le cadre de l'OTAN?

DE HOOP SCHEFFER: Je n'ai pas dit ça. J'ai dit...j'ai dit... et je me souviens très bien en répondant votre collègue (inaudible) j'ai dit que j'espère qu'on va trouver une solution entre maintenant et le moment du sommet de Bucarest et j'ai ajouté deux éléments: d'abord, premier élément, il y a un allié, la Grèce et il y a un non-allié Skopje, (inaudible), n'est-ce pas?

Deuxième élément, l'OTAN décide par consensus. Et si on n'a pas.... si on n'a pas de succès à Bucarest il existe un problème. Mais je suis optimiste et j'espère qu'on va avoir une solution entre maintenant et Bucarest. Never give up.

APPATHURAI: I'm sorry, two last ones, here and here.

Q: (Inaudible)... German Television. You just gave us an impression how important it is for NATO to have an enlargement in the Balkan area, but are there only the reasons of stability, or do you have other reasons for this enlargement, and just, if you allow, just let me ask one more question. You had bilateral talks with Greece. Do you think Greece could agree with the name of Macedonia such as Upper Macedonia or New Macedonia?

DE HOOP SCHEFFER: On your last question I'm not going to comment. That's not my role. NATO has no role in this discussion and that is a UN-sponsored process led by Mr. Nimitz, as you know.

Answering your first question, I think the position is well-known and the positions of NATO and the European Union are not basically different there. I have stated over and over again that I do think that Euro-Atlantic integration, that I can only speak for NATO, I can't speak for the European Union, of course, is basic, is basic. It has been basic for Europe. It is basic for the Balkans. To prevent that we would see the horrors of the nineties again.

That is for me the basic element. The other element, of course, is, but that is in fact the same way of argumentation, that nations who want to join this unique Alliance, this value-based Alliance, this family of democratic nations, for them the door is open. Let me again underline that NATO's door is open and will stay open and nobody else decides who is going through that door.

That's the basic answer.

APPATHURAI: Last question is here.

Q: Sorry, Marie Sole Tognazzi from ANSA Italian News Agency. Is about Afghanistan (inaudible). This morning the Italian Chief of Defence announced that the Italian group will move very soon from Kabul to Herat. I was wondering if you are aware about that, if there is a request of NATO in that sense? And who will replace the Italian troops in Kabul in that case, or just the Afghan Army will take care of that? Thank you.

DE HOOP SCHEFFER: I must admit that's... I'm not aware of any details in this regard, so I'm not going to take the risk of commenting on a situation I do not know. If this is the case, if this is the case, it will certainly be discussed around the NATO table in the political sense, but also very much in the chain of command, the military chain of command, because it's after all military commanders advising us about who is where, or who goes where, but I'm not aware of the situation in your question.

Thank you so much.