OANA LUNGESCU: The next question goes to Jacques Hubert-Rodier, from Les Echos.
JACQUES HUBERT-RODIER: Thank you to take my question and good evening. Well, my question is about Australia and it’s not about the wine of Australia, that I suspect is very good, but I was wondering what NATO will do in front of a very aggressive attitude of China toward Australia? And I had the feeling that the fake photo, the fake image, of an Australian soldier in Afghanistan was an indirect attack against all the Allies. What was your reactions to that?
JENS STOLTENBERG: I would like to say that in general, we appreciate very much the close partnership with Australia and just the fact that we had this meeting today is an example of how NATO Allies work more and more closely together with also Asia-Pacific partners. This meeting was, you know, with Australia, New Zealand, Japan, South Korea, but also with European partners, Finland and Sweden and the High Representative, Josep Borrell of the European Union.
And I think that for NATO, it is of increasing importance, also when we address the consequences of the rise of China, to work even more closely with a partner like Australia. And they appreciate that, we appreciate that. And I also had the privilege of visiting Australia and we’re looking into how we can do more together.
Then, on the specific issue you mentioned, the issue of Chinese propaganda and disinformation was raised during the meeting. At the same time, we are all aware of these very serious allegations, but I am absolutely confident that the Australian authorities will make sure that those who are responsible will be held accountable.
OANA LUNGESCU: For the next question, we go to Robert Lupitu from Calea Europeana.
ROBERT LUPITU [Calea Europeana]: Good evening.Thank you so much. Mr Secretary General, two . . . two questions. In the experts’ report, one of the recommendations was to further strengthen NATO’s presence in the Eastern flank and also in the Black Sea, considering Russia’s military build-up in Crimea and so on. So my question to is: would you consider to propose an increase of NATO’s presence in the Black Sea part of the eastern flank? And the second question: Romania has proposed yesterday, or has said its intention to host a NATO Resilience Centre. What would be the role of this . . . of this centre? Thank you so much.
JENS STOLTENBERG: In general I can say that, for NATO, resilience is of great importance. And one of the issues we actually discussed today was the importance of strengthening further, our resilience to protect our critical infrastructure, telecommunications, continuation of government, all the other parts of resilience, because we know that the only way to have strong defence is to also have strong societies. And the importance of resilience has just increased in the light of the fact that we now are addressing the consequences of the rise of China – China investing heavily in our critical infrastructure – and we need to assess the security consequences of that and make sure that we have safe and secure infrastructure and that we are able to uphold the necessary levels of resilience.
So, resilience has been, for a long time, an important issue for NATO. We agreed a resilience pledge at our summit in Warsaw in 2016, but this is something we now are stepping up, doing even more, because we all realise the huge importance of resilience in the light of cyber, hybrid challenges, but also in the light of the rise of China.
NATO has demonstrated the ability to adapt when the world is changing. So after the illegal annexation of Crimea, we decided to increase our military presence in the eastern part of the Alliance, both with Tailored Forward Presence in Romania, air policing; we have a brigade, training brigade there. We have other kinds of presence, but also with the battlegroups deployed in the Baltic region, in the two Baltic countries and Poland, high-readiness, more exercises.
We will constantly assess to further adjust this presence. And one of my objectives with NATO 2030 is to make sure that NATO remains a strong military Alliance in light of new threats and new challenges. And, therefore, I also welcome the fact that the Allies are committed to continue to invest in defence. And I plan to put forward a few strategic-level recommendations for heads of state and government when they meet next year, because I strongly believe that NATO should make sure that we continue to be a strong military Alliance - that will strengthen our Alliance as a political platform and also that we have a more global approach.
OANA LUNGESCU: And the next question goes to Teri Schultz from NPR/Deutsche Welle.
TERI SCHULTZ [NPR/Deutsche Welle] Hello, thank you very much. I wanted to go back to Afghanistan for a moment. And, Mr Secretary General, I understand that this is a big step getting to today where they can at least start forwarding the agenda for the peace talks. But given how long it’s taken to get to this point, do you feel that the timeline that was laid out initially, where troops could actually be coming . . . be pulled out because there is stability on the ground, is that realistic at all anymore? And would you . . . would you think that it’s possible to . . . to bring NATO troops home, as you expect to decide in February, if the peace talks are ongoing? And certainly if they’re not? And finally, did Secretary Pompeo, was he able to assure Allies that there would not be a move, as long as . . . at least as long as the Trump administration is in power, to bring home this very crucial element of enablers, which allow the rest of the NATO troops to stay there? We heard from some . . . some Allies that this . . . we’re really at the baseline number now; they can manage as it is with the 2,500 American troops, but anything below that would be dangerous for everyone. Thanks.
JENS STOLTENBERG: The US has stated several times, and also Secretary Pompeo has stated, and also Acting Secretary of Defence Miller has stated clearly that the US will, despite the drawdown, continue to provide the enablers for the rest of the NATO mission.
And our military commanders have also assured me that, with those enablers and the clear commitment of the United States, we can continue the Mission. And we will continue the Mission with its current configuration with, for instance, the German-led base, presence, in the north and the Italian-led presence in the west, and, of course, everything we do, for instance, in Kabul and other places.
So we will continue our Train, Assist and Advise Mission in Afghanistan. And as you know, now, more than half of the troops in Afghanistan are coming from European Allies and partner nations, they are non-US troops.
Then we will make an assessment of the conditions of the progress within the peace process by the defence ministerial meeting in February. And then we have to decide. And it’s too early to say how the world will look like, how the situation in Afghanistan and in the peace talks in Doha, where they will be, how far have we been able to get? So that’s exactly why we will not make that decision today. But when we have better information, have seen how things have developed, then we will assess, coordinate and make decisions together at the February defence ministerial meeting.
So, therefore, I think it will not be wise if I started to speculate about the likelihood of different outcomes. What I can say is that the agreement today is . . . you can discuss whether it’s a big or a small step, but the important thing is that it’s the first step. It’s the first time actually Taliban and the Afghan government are able to sign a document agreeing on the framework, the modalities for negotiations, addressing a long-term peaceful solution, how to reach peace in Afghanistan. And also then, of course, as a first step to reach that, to agree on a comprehensive ceasefire.
I’m not underestimating the difficulties and the risks for setbacks and disappointments as we move forward, but I’m absolutely certain that the only way is the ongoing intra-Afghan negotiations. And, therefore, we support them, knowing that it will be difficult, fragile, but it is the only option for all of those who want peace in Afghanistan.
OANA LUNGESCU: And for the last question, as I’m afraid we’re running out of time, we’ll go to Levan Akhalaia from Georgian Public Broadcaster.
LEVAN AKHALAIA [Georgian Public Broadcaster]: Thank you. Secretary General, I want to ask you about the … [inaudible] situation that you mentioned. I want to have more details about this. And one more question about NATO 2030 and especially about the decision-making process. Does it mean that … [inaudible] closer to NATO, when it doesn’t meet . . . when it doesn’t meet the … [inaudible ] of all the members of NATO?
https:/
JENS STOLTENBERG: It was a bit hard to understand because of the quality of the sound, all the details. But my understanding is that it was about what more NATO can do for Georgia and also whether the report will change anything, also related to how we make decisions. Consensus is the core of our Alliance. It will continue to be the core of our Alliance. And I think it’s obvious that decisions on enlargement is something that needs the support from all Allies.
Then we are, as I said, stepping up our support. Many Allies confirmed during the meeting today that they are looking into what more they can do, both within the NATO framework, but also bilaterally. And I encourage them to provide more and therefore I also agree that we have agreed on this renewed Substantial Package which is the tool we use to provide practical support for Georgia.
OANA LUNGESCU: Thank you very much, this concludes this press conference. Thank you.
JACQUES HUBERT-RODIER: Thank you to take my question and good evening. Well, my question is about Australia and it’s not about the wine of Australia, that I suspect is very good, but I was wondering what NATO will do in front of a very aggressive attitude of China toward Australia? And I had the feeling that the fake photo, the fake image, of an Australian soldier in Afghanistan was an indirect attack against all the Allies. What was your reactions to that?
JENS STOLTENBERG: I would like to say that in general, we appreciate very much the close partnership with Australia and just the fact that we had this meeting today is an example of how NATO Allies work more and more closely together with also Asia-Pacific partners. This meeting was, you know, with Australia, New Zealand, Japan, South Korea, but also with European partners, Finland and Sweden and the High Representative, Josep Borrell of the European Union.
And I think that for NATO, it is of increasing importance, also when we address the consequences of the rise of China, to work even more closely with a partner like Australia. And they appreciate that, we appreciate that. And I also had the privilege of visiting Australia and we’re looking into how we can do more together.
Then, on the specific issue you mentioned, the issue of Chinese propaganda and disinformation was raised during the meeting. At the same time, we are all aware of these very serious allegations, but I am absolutely confident that the Australian authorities will make sure that those who are responsible will be held accountable.
OANA LUNGESCU: For the next question, we go to Robert Lupitu from Calea Europeana.
ROBERT LUPITU [Calea Europeana]: Good evening.Thank you so much. Mr Secretary General, two . . . two questions. In the experts’ report, one of the recommendations was to further strengthen NATO’s presence in the Eastern flank and also in the Black Sea, considering Russia’s military build-up in Crimea and so on. So my question to is: would you consider to propose an increase of NATO’s presence in the Black Sea part of the eastern flank? And the second question: Romania has proposed yesterday, or has said its intention to host a NATO Resilience Centre. What would be the role of this . . . of this centre? Thank you so much.
JENS STOLTENBERG: In general I can say that, for NATO, resilience is of great importance. And one of the issues we actually discussed today was the importance of strengthening further, our resilience to protect our critical infrastructure, telecommunications, continuation of government, all the other parts of resilience, because we know that the only way to have strong defence is to also have strong societies. And the importance of resilience has just increased in the light of the fact that we now are addressing the consequences of the rise of China – China investing heavily in our critical infrastructure – and we need to assess the security consequences of that and make sure that we have safe and secure infrastructure and that we are able to uphold the necessary levels of resilience.
So, resilience has been, for a long time, an important issue for NATO. We agreed a resilience pledge at our summit in Warsaw in 2016, but this is something we now are stepping up, doing even more, because we all realise the huge importance of resilience in the light of cyber, hybrid challenges, but also in the light of the rise of China.
NATO has demonstrated the ability to adapt when the world is changing. So after the illegal annexation of Crimea, we decided to increase our military presence in the eastern part of the Alliance, both with Tailored Forward Presence in Romania, air policing; we have a brigade, training brigade there. We have other kinds of presence, but also with the battlegroups deployed in the Baltic region, in the two Baltic countries and Poland, high-readiness, more exercises.
We will constantly assess to further adjust this presence. And one of my objectives with NATO 2030 is to make sure that NATO remains a strong military Alliance in light of new threats and new challenges. And, therefore, I also welcome the fact that the Allies are committed to continue to invest in defence. And I plan to put forward a few strategic-level recommendations for heads of state and government when they meet next year, because I strongly believe that NATO should make sure that we continue to be a strong military Alliance - that will strengthen our Alliance as a political platform and also that we have a more global approach.
OANA LUNGESCU: And the next question goes to Teri Schultz from NPR/Deutsche Welle.
TERI SCHULTZ [NPR/Deutsche Welle] Hello, thank you very much. I wanted to go back to Afghanistan for a moment. And, Mr Secretary General, I understand that this is a big step getting to today where they can at least start forwarding the agenda for the peace talks. But given how long it’s taken to get to this point, do you feel that the timeline that was laid out initially, where troops could actually be coming . . . be pulled out because there is stability on the ground, is that realistic at all anymore? And would you . . . would you think that it’s possible to . . . to bring NATO troops home, as you expect to decide in February, if the peace talks are ongoing? And certainly if they’re not? And finally, did Secretary Pompeo, was he able to assure Allies that there would not be a move, as long as . . . at least as long as the Trump administration is in power, to bring home this very crucial element of enablers, which allow the rest of the NATO troops to stay there? We heard from some . . . some Allies that this . . . we’re really at the baseline number now; they can manage as it is with the 2,500 American troops, but anything below that would be dangerous for everyone. Thanks.
JENS STOLTENBERG: The US has stated several times, and also Secretary Pompeo has stated, and also Acting Secretary of Defence Miller has stated clearly that the US will, despite the drawdown, continue to provide the enablers for the rest of the NATO mission.
And our military commanders have also assured me that, with those enablers and the clear commitment of the United States, we can continue the Mission. And we will continue the Mission with its current configuration with, for instance, the German-led base, presence, in the north and the Italian-led presence in the west, and, of course, everything we do, for instance, in Kabul and other places.
So we will continue our Train, Assist and Advise Mission in Afghanistan. And as you know, now, more than half of the troops in Afghanistan are coming from European Allies and partner nations, they are non-US troops.
Then we will make an assessment of the conditions of the progress within the peace process by the defence ministerial meeting in February. And then we have to decide. And it’s too early to say how the world will look like, how the situation in Afghanistan and in the peace talks in Doha, where they will be, how far have we been able to get? So that’s exactly why we will not make that decision today. But when we have better information, have seen how things have developed, then we will assess, coordinate and make decisions together at the February defence ministerial meeting.
So, therefore, I think it will not be wise if I started to speculate about the likelihood of different outcomes. What I can say is that the agreement today is . . . you can discuss whether it’s a big or a small step, but the important thing is that it’s the first step. It’s the first time actually Taliban and the Afghan government are able to sign a document agreeing on the framework, the modalities for negotiations, addressing a long-term peaceful solution, how to reach peace in Afghanistan. And also then, of course, as a first step to reach that, to agree on a comprehensive ceasefire.
I’m not underestimating the difficulties and the risks for setbacks and disappointments as we move forward, but I’m absolutely certain that the only way is the ongoing intra-Afghan negotiations. And, therefore, we support them, knowing that it will be difficult, fragile, but it is the only option for all of those who want peace in Afghanistan.
OANA LUNGESCU: And for the last question, as I’m afraid we’re running out of time, we’ll go to Levan Akhalaia from Georgian Public Broadcaster.
LEVAN AKHALAIA [Georgian Public Broadcaster]: Thank you. Secretary General, I want to ask you about the … [inaudible] situation that you mentioned. I want to have more details about this. And one more question about NATO 2030 and especially about the decision-making process. Does it mean that … [inaudible] closer to NATO, when it doesn’t meet . . . when it doesn’t meet the … [inaudible ] of all the members of NATO?
https:/
JENS STOLTENBERG: It was a bit hard to understand because of the quality of the sound, all the details. But my understanding is that it was about what more NATO can do for Georgia and also whether the report will change anything, also related to how we make decisions. Consensus is the core of our Alliance. It will continue to be the core of our Alliance. And I think it’s obvious that decisions on enlargement is something that needs the support from all Allies.
Then we are, as I said, stepping up our support. Many Allies confirmed during the meeting today that they are looking into what more they can do, both within the NATO framework, but also bilaterally. And I encourage them to provide more and therefore I also agree that we have agreed on this renewed Substantial Package which is the tool we use to provide practical support for Georgia.
OANA LUNGESCU: Thank you very much, this concludes this press conference. Thank you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ウィスパリング同時通訳研究会 更新情報
-
最新のアンケート
-
まだ何もありません
-
ウィスパリング同時通訳研究会のメンバーはこんなコミュニティにも参加しています
人気コミュニティランキング
- 1位
- mixi バスケ部
- 37839人
- 2位
- 酒好き
- 170670人
- 3位
- マイミク募集はここで。
- 89534人