The official site of the Prime Minister's Office

In a government press briefing the Secretary of State for Defence, Geoff Hoon and Chief of theDefence Staff, Admiral Sir Michael Boyce, answered questions from journalists on a number of issues, including Iraq, cover being provided by the armed forces during the fire dispute and NATO.

Read the full transcript below:

Mr Hoon:

Good Morning Ladies and Gentlemen. The one word that should be used to characterise the Prague Summit is transformation. NATO now needs to change to face the new threats and challenges of the 21st century. Prague is an important milestone in this evolution. This transformation will happen in a number of ways. NATO will be significantly larger with an expectation of membership invitations to seven more countries, so strengthening Euro-Atlantic security and stability. We will have new capabilities embedded in new force and command structures with the new NATO response force at the leading edge. It will have strengthened its partnerships to the east and south and it will have committed itself to becoming a more modern organisation.

The new capabilities package - the Prague Capabilities Commitment, or PCC - is about dealing with questions of capability shortfalls which we in the United Kingdom are determined to resolve. We will be making renewed efforts on these issues at Prague. PCC has strong top level support right across the Alliance, it has clear timeframes and objectives. It will give the Europeans an unprecedented opportunity to start narrowing the growing capability gap with the United States, something that we must achieve.

With the security NATO brings, there is also responsibility. We will be therefore looking to newly invited members to contribute, probably through the provision of specialised niche capabilities. The PCC sharper focus will come essentially from the NATO response force which will provide war fighting forces available at short notice. We need to ensure that it is fully effective by giving it the right capabilities. And the root and branch review of the command structure will provide the streamlined framework within which this new force and these new capabilities will be deployed. We expect agreement to be reached at Prague to a revised command structure which will be more flexible and more responsive.

Capability improvements in NATO need to dovetail with the European Union’s capability targets in the headline goal. When it is good for NATO it is also good for the European Union. These are therefore complementary, not competing, initiatives. And NATO’s success in the future will depend not only on its military capabilities and structures, but also on its ability to work closely with as many partners as it can. So the Prague Summit will also take further steps to enhance NATO’s partnerships. The Alliance has already established a new relationship with Russia through the NATO-Russia Council and we will build on this at Prague. We will also look to develop our relationships with other key partners to the east and south.

And last, but certainly not least, there is a need, as George Robertson has pointed out robustly, for serious internal reform to maintain NATO’s efficiency and effectiveness and a strong focus on streamlining the bureaucracy. We expect a wide ranging package of reforms to be agreed at the summit. There is no point modernising frontline forces if we do not also modernise the structures that plan and support their operations.

The Prague Agenda therefore involves real change. It clearly demonstrates the health, vitality and relevance of NATO. Implementation will be the key challenge with the next summit only 18 months away. By then it is crucial that the commitments made at Prague are delivering real results. It is worth making clear that in the months after this summit we will continue to push hard to take these changes through. It is not about rhetoric, it has got to be about real results.

Question:

Are you saying it could be made a condition of joining for some of these new countries that they are prepared for instance to contribute troops to an invasion of Baghdad or Iraq?

Mr Hoon:

Clearly that is not what I was describing. I was describing a situation where new members in particular will make available capabilities that the Alliance requires. In the past new members have tended to try and emulate the full range of capabilities made available by larger member states. We are recognising that that is no longer realistic, but that actually in modern operations what is crucial is that smaller states can for example provide scarce capabilities that even the larger states don’t always have available. So they are providing a key contribution to a military operation, but no specific military operation is being mentioned.

Question:

Can I ask first of all whether you regard Iraqi firing on British and American planes in the No Fly Zone as already breaking UN resolutions? And second, what your thinking is about the targeting of Syria and Libya as a second phase in the war against terrorism?

Mr Hoon:

We have always treated the attacks on our aircraft and those of our partner, the United States, over the No Fly Zones with very great seriousness and our air crew are entitled in international law to respond in self-defence, which is what they do and what increasingly they have been doing in recent times because the level of attacks on them has certainly increased and that is a matter of concern and a matter of concern both for the United States and for the United Kingdom.

Question:

Inaudible.

Mr Hoon:

I am certainly not getting into the question of whether under 1441 that is a specific trigger simply because, as Donald Rumsfeld made clear, I think he was in Chile at the time, this is something that would have to be reported to the Security Council and it would be for the Security Council to discuss in terms of 1441.

Question:

Would you consider it as part of a dossier being built up against Saddam Hussein that would at some stage justify military action?

Mr Hoon:

It is clearly relevant that his forces should attack our forces carrying out humanitarian tasks in the No Fly Zones and certainly I agree, and again I think this is what Donald Rumsfeld said in answer to a very specific question, that it is important that we recognise that this is an aggressive belligerent state as far as our aircraft are concerned and that that would go to part of the picture that the Security Council would discuss, but can I emphasise that it would be, as he has said, a matter for the Security Council to discuss once all the evidence had been amassed.

Question:

On the new NATO rapid response force, can Europe possibly sustain a 60,000 strong European Union rapid reaction force and a 20,000 strong NATO rapid response force when inevitably assets will have to come from the same sources for those two groups?

Mr Hoon:

In a sense you have answered your own question because they clearly do come from the same Armed Forces. The issue is the level of readiness at which they are maintained and indeed the tasks for which they are designed to deal. And specifically as I mentioned, the rapid reaction force at NATO level is about ensuring that we have forces capable of conducting war fighting operations at very short notice. The Petersburg Tasks do not go as far as that in the sense that they are at the highest level concerned with peace-making and by and large will be involved in a range of peace-keeping tasks. Therefore that is why I am able to say with some confidence that these are complementary forces and not in any way contradictory. Perhaps, Mike, you might like to add to that?

Admiral Sir Michael Boyce:

The point about forces coming from the same pool is absolutely valid and by developing the NATO response force we are going to help the European reaction force, but it is the same soldiers, sailors or airmen who will be doing the job as part of them.

Question:

You have said the question of Europe and NATO, a complementary rather than competitive relationship, so what are you going to do about the French vetoing the extension of the NATO mandate in Macedonia, and indeed do you have a figure of the percentage of GNP which you think nations ought to be spending on defence?

Mr Hoon:

Contrary to their vetoing it, I think you will find they have just agreed it. And as I understand it there has been an agreement in NATO that the force in Macedonia will continue until February.

Question:

Inaudible.

Mr Hoon:

There has been a discussion for some days about how best to carry on the operation in Macedonia and as I understand it an agreement has been reached that it will continue until February.

Admiral Sir Michael Boyce:

The force may be configured differently, and the NATO force, the task has reduced from the one which Task Force Fox has been doing for some months and NATO has been busy working to see what is required of NATO in Macedonia. And as the Secretary of State said, the French have actually not vetoed it and they have gone ahead with the NATO plan.

Question:

… quite fair isn’t it, that there is a tension between France and the rest of NATO as to a competitive aspect to European forces compared with NATO. Is that not true?

Mr Hoon:

I don’t accept that at all, indeed France, every other European nation signed up at Nice, for example, to a specific linking between the headline goal and NATO planning processes and it is important that we maintain that linkage, that is something that every European state, including France, has agreed to.

Question:

I was wondering if I could ask the Chief of the Defence Staff what advice he is giving now to the government over the impact on our Armed Forces, their state of readiness for any possible conflict in Iraq of a prolonged Firemen’s Strike. According to the Downing Street spokesman who has just been speaking to us, it does look as if the strike will go ahead, an 8 day strike from Friday. How worried are you about the impact of that on our Armed Forces?

Admiral Sir Michael Boyce:

I am extremely concerned for two reasons: first I am concerned on if you like the military effectiveness of our Armed Forces; and secondly I am concerned at the impact on our individuals who are helping out in the fire-fighting situation. Clearly we don’t have a box of 19,000 people standing by to be called upon to do fire-fighting duties, they must have been drawn from operational units, which they have done, and as every day that goes by that they are standing by for these duties, and they have now been standing by since September when we started training for the duties, they are not doing their tasks of training for whatever eventuality may come in the future. There is also the problem, as I say, of impact on individuals because a lot of people have come straight off deployment from Bosnia, from Afghanistan or whatever and gone straight on to these duties without the benefit of any home time and so there is a morale and motivation problem to be addressed as well.

Question:

Could I just ask on the question of red fire engines and picket lines, is it your advice that Armed Forces should not cross picket lines, that should be a question of the domestic police force doing that?

Admiral Sir Michael Boyce:

Certainly so far as crossing picket lines, my advice is that and my advice, and the Secretary of State I am sure would agree it has been totally accepted about Armed Forces crossing picket lines, they should not do it.

Question:

The Armed Forces should not do it?

Admiral Sir Michael Boyce:

Yes.

Question:

Does that mean that your concern extends to some sort of implication for our potential ability to respond to action in Iraq should that happen at very short notice?

Admiral Sir Michael Boyce:

We will maintain a capability to respond to any future requirements falling on the Armed Forces and we are trying to husband some operational capability, but clearly we can’t perform at the fullest end of our operational capability while 19,000 people are tied up standing by to do the fire-fighting duties.

Mr Hoon:

Can I make it clear that we are prepared and offer a credible threat.

We have always made it clear that in order to underpin the effectiveness of the Security Council process there needs to be a credible threat. We are going to provide that.

Question:

What can you tell us about the terms of the Commons Motion on the Iraq-UN debate? Will those who have got doubts, and still have doubts, have a chance to express those in the voting lobby?

Mr Hoon:

There will obviously be a debate on Monday. I am sure all Members of Parliament, including those who are also part of the government will be thinking through their positions. I don’t think it helps any at this stage to anticipate what might or might not be discussed. I think the lines of the debate are likely to be familiar to you.

Question:

Do you share the Chief of the Defence Staff’s extreme concern that the Armed Forces are being over-stretched if there is a strike?

Mr Hoon:

Well I didn’t actually hear him say extreme concern.

Question:

Inaudible.

Mr Hoon:

It is not quite the same thing.

Question:

Do you share the extremely concerned nature?

Mr Hoon:

What we have to do always is to maintain an appropriate level of response to the tasks that ultimately the government ask of the Armed Forces. It is my job clearly on the advice that I am given by the Chiefs of Staff to make sure that we are able to respond to any emergency in any situation, and that remains the position.

Question:

Have you yet had particular detailed requests from the Americans for British contributions to any operation against Iraq? The American press are talking about a British role possibly in Kurdistan and then in the south around Basra?

Mr Hoon:

We have had a request for forces from the United States, but can Iemphasise that no decision has been taken on that and it does seem to me appropriate that I should set out in more detail our thinking on Monday in the Parliamentary debate.

Question:

… military effectiveness was affected, you also mentioned morale. I wonder if you could elaborate on those? On military effectiveness we have heard that ships haven’t been able to sail that might otherwise have sailed. On those two issues I wonder if you could elaborate on the impact of the fire-fighters’ strike.

Admiral Sir Michael Boyce:

Well to provide the 19,000 or so people we have, we have had to take people from units which are now not doing the training they might otherwise have been doing. So yes there are ships which are alongside so that sailors can go and help towards the fire-fighting effort, as indeed there are air stations which are providing airmen, so they are not running at full efficiency, and battalions which are providing soldiers from Germany or from wherever so they are not doing their military training, because part of our business in the Armed Forces is when we are not actually engaged in operations is to be preparing for whatever the next operation may be. So we are bound to be detracting from our planned cycle of training as we put people into this extra duty we have. So far as morale and motivation is concerned, obviously people have been taken away from wherever they are at the moment to stand by and are barracked up around the country ready to go and do their duty in fighting, they are either not doing their training, which is always demotivating because you actually joined to do the job which youactually joined to do, or indeed you have been taken off leave or off holidays that you were expecting to have, having been away for 6 months and you might now be in some standby fire-fighting duty. So clearly they are not going to be, overjoyed is not the word I would actually express it by.

Mr Hoon:

Having said that, can I say on behalf of the government what a magnificent job they have done, and indeed as I understand it derived great satisfaction from standing in for those two days. But I think what is important is that the strike planned for Friday is called off so that we don’t ask the same of them again.

Question:

Can we ask where the … was, having two lots of forces, one lot of forces doing two jobs?

Mr Hoon:

I have said to you already that it is our job to ensure that when we are asked to take on these responsibilities we are able to satisfy them, and that remains our commitment. We have 100,000 soldiers for example, so although it is a pressure to have 19,000 members drawn from all three Armed Forces, it is a pressure that for the moment at any rate we can contain.

Question:

For the past two weeks Iran has been in the midst of a political crisis with more students coming out on to the streets. Has this had any impact on Iran’s co-operation and contribution to the war against Iraq? And secondly, do you have any views on this question and any messages for the students?

Mr Hoon:

We have continued to watch closely the situation in Iran over a long period of time, we have consistently supported those reformist elements that perhaps we have seen most recently out on the streets and we want to see Iran continue on the path to reform, which certainly the Foreign Office has consistently encouraged.

Question:

Given what you have said before about Monday, can we assume that the political decision which the military have been pressing for a long time on some kind of mobilisation plan or war plan for British forces in the potential operation in Iraq will be announced on Monday?

Mr Hoon:

You can’t take it that any war plan will be announced because as I have consistently emphasised, no decision whatsoever has been taken here, or for that matter in the United States on a specific plan to participate in military operations in Iraq. But obviously what is important is that we are prepared, that we maintain that preparation, that we are there to underpin if necessary the UN Security Council process, and that continues to be the case. Obviously contingency planning must take place, as it is taking place in the United States, and that has led to the request for forces that they have made.

Question:

… says that he expects and hopes for what I think the military call a political decision on some kind of contingency planning to allow the military to mobilise properly and know what actually may be going to Iraq or the Gulf?

Admiral Sir Michael Boyce:

What I very much hope for most of all is that Saddam Hussein will comply with UNSCR 1441 and save the whole problem of actually getting into a conflict situation.

Question:

What if he doesn’t?

Admiral Sir Michael Boyce:

Well clearly my job is to make sure that our Armed Forces are fit to fight and we have a contribution which can be made to any armed response to any non-compliance of 1441 and I will make that available to the Secretary of State and the government.

Question:

Could you just clarify this picket line question. The Fire Brigade’s Strike is about to start, we had Lord Falconer last week making it quite clear that in the interests of public safety troops would be asked to cross picket lines, the Deputy Prime Minister and the Prime Minister both supported those remarks, and yet today we have got the Chief of Defence Staff saying the Armed Forces should not cross picket lines and the Defence Secretary nodding. Now which is it?

Mr Hoon:

The position as set out by all members of government is obviously our overriding priority is concern for the protection of the public and if we do have to take those difficult decisions in relation to removing the red fire engines from our stations, they will have to be done, but that will have to be done by the civil authorities responsible. That has always been the government’s position and it remains so. But can I emphasise, as I have emphasised already, we do not want to be in that situation and we believe that the best way through is for the Fire Brigades’ Union to call off the strike planned for Friday, and indeed a series of 8 day strikes planned thereafter, in order to avoid the situation having to arise.

Question:

So you have agreed you can cross picket lines, but not soldiers, is that right?

Mr Hoon:

It has always been the responsibility of our civilian authorities to provide for law and order, it has not been the responsibility of the military to do so in the United Kingdom, otherwise than at the request of the civil power.

Question:

Are you saying therefore that the Fire Brigades’ Union are jeopardising and threatening your foreign policy?

Mr Hoon:

No I am not saying that at all, but what I am saying is that it is in the interests of all of us, the whole of the United Kingdom’s community, for this matter to be resolved through negotiations and discussion and not through the calling of an 8 day strike starting on Friday.

Extra info

Read in full previous government press briefings by:

• The Secretary of State for Health (31 October)

• The Secretary of State for Wales (30 October)

• The Foreign Secretary (23 October)

• The Deputy Prime Minister (17 October)

• The Home Secretary (14 October)