Defense Secretary Dr. Mark T. Esper and British Defense Secretary Ben Wallace brief reporters at a joint news conference in London, September 6, 2019.
Transcript
Good afternoon everybody and can I just welcome on behalf of the UK, Dr. Mark Esper, the Secretary of Defense for the United States. It is delighted that I’ve had the chance to meet. We have already spoken previously after my appointment. The United States is not only one of our closest and deepest allies, it’s also our personal friend and we enjoy a special relationship together. And it is my intention in the time that I am the Secretary of State for Defense to continue to deepen that and work side by side. We share many common goals around China, Russia, Syria, in the straits at the moment and the Strait of Hormuz, and indeed elsewhere in places such as Afghanistan. And I think working together both, in operations, but also in trade and industry, and the defense industry, sharing our knowledge to make sure our men and women in our Armed Forces have the best equipment that they can to fight off our adversaries. So, I’m going to hand over to the Secretary of Defense, and see if he had opening comments.
Sir, no, thank you. First of all, I’d like to start on two somber notes. First of all, as some of you know, we’ve lost an American soldier in Afghanistan the other day so I wanna express my condolences to his family and, you know, express our deep appreciation for all that he and our other young service members in Afghanistan have done to contribute to our mutual security. And I extend those condolences as well to the Romanian Soldier, who gave his life as well for our mutual efforts. The second one is to extend my condolences to so many people who have lost their lives as a result of Hurricane Dorian, specifically in the Bahamas, where I’ve authorized DOD support, if you will, to the people of the Bahamas who have suffered greatly from this hurricane. And obviously we’ve seen loss of American life also in the, as the hurricane has moved up the American coastline. So, again express my condolences to all those affected by that hurricane. Thank you Secretary Wallace for your comments, I am honored to be here today. On my first visit to the United Kingdom since I became Secretary of Defense. I appreciate your hospitality and enjoyed our productive discussion just recently. Our two countries do indeed possess an incredible bond, one we cherish as a special relationship forged through our shared sacrifice over many decades. The strength of this relationship is demonstrated every day as our two militaries work hand in hand to deter conflict and to preserve peace. I wanna thank the United Kingdom for its strong partnership and its numerous contributions to security throughout the world to include contributions to the Resolute Support Mission in Afghanistan, continued support to the Defeat ISIS coalition, maritime enforcement of the UN Security Council resolutions in the Indo-Pacific, and for your leading role within NATO, especially maintaining an enhanced forward presence in Eastern Europe. I also wanted to highlight the fact that the UK was the first nation to join the United States in the International Maritime Security Construct, the mission to secure the international waterways through the Gulf of Oman and the Persian Gulf. The UK’s many contributions play an important role in enhancing international security. I’m very encouraged by our conversation today, the U.S. and the UK have remain aligned in our commitment to maintaining stability in today’s very complex security environment. As the United States implements our National Defense Strategy, we will continue to work closely with the UK to address our mutual concerns. Among them are the threats posed by strategic competitors in what has become a new era of great power competition. Russia continues to disregard international rules and norms as it pursues veto authority over the economic, diplomatic, and security decisions of its neighbors and others. By violating the borders of nearby nations and meddling in foreign elections, Russia’s malign influence seeks to undermine the integrity of the NATO alliance. We stand firm in our commitment to deterring, and where necessary, countering continued Russian aggression. The NATO alliance remains postured and ready throughout Europe, particularly along the Eastern flank and this readiness depends on sustained investment in our militaries. I continue to ask our NATO allies to meet the two percent defense commitment as agreed to under the 2014 Wales Declaration. I wanna thank the United Kingdom and Secretary Wallace for its strong defense spending and I encourage you regardless of the outcome of Brexit to maintain your investments in defense modernization. Today, I also shared my view of how China’s rise is happening at the expense of other nations. I traveled to the Indo-Pacific last month and saw first hand how the Belt and Road Initiative is eroding the sovereignty of many unsuspecting countries. Additionally, China’s technology theft continues to pose a risk to many things, especially the secure telecommunications infrastructure on which we mutually depend. Competing with China requires us to have the courage to stand up for our shared values and to protect the rules-based order that has preserved the peace and enabled prosperity for the past 70 years. The United Kingdom has long been a strong moral voice on the international stage and I applaud your courage and leadership as you continue to prioritize defense in the midst of tough domestic choices. Our bilateral relationship and our combined leadership within the NATO alliance is critical to the peace and stability not only within Europe, but globally. In closing, I want to thank again Secretary Wallace for a great meeting today. This was an excellent first visit for me to London, and I look forward to continuing our close partnership as we work together to meet the challenges that lie ahead. Thank you.
Thank you very much, Secretary of Defense. Now we’re gonna open up to questions, I think four questions. If we go first to Jonathan Beale from BBC.
[Jonathan] Thank you very much, Sir. And first question is for the Secretary of State for Defense, and the next one for Defense Secretary, but um—
That’s two questions.
That’s two, there are other people waiting to ask questions. Let’s hear the first.
You can ask him his.
[Jonathan] Okay, as you suggested yesterday, Dr. Esper, Britain needs to take, Europe needs to take responsibility for its foreign fighters. You’ve been instrumental as Security Minister, taking articles away from some of those foreign fighters, which as Dr Esper says, does not to resolve the problem. Isn’t there a moral responsibility for Britain to help the Kurds here and to forge on the ground in defeating IS, that suffered huge casualties? To take some responsibility for the British foreign fighters in Syria essentially as Dr Esper says, “Take them home to face justice.” And you also said that China was a threat, I was wondering if you could tell us, you know, what was the warning you gave to our Defence Secretary at having [??] gained to our defense about having as the key partner.
I’ll go first.
You want to go first, sure, yeah.
My inside voice is as same as my outside voice so I don’t get into the private discussions I have with anybody as a War Com but you can trust that what I told you yesterday or what I said today at Russey is the same that we discussed and that is that we have to face the fact is, as I said in my notes as well, that China has ambitions to expand their region to our systems through companies like Wallet. So I think its a shared concern that we need to address. We discussed this in June at the Defense Ministerial Meeting and I think we’re all recognizing that China is a strategic challenge that we need to confront.
Well on the foreign fighters. First of all, we do bring some back and some of them are charged. Only about 18 months ago, someone went away for a considerable length of time, who had been a foreign fighter and when we have the evidence that we can put before a court we will try them. Of course, Jonathan, you will know that in our law, we can’t render people from States, we can’t take them out of the State in law without either an extradition treaty or indeed a relationship with that government. Now, we don’t have a relationship with the Assad regime, and while we fully recognize all the hard work and the partnering that the SDF has done, if we were to do that the first defense that these individuals would deploy when they got to a British Court would be, “I was rendered here against my will,” and that would probably render the case unlawful or render the case as unable to prosecute. So it’s not as straightforward. The second question about them is the bit about face Justice, people brandish that around. You have to have evidence to face Justice and a lot of our evidence may not be admissible in British Court because it might be somebody else’s intelligence, it may be a third country’s intelligence. That is a challenge for all jurisdictions, including the United States, about how you marry up intelligence in a court, in an open court where people go on trial for criminal offense. So that raises challenges and that’s why we often work with all our allies to see sometimes where people are most appropriate to be prosecuted when they appear outside of Syria, for example. Whether that’s in Turkey or whether that’s in Iraq or whether they come back into the United Kingdom. I think the things you say about deprivation, it’s not a first resort, it is the last resort, and our aim is to try people of these usually horrendous crimes that they’ve done and put them on trial and justice to be seen to be done and for those people to be put away for a very long time and we have done in a number of cases. Not just from Syria, from Afghanistan, as well I think an individual from Afghanistan who had been instrumental in making bombs that killed American soldiers is I think now serving life here in the United Kingdom for just that type of offense. So we do try and do it. But it is not a challenge that is unique to the United Kingdom. It’s a challenge to the Europeans. It’s partly to do with the statute book, which is why when I was security minister, I changed the law so that we now have the designated area fence which will make it much easier in future to try these type of people. And that fence means that if you go to an area that we have designated a place not to go you will face 10 years in jail, just for being there. That is a much easier offence to try and prosecute, and it’s had some success in Australia and Denmark, I think are the other two countries. So we do try and deal with it but it is not an easy solution. But our preference is of course always to try people but we’ve been very clear that we don’t provide consular services in Syria. I’m not gonna put at risk Crown Servants who are different from journalists and aid workers wandering around some of those camps looking for terrorists. That’s not usually a good way for their health and it’s also not something that we want to put at risk. And let’s remember, these people rejected this country, rejected our values and then went over there to commit horrendous crimes and murders and my obligation is to the British citizens of this country to keep them safe. If I can try them and put them away I will, If I can’t, I will look at other methods. So, who’s next?
[Paul] Thank you. Paul Lawrence from the Associated Press. I have a question on Iran for each of you, I might Doctor Esper first. You said in your remarks that this years mourning that it seems to you that the Iranians are inching forward, to use your own term, a place where there could be negotiations. What do you… if you could expand on that a bit as to what makes you say that they appear to be moving in that direction, and also whether you expect that you, as Secretary of Defense, might play a role in some way in laying the groundwork for negotiations? And a similar question for Minister Wallace: which direction do you think it’s trending in terms of the possibility for negotiations?
Well, I’ll go first. With regard to the inching, I just made that comment in light of some of the comments made by the Iranians in the wake of the G7 meeting where Ruhadi, I guess, attended. And it seemed that there was, again, inching, is you know, subtle movements, and I think that’s a good thing. That has always been our aim here, is to get the Iranians on a diplomatic path so we could talk to them. The President has been clear about the willingness to meet with Iran, without precondition, to discuss how we move forward and avoid conflict. Now my role, my responsibility in that regard is making sure that we shape the environment, if you will and enable our diplomats to get to that point. And that’s one of the reasons why we stood up this International Maritime Security Initiative because what we wanted to do was deter and prevent what was Iranian bad behavior through the ROCG to either cease or attack ships in the strait of Hormuz and the Persian Gulf and elsewhere which could most likely in many cases lead to an escalation of conflict that we’re not seeking. So that’s my role was to kind of through the International Maritime Security Construct is to set something up where we could deter conflict, prevent some sort of escalation and again keep it in the diplomatic tracks so we can have discussions about a profitable but productive way forward.
[Paul] So you wouldn’t have diplomatic lawyers on board?
No that’s the Secretary, the State Department would lead those efforts.
I’ve known the Iranian Government on and off for years, I don’t I’d be speculating about their intentions I think they always wanted sometimes a grand bargain or a big deal they’ve often said, but obviously we have to judge them by their actions. I mean, right now, they are holding, illegally, a British flag vessel which they took illegally against all international law and you know, we have to deal with that, right now that is incredibly important. We shouldn’t forget that, and actions speak louder than words. So I think we’ll take them at their actions rather than their words. But if there is a deal to be made, we’ll of course help the United States along that path. Because I think peace and stability in that region is the most important thing.
Two questions, first is for a friend. Firstly, with an Afghan peace deal perhaps in the offering, can we keep British troops in Afghanistan if America decides to pull out theirs in large numbers and indeed are we looking at a way of withdrawing troops from Afghanistan should that be the case? And Doctor Esper, I asked yesterday about Brian Hook. News that he’d been offering the captains of tankers millions of dollars to bring the tankers around to the American side. You quite understandably said that you’d been traveling and that you weren’t aware of it. Now you’ve had a bit more time to be briefed.
48 hours.
Crack of a whip. What have we been doing, what has the government been doing? Can it be successful? And what do you make of Zarif’s comments that this is quote unquote, “Outright blackmail?”
Yes so I don’t have anything more to add on that. I have not had time in the, like I said, in the overnight that you first asked that question, I’ve been focused on some other things. Let me tee up the Secretary’s maybe response to the other question, Afghanistan. We are in negotiations right now, obviously and near the end, if you will, but the bottom line is this: we believe the way forward, out of this 18-years conflict is through a political agreement and we’re hopeful we’ll get there, but we gotta see where it goes. But one thing that we’ve, I’ve talked to our allies about, I’ve just spoke with Secretary General of NATO Stoltenberg the other night. Just like we went in together, we aim to come out together as allies, and if we get to a point where we withdraw some level of forces, we would withdraw proportionally as well. So that’s our aim, I think, that we’ve discussed with the NATO and I think going forward that’s what we would expect regardless of the outcome.
I mean look, I think as far as disposition goes that’s all subject to whatever deal is put forward, and I think we shouldn’t, I’m not gonna jump ahead and speculate on that. I think the reality is, as Secretary Esper says, that, you know, what was it all for? Both our countries lost many men and women fighting in Afghanistan, for the freedoms and a political settlement. And I think that is the key, is to make sure that we get a political settlement which involves peace and prosperity for Afghanistan, and we will work very closely with the United States and the Afghan government to make sure that is what we get. So I think we will take it one step at a time, I think it would be good to wait for the details to come out and be published when a resolution is reached. And then I’ll be happy to talk about other issues, about troupes et cetera, but for now, you know, I want to welcome the American effort in leading this type of political dialogue in Qatar. I think that’s been really important, and then we’ll see what comes out in the next few days or weeks about it, because I think its incredibly important, but it has to have been for a reason, and the reason was to bring Afghanistan into a place of prosperity and political settlement, where those people’s rights were valued, and that’s what I think it is that we think we intend to keep to.
Going back to, beginning with the stars and stripes, and, you know, Afghanistan, do you have any agreement on what forces would the United States and Britain lead in the country to address specifically counter-terrorism concerns? Do you have a negotiative agreement with the Taliban? [??]
That is a level of detail that I’m not prepared to discuss, and won’t be until we have, if, we have a final agreement. We’ll sort those things out as we go.
I think the same. It’s fluid, you know, until there’s a piece of paper or an announcement, I think these things change [??], so I think it is important that, you know, the thing to recognize is in the right direction. Everything is in the right direction. So, one more. Sorry, you, the gentleman behind you, had his hand up.
[Dominic] Dominic Nicholls from The Telegraph. To stay in Afghanistan, and with the advance in the eastern country at the moment, [??] [??] How comfortable are both of you that UK and US trained partner forces may end up fighting for Afghanistan with the Taliban against those armies?
Yeah I’m sorry, I’m going to disappoint you again, because I don’t wanna comment on anything related to this because negotiations are ongoing and I don’t want to say or suggest anything when first of all, we don’t have the lead within our government, the State Department does. I want to give them the freedom and maneuver to kind of work the best deal they possibly can and not suggest or state whatever with regard to this network, or that group or this is part of the deal or whatever. I need to give them their freedom to kind of work the best deal the best they can and see what we come up with, then all that at an appropriate time, will be addressed.
I mean I, you know. There’s lots of “may” in your question, we’re not gonna do the speculation, but, I think all to say that both governments will make sure that whatever happens, it’s not gonna be at the cost of our security. You know, that’s key, here or abroad, You know, whatever the final Afghanistan looks like, it’s got to make sure that it doesn’t put at risk United States or Britain’s security. And let’s remember why we went there in the first place, so I think that is, no one’s gonna do that, but the detail will come out obviously as this is resolved and hopefully published soon.
[Journalist] I have one you could both answer, I promise.
Okay, last one, for our guest.
[Journalist] You’re both very new to your jobs, what’s the advantage of this freshness in moving forward in order to tackle these problems on a scale like this?
Well first of all, we’re both soldiers, previously. Both armored infantry at one stage, I think.
That’s right.
I lived in, my parents live in Pennsylvania where I think the Secretary came from.
Pennsylvania.
I won’t say where, what Battlefield I live near but it was the one that (coughs) did not go well for the Americans in that one. But look, I think—
You need to come to Pittsburg.
I think it was, it’s personal, I mean, all our relationship in the United States, in my view, is personal. Whether that’s soldiers sharing tactical and operational deployments, whether it’s politicians sharing conversations together, whether it’s the media pack that’s effectively working together. You know, it is a personal relationship and I think its really important to be fresh. You know, we both are living in political uncertain times, I think I would say, in different ways, but we do. But I think we both head up organizations that are first class and world leading, and that means we both start in the same place, we’re both committed to more spending in NATO. You know, because of the defense settlement that I got this week, its gone up to 2.14% of the GDP of the £13.2 billion of new money, MOD got 17% of that. Now you don’t usually get a chunk that big in budget settlements, so we’re fighting for that and we are sharing our experiences together, and that has always been the case and I hope it always will be.
He said it so well. Look, it’s a privilege and an honor for me to be in this role. I’m sure it is for Secretary Wallace as well. But these jobs are demanding, and so what I think I bring, and probably he mentioned it, is you bring renewed energy, you bring a fresh outlook, different perspectives, and you know, the experiences you bring behind them. Whether it’s for both of us, our experience in the militaries, which I think is, you know, really helpful in the roles we form. But at the end of the day, we serve the peoples of our respective countries, and whether it’s advising and helping the Prime Minister or the President, I think we also bring all those perspectives as well to help our chief executives make the best decisions for our countries.
Thank you very much. Thank you. Bye bye.