Questions and Answers- Provisional Transcript
Christian Schmidt, Parliamentary State Secretary to the Federal Minister of Defence, Germany
We can learn something from the Straits of Malacca success. I would like to ask Mr Margelov about his country’s security structures in Europe and Asia. You referred to some dissenting opinion about the membership application of Georgia and the Ukraine to NATO. Maybe you could give us insight into your idea of the organisation of security in these countries. We unfortunately have not had the C of E treaty ratified. Is there any intention to bind in any proposals from your side?
We also heard from all panellists about the concern of Iranian nuclear commitments. There is, as we all know, an intention to have the possibility to show the Iranians that, in case there is a defence capability against aggressive missiles, NATO has committed to adapting the American, Polish, Czech initiative. There had been a response in offering a RADA station some time ago from President Putin. I did not get new information on your ideas for a twofold initiative, on the one side thinking about joint defence capability as the threat is not only to the Gulf region, but all neighbours in this region.
Participant
I also have a question for Mr Margelov, about talks between Russia and the United States, within the five permanent members of the Security Council. These talks will take place on Monday and Tuesday in New York, with GCC plus three – Iraq, Egypt and Jordan. What is new on these talks? Why are they taking place now with the current administration? Is it a preparation of something you plan to do with the Obama administration? What is Russia offering now in order to sustain the five plus one approach to Iran, and bring about a new way to deal with the issue of security in the region? What is Russia willing to do vis-à-vis Iran, and the relationship with the United States bilaterally?
Colonel (retd) Christopher Langton, Senior Fellow for Conflict and Defence Diplomacy
I was going to ask Minister of Defence Gönül and Mr Margelov for further comment on a region they both mentioned, the south Caucuses, particularly prospects for peace after the events of last August in arguably the most dangerous conflict in the region, Nagorno-Karabakh, which also threatens the European energy corridor.
Dr Dana Allin, Senior Fellow for Transatlantic Affairs
Also to Mr Margelov, you gave a fairly pessimistic assessment of the dissolution of solidarity in the international community, which I cannot say is totally inaccurate. Again on the question of Iran, though you emphasised different American and Russian views, it is the case that Russia has backed a series of Security Council resolutions which essentially declare Iranian enrichment activity to be illegal. I wanted to push you further on this issue, and see if there really is not something more that Russia can support to back that up.
Vice Admiral DK Joshi
I have a question each to Teo Chee Hean and Ali Hassan. Mr Teo, whilst you brought out the similarities between the piracy-related incidents in the Straits of Malacca and Singapore, versus that in the Gulf of Aden, and you talked about some of the key differences, the one salient difference which perhaps did not come out with sufficient clarity is that whilst in the Straits of Malacca, the entire stretch of water is within the territorial limits of one of the littorals, and therefore the success of the Eyes in the Sky ventures have by themselves resulted in that situation being addressed and there isn’t very much left for the international community to do. The situation in the Gulf of Aden is entirely different in that the entire corridor of around 200 miles is in international waters, quite beyond the territorial limits of the waters of the littorals. Therefore, even if and when the littorals initiates certain steps to curb the incidents of piracy, until that times there would be a fair amount for the international community, and particularly for the users of that corridor, to do.
My second question is to Minister Ali Hassan. Again relating to the Gulf of Aden, you brought out what the international community needs to do, as well as what the state of Yemen would do. You will have followed the media reports this morning that yesterday afternoon, whilst our breakout session on counter-piracy was in progress, one of the Indian naval ships apprehended a pirate ship and took into custody 23 pirates, confiscated a cachet of arms, and so on. Would you accept these 23 pirates, who are currently on board this ship, in the port of Aden, to be tried under your laws?
General Khalid Jamil Al Sarayreh, Jordan
My question is to the deputy minister. In addition to fighting piracy in the Arab sea, or in the Gulf of Aden, do you not think that Yemen should lead an Arab effort to find a solution to the Somali problem? Fighting piracy in the Arabian Sea, as important as it is, is not going to solve the problem of Somalia. We know that international and regional efforts to do something have failed to now. While the Arab states are the most affected by this problem, they have not done much until now on the regional or inter-Arab arena to find a solution to the Somali problem, which is first of all our problem, especially those countries like Yemen overlooking the Arabian Sea. Do you not think that Yemen should lead an international effort, an Arab effort, to participate in a solution to the Somali problem?
Dr Ahmed Al Kibsi
I would like to ask about the role of the EU in the regional security of the area. Coordination and cooperation are important, as the Turkish defence minister. I would like to ask about the role of Turkey in maintaining the stability of Iraq. What is the role of Turkey in the negotiation between Syria and Israel? For Mr Ali Hassan reminded us that we are in Bahrain, also an Arab state. I would like to ask him about efforts first to bring Yemen into the GCC, as we consider that Yemen is a guarantee of the stability of the area, if we are talking about the GCC. He mentioned establishing a centre for watching and fighting piracy in the Arabian Sea.
Lara Setrakian, ABC News
I would like to ask the speaker from Yemen to expound a bit on the efforts towards de‑radicalisation and what is being done to address the youth bulge in Yemen. Also, whether those efforts will be affected by the fall in the oil price in the sense of whether resources will become more scarce and what he sees there. I would like to ask the speaker from Turkey what he sees going forward for the negotiations between Turkey and Armenia.
Dr Frederick Kagan, Resident Scholar, American Enterprise Institute
I have a question from Mr Margelov. I am very glad that you are here and able to explain to us more clearly perhaps some things that are difficult to understand about Russian policy toward Iran at the moment. It is a fact that the missile defence system that is being proposed in Europe is no threat to Russia. A very small number of launchers, a very small number of interceptors make no meaningful difference, given the size of the Russian arsenal and the laws of physics are such that that is one of the worst places to put a defensive system to threaten Russia to begin with. It is very hard for me to believe that Russia, with its history in this field, is not aware of these facts and so it is very difficult to comprehend why Russia should argue that this missile defence system is in some way a threat to Russia and I would hope that you could explain that.
In addition, since one of the Russian responses has been to announce that it intends to deploy Iskander missiles in Kaliningrad in response to this, which are not necessary from a strategic standpoint but do, in fact, threaten states throughout Europe, most of whom have no involvement in this missile system, I wonder if you could comment on why Russia thinks that an appropriate response to a system that does not threaten Russia is to generate perhaps a new arms race in Europe.
Lastly, I believe it is the position of the Russian government that Iran is in violation of its Nuclear Non‑Proliferation Treaty (NPT) obligations and is in violation of the International Atomic Energy Authority (IAEA) inspections. It would seem very natural for Russia not only to make a very clear public announcement that it would suspend cooperation with Iran on the nuclear programme, but then to follow through very clearly and immediately on such a pronouncement and refuse to assist the Iranian civilian nuclear programme which, after all, the Iranians justify on the basis of their rights under the NPT which they are in violation of, until such time as Iran complies with those obligations. I wonder if you could explain to me these problems in Russian foreign policy that are not clear. Thank you.
Tadashi Maeda, Head, Energy and Natural Resources Finance Department, Japan Bank for International Cooperation
I have two brief questions. My first question is to Minister Tao Chee Hean of Singapore. You portray the role of multilateral organisations in international regional forums in the twenty-first century. My question is, what do you think about the idea of creating an Asian Monetary Fund (AMF)? It was opposed by the US government 11 years ago but, for instance, Indonesia had some difficulties in receiving funding from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) because of the bad experience 11 years ago and so a new AMF could supplement the law. What do you think about that?
My second question is to Mr Margelov. Russia used to be very over‑weighted to European countries, but now the Russian government is going to host an Asia‑Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) meeting in Vladivostok in 2012, so how do you play a role of Asia?
Participant
I would also like to congratulate the panellists for their deep insights and excellent speeches. It seems that Mr Margelov is getting the lion’s share of questions this morning. It is indicative of the importance of course of Russia and that is why everybody seems to be asking him. We gather from Russian statements regarding the Iranian nuclear find, as well as your own statement that Russia is adamantly against the nuclearisation of Iran. I think this is clear enough for all of us, but yet for us in the Gulf and the way we see the Russian position it is a bit perplexing in the sense that you are in support of resolutions vis‑à‑vis the Iranian nuclear find. You state frequently enough that you are against Iran going nuclear and you support negotiation. Now, in the GCC we share the view that other than military means should continue to be exerted with the hope that ultimately they might succeed. However, my question is what is the perception of what can be done at the end? Time is of the essence in this regard, so okay, we support negotiation and we are against military action, but then what if you are also against increasing sanctions?
Another question for His Excellency, the Defence Minister of Singapore, regarding the Korean nuclear issue: does His Excellency think that it is almost over?
Baria Alamuddin, Al‑Hayat
My question is to do the Defence Minister of Turkey. Sir, do you see any role for Turkey in Kirkuk and, if yes, what sort of role?
Dr John Chipman
Commodore Williams, could you help us on the Union’s role in the region?
Commodore Simon Williams, Head, International Plans & Policy Division (Military), Ministry of Defence
Yes, certainly. I was very tempted, first of all, to see permission from my French colleagues, since they hold the Union presidency, but since we have taken the operational command on behalf of the Union and have the multinational Union headquarters based in Northwood I will take the hit. I think we have to be clear on a couple of things. The Union forces is coming in under the UN SCRs to fulfil the UN mandates and its order of priorities have been quite clearly stated and they are: to protect the World Food Programme (WFP) shipping, to make sure that the humanitarian aid reaches Somalia. Secondly, to escort key shipping and, thirdly, of course, to act in general repression of piracy, which is the duty of the international community as it is the first universal crime. Those are the fairly straight priorities.
I guess the question was aiming at why the Union. The answer is the Union as a coordinating mechanism can unlock a number of other maritime states to contribute which otherwise would not have contributed under other frameworks. There are three established frameworks: the Union, the Alliance and the coalition maritime force that is commanded from Bahrain. A number of countries participate in all three, some do not and, therefore, as a force generation mechanism and then one to produce a unity of effort the Union has stepped up to the plate for a year to commission this particular force. The advantages are in terms of coordination and intelligence‑sharing and there is an ongoing discussion to ensure that we can have the right mechanisms in place to fulfil both of those functions as the force then fulfils its role.
I could not leave the microphone open at this point and not say that I think we have to remember what Secretary Gates said yesterday. That industry too has to play its part. This is a very low probability incident but very high profile when it occurs and industry can do a great deal to address the issue. That is why the Union has focused on those particular priorities that I have touched on as its effort, because it is rather similar to any form of crime, getting to zero is a very, very difficult thing to do. Getting to a minimal acceptable level is probably the closest that one can get and that is the sort of framework that has been put in place.
I hope that answer the questioner.
Dr John Chipman
Thank you very much indeed. We will return to the panel, and I think the best thing is to go in order that you see them: Minister Gönül, Minister Teo, Minister Hassan and Mr Margelov, and I will exercise the principle of proportionality and give the first three speakers three minutes each and Mr Margelov five minutes and then we will conclude.
Vecdi Gönül
Thank you so much, Mr Chairman. Let me start with the easiest question, with Kirkuk. Of course, it is an internal problem of Iraq, but I would like to draw your attention to some facts about Kirkuk. First of all, Kirkuk is a small model of all Iraq. Its population consists of Arabs, Turkmen, Assyrians, Kurds and many others. Iraq’s temporary constitution paid it special attention and, if I am not mistake, Article 57 indicates it should be arranged differently. This attention continues and I would also like to let you know that the real estate records were destroyed at the beginning of the invasion, so I do not know which records the present administration is going to use. Kirkuk should have the real and close attention of the Iraqi government and we are ready to help them in any way.
Coming to the South Caucasus question, as I mentioned, from the outset Turkey has urged that the problem of the Caucasus region has to be solved by peaceful means. That is why our Minister of Foreign Affairs visited the two countries and also our Prime Minister visited Georgia and Moscow straight after and that is why we offered the Caucasus a stability and cooperation platform. The Russians said, ‘Yes, Assyria said, ‘Yes’, Armenia said, ‘Yes’, Turkey said, ‘Yes.’ We are awaiting a response from Georgia. We are ready to help them in any way we can.
Turning to Armenian and Turkish relations and the Nagorno Karabakh issue altogether, there are three questions about that. We recognised Armenia right after its independence. We opened the border; we tried to help Armenia’s difficult economic conditions. Later on, however, Armenia occupied 20% of Azerbaijan’s legal territory. They said, ‘There are Armenians over there’, but there were a million Azeris living there, maybe double the number of Armenians. They escaped and are living in refugee conditions in Azeris, Azerbaijan’s territory. These are big problems in the process of being solved for 18 years and there has been no development so far, so we closed the door for the sake of solving this problem. Recently, however, we opened it and more than 50,000 Armenians are working in Turkey because of their economic difficulties and, also, President Gul recently visited Armenia; it was for a football game, but anyway it is a good sign. Sometimes we have this kind of diplomatic relations. This is what we are trying to do to help both sides. Azerbaijan is now a very important country, but it is also a victim of these occupations and Georgia is a very important country for Turkey and, of course, Russia is an important country for Turkey.
Regarding the last question, the negotiation between Israel and Syria, these are not official negotiations. These are informal negotiations and we are trying to help both sides. They have had four meetings. We are helping them, not negotiating with either side. I hope, after the government problem in Israel, they will continue with this informal negotiation – informal touch, let us say, and Turkey will continue to help them.
Teo Chee Hean
Perhaps I will address the Asian Monetary Fund first. I think the issue here is that certain countries may have an allergy, as you say, to approaching the International Monetary Fund (IMF), but I think the IMF also has learnt from its previous experiences dealing with the Asian financial crisis and, in my view, the IMF is the only institution which has the capacity to deal with major problems if a country faces them. Therefore, even if you have an Asian Monetary Fund, the issue of whether that has sufficient capacity to deal with a major problem in a country does arise. There are various swap agreements between Asian countries, which Japan, China, South Korea and various Asian countries have contributed to, but I think that alone will not be sufficient to address a major problem if it arises and we will still have to go back to the IMF, allergies notwithstanding.
On the Malacca Strait, I completely agree with Admiral Joshi’s comments that there is a major difference. Most of the Malacca Strait is territorial waters. It is a funnel. It is about 700 miles long. At the northern reaches it is about 200 miles wide, but in the southern reaches it can be as narrow as 20 miles. Therefore, on average it is about 700 miles by, say, 100 miles, which makes it about one‑tenth the size of the area which the Commodore has to cover, so it is a different problem. However, I think the principles remain the same, which are that you need international cooperation, you need the littoral states to act and you need users also to take responsible action. Of course, whether they are in territorial waters or international waters you need different combinations. I think also with the missions which the Commodore has to carry out on behalf of the Union there will be issues that arise almost entirely within territorial waters: the escort of the World Food Programme (WFP) ships, for example, whereas for the international sea lanes that can largely be routed through international waters, so there are different sets of problems.
On North Korea, North Korea sees its nuclear capability as the final guarantor of its continuation and it is also the biggest bargaining chip that it has, so it is not going to be an easy negotiation. I do not see it being over very easily. If it is the biggest and practically the only bargaining chip that you have and if you bargain it away you are going to make sure that you get the biggest possible pay‑off for it and, preferably, if you can bargain it away several times for big pay‑offs each time it is even better. I think the North Koreans are very tough negotiators and so I do not see that going away very quickly. Also, with North Korea currently I think there is a bit of uncertainty over its leadership and leadership transition, so we may not have such a clear resolution immediately.
Minister Ali Hasan
I would like to respond respectively to the four questions addressed to me. First of all, regarding what kind of facilities Yemen could offer the international warships that are deployed in the Gulf of Aden and the Indian Ocean, as my colleague has said, within the framework of international cooperation and the United Nations Yemen is ready to cooperate as far as possible to fight piracy. It will give every kind of facilities that are needed to the warships in the area and the effort that is deployed in that respect. We are already cooperating in that regard with the coalition forces that are present in that area and we are providing every facility required. There is no way to escape from taking responsibility and we are the first to be badly hit by the piracy question, so we will give every facility needed in that respect, as long as it is an action that is taken in coordination with the authorities in Yemen, respecting territorial sovereignty and in the framework of the United Nations.
Regarding the question of Somalia and is Yemen willing to lead an effort to find a solution, I would like to assure you that since the beginning of the Somali crisis Yemen has done everything possible and we have been involved in that question. We have hosted so many negotiations between different Somali factions; we have been active in every effort, either of the Arab League or the UN or the Economic Growth and Trade (EGAT); we have done all we can. I think the Somali problem is a concern for all countries, not only for Yemen, although with the neighbouring countries of course we are the first to suffer from the instability in Somalia, but the question of Somalia is a concern for the entire international community and the UN. Yemen is hosting about 700,000 Somalis and now, with the question of piracy, it is becoming another burden. The solution of Somalia’s problems is a concern for the international community and it should be addressed by the UN, the Arab League and the African Union. First of all, the Somalis should be convinced that it is their problem and then the neighbouring countries and the Arab countries could help if this conviction is accepted by all. Therefore, I would spare no effort to help our Somali brothers to find a solution and we have been doing that from the beginning.
As for the efforts of Yemen to join the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), we think we are doing our best to enable this. We are having good responses from our brothers in the GCC countries. We are on the way and I think the best thing is to prepare Yemen for that event. In accordance with our brothers in the GCC, I think that Yemen should be prepared and given the means to get repaired in order to join the GCC at the final stage. We are at the first stage of that process, but I think we are heading in the best direction.
With regard to establishing a centre for monitoring activities in the Gulf of Aden, we are having dialogue with neighbouring countries. There have been meetings in Oman and Tanzania and all neighbouring countries accept the idea that a centre should be set up in Yemen in order to monitor the activities in the area of the Gulf of Aden and I hope this will be established as soon as possible with the help of the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) and the neighbouring countries.
I think I have responded to all the questions addressed to me. Thank you very much.
Mikhail Margelov
Let me start with the first question. During the years of the Cold War we were lucky to live in a black and white world where two vertically integrated systems opposed each other. On the one flank there was NATO, on the other flank there was the Warsaw Pact. After the collapse of the Soviet Union and the disappearance of the so‑called socialist system the Warsaw Pact melted. In 2001, we learned that the new threats for the world looked like networks and the philosophy behind the proposal of President Medvedev, which he came up with on 5 June in Berlin, was like that. If I may use very simple words to describe it, if there is a network of bad guys called Al Qaeda we have to create a network of good guys which we would not know how to call, but we have to start serious negations on what is the new security mechanism for Europe. Unfortunately, when crises occur in Europe, and we can trace that history from 1991, including Nagorno‑Karabakh, including Transnistria, including Abkhazia, South Ossetia, then former Yugoslavia, then conflict in South Caucasus between Russia and Georgia, the European security mechanisms do not work efficiently in order to prevent the conflicts. Neither the Council of Europe nor the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), neither the European Union (EU) nor I do not know what can be efficient in order to stop the shooting immediately.
Therefore, our idea is to start talking business. We have spent so much time in different discussions since 1991, but we have not constructed any new institution or any new system which can make the continent of Europe really stable. We do not want to eliminate any existing international organisation. Our proposal is to include them. We believe in engagement. We do not believe in any surgery when we talk about security in Europe. Our proposal was just an invitation for serious, substantive discussion. That is why Russia seriously thinks that all countries and all institutions should send positive signals to each other. When we talk about missile defence, the third positioning area, for many people, for example in my constituency in Pskov, which is in the northwest of Russia bordering Estonia and Latvia, it is like another edition of the medium range and Pershing missile crisis in the early 1980s. It is a bad signal. It is bad reminiscences. We think that if we seriously talk with our partners about common threats we should together work out mechanisms to combat those threats. That is why if our American partners consider Iran as a real threat, we propose Gabala, we propose Armavir, we propose other sites which we possess in order to create the system which we can operate together, the shield which will cover not only some part of Western Europe but also some part of Russian territory, because Russia is neighbouring Iran. We have a common border in the Caspian Sea and, well, I do not know if Iranian nuclear warheads can be delivered to the US by DHL – probably, but they can to Russia, even with current Iranian missiles, which they test all the time.
In answering the question about our general attitude towards the Iranian nuclear programme, I should say that you can hardly find any responsible politician in Russia who will support the idea of granting the nuclear bomb to Iran. It is a nightmare even for our radicals. We seriously are ready to cooperate with the United States of America and other members of the Security Council in sponsoring a comprehensive and realistic resolution in the Security Council.
Unfortunately, the projects which we have seen before lack realism. In addition, I should say that we really do not believe in sanctions. Two main examples of sanctions showed that they do not work. They did not work in the former Yugoslavia. They made a lot of millionaires in the Balkans. They did not work properly in Iraq; Senator Coleman is still very much engaged with the investigation of the Oil‑for‑Food project. We are ready to cooperate in the Security Council as well as we are cooperating with the Americans today. On 16 November we are coming up with the first Russian‑American project on a resolution for the Middle East, which will occur after the Quartet meeting on 15 November in Europe. Russia is ready to be involved in real security measures in the Middle East and we think that joint cooperation is very helpful here.
We were not the country which started the arms race in Europe and worldwide, but if the arms race has started we have to respond. That is why President Medvedev said that if the arms race goes on Russia is ready to deploy the Iskander missiles in Kaliningrad. We do not want to do that, just as we do not want to be in a state of war with Georgia, but if the arms race starts we have to participate. We consider that the arms race in the events of the world financial and economic crisis is a non‑revenue‑producing activity. That is why we would be more than happy not to participate in any kind of arms race, in any kind of new, expensive military project, but if we are made to do so then we shall.
Russia is the biggest European country, but we are not only a Euro‑Atlantic, we are also a Euro‑Pacific country. That is why we highly estimate our involvement in Asia and our role in Asia. We are serious about involvement in Asia‑Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) activities. I was with President Medvedev in Peru at the APEC summit and I should say that there was a very fruitful, very serious discussion with the Japanese Prime Minister, Mr Aso, including our favourite subject, the Kuril Islands and both the President and the Prime Minister to my mind said some very important words. They said that we should not leave that problem for the forthcoming generation; we should solve it when we are active.
On the last point, the South Caucasus, we welcome very much the efforts of Turkey which assisted, as well as the French President Nicolas Sarkozy, in the resolution of the Russia‑Georgia conflict. We support very much the so‑called Turkish project for stability in the Caucasus. We are all waiting for the answer from Georgia, but we are wiling to cooperate. Thank you.
Dr John Chipman
Thank you very much indeed to our four speakers for a very lively and enriching debate.
