Situation in the Middle East and Other Matters
Ambassador John R. Bolton, U.S. Representative to the United Nations
Remarks to the media following a Security Council Stakeout
New York City
Released on August 15, 2006
USUN PRESS RELEASE #206
Ambassador Bolton: Good morning. I don't particularly have anything to start off with other than that we are working
hard to support the Secretariat efforts to generate an enhanced UNIFIL force. We've sent one military planner up from
the Pentagon. You know, the French have sent either one or two. We're obviously working to discuss with possible troop
contributors their interest in adding onto UNIFIL, as Resolution 1701 provides, and that's really, I think, the center
of activity. What we think the center of activity for the Secretariat should be is the implementing arm of the
organization to help generate the force and get it deployed as quickly as possible.
Reporter: Ambassador, yesterday we were told by the office of the spokesman for the Secretary General that although
there is a lot of talk, no one had actually, no individual country had made a firm pledge to commit troops. Are you
concerned about this, and what do you think about how -- what the timetable of this should play out in terms of, you
know, this week getting troops on the ground or -
Ambassador Bolton: I think that obviously the decisions have to be made by individual countries and their taking into
account the circumstances of the mission, the extent of the mandate, the operational difficulties. I did see a story
from -- I suppose I should say one wire service from Rome today quoting an Italian military official as being rather
skeptical of being involved in a UN force. But in any event, this really is a responsibility of the Secretariat. We're
doing everything we can to help support the generation of new contributions, but that's what the Department of
Peacekeeping Operations really is there to do.
Reporter: President Bush yesterday said that Syria's borders would be secured by UNIFIL. I don't know where that is in
the resolution. Or is that possible while its other responsibilities include southern Lebanon? Can you explain that?
Ambassador Bolton: The resolution provides that, as part of the provisions on the arms embargo, that there shall not be
any transfers of arms or weapons into Lebanon without the consent of the government. It calls on the government of
Lebanon to police its borders and other entry points to give effect to that provision and says also that UNIFIL, at the
request of the government of Lebanon, will assist in that operation. So the idea would be that the Lebanese armed
forces, pursuant to Resolution 1559, really, would take control of securing the borders and entry points and that an
enhanced UNIFIL could assist them. I think that's what he had in mind.
Reporter: Mr. Ambassador, is the United States encouraged that there seems to be some indication of an Israeli
withdrawal of some troops and that there's now talk of speeding this whole thing up and getting it done in 10 days? And
is the U.S. still expecting France to lead this force with a significant new commitment of troops?
Ambassador Bolton: I don't think there's any expectation one way or another. The contemplation has always been that
there would not be a vacuum in southern Lebanon such that the withdrawal of Israeli forces or the progress of Lebanese
armed forces in UNIFIL would be conducted in a way that would not permit Hezbollah to re-infiltrate southern Lebanon. So
the question of how rapidly that occurs depends on generating the enhanced UNIFIL up to 15,000 troops, as Resolution
1701 provides, and a decision by the government of Lebanon to carry through on the deployment of the 15,000 Lebanese
troops that they mentioned.
So this is really a test for the Secretariat in getting the enhanced UNIFIL in place and the decisions that have to be
made by the government of Lebanon. So how and under what circumstances the deployment of the Lebanese armed forces and
UNIFIL takes place, and how the consequent withdrawal of the Israeli forces takes place, is still playing out. I'm not
sure you can be encouraged by it or discouraged by it at this point.
Reporter: France?
Ambassador Bolton: You know, I think the decision on who the force commander will be will depend in large part on what
country makes the most significant troop contribution. And my understanding from various parts of the French government
is they have not yet made a decision on whether and at what level their force contribution will be made. So until we
hear that definitively from them or until the Secretariat hears that definitively from them, I don't think we know the
answer.
Reporter: Ambassador, President Bush has said that while the United States will not be committing any troops to this
force, it is open to the idea of logistical support and other things. Is that what the American military planner is
coming here to offer and discuss?
Ambassador Bolton: I think the logistician that we're sending up at the request of the Secretariat will be part of a
group of perhaps four or five senior, experienced planners to try and scale the nature of the mandate that has been
enhanced by 1701 and try and make decisions as to what kinds of forces would be necessary at what point, how to deploy
them and the rest of it. So it's not so much to foreshadow American logistical support, although I think that will be
forthcoming, as it is to augment DPKO's capabilities, so that force planning and therefore force generation can proceed
as effectively and as rapidly as possible.
Reporter: Mr. Ambassador, about the sequence of the withdrawal, are you worried that it is very complicated -- given
that the Israeli army would be perceived as an occupation army by the local population of south Lebanon, do you think
that's a tricky sequence? And how do you plan to react to it?
Ambassador Bolton: I think the sequence was essentially agreed to by the government of Lebanon, by the government of
Israel and by the Security Council, and that that's -- it goes coordinate with the notion that we want to take advantage
of this crisis to proceed more fully with the implementation of 1559. And what that has to mean is the effective
control, from a security point of view, over southern Lebanon by the government of Lebanon. And that means that -- to
prevent armed, as Hezbollah, from reappearing. And in that sense, I think, therefore, it's very much in the interest
both of the government of Lebanon and the government of Israel to have the handover take place as rapidly as possible
consistent with the goal of avoiding the vacuum. Let me just take one more.
Reporter: Ambassador, is Washington helping the UN round up troops for this mission so that it can go in quickly? And
have you heard from countries that were interested in contributing troops?
Ambassador Bolton: Well, the president has made calls. The Secretary of State has made calls. Others are making calls to
generate interest. But obviously each decision on troop contribution is made by each country. But we're also relying on
the Secretariat, which has the experience of generating contributions. Each country has to make its own decision, and
that's what we're working on now.
Reporter: Peacekeepers -- 15,000 peacekeepers go in here, to southern Lebanon; but yet Sudan, a genocide occurred, while
in Lebanon/Israel 1,100 dead. What does that say about the Council and the people who are living in Darfur? Ambassador
Bolton: I think that we're certainly accelerating our efforts to get the handover from the African Mission in Sudan to a
UN led mission, and hopefully we will make progress on that on the next several days. The question, as always, is
whether the Security Council can overcome the political objection from several significant member governments, including
two permanent members and the government of Sudan in this case, and we'll just have to see what happens. See you all a
little bit later.
Released on August 15, 2006
ENDS