E&OE
1 April 2009
Interview - Fran Kelly, Radio National
Subjects: International Conference on Afghanistan, relationship with China
FRAN KELLY: But first to The Hague, where our Foreign Minister, Stephen Smith, has been attending important talks on the war on Afghanistan.
The one-day summit in The Hague focused on engaging Afghanistan's neighbours in finding a solution to the war.
Significantly, both Pakistan and Iran were at the table alongside the US and others. The meeting took place as the Obama administration pushes for a regional solution to the country's chronic instability.
Stephen Smith joins us now. Minister, thank you very much for being with us.
STEPHEN SMITH: Pleasure Fran. Good morning.
KELLY: Minister, this meeting was about engagement as much about finding a solution. Did you pick up signs of a new energy in the region around this whole issue?
SMITH: I certainly think there's a very strong emerging consensus that three things need to happen.
Firstly, Afghanistan and Pakistan's regional neighbours in south and central Asia have to become more active and more involved.
There was a good reflection of that. Iran was at the conference, as were a number of the central Asian states.
Secondly, that Afghanistan is not going to be successful unless there is a combination of military and also civil reconstruction or nation-building or capacity-building effort, and at some stage, a political dialogue and reconciliation amongst the Afghan political leadership.
And thirdly, there's a very clear appreciation now that Pakistan is a problem for the international community, not just as it relates to the border area with Afghanistan, but also a direct terrorist threat to Pakistan itself.
So, those very clear analyses I think have emerged as a consensus. The challenge now is to make sure that there's a response to that, and it's implemented effectively.
KELLY: All eyes, at the start of this meeting, I presume were around the US and Iran sitting unusually at the same table. How, how was that dynamic?
SMITH: I think there was a very good appreciation of the fact that Iran was there, together, as I say, with other south and central Asian nation states.
There was a very good welcoming at the conference by Foreign Ministers that I spoke to of the olive branch of dialogue that the United States had put out to Iran, not just on Afghanistan, but generally.
No one is being starry eyed about that, particularly when it comes to Iran's nuclear program. But Iran has an extensive land border with Afghanistan, as Pakistan itself does. China has a small border. And some of the central Asian states do as well.
So, pretty well every nation state that touches Afghanistan's border had a presence here. And it was good to see the presence from Iran. They weren't represented by their Foreign Minister but by a junior or a vice Minister, but their presence I think was well received. Iran's engagement on the Afghanistan problem I regard as a positive development.
KELLY: Was there any specific commitment from Iran for greater engagement? I mean, I notice that Australia used this meeting to commit, you know, more money for civil support and security support. What about from Iran?
SMITH: No, just the fact that they were here, and they also engaged in extensive bilateral conversations in the margins of the conference.
I met for a brief period with their vice Minister, as did a range of other nation states.
And we've seen, in recent times, a very good development where Pakistan and Afghanistan have been meeting together. But, in the recent period there's also been a very important trilateral with Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iran meeting, and that's continuing. Just as, on the other side if you like, on the other side of Afghanistan, the other border, there are now regular and constructive meetings between Afghanistan, Pakistan and the International Security Assistance Force or ISAF, which is the international military contribution presence in Afghanistan.
KELLY: It's 17 to eight on Breakfast. Our guest this morning is Foreign Minister Stephen Smith who is in The Hague.
Minister, you, part of your contribution to the conference was the, expressing the need for dialogue and reconciliation led by the Afghan political leadership - as you mentioned earlier. Hillary Clinton too was offering reconciliation for non-violent Taliban.
Did the summit discuss the pros and cons of some kind of engagement, involvement with the Taliban? Direct involvement.
SMITH: Yes. I think there's a general view or consensus that at some point in the cycle there has to be an effort at reconciliation and political dialogue.
And, President Karzai, who spoke at the Conference, and to whom I also spoke personally and privately, said that he was happy to speak to the Taliban provided they laid down their arms; they committed themselves to the Afghanistan constitution.
The theory or the thesis is that whilst there may well be hardcore terrorists who only operate under the barrel of a gun, there are some people who are attracted to that approach because they see no other future for themselves or their country. They're not necessarily ideological, and they can clearly be persuaded to pursue legitimate democratic or political mechanisms or means.
I also had a brief conversation with Secretary of State Clinton and it's quite clear that the notion now of a political dialogue is also a very important part of the Obama-Clinton response, as it is indeed the Pakistani response.
I again had a session with Foreign Minister Qureshi and I think it is true to say that there's a very strong consensus around the very strong view that the response to Afghanistan has to be regional. And one of the good things about the meeting was that it was a very well sponsored United Nations meeting. Under-appreciated, I think, is the fact that the effort in Afghanistan is United Nations mandated; United Nations sponsored; United Nations supported.
There's a very good appreciation that it has to be both a military or combat effort, but also a nation building or capacity building effort, and there has to be a political dialogue. Now…
KELLY: Just on this…
SMITH: … the last part of course is very difficult when you get down to from whom you might choose, and in the first instance that's got to be done by the Afghans on the ground themselves. But it's quite clearly the case that to get a long-term, enduring solution here there has to be something of an effort made to effect a political reconciliation and outcome.
KELLY: It is a vexed question though, who do you choose, isn't it? Because Pakistani Taliban commander has claimed responsibility in the last 24 hours for that deadly assault on a police academy in the - in Lahore this week. He vows to continue attacks as long as the US is involved with Pakistan; that's not a good start for any kind of dialogue, is it?
SMITH: Well, there are some people with whom you simply can't have a dialogue. And we've made it clear, as has the United States, that if you're dealing with hardcore al-Qaeda, hardcore Taliban, then a dialogue's not in contemplation. But there will be people who are attracted to it who aren't necessarily committed or convinced of an ideological approach which is only through the barrel of a gun.
So far as the Taliban's claim of responsibility for the terrible attack on the police academy yesterday, as I say, I had the opportunity of speaking with Foreign Minister Qureshi - and of course there have been two terrible attacks recently in Lahore, one on the Sri Lankan team - the Pakistanis are conducting a judicial inquiry over that. Minister Qureshi essentially said that it was too early to make a judgement about who was behind that. Although the finger has been pointed at Lashkar-e-Toiba or Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, two well known terrorist groups in the Pakistan-Afghanistan region. And he also said it was much too early to make a judgement about the attack on the police academy.
KELLY: Okay.
SMITH: In some respect you could expect that the Taliban would claim responsibility because that adds to their political propaganda, but equally, one at this stage would not discount either Pakistan Taliban or the other two groups that I've referred to.
KELLY: Minister, I know you've got to go, but can I just ask you briefly on another subject, Australia's relationship with China. The Opposition says the Government is too close. As Foreign Minister, have you seen any evidence that this is concern for other countries?
SMITH: Well, I am very concerned that we have the Leader of the Opposition saying one thing on Friday and Saturday and Sunday of last week; a different thing on Monday and now a different thing on Tuesday and Wednesday.
It is unquestionably the case that Australia having a sensitive, positive, constructive relationship with China is in our national interest. China is our second-largest trading partner, it waxes and wanes with Japan as to who is the largest, who is the second-largest. We have a very positive relationship with China where we pursue, rigorously, our national interest.
And in this century, where economic influence moves to our region, the Asia-Pacific, and it's not just the rise of China - it's the rise of China, the rise of India, the rise of the ASEAN economies combined, the ongoing, very significant, deep influence of the United States - it makes sense for Australia to have constructive relationships with all of those countries or those regional associations like ASEAN.
KELLY: Okay. Minister, we must leave it. Thank you very much for joining us.
SMITH: Thanks, Fran. Thanks very much.
KELLY: Stephen Smith is the Foreign Minister, joining us from The Hague in the Netherlands, been sitting around the table looking at a way forward in Afghanistan.
[ENDS]
Media inquiries
Foreign Minister's office (02) 6277 7500