'Things could be better in Afghanistan'

On July 31, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer comes to the end of his term as secretary general of Nato. In an interview with NRC Handelsblad De Hoop Scheffer looks back on Iraq, Afghanistan and a rocky relationship with Russia.

"He is saying goodbye at the height of his power," the BBC's defence correspondent said at the end of a panel discussion in Brussels last week which included Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, the Canadian and Polish defence ministers and a prominent member of the US congress. De Hoop Scheffer was given a long ovation. But when De Hoop Scheffer (60) ends his term as secretary general of Nato on July 31, he will leave behind an alliance deeply divided - about the war in Afghanistan, its relationship with Russia and its own mission in the world.

When you took office there was much bitterness among the allies about the Iraq war, which many member states opposed.

"The wounds were still fresh. But as secretary general it is my role to build bridges. I have to keep the whole thing together so I had to respect both points of view: those against the war and those in favour of it.

"The wounds healed sooner than I thought. At the request of the Iraqi government we started a Nato mission to train and equip the Iraqi army, which the Americans had abolished after the invasion. That mission brought the allies together again.

"In order to play my role I need to have a good relationship with all the players - big or small. When we are faced with a problem I can always call this prime minister or go visit that president. This allows me to smooth over the differences that are unavoidable in an alliance of 26 democracies."

You met with president George W. Bush many times. Does the image Europe has of Bush correspond with the Bush you know?

"No. The mood in Europe, especially after the Iraq war, was very anti-Bush, and I think this is doing him an injustice. I knew him mostly during his second term. By then his administration had come to realise that everything is more difficult if you try to do without your allies.

"The Iraq war has taught me two things. Whenever Europe presents itself as counterweight for the Americans this results in a divided Europe, which saddens me as a European. And an America that thinks it can do it alone is also doomed to fail."

Was Bush the kind of president who allowed the Nato secretary general to contradict him?

"Well, I certainly did. Personal relations are very important in my job because it allows you to bring up bad news. Last night the Spanish defence minister, Carme Chacón, called me on the phone - I was on the plane from Afghanistan - to tell me Spain had decided to withdraw from the Nato mission in Kosovo. I don't think that's a good thing, and if you do it all you should first consult with your allies. But you can't allow yourself to get angry.

"When I first met with Chacón, she gave me an old map of the Netherlands as a present. It was a copy but nevertheless a nice gesture. When she had a baby I sent her a present. It was a stuffed animal I think. Well, I must admit my wife usually buys the gifts - I just don't have the time to go shopping. Because we have such a good relationship it is easier for us to discuss a topic like Kosovo. But in the end I have to acknowledge that Spain has taken an entirely legitimate decision."

Having a difference of opinion with a Spanish minister is one thing; to have one with the American president is quite another.

"Bush called me once about Darfur. Listen, he said, I am more and more frustrated that there is no end to the killing and raping there. We have to do something. Secretary general, Jaap, can't Nato go there?

"Then I have to tell him that I don't think that's a good idea. Because Nato troops, white Nato troops, in Africa would lead to great unrest. I told him it wouldn't work. I remember it well. I was sitting in the VIP lounge at Berlin airport - you get these calls in the strangest places. Once in Kyrgyzstan I had to lean way out the window in order to get good reception on my phone. It's a funny thing to be talking to the president of the United States and constantly having to yell: 'What? What? What?'

"During Nato meetings he always sits to the right of me - the seating is alphabetical by country - and whenever he gets bor... - when the meetings run late - he starts talking about mountain biking. What kind of clip system do you have for your pedals? That kind of thing. This is how you build the kind of personal relationship that you need. Over Darfur we agreed to a compromise: we would help the African Union to transport their troops."

Isn't he going down in history as a dramatically bad president?

"I don't know about that. I wouldn't be surprised if we Europeans reached a much milder verdict of his presidency 15 to 25 years from now."

Even the Red Cross is now saying that the Americans have used torture? Does that upset you? Aren't you ashamed of our biggest ally?

"If torture has been used, yes of course that upsets me. You don't do that. I have my own opinion about that of course but I am the secretary general of Nato. And in my field, security policy, I have good relations with president Bush. It is not my role to take a position on Guantánamo Bay or illegal rendition or the International Criminal Court. These questions are more relevant for ministers. It is my responsibility to make sure that the biggest shareholder in this alliance stays on board."

But doesn't America's behaviour damage the image of Nato?

"I don't think so."

In Afghanistan the alliance is fighting its first large ground offensive and things are not going well. Is Nato up to the task?

"Nato can't do it alone. Because the solution in Afghanistan is not a military one. That's why it's s hard to get the country on the right track. The solution has to come from development, reconstruction and a political process on the Afghan side. Nato is not a humanitarian organisation; we are not aid workers."

But is Nato up to its military task?

"Yes, even if counter insurgency is a new thing for Nato. This is not a classic conflict between nations but a 'war amongst the people’, as the former British general Rupert Smith called it. You need to be careful not loose the hearts and minds of the people.

"Nato is up to the task militarily speaking but I admit it doesn't always come easy. We learn by doing. Sometimes there is not enough political will to contribute troops. A lot of effort has gone into that these past five years. But when I arrived there were less than 6,000 troops and they were all in or around Kabul. Now there are 60,000, spread out across the whole of Afghanistan.

"It is not all good. In the north and the west of the country there is relative stability and development. There is progress in the east. The real challenge is the south, where the Dutch are making a positive contribution."

The increasing violence in Afghanistan has gone hand in hand with the increase in Western troops? Aren't you afraid that the troop presence is counterproductive?

"No, I don't think so. And eighty percent of the Afghan population doesn't think so. There is still massive support for the troop presence. It's true that the suicide and roadside bomb attacks are increasing. But 70 percent of the violence happens in 10 percent of the districts. I'm not saying that things are good all around. But if there were no troops at all Afghanistan would be finished. I don't have to draw a picture of what a return to a Taliban regime would mean - not just for the Afghans but for us too.

"At this moment we still need more troops. We are often not able to hold on to areas that we have cleared of the enemy. And it is an essential element of counter insurgency that you need to show the population that they are better off with us than with the others. So you need to quickly build schools, drill wells, install solar panels...

"There are a number of areas in which we simply have to do a better job. So in that respect I am not leaving as a satisfied man."

You are frustrated then...?

"Not frustrated, no. But there are things that still need improvement and since this happened on my watch I feel responsible."

What exactly do you feel responsible for?

"Nothing specific but after five years I have to admit: things could be better in Afghanistan. But I must add: as secretary general I can only do as much as the government of the Nato member states will let me. I have to rely on my powers of conviction."

Can the Netherlands get away with saying: we are going to reduce our military effort in Afghanistan next year?

"That is a Dutch decision. It was taken by the government and ratified by parliament. The Netherlands' contribution has been substantial and impressive. That's what I always tell foreign journalists. Netherlands is up there with with the big ones and has been for a number of years.

"But I can imagine that there is only so much the army can do. There comes a point when you have to give man and machine a rest. I respect that. Just see what a C-130 Hercules or an Apache helicopter looks like after three years in Afghanistan. And the men and women wear out too, especially in 40 degrees heat. Of course I do hope that the Netherlands will continue to play a role in Afghanistan, whether it is militarily or in a civil role."

Nato was formed 60 years ago as a defence pact against a Soviet Union which doesn't exist anymore. Why we still need Nato is something we have never been able to explain to the Russians.

"Well, I don't know about that..."

Is Russia still a threat?

"No although it is sometimes easy to believe otherwise, But Russia is not a threat to Nato. Nato needs Russia and Russia needs Nato. There is no alternative. It is an important partnership. But it will always be a rocky relationship. That is partly because of history and partly because Russia and the Nato members sometimes have conflicting interests. That's nothing to get nervous about; these things happen in international politics. We have fundamentally different views on certain issues and sometimes that leads to fireworks. But we need the Russians for a number of urgent global matters, if only because they are a permanent member of the UN Security council and have veto power."

Still, Nato is divided about how to approach Moscow.

"I won't deny that there is a difference between those member states who used to be told by the Soviet Union what they could think and what they could say, and those who weren't. But we have always been able to reach a consensus vis-a-vis our relationship with Russia. It is important that the leaders in that part of Europe stop painting a picture of an evil Russia. Vice versa I have always asked our Russian partners not to portray Nato as an offensive organisation.

What will you do after you leave Nato this summer?

"I'm not going back into Dutch politics. I have said a final goodbye to that. I'm still thinking about what I'm going to do but it is bound to have something to do with international politics. That's my job and I think it is also what I do best. But my base will be The Hague. We are renovating our house there. My wife wants to pick up her teaching again. It is what she has done all her life and what she had to give up because of my work here."

Has it been hard on her?

"It is always hardest on the spouse. My predecessors never brought their wives to Brussels or they didn't have one. One result was that when we first arrived they never opened the left passenger door - there had never been anyone there.

"So we would arrive in our fancy official car and the man sitting in front would get out and open my door. I will never forget when we arrived in Istanbul for our first summit - I will never make that mistake again. I got out and started shaking hands with people and my wife was just sitting there on the left. Nobody opened the door for her. So she had no choice but to get out and walk around the car and she ended up behind the photographers and cameramen. She was hit in the head with the cameras. People were yelling at her: 'Get out of here!' Now I never get out of the car until she has walked around the car."