Falling Behind in Afghanistan

Mr Steinmeier, the German parliament will be asked to extend the mandate for the Afghanistan mission in autumn. There are rumors in the Social Democratic Party (SPD) that you might not get the majority you need.

In my judgment there are no rumors. There is a discussion about it and that is necessary. In contrast to many other countries that are engaged in Afghanistan, the continuation of our involvement there requires not only the support of the German public but also of the German parliament. We have to win that support, and I am confident that in the autumn, we will reach the necessary decisions.

Many of your Social Democrat colleagues criticize the US-led operation "Enduring Freedom" because many civilians are being killed. Wouldn't it be better for Germany to withdraw from this part of the mission?

There's no question about it -- such mandates need to be discussed. And in autumn, we shall have to look closely and critically at which parts of the mandate we wish to extend, and, if necessary, change. But it's more important to consider how we are doing with regard to our own commitments to the Afghan people.

You have to occasionally remind people that we are not alone in Afghanistan. After the terrible attacks in 2001 (in New York and Washington) we, together with others, took over the responsibility of dismantling these training grounds for worldwide terrorism. We committed ourselves to do the necessary along with other partners. Along with others, we took a common pledge to ease civilian reconstruction in Afghanistan. The country and its people have been plagued by war and civil strife for 30 years.

I've come to the conclusion that we're falling behind with civilian reconstruction in Afghanistan. And more importantly, in light of our mandate that needs extending, we're lagging in our commitment to help Afghan security officials, the police and the army, take responsibility of their own nation. In other words: we're not doing enough to keep our own commitments to Afghanistan and that's why I think we need to strengthen our efforts here.

We have to ensure that our military presence in Afghanistan is not perceived as a form of occupation. And in all our activities, we have to take the utmost care to avoid civilian casualties. My impression is that the German Bundeswehr soldiers and many others are doing everything they can in that regard. And I know from my own visits to Afghanistan that the Afghan people largely accept the presence of the Bundeswehr. The citizens there realize that a military presence is necessary to enable civilian reconstruction, for example by private aid organizations.

There is another side to the discussion. Some here in Berlin -- and also soldiers in Afghanistan -- say the separation of ISAF and Enduring Freedom is artificial... that the two missions should be brought together under a single command. Would that make sense?

I think it made sense to leave the anti-terrorism tasks, the pursuit of terrorists, in the hands of Operation Enduring Freedom.... and the provision of security for the tasks I have just described -- protection to allow reconstruction to take place -- in the hands of ISAF. I think this division is sensible but it's something we will be discussing this year, not just here in Germany, but also with our European and NATO partners.

The highest-ranking German general in Afghanistan says more troops are needed to stop the Taliban winning this battle. What do you think about such concerns? Could the West fail in Afghanistan?

You can never rule out failure with military missions anywhere in the world. And so of course there is the risk in Afghanistan that we might not be able to achieve our aims, in particular, as quickly as we would like to see. But contrary to some of the reports in recent days, one really should not overlook the fact that even in the South of the country where the security situation is still very precarious as compared with other parts, there has been a significant improvement in recent months.

But I will say one thing and it's something that I have attached clear importance to this year: We will not solve the problem in the south unless we can manage to bring Afghanistan and Pakistan together in a proper political dialogue. We need to get both sides talking about how to provide better protection along the long and difficult border between Pakistan and Afghanistan.

As part of our presidency of the G8, we held talks with foreign ministers of both Pakistan and Afghanistan here in Germany and I hope we were successful in kick starting a dialogue between them... so that questions such as this can be dealt with through mutual, co-operative political responsibility.

Afghanistan and other conflict zones were on the agenda during the G8 Presidency and at the recent summit in Heiligendamm. But there doesn't seem to have been a breakthrough in mapping out a clearer future for Kosovo. Why not?

I have to admit that we are still some way away from a solution for the final status of Kosovo and from a consensus among the UN Security Council members. But I have a degree of hope when I look ahead to the talks between President Putin and President Bush in early July. I hope this matter will be discussed, and I hope the basis of this discussion will be the joint recognition that the final status issue for Kosovo cannot be postponed much longer. Otherwise, impatience over the issue will boil over and above all in Kosovo, the situation will become difficult to control.

It's been an exciting and challenging few weeks and months, with the G8 Presidency and EU Presidency. How satisfied are you with what Germany was able to achieve in this dual role?

My impression is that our European partners recognize that this was a very successful presidency overall. We tackled some very important issues and I hope we brought them to a successful conclusion. In my view, these include decisions on climate protection and energy policy that I think were not just courageous, but also ground-breaking. Without those decisions, I don't believe the discussions at the G8 summit in Heiligendamm would have been possible.

And I am also very satisfied with what we achieved in the last few days of our presidency of the European Union. The foundation that was agreed on is no longer called a "constitution" but I think we managed to achieve what we always said was our aim: namely, to preserve the substance of the draft constitution. I think that the form of the treaty that was agreed will be the basis for the future co-operation of the member states.

Poland made things very difficult for the EU Presidency. Warsaw struck a strong anti-German note during the summit. How much has that damaged relations with Poland?

Of course, the memory of these unpleasant rows, covered by the media, lingers. But despite everything I will not lose sight of the fact that the support of the Polish people for Europe was considerable and has grown even further since the agreement reached last weekend. And that tells me that the people of Poland want a good, neighborly relationship with Germany and that they also want to feel a part of Europe for the future.

After these rows, it's very important to remember that this is our joint future. For both Germany and Poland, the future lies in Europe. I intend to work on that, and I am confident that we have partners willing to cooperate to this end in Poland.

Christian F. Trippe interviewed Frank-Walter Steinmeier (sp)