• Military

• WMD Menu                           

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Operations
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

03 June 1998

TRANSCRIPT: U.S., UK DEFENSE OFFICIALS ON NUCLEAR TESTS, KOSOVO

(Cohen: India/Pakistan reversed non-proliferation trend) (3190)
Washington -- Defense Secretary Cohen says recent nuclear tests
conducted by India and Pakistan have reversed the nuclear
non-proliferation trend which has seen the denuclearization of
Belarus, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Brazil, Argentina and South Africa.
"We have to work cooperatively to facilitate" reducing tensions and
lowering the rhetoric on the subcontinent, he said, and find ways to
encourage India and Pakistan to stop producing fissile material, sign
up to the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, and address the dispute over
Kashmir.
Speaking to reporters immediately following a June 3 working meeting
at the Pentagon with British Secretary of State for Defense George
Robertson, Cohen also noted that he and his counterpart would be
looking at a variety of ways to cope with the threat of weapons of
mass destruction including:
-- developing protective equipment against chemical and biological
threats;
-- developing new vaccines; and
-- identifying mechanisms for sharing intelligence.
Robertson pointed out that the recent stand-off between Iraq and the
United Nations illustrated "how deadly and ... real the threat from
chemical and biological weapons actually is" to world.
Tensions in Kosovo were also on the agenda for the two officials.
Asked about the possibility of deploying U.S. or NATO peacekeeping
forces to the immediate region, Cohen said that "it is always
important to try to resolve issues like this diplomatically." Any kind
of military response what have to "a multinational approach," he said.
The secretary noted that the alliance is studying a variety of options
should military force be required. After the study, Cohen said there
would need to be a further assessment "in terms of its (the option
selected) desirability, its feasibility and its effectiveness."
Robertson said, "This is an important and serious situation that we
see developing" in Kosovo. While NATO military authorities are looking
at all options, he said, any future message must be "strong and robust
and practical."
The following is the transcript of the joint Cohen-Robertson media
availability:
(Begin transcript)
DoD News Briefing
Wednesday, June 3, 1998
Secretary of State for Defense George Robertson, the United Kingdom
Media Availability
Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen
Secretary of State for Defense George Robertson, the United Kingdom
Wednesday, June 3, 1998
SECRETARY COHEN: The Minister and I have had an opportunity last
evening and also this morning to share discussions on a number of
issues. We have a very strong friendship. We met last year,
approximately a year ago, and have spent a good deal of time talking
to each other by phone and also meeting at NATO Ministerials. Today
was an opportunity for us to spend considerable time reviewing a
variety of subjects that we are cooperating on and areas that we are
cooperating in.
So we are here to welcome the Minister. This is the first anniversary
of his first official visit to Washington. We look forward to a number
of years in the future.
SECRETARY ROBERTSON: It's very nice to be in the Pentagon. I think
I've seen a lot of you earlier on this morning, but it's nice to be
here again in front of the American and the expatriate press.
As Bill says, we've got a very strong personal relationship, but we're
also two of the closest allies in international security terms as
well, and therefore coming to the Pentagon we're looking at a very
dangerous world and how best we two countries, as part of NATO and as
part of a growing international security community, can get to grips
with the challenges that face our people.
So, yes, it's past the first anniversary, and anniversaries are very
important for politicians. They're one further step along the road to
our own positions in our jobs here as well. But a personal and
country-to-country friendship has been consolidated here today, and
I'm very glad to be here.
Q: Mr. Secretary, the Minister told us this morning that you all
agreed to cooperate on the chem-bio defense with your military,
perhaps in stockpiling things and research. Could you go into a bit of
detail on what you're talking about. Perhaps stockpiling protective
suits?
A: (COHEN): We're going to explore a variety of ways in which we can
cooperate. It would be developing protective equipment, it would
involve devising and cooperating as far as developing vaccines. It
would involve developing cooperative measures as far as the sharing of
intelligence. It would cut across a wide variety of areas that are
going to be required if we are going to effectively be able to cope
with the threat of weapons of mass destruction and chemical and
biological weapons. These are just some of the areas that we're
currently exploring.
A: (ROBERTSON): I think the standoff between Iraq and the United
Nations earlier this year brought home to many people just how deadly
and how real the threat from chemical and biological weapons actually
is. I think people rightly expect their governments to be in the
forefront of research into the vaccines that are available just now,
and making sure we've got adequate stocks of them; researching whether
further vaccines can be made available that are safe and would give
protection to our troops and to the wider population. Whether there
are systems of detection that can also be increased in number but made
much more effective. We're already looking at that carefully.
As the two countries that were at the forefront of defending the
authority and integrity of the UN earlier this year, we want to make
sure that we learned the lessons of that period. Just as the UNSCOM
Chairman this morning will be seeing, I'm sure, that Iraq has still to
provide the evidence to show that it has destroyed its capability in
this area, then so long as we cannot trust them, we must keep our
vigilance up. That is why the cooperation between our two countries in
this area is absolutely vital. It's not just a desirable add-on, it is
critically important to the security of people in the Middle East, but
also in the wider international community.
Q: For both of you gentlemen, Kosovo. There's been an escalation over
the weekend in the violence in Kosovo. I believe our President has
said that it must not become another Bosnia. The Kosovars are ready to
quit the peace process. At least as of Friday they were pretty
frustrated. I would ask you gentlemen, can NATO deploy into Bosnia?
Should NATO deploy? What is the British view of the seriousness of
this situation? For both of you.
A: (ROBERTSON): The British position is the same as the Americans',
and that is that this is an important and serious situation that we
have seen developing. That Slobodan Milosevic must be under no
illusions that the international community expect him to deal with
this resolutely, nonviolently, and diplomatically, and that we will
keep up the pressure to make sure that that takes place. The NATO
military authorities have been taxed by the Foreign Ministers last
week with looking at all of the options that are involved in it. The
Defense Ministers will be meeting in Brussels next Thursday and Friday
as well.
We treat this matter with great seriousness, and the Partnership for
Peace exercises that are scheduled for Albania and Macedonia on the
borders of Kosovo are designed to show that we are going beyond mere
declarations and that the message to Milosevic is deal with this
issue, and to deal with it nonviolently.
Q:  Do you favor deployment of British troops in Kosovo, per se?
A: (ROBERTSON): That is something that is being dealt with on a NATO
basis. All of these options are being looked at and examined. But
we've got to be practical about what we do here.
The border between Albania and Kosovo looks like a line on a map, but
in fact it's 6,000 feet high mountains that make up that border. At
the present moment it would be to the advantage of Milosevic and
Kosovo if there was to be a complete blockade put on the mountain
passes that are involved there.
So we must be careful in making sure that our message is strong and is
robust and is practical. That is why these very substantial
Partnership for Peace exercises have been organized, to make sure that
that message goes across and the Defense Ministers will look again at
what evidence and assessment has been made when we meet in Brussels.
Q: There are reports that NATO is studying the possibility of
deploying something like 23,000 troops, just studying. But it appears
at least to me that they're talking about deploying these next door to
Kosovo, not in Kosovo. A, what are the odds that this would actually
occur? And B, is that likely to be effective even if it does occur?
A: (COHEN): You indicated that it's a study. NATO has been tasked to
study a variety of options. There should be no declaration in terms of
what the intent is going to be or the result is going to be. It's
required and incumbent upon us to examine what options would be
available should military force be required. So I don't think that one
should draw any conclusions from the study itself, but rather this is
prudent exploration on the part of the NATO countries, and we would be
abdicating our responsibility if we simply ignored it.
So there is a study under way to find out what the options are and
then there will be an assessment made in terms of its desirability,
its feasibility, and effectiveness. Until that study is completed,
until it's been examined and reexamined, then I think it would be
rather counterproductive to say what is going to take place.
A: (ROBERTSON): The problem in Kosovo comes from Belgrade and from
Slobodan Milosevic because it is his policy there that is causing the
immediate crisis there. Therefore a diplomatic solution to this
problem has got to be found. The views of the Kosovar Albanians have
got to taken into account in any eventual outcome. Therefore the
pressure on Belgrade will be maintained to take the right direction
about the future of Kosovo. But an examination of the military options
does not mean to say that we are wedded to any of these options at the
moment.
Q: For both of you gentlemen on India/Pakistan, the nuclear face-off.
What should be done? Should they be cajoled or bullied or what? And
what can be done about Kashmir, which seems to be at the heart of the
problem? What concrete steps could be taken by the United States,
Britain and other countries to ease the Kashmir...
A: (COHEN): As you know, there are going to be meetings this week and
next week to examine exactly what options are available, but I think
the world community has expressed itself in condemning what both India
and Pakistan have done. They have, in fact, reversed the current of
events, namely that you have seen a strong current flowing in the
direction of nuclear non-proliferation, of nuclear disarmament, of
countries declaring themselves to be nuclear free and abdicating any
desire whatsoever to develop and deploy nuclear weapons. So if you
look at what has taken place with Ukraine, with Belarus, with
Kazakhstan, with South Africa, with Brazil, with Argentina, these two
countries now have reversed that trend and I think they should expect
that the world would condemn what they have done and we should try to
find ways, obviously, of curbing any further tensions that could be
developed. We have said before that we want to see them lower the
rhetoric, lower the tensions, start talking in a more rational manner.
But also to stop the production of fissile material, to agree to a
comprehensive test ban treaty, to sign up to that. To find ways in
which we can deal with the issue of Kashmir. I know that India, for
example, would object and does object to any internationalization of
that issue, but frankly, I think it's something that has to be on the
agenda for a variety of countries to sit down and talk about ways in
which we can reduce tensions in that area.
But I think in the short term, obviously the United States is going to
take some action because it's required to take action as far as the
imposition of sanctions, and then to also indicate to these two
countries that they have to find ways in which to reduce the tensions,
that we have to work cooperatively to facilitate that.
Q:  What can be done about Kashmir, to ease the tensions there?
A: (COHEN): We first have to start talking about Kashmir and seeing
what options are available in terms of reducing the tensions. As I've
indicated before, India has strongly objected to any kind of
international consideration of that issue. I think it has to be on the
agenda.
A: (ROBERTSON): The P-5, the Permanent 5 Foreign Ministers are meeting
tomorrow in Geneva, and next week in London the Foreign Ministers of
the G-8 are going to be meeting. This sort of (inaudible) of numbers
and letters seem to be associated together. But, what is important is
that there is a multinational response to the India/Pakistan
situation, know that the tests have taken place, and that we move
forward to make sure that they reenter the comprehensive test ban
regime, and, as Secretary Cohen says, that they deal with fissile
material. We make sure that the pressure is on to do all of these
things. So a combination of sanctions, some of which have already been
announced and some of which will no doubt be considered by the
countries both at tomorrow's meeting and next week's meeting, combined
with a movement forward to try and bring these two countries back into
the regime which, as Bill says, has produced dividends in the past.
It's going to be clear where the priority... But operating on a
multinational basis is clearly part of the outcome that we're all
looking for.
Q: Closer to home, Mr. Secretary, the President today declared MFN
status for China. Do you have any reaction to that?
A: (COHEN): I strongly favor that. During my years in the Senate I
favored the extension of most-favored-nation status which is normal
trading status with China. I believe it's important for us to continue
that policy, and I strongly endorse what the President has declared.
I'm hoping that Congress will also endorse that.
Q: How will that affect mil-to-mil relations between the two
countries?
A: (COHEN): Our military-to-military relationship is good. We continue
to build upon the relationship that was started certainly under
Secretary Perry which I have followed up with my own visits to China.
We have secured by way of that military-to-military cooperation
efforts on the part of certainly the Chinese to stop the flow of
nuclear technology going to Iran, to pledge not to convey any
anti-ship cruise missiles, the C-801s, 802s, and cooperate in a
variety of ways to lessen tensions in the Gulf region.
In addition to that, we have established these contacts whereby we're
going to share our expertise and how we cope with humanitarian type of
exercises, and hopefully we will build upon that with port visits and
other types of programs to build a strong relationship in the future.
So our military-to-military contacts will continue, and they will be
built upon.
Q: Back to Kosovo, is it fair or accurate to say that the Clinton
Administration is less willing to get militarily involved in that
situation? And if so, why? And for the Defense Minister, it sounded a
moment ago as if you suggested there could be some kind of economic or
military blockade on Kosovo. Is that under active consideration? If
so, how would that be done? Who would carry it out?
A: (COHEN): With respect to the first question, it's always, I think,
important to try to resolve issues like this diplomatically, to use
whatever levers we have from economic to diplomatic trade, whatever
levers are available before looking to a military options.
Is the Administration reluctant to exercise a military option?
Obviously this is something that requires a multinational approach.
The United States is not eager under these circumstances or others to
be the sole power who's going to exercise military options. Secondly,
you have to be very clear on what the mission is. Before you can even
talk about exercising a military option you have to be very clear on
what the mission is, how defined it is, how realistic it is,
achievable, and what the risks are involved and what would be the
so-called exit strategy out of any military operation. So there is
that kind of calculation that would go into any area.
We have learned, obviously, from our experience in Bosnia. There was a
peace established in Bosnia. We are maintaining that peace. So we will
look for ways in which we can help resolve this issue diplomatically
and turn to military options not as a first resort, but a last resort.
A: (ROBERTSON): Just as the problem has been created in Kosovo by Mr.
Milosevic, then the problem can be solved by Mr. Milosevic. There are
a whole number of factors that will change his mind about what he's
doing at the present moment in that part of the world. Some of them
will be a military calculation; some of it will be a democratic
calculation. After all, there was a stinging rebuke from Montenegro at
the weekend through the ballot box on his present policy. And partly,
it will be economic because Serbia is an economic basket case at the
moment. Further sanctions or the reinforcement of existing sanctions
will undoubtedly put pressure on the civil population and on
Milosevic's regime. So diplomatically and in every other way we've got
to try and change his mind about the approach that he is taking, the
attitude he is taking in Kosovo, and we will do that. As long as we
keep all of these things working in the same direction, he will get
one unmistakable signal, and we intend to change his mind.
Q: Does that, as suggested earlier, include consideration for some
kind of military blockade?
A: (ROBERTSON): NATO is looking at all of the military options and at
their practicality and at their efficacy. And it is for NATO to do
that. NATO is the military organization that unites us all together.
There is a Contact Group of nations that includes Russia that is
involved with the diplomatic process at the present moment, and all of
the contact, including the Russians, are calling on Milosevic to
change his approach in Kosovo.
So we will use every mechanism that is available and is practical to
change the view of the Belgrade government and its actions against the
Kosovars at the present moment.
Thank you.
(End transcript)