Statements by U.S. Officials

Remarks by Undersecretary of Defense for Policy - Douglas Feith - Meeting with the Press at the Embassy

Ankara, February 1, 2005

UNDERSECRETARY FEITH: Good morning. It’s good to meet with you. I had a number of talks yesterday with Turkish officials. We met, as you know, with the Foreign Minister and had a very nice dinner with the Defense Minister last night. I met with General Basbug yesterday. Today, we’ll be meeting with the National Security Advisor. The meetings have been very useful. I think that we had a very good discussion about the significance of what happened in Iraq on Sunday with the elections, and an appreciation of the importance of those elections, not only for progress in the political process in Iraq, but also the potential for improving -- affecting for the good -- the security situation in Iraq. We hope that these elections will help demonstrate the breadth of support for the political process, and will help demonstrate that the future in Iraq is with the building of a representative democratic government. We talked a great deal about the high importance of preserving Iraq’s unity and territorial integrity. This remains a top priority for Turkey and the United States, and we believe it is in the interest of not just the Turks and the Americans, but the Iraqis, too, and people throughout the region. Preserving Iraq’s unity and territorial integrity is a key to the stability and peace of the region. We had discussions about the situation in Kirkuk, and various other things that are going on in Iraq that are of obvious concern and importance to Turkey. We agreed that it is important that all of these matters be addressed and resolved in a way that strengthens the integrity of Iraq and does not tend to the disintegration of Iraq. We dealt with quite a wide range of issues. We discussed Afghanistan, where Turkey has done important work and in a few weeks is about to assume again an important responsibility in taking the lead for the International Security Assistance Force. We discussed NATO’s role in that Afghan mission, and the importance of the NATO alliance in general. Turkey and the United States have, for many decades now, been focused on preserving the strong transatlantic link that is basic to the NATO alliance. We both have an interest in preserving that link and strengthening it, and making sure that it is the key to success for NATO’s mission in the future. We talked about global problems such as terrorism and proliferation, and the opportunities that Turkey and the United States have to work together regarding those matters. We both have strong interests in developing, for example, the Proliferation Security Initiative, reinforcing the efforts to uphold the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty, and do other things that can help make the world a bit safer despite the problems of proliferation terrorism. I will be happy to take some questions.

QUESTION: Sir, in June, you made a statement at the House Armed Services Committee. You talked about the Global Defense Posture. We wonder what the status of that is now in the United States, and whether you raised this issue in your meetings here in Ankara. What are your expectations? You were referring to a need to update international agreements with countries like Turkey and other allies. Can you give us a general view?

UNDERSECRETARY FEITH: As you know, we have been in the last several years looking at the question of how we want to realign our defense posture around the world. When we talk about our defense posture, we are not just talking about bases or facilities. We are also talking about the activities that we conduct with our partner nations. We talk about the legal arrangements that we have with our partners, and our ability to move forces around the world. One of the key points in our posture realignment work is that we do not believe that we can know where we might have to do operations in the future – anything from peace operations to humanitarian operations or combat operations. What we have learned over recent decades is that we find ourselves operating in areas that nobody, even a few months before, anticipated having to operate in. That was true of Iraq back in 1991, and in the Balkans, and Afghanistan. We find that strategic surprise is an inevitable feature of the world. We need to be able to react, to do what we need to do whether it is a kind of peace intervention that was done in Liberia or Haiti, or the kind of military operation that was done in Afghanistan. So we need flexibility, and we are working on putting ourselves in a position where we can work with our friends and allies around the world more effectively. In that regard, we have been talking to countries all around the world -- throughout the NATO alliance, in the Middle East, in Asia, everywhere. The process is one in which we are talking to allies and friends who are sovereign countries, and they are going to make sovereign decisions about the degree to which they want to cooperate with us regarding facilities or activities. In some cases we are talking about posture realignment projects that do not involve facilities at all. They just involve the willingness to train with us or to have a rotational U.S. presence in the country. So I give you that long answer because there is a general misunderstanding that when we talk about posture, a lot of people think all we are talking about is bases, and we are not. The concept of posture is much broader than that. Now with regard to Turkey, we have been discussing various ways that we can work together. Some of the posture discussions relate to dealing with missile threats, and some of them relate to the work that we are doing together in the war on terrorism in Afghanistan, or supplies that are going into Iraq. You asked when this will be done. The answer is that it is a rolling process. We are talking with so many countries around the world, it is going to take years to carry out these talks with various countries. There will never be a point where we will say “The work is done.” It is a rolling process where we make proposals, countries come back with their proposals, and we make decisions. Sometimes the decisions are not actually decisions to do things; they are just decisions to start negotiating about arrangements. It is a long process and it is going to take many years. But at the end of it, we will be in a much stronger position to work with our allies and partners around the world to do the various things that we think we need to do to serve our common purposes.

QUESTION: During your visit here, have you made any progress concerning your request to turn Incirlik into a logistic cargo hub? The Turkish General Staff, who you met with yesterday, said that you came up with that proposal almost six months ago. Secondly, have you already raised the issue of basing for 48 fighters at Incirlik as part of the global force restructuring plan? Thirdly, what kind of cooperation are you going to be involved in with Turkey on the fight against proliferation?

UNDERSECRETARY FEITH: On the cargo hub, we discussed it, and there will be follow-up discussions. We did not get into great detail. But we are interested in talking with Turkey about that to see if there is a sensible arrangement that we can both agree to. On the permanent stationing of the F-16 squadrons, we are not asking for that. On the proliferation cooperation, we think that the Proliferation Security Initiative is a useful, creative, innovative way to deal with the problems of weapons of mass destruction proliferation. The nice thing about the initiative is that there are opportunities for all kinds of countries to step in and take a leadership role in an area that is a peculiar interest to them. We have encouraged Turkey to find where it would like to play a leadership role, and we would be happy to support a Turkish effort like that. We have told them that there are various things that the United States is doing, and we would invite Turkish support with us in the areas of the Proliferation Security Initiative where we are going to be launching activities.

QUESTION: You said you are not asking for the basing of the 48 aircraft. So you gave up on this idea with Turkey, or do you think this issue may come up again?

UNDERSCRETARY FEITH: We are not asking for it. There had been some talk about it. I know there had been some speculation about it, but I am just clarifying the situation.

QUESTION: You were talking about a more flexible deployment of the F-16s at short notice, if necessary, and a more flexible deployment strategy in Turkey.

UNDERSECRETARY FEITH: Well, there could be rotations of airplanes through bases. That has been part of our alliance arrangements for a long time. That is not new.

QUESTION: You have not reached a conclusion on Turkey turning Incirlik into a cargo hub. You have also been refused on deploying the 48 aircraft.

UNDERSECRETARY FEITH: No, I didn’t say that.

QUESTION: I wasn’t quoting you. Because of this need for flexibility, we know that you sought access to Incirlik and other Turkish bases, as far as we are told, concerning the deploying of 48 aircrafts. So this, I think, has been viewed as an infringement of Turkish sovereignty rights. I was told this by a Turkish officer. What I am going to ask you is, can we now talk about an empty strategic partnership with Turkey, because you need Turkish cooperation on various issues concerning Iraq. But we notice that you do not see eye-to-eye with Turkey anymore on the Iraq issue. We have evidence that when it comes to military support -- we saw on March 1 -- you were rejected, then you were looking to use Turkish bases and you were turned down. So can we really talk about a reliable strategic partnership?

UNDERSECRETARY FEITH: I consider that question mischievous. I think you misstated numerous points in your premise. We have a long-standing, close alliance and friendship with Turkey. We cooperate on many issues. There are issues that we find in our dealings with our various allies, Turkey and others, we have disagreements sometimes. That is natural. The reason that our alliance is good and resilient and capable of surviving for decades is that it is an alliance among sovereign countries. When you look at the Warsaw Pact, you did not have a lot of disagreements within the Warsaw Pact, but the Warsaw Pact was pretty brittle. At the first opportunity, the countries that were so-called allies of the Soviet Union broke away, and now we are delighted that they are our allies. But our alliance is not brittle. It does not break, and it is not empty because it is an alliance between sovereign countries who respect each other’s sovereignty. So the way you characterized the issue in your question, I think, is all wrong. We have a useful, strong, deeply-rooted alliance with Turkey, and it will continue. We were not rejected. We talk about ideas, and some ideas are more interesting than others. The ones that are interesting and serve our common interest, we pursue. The ones that we decide, for one reason or another, are not worth pursuing, we drop and move on to the next thing. But we have got lots of important cooperation together, and it is a good, strong alliance with a lot of purpose. I think that one key to preserving the alliance is for American officials to continue to work to explain the value of the alliance to the American people, and for Turkish officials to do the same with the Turkish people. In democracies, you cannot really have an alliance that gets supported and lasts for a long time if you don’t have popular support. So working on building that popular support is an important part of preserving the alliance. I think that trips like this which give opportunities to talk about the alliance publicly are a good thing and a contribution to the strength of the relationship.

QUESTION: If I did not misunderstand, with respect to Proliferation Security Initiative, you said that Turkey has a leadership role to play. What kind of a role can Turkey play? And with respect to Iran, do you expect Turkey to play a role and take an initiative?

UNDERSECRETARY FEITH: The idea of the Proliferation Security Initiative is that we work with other countries to build up our common capacity to do things – like, for example, interdict shipments of weapons of mass destruction on the high seas. So, in that case, we do naval exercises. The interesting thing about the Proliferation Security Initiative is that it is not based on a new treaty. It is not based on something that will take decades to negotiate. It is not based on the creation of a major new international institution. It is based on practical work where the naval forces, for example, of a given country, decide they are going to do an exercise on interdiction operations. They announce that they are going to do it, and they get other countries that are interested in participating to join them. So there are leadership opportunities for any country that wants to step forward and say “we want to do something” in a particular area. It may relate to intelligence sharing, maybe something that relates to consensual boarding techniques, or maybe something that relates to search and rescue. There are all kinds of aspects of this work that can be exercised. Building the capacity of our partners, and we are increasing the ability of the partners to work together, is the essence of the Proliferation Security Initiative. So what we are saying is that, if Turkey wants to pick a topic -- an area in which to exercise, and a region -- that will be a good thing, and we would be happy to work with them. We have picked a few ourselves, and we would invite Turkey to join us as a number of other countries have. That is the beauty of the Proliferation Security Initiative. It is very flexible, and any country that wants to jump forward and take a leadership role in a particular exercise can do so, and there is a reasonably good chance that they will get support.

QUESTION: Do you expect Turkey to take a role with respect to Iran?

UNDERSECRETARY FEITH: There is diplomacy, as you know, right now with respect to Iran’s nuclear weapons program. The diplomacy is being led by countries in the EU. We are supporting that. We are hoping that that diplomacy and the general support for it, and the pressure that can brought to bear on Iran will lead the Iranians to recognize that Iran’s interests are best served by getting rid of its nuclear weapons program. This is a decision that Libya took with respect to its own WMD programs. Having pursued them for many years, it came to the conclusion -- partly as a result of diplomatic pressure, and partly as a result of some very good work within the Proliferation Security Initiative -- that Libya was better off, and would be more secure, getting rid of its nuclear weapons program and its other WMD programs, and changing its policy on terrorism. That is a model. If the international community can get the Iranians to decide to follow that model, the world will be better off.

QUESTION: You have said that the alliance exists. You have stated this rather firmly. But what do you think about the patterns, the manners, and the nature of this alliance? As you know, Mr. Erdogan has pronounced very harsh words about the United States’ Iraq policy. Do you think the alliance with Turkey is more unpredictable than in the past, and has a bit of a different nature now?

UNDERSECRETARY FEITH: We have had some differences over Iraq. Those differences have caused problems. On the other hand, at this moment I think we have strong common interests in seeing the Iraqi political process move forward and build on the success of the election turnout on Sunday. We have strong common interests in preserving Iraq’s territorial integrity, the unity of the country. We have a strong interest in building up the capabilities of the Iraqi security forces -- and NATO, as you know, is playing a role in the training of Iraqi security forces. We have a strong interest in the security situation improving, and that helping the economic development of Iraq to take place. Turkey can be one of the major beneficiaries of the creation of a prosperous, stable, secure Iraq. That is what we are aiming for in the United States, and I believe that is what Turkey is aiming for. There is a lot that we have in common. Yes, we have had problems. But as I said, problems are not that unusual in an alliance of free countries. We have enough momentum, we have enough good will, we have enough common interests to be able to keep the alliance healthy despite the problems. It does require people having understanding of the whole picture, and not losing perspective.

We really have to go. Thanks very much.