ANNAN VISIT: On the eve of his visit to Ireland this week, the UN Secretary General talks to Deaglán de Bréadún, Foreign Affairs Correspondent, about the Iraq war, the Darfur situation and the general perception of the United Nations.
Prior to his Irish visit this week, the United Nations Secretary General, Kofi Annan, spoke to The Irish Times in his office at UN headquarters in New York.
The holding of elections in Iraq next January was a matter for the country's Independent Electoral Commission, he said, and not the United Nations, whose role was confined to assistance and advice. "It will be their call," Mr Annan said.
The UN Secretary General arrives in Dublin on Wednesday on a five-day official trip to the Republic, which will be followed by a visit to Northern Ireland where he will give a speech at Magee College in Derry on Monday next, before travelling on to Britain.
Speaking at his office on the 38th floor of UN headquarters in New York, the world's top civil servant was clearly anxious to dispel widespread confusion about the UN's role in the proposed Iraqi elections.
"We will support and advise the process. When the Prime Minister was here, Allawi, he indicated to us that he is determined that the elections go ahead in January. It will be their call," he said.
On the crisis in Western Sudan, Mr Annan expressed deep disappointment that four members of the Security Council - Algeria, China, Pakistan and the Russian Federation - had abstained on a resolution threatening oil sanctions against the Khartoum government if it failed to protect the people of Darfur.
"This is an issue on which I thought there wouldn't have been any arguments and disagreements," he said.
The 15 Council members always had greater impact when they acted together. "On a moral issue like this, I would have been happier if there had been unanimity."
Paying tribute to Ireland's performance as a UN member-state, he said he was coming here because "periodically we need to find time to visit some of our model members and exchange ideas".
He will be addressing the Forum on Europe at Dublin Castle on the subject of United Nations-European Union co-operation and said he was "very excited" at the prospect of small military detachments from EU countries, about 1,500 strong, being sent into a crisis to "contain or nip it in the bud".
With a high-level panel on UN reform due to deliver its report in early December, Mr Annan said he hoped the proposals would be "bold". However, he expressed concern that the issue of reforming the Security Council was distracting attention from other priorities for the world body.
Meanwhile, Mr Annan firmly quashed speculation that he might consider a third five-year term of office. "Ten years is enough," he said.
Q. The issue that's burning at the moment is Iraq and the elections. Every day we are reading about more and more violence and it's looking very tricky for people to go out and vote at the end of January next year.
A. This is why every effort has to be made to create a secure environment. Obviously we are going ahead with the preparations but let me clarify from the outset; Iraqis have ownership over the process, the elections are being organised by the Independent Electoral Commission which the UN electoral assistance team helped set up, so we will support and advise the process.
When the Prime Minister was here, Allawi, he indicated to us that he is determined that the elections go ahead in January. It will be their call.
Q. So they will decide whether to go ahead or not?
A. They will decide. The independent commission will have to decide whether they go ahead or not.
Q. What will the criteria for a free and fair election be? Will the UN be able to endorse this electoral process?
A. It's a bit too early to say what will happen. We are giving them all the assistance we can. We have helped them set up a legal framework for elections, estab- lishing the Independent Electoral Commission, political parties law and we are giving them advice and support as the process moves forward. Obviously we will monitor it very closely and both the government and us will have to make some judgments as we go forward.
Q. The UN staff level is 35 at the moment and I see you have made proposals for high security. Are you satisfied there will be sufficient security for the number of UN staff required to assist properly in this process?
A. That is something we are discussing with the multinational forces, with the American government and the UK government. Obviously if the staff are going to go in they will need security and protection and that will have to be provided for them to be able to go in and do any work.
Q. A BBC interviewer pushed you and got you to say that the war was illegal under the UN Charter. I take it that is still your view?
A. I have caused enough problems on this one that I am not sure we want to get into that now, because really I have always, since the war, looked forward and tried to get the divisions within the organisation healed and for us to do whatever we can as an international community to assist the Iraqi people in stabilising the country.
Q. Do you think it's good for the UN to be involved in this whole process since there seems to be so much opposition on the ground?
A. The Security Council has given us a mandate and would want us to help to the extent that we can, but we are very conscious of the environment in which anyone who goes in will have to work. In fact, this was one of the reasons why the Council in its own resolution introduced a phrase that, the circumstances permitting, we should assist and so we are monitoring the security aspects as carefully as we can.
Q. The UN is a force for good in the world, so why are its personnel obliged to have so much security when they are trying to do good for these people?
A. This was a shock for us and for the entire staff because in the past we had always expected the blue flag to protect us. Our people, as you said, are there to assist, they are not parties to the conflict and so it was quite a shock when they were so deliberately and brutally targeted.
Obviously we are taking greater measures to protect our staff generally but we also have to be careful not to generalise out of the particular situation in Iraq. We are taking measures, working on the assumption that we seem to be operating in areas which are not risk-free and we need to take concrete measures to manage that risk and to protect our staff.
It would be very difficult for us and for those we help if we were to withdraw completely from the places around the world where we are offering assistance and this is a problem not just for the UN. Our essential partners, the NGOs and those who also work in the field like Red Cross are all confronted with this new phenomenon.
Q. On Sudan, what more can the international community do? The big worry is that we are facing another Rwanda but you can't just march in and knock heads together.
A. There are a couple of things that we can do. There is tremendous pressure on the Sudanese government to take effective measures to protect its population but we learnt from experience over the last couple of months that that has not happened and the Council has embraced the idea that the African Union was sending a force which is now being increased to several thousand men, all ranks.
But the African Union is a new union, it doesn't have resources and it's going to need financial and logistic support. I think the international community should give them all the support to be able to deploy rapidly.
Their mandate should go beyond monitoring the ceasefire, their presence should also be used to help protect the population and if they do send in police forces, the police forces should be able to monitor the local police to make sure that they are indeed protecting the population. That is on the security side.
On the humanitarian side, weneed additional resources. We are about $230 million short of what we need and I hope that money will be forthcoming because there is moral outrage. We are putting lots of pressure on the Sudanese to do what they have to do and we as an international community should be able to meet our own obligations and commitments and the pledges we have made.
Q. So, basically, the West - Europe, America - has to stump up money.
A. And not just stump up money, use your own influence also with Khartoum to get the government to really co-operate. But it's not just the government, the rebels must also respect the ceasefire and we should urge both of them to go to the table and negotiate seriously in the spirit of compromise to find a political solution, not just in the Darfur crisis, but they should conclude an agreement between the north and the south where they are very close.
Q. There is division in the Security Council and the Irish foreign minister said he was saddened and bewildered by that in his speech to the UN General Assembly. Are you saddened and bewildered by it?
A. Yes, this is an issue on which I thought there wouldn't have been any arguments and disagreements. When you talk to each Council member, they tell you they are pained by what they see, they are troubled by what's going on in Sudan and nobody denies that serious crimes are taking place there. But some have a difference of approach from the majority in the Council and this is where the differences had come.
I have always encouraged the Council in situations like this to work together and speak with one voice. They have greater impact when they act together and, on a moral issue like this, I would have been happier if there had been unanimity and it would also have been a much more powerful voice coming out of the Council.
Q. Did the Americans pronounce it as genocide a bit prematurely?
A. The determination of genocide is a judicial process. This is why the Council has asked me to send in a team to investigate what is going on, what crimes are being committed and to qualify the crime, whether it is genocide or not.
Q. Since Rwanda and Srebrenica were very damaging to the UN and to people's hopes for the UN, would you be appealing to the Security Council minority to 'get on side' for oil sanctions if the Sudanese government don't do what they are supposed to do?
A. I have spoken quite frankly to the Council members and indicated that they will have to maintain the pressure on the Sudanese government for it to do the right thing and if it gets to that stage, I would hope the Council members would realise that they need to take whatever measures are necessary to protect the vulnerable in Darfur.
The Council itself indicated in the last resolution that there was no automaticity so they would have to revisit that issue of sanctions and you are right on that, there are divisions but depending on what the Sudanese do or do not do, this issue may be back on the table and then I would expect the Council to face up to its responsibilities.
Q. The situation in Israel and the Occupied Territories is very bleak at the moment, the 'road map' process seems to be stalled. What initiative can the UN take to break this cycle of violence?
A. It's a very tragic situation, yet another one in our world. Two weeks ago, was it, we had the Quartet meeting, where we discussed the situation on the ground and what we could possibly do. We were distressed by the difficulties on both sides.
The Palestinians have their own internal problem on the political issue, Prime Minister Sharon has his own political problems within his party and his cabinet, and the most influential member of the Quartet, the US, is also caught in presidential and national elections. There was a sense there that maybe early next year one may be able to move the process forward.
In the meantime, we should do whatever we can to assist the Palestinians to resolve their differences and encourage them to empower the Prime Minister and the cabinet to go ahead with their work and, on the Israeli side, monitor what is happening.
The Quartet took a position that the withdrawal from Gaza should be in line with the road map and that it should be 'Gaza First' and the withdrawal from the West Bank would also have to follow and that it shouldn't be 'Gaza First and Gaza Last'. But for the immediate , we all seem to be stymied.
Q. What is the purpose of your visit to Ireland?
A. I hope to be able to engage the Irish leaders in a discussion about UN-Ireland relations, the role they play in it and their role around the world.
For a relatively small country, Ireland has been very active in this organisation, not only in areas of peacekeeping. A few years ago, you were very active members of the Security Council, you play an important role in the European Union. Interestingly enough, when you took over the \ Presidency, I said to a friend, 'They will get the Constitution through'.
Q. How did you know?
A. I knew that! (Laughs) There are times when there are advantages to being small and effective, you don't threaten anybody.
Q. So you obviously have respect for Irish diplomatic skills.
A. They are very good and I can tell you, in this building, you do punch above your weight.
Q. You're a busy man, it's a big world, you are going to China, that I can understand, but even as a proud Irishman, can I ask, why are you giving your precious time to come to such a tiny country?
A. Sometimes I am asked that question when I go to peaceful countries because I visit lots of conflict areas and I often say, nations, like other institutions and organisations, are made up of individuals. In any organisa- tion, whether it's a company or institution like ours, about 7 or 8 per cent of the staff cause all your problems and if you are not careful, you pay so much attention to them that you don't have time for the good ones. I think periodically we need to find time to visit some of our model members and exchange ideas.
Q. You will be speaking at the Forum on Europe about UN-EU cooperation. The Irish Chief of Staff spoke to me earlier this year about this idea of EU military groups of about 1,500 which could be dispatched to trouble-spots like the French were, in Bunia in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Is that the way forward?
A. I'm very excited about that prospect, in the sense that there are quite a few problems which you can either contain or nip in the bud if you are able to send in a force quickly and, in fact, if you do that, sometimes you can nip it in the bud and you may not necessarily even have to fight.
You sometimes have to show force in order not to use force because, in some of these areas, you have local bullies who get organised and begin to intimidate but they . . . will not stand up to a force - if one gets in early enough. In Bunia, it helped, and I think if we can take them in, which also means that you have to make arrangements for them to be relieved so that you can use them again and they don't get stuck. So it can be a very useful tool for us.
Q. Do you think the EU is a good instrument for this kind of force?
A. We have very good partnership with the EU in many areas, including security and peacekeeping and I think quite a lot of EU members have had very good peacekeeping experience and I am sure they can put together a very effective force.
Q. The Oil-for-Food investigation, chaired by [former US Federal Reserve chairman] Mr Paul Volcker: have you any comment about that?
A. I think Mr Volcker, Judge Goldstone and Mark Pieth will do a very thorough job. We have encouraged them to get to the bottom of this and we have asked everybody to co-operate, includ- ing our contractors. They are busy at work and I would want them to get to the bottom of this.
It's in the interests of the UN that this get aired and I think when the facts come out, the world will understand what contribution the Oil-for-Food programme made and how complex the whole process was. Honestly, I will be very surprised if some of the reports we read in the papers that are implying that almost everybody involved in it was corrupt were to be true.
Q. How big will the UN reform be? Shouldwe be expecting something thorough- going or just more nibbling and tinkering?
A. I think it should be bold. I think the panel of eminent persons will give us bold proposals and they will deal with the issues of policy, questions of when is intervention legitimate, under what circumstances, and how should it be authorised, how does the Council act . . . in these situations.
They will touch on the responsibility to protect innocent citizens, if the government concerned is not able to do it and, of course, move on to defining the other threats, but not just weapons of mass destruction and terrorism but they will look at poverty, environmental degradation and disease, such as HIV/AIDS and the impact it has on stability. We tend to forget that there is also economic bases for conflicts sometimes.
So they will have a clear assessment and definition of the threats we face and they will make suggestions for strengthen- ing the General Assembly and Ecosoc [the UN's Economic and Social Council] and of course the Security Council reform.
Unfortunately, there has been so much excitement around Security Council reform that sometimes one gets the impression that that is the only issue on the agenda. They will cover quite a wide range and I hope the member-states will have the will to embrace some of the recommendations we will put before them.
Q. You have been a huge success as Secretary General. Any chance you could go for a third term?
A. Absolutely not. Ten years is enough.