» Monday, July 24, 2006Prime Minister’s speech/Middle East
Asked for further information about the Prime Minister’s speech that he had mentioned in today’s press conference, the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman (PMOS) said that the genesis of it was the G8 statement and the analysis it presented of how the problem arose, the need to address that analysis, and the proposal for a stabilisation force, which was now gaining genuine momentum. We believed that that could form part of an overall consensus about how to move this forward, and an important part of that was Dr. Rice’s visit to the region today, as well as the meeting of foreign Ministers in the Core Group on Wednesday in Rome in order to get a consensus about how to move things forward. The PMOS said that if people looked at the G8 statement, it was very detailed on what needed to happen in terms of moving forward on prisoner issues and kidnapped soldier issues, as well as the political track as well. It therefore did form a rich agenda to explore. Put that the Prime Minister had mentioned today that he had to have a plan in a few days, and did that therefore mean for the Wednesday meeting, the PMOS replied that what we hoped the Wednesday meeting would agree the broad principles of how we moved forward. We had to take things day by day, but there had been, and there continued to be, a lot of very intense activity across Europe, across America and in the region, and that activity was starting to coalesce around a possible plan. We now needed to take it to the next stage. Asked if that plan still included sending a disengagement force, the PMOS said that it was part of the G8 proposal, and it was still not only on the agenda, but rather, was gathering momentum. Asked that if the new countries who were now supposed to be sending troops to Afghanistan etc were so reluctant, why should we believe that they were ready to commit their troops to move on the ground, the PMOS said that in terms of the make-up of the force, that had been a matter for discussion at the UN and between countries. What had helped was that obviously, the UN had been supportive of this force right from the beginning. As people saw when the Prime Minister and Kofi Annan had a meeting a the G8, Mr. Annan was supportive of the idea from the start. Asked what had been discussed regarding Iraq, and did they talk about a possible timetable to pull troops out of Iraq, the PMOS replied that the context in terms of our force levels depended on not only the capability of the Iraqi forces, but also, the wishes of the Iraqi Government. As we discovered when we were in Baghdad, the Iraqi Government did not want to see an immediate or precipitated pull-out. Rather, what it wanted to see was an orderly process in which it took over responsibility, which in terms would allow our profile to go down. We had seen that first step in Al Muthanna province, and what we had said in Baghdad applied equally, as province by province had to be judged as capable. Therefore, the Iraqis would take responsibility, and that continued to be the dynamic of where we were going. The PMOS said again that it was a question of capability and the wishes of the Iraqi Government. Asked further about the reasons to send a stabilisation force and whether British forces would be part of it, the PMOS replied that the Prime Minister in his answer last week referred to our commitments elsewhere, but equally, to the fact that historically, we did not operate in this particular area. Discussions continued, but both those factors still applied. Asked if the Prime Minister had asked Mr. Maliki to use his offices to seek an Iranian intervention with Hezbollah, the PMOS said that in terms of the discussions, as he had said this morning, it was better that some discussions took place in private. Asked for further information about Wednesday’s meeting, the PMOS said that the meeting was taking place in Rome and was the core group of countries. That included countries such as France, Germany, Italy, the UK, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the USA and others. Put that the Prime Minister had said in his press conference that there had to be a two-stage process to any agreement which was the short term cessation of violence by both sides, but wasn’t that a change from last week when he had said that there was no point trying to call on two sides for an immediate cease-fire because the underlying causes of the problem had to be dealt with first, the PMOS replied that this had short, medium and long term aspects. We had been consistently saying that we would like the conflict to stop now, but it had to be on both sides, and that was what the Prime Minister had said in the Commons last week. Equally, there might be a temporary ceasefire, but how could that be turned into sustainable peace. The PMOS said that that was where the role of the stabilisation force in Lebanon came in. There would not be a long-term, permanent peace in the area unless there was a durable political settlement, and that meant getting back to the Road Map, as well as finding a viable two-state solution for Israel and Palestine. Put that Margaret Beckett had not visited the region and was there not a danger of the UK’s role in the peace talks being limited, the PMOS said: no. We had been right in there from the start with the G8, and the PMOS reminded journalists that the Prime Minister negotiated the statement on the Middle East with President Putin representing the old G7. Mrs. Beckett had been on the phone constantly during the past week, and the PMOS said that this was not a competition for airmiles. Rather, it was trying to put the conditions in place for a cessation across of hostilities, and the best way to do that sometimes was to work behind the scenes. That was what we were doing. Asked that by emphasising the Road Map, wasn’t the Prime Minister falling into Hezbollah’s trap, the PMOS replied that if the underlying causes were not addressed, then this conflict would break out again. If rockets going into Israel were not stopped, then Israel would respond. If a political solution was not found, then Gaza would remain in the state that it was, and in which case, there would be militias attacking Israel from Gaza. The PMOS said that there had to be a comprehensive solution if the problems were to be addressed which appeared on all sides, otherwise there would be a sticking plaster that would easily peel off. Asked if any thought was being given to reconstruction, and who would pay for it, the PMOS said that at this stage, our primary focus was on stopping the hostilities. Asked if Mrs. Beckett had had to postpone her holidays, the PMOS said he was not aware of her holiday plans. Asked if the caravan was on bricks, the PMOS replied that he was not going to talk about holiday plans. Briefing took place at 16:00 | Search for related news Original PMOS briefings are © Crown Copyright. Crown Copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen's Printer for Scotland. Click-use licence number C02W0004089. Material is reproduced from the original 10 Downing Street source, but may not be the most up-to-date version of the briefings, which might be revised at the original source. Users should check with the original source in case of revisions. Comments are © Copyright contributors. Everything else is © Copyright Downing Street Says. |
The unofficial site which lets you comment on the UK Prime Minister's official briefings. About us...
Search
Supported byRecent Briefings
Archives
LinksSyndicate (RSS/XML)CreditsEnquiriesContact Sam Smith. |
No Comments »
No comments yet.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Post a public comment