Subscription and demo access


 
About Interfax
Press Releases
Products & Services
Contact us
Customer Login
 


Headlines
 

09/21 10:22   Putin congratulates Armenia on Independence Day, expresses confidence in further broadening of bilateral partnership
 
09/21 10:10   Uzbek president set to visit Russia in early 2020
 
09/21 10:01   Surgutneftegas commissions 40-mln-ton Lenskoye oil field in Yakutia
 
09/21 09:50   Venezuelan oil minister may visit Moscow in early Oct - source
 
09/21 09:47   VENEZUELAN OIL MINISTER QUEVEDO MAY VISIT MOSCOW IN EARLY OCT - SOURCE
 
09/21 09:00   RUSSIA AND FSU GENERAL NEWS
 
09/20 22:05   Russia wants Libya to remain unitary state, launch political process - Bogdanov
 
09/20 22:01   Pskov journalist Prokopyeva indicted for justifying terrorism
 
09/20 21:57   Zelensky gives 3 months to draft legislation on principles of administrative-territorial division, local elections
 
09/20 21:43   Kozak optimistic about gas shipments to Moldova via Ukraine in 2020
 





 Subscription
You can access a demo version of, recieve more information about or subscribe to Interfax publications by filling in and sending the form below.

First name:


Last name:


Company:


Division:


E-mail:


Phone:


Country:


City:


Please enter the digits in the box below:

 

Interfax.com  |  Interviews  |  Paul Jones: U.S. is taking drug problems in Afghanistan extremely serious



Interviews


March 18, 2010

Paul Jones: U.S. is taking drug problems in Afghanistan extremely serious


U.S. Deputy Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Afghanistan and Pakistan Paul W. Jones arrived in Moscow to discuss the situation in Afghanistan and has given an interview to Interfax following his meetings in Moscow.

Question: First of all I would like to ask you about the purpose of your visit?

Answer: The purpose of our visit - we came here as an interagency delegation from the National Security Council, from the Department of Defense, the Russian office of the State Department and myself and people from Ambassador Holbrooks team - is to continue our conversations with the government of Russia about Afghanistan and the region that Afghanistan finds itself in. I was with Ambassador Holbrook when he visited in November, we had excellent conversations at that point. We have met with Russian officials in Washington, and we really want to deepen the conversation, including before Secretary Clintons visit which is coming toward the end of the week. So, we had had a wide range of meetings, we were able to see a few more people than we were able to see when we visited with Ambassador Holbrook. And they were very successful.

Q.: You met people from the Foreign Ministry, the Ministry of Defense?

A.: We started out yesterday meeting with, Ill get his title wrong, Secretary General of the CSTO organization Mr. Bordyuzha, we met this morning with Russias ambassador at large to the SCO [] and then Deputy Foreign Minister Borodavkin, we met with deputy director Tsvetkov of the FSKN, because Director Ivanov is in Afghanistan right now.

Q.: Mr. Ivanov? Really?

A.: Yes. He is having a good visit, I think he has a very good schedule. We just came from the Ministry of Defense with General Sukhov from the international cooperation department. We met several of those people before with Ambassador Holbrook, but we had not previously met with the SCO and CSTO, and we wanted to talk with them more about the region.

Q.: So, certain analysts here believe the United States sent its troops to Afghanistan to counterbalance Russias military presence in Central Asia. How does the United States regard Russian military bases in Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan? Do you consider them as a threat?

A.: We sent troops to Afghanistan because of al-Qaeda. And that is the narrow focus goal of President Obama and the United States is to dismantle and ultimately defeat al-Qaeda in this region. There has been good cooperation from Pakistan, especially recently, in this regard, and we have a significant effort in Afghanistan, particularly regarding the Taliban, which has not ever completely severed its relationship with al-Qaeda. We did not put troops in Afghanistan for any other purpose and we believe that the decisions that other states make are up to them. Its not an issue for us.

Q.: And Russia said it wants Afghanistan to have in the future neutral status and no foreign military bases on its territory. What is the U.S. attitude to the issue?

A.: It is an interesting idea that Ive heard in a number of different places. It strikes me that its an idea several people in different countries are coming to some people have described it as restoring Afghanistans status from the 1960s or 1970s. I think it fits with our approach, but we have to discuss more exactly what people mean. As President Obama has said, and said repeatedly, we have no desire for permanent military bases in Afghanistan. So, the idea that Afghanistan not having any military bases from any country sounds logical.

Q.: Are you planning to enlarge your military presence in Central Asia to build more military bases in this region or do you think that in the future there should be no foreign military presence?

A.: You know, we received very significant cooperation from Russia and countries in Central Asia in transit routes for logistics and personnel of our military forces in Afghanistan. I think we have a really remarkable agreement with Russia on transit overflights. There are over 100 flights now, and we are very pleased with that success. There is a significant rail line going into Afghanistan through Russia, others come from different directions, we are now talking about a specific rail line that goes through Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. So, those are the kinds of military cooperation, if you can call it that, what were interested in, in Central Asia its that cooperation that allows our military forces in Afghanistan to be supplied. And we are very pleased with the way it has been going.

Q.: So, it is true that the U.S. military transit starts working...

A.: Yes, that is certainly true

Q.: And that every day there are one or two flights through Russia with military transit to U.S. forces in Afghanistan and when did it start?

A.: When we were visiting in November there had been a couple of test flights. I dont know the trajectory, but over the course of the past couple of months its become much more regular, and we worked out ways of cooperating that lead us to over 100 flights. I do not how many a day that is right now, how many a week, but it is a significant number and its a really significant contribution helping us get our forces and equipment to Afghanistan.

Q.: And is the United States interested in organizing ground military transit to Afghanistan via Russia and is the matter being discussed with Russia?

A.: We have now a rail link. There are several routes that come from different parts of Europe and traverse Russia, there is another one across the Caucasus, and they end up going through Uzbekistan, but a significant number, I mean thousands of containers of equipment transit this route. And that is with the cooperation of Russia, which we very much appreciate.

Q.: This is non-lethal equipment, is not it?

A.: That is right. Its not weapons, its not lethal supplies. Those are construction and humanitarian goods.

Q.: Are you discussing and have you discussed with the Russian side the ground military transit?

A.: Yes. We have the air military transit. You know with the growth in our troops in Afghanistan, we are looking at ways to supply them with everything that they need, including armored vehicles and things like that. We do not have formal proposals at this stage, but I think we are looking at how to increase the ability to put our supplies and equipment into Afghanistan.

Q.: We know about the tensions between the Turkey and the U.S., and we know that Turkey is helping much to the international forces in Afghanistan. Georgia has offered its territory for cargo transit for the international forces in Afghanistan. Does the United States intend to take up this offer?

A.: Well, the trend that we see regarding Afghanistan is that more and more countries are contributing in one way or another, and we have very deliberately over the past year of the Obama administration tried to welcome each countrys contributions to stability and prosperity in Afghanistan. And a lot of countries have come forward. As you mentioned Turkey has come forward. They have opened a provincial reconstruction team and do some more humanitarian projects. And Georgia has offered a battalion to the international forces. There are transit routes that go through the Caucasus, I do not exactly know what the route they take is. We do not take this as a sort of indication of political decisions, we try to welcome and encourage all countries to contribute as they can in Afghanistan.

Q.: Russian officials have said that they are ready to deliver weapons and military vehicles, including helicopters, to Afghanistan at the expense of the international funds that the United States and its allies assign for reinforcing the Afghan army and police. Moscow has pointed out that today with U.S. money the Afghan army and police are supplied with analogs of Soviet and Russian weapons produced without proper licenses in East European countries. What do you think about the idea to supply weapons with the U.S. money to Afghanistan? The Russian side said that Afghan soldiers are accustomed to Soviet weapons?

A.: One of the themes that we have been talking about during the visit last November and this visit, many meetings in Washington and elsewhere is that it is up to Russia to decide what it wants to contribute in Afghanistan. I think there was, may be, a sense over the previous years that the U.S wants to keep other countries out of Afghanistan, that we wanted to do everything ourselves. Weve tried to change that and weve tried to encourage the Afghan government and Afghan people to take the lead in deciding which countries they would like to accept contributions from, and frankly they are quite open and they need a lot of help. So, I do not want to get into too many specifics but, if Russia would like to offer contributions beyond what it has already offered, I think there will be a great willingness to talk about that. Certainly the Afghan side needs to take a leading role, but the international security forces particularly do a lot of training and equipping of the Afghan army and police, so we would love to be involved in that conversation as well.

Q.: So, you are not against Russia supplying its weapons to the Afghan army?

A.: No. Wed like to talk about it and see how that fits in with the needs of the Afghan security forces.

Q.: The U.S. wants to start moving its forces from Afghanistan by the end of the next year. Are you sure that Afghan security forces are able to calm the situation to guarantee stability in the country?

A.: Its a very good question, and I think there is a lot of misunderstanding. What weve said is that in July of 2011 our additional forces that President Obama has sent in will have been there for just about a year at that stage. And at that stage we will look to start the transition of districts and provinces in Afghanistan over to the Afghan national security forces. We will do that on the basis of the conditions in each area in Afghanistan and what the security forces are capable of doing at that time. So, the Afghan security forces are in a very rapid training and equipping program now. Their recruitment is going very well, above their goals. And we are confident that by July 2011 they will be able to secure some areas of the country where currently the international forces are operating. But how quickly that goes depends on the situation on the ground. We are not going to do it any faster, any slower that the situation on the ground requires and the ability of the Afghan security forces. But I have to say that the Afghan security forces, the Afghan government is very interested in this. They have long said that they wanted to take back their country, and President Karzai made this statement in his inaugural address. There is a great incentive for them to move as quickly as they can to take over security responsibility in the parts of the country that they can and to move as quickly as the conditions allow.

Q.: So, the international forces will stay in Afghanistan as long as it is needed? There is no fixed time?

A.: Right. There is no fixed time. You know July 2011 is the peak. How quickly we are able to reduce, depends on conditions on the ground. Our civilian presence is going to stay a long time and our civilian assistance. There is a lot of concern in the region that maybe the United States will just walk away from Afghanistan, as we did in 1990s. And that is not going to happen. We are going to remain committed to Afghanistan with economic assistance, diplomatically, with our trading relationship. We are going to try to make sure that Afghanistan has solid partners in the international community, and the United States will remain one of them. Our combat and military forces, were going to see whether we can reduce them and Afghans can take over that responsibility.

Q.: We read about the Moshtarak operation, and some say that that operation was just a prelude, and entry to taking control over Kandahar. Is that true? Are the U.S. forces planning more ambitious operations in Afghanistan?

A.: Well certainly, the operation in Marjah that is going on now is just one step in a process that will continue. General McChrystal took a very different approach in Marjah than the international forces have taken before. We waited to make sure that the Afghan civilian government and the Afghan military were ready to go into Marjah with us, so that this operation is as Afghan led as possible. About ten or twelve days of the Marjah operation we reached a very important milestone, and that was the number of town meetings, Shurahs, exceeded the number of military engagements. And thats what we want to have happened in each of the areas that the international forces go in, is very quickly for civilian governments to start to take hold with an Afghan lead. So, I think you will see that sort of model in other areas, including in Kandahar. Kandahar is difficult, it is a different situation. Another significant piece of going into Marjah. Marjah is the center point of the nexus between the insurgency and narcotics industry in Afghanistan. And there has been a lot of misunderstanding I think of how important fighting narcotics and opium production in Afghanistan is. To us it is extremely important, we recognize how important it is for Afghanistan, how critical it is for countries like Russia, and going into Marjah is key to breaking that connection between the insurgency and narcotics industry in Afghanistan.

Q.: What part of Afghanistan is controlled now by the Taliban? Is it a large part?

A.: You know it is a very mixed picture. You have to go down and look at each district, and there are 364 districts in Afghanistan, and many of the districts if you take a very basic look at Afghanistan sometimes people say: Well all these districts are controlled by the Taliban, but when you look at a district itself, you find that in fact the Taliban did not come in and take over this district, they formed an alliance with the traditional leader of this district, so people now say that the Taliban are in control. That can shift quite quickly. So, where the Taliban really is in control, mostly in parts of the South and in pockets, they have significant presence in pockets of the North where there is a traditionally Pashtun tribe representation. But it is very hard to speak about Afghanistan as a big picture. You really have to go down to the district level. And that is why we think it is so important this re-integration program that President Karzai announced at his inauguration, and that he is developing a policy for and the international community has set up a trust fund to help fund and support this program. If Taliban foot soldiers and local commanders accept the Afghan Constitution, if they renounce al-Qaeda, and if they lay down arms and cease violence against the government, there will be a program for them to receive livelihood support and security. And that we think has great potential at the local level in Afghanistan for shifting them into.

Q.: What is going on with al-Qaeda? We know that Osama bin Laden was reportedly somewhere near the border of Pakistan and Afghanistan and why do Western allies and the U.S. still fail to track down and neutralize him? Perhaps, he is not a real figure, perhaps he is a myth?

A.: He is hard to find but this has been the case with many individuals that countries have tried to find. You know if a person spends his whole life trying to hide he is hard to find. But there are al-Qaeda in the border area of Pakistan and Afghanistan, and those are the people who are really plotting and threatening our country, your country and many countries around the world. So, the focus of our strategy is how to isolate them and defeat them. It will take cooperation from Pakistan, from Afghanistan, who knows whether Osama bin Laden will turn up. But there are clearly some al-Qaeda fighters who need to be defeated in that area for the security of our countries of the world.

Q.: And perhaps the last question about the black list of the UN Security Council. We know that some people suggest to review the sanction list of the UN Security Council, and as far as the Taliban is concerned to remove them or the list needs to be enlarged. What is your opinion?

A.: Well, Russia was the most recent country to take action in agreeing to remove five names that have been requested by the Afghan government. I think it is important that this list is real and dynamic, that those countries on the committee and in the P5 [five permanent members of the UN Security Council] that contribute to the list as well as Afghanistan think of adding, think of taking away. In order to have the impact that a list like that needs to have it needs to be updated live to the extent that countries can review names, suggest names for taking off or adding. I think this is a good thing for the impact of those sanctions.

Q.: What about the idea of reviewing this list?

A.: Well, I think as I said, individual countries are always going through that process, and thats what leads to the names coming on and coming off.

Q.: Russia criticizes the United States, the international forces that they do nothing about drug trafficking from Afghanistan?

A.: Well, I think it important that [FSKN] Director Ivanov is in Afghanistan today. And he is meeting at our embassy, as well as many other, with Afghan officials. Merely seeing on the ground a kind of international cooperation to support Afghan efforts against the drug problem. Our bilateral dialog is growing and our bilateral cooperation is growing on the drug issue in Afghanistan. We really recognize how important it is. And it is a central part of our strategy. I do not think it has always been so well communicated because people are getting confused by this issue of eradication, whos eradicating, no eradication. The United States supports a comprehensive policy. We do support, we actually fund. When the Afghan government and governors want to eradicate poppy in their provinces, the United States puts money for that. We also have a fund for governors to receive incentives and assistance when their provinces are poppy-free, so that again encourages them. We have tripled the number of DEA agents in Afghanistan working on operations with our international forces, with the Afghans, as well training. Three of them were killed in the last few months, as well as numerous members of our security forces, when they have been going in and seizing precursor chemicals and drugs, so we are taking the problems extremely seriously, and I am very glad that our conversations, particularly since the visit of our drug control director Kerlikowske was here in February, had very good conversations. And I think there is greater and greater understanding, and I think at the operational level we are also just beginning to be able to work better and more closely with Russia and Central Asian countries, because its obviously a major route from where the drugs come from.

Q.: Did you hand over the list of 50 drug barons that Mr. Ivanov hoped to get some time ago?

A.: I am not an expert on operational aspects. I do not want to comment on that because I am not really familiar with that issue, but we are increasingly working together.

Q.: Thank you very much.

A.: Thank you so much.
//



Interviews
 

.
U.S. Ambassador to Russia John Huntsman, who will leave his post in early October, has given an interview to Interfax in which he speaks about exchanges at the highest level between Moscow and Washington, a possibility of Russias return to G8, as well as his vision of the future of U.S.-Russian relations.

more
.
.
Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov has given an interview to Interfax in which he speaks about the U.S. withdrawal from the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty on that is expected on August 2, about Russia‘s response to the U.S. and NATO possible deployment of missiles banned by the treaty, and about whether the Cuban Missile Crisis may repeat itself.

more
.
.
German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov will hold negotiations on the sidelines of the Petersburg Dialogue forum in Germany on Thursday. Maas has given an interview to Interfax ahead of the forum, in which he speaks about prospects of settling the conflict in Ukraine, Germanys preparations for ensuring security in the absence of the INF Treaty and attempts to save the Iranian nuclear deal.

more
.
.
German Ambassador to Russia Rudiger von Fritsch, who is leaving Moscow after a five-year mission, told Interfax about the state of affairs in bilateral relations, Germanys position on the Nord Stream 2 project amidst sanction risks, and assessed prospects for settling the crisis in Ukraine under the new authorities in Kyiv.

more
.
.
U.S. Special Representative for Afghanistan Reconciliation Zalmay Khalilzad has given an interview to Interfax in which he speaks about results of the trilateral meeting on Afghanistan settlement that took place in Moscow on April 25, prospects of the intra-Afghan meeting in Doha, and Russia‘s role in the Afghan issue.

more
.
.
NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg has given an interview to Interfax ahead of the Alliances 70th anniversary that is to be celebrated on April 4. He speaks in the interview about the NATOs vision of future relations with Russia, its attitude to the situation surrounding the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) Treaty and the New START Treaty, as well as further plans of expanding the Alliance.

more
.
.
British Ambassador to Russia Laurie Bristow has given an interview to Interfax in which he speaks about the current situation in the relationship between the United Kingdom and Russia, the impact of the Skripal case on it, the restoration of the numbers of diplomatic staff, exchange of information on counter-terrorism, possible introduction of sanctions over the Kerch Strait incident, the INF Treaty, and British-Russian economic relations.

more

 
  
 ©   1991—2019   "Interfax News Agency" JSC. All rights reserved.
Contact information   |   Privacy Policy   |   Interfax offices   |   made by web.finmarket

News and other data on this site are provided for information purposes only, and are not intended for republication or redistribution. Republication or redistribution of Interfax content, including by framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Interfax.

Browse other Interfax sites:  Interfax.ru   |   IFX.RU   |   Interfax Group   Rambler's Top100