18 December 2001
Transcript: US Returns to Afghanistan Diplomatically, Politically, Economically
(Dobbins reaffirms U.S. commitment to help rebuild Afghanistan) (3360)
James Dobbins, U.S. Special Envoy to Afghanistan, said the reopening
of the U.S. diplomatic mission in Afghanistan December 17 signifies
that the United States has returned diplomatically, politically and
economically to the war-torn country.
Speaking to reporters in Islamabad December 18, Dobbins said the
United States intends to stay in Afghanistan and support the new
interim administration and the subsequent government.
The U.S. has a long-term commitment to play an appropriate part in the
overall international community's efforts to help Afghanistan make the
transition from war to peace, Dobbins said.
Dobbins said that all segments of the opposition and Afghan society
seem to be supportive of the process underway in Afghanistan to
install an Interim Administration on December 22.
While he was in Kabul, Dobbins met with both outgoing President
Rabbani, and incoming Chairman of the Interim Administration, Hamid
Karzai. Both men, he said, "seemed to be working together in good
spirit to bring about this peaceful transition."
"You can't do it for them: the people have to be prepared for
reconciliation; the leaders have to be prepared to overcome their
differences. And that's why what happened in Bonn is so important,
because it does indicate that the leaders are prepared to do that, and
the popular reaction to it in Afghanistan suggests the people are
ready," Dobbins said.
Dobbins expressed appreciation to Pakistan for its role at the Bonn
Conference, and for its commitment to strict border controls to
prevent an influx of defeated Al Qaeda fighters into Pakistan.
Following is the transcript of Dobbins' remarks in Islamabad on
December 18.
(begin transcript)
Press Conference
Ambassador James F, Dobbins, U.S. Special Envoy to Afghanistan
Islamabad, Pakistan
December 18, 2001
AMB. KENTON KEITH, Director of the Islamabad Coalition Information
service: It is a great pleasure today for me to introduce Ambassador
James Dobbins, U.S. special envoy to Afghanistan. Ambassador Dobbins
will say a few words and then take questions. On the local front, we
will be briefing tomorrow at our usual time 3:30; and we will also be
briefing on Thursday also as 3:30.
AMB. JAMES DOBBINS: This is my Third visit to Pakistan in connection
with my current responsibilities. I first came in mid-November when I
took up my assignment as the U.S. Envoy to the Afghan Opposition at
the beginning at the trip, which was to introduce me to that
opposition, and I consulted here with Pakistani officials on the
situation in Afghanistan and then traveled to Peshawar and ultimately
to Afghanistan, itself. At the end of that trip I returned and
debriefed Pakistani officials on what I had found on the prospects for
what ultimately became the meeting in Bonn which succeeded in agreeing
on an interim administration for Afghanistan. Yesterday I was in Kabul
where I was able to officially open the U.S. diplomatic mission there;
and over the last couple of days I have had an opportunity to meet
with President Rabbani, with the incoming chairman of the Interim
Administration Hamid Karzai, and with other, both current and
prospective, leaders of the new Interim Administration to discuss
plans for the transfer of power that will take place on December 22nd.
Those plans seem well advanced. All segments of the opposition and of
Afghan society seem to be supportive of the process that is underway,
and I would anticipate that the new Interim Administration should, in
these circumstances, be off to a good start after an internationally
recognized inauguration celebration, which will take place on 22nd of
December in Kabul. And that's why I am here. I have had meetings here
today. (I guess today is a holiday, so it wasn't technically a
meeting, it was a lunch) with the Foreign Secretary and with a number
of his colleagues, several of whom I met before. I expressed
appreciation for the Pakistani role at the Bonn conference where
Pakistan joined with a number of other countries in helping to promote
the agreement that ultimately emerged there and which will be
implemented on the 22nd of December in Kabul. Questions?
Q: There are many that say that the Bonn agreement doesn't represent
majority of Afghans. What's your feeling on that?
A: Well, first, I am not sure there are many. There are some. I don't
know any of them who suggest that the Bonn agreement therefore
shouldn't be applied. The Bonn agreement is a coalition government in
effect. I don't know any coalition government where all of the people
feel they are adequately represented. So a certain amount of grousing
that "I got three ministries instead of four" is normal whether in
Western Europe or South Asia, but that's what it is. Nobody is saying,
"I am not going to participate." Nobody is saying that this is a bogus
process. They arc just saying, "I should have four ministries of
three." Well, you know, we can live with that and I think the process
can live with it.
Q: Can, you explain exactly where the peacekeeping force stands and
what steps are missing before it actually is on the ground?
A: The discussions are fairly advanced. I attended, on my way to
Kabul, a meeting in London that was hosted by the UK. It was a meeting
with all of the prospective troop contributors -- I think there were
16 countries represented there -- at which the British briefed on the
concept of operations and their intentions in terms of discussions
with the Afghans. A British general then went to Kabul and he and I,
in fact, met yesterday afternoon, along with some American military
officers who had flown to Kabul for that purpose from our Central
Command, to discuss with Minister of Defense Fahim and Minister of The
Interior Qanooni the scope and arrangements for the force. There were
discussions on a number of issues. The British General, Major-General,
McColl, is flying back to London today where he will have another
meeting with troop contributors to brief them on the results of those
discussions. So that's one track. A second track is at the United
Nations. There is a resolution which is being discussed at the United
Nations and which will be formally tabled, and I would anticipate
voted on, sometime in the next few days. Those are basically the two
tracks, which should lead, I hope, to at least an initial deployment
by the 22nd.
Q: Ambassador, would you like to share with us the details of your
discussions with the Foreign Secretary of Pakistan?
A: They were very much what we have been saying here. I briefed them
on the discussion I had had; what the prospects were for an
international security force for the celebrations on the 22nd; and the
prospects for the Interim Administration to progress. I told them that
I had met both with the outgoing President Rabbani and the incoming
Chairman Hamid Karzai. I met with them, interestingly enough, together
and then separately; and that they both seemed to be working together
in good spirit to bring about this peaceful transition. We talked
about what the developments were likely to bring, including in
Pakistan's relationship with the new government in Afghanistan.
Q: Ambassador, just a follow up question, which is on the issue of
Pakistan's relationship with the new Afghan government. Officials here
on background have been very concerned about what they see as hostile
gestures from the Northern Alliance in recent weeks, and there are
many examples that they cite. In your discussions with the Foreign
Secretary and outer officials here, was there any discussion on some
of the Pakistani concerns; and could you also tell us if the
Pakistanis have said to you if there is going to be a delegation going
to Kabul for the 22nd? And at what level are they going to be
represented? How do they see the whole situation?
A: I think they probably do intend to be represented, and I think
there was an agreement that there is a good deal of anxiety and
suspicion on both sides that have to be overcome. There's a lot of
history that will need to be overcome for the relationship to achieve
the level of cooperation that I believe both sides want and need.
Q: Some Afghan representatives I have talked to are concerned about
the U.S. commitment to the process, long-term commitment. What now can
you say about the long-term commitment by the U.S. for the future of
Afghanistan?
A: Well, I addressed this yesterday at the ceremonies which marked the
re-opening of our diplomatic mission in Kabul; and I noted that this
(reopening) meant that the U.S. was returning diplomatically,
politically and economically to Afghanistan and that we intended to
stay, and that we would continue to play such a role in support of the
new Interim Administration, and then of more permanent arrangements,
as those are put in place in Afghanistan.
Q: In your discussions today and with regard to reports that Al Qaida
fighters filed into Pakistan, was there any expression of concern on
the part of the Pakistani officials that the problem from Afghanistan
may actually have been exported into Pakistan?
A: Well, we discussed the issue briefly, and the Pakistani officials
reaffirmed their commitments to us as regards their strict border
controls, I don't know that they were...no...I mean, they weren't
expressing concerns. They were expressing a common view with us as to
how the problem should be handled, and their commitment to handle it
exactly in the manner that they had committed themselves to do.
Q: Can you tell us anything about these reports that fox (TV) is
saying that Same bin Laden may be in Peshawar?
A: I don't know anything beyond what, on that issue, we have all seen
in the press. I really have nothing to tell you on that because it's
not in my brief, and it didn't come up today. I don't have any
information to give you, not because I am denying it, but because I
literally don't have it.
Q: But just in regards to the border issue again, the Pakistani
government says it is protected, but we keep hearing reports that
armed Taliban fighters are slipping over. Do you think it's porous,
still, or do you think it's completely blocked?
A: Well, it's a mountain range, so I think the passes are sealed. I
don't think it's possible to prevent individuals from crossing the
border. I think it is possible once they have done so, to apprehend
them over time and to ensure that they are dealt with appropriately.
Q: And will U.S. forces be active on Pakistani soil in that region?
A: I wouldn't anticipate so, but frankly I am not the Ambassador to
Pakistan. I have the Ambassador to Pakistan here (gestures to Amb.
Wendy Chamberlain), and maybe later she can answer the question. But
"no" would be my answer.
(Chuckles)
Q: Do you have any information about Mr. Karzai's going to visit
Pakistan?
A: I don't know what his travel plans are, I would anticipate he will
make international visits to a number of places over the next several
months, once he has gotten a firmer grip on his primary
responsibilities, which are in Kabul, I know he is been in contact
with the Government of Pakistan at the highest levels anti that they
have established a good relationship, and I am sure that that will
continue.
Q: I have a question for Ambassador Keith, if that's allowed. Do you
have any more information on the identity of the three Al Qaida
detainees on the U.S. slip?
A: (Amb. Dobbins) I don't. Neither does he.
Q: Not even in terms of their importance? Their positions?
A: It's just not in my brief; I'm sorry, I don't, I literally don't
have any information.
Q: Is there any compromise to make, perhaps, between the Northern
Alliance and the international community? Or would the deployment of
the numbers of the peacekeeping forces in Afghanistan, I mean, in
Kabul as well as in the other places...?
A: Well, there will be such an agreement, I anticipate. It won't be an
agreement with tae Northern Alliance because the Northern Alliance
won't exist. It will be an agreement with the Interim Administration
in Kabul, which will be a broadly based administration representing
Afghans in the north and south. There were discussions yesterday with
two of the Ministers, who will continue in their positions in that new
government, and a number of points were settled, and others are still
under discussion.
Q: After Mr. Putin's statement this week on the whole question, of
broadening the war on terrorism beyond Afghanistan -- I mean does this
complicate in any way the mandate under which peacekeepers are going
to be deployed in Afghanistan, because of the Russian position that
there are reservations on taking this campaign onwards, perhaps to
Iraq and so on?
A: I think the short answer is no. I don't see a connection between
the two. I think this there are discussions in the Security Council;
they tend to be at the level of detail at the moment, how many months
is the mandate for, that kind of stuff. But the Russians were active
and very constructive participants in the Bonn meeting. They express
no opposition to the request of the Bonn meeting for an international
security force, and I'm confident that they will support it. So I
don't see a connection between the two, frankly.
Q: The Government of Pakistan has stated that it would open its
diplomatic mission in Kabul as and when the guarantees for the
security of its diplomatic people are received from Kabul. You have
opened your diplomatic mission in Kabul. Whether the United States
would be in a position to ask the Northern Alliance to give the
security guarantees for the Pakistani diplomatic mission there?
A: Well, as I said in answer to another question, it wouldn't be the
Northern Alliance, which will cease to exist in four days -- I mean,
as a government. It would be the Interim Administration. We have
opened our Mission, and I know that Pakistan intends to reopen its
mission as soon as the conditions can be met, and we would be happy to
facilitate that in any way necessary, although I was not requested to
make the approach that you suggested. I mean, they haven't made such a
request, but we would be happy to facilitate this in any way possible.
Q: I would like to follow up on this question regarding America's
long-term commitment to Afghanistan. So, the U.S. has reopened its
Mission. What is it discussing internally in terms of a long-term
financial commitment -- reconstruction, economic, humanitarian?
A: Well, that is what it is discussing internally, initially within
the administration and then with Congress, and ultimately then its
consultation with other donors. The United States has, in consultation
with the Japanese, launched a process of organizing donors to address
the needs of Afghanistan. An initial meeting was held in Washington,
co-chaired by Japan and the United States, on the 20th of November,
and that meeting took several decisions, one of which was to request
the World Bank and The United Nations to do what is called a needs
assessment -- that is, to establish how much money is necessary, over
what period, and in what categories to meet Afghanistan's
reconstruction needs and, secondly, to schedule a donor's conference
which would meet once that needs assessment had been circulated, with
a view to getting donors to commit the funds that would be needed to
meet those needs. That will probably take place, I would guess, in
January sometime. It's when we have that needs assessment that we and
other donors will determine what proportion of that undoubtedly
multi-billion dollar figure each of us are prepared to commit, and
then we would go to the conference and make chose commitments and see
whether we would meet the target. So far, the response that we've
gotten in our initial contacts with the U.S. Congress indicate that
there is a positive interest in this, and so I am confident that the
United States will play an appropriate part in the overall
international community's efforts to meet Afghanistan's needs. And
those needs are going to be very large.
Q: What is being done by the Administration to prepare the American
people for the fact that the recovery may be just as messy as the war?
That this may take quite a long time to settle down. That different
ethnic and tribal groups may not work easily together, may not play
well together. What is being done to prepare the American people that
this could be a dangerous situation for relief officials, for U.S.
soldiers and peacekeepers for a while?
A: Well, I don't think this will come as any shock to the American
people. We've had a good deal of experience over the last decade in
helping countries make the transition from war to peace, and we know
that it is a messy, frustrating, difficult, and sometimes dangerous
process, as you've described. On the other hand, we've gotten
increasingly better at it. When I say we, I don't mean just the United
States; I mean the international community as a whole. From early
mistakes in places like Somalia and Haiti, to increasing success in
places like Bosnia and Kosovo and East Timor, the international
community is beginning to develop the techniques and the experience
necessary to help societies make that transition. You can't do it for
them; the people have to be prepared for reconciliation; the leaders
have to be prepared to overcome their differences. And that's why what
happened in Bonn is so important, because it does indicate that the
leaders are prepared to do that, and the popular reaction to it in
Afghanistan suggests the people are ready, and what we were talking
about a few minutes ago, about the donors' organization of their own
efforts, suggests that the international community is itself prepared
to provide the requisite assistance. But you're right; it's not going
to be a straight-line process. There are going to be setbacks and
frustrations as we move forward. But as I said, I don't think that
will come as a shock to the American people or others who watch this
process in other countries making this difficult transition over the
last decade.
Q: What setbacks and frustrations do you foresee in this process? What
are your biggest concerns?
A: Well, I think they're probably the sane as anybody would have. One
is the need to meet the immediate humanitarian needs of a country that
is devastated, first of all, by three years of drought and then by
nearly twenty years of civil war, and to meet those needs before
winter closes in, mountain passes freeze up, and populations are left
exposed. Secondly, the need to begin, over time, a process of
demobilization, and to offer large numbers of young men, who have had
little opportunity to do anything other than bear arms for their adult
life, other sources of income and livelihood. The need to create
institutions, including to integrate the military service, to begin to
professionalize a police force and to build up the civil service and
the institutional capacity. These are all steps that different
elements of the international community -- the United Nations, for
one, but individual donor nations and other institutions and
organizations -- will have to address in concert with the Interim
Administration and the more permanent arrangements that follow on from
the Interim Administration after its term of office is concluded.
Q: How would you evaluate the service of your Ambassador in Islamabad,
which has been rendered by her for the United States of America?
A: Outstanding.
Q: Has your office or any of your group been contacted by American
corporations that may have a business interest in Afghanistan, and if
so what?
A: No is the answer, but I would be delighted to be so contacted.
Thank you.
End of text
(end transcript)
(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S.
Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
