NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg speaks during Question and Answer session at the 65th Annual session of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly in London
Transcript
We now go to Deputy Heads of Delegation Julio Miranda Calha from Portugal, Ants Laaneots from Estonia, and we have Ausrine Armonaite from Lithuania. Julio, over to you.
Thank you, President. Dear President and dear secretary general. The subcommitte on NATO partnerships in the central (mumbles) city that is (mumbles). Where three-quarters of the African Union is located. From our visit, we learned that security developments in Sub-Saharan Africa are closely linked with the stability of Middle Eastern/ North African region. My conclusion from the briefings that we received there was that the challenges on NATO so that (mumbles) should not be considering the (mumbles) or as a local problem. Security is huge facing (mumbles) in some parts in Africa with enormous spillover potential, which can ultimately threaten the safety of NATO’s (mumbles) allies. Our African security issues are NATO’s (mumbles). If not, do you think that NATO should do more to increase awareness about these subjects? That’s that question, thank you.
Ants, please, from Estonia.
Thank you, Madame President and Mr. Secretary General. Russia has deployed a medium range nuclear missile (mumbles). And though it’s (mumbles), it means one missile (mumbles). Additionally, Russia has, through Navy missile brigades, is the same missile system. One is Kaliningrad area, and second in Crimean Peninsula. A few weeks ago, NATO announced, and you, Mr. Secretary, repeated it now again, that Alliance doesn’t now foresee deployment of the NATO (mumbles) missiles in west Europe. From our point of view, it means a serious threat in balance of nuclear power. Europe, between NATO and Russia, would like you to explain a bit more what is the reason of such NATO position. Thank you.
Ausrine?
Thank you, Madame President, Dear Secretary General. I’m right here, right here. Last week, The New York Times has published an article about the existence of top-secret Russian unit that seeks to destabilize Europe. And their sources claim that an attempt… Well, poisoning of Sergei Skripal in Salisbury, and also an attempt to poison the arms deal in Bulgaria. And the recent murder of a former Chechen insurgent in Berlin are related, and that Russian state is behind these cases. It’s getting more and more obvious that NATO can’t ignore that kind of modus operandi by Russian state. And we have to combat it. Could you please elaborate more about this? Thank you.
Secretary General.
Thank you. First, on Africa, yes I think that NATO can do more when it comes to South in general, and Africa in particular. We have partners there; we work with them. We have… This is a fruitful cooperation with also African Union and partners in Africa. But I think the potential for doing more is absolutely there. I think one of the main challenges we face as an Alliance is to have what is agreement within the lines what more we should do, because when I travel, I meet leaders from the South for Africa, they actually want more NATO and more cooperation with allies, and I think Portugal plays a key role in promoting that agenda. Then, Estonia. Well, we have stated that we don’t have any intention of deploying nuclear capable land-based missiles in Europe, for several reasons. Partly because we think it is important to find a balance between responding in a way that makes sure that we are efficient and credible (mumbles), also in the world without (mumbles) more Russian missiles in Europe, without triggering a full New Arms Race. Second, we know that we have alternatives. We are now working on other ways to respond. That includes conventional options, air and missile defense, the readiness of forces, but intelligence and other ways to make sure that we are able to respond. Then I think we have to understand that the violation of the RNF Treaty under the prevent of the SSE8 and also this (mumbles), which is short range missiles. They are part of a pattern, and NATO has already responded to that pattern. Meaning that the increased investments of Russia in mobile military capabilities we have seen over several years is one of the reasons why we now, for the first time in our history, have combat ready troops in the Eastern part of the Alliance, why we have tripled the size of the NATO Response Force, why NATO allies are investing more in defense, and why we are, in general, modernizing our Alliance and have implemented the biggest reinforcement of collective defense since the end of the Cold War. So, it’s not that this is all the SSC-8. This (mumbles) is part of a broader pattern. NATO has already responded to that, and we will continue to take the necessary decisions and measures to make sure that we have credible defense (mumbles), also with a more assertive Russia. Part of this is also to continue to work for arms control. Arms control is in our interest. And therefore, the whole idea the tense defense (mumbles) when it comes to Russia is just highlighted by the violation of the RNF Treaty, because if Russia wants to confront us, then, well, we are ready to respond. If they want to work with us, to cooperate with us, then we are ready to sit down and work with them. Arms control should be part of that. Then, Lithuania. So, I cannot confirm each and every (mumbles) report and comment on our intelligence, but what I can say is that Russia is using what we call harbor tools, trying to meddle in our democratic elections, using cyber disinformation, they were behind the use of a chemical agent in Salisbury, as you mentioned. So, we see a pattern of Russian behavior, which is, of course, of great concern. That’s the reason, again, why we are responding and adapting NATO also to address and to respond to these harbored threats. Meaning, for instance, significantly increasing our intelligence to better understand, to see what is going on, significantly strengthening our cyber defenses, which we have done and we are in the process of further strengthening, increasing the readiness of our forces, because you saw what happened in Crimea, readiness of forces, as in not a NATO ally, but the readiness of forces is perhaps the most important tool we have to respond if (mumbles) Greenland, somewhere in NATO territory. And also then, presence of forces in the Eastern part of the Alliance is part also to respond to potential harbored threats. Last thing I would mention there is resilience of infrastructure. Making sure we have telecommunications, energy infrastructure, which is resilient, that is also part of the way NATO is addressing these harbored threats. So yes, we are also addressing that.
Thank you, we move onto Seth Murley from Norway, Ojars Kalnins from Latvia, and Chris Peters from the European Union.
Thank you Mr. Secretary General. First, we can inform you, it’s functioning quite well in your home country, even without you as our Prime Minister, believe it or not. And we are happy to see that NATO is functioning very well with you as the Secretary General. You mentioned China and the growth of the Chinese economy in your speech. I have a question to you about the development in China and China’s role in the future. In this assembly, we have several times discussed the length between the transatlantic area and Asia, and in particular China. So could you, Mr. Secretary General, from your point of view, comment on the development in China and the future role of China from a NATO perspective, from a security perspective? Thank you.
Ojars.
Yes, thank you Madame President, Mr. Secretary General. The NATO leaders meeting will take place in London this year in what could be a post Brexit period. And if there is a no deal Brexit, it could impact civilian mobility between the European continent and the United Kingdom. This could also impact military mobility, and as you’ve pointed out, EU-NATO cooperation is essential to deal with the regulatory infrastructure issues that are necessary. Do you have any concerns at all about the UK’s departure from the EU affecting this NATO-EU cooperation, especially on mobility issues?
Chris.
Thank you, Madame President, Dear Secretary General. The best achievements do not guarantee future success. Multilateralism is at the core of the European Union, and of the NATO, our alliance. It is the very reason we have spent time and energy to build our organizations and engaged our soldiers in many operations on a daily basis, because, dear colleagues, we are convinced that this is the only way we can achieve peace, security and prosperity. Today, we witness the surge of unilaterialism. This lack of consultation not only undermined the stability of entire regions, but put a threat to security, our security. And I would also like to make clear that this endangers our organizations. Dear colleagues, a crucial part of an alliance is the trust we put in your alliance and in the upholding of our values. As a result, dear Secretary General, I would like to ask whether the current situation is discussed—
Sorry, Chris, you went over the minute, sorry. I’ve gotta be the same strictness for everybody, sorry.
Thank you. First, to decide (mumbles) Norway. It’s a little hard to imagine that they manage without me, but– (audience laughs) But, I see it works. Then, China. I think we have to understand that for historical reasons, NATO has been focused on the Soviet Union and Russia. But I think, at the same time, that more and more NATO allies realize that the rise of China has security implications. We have seen what they have done in the South China Sea. We see how they use modern technology, also, to control their own people, and of course, many allies of ours are concerned about what they see in Hong Kong. The fact that China is also investing heavily in new military equipment is something that is gradually the global balance of power. Then, I think, no NATO ally is arguing in favor of moving NATO into the South China Sea, but China is coming close to us, partly because we see them in Africa, we them in the Arctic, we see them actually investing in critical infrastructure in Europe, and we see them in cyberspace. And you also know that what happens in Asia also has implications for our own security. The debate about Intimida Trench nuclear forces is one example of that. So, we need to address these challenges, and I welcome the fact that NATO allies are now assessing, discussing how we can both see the opportunities, but also the challenges related to the rise of China. Then, Latvia, (mumbles), that an excellent example of where there is a huge potential for a cooperation between NATO and the European Union. We address those issues at the meeting recently with President (mumbles). And one of their main issues we discussed during that meeting was exactly how we can speed up the cooperation when it comes to military mobility, because our collective advance depends on our ability to move forces quickly throughout Europe. EU, one other, I think my main message is that in the more unpredictable world, with more uncertainty, we need stronger multilateral institutions, and NATO is such an institution. The EU is such an institution, because, I think, that’s the best tools we have to deal with surprises and to deal with uncertainty we all are faced with. And, of course, an argument for two multilateral institutions as NATO and EU to work together. I tried to be short myself, but that’s hard.