|
The US Defense Secretary, Donald
Rumsfeld, visited the UK on 5 June for meetings with
the Secretary of State for Defence, Geoff Hoon, and
the Prime Minister. Mr Rumsfeld and Mr Hoon then held
a joint press conference at the Ministry of Defence.
Hoon:
Good afternoon. Could I say how delighted I am to be
able to welcome US Defense Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld,
to the Ministry of Defence today. We have discussed
a wide range of issues of mutual interest, we are going
on to a meeting of NATO Defence Ministers in Brussels.
This will be a vital meeting on the road to the NATO
Summit in Prague in November. We have therefore spent
some time today discussing how NATO can adapt and modernise
its structures to meet new challenges, particularly
the challenge of a future enlargement. As you would
expect, we have also compared notes on the tensions
between India and Pakistan and we will continue to work
closely together to try and reduce those tensions. Finally
of course we have also discussed the close cooperation
between our forces in Afghanistan.
Rumsfeld: Thank
you very much Mr Minister. I will not repeat the topics
of discussion that Minister Hoon has just outlined,
but I do want to say that it is a real pleasure for
me to be here in London and to be able to meet with
Prime Minister Blair and Minister Hoon and tell them
personally how grateful we are for their superb cooperation
in the global war on terrorism and the fact that we
work so closely together in Afghanistan as well as other places around the world.
We had good discussions and I would be happy to respond
to questions with the Minister.
Question (Michael
Evans, The Times): President Bush the other
day said that the war on terror should now go to 60
other countries, I think he said, where al Qaida are
supposed to be hibernating or are being harboured. Do
you seek, or have you asked, the British government
to supply military assistance to help in the war on
terror in a lot of other countries?
Rumsfeld:
I am not sure I got every word that you said, but I
think that President Bush did not say that the war should
go to 60 countries, I think what he pointed out was
that there are al Qaida cells in 50 or 60 countries
around the world, which is what the best intelligence
suggests, and the global war on terrorism as a task
has to be to try to persuade those nations, and of course
some of those nations include the United States of America
there are al Qaida operating, to do everything possible
to put pressure on the terrorist networks and on the
nations that are actively harbouring or providing assistance
to the terrorist networks.
Question (Jon Snow,
Channel 4 News) : President Putin has said that
this is the most dangerous crisis, the Indo-Pak threat
of nuclear war, since the Cuban missile crisis. Would
you agree with that or would you go further?
Rumsfeld: There
is no question but that when you have two nations that
have nuclear weapons and the situation is as it is between
India and Pakistan today that it is a dangerous situation
and I think fortunately the people across the globe
recognise that and there are a great many nations, including
this country and the activity that Prime Minister Blair
has been engaged in with respect to India and Pakistan,
as well as President Putin and certainly the United
States all recognise the seriousness of the situation
and are anxious to work with those two countries so
that in fact the tensions are somewhat relieved rather
than made worse.
Question:
[Inaudible]
Rumsfeld:
Well clearly I don’t think so or I wouldn’t
be here. There are as I say a great many people that
are talking to the people in India and in Pakistan.
President Bush has been involved, Secretary Powell is
involved, Deputy Secretary Armitage I believe is going
to go in today or tomorrow and be there, and I think
that all of that is helpful and useful and my guess
is that the timing of my visit will be not inappropriate.
Hoon: And
can I just emphasise that the US Administration and
the UK Government have been coordinating their efforts
to try and reduce tensions on both sides. We have a
complementary role to play in ensuring that both sides
are aware of our concerns and a great deal of effort
is being made at all levels with both governments to
ensure that Pakistan and India are fully aware of our
concern.
Question: Mr
Secretary, how would you characterise your contribution
to this when you do reach India and Pakistan? You have
said that you are not going there to mediate, you are
not going there with a bag of goodies, a bag of incentives
for the two sides, what is it that you hope to bring
yourself?
Rumsfeld: Well
I have met on a number of occasions with the senior
officials from both countries and my instinct in matters
like this is to talk to them rather than to talk to
the press about what I would talk about with them, and
maybe that is kind of idiosyncratic behaviour on my
part but it seems quite rational to me and I think I
will stick with it.
Question (Wyatt Andrews,
CBS): For both the Minister and you Mr Secretary,
is there anything even approaching a plan, a step by
step plan, that is being put forward for example by
Minister Straw, by Mr Armitage, by you, by which both
these nations are being asked or given some sort of
formula on a step by step basis to back away from the
brink?
Hoon: The
first step is to back away from the brink. I don’t
think we can possibly plan out what happens thereafter,
but both sides clearly have to see, as we see, real
advantage in stepping back from the brink and preparing
to discuss the issues of Kashmir and the issues that
divide them, but there is not a formula because there
cannot be a formula in what is a rapidly changing situation.
What we do have are arguments that we can put to both
sides to prevent that first step from which we are concerned
that there can be very significant escalation.
Rumsfeld: I
would just add that these are two sovereign nations,
they have histories and have experience and to the extent
that they are going to make judgments about what is
in their best interest, and it seems to me that there
are a great many countries in this world that recognise
that conflict between those two countries is not in
their best interest, and certainly not in the best interests
of the world. We have, what has it been, 55 – 57
years since nuclear weapons have been fired in anger
and that is an impressive accomplishment on the part
of humanity I would say. I don’t know of any other
time in history where there has been a significant weapon
that has not been used for that long a period, and these
are not just larger weapons, they are distinctively
different weapons, and war being what it can be it can
be unpredictable. And therefore I think it is important
that we all recognise that they recognise, and may very
well be looking for ways to tap things down rather than
see things escalate.
Question: To
follow-up on that point about possibly tamping down,
what is the assessment that you both have of the statements
from Mr Vajpayee today, or in the last 24 hours, about
India possibly accepting joint patrols, looking for
some verification along the line of control, do you
think that things are now tamping down or do you think
this is a heavily conditioned proposal that isn’t
terribly realistic?
Rumsfeld:
I haven’t had a chance to read it.
Hoon: I have
only seen newspaper accounts on it but it is certainly
encouraging, it is a sign that the Indians are looking
for if you like
the first step back from the brink, which is certainly
something that we will encourage. We want to look in
more detail at precisely what are the conditions and
whether they can be sensibly satisfied.
Question (Novosti):
I would like to ask both Defence Secretaries about their
assessment on the results of Almaty, the meeting between
President Putin and the leaders of Pakistan and India?
Rumsfeld:
Myself I think it was a useful thing that the meetings
took place and a useful thing that President Putin met
with the two leaders. Even though the meetings may have
been separate I think that all of that contributes to
a better understanding of the interest of the world
community in what is taking place in south Asia.
Hoon: We
very much welcome what has taken place and we want to
see as much international pressure as possible from
every quarter being brought to bear on India and Pakistan
to recognise that they must step back from the brink.
Question (Richard
Norton-Taylor, Guardian): Can I ask Secretary
Rumsfeld if he thinks that the Kashmir crisis, how dangerous
it is for distracting from the war against terrorism,
particularly in Afghanistan? And could I ask a second
question to both of you, did you discuss Iraq at all
this morning?
Rumsfeld: With
respect to the first question, there is no question
but that Pakistan has been enormously helpful in the
war on terrorism, being a neighbour of Afghanistan and
our being able to cooperate so fully with the Pakistani
government. They have had forces, and do today, along
the Afghan border, we have been able to use their airfields,
it has been a significant advantage for the success
that has been achieved thus far in Afghanistan. There
is no question but that to the extent that tension on
the Indian-Afghan border continues to go up that at
some point those troops that are along the Afghan border
are going to be moved. Fortunately thus far only very
small elements have been moved so it has not had a notably
harmful effect thus far. To the extent it goes on much
longer it could and that would be most unfortunate.
Hoon: As
far as Iraq is concerned, we certainly had discussions
about Iraq, we both have forces patrolling the No Fly
Zones in Iraq, risking their lives to protect people
on the ground there, and there is no doubt that the
threat to those forces has been increasing in recent
times and we have to ensure that we can take appropriate
action to deal with that threat, and certainly we both
believe that Iraq will be a much better place, not only
for the region and for its own people, if Saddam Hussein
was no longer in power in Baghdad.
Question:
Secretary Rumsfeld, do you agree with that statement
that the threat from Iraq is in fact increasingly recently?
What evidence is there of an increased threat from Iraq?
Rumsfeld:
We know that the Saddam Hussein regime in Iraq has had
a sizeable appetite for weapons of mass destruction,
we know that the borders into that country are quite
porous and we know that dual use capabilities have been
flowing in as well as illicit materials that are helpful
in their programmes for weapons of mass destruction.
There is not a doubt in the world but that every month
that goes by their programmes mature by a month and
that is not something that is a happy prospect for that
region. This is an individual who has used chemical
weapons on his own people, so there is not any great
debate as to what he and his regime would be willing
to do with weapons of mass destruction.
Question (Associated
Press, Pakistan): I would just like to know,
President Musharraf has accepted Mr Putin’s invitation
to visit Moscow. Would you like or expect the Indian
leader to go to Moscow for a reduction of tension?
Hoon: I think
it would be helpful if there were discussions continuing
for as long as they possibly can to continue to avoid
steps being taken to war and therefore we would like
to see conversations taking place wherever and whenever
they can.
Question (The Independent):
In light of what you just said, Mr Rumsfeld, about every
month that goes by the situation is getting potentially
intrinsically more dangerous. Can we then expect possible
military action to prevent this sooner rather than later?
Rumsfeld: That
is a matter for the Heads of Government, not for Ministers
of Defence, and as the Minister has said, I think there
is a very widely held recognition that the world would
be a better place if that regime were not in power,
and in fact it has been the policy of our country, our
Congress, that regime change would be in the best interests
of the world. There are a variety of ways for that to
be achieved and certainly it is not for me to make any
announcements.
Question (Julie McCarthy,
National Public Radio): Mr Rumsfeld, are you
inclined at the moment to back off of action in Iraq
right now because of what is happening in India and
Pakistan? And although you say that you would prefer
to deal directly with the Heads of State rather than
to telegraph things through the press, I wonder more
broadly if you could help us understand how you plan
to impress upon India and Pakistan what is in their
own interests given the fact that in this kind of fog
people may forget what is in their own best interests.
And for example would you be bringing estimates that
the Defense Department has given on the kinds of destruction
and devastation and death tolls that could take place
if there were an exchange?
Rumsfeld:
Well with respect to the first part your question says
are you backing off because of the India-Pakistan situation
with respect to Iraq, and the answer is to back off
you have to have been some place and I would think that
that would not be a correct characterisation. The second
thing, with respect to India and Pakistan, the United
States has important relationships with each of those
countries, we have political and economic and military
relationships that have been growing and developing
in the past period. They are important to us and clearly
we have a stake in those two countries not setting themselves
back whatever number of years one wants to pick. The
world has an interest in those two countries and I must
say I think each of those two countries have an interest
in not allowing the situation there to escalate into
a conflict. The circumstances of the people in each
country, given the possibility of a conflict, would
clearly be dramatically adversely affected. And the
leaders of those countries are sophisticated and knowledgeable
people, they know that, they are aware of their circumstance
and I think they are aware of the circumstance that
they would be in in the event that things deteriorated.
Question (George
Pascal Watson, Sun): Secretary, can I ask you
have you been impressed, or how impressed have you been,
by Britain’s Royal Marines operating in Afghanistan?
And secondly, can I ask you how worried are you by other
European nations’ reluctance, or seeming reluctance,
to increase their defence budgets?
Rumsfeld:
The answer to the first question with respect to the
Royal Marines and the contribution of the United Kingdom
is that they have done a superb job, there is just no
question but that the relationship between our two countries
not only politically and economically, but militarily,
is an unusual one, a distinctive relationship and a
very valued one and I am sure if General Franks were
here he would go into great detail as to how valuable
the contribution of the Royal Marines has been.
On your second question,
I hate to fuss at folks, I really don’t. We live
in a dangerous and untidy world, this is not an easy
time for the world. We have a series of threats that
exist, they are, to use the fancy words, so-called asymmetric
threats, they are less threats against armies, navies
and air forces than they are threats of terrorism, cyber
attacks, cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, a series
of things that advantage the attacker and disadvantage
the defender, and the militaries of the NATO nations
clearly have to recognise that that calls for several
things, it calls in some cases for a number of countries
to increase their defence budgets and see that they
are putting the resources in that will enable NATO and
our countries individually and collectively to be able
to contribute to peace and stability in the period ahead.
Secondly, it is going to
call for some transformation in our capabilities and
how we spend our money and how we are organised and
trained and equipped to do the job, because it is not
that the old tasks have all gone away but it is that
some new tasks have arrived that require investment,
that require different organisations, that require greater
lethality, greater precision and certainly better
interoperability among the NATO countries, and I would
add an improved tooth to tail ratio, I think we need
to lean down some of our headquarters and beef up some
of our frontline swiftly deployable capabilities.
The Ministry
of Defence is not responsible for the content or availability
of external websites.
|
