NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg holds Question & Answer session following the pre-ministerial press conference, October 23, 2019.
Transcript
Okay, we’ll start with Reuters here.
Thank you very much from Reuters. Secretary General, we have heard overnight about the Sochi Agreement between Turkey and Russia on the Syrian border. I wondered, given that Turkey is a NATO ally, how you view this agreement, whether you see it as a positive development. And do you see any kind of NATO role, or an international role with NATO involved, to make this agreement more sustainable and patrol the border in the future? Thank you.
I welcome the joint statement between the United States and Turkey. And Secretary Pompeo came to NATO headquarters last Friday. We discussed the statement and the way forward, and I welcome the fact that after that statement, we have seen progress. We have seen a significant reduction in violence. And I think, also, this is something we can build on as we strive for a political settlement to the crisis in Syria. The war has been there for years. We have seen hundreds of thousands of people being killed, atrocities. So there’s urgent need for progress for a political, negotiated solution. And that’s also the reason why NATO so strongly support the UN-led efforts to find a lasting political solution to the crisis in Syria. NATO allies have been present in northern Syria as part of the Global Coalition to Defeat Daesh or ISIS. And that’s the reason why NATO allies and the United States went into northern Syria. And we have been able to defeat the physical caliphate. We have to remember that NATO is part of the Global Coalition. All NATO allies are a part of the Global Coalition. NATO is present on the ground in Iraq. We provide support to the Global Coalition with our AWACS flights and the Global Coalition, led by the United States, has made enormous progress. We have defeated the physical caliphate. Not so long ago, ISIS controlled big parts of Syria and Iraq. Now, they don’t control any territory anymore, and millions of people have been liberated. That’s the reason why we went in. That’s the reason why the Global Coalition was established. And we have to make sure that we preserve those gains, that we don’t jeopardize those gains, and that we also understand that the fight against ISIS is not over. They can come back, and that’s the reason why, for instance, we continue to train Iraqi forces. Yeah.
Okay, Hurriyet, first row.
It’s a follow-up to my colleague’s question. You have not referred to Turkish-Russian agreement last night. Don’t you think this agreement is also a kind of contribution to deescalate tension in northeastern Syria? And my second question is, what specific safeguards do you think NATO ministers can adopt in their meetings tomorrow and on Friday in the fight against ISIS? Because the conditions in the field have drastically changed in the last 10 days’ time. Thank you so much.
I think it is a bit too early to judge the consequences, the outcome of the statement, the agreement between President Erdogan and President Putin. I met with President Erdogan a few days ago and, of course, we discussed the situation in northern Syria. I expressed my deep concerns about the situation and the risk of increased human suffering and increased tensions, but I also recognized, of course, that no other ally have suffered more terrorist attacks and no other ally is hosting more refugees than Syria, and therefore they also have some legitimate security concerns. I think what we have seen over the last days is encouraging because it shows that it is possible to move towards a political settlement, a political solution. The first requirement for having a political solution is to stop the violence, is to stop the fighting. And what we have seen is at least some reduction, some significant reduction, in violence and fighting. Then, we need to move on, building on that, and then have a real political, negotiated solution to the conflict in Syria. I don’t believe that is easy. That’s extremely difficult, but it is also extremely important, and therefore we need to all do whatever we can to make that happen. NATO will, of course, make sure that we continue to support the Global Coalition. All NATO allies are members of the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS/Daesh. NATO is part of that coalition, and we have our training mission in Iraq. I think it’s extremely important to train local forces to make sure that Daesh is not able to return. And we will discuss also the importance of providing the necessary trainers, the mobile training teams to our training mission in Iraq. I also visited Iraq recently and the training mission is up and running, but we are still urging allies to provide even more trainers to our mission. And that is one of the issues we will discuss at the Defence Ministerial Meeting that starts tomorrow.
Okay, we’ll take a couple of questions over there, so Washington Post first, please.
Hi, thank you, Michael Birnbaum from The Washington Post, a question about Ukraine. President Trump said that one of the reasons the US had suspended military aid to Ukraine was that European allies weren’t doing enough to shoulder their share of the burden. Are you aware of any US effort to get the rest of NATO to increase its aid for Ukraine? Do you expect that’s gonna be part of the discussions, either here in the meetings or in some other NATO format in the coming days and weeks? Thank you.
All allies, both in North America and Europe, are providing significant support to Ukraine. First of all, we provide strong political support. We have again and again stated that we don’t accept the illegal annexation of Crimea and that we support the territorial integrity of Ukraine. We strongly support the efforts to find a political settlement, the implementation of the Minsk agreements, and we have seen some progress, also with the exchange of prisoners. So, we’ve seen some new initiatives, some new momentum in the efforts to make progress towards implementing the Minsk agreements. Then, of course, we also provide practical support to Ukraine. We have different trust funds. We help them to modernize their armed forces, their security forces. Different NATO allies provide partly support through the NATO mechanisms, but also bilateral support, training and different kinds of support. We help them with command and control, cyber, and NATO, the North Atlantic Council will visit Ukraine. I think it’s a couple of weeks. It’s in the near future. We’ll also go to Odessa, where we have also started to help them with building naval capabilities. So we are providing support in many different fields from command and control, allies provide training and so on. Then, of course, I, as Secretary General, I am always pushing allies to provide more. So I urge allies to step up, to provide more trainers, to provide more money to the trust funds, and to have more activities with Ukraine. And I met with President Zelensky and I highlighted for him that we will continue and we will step up. And we are actually in the process of stepping up our support to Ukraine because at the Foreign Ministerial Meeting in Washington in April, we agreed a new package also addressing some of the different capabilities but including naval capabilities. This will be addressed, also, during the meeting today, the need, sorry, tomorrow and the day after tomorrow. That’s an ongoing conversation in NATO about the importance that all allies provide support, and I’m urging them always to step up and do even more.
Okay, Financial Times, yeah, second row.
Thank you, Michael Peel, Financial Times. On Syria, aren’t you worried that the fight against ISIS has already been heavily undermined with reports of fighters escaping? And is part of burden-sharing and allies stepping up for European allies to finally take responsibility for their nationals who have fought for ISIS and are detained? And then if I could just ask a small point of brief clarification, on 5G, given the security requirements you’ve outlined, is it possible for a Chinese company ever to satisfy those security requirements? Thank you.
Burden-sharing within the alliance is partly about spending cash. But we often speak about the three Cs, cash, capabilities and contributions. So burden-sharing is also about contributions to NATO missions and operations. And whether we speak about Ukraine or we speak about the fight against Daesh or ISIS or we speak about Afghanistan or whatever NATO does, or Kosovo, is always a need to try to make sure that allies contribute their fair share. And therefore, that’s constantly on the agenda of NATO. And we will address exactly that tomorrow, contributions to NATO missions and operations and a wide range of different NATO missions and operations. And that will, of course, also include what we do in support of the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS. And as I said, we will then discuss the need, and I will highlight to all allied ministers that I welcome the support they provide, the trainers they have provided, both to our training mission in Afghanistan because we have to remember that Afghanistan is also part of our global fight against ISIS. We have to make sure that the caliphate they lost in Iraq and Syria is not reestablished in Afghanistan. And we know that ISIS is present in Afghanistan. We have seen some horrendous attacks committed by ISIS in Afghanistan, recently against a mosque where they killed 69 people. So NATO’s presence in Afghanistan with our Train, Assist and Advise Mission there, where we have roughly 8,000 non-US soldiers in that mission, and then we have the US soldiers, is part of our global efforts to defeat ISIS and part of burden-sharing. And again, the training mission in Iraq is the same. So I will urge allies to step up to do more partly because we need those trainers. We need to fully resource all these missions and operations. But also partly because when European allies and Canada do more of that, it also contributes to a fairer burden-sharing.
Two particular points about European countries taking responsibility for their foreign—
Yeah, I’m coming to that. I’m just, yeah, addressing the wider thing about burden-sharing. Then, foreign fighters, of course, part of that picture. And I expect also that to be discussed at this meeting. NATO is not the main tool to solve that issue, but NATO is a platform where NATO allies can meet, discuss, and also address issues related to foreign fighters. I also believe that what NATO does when it comes to exchange of intelligence and also the work we are doing on biometric data is relevant for also addressing issues and challenges related to foreign fighters. What I can say is that I believe that what we need is a more coordinated and international, as I say, a coordinated approach to dealing with the issue of foreign fighters, and I expect that to be also discussed during this meeting. Then, lastly, on the resilience requirements, which we then will agree at this defense ministerial meeting, these requirements are not about any particular country or any particular company. They are about the need for all allies to have thorough security assessments and mitigation measures. And that is important because that is the way we can make sure that we have resilient, safe, and secure telecommunications, including 5G in peacetime, in a crisis, and in conflict. And that is extremely important because we know that this is important for the civilian infrastructure, for the civilian society, health care, electricity, transportation. But of course, in times of crisis and conflict, these infrastructure, or this infrastructure, is also extremely important for the military, for our military operations. So this is partly about protecting civilian infrastructure but also protecting our military operations. And therefore, 5G is so important for our security and it’s part of the resilience pledge we have made together in the alliance.
Okay, we’ll go to Radio Free Europe, third seat, please?
Thank you, Mr. Secretary General, Mustafa Sarwar from RFE/RL. To what extent is election transparency and credibility important for Afghanistan’s political stability? And what’s NATO’s role in resolving a potential dispute over election results? Thank you.
Of course, transparency and predictability when it comes to elections are extremely important because we need free and fair elections. I would like to commend the Afghan Security Forces for protecting and making it possible to have elections in Afghanistan. I think the important message now is that all parties should show restraint and calm and let the electoral bodies finish their work, so we can have the outcome of the elections and then finalize the election process in a well-organized and good way.
[Oana] Okay, now we’ll have Ariana.
Thank you very much, Secretary General. I’m Sharif Hassanyar from Ariana News. You had met Dr. Khalilzad two days back today. What was the agenda of your meeting with Dr. Khalilzad? And at the same time, Secretary Esper came to Kabul and announced that he’ll reduce 2,000 troops from Afghanistan. Is there any plan shows that NATO has the same plan?
Ambassador Khalilzad visited NATO a couple of days ago, and he met me and he met the North Atlantic Council. He has been here many, many times consulting with NATO allies because, of course, he negotiates with Taliban, or he has been responsible for the negotiations, the talks with Taliban. The talks have now broken down, but NATO supports and I support the resumption of these talks. But then Taliban has to show real willingness to make real compromises and to agree on a credible peace deal. Because what we need is a deal which, in a credible way, preserve the gains we have made in Afghanistan for the Afghan people, for women, for journalists, for everyone who believes in a democratic, free Afghanistan, but also for our fight against terrorism. Because we have to remember that the reason why we went into Afghanistan was to fight international terrorism. And therefore, we support the resumption of the peace talks, but then Taliban has to show a real willingness to make real compromises. And we believe that the best way NATO can support the peace process is by remaining committed to our military presence because Taliban has to understand that they will never win on the battlefield. They have to sit down at the negotiating table and make real compromises. So, for us, there is no contradiction between the military presence and the efforts to find a political solution. Actually, we strongly believe that a strong commitment to our military presence is the best way to provide the framework, the basis for a political solution. We, NATO allies have stated again and again that we are committed to the Resolute Support Mission. We have seen some adjustments up and down in the number of troops, as we have seen also with the US presence, but we will stay committed. We will maintain our mission. And the US has also expressed clearly that they are committed. We went into Afghanistan together, we will make decisions on our future presence there together, and when the time is right, then we will also leave together. But that depends on that we really get a political settlement that enables us to reduce our presence.
Okay, we’ll go to NPR/Deutsche Welle, yeah.
Hi, Terri Schulz with Deutsche Welle and NPR, over here, sir. A couple of questions that you haven’t touched on yet. The German Defense Minister has floated the idea of an internationally-controlled safe zone in northern Syria that could be done in cooperation with Russia and, of course, with Turkey. What is your response to that? Would that be Europe stepping up and taking more responsibility, as it’s often called on to do? And also, the Defense Secretary of the US, Mark Esper, says that he believes that Turkey could be responsible for war crimes committed in northern Syria. What is your response to that? And do you fear that the entire meeting will be poisoned by this issue? Thanks.
So I spoke with the German Defense Minister yesterday, Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer. She then shared with me her thoughts about the way forward in northern Syria. And I welcome that NATO allies have proposals on how to move forward, how to find a political solution. And of course, a political solution, has to, in one way or another, involve all actors on the ground. You cannot have a political solution only involving some of them. So a political solution can have different shapes and different forms, but it has to involve those actors who are on the ground. And again, we need a political solution and therefore also welcome proposals from NATO allies on how we can try to move forward. This will certainly be addressed, discussed during our meeting. And I expect Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer, the Defense Minister, to then share her thoughts with the other allies. As I said, I expect all forces on the ground to respect international law, and that’s extremely important for this alliance because international law is important for all allies.
Okay, Novaya Gazeta, lady in green, lady in green here.
You are not a lady in green. (reporters laughing) No.
[Oana] Front row, please, thank you.
Yeah, I had a couple of question, questions about Afghanistan, but I want to ask again about Ukraine, to continue this theme. You are to visit Ukraine next week or next two weeks, and some Ukrainian politicians suggested that you and President Zelensky will discuss some structural reforms in Ukraine. So what is it about and what it will be in reality, what structural reforms?
The North Atlantic Council will, in a few days, visit Ukraine, will visit Kiev and Odessa. That’s partly to get a better understanding, to have firsthand updates, information from the Ukrainian government, from President Zelensky, and from different ministers. We have the meeting of the NATO-Ukraine Commission, will meet there, and also a way for us to sit down and exchange views on how NATO can support Ukraine and support the peace efforts. And part of that, again, is what NATO has been doing for several years, but which we are now looking into how we can do more to provide help to Ukraine, to reform, to modernize their armed forces, to fight corruption, and to make sure that Ukraine is able to have modern ways for command and control, cyber defenses and in other ways reforming their armed forces. So that’s the reason why we are going there, and that will be part of the discussions.
Okay, and we have NTV now.
Guldener Sonomut from NTV, my question is with regard SAMP/T assured measures to Turkey. While you were in Turkey, because of the start of the Peace Spring operation, some member state decided to either withdraw or not to renew their deployment over there, and there are lots of shortfalls. So, do you think that in this new configuration, there will still be a contribution to SAMP/T, whether country who decided, like Spain or Italy, to withdraw will stay on the ground? Or will you use your influence to convince them in that meeting, or other countries, to come with the full trial of SAMP/T? Thank you.
Of course, as always, there are national decisions that have to be taken to provide contributions to NATO missions and operations and activities. The tailored or the assurance measures for Turkey is something we have had in place for now several years. Different NATO allies have provided different kinds of assurance measures, and they have been on rotation. So, for instance, when it comes to the augmentation of Turkish air defenses, for the time being, it is Italy that provides a SAMP/T battery, and then Spain provides a Patriot battery. And I think it is important. And then we have port visits. We have other kinds of assurance measures. I think that these assurance measures are important. And of course, I have urged allies over the years to provide assurance measures, and I will continue to underline the importance of these assurance measures because they show that, despite the differences we see between NATO allies about the situation in northern Syria, we have to be able to deliver on the activities we do together. And that also includes, for instance, the NATO activity in the Aegean Sea, where we currently have six ships helping to implement the agreement between Turkey and the EU addressing the illegal flow of migrants over the Aegean Sea.
Okay, Europa Press, yeah, lady over there.
Thanks, Ana Pisonero from the Spanish news agency, Europa Press. It’s actually a quick follow-up to the colleague’s last question. Do you actually expect a decision in this ministerial on what to do with the SAMP/T and the Patriot battery? I mean, very clearly you want them to continue. It’s polemic for some allies in this context. There are other allies pushing to continue to not make a bad gesture vis-a-vis Turkey. Do you expect a decision in this ministerial? Or would we still have time because the replacements would not need to be until the end of the year? What’s your thinking there? And a second quick question, if I may, do you think it’s fair, the critics that President Macron made last Friday during the second day of the European summit? Precisely on the reaction, how NATO had reacted to the Turkish offensive, I mean, do you see where he’s coming from? Particularly on the credibility of the whole of NATO, which is a member of the Global Coalition against ISIS, to, in a kind of way, have left the fundamental partner, local partner on the ground? You’re always explaining how important it is to train local forces, for them to do their own combats, but then if the main ally is left aside, what does that say about the alliance? Thank you.
NATO agreed several years ago that we will provide assurance measures to Turkey. And we also agreed that we should provide air defense batteries to augment their air defenses. And as I’ve said, over many years, or several years, we have provided different kinds of assurance measures and we have augmented their air defenses. Different nations have, by rotation, provided these different assurance measures. I expect, of course, this to be discussed at the meeting tomorrow because we will discuss the situation in northeast Syria, the instability to the south for the alliance, and of course, these assurance measures are triggered by the volatile and the difficult situation we have had there for several years. I don’t expect any final decision because it’s, at the end of the day, this will be for nations to decide what kind of capabilities they provide to the different assurance measures that NATO has agreed. So that’s a national decision to be taken, and the nations will then announce what they do or not do. It’s absolutely meaningless to try to hide that there are differences when it comes to the situation in northern Syria between NATO allies. That’s a matter of public record. It’s something you can all read in newspapers or watch on television every day, that there are differences. And of course, that’s always difficult when allies disagree. That’s also the reason why I think it’s important that we meet because the best way of addressing disagreements is to sit together around the table and then to discuss and try to find a way forward. And therefore, I am encouraged by the agreement, or the joint statement, between two major allies, Turkey and the United States, last week, where they at least agreed on the way forward in some very critical areas. And following that statement, following the agreement on that statement between Turkey and the United States, we have seen progress. We have seen significant reduction in violence. I’m not saying that all problems are solved. I’m not saying that all disagreements between NATO allies have disappeared. But I’m saying that compared to where we were before that, we are now in a better place, but still, many challenges and many problems ahead of us. So I think it’s important that NATO provides that platform for discussion, for having frank and open discussions about the difficult issues, and then to look into what we can do, partly when it comes to missions and operations, and, not least, when it comes to making sure that we don’t jeopardize the gains we have made in the fight against Daesh, the training mission in Iraq, making sure that the caliphate which they lost in Iraq and Syria is not reestablished in Afghanistan, and many other things we can address together in the fight against Daesh.
Okay, we have Agence France-Presse, yeah, if you go down, gentleman just there, second row, yeah. (Christian speaks in foreign language)
You are absolutely right. I said that the fight against ISIS is not over, and that’s absolutely correct, and you’re right referring to that, but we have to distinguish between two things. The caliphate, the physical caliphate they controlled in Iraq and Syria, they don’t control anymore. They have lost control over all the territory and all the people they suppressed or controlled in Iraq and Syria. That’s a great achievement, and the only way we were able to achieve that was through the US-led Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS, that we joined forces and that we worked together and made that great progress and defeated the physical caliphate. That’s the reason why we went in Iraq and in Syria, different allies participating in different ways, but all NATO allies have participated in one way or another in the Global Coalition, and NATO is also part of that coalition. Then, as I said, there are differences between NATO allies on how to deal with the situation in northeast Syria. And I have expressed clearly that I am, when I was actually in Istanbul last Friday, I stated clearly that I am concerned about the consequences of the then-ongoing Turkish operation, the consequences for tensions in the region, the risk of escalating further the tensions, human suffering, and also the risk of jeopardizing our fight against, or the gains we have made in the fight against Daesh. But I also stated that Turkey has legitimate security concerns because they are on the frontline of this volatile region. That’s the reason why I welcome the progress we have seen. There is a lot of problems ahead of us, but at least it is encouraging that we had agreement last Thursday or last week, and then we tried to build on that to make further progress and to support efforts to find a political solution. And again, I think that one of the important reasons that NATO plays a role in this is that we provide a platform for allies also with different views on how to deal with the situation in northern Syria to meet, to discuss, and that’s exactly what we’re going to do, starting tomorrow.
Okay, we have Swiss Radio, third row up there, please. Thank you.
Thank you, Secretary General. Talking about limits of international organizations, the EU actually failed to start accession negotiations with Macedonia and Albania. In Northern Macedonia, this has led to a political crisis and the call of new elections. That’s a country which is joining NATO. I know they are two different organizations, but I was wondering whether you have any concerns with the situation that has arised.
It’s not for me to give the European Union any advice on how to deal with the requests from North Macedonia to start negotiation talks. We have all seen the outcome of the discussions within the European Union, and that’s not for me to comment on that. What I can say is that we strongly welcome that NATO allies have proven once again that NATO’s door is open. We will soon have North Macedonia as a full member. Almost the majority of NATO allies have already, we signed the accession protocol not so long ago. And just yesterday, the US Senate ratified the accession protocol of North Macedonia, and so has also most other NATO allies already done, and I expect the rest to do it in the near future. And that’s important because by joining NATO, North Macedonia contributes to stability in the region. It provides the framework for, also, economic prosperity. I spoke recently, a couple of days ago, with Prime Minister Zoran Zaev, and he told me that after they joined NATO, they have seen a significant spike, or increase, in foreign investments. So, I welcome North Macedonia as the 30th member. It’s not for me to comment on the issue of EU membership.
Thank you very much. I know there are lots of questions, but we’ll see you at the ministerial. Thank you very much. This concludes this press point.
Thank you.