Secretary of State Antony J. Blilnken’s Press Conference from Brussels, Belgium
Transcript
Yeah. Uh, well, good afternoon, everyone. So we’ve just wrapped up to busy days here at NATO covering a very wide range of issues that face the alliance, including the future of our presence in Afghanistan, evolving threats from Russia and China, the Covid 19 pandemic, the climate crisis, and I could go on. We had a very broad, very full, very important agenda. We also focused critically on the future of NATO. What work we must do to ensure that the alliance remains strong and effective for decades to come. And we laid the groundwork for the upcoming leader level summits where even more work will be done to strengthen the alliance and chart a unified path forward against the threats of our time. NATO has been the cornerstone of transatlantic security for more than 70 years. The United States is committed to this alliance now and in the future. And I came here to Brussels to consult with our allies because we intend to work with them and our partners wherever and whenever we can. We share collective security, strategic interests, a long history, people to people ties and a commitment to core values, including democracy, human rights the rule of law. In short, we’re in this together. That’s the spirit of Article five. That’s the spirit of the United States commitment to NATO. Let me just say on a personal note, I’m very happy to be back in Brussels from my first visit as secretary of state. I’ve been gratified by how our allies have welcomed America back to the table. We know that our return is being met with high expectations. We welcome that in a few hours. I’ll have an opportunity to speak here at NATO, uh, and go into greater depth about how the Biden administration will work with our allies and partners to advance our national security priorities around the world. So I invite you to stay tuned for that. But for now, let me just end by expressing, uh, my personal gratitude and the gratitude of, uh of the United States to Secretary General Stoltenberg and everyone here at NATO headquarters for hosting us this week and doing it so well and so productively. And with that happen to take a few questions. Start with Jennifer Chancellor. What you heard on Afghanistan to President Biden yet what was his reaction and you said yesterday that you would leave together when the time is right, is now the right time. And what would have to change in the about a month before May 1st to make it the right time to meet that deadline. So you know, as you as you know, as we’ve discussed already, we have this review underway, and I came here to do two things to share some of the thinking that we have with our allies, but just as important to hear from them to consult with them because that’s what we’re what allies do. And indeed, I relayed back the views that I heard yesterday from our allies to the president. And I think that’s going to be an important factor in informing his thinking about about the way forward. Um, we we heard this the other week at the defense Ministerial. Uh, we’ve heard this refrain as well this week, and it remains true we went in together, we, uh, adjusted together, and when the time is right, we will leave together. And the common theme, as I noted the other day is, is together. And that was reemphasized in our meetings here this week. Um again. Uh, last week, the president noted it would be tough to meet the May 1 deadline for a full withdrawal. But whatever we end up doing again, it’s going to be informed by the thinking of our allies. And tactical decisions aside were united with those allies in a few things and making sure that, um, we as we move forward, we seek to bring a responsible end to the conflict, to remove our troops from harm’s way and to ensure that Afghanistan can never again become a haven for terrorists that would threaten the United States or any of our allies. So we’re in very close consultation, very close coordination with our allies and partners. That was reinforced over the last, uh, 24 hours. And again, I think this will be extremely helpful in informing the president’s thinking. As we go forward, we’ll go to Steve or linger in our times. Steve. Thank you. Thank you, Mr Secretary. Good to see you. You just had a long discussion about Russia and there are lots of things I wanted to ask you, but But I’m going to ask you is do you agree now without an I N F treaty in place, that there’s a real nuclear vulnerability in Europe to Russian I N f and even tactical nuclear weapons. And if you do, what’s the right answer? And if you don’t, does it mean that NATO still needs German nuclear sharing, which is becoming increasingly controversial there, Thank you.
Mm. Well, let me say this. We had a a couple of things. We had a lengthy discussion about Russia this morning with our colleagues and before getting the specific question, I think a few things stood out. I think we all expect our relationship with Russia to remain a challenge into the foreseeable future, but it’s one that we’re prepared for. And ultimately, uh, I think what we can hope is to have a relationship with Russia that is at least predictable and stable. Um, And so, given that our intent is to, uh, engage Russia in ways that advance our interests while remaining very clear eyed about the challenges that it poses. So even as we work with Russia to advance our interests and advanced alliance interests, we also work to hold Russia to account for its reckless and adversarial actions. Um, I think we’ve already demonstrated that, particularly with the extension of new start for five years, but also with the actions we’ve already taken to hold Russia to account. But one of the areas where I think we we have a clear mutual interest in, uh seeing if we can work together is on strategic stability to include, um, all of Russia’s, uh, nuclear weapons systems, including those that may not be covered. Buy New Start. And I think that’s clearly in the interest of the United States in the interest of our allies. And I can’t speak for Russia and Russia’s interest to So Steve, that’s what we’ll be looking at. When, when, when President Biden spoke to President Putin, they both did note the possibilities of exploring beyond the extension of New Start, where we might go on strategic stability, and again that would have to encompass all of the systems that Russia possesses. Good to Dan Michaels, Uh, Dan Michaels with the Wall Street Journal. Thank you, Mr Secretary. First, if I could just quickly follow up on Afghanistan, can you say what you’ve told your NATO allies about the timing of the administration’s review? And what if the Taliban doesn’t agree to an extension of the timeline. And and and second, if I made quickly, it’s clear the atmospherics here have improved. Are you at all concerned that allies will take that as a leeway to be a bit more relaxed about meeting some of the commitments that they have faced a lot of pressure on over the past four years?
Thank you very much. So thank you. Um, look, I don’t want to get into hypotheticals about what the Taliban may or may not do what we may or may not do. This is a very active review. And again, as I said, it’s now fully informed by the views of our allies. And that was really what our goal was coming here to make sure that we could do that. Um, as you know as well, the diplomacy on Afghanistan has been moving forward. Even as we’ve been reviewing, uh, the question of the, uh, May 1 deadline we saw a, I think, very productive meeting in Moscow with the so called troika plus one Russia, China, Pakistan, the United States. The statement that came out from that That meeting, I think is, uh is important and significant and underscoring the view of all four countries that it was important for the parties to accelerate their efforts at finding a peaceful resolution to the conflict in Afghanistan. Uh, important that there be a reduction in violence, a clear rejection of the establishment, or reestablishment of an emirate in Afghanistan. So there’s a lot of a lot of common denominators among these four countries, which otherwise occasionally have their differences. So I think that’s significant. And we’re also tracking to a meeting hosted by Turkey in the coming weeks that would bring together leadership of the the Afghan government, uh, and the Taliban again in, uh in an effort to advance on the diplomacy and to advance toward some kind of agreement for a peaceful political resolution of the conflict. So all of that is it’s moving forward. You’re right that I think we found a very positive reception, hear from allies and partners. So I’ll take that for, uh, for today and for this week. That may not may not last forever, but in all seriousness it was It was extremely gratifying, but again, I think it starts with the fact that we expressed very clearly and I expressed very clearly on behalf of President Biden, our commitment to this alliance and our determination to, um engage, to consult, to listen, to work together with our with our allies. Um, but we also discussed in some detail the need not only to look at what NATO has to do to make sure it is engaged on the challenges of our time, not just the time the alliance was founded. We also discussed the need to properly resource that and certainly we believe strongly in the United States believes strongly that we do need to do that. Uh huh. Allies made commitments at the Wales summit in 2014 that in fact, they are making good progress on. But there are other aspects to this that are important. Uh, the financial commitments are significant, their their vital, they’re important. And we were determined that we all see them through together. But there are also important questions of readiness of our forces. There are important questions of our ability to actually raise the necessary forces for particular missions. Those are vital things, too, and and finally, um, Then I would say that, uh, we also recognize that while it’s very important that we remain true. The commitments that we all made as allies in 2014 in Wales. Um, it’s also true that different allies and partners who are not allies contribute to our security, Um, defined largely in many ways. And it’s important, I think, for the United States to recognize that, too. For example, development assistance is a vital part of security and a number of our allies. A number of our partners make very significant per capita contributions to development. And so that’s that’s something we don’t want to lose sight of, either. Schultz Hello, Mr Secretary. Up here. Teri Schultz for NPR. Thank you very much. Um, despite the improved atmosphere, there are still some pretty significant areas where the US and its European allies and its partners at the EU are on different pages. Um, specifically on china. Um, the Biden administration, before it was in office, um sent out signals that they would like to see the EU weight on its investments deal. And, uh, that didn’t happen. And you’ll be speaking with, um, are still have underlined and, uh, Jessica later. Um, are you hoping to pull them more towards the U. S. view that they should not be doing business with China. To the extent that European governments are at the moment. Are you concerned about this? And the other issue is Iran. The three would very much like to see you and Iran sit down. There was an invitation. I understand that the U. S says it’s waiting for Iran to make the first move. Iran says it’s waiting for you to make the first move. I mean, why can’t you come to an agreement to sit down and talk on this? What’s what’s What’s the holdup?
Thanks. Good. Thank you. So first with regard to the EU and particularly, uh, China. You’re right. I have the opportunity, actually this afternoon to sit down with our very close partners. And the leadership may be more important than that. President Biden is going to be speaking to the council tomorrow. The video all both important and especially the president important evidence of our commitment to work closely with the European Union. We see the European Union as a partner of first resort on broad array of issues, and China is one of them. Um, we are looking very much forward to actually having close consultations between the United States and the EU on China. That will be an opportunity to share the concerns that we have, including those related to trade, uh, investment, human rights. And indeed, I’ll have an opportunity that this afternoon with my counterparts with regards to the comprehensive agreement on Investment our judgment is that the onus is really going to be on China to demonstrate that the pledges it’s made on forced labour on state owned enterprises on subsidies are not just talk and that the Chinese government will follow through on the commitments that is made. So I suspect that not only will we be looking to that, but so will the European Union. Um, but we’ll also continue to engage with European counterparts, including members of the European Parliament, on how to advance our shared economic interests and to counter some of China’s aggressive and course of actions as well as its failures, at least in the past, to uphold its international commitments. And I think again what’s so important, both with regard to to NATO and the issues we’re dealing with but also the EU and our partnership with the EU is that, um when we are working together, When we are speaking with one voice when we’re acting together, we are much stronger and much more effective than if any single one of us is doing it alone. And so, for example, when it comes to dealing with some of China’s practices in the commercial area and the trade, investment and economic area that we all object to if the United States is taking those on on its own were about 25% of world GDP. When we’re actually working with our European partners, Asian partners and, uh and others, we might be 40 50 or 60% of world GDP. That’s a lot harder for Beijing to to ignore. So that’s another reason why we are really, uh, focusing on revitalizing recommitting to our alliances and partnerships. So with regard to Iran, um, we have been very clear that the path to diplomacy is open. And as you noted, when the EU suggested bringing together all of the participants in the Jcpoa to look at how we might come back to compliance with the FBI, we we we said yes, and and to date Iran has chosen not to engage so as we’ve said, the ball is really in their court to see if they want to take the path to diplomacy and returning to compliance with the agreement. And should that should that happen, Um, we would then seek, as we said, to build a longer and stronger agreement, but also to engage on some of the other issues where Iran’s actions and conduct are particularly problematic. Destabilization of countries in the region ballistic missile program, etcetera. So I had a meeting last night with Ari three partners with, uh with the UK with Germany and France were all very much on the same page. When it comes to when it comes to Iran, when it comes to our common interest in seeing if Iran wants to engage in diplomacy to come back fully into compliance with its obligations under the jcpoa, we are again prepared to engage on that. To date, Iran has not been, but let’s see what happens in the weeks ahead. Final question from Robin Emmett. Mhm. Thank you, Mr Secretary Robin Emmott from Reuters. You said yesterday that you had a bilateral with Germany’s Foreign Minister Heiko Maas. Um and I wanted to ask you about Nord Stream. Um so the pipeline is almost complete. I wondered. What you see is a solution in this issue because Ambassador Ischinger has put forward this idea that construction could actually be completed. But there would be some kind of kill switch whereby gas could always be shut off if, say, Russia moved against Ukraine. So I wondered. First of all was that discussed yesterday between you and yourself and like, a mask. And if not, what is a solution?
Thank you. Well, first, let me say that Germany is among our closest allies. And, um, we have a real disagreement on North Stream two. That’s not a secret to anyone, but we’re not going to let that stand in the way of the work we’re doing together on issue after issue. That is a direct concern to the citizens of both of our countries. Uh, and indeed, uh, I’ve had great conversations with with my commas and German colleagues about the agenda that we have together both as partners ourselves through NATO, the U at the U. N. You name it. Um, but it’s also true that President Biden has been very clear for a long time. in his view that North Stream two is a bad idea. And I reiterated that view, uh, directly to Foreign Minister. Maas and I also made clear that firms engaged in pipeline construction risk US sanctions. Ah, the pipeline divides Europe. It exposes Ukraine and Central Europe to Russian manipulation and coercion. It goes against Europe’s own stated energy security goals. So what?
What I said was that we will continue to monitor activity to complete or certify the pipeline. And if that activity takes place, we’ll make a determination on the applicability of sanctions. And, uh, this was, I think, you know, useful as well for me to have an opportunity to discuss directly with Foreign Minister Mask just to make clear our position and to make sure that there’s no no ambiguity. And that’s exactly what. But I did, thank you very much. Thanks very much.