David Miliband's interview with Adam Boulton, 3 April 2008
TRANSCRIPT
Programme(s): Sky News
Date & time: Thursday, 3rd April 2008 19.01
Subject/Interviewee: Interview - David Miliband
Steve Dixon, Presenter: This is Sky News at seven. And, first tonight, NATO leaders have pledged their firm and shared long-term commitment to peacekeeping in Afghanistan. At the summit in Bucharest, France promised to send 700 troops and Canada withdrew a threat to pull out its 2½ thousand forces.
Well, Sky's political editor, Adam Boulton, is in the Romanian capital for us tonight.
Adam?
Adam Boulton, Political Editor: Yes, indeed. They've been meeting all afternoon on the subject of Afghanistan. Amongst those present, the President of Afghanistan, Mr Karzai. And, in total, according to the British Prime Minister, more than 48 organisations around the table.
Well, with me is the British Foreign Secretary, David Miliband.
Mr Miliband, is what's been agreed here on Afghanistan actually going to make any difference on the ground?
David Miliband, Foreign Secretary: I think it is significant. I've just come from a private meeting with Hamid Karzai, the President of Afghanistan, with Gordon Brown, and he certainly thinks it's going to make a difference. In three ways: first of all, more international troops, that's clear; secondly, a stronger civilian effort to balance those troop numbers, because in the end the military can't provide a solution to this. It needs economic and political development; and, third, a very clear message that the Afghan government also needs to raise its game, and wants to. And you heard that... President Karzai has himself announced that the Afghan forces will take control of Kabul from the French from the summer. So, I think those are important developments that are useful in terms of taking forward the argument in Afghanistan itself.
AB: 47,000 NATO personnel I think there now, including 7,000 Britons. What sort of levels are we talking about that troop level going up to?
DM: Well, I don't think that in percentage terms you're going to see massive increases in foreign troops, because the absolute key is to increase the size of the Afghan army. We're not there to create a colony. We're there to build up the Afghan army, which was hardly anything five years ago; it's now 49,000 troops. They've got a target of 80,000 by 2010. That is the key variable, building up the capacity of Afghans to run their own society.
AB: Yeah, this is going to be a long-term commitment, isn't it?
DM: It's a very long-term commitment, especially on the economic side. And, remember, this is the 174th poorest country in the world out of 178 in the World Development Index. So, it's a very long-term development commitment. On the security side, there's a big training job to be done. But, there's also combat. We've seen our own forces there; I've met them, you've seen them on the TV screens. They're engaging with the Taliban in a very tough fight, but it's one that they're winning. And I think we've got to protect the space that they have created by making sure that the Afghan government develops the local administrative structures that give Afghans confidence that this time there isn't going to be a reversal.
AB: We still have this odd situation though, don't we, that more than 40 countries involved - all of NATO involved - and yet it's only four countries, one of which is Britain, that appear to be prepared to, well, put it bluntly, to lose lives to fright-... fight on the front line. I mean, that doesn't say much for NATO, does it?
DM: Well, you've certainly got a scale of commitment from Britain, America, now France; the Canadians, very strong; the Dutch, strong; the Australian Prime Minister is strong. But it's certainly true that it's not all 40 that have got their troops in the toughest areas. But, I think the French decision is important. I mean, it shows a commitment, admittedly in 2008, that - after a few years - of the French recognising the importance of this. President Sarkozy said in London last week that we couldn't afford to lose. And I think the fact that there are 40-odd countries here thinking about the level of their commitment is something that we should build on.
AB: What about the Russian role? President Putin is coming here. Suggestions that they might actually want to assist in Afghanistan after their own very bitter experiences as the Soviet Union.
DM: I mean, it's quite an incredible thought really, isn't it, in two senses: one, now the Russians back in Afghanistan; and, secondly, Russians working with NATO in Afghanistan. But what I think that makes clear is that the Russians can see the danger if Afghanistan again becomes an incubator of Taliban/Al Qaeda terrorism. We'll see what President Putin says, I don't know, but I think the fact that NATO is saying we want to work with you on this common challenge is right because it recognises that we have common interests with the Russian Federation.
AB: You've also been staying in touch with the situation in Zimbabwe. Is it your view now that we are seeing the end game for President Robert Mugabe?
DM: Well, I think that... obviously I've been on the phone with our High Commissioner, with our Ambassador to Harare today. I don't want to say anything that is going to get in the way of developments that are under way in Zimbabwe. The truth is no one yet knows about the final decisions of the Zimbabwe Election Commission or of Robert Mugabe himself. Our consistent demand is that the results that have been published in 9,400 polling stations are published for the presidential election, because it's important the result comes out clear and soon.
AB: Do you think it would be helpful if there was a rerun of the presidential election?
DM: I think it would only be helpful to rerun the election if no one has won. If, in fact, we're clear who has won then in fact that's the will of the Afghan-... of the Zimbabwean people and that needs to become clear.
AB: And if Robert Mugabe does step down, does Britain stand ready to help the people of Zimbabwe?
DM: Well, British people and the Government of Britain have stood by the people of Zimbabwe during their national trauma over the last 10 or 15 years. We're still putting in about £50m a year of aid. And I made clear in the House of Commons yesterday that we were absolutely determined to stand by the people of Zimbabwe to conclude the trauma and then to rebuild.
AB: Would some of the other countries here come in and help as well, do you think?
DM: Well, I think it's really striking. I've had conversations with foreign ministers today. They've all asked me about Zimbabwe. They recognise that the pain that is being suffered by people in Zimbabwe and the effects on the neighbouring countries is a challenge to the whole international community, and Britain won't find itself alone in helping to... the people of Zimbabwe to build a way out of the ashes.
AB: But do they, finally, see it to a certain extent as Britain's colonial legacy, if you like, up to Britain to help sort out?
DM: No, I don't think so. I think what people recognise is that 27, 28 years ago Britain oversaw the independence of Zimbabwe, Rhodesia becoming Zimbabwe, and the choices that have been made by Robert Mugabe have plunged Zimbabwe in to the chaos that it has descended in to. That's not Britain's fault and no one is pointing the finger at us. Nor is anyone saying that somehow we have sole responsibility for rebuilding. It's got to be built out of southern Africa and the alliance of the states there. But it needs... it's a development need that the whole community, the whole international community, needs to respond to.
AB: But, right now, a moment of hope?
DM: It's a moment of opportunity, I think.
AB: Thank you very much indeed.
DM: Thank you.
AB: There's the British Foreign Secretary. And, of course, tomorrow NATO business will shift to that visit here by President Putin.
Back to you.
Steve Dixon: Okay, Adam in Bucharest, thank you.
Ends
Programme(s): Sky News
Date & time: Thursday, 3rd April 2008 19.01
Subject/Interviewee: Interview - David Miliband
Steve Dixon, Presenter: This is Sky News at seven. And, first tonight, NATO leaders have pledged their firm and shared long-term commitment to peacekeeping in Afghanistan. At the summit in Bucharest, France promised to send 700 troops and Canada withdrew a threat to pull out its 2½ thousand forces.
Well, Sky's political editor, Adam Boulton, is in the Romanian capital for us tonight.
Adam?
Adam Boulton, Political Editor: Yes, indeed. They've been meeting all afternoon on the subject of Afghanistan. Amongst those present, the President of Afghanistan, Mr Karzai. And, in total, according to the British Prime Minister, more than 48 organisations around the table.
Well, with me is the British Foreign Secretary, David Miliband.
Mr Miliband, is what's been agreed here on Afghanistan actually going to make any difference on the ground?
David Miliband, Foreign Secretary: I think it is significant. I've just come from a private meeting with Hamid Karzai, the President of Afghanistan, with Gordon Brown, and he certainly thinks it's going to make a difference. In three ways: first of all, more international troops, that's clear; secondly, a stronger civilian effort to balance those troop numbers, because in the end the military can't provide a solution to this. It needs economic and political development; and, third, a very clear message that the Afghan government also needs to raise its game, and wants to. And you heard that... President Karzai has himself announced that the Afghan forces will take control of Kabul from the French from the summer. So, I think those are important developments that are useful in terms of taking forward the argument in Afghanistan itself.
AB: 47,000 NATO personnel I think there now, including 7,000 Britons. What sort of levels are we talking about that troop level going up to?
DM: Well, I don't think that in percentage terms you're going to see massive increases in foreign troops, because the absolute key is to increase the size of the Afghan army. We're not there to create a colony. We're there to build up the Afghan army, which was hardly anything five years ago; it's now 49,000 troops. They've got a target of 80,000 by 2010. That is the key variable, building up the capacity of Afghans to run their own society.
AB: Yeah, this is going to be a long-term commitment, isn't it?
DM: It's a very long-term commitment, especially on the economic side. And, remember, this is the 174th poorest country in the world out of 178 in the World Development Index. So, it's a very long-term development commitment. On the security side, there's a big training job to be done. But, there's also combat. We've seen our own forces there; I've met them, you've seen them on the TV screens. They're engaging with the Taliban in a very tough fight, but it's one that they're winning. And I think we've got to protect the space that they have created by making sure that the Afghan government develops the local administrative structures that give Afghans confidence that this time there isn't going to be a reversal.
AB: We still have this odd situation though, don't we, that more than 40 countries involved - all of NATO involved - and yet it's only four countries, one of which is Britain, that appear to be prepared to, well, put it bluntly, to lose lives to fright-... fight on the front line. I mean, that doesn't say much for NATO, does it?
DM: Well, you've certainly got a scale of commitment from Britain, America, now France; the Canadians, very strong; the Dutch, strong; the Australian Prime Minister is strong. But it's certainly true that it's not all 40 that have got their troops in the toughest areas. But, I think the French decision is important. I mean, it shows a commitment, admittedly in 2008, that - after a few years - of the French recognising the importance of this. President Sarkozy said in London last week that we couldn't afford to lose. And I think the fact that there are 40-odd countries here thinking about the level of their commitment is something that we should build on.
AB: What about the Russian role? President Putin is coming here. Suggestions that they might actually want to assist in Afghanistan after their own very bitter experiences as the Soviet Union.
DM: I mean, it's quite an incredible thought really, isn't it, in two senses: one, now the Russians back in Afghanistan; and, secondly, Russians working with NATO in Afghanistan. But what I think that makes clear is that the Russians can see the danger if Afghanistan again becomes an incubator of Taliban/Al Qaeda terrorism. We'll see what President Putin says, I don't know, but I think the fact that NATO is saying we want to work with you on this common challenge is right because it recognises that we have common interests with the Russian Federation.
AB: You've also been staying in touch with the situation in Zimbabwe. Is it your view now that we are seeing the end game for President Robert Mugabe?
DM: Well, I think that... obviously I've been on the phone with our High Commissioner, with our Ambassador to Harare today. I don't want to say anything that is going to get in the way of developments that are under way in Zimbabwe. The truth is no one yet knows about the final decisions of the Zimbabwe Election Commission or of Robert Mugabe himself. Our consistent demand is that the results that have been published in 9,400 polling stations are published for the presidential election, because it's important the result comes out clear and soon.
AB: Do you think it would be helpful if there was a rerun of the presidential election?
DM: I think it would only be helpful to rerun the election if no one has won. If, in fact, we're clear who has won then in fact that's the will of the Afghan-... of the Zimbabwean people and that needs to become clear.
AB: And if Robert Mugabe does step down, does Britain stand ready to help the people of Zimbabwe?
DM: Well, British people and the Government of Britain have stood by the people of Zimbabwe during their national trauma over the last 10 or 15 years. We're still putting in about £50m a year of aid. And I made clear in the House of Commons yesterday that we were absolutely determined to stand by the people of Zimbabwe to conclude the trauma and then to rebuild.
AB: Would some of the other countries here come in and help as well, do you think?
DM: Well, I think it's really striking. I've had conversations with foreign ministers today. They've all asked me about Zimbabwe. They recognise that the pain that is being suffered by people in Zimbabwe and the effects on the neighbouring countries is a challenge to the whole international community, and Britain won't find itself alone in helping to... the people of Zimbabwe to build a way out of the ashes.
AB: But do they, finally, see it to a certain extent as Britain's colonial legacy, if you like, up to Britain to help sort out?
DM: No, I don't think so. I think what people recognise is that 27, 28 years ago Britain oversaw the independence of Zimbabwe, Rhodesia becoming Zimbabwe, and the choices that have been made by Robert Mugabe have plunged Zimbabwe in to the chaos that it has descended in to. That's not Britain's fault and no one is pointing the finger at us. Nor is anyone saying that somehow we have sole responsibility for rebuilding. It's got to be built out of southern Africa and the alliance of the states there. But it needs... it's a development need that the whole community, the whole international community, needs to respond to.
AB: But, right now, a moment of hope?
DM: It's a moment of opportunity, I think.
AB: Thank you very much indeed.
DM: Thank you.
AB: There's the British Foreign Secretary. And, of course, tomorrow NATO business will shift to that visit here by President Putin.
Back to you.
Steve Dixon: Okay, Adam in Bucharest, thank you.
Ends
