In an interview with German newspaper "Stuttgarter Zeitung", March 13, 2012, General Carter Ham, commander of U.S. Africa Command, answered questions about the command's role in efforts to counter the Lord's Resistance Army, security challenges caused by terrorist groups in Africa, and the situation in Libya after the fall of the Qadhafi regime.
A year into his role as AFRICOM commander at the time of the interview, Ham said he has more appreciation for the complexity and diversity of security challenges faced by African nations. "I have been very impressed by the optimism of African leaders, both military and civilian," he said. "They realize that they have some significant challenges, but they are genuinely optimistic that they can confront those challenges and help their countries continue to progress economically, politically, and on a security front."
Of great concern to Ham is the security threats in Africa from al-Shabaab, al-Qaeda in the Lands of the Islamic Maghreb, and Boko Haram.
"We think it is best if the African countries are able to confront these threats and deal with these threats themselves, recognizing that a military response is only one component of an overall approach to countering these extremist organizations. You really have to address the underlying causes, which are often economic or developmental or political issues that are of concern," Ham said.
U.S. Africa Command assists African militaries by providing training, equipment, and other assistance to help them develop their capabilities and address security threats. As an example, Ham talked about U.S. assistance to Ugandan and Burundi forces to help them prepare for deployment with the African Union Mission on Somalia, which is making progress in countering al-Shabaab.
The complete transcript is provided below. ZEITUNG: OK. We would like to start with a video, a video, "Kony 2012." GEN. HAM: Yeah. ZEITUNG: I don't know if you've seen it. GEN. HAM: Sure. Of course, yeah. ZEITUNG: Up to 30 million people have viewed the film over -- GEN. HAM: Yeah, and we think it's now over 70 -- STAFF: Seventy -- a little over 72 million. (Cross talk.) GEN. HAM: Yeah, it's -- STAFF: And that's just on YouTube. GEN. HAM: It's huge. ZEITUNG: Just huge. So many, many, many people have viewed the film about these child soldiers and Joseph Kony. Did you expect such support for a video on an African topic? GEN. HAM: The reaction was a little surprising, that it is -- it has had such an attraction, I think. But it's a very compelling story. It's not a new story. Kony is -- ZEITUNG: It's for you -- GEN. HAM: Yeah, yeah, Kony has killed many thousands of people, murdered, raped, kidnapped; has caused -- his group has caused, some estimate, as many as several hundred thousands of Africans to leave their homes and to be displaced in the four-country region. So it's an interesting topic, to be sure. ZEITUNG: Are you happy or worried about the political pressure this produces? GEN. HAM: No, I'm not -- I'm not worried about that. We've been trying to help the governments of, again, the four countries that are mostly affected by this for many, many years. Unfortunately, when the peace talks broke down in 2008 and it became apparent that Kony was -- had no interest in a peaceful solution, the African countries committed to bringing him to justice. We now have -- there's now a U.S. law that has passed in support of this effort, and that's what resulted in the -- in the U.S. military advisers being provided to this mission. ZEITUNG: Why is it so difficult to -- GEN. HAM: To find him? ZEITUNG: To find him, to kill him, catch him - GEN. HAM: Yeah, it's a very small number of people in a in a very, very large area that's heavily forested; very rough terrain; very poor communications networks; not many roads; very, very difficult area in which to operate. And Kony and his group are familiar with that territory. So they can operate pretty effectively. It's a very difficult mission, but I'm increasingly confident that the Africans will be successful. ZEITUNG: But you are there only with people who assist these local military leaders -- GEN. HAM: Sure. ZEITUNG: -- or is it combat -- (inaudible) -- GEN. HAM: No, we're -- we are very specifically prohibited from participating in actual operations. Our role is training, advising and assisting. What I think the U.S. can do to help most in this effort is helping with some intelligence, helping with supply and logistics and with communications over these tremendous distances. ZEITUNG: Are these countries grateful for this help or reluctant to get it? GEN. HAM: We've had a very positive response. I've been now to each of the four countries involved: Uganda, South Sudan, Central African Republic, and Democratic Republic of Congo. I think they are -- my sense is they are appreciative of the assistance. The four of them are increasingly cooperating in their efforts to locate Kony and bring him and his senior leaders to justice. So I mean, I -- again, it's a very difficult problem, but I'm optimistic that progress is being achieved. ZEITUNG: I mean Kony's only one of these -- GEN. HAM: Right. ZEITUNG: -- local -- I don't know -- leaders who abduct children, with child soldiers. How strong is this problem in that area? (Inaudible) -- GEN. HAM: Yeah, I -- there are other groups that are violent. I don't know of any others that quite rise to the level of violence that Kony and his group have caused over such a long period of time. This is 25 or more years that -- ZEITUNG: (Inaudible) -- 30 years -- GEN. HAM: -- that he's been doing this. So the effect of Kony's group, I think, has been more significant than some other groups. ZEITUNG: So there are a lot of other challenges on this continent, for example, terrorism. How do you think -- and that these terrorist groups like Boko Haram in Nigeria -- you are faced with al-Shabaab in Somalia. How do they expand on the continent? GEN. HAM: Yeah, there are three terrorist groups that we focus on mostly: al-Shabaab in Somalia and in East Africa; al-Qaeda in the Lands of the Islamic Maghreb, operating in the -- Niger, Mali, Algeria, Mauritania region; and then Boko Haram almost exclusively in Nigeria. Each of the three of those organizations are very, very dangerous. Two of them, al-Shabaab and al-Qaeda in the Lands of the Islamic Maghreb, have now publicly -- a publicly stated affiliation with al-Qaeda senior leadership in the Pakistan-Afghanistan region. We believe that Boko Haram, while they have not publicly stated an affiliation with al-Qaeda, their actions, their messages seem very consistent with al-Qaida, but we haven't seen a formal linkage yet. We have -- so while I'm worried about each of those organizations individually, what concerns me most is an -- what appears to be a growing level of cooperation amongst those three African groups. We have seen -- ZEITUNG: Do they even coordinate their operations, or is it just an ideological network? GEN. HAM: We -- with al-Qaeda in the Lands of the Islamic Maghreb and Boko Haram, we have seen some clear indication of financial support, probably some training -- maybe explosives training, something like that -- so that's of concern. Perhaps because of the distances involved, their relationship with al-Shabaab is more aspirational than actual. But it is nonetheless of great concern to us. ZEITUNG: As you have said, you cannot send soldiers to fight them over there, if I get it right. What do you do? What's your work to fight this terrorism on the African soil? GEN. HAM: Yeah, we think it is best if the African countries are able to confront these threats and deal with these threats themselves, recognizing that a military response is only one component of an overall approach to countering these extremist organizations. You really have to address the underlying causes, which are often economic or developmental or political issues that are of concern. But there is a military component to this in terms of providing security, protecting the population. So what we at U.S. Africa Command try to do is work with the security forces of the African states to help them, perhaps with a little bit of equipment, with some training, with some assistance, to help them become more capable so that they can deal effectively with these organizations. The best example of that today is how the African Union Mission in Somalia is dealing with al-Shabaab. Again, with a little bit of training and assistance that we provide in the home nations of particularly Uganda and Burundi, those forces then deploy to Somalia and are starting to have some very good effect against al-Shabaab. We think that's a better role for us than a large U.S. military presence. ZEITUNG: We have seen a lot of turmoil, especially in the Maghreb states, over the last years -- revolutions. How does that affect these terrorisms? In some of these areas, we have thought that that's a pretty good area to go in for these terrorist groups, to spread and to find new roots from where they can expand over the African continent. Is that correct -- a correct perception -- (inaudible)? GEN. HAM: I believe it is very accurate. I believe it's a very accurate assessment. These extremist organizations seek to exploit vulnerabilities in governance. They seek ungoverned or undergoverned spaces. A great example of that is unfolding right now in northern Mali, where the Tuareg organization, which is -- which has political grievance with the government in Mali, is seeking to exert increasing control over areas in Mali where the Tuareg people are a majority. That's essentially an internal Malian political issue, but we see al-Qaeda in the lands of the Islamic Maghreb seek to take advantage of that -- of the political turmoil that is caused by that confrontation. So again, I think your assessment is quite accurate. ZEITUNG: After the death of bin Laden, at least some of us has hoped that al-Qaeda will implode, something like that. Did that happen, or are they as strong as before? GEN. HAM: I don't think al-Qaeda as a global enterprise is as strong as it was before Bin Laden was killed. You know, he was such a central character: charismatic; you know, had the ability to bring together groups of differing opinions. And it doesn't appear that Zawahiri and others who have now assumed the leadership role -- it doesn't seem that they're quite as effective as he is. But still, we should be clear: Al-Qaeda remains a very dangerous organization. They do continue to seek affiliation with organizations, and obviously, the ones we are most concerned about are those in Africa. But they remain a dangerous organization but, I would say, somewhat diminished after Bin Laden's death. ZEITUNG: What's the -- what's the situation in Libya right now? I mean, that was one of the states where we thought, oh, maybe we'll see a large group of al-Qaeda coming in and using this as a new base ground. GEN. HAM: We have actually seen indications that al-Qaeda's senior leaders desire to take advantage of the conditions in Libya. With the fall of the Qadhafi regime, while the transitional government seeks to get established, there again is one of these vulnerabilities which you mentioned that al-Qaeda is seeking to exploit. And so while we haven't seen concrete evidence of lots of al-Qaeda operatives, we've seen indications that they are desirous of coming to Libya. I actually am pretty optimistic about the direction in which Libya is headed. It's important to remember that they have now 40 or more years without the experience of a government other than that led by a single individual. So there is no -- the institutions of government, which we accept as normal, simply do not exist in Libya. So they really are starting from -- almost from a very basic point in forming their government. There are lots of challenges, to be sure, in Libya. How do we -- you know, how do we bring these -- how do they bring these many militia under government control? How do they establish, you know, credible political systems that address the needs of the people? But there are some very positive indicators: They have used some of the monies which have been unfrozen and made available to them to begin jobs training programs for the militia to help them learn other skills and become productive members of the society; a very significant effort by the transitional government in education and re-establishing health care systems; they have a very aggressive timeline for elections as early as June to form a constitutional committee and then elections about a year following to form the new government. So they have a good plan, I think. They'll need the support of the international community to help them move forward, but it seems like they're moving in a good direction. ZEITUNG: On the other hand, there's the danger too that the country falls in three parts, broke in three parts. How do you see this danger, this option for this country? GEN. HAM: It is a danger, and we saw as recently as last week some in the east proposing an autonomous region in the eastern part of the country. It's clear -- that clearly is not the intent of the transitional government. They fully intend to keep Libya intact as a unitary state. And that very clearly is the desire of the African Union and my country as well. We want to see Libya stay intact. But there will be pressures, I think, to -- internal pressures in Libya. They'll have to find their own way through that. I think they'll -- again, they'll need some international support. I would hope at the end of the day that Libya will remain an intact country and not fracture along some of these lines that some have suggested. MR.PORTNER: Is AFRICOM still engaged in this Libyan defense? GEN. HAM: Absolutely. The best way that I could describe what we're trying to do with the Libyans today is to establish a normal security assistance relationship. We had no military-to-military engagement with Libya -- or very, very limited under the Qadhafi regime. And now that the government is forming, we have a defense attache in Libya, as do many other countries. We have formed what we call an Office of Security Cooperation; this is the means that the U.S. government conducts its military-to-military business with a country. I've been to Tripoli. We've had the military chiefs visit here in Stuttgart to start to plan out our longer-term engagement. We'll have Libyan officers attending training in the U.S. as well as in many other countries. So I think we're off to a pretty good start, but there is still lots of work to do. ZEITUNG: If you look back to the military operation one year ago, without any doubt, it was a success in terms of ending a dictatorship, in terms of military efficiency maybe. But during this conflict, up to 30,000 people have died. Many people are still missing. When you resume this mission, was everything fine or would you admit any mistakes? Any lessons learned? GEN. HAM: I mean, nothing's ever fine. I mean, whenever you conduct military operations in a country, it causes damage, it causes deaths, and that happened. What struck me when I visited Tripoli was the precision of the strikes. You know, we talk about that a lot, but to be able to see it, to go to a place, for example, that was a command-and-control facility for regime forces and see that facility just completely destroyed, but adjacent to it an apartment complex that was untouched, it -- of course, I was very impressed by that. I know -- I'm well aware that there have been some reports of civilian casualties, and I know some specific reports have been filed with NATO and NATO has been requested to investigate those. I think the secretary-general has spoken on that. The issue now, I think, is how do we move -- how do we help the Libyans move forward from this -- (inaudible). There is rebuilding that needs to occur. Some of that is already under way in the most critical infrastructure. The ports are back up and opening and the like, the airfields the same. But it will take some time to -- there's no question but that there's a level of destruction of government facilities that were run by the former regime that will take time to be rebuilt. ZEITUNG: If you look back, do you think the Libyan rebels would have been able to gain victory without your help, without the help of this coalition -- GEN. HAM: It is important, I think, to remember what the mission was. The mission was not to help the opposition overthrow the regime. The mission that we at U.S. Africa Command were given was to protect civilians. Remember back a year ago, precisely a year ago, the population of Benghazi, about 750,000, was under imminent threat by the Qadhafi regime. We think back to the language that he used just -- again, just exactly a year ago, talked about, you know, hunting down these people like rats, made no -- was very clear that they intended to kill the people of Benghazi. And the Libyan force was nearing the city, so the U.N. Security Council resolution that condemned that and authorized activity was specifically intended to protect the civilians. Now, after we handed off the mission to NATO, then -- you know, NATO conducted operations for a much longer period of time. Specifically to your question, it would -- I think just from a military standpoint, I think it would have been difficult for the opposition forces to have been successful on the same timeline. I think they ultimately would have been successful because they had the support of most of the people in Libya to remove Qadhafi, but I think without the international community's support, and specifically NATO operations, it probably would have taken longer and the casualties would have been higher. ZEITUNG: You mentioned the U.N. mandate. There are people who suggest the anti-Qadhafi coalition stretched this mandate under the legal limits, for example, or even beyond. Russia and China opposed this authority. Do you think maybe that is one of the reasons today we are confronted with the situation in Syria and where -- (inaudible) -- it isn't possible to have maybe a mandate like in Libya? GEN. HAM: You're asking political questions of a soldier. So I won't go into the political aspect of that. I would just say again when the -- first of all, the conditions are very different between Libya and Syria, and I don't study Syria so much, because it's not in the area that we focus on, but it is clear to me that the conditions are very, very different. The -- I'm very confident that in -- the conduct of military operations in Libya when this command was in charge of them were completely consistent with the U.N. Security Council resolution. I know others have taken issue with that, to include some African countries have taken issue with that, to include some who voted for the resolution. I can't explain why they took that position, but I'm very confident and very comfortable that the actions -- all the actions we took were completely consistent with the Security Council resolution. ZEITUNG: Do you think in general there's a lot of illusions about the capabilities of military and soldiers? Or to put it another way, if you go back to this military engagement in Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, what do you think the military can achieve and what they cannot achieve? GEN. HAM: There's a lot -- there's a lot that the military can achieve. The best way that I think I could describe it would be to say that in situations like this -- Afghanistan is, again, an example of that, but certainly in addressing terrorism in Africa, the military is an essential but nondecisive component of an overall strategy. By that I mean there is -- there are some tasks which can only be accomplished by the military, not just American, but militaries writ large. But there are few, if any, missions which can be accomplished only through military force. Again, particularly in dealing with terrorism, it's the challenge of addressing the underlying issues, and those are generally not military issues. It's usually economic or political or developmental, sometimes religious. So again, we have a role in helping to contribute to security and stability, but it is those other components -- good governance, economic development, education, provision of health care -- those are the efforts that will have longer-term effect. R. PORTNER: If you look at Iraq or, right now, Afghanistan, how important is it to get the mind and heart of the people? I mean, it's especially the problem right now in Afghanistan. You have this American soldier who killed 16 civilians, and a new uproar and a lot of hate and mistrust, condemning the American troops. Is there any way to get out of this? GEN. HAM: Yes, but actions like that undermine in a very significant way the overall effort. Again, the primary role of the militaries -- not just American, but all militaries -- is to provide for stability and security. And the first step in that is securing the population. When there are instances where that becomes questioned by the people, either through the misconduct of members of the military or for other reasons, then it undermines the overall effort. I'm confident we'll be able to work through that, but this is a serious situation. ZEITUNG: What do you expect from your subordinates in this conflict; to behave how? GEN. HAM: We have a responsibility, I think, whenever U.S. military personnel are present in Africa, to ensure that we are abiding by our own standards, that we conduct ourselves professionally, that we interact with our African partners on a co-equal basis and that we try to convey to our African partners the importance of adhering to standards. What we try to do as we interact with African militaries is help them become the professional military force that they want to be, a force that is not only technically and tactically capable, but is also one that is respectful of the rule of law, respectful of human rights and sees itself and is seen by the people of the country as protectors of that society. That's not always been the case in Africa. In some cases, militaries have been used by particular leaders to be oppressive rather than protectors. We're seeing that change almost everywhere in Africa, and the professionalization of the militaries is an area where many African countries have asked us to assist them. ZEITUNG: If -- you told us you train soldiers; you organize military assistance in different ways. And you do all this for regimes of states which all of us wouldn't consider as pure democracies. How do you take care that these military capabilities aren't used to suppress democratic movement in these countries afterwards -- (inaudible)? GEN. HAM: We have a number of means that we apply. First is our several U.S. laws that require us to determine that the people that we are training are not people who have records of human rights abuses, you know, and violations of law. For example, if we're going to have a conference -- a training conference or if we're going to bring some people to the U.S. for military training, we have a process where we work with the host nation to do background checks and make sure that these people are the kinds of people that we would like to see gain in their skills. When we provide military equipment through foreign military sales or other programs, we have a program that we call end-use monitoring, which basically says if we're going to provide military equipment to a country, we always retain the right to monitor how that equipment is used so that we're certain that it is not used in an oppressive way but is used for appropriate purposes. So there are some checks and balances in the system. But mostly, I think what we're seeing is most of the African militaries that we work with certainly see themselves increasingly as a professional force responsive to legitimate civilian control, and so we're -- I mean, again, the -- there are still some challenges, but progress being made. And again, lastly I would say we do recognize that, you know, we're only one part of the U.S. foreign policy in a particular country. So the main themes of U.S. foreign policy in terms of good governance and in a -- respect for the rule of law, respect for human rights more broadly across the government, we try to mirror that in our engagement with the militaries. ZEITUNG (?): And how do you see yourself, as the -- foremost a soldier or a diplomat? GEN. HAM: Oh, I'm a soldier. (Laughter.) But I recognize, you know, particularly in this current job that I'm a soldier, but I operate in a political context. So again, the -- while our tasks are inherently military, in our engagement with African partners, we do that in the context of an overall U.S. foreign policy with regard to a particular nation. So there's some crossover there between the military and political worlds. ZEITUNG (?): And the State Department likes that? Or is that OK? GEN. HAM: Oh, I think they like us. I mean, you know, we all work for the same boss. We all work for the American people. Sometimes our approach might be different, but we have a very good relationship with the U.S. ambassadors in each country. Of course, that's the -- you know, that ambassador is the senior American in every country, and we obviously -- we don't do anything in a country without the ambassador's approval. We have very good relationships with the bureaus at the U.S. State Department that deal with Africa. We have several State Department -- very senior State Department people assigned to the headquarters here to make sure that our efforts are more fully coordinated. That doesn't mean we always agree. You know, we'll have meetings and sometimes have strong disagreement about the way ahead. But ultimately, you know, there'll be a -- the government will make a decision, and then we'll support that. It's -- and I'm OK with it, yeah. ZEITUNG (?): But especially in this role as not only a soldier, also a diplomat, you travel to -- through the -- through African countries for one year and then contact the political -- GEN. HAM: Sure. ZEITUNG (?): What have you learned in this year mostly? What was new for you in AFRICOM? GEN. HAM: That's a great question. It is just a year now. And I think I've been to 31 of the 54 countries in Africa. And you learn a couple of things. The first thing you learn is that there are at least 54 different ways of looking at problems in Africa, and there isn't a single African view. Each country looks at things a little bit differently. I didn't -- coming into this job, I didn't fully appreciate the complexity and the diversity of the security challenges that many African countries face. Another way to say that is a year into this job, I'm just now beginning to understand how much I do not know about Africa. Having said that, I'm -- I have been very impressed by the optimism of African leaders, both military and civilian. They realize that they have some significant challenges, but they are genuinely optimistic that they can confront those challenges and help their countries continue to progress economically, politically and on a security front. So I come away at this first year with a realization that there are many, many difficult security challenges across the continent but that the African leadership, which is really the most important leadership -- the African leadership is committed to seeking to solve those problems. And if we can help a little bit, that's a good thing for us to focus on. ZEITUNG (?): Do you think Africa is the most underestimated continent? GEN. HAM: I don't -- I would -- from a U.S. military standpoint, I don't know if necessarily "underestimated," but perhaps underappreciated. We didn't -- as a U.S. military, we didn't focus -- we didn't think much about Africa. And as the world's changing, I think the importance of Africa to global security, and therefore to our own security, is becoming increasingly apparent. So I'm encouraged by the focus that Africa -- that the establishment of Africa Command has had on strengthening the military-to-military ties with the Africans. I think that's a good step forward. (side conversation) ZEITUNG: There are strong forces in Washington who wants AFRICOM coming home. GEN. HAM: Yeah. Yeah. ZEITUNG: (Chuckles.) Do you think they will win this fight? GEN. HAM: Yeah, it's -- I don't know what the outcome will be. Our Congress has required that the Department of Defense conduct a study, an analysis, a comparison, if you will, of basing the -- continuing to base the headquarters here, in Stuttgart, or returning the headquarters to the continental United States. That study is ongoing and, I suspect, will be concluded fairly soon. The way I talk with people in Congress and people at the U.S. Department of Defense is, we are very well-served by this headquarters in Stuttgart. It's a good facility. We have a very -- a good quality of life for our service members, our civilian employees and their families. This is a safe, secure place. We're very -- we feel very welcome here. It is a home away from home for many of us. From an operational standpoint, being in a city that has a large international airport is very helpful for us. It also has part of that as a military airfield, as you know, that we use as well. So there's great convenience of that. Our travel to Africa, which is -- for most of the personnel here at the headquarters, is by commercial air, is easily facilitated by the airport here. So -- and then lastly we're generally in the same time zones as the Africans. So it makes just doing business on a daily basis is easier than if you were several hours offset from it. So this is a good place, and we have been operating successfully here, under General Ward's leadership, and I'm convinced that we can continue to operate successfully from here as well. If ultimately there's a decision that we have to move, then obviously we'll do that, but right now this is a good place for us to be. ZEITUNG: Mmm hmm. Do you think we will have this decision on -- this year? GEN. HAM: The -- when the command was first formed, as you -- as you may recall, there was a lot of discussion about where should the headquarters be. Should it be in Africa? Should it be in the U.S.? Should it be in Europe? And then-Secretary Gates and General Ward made, I think, a very good decision to say we're not going to worry about that right now; we're going to postpone that decision until 2012. Well, now we're in 2012, and so the Congress has said: OK, you said you were going to delay this decision. It's now the time. Do the study and give us a recommendation. The Congress has asked for the report from the Department of Defense next month, April, and I suspect that the Department of Defense will answer the Congress in April, and then there may be some discussion about what the ultimate decision is. I don't know. I provided my input, which is largely what I just explained to you. The department is looking more at the cost aspects of it, which are -- those are not factors that I can judge, because I don't have insight into what the -- you know, the costs of civilian personnel in the States as opposed to Germany might be. So there's a -- that study, again, under way. The report should be out next month. ZEITUNG: And my understanding is this is just a question if it moves back to -- if it moves to the U.S. or stay in Stuttgart, is it not optioned -- not still an option to move to Africa? GEN. HAM: I don't think so. You could think of some benefits of being in Africa. In this current fiscal environment, though, it would be so expensive to basically build a headquarters from nothing that it just seems to me to be beyond a reasonable option. It would be -- it would just cost so much. Basically, if you thought about replacing Kelley Barracks; building housing, schools, shopping areas, sports fields, churches, I mean, it's a very, very expensive proposition, and I just don't see that as realistic in this financial environment. ZEITUNG: But there's a -- I thought it's a large military base in Djibouti. GEN. HAM: There is, yes. ZEITUNG: As -- it would -- wouldn't be possible to move the headquarters, the Africa headquarters, maybe to Djibouti? GEN. HAM: We'd have the same problem. There are about 2,400 people in Djibouti right now that have meaningful functions, but there's no families. They -- you know, they live in expeditionary condition -- I mean, you know, small containers, and some of them actually live in tents. If we were to have the headquarters there, we would want people there for a longer period of time, permanent facilities, very expensive, we'd need to expand. So again, I -- you know, could it be done? Sure, it could be done. But I think the expense would be such that it -- again, it's just not a realistic option at this point. ZEITUNG: Djibouti's not such a lovely place to live. It's fairly (intensive ?) -- GEN. HAM: It's a very strategic location. ZEITUNG: Yes, strategic, but -- GEN. HAM: And it's a very -- it's a very good place for us to operate from. (Cross talk.) It gives us a platform to operate in Eastern Africa. But there are -- ZEITUNG: Only in Eastern Africa or maybe I'm -- if I look on the map, it's located only, I think, 200 or 300 miles away from south of Yemen. GEN. HAM: Oh, even closer than that. ZEITUNG: Even closer. GEN. HAM: I think the Bab el Mandeb is 40-something miles, perhaps, so -- 60 -- ZEITUNG: Just 40 miles? GEN. HAM: It's very -- it's very narrow, yeah. ZEITUNG: There are a lot of -- some cities in south of Yemen are under -- still under control of al-Qaeda. So are there any -- as you said, it wouldn't be a long way to the -- a long distance. Are there activities run, yeah, across this -- across the Gulf of Aden? GEN. HAM: Yes. Djibouti -- the base at Djibouti, while it's a base that primarily supports us at U.S. Africa Command, it also supports U.S. Transportation Command because of its proximity through the -- to the Indian Ocean and to the larger Mideast. U.S. Central Command is important to them, again, because of the proximity to Yemen. So it is a -- it is not only its geostrategic location internationally but it is important for multiple U.S. military commands as well. ZEITUNG: Do you also coordinate the cooperations with Operation Atalanta from the European Union from there? GEN. HAM: We do. They are -- some of the other nations which conduct maritime security operations in the Gulf of Aden, in -- and in the Red Sea and in the Indian Ocean operate from Djibouti. Your country has a presence there of maritime patrol aircraft, as do the Japanese, the French. Spanish, I think, often use the base. It's not unusual at all for NATO and European and other nations' ships to make port calls into Djibouti. So there is a very large international military presence in Djibouti. (cross talk) (END)
A year into his role as AFRICOM commander at the time of the interview, Ham said he has more appreciation for the complexity and diversity of security challenges faced by African nations. "I have been very impressed by the optimism of African leaders, both military and civilian," he said. "They realize that they have some significant challenges, but they are genuinely optimistic that they can confront those challenges and help their countries continue to progress economically, politically, and on a security front."
Of great concern to Ham is the security threats in Africa from al-Shabaab, al-Qaeda in the Lands of the Islamic Maghreb, and Boko Haram.
"We think it is best if the African countries are able to confront these threats and deal with these threats themselves, recognizing that a military response is only one component of an overall approach to countering these extremist organizations. You really have to address the underlying causes, which are often economic or developmental or political issues that are of concern," Ham said.
U.S. Africa Command assists African militaries by providing training, equipment, and other assistance to help them develop their capabilities and address security threats. As an example, Ham talked about U.S. assistance to Ugandan and Burundi forces to help them prepare for deployment with the African Union Mission on Somalia, which is making progress in countering al-Shabaab.
The complete transcript is provided below. ZEITUNG: OK. We would like to start with a video, a video, "Kony 2012." GEN. HAM: Yeah. ZEITUNG: I don't know if you've seen it. GEN. HAM: Sure. Of course, yeah. ZEITUNG: Up to 30 million people have viewed the film over -- GEN. HAM: Yeah, and we think it's now over 70 -- STAFF: Seventy -- a little over 72 million. (Cross talk.) GEN. HAM: Yeah, it's -- STAFF: And that's just on YouTube. GEN. HAM: It's huge. ZEITUNG: Just huge. So many, many, many people have viewed the film about these child soldiers and Joseph Kony. Did you expect such support for a video on an African topic? GEN. HAM: The reaction was a little surprising, that it is -- it has had such an attraction, I think. But it's a very compelling story. It's not a new story. Kony is -- ZEITUNG: It's for you -- GEN. HAM: Yeah, yeah, Kony has killed many thousands of people, murdered, raped, kidnapped; has caused -- his group has caused, some estimate, as many as several hundred thousands of Africans to leave their homes and to be displaced in the four-country region. So it's an interesting topic, to be sure. ZEITUNG: Are you happy or worried about the political pressure this produces? GEN. HAM: No, I'm not -- I'm not worried about that. We've been trying to help the governments of, again, the four countries that are mostly affected by this for many, many years. Unfortunately, when the peace talks broke down in 2008 and it became apparent that Kony was -- had no interest in a peaceful solution, the African countries committed to bringing him to justice. We now have -- there's now a U.S. law that has passed in support of this effort, and that's what resulted in the -- in the U.S. military advisers being provided to this mission. ZEITUNG: Why is it so difficult to -- GEN. HAM: To find him? ZEITUNG: To find him, to kill him, catch him - GEN. HAM: Yeah, it's a very small number of people in a in a very, very large area that's heavily forested; very rough terrain; very poor communications networks; not many roads; very, very difficult area in which to operate. And Kony and his group are familiar with that territory. So they can operate pretty effectively. It's a very difficult mission, but I'm increasingly confident that the Africans will be successful. ZEITUNG: But you are there only with people who assist these local military leaders -- GEN. HAM: Sure. ZEITUNG: -- or is it combat -- (inaudible) -- GEN. HAM: No, we're -- we are very specifically prohibited from participating in actual operations. Our role is training, advising and assisting. What I think the U.S. can do to help most in this effort is helping with some intelligence, helping with supply and logistics and with communications over these tremendous distances. ZEITUNG: Are these countries grateful for this help or reluctant to get it? GEN. HAM: We've had a very positive response. I've been now to each of the four countries involved: Uganda, South Sudan, Central African Republic, and Democratic Republic of Congo. I think they are -- my sense is they are appreciative of the assistance. The four of them are increasingly cooperating in their efforts to locate Kony and bring him and his senior leaders to justice. So I mean, I -- again, it's a very difficult problem, but I'm optimistic that progress is being achieved. ZEITUNG: I mean Kony's only one of these -- GEN. HAM: Right. ZEITUNG: -- local -- I don't know -- leaders who abduct children, with child soldiers. How strong is this problem in that area? (Inaudible) -- GEN. HAM: Yeah, I -- there are other groups that are violent. I don't know of any others that quite rise to the level of violence that Kony and his group have caused over such a long period of time. This is 25 or more years that -- ZEITUNG: (Inaudible) -- 30 years -- GEN. HAM: -- that he's been doing this. So the effect of Kony's group, I think, has been more significant than some other groups. ZEITUNG: So there are a lot of other challenges on this continent, for example, terrorism. How do you think -- and that these terrorist groups like Boko Haram in Nigeria -- you are faced with al-Shabaab in Somalia. How do they expand on the continent? GEN. HAM: Yeah, there are three terrorist groups that we focus on mostly: al-Shabaab in Somalia and in East Africa; al-Qaeda in the Lands of the Islamic Maghreb, operating in the -- Niger, Mali, Algeria, Mauritania region; and then Boko Haram almost exclusively in Nigeria. Each of the three of those organizations are very, very dangerous. Two of them, al-Shabaab and al-Qaeda in the Lands of the Islamic Maghreb, have now publicly -- a publicly stated affiliation with al-Qaeda senior leadership in the Pakistan-Afghanistan region. We believe that Boko Haram, while they have not publicly stated an affiliation with al-Qaeda, their actions, their messages seem very consistent with al-Qaida, but we haven't seen a formal linkage yet. We have -- so while I'm worried about each of those organizations individually, what concerns me most is an -- what appears to be a growing level of cooperation amongst those three African groups. We have seen -- ZEITUNG: Do they even coordinate their operations, or is it just an ideological network? GEN. HAM: We -- with al-Qaeda in the Lands of the Islamic Maghreb and Boko Haram, we have seen some clear indication of financial support, probably some training -- maybe explosives training, something like that -- so that's of concern. Perhaps because of the distances involved, their relationship with al-Shabaab is more aspirational than actual. But it is nonetheless of great concern to us. ZEITUNG: As you have said, you cannot send soldiers to fight them over there, if I get it right. What do you do? What's your work to fight this terrorism on the African soil? GEN. HAM: Yeah, we think it is best if the African countries are able to confront these threats and deal with these threats themselves, recognizing that a military response is only one component of an overall approach to countering these extremist organizations. You really have to address the underlying causes, which are often economic or developmental or political issues that are of concern. But there is a military component to this in terms of providing security, protecting the population. So what we at U.S. Africa Command try to do is work with the security forces of the African states to help them, perhaps with a little bit of equipment, with some training, with some assistance, to help them become more capable so that they can deal effectively with these organizations. The best example of that today is how the African Union Mission in Somalia is dealing with al-Shabaab. Again, with a little bit of training and assistance that we provide in the home nations of particularly Uganda and Burundi, those forces then deploy to Somalia and are starting to have some very good effect against al-Shabaab. We think that's a better role for us than a large U.S. military presence. ZEITUNG: We have seen a lot of turmoil, especially in the Maghreb states, over the last years -- revolutions. How does that affect these terrorisms? In some of these areas, we have thought that that's a pretty good area to go in for these terrorist groups, to spread and to find new roots from where they can expand over the African continent. Is that correct -- a correct perception -- (inaudible)? GEN. HAM: I believe it is very accurate. I believe it's a very accurate assessment. These extremist organizations seek to exploit vulnerabilities in governance. They seek ungoverned or undergoverned spaces. A great example of that is unfolding right now in northern Mali, where the Tuareg organization, which is -- which has political grievance with the government in Mali, is seeking to exert increasing control over areas in Mali where the Tuareg people are a majority. That's essentially an internal Malian political issue, but we see al-Qaeda in the lands of the Islamic Maghreb seek to take advantage of that -- of the political turmoil that is caused by that confrontation. So again, I think your assessment is quite accurate. ZEITUNG: After the death of bin Laden, at least some of us has hoped that al-Qaeda will implode, something like that. Did that happen, or are they as strong as before? GEN. HAM: I don't think al-Qaeda as a global enterprise is as strong as it was before Bin Laden was killed. You know, he was such a central character: charismatic; you know, had the ability to bring together groups of differing opinions. And it doesn't appear that Zawahiri and others who have now assumed the leadership role -- it doesn't seem that they're quite as effective as he is. But still, we should be clear: Al-Qaeda remains a very dangerous organization. They do continue to seek affiliation with organizations, and obviously, the ones we are most concerned about are those in Africa. But they remain a dangerous organization but, I would say, somewhat diminished after Bin Laden's death. ZEITUNG: What's the -- what's the situation in Libya right now? I mean, that was one of the states where we thought, oh, maybe we'll see a large group of al-Qaeda coming in and using this as a new base ground. GEN. HAM: We have actually seen indications that al-Qaeda's senior leaders desire to take advantage of the conditions in Libya. With the fall of the Qadhafi regime, while the transitional government seeks to get established, there again is one of these vulnerabilities which you mentioned that al-Qaeda is seeking to exploit. And so while we haven't seen concrete evidence of lots of al-Qaeda operatives, we've seen indications that they are desirous of coming to Libya. I actually am pretty optimistic about the direction in which Libya is headed. It's important to remember that they have now 40 or more years without the experience of a government other than that led by a single individual. So there is no -- the institutions of government, which we accept as normal, simply do not exist in Libya. So they really are starting from -- almost from a very basic point in forming their government. There are lots of challenges, to be sure, in Libya. How do we -- you know, how do we bring these -- how do they bring these many militia under government control? How do they establish, you know, credible political systems that address the needs of the people? But there are some very positive indicators: They have used some of the monies which have been unfrozen and made available to them to begin jobs training programs for the militia to help them learn other skills and become productive members of the society; a very significant effort by the transitional government in education and re-establishing health care systems; they have a very aggressive timeline for elections as early as June to form a constitutional committee and then elections about a year following to form the new government. So they have a good plan, I think. They'll need the support of the international community to help them move forward, but it seems like they're moving in a good direction. ZEITUNG: On the other hand, there's the danger too that the country falls in three parts, broke in three parts. How do you see this danger, this option for this country? GEN. HAM: It is a danger, and we saw as recently as last week some in the east proposing an autonomous region in the eastern part of the country. It's clear -- that clearly is not the intent of the transitional government. They fully intend to keep Libya intact as a unitary state. And that very clearly is the desire of the African Union and my country as well. We want to see Libya stay intact. But there will be pressures, I think, to -- internal pressures in Libya. They'll have to find their own way through that. I think they'll -- again, they'll need some international support. I would hope at the end of the day that Libya will remain an intact country and not fracture along some of these lines that some have suggested. MR.PORTNER: Is AFRICOM still engaged in this Libyan defense? GEN. HAM: Absolutely. The best way that I could describe what we're trying to do with the Libyans today is to establish a normal security assistance relationship. We had no military-to-military engagement with Libya -- or very, very limited under the Qadhafi regime. And now that the government is forming, we have a defense attache in Libya, as do many other countries. We have formed what we call an Office of Security Cooperation; this is the means that the U.S. government conducts its military-to-military business with a country. I've been to Tripoli. We've had the military chiefs visit here in Stuttgart to start to plan out our longer-term engagement. We'll have Libyan officers attending training in the U.S. as well as in many other countries. So I think we're off to a pretty good start, but there is still lots of work to do. ZEITUNG: If you look back to the military operation one year ago, without any doubt, it was a success in terms of ending a dictatorship, in terms of military efficiency maybe. But during this conflict, up to 30,000 people have died. Many people are still missing. When you resume this mission, was everything fine or would you admit any mistakes? Any lessons learned? GEN. HAM: I mean, nothing's ever fine. I mean, whenever you conduct military operations in a country, it causes damage, it causes deaths, and that happened. What struck me when I visited Tripoli was the precision of the strikes. You know, we talk about that a lot, but to be able to see it, to go to a place, for example, that was a command-and-control facility for regime forces and see that facility just completely destroyed, but adjacent to it an apartment complex that was untouched, it -- of course, I was very impressed by that. I know -- I'm well aware that there have been some reports of civilian casualties, and I know some specific reports have been filed with NATO and NATO has been requested to investigate those. I think the secretary-general has spoken on that. The issue now, I think, is how do we move -- how do we help the Libyans move forward from this -- (inaudible). There is rebuilding that needs to occur. Some of that is already under way in the most critical infrastructure. The ports are back up and opening and the like, the airfields the same. But it will take some time to -- there's no question but that there's a level of destruction of government facilities that were run by the former regime that will take time to be rebuilt. ZEITUNG: If you look back, do you think the Libyan rebels would have been able to gain victory without your help, without the help of this coalition -- GEN. HAM: It is important, I think, to remember what the mission was. The mission was not to help the opposition overthrow the regime. The mission that we at U.S. Africa Command were given was to protect civilians. Remember back a year ago, precisely a year ago, the population of Benghazi, about 750,000, was under imminent threat by the Qadhafi regime. We think back to the language that he used just -- again, just exactly a year ago, talked about, you know, hunting down these people like rats, made no -- was very clear that they intended to kill the people of Benghazi. And the Libyan force was nearing the city, so the U.N. Security Council resolution that condemned that and authorized activity was specifically intended to protect the civilians. Now, after we handed off the mission to NATO, then -- you know, NATO conducted operations for a much longer period of time. Specifically to your question, it would -- I think just from a military standpoint, I think it would have been difficult for the opposition forces to have been successful on the same timeline. I think they ultimately would have been successful because they had the support of most of the people in Libya to remove Qadhafi, but I think without the international community's support, and specifically NATO operations, it probably would have taken longer and the casualties would have been higher. ZEITUNG: You mentioned the U.N. mandate. There are people who suggest the anti-Qadhafi coalition stretched this mandate under the legal limits, for example, or even beyond. Russia and China opposed this authority. Do you think maybe that is one of the reasons today we are confronted with the situation in Syria and where -- (inaudible) -- it isn't possible to have maybe a mandate like in Libya? GEN. HAM: You're asking political questions of a soldier. So I won't go into the political aspect of that. I would just say again when the -- first of all, the conditions are very different between Libya and Syria, and I don't study Syria so much, because it's not in the area that we focus on, but it is clear to me that the conditions are very, very different. The -- I'm very confident that in -- the conduct of military operations in Libya when this command was in charge of them were completely consistent with the U.N. Security Council resolution. I know others have taken issue with that, to include some African countries have taken issue with that, to include some who voted for the resolution. I can't explain why they took that position, but I'm very confident and very comfortable that the actions -- all the actions we took were completely consistent with the Security Council resolution. ZEITUNG: Do you think in general there's a lot of illusions about the capabilities of military and soldiers? Or to put it another way, if you go back to this military engagement in Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, what do you think the military can achieve and what they cannot achieve? GEN. HAM: There's a lot -- there's a lot that the military can achieve. The best way that I think I could describe it would be to say that in situations like this -- Afghanistan is, again, an example of that, but certainly in addressing terrorism in Africa, the military is an essential but nondecisive component of an overall strategy. By that I mean there is -- there are some tasks which can only be accomplished by the military, not just American, but militaries writ large. But there are few, if any, missions which can be accomplished only through military force. Again, particularly in dealing with terrorism, it's the challenge of addressing the underlying issues, and those are generally not military issues. It's usually economic or political or developmental, sometimes religious. So again, we have a role in helping to contribute to security and stability, but it is those other components -- good governance, economic development, education, provision of health care -- those are the efforts that will have longer-term effect. R. PORTNER: If you look at Iraq or, right now, Afghanistan, how important is it to get the mind and heart of the people? I mean, it's especially the problem right now in Afghanistan. You have this American soldier who killed 16 civilians, and a new uproar and a lot of hate and mistrust, condemning the American troops. Is there any way to get out of this? GEN. HAM: Yes, but actions like that undermine in a very significant way the overall effort. Again, the primary role of the militaries -- not just American, but all militaries -- is to provide for stability and security. And the first step in that is securing the population. When there are instances where that becomes questioned by the people, either through the misconduct of members of the military or for other reasons, then it undermines the overall effort. I'm confident we'll be able to work through that, but this is a serious situation. ZEITUNG: What do you expect from your subordinates in this conflict; to behave how? GEN. HAM: We have a responsibility, I think, whenever U.S. military personnel are present in Africa, to ensure that we are abiding by our own standards, that we conduct ourselves professionally, that we interact with our African partners on a co-equal basis and that we try to convey to our African partners the importance of adhering to standards. What we try to do as we interact with African militaries is help them become the professional military force that they want to be, a force that is not only technically and tactically capable, but is also one that is respectful of the rule of law, respectful of human rights and sees itself and is seen by the people of the country as protectors of that society. That's not always been the case in Africa. In some cases, militaries have been used by particular leaders to be oppressive rather than protectors. We're seeing that change almost everywhere in Africa, and the professionalization of the militaries is an area where many African countries have asked us to assist them. ZEITUNG: If -- you told us you train soldiers; you organize military assistance in different ways. And you do all this for regimes of states which all of us wouldn't consider as pure democracies. How do you take care that these military capabilities aren't used to suppress democratic movement in these countries afterwards -- (inaudible)? GEN. HAM: We have a number of means that we apply. First is our several U.S. laws that require us to determine that the people that we are training are not people who have records of human rights abuses, you know, and violations of law. For example, if we're going to have a conference -- a training conference or if we're going to bring some people to the U.S. for military training, we have a process where we work with the host nation to do background checks and make sure that these people are the kinds of people that we would like to see gain in their skills. When we provide military equipment through foreign military sales or other programs, we have a program that we call end-use monitoring, which basically says if we're going to provide military equipment to a country, we always retain the right to monitor how that equipment is used so that we're certain that it is not used in an oppressive way but is used for appropriate purposes. So there are some checks and balances in the system. But mostly, I think what we're seeing is most of the African militaries that we work with certainly see themselves increasingly as a professional force responsive to legitimate civilian control, and so we're -- I mean, again, the -- there are still some challenges, but progress being made. And again, lastly I would say we do recognize that, you know, we're only one part of the U.S. foreign policy in a particular country. So the main themes of U.S. foreign policy in terms of good governance and in a -- respect for the rule of law, respect for human rights more broadly across the government, we try to mirror that in our engagement with the militaries. ZEITUNG (?): And how do you see yourself, as the -- foremost a soldier or a diplomat? GEN. HAM: Oh, I'm a soldier. (Laughter.) But I recognize, you know, particularly in this current job that I'm a soldier, but I operate in a political context. So again, the -- while our tasks are inherently military, in our engagement with African partners, we do that in the context of an overall U.S. foreign policy with regard to a particular nation. So there's some crossover there between the military and political worlds. ZEITUNG (?): And the State Department likes that? Or is that OK? GEN. HAM: Oh, I think they like us. I mean, you know, we all work for the same boss. We all work for the American people. Sometimes our approach might be different, but we have a very good relationship with the U.S. ambassadors in each country. Of course, that's the -- you know, that ambassador is the senior American in every country, and we obviously -- we don't do anything in a country without the ambassador's approval. We have very good relationships with the bureaus at the U.S. State Department that deal with Africa. We have several State Department -- very senior State Department people assigned to the headquarters here to make sure that our efforts are more fully coordinated. That doesn't mean we always agree. You know, we'll have meetings and sometimes have strong disagreement about the way ahead. But ultimately, you know, there'll be a -- the government will make a decision, and then we'll support that. It's -- and I'm OK with it, yeah. ZEITUNG (?): But especially in this role as not only a soldier, also a diplomat, you travel to -- through the -- through African countries for one year and then contact the political -- GEN. HAM: Sure. ZEITUNG (?): What have you learned in this year mostly? What was new for you in AFRICOM? GEN. HAM: That's a great question. It is just a year now. And I think I've been to 31 of the 54 countries in Africa. And you learn a couple of things. The first thing you learn is that there are at least 54 different ways of looking at problems in Africa, and there isn't a single African view. Each country looks at things a little bit differently. I didn't -- coming into this job, I didn't fully appreciate the complexity and the diversity of the security challenges that many African countries face. Another way to say that is a year into this job, I'm just now beginning to understand how much I do not know about Africa. Having said that, I'm -- I have been very impressed by the optimism of African leaders, both military and civilian. They realize that they have some significant challenges, but they are genuinely optimistic that they can confront those challenges and help their countries continue to progress economically, politically and on a security front. So I come away at this first year with a realization that there are many, many difficult security challenges across the continent but that the African leadership, which is really the most important leadership -- the African leadership is committed to seeking to solve those problems. And if we can help a little bit, that's a good thing for us to focus on. ZEITUNG (?): Do you think Africa is the most underestimated continent? GEN. HAM: I don't -- I would -- from a U.S. military standpoint, I don't know if necessarily "underestimated," but perhaps underappreciated. We didn't -- as a U.S. military, we didn't focus -- we didn't think much about Africa. And as the world's changing, I think the importance of Africa to global security, and therefore to our own security, is becoming increasingly apparent. So I'm encouraged by the focus that Africa -- that the establishment of Africa Command has had on strengthening the military-to-military ties with the Africans. I think that's a good step forward. (side conversation) ZEITUNG: There are strong forces in Washington who wants AFRICOM coming home. GEN. HAM: Yeah. Yeah. ZEITUNG: (Chuckles.) Do you think they will win this fight? GEN. HAM: Yeah, it's -- I don't know what the outcome will be. Our Congress has required that the Department of Defense conduct a study, an analysis, a comparison, if you will, of basing the -- continuing to base the headquarters here, in Stuttgart, or returning the headquarters to the continental United States. That study is ongoing and, I suspect, will be concluded fairly soon. The way I talk with people in Congress and people at the U.S. Department of Defense is, we are very well-served by this headquarters in Stuttgart. It's a good facility. We have a very -- a good quality of life for our service members, our civilian employees and their families. This is a safe, secure place. We're very -- we feel very welcome here. It is a home away from home for many of us. From an operational standpoint, being in a city that has a large international airport is very helpful for us. It also has part of that as a military airfield, as you know, that we use as well. So there's great convenience of that. Our travel to Africa, which is -- for most of the personnel here at the headquarters, is by commercial air, is easily facilitated by the airport here. So -- and then lastly we're generally in the same time zones as the Africans. So it makes just doing business on a daily basis is easier than if you were several hours offset from it. So this is a good place, and we have been operating successfully here, under General Ward's leadership, and I'm convinced that we can continue to operate successfully from here as well. If ultimately there's a decision that we have to move, then obviously we'll do that, but right now this is a good place for us to be. ZEITUNG: Mmm hmm. Do you think we will have this decision on -- this year? GEN. HAM: The -- when the command was first formed, as you -- as you may recall, there was a lot of discussion about where should the headquarters be. Should it be in Africa? Should it be in the U.S.? Should it be in Europe? And then-Secretary Gates and General Ward made, I think, a very good decision to say we're not going to worry about that right now; we're going to postpone that decision until 2012. Well, now we're in 2012, and so the Congress has said: OK, you said you were going to delay this decision. It's now the time. Do the study and give us a recommendation. The Congress has asked for the report from the Department of Defense next month, April, and I suspect that the Department of Defense will answer the Congress in April, and then there may be some discussion about what the ultimate decision is. I don't know. I provided my input, which is largely what I just explained to you. The department is looking more at the cost aspects of it, which are -- those are not factors that I can judge, because I don't have insight into what the -- you know, the costs of civilian personnel in the States as opposed to Germany might be. So there's a -- that study, again, under way. The report should be out next month. ZEITUNG: And my understanding is this is just a question if it moves back to -- if it moves to the U.S. or stay in Stuttgart, is it not optioned -- not still an option to move to Africa? GEN. HAM: I don't think so. You could think of some benefits of being in Africa. In this current fiscal environment, though, it would be so expensive to basically build a headquarters from nothing that it just seems to me to be beyond a reasonable option. It would be -- it would just cost so much. Basically, if you thought about replacing Kelley Barracks; building housing, schools, shopping areas, sports fields, churches, I mean, it's a very, very expensive proposition, and I just don't see that as realistic in this financial environment. ZEITUNG: But there's a -- I thought it's a large military base in Djibouti. GEN. HAM: There is, yes. ZEITUNG: As -- it would -- wouldn't be possible to move the headquarters, the Africa headquarters, maybe to Djibouti? GEN. HAM: We'd have the same problem. There are about 2,400 people in Djibouti right now that have meaningful functions, but there's no families. They -- you know, they live in expeditionary condition -- I mean, you know, small containers, and some of them actually live in tents. If we were to have the headquarters there, we would want people there for a longer period of time, permanent facilities, very expensive, we'd need to expand. So again, I -- you know, could it be done? Sure, it could be done. But I think the expense would be such that it -- again, it's just not a realistic option at this point. ZEITUNG: Djibouti's not such a lovely place to live. It's fairly (intensive ?) -- GEN. HAM: It's a very strategic location. ZEITUNG: Yes, strategic, but -- GEN. HAM: And it's a very -- it's a very good place for us to operate from. (Cross talk.) It gives us a platform to operate in Eastern Africa. But there are -- ZEITUNG: Only in Eastern Africa or maybe I'm -- if I look on the map, it's located only, I think, 200 or 300 miles away from south of Yemen. GEN. HAM: Oh, even closer than that. ZEITUNG: Even closer. GEN. HAM: I think the Bab el Mandeb is 40-something miles, perhaps, so -- 60 -- ZEITUNG: Just 40 miles? GEN. HAM: It's very -- it's very narrow, yeah. ZEITUNG: There are a lot of -- some cities in south of Yemen are under -- still under control of al-Qaeda. So are there any -- as you said, it wouldn't be a long way to the -- a long distance. Are there activities run, yeah, across this -- across the Gulf of Aden? GEN. HAM: Yes. Djibouti -- the base at Djibouti, while it's a base that primarily supports us at U.S. Africa Command, it also supports U.S. Transportation Command because of its proximity through the -- to the Indian Ocean and to the larger Mideast. U.S. Central Command is important to them, again, because of the proximity to Yemen. So it is a -- it is not only its geostrategic location internationally but it is important for multiple U.S. military commands as well. ZEITUNG: Do you also coordinate the cooperations with Operation Atalanta from the European Union from there? GEN. HAM: We do. They are -- some of the other nations which conduct maritime security operations in the Gulf of Aden, in -- and in the Red Sea and in the Indian Ocean operate from Djibouti. Your country has a presence there of maritime patrol aircraft, as do the Japanese, the French. Spanish, I think, often use the base. It's not unusual at all for NATO and European and other nations' ships to make port calls into Djibouti. So there is a very large international military presence in Djibouti. (cross talk) (END)