THE VINCENT BROWNE INTERVIEW/Mary Robinson: The interview took place in the Chaplain's Office in the Arts Block in University College, Dublin, on Friday of last week. She had just addressed the largest audience I have ever seen in a theatre in UCD - a meeting of the new Third World Society
She had spoken without notes fluently, passionately, humorously and then took some questions, responding openly and warmly. She appeared more relaxed and easygoing than for many years.
In the course of that address, she said "the world is an appalling place". She went on to say she would have liked to have included the "F" word in there somewhere but it perhaps would be inappropriate for her, given her position. The students loved it, perhaps because it was so surprising coming from her.
Mary Robinson is a different person from the President Robinson of five years ago. She knows more, has seen more and been radicalised by that.
She is more passionate, more focused, more fluent (the hesitancies in her delivery have much diminished and the hand gestures are less strained), she is more interesting. It would have been impossible to conceive of President Robinson ever considering the use of the "F" word.
Although pronouncements from the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights do not much reverberate in the major corridors of power, she has brought a moral stature to the office which has won attention especially from people working in non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and in sections of the media.
I first knew Mary Robinson when we were both at university, she at Trinity and I at UCD. Her best friend from her school days stayed in the same digs as I did and Mary Burke (her maiden name) used to visit a lot.
I liked her then but later became irritated by what I considered to be her soft liberalism and her pro-unionist leanings, when she was a Senator. I voted against her in the 1990 presidential election.
I was wrong about her suitability for the Presidency and I perceived my mistake vividly when I saw her in Somalia in 1993 and witnessed her raw anger and upset at the conditions in which millions of Somalis were starving to death.
Since then she seems to have grown into a figure of great substance and moral authority, not at all in the judgmental sense that many of us would have feared of her in the 1980s but in the committed, outspoken, fearless sense.
VB You said recently that this was the bleakest time for human rights, why?
MR Because the coalition against terrorism and the perceived need to combat terrorism, which I support, is being used by a number of states to clamp down on legitimate dissent, on freedom of expression, to imprison people as "terrorists," to suppress minority expression, to justify what has been done in the past and there's a blurring of standards instead of upholding strongly the standards (of human rights).
So it is a difficult time.
VB You mentioned in recent remarks some central Asian states and Middle Eastern states that had reacted to the September 11th attacks by curtailing human rights. I haven't seen you being outspoken about the American and British curtailments of human rights.
MR I have been addressing the need to uphold, in times of insecurity and crisis, the standards (on human rights), particularly the covenant on civil and political rights and the Geneva conventions (on the treatment of prisoners). They are there and we often don't think about them when we're not under stress. It's precisely when there are difficulties that we need to (observe such standards). We have very clear rules.
I have been in contact with the United States Mission in Geneva in particular, and I'm glad that within the United States there's a very strong pressure from international NGOs like Human Rights Watch and increasingly, I think in Congress, there's a perception now that it's important to gain the minds and hearts in this battle against those who commit terrorist acts.
VB In the course of the bombing of Yugoslavia, you were quite critical of the bombing on grounds of proportionality. Have you had any such reflections on the bombings of Afghanistan on similar grounds?
MR Yes. I did speak (about the bombing in Afghanistan), and I have addressed the concerns about the civilian casualties and the principles that apply, principles of necessity that you do only what is necessary to achieve the objectives and secondly, (the principle of) proportionality. And (in observing the principle of proportionality) you use only proportionate means and minimise or avoid civilian deaths and minimise as much as possible the destruction of civilian houses and property. I have made the same case consistently in relation to Afghanistan, publicly.
VB Is it your view that not enough was done in the first instance to resolve the issues in contention with the Taliban regime through peaceful means?
MR It's difficult to have a clear position on that. It's hard to be in the position of those who are taking the decisions. I do have an enormous concern for the civilian population of Afghanistan. The Taliban were not an elected government and established a very repressive regime, particularly for women.
I subscribe fundamentally to the dignity and worth of every person so (the life of) an Afghan child or an Afghan adult has equal value to the life of an adult killed at the Twin Towers.
But that's not the way we are seeing the coverage of the war in Afghanistan by the media, nor is it the reality of military strategies that result in civilian casualties. That these casualties are not accounted for punctiliously and publicly each time is a matter of great regret. Each time an individual or family is killed or their house destroyed, it should be part of a public noting because these people are individuals with names, with aspirations, hopes and dreams. Instead of that there has been a kind of attempt to say either that the numbers are exaggerated or that everything has been done to minimise casualties. The important thing is to value the lives and dignity and worth of each individual. Also, I haven't heard serious discussion yet about compensation. Is there going to be compensation as there was very quick compensation for the innocents killed in the Twin Towers?
VB You called for an inquiry into the killings of up to 600 prisoners at Mazar-e-Sharif. What has happened?
MR I supported the call by Amnesty International for an international inquiry. I am aware that they continue also to see it as being necessary. There is a possibility of a parliamentary inquiry being brought about by the British parliament. I have read quite detailed media accounts (of the killing of prisoners at Mazar-e-Sharif), there are eyewitnesses to most of what happened and I think it's important that there would be an investigation. It's an important issue but there are other issues that we are monitoring in the context of Afghanistan that would take more priority (in terms of) our limited resources.
VB What are those?
MR Recent massacres, where people were massacred in contexts either by Taliban or Northern Alliance. (We are concerned to draw attention to) the climate of impunity (an environment in which factions believe they can massacre people and avoid any accountability) and the importance now of addressing this as part of beginning the culture of human rights for the new Afghanistan. We have a requirement under the Bonn Agreement (on a new constitution for Afghanistan) to investigate human rights violations.
VB Do you have any estimate or has your office attempted to make any estimate of the number of civilians killed in Afghanistan?
MR Our office hasn't itself attempted, we are aware of some estimates and of some questioning of them and I am going to be very careful to cross-check on any figures because it is important.
VB: You called for the appointment of international monitors in Israel and the occupied territories and a UN Security Council resolution on that was vetoed by the US. Have you protested to the US about this?
MR I was very clear following my visit (to Israel and the occupiedterritories) at the request of the Commission on Human Rights in November of last year that it would be a way of reducing the risk of civilian killings, both of Palestinians in the occupied territories and of Israelis, if there were a presence on the ground (of international monitors) and I reported at that time. I publicly reiterated that at the meeting in Geneva in late December. It is important in my role to make such statements publicly (but) how individual countries vote in the Security Council is more appropriately a matter for the Secretary General (of the United Nations) if he wants to take it up.
VB You spoke a year ago of not seeking a second term (as UN High Commissioner on Human Rights), when your mandate expired in September last year. Then you agreed to have your mandate extended by another year. Will you be seeking further extension of your mandate from next September?
MR Obviously I have been considering this. I was persuaded to continue for another year after my term had expired, which would have been as and from the 11th of September by an ironic coincidence. When I agreed to do this, when persuaded by the Secretary General in Nairobi in early April of last year (to continue on for an additional year) I felt it gave me great peace of mind (for) I actually knew it was the right thing at that stage because of the enormous pressure from the grassroots of insecure human rights groups, much more than I had fully appreciated.
It was also important to be able to have a follow-up to the World Conference Against Racism. Obviously I hadn't anticipated the terrible events of the 11th September and this aftermath. I am obviously thinking very deeply about the issue (of staying on beyond next September). I will be discussing it at the end of the month with the Secretary General. I am determined to serve with energy and vigour and enthusiasm and pride, leading the team that I lead until the 11th September. I haven't made any definite decision about anything else.
VB What is your disposition at this stage?
MR I don't think I can even say that there is a clear disposition because there are many factors involved. I look forward to discussing it further with the Secretary General.
VB You have talked about ethical globalisation. What do you have in mind?
MR I am very keen that those who at the moment are very often characterised as anti-globalisation be encouraged to help influence the shaping of an ethical globalisation which would have many component parts.
The legal framework of international human rights would be one component. World Trade Organisation rules would be another, they have to be a lot fairer. Arms control, the peace movements, the women's movement, cultural diversity, environmental issues, indigenous people, they are factors that have to be higher on the table of decision-makers of both governments and increasingly the corporate sector - a need for a much more conscious follow-through on what is now called corporate, social responsibility.
VB In that context you talked about the right to food being part of human rights. Who would that right to food be against?
MR It's Article 11 of the Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the right to food meaning the right of people not to have barriers in their way of access to food. We could spend a lot of time on the rigour of how that would be implemented but it is not a wavy aspiration. It's a core discipline which the UN will consider again at a very high level at the World Food Summit in June in Rome.
VB You have been critical of Irish policy on asylum-seekers and on the treatment of travellers. Do you think the situation has been adequately remedied on those fronts?
MR No. I think that it is disappointing that on both fronts, Ireland doesn't live up to the lessons of our own history and I think that Ireland should be thinking more about managing migration in all its senses, as a country that more and more people will wish to come to.
Some of them will be desperate refugees and asylum-seekers who need the full implementation of the protection and safeguards that have been built up in relation to them. Others will be what so many Irish were, economic migrants desperate for a new life and we need to do more in that direction also. Then, I know from the Travellers, representatives for the Travellers, who came to Durban, that there is still a great deal that needs to be done in that context also, in an economically highly developed Ireland that has inequalities within it.