Only days before the Security Council meeting on Iraq last Tuesday, Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Iraq, Sergio Vieira , told Jihan Al-Alaily in Baghdad that neighbouring countries should be patient with Iraq's interim Governing Council In your recent regional tour have you secured recognition and support for the Interim Governing Council (IGC) of Iraq? That would be going too far if I answered affirmatively. I have detected some scepticism, a reserved type of attitude and in some instances a certain lack of information on the genesis of the IGC -- what it took to make it happen, what it took to come up with such a broadly representative group of personalities and that is understandable in the circumstances. On the other hand we have argued that, because of the circumstances which are truly peculiar, truly unique -- I don't think you would find another such model in contemporary history --, we believe that this governing council needs to be given a chance, needs the support of neighbouring countries, and I believe by the end of our discussions with the leaders with whom we've met we were paid some positive attention. Recognition but not support? Recognition but not inclusiveness and commitment to work with the IGC? I don't want to rate the approval of the governing council by neighbours. I have not finished my tour yet -- I've only visited Saudi Arabia, Syria and Iran. And even though I have met with the foreign ministers of Jordan, Egypt and Turkey as well as with the Arab League Secretary-General Amr Moussa in Amman during the World Economic Forum, I still need to visit those three countries as well as Kuwait immediately after the Security Council meeting. But what I have sensed so far is positive support, recognition of GC as an important step forward toward full restoration of Iraqi sovereignty. To the other side of the spectrum is benevolent neutrality towards the GC. I repeat this is not surprising because the GC needs also to assert itself as a cohesive body with a well-known policy. They will be making, I hope very soon, a policy statement including a foreign policy statement that will send a clear signal to the neighbours regarding their intentions in terms of good neighbourly relations and cooperation with the countries surrounding Iraq, so it takes two to tango. The Secretary-General of the Arab League, Mr Amr Moussa, recently criticised the appointed Governing Council and said it would have gained much more power and credibility had it been elected. What is your reaction? First of all, I would say "self- appointed". I don't think one should play with words here, I have seen everywhere in the media the GC presented as an appointed body. Yes, originally that is what it would have been, but I believe the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA), Ambassadors Bremer and Sawers, understood that it was preferable, desirable, necessary for the council to form itself and announce its formation without the CPA actually appointing its members, and this is what happened and I applaud the Iraqi political leaders for having achieved that, clearly in consultation with the CPA, and with some modest and discreet role on the part of the UN. Of course, if elections could be organised that would be the ideal formula. The problem is that you cannot organise general elections, certainly not democratic, free and fair elections in a matter of weeks, so while elections are prepared -- and I have indicated clearly to members of the governing council and to political parties here and to the CPA that the UN wishes to assist in the preparations of such elections -- while those elections are organised we needed an interim body. May I know which other formula was desirable or possible in the circumstances apart from the one that was found, this Governing Council; there is no other formula. In the eyes of many Iraqis, the Governing Council is seen as representing less the interests of the Iraqi people than those of the occupying forces. Any comment? First of all I think the Governing Council needs to be given time, no one should pass judgment on the Governing Council until it has functioned for a number of weeks, until it has appointed interim ministers, in other words until it has played fully its role and organised itself. This is a new body composed of 25 persons who were not used to working together, and it is a collegial type of body, and it is not easy to govern in a collegial fashion. Secondly, tell me who is missing in the GC? Look at the 25 persons in that council, look at their level of responsibility in their respective political parties or movements and tell me who is missing? So why would one say that this GC is not truly representative of the broad spectrum of political, philosophical and even religious trends in Iraq? Well, there are a lot of people missing and some say there are too many technocrats in that council who represent no one but themselves. Secondly, aren't you worried that the selection of the members of the Governing Council along ethnic lines would anger many Iraqis as we have already seen -- remember the council rejection statement issued by the City Council of Faluja, to name just one body. We did not expect unanimity. I don't think the members of the GC expected unanimous applause from the Iraqis or Iraq's neighbours. I think they realise that they are as representative as was possible. Of course if you want a truly and fully representative body the Governing Council should be composed of 75 or 100 persons; now how do you govern with such a large council? Therefore one had to combine representativity and size, so as to make it workable. Again when it comes to ethnic divide, I have not heard one single member of the GC speak of the future of Iraq through the prism of the long-term interest of its own community -- this applies to Kurds and this applies to Shi'ites. That they must be representative in the council goes without saying, does that mean that they bring into the council a sectarian vision of the future of this country or indeed of the constitution of Iraq? I do not believe that is the case... We are entering a new phase, I repeat give this council a chance and I am convinced that they will demonstrate that all of them without exception can transcend their own political or ethnic or cultural interests to work for a united Iraq where the rights of all communities are respected and protected. When you say give the council a chance, a chance until interim ministers are selected, until the constitution is written, until elections are held, what is the time frame that you are speaking of? You don't govern in the short term, so when I say give the council a chance, I am thinking of different stages in this transition between the fall of the Saddam regime, the installation here of a coalition authority with its military component which is that of an occupying force and general, democratic, free and fair elections that will lead to the emergence of a new internationally recognised legitimate government of Iraq. The first stage is obviously the appointment of interim ministers, and a policy statement; what is the platform of government of this GC? The following stage is: Which is the best option for the elaboration of a new constitution for Iraq? That is a decision that the GC will have to make after a consultative mechanism that they will put in place, it will be their decision, not the CPA's or ours. Will the process of finding the members of the constitutional council be via election or selection? The UN input will be to assist them in considering fully all the options available to them. We are not going to tell the GC we believe this is the preferable option. No. We are going to tell them if they request this assistance from us, these are the options which we believe are available to you, based on history, on expertise. The UN has worked on constitution-making and electoral process in a dozen different countries in the last couple of decades, so we will never tell them in substance what we believe is preferable, is desirable for Iraq, we will tell them these we believe are the options and let them decide. The third stage in terms of giving them a chance is preparation for elections. We have a lot of experience in that. I am bringing over in the next couple of weeks the head of the electoral division in New York of the Secretariat of the UN and she will be available with her team to the Governing Council, to political parties here, to the CPA to help them think through the difference stages that should lead to voter registration, the choice of an electoral system and to the actual holding of general elections, hopefully in 2004, this is what I mean by giving them a chance, let them govern, let them make decisions for the interim at least. Iraqis need to see a clear timetable leading to the full restoration of their sovereignty, but there appears to be a longer time frame envisaged by the CPA, to the effect that restoration of full sovereignty will not happen until after the drafting of a new constitution and after the holding of national elections, which certainly will take more than a year. What is the UN position on that? I cannot speak for the CPA and the time frame they have in mind. What I know from discussions with Ambassador Bremer and Ambassador Sawers, is that they see this process as one that should come to fruition sooner rather than later. This is what they tell us. Secondly, on the question of sovereignty, it is not for me to tell you when Iraqi sovereignty will be fully restored. The secretary-general has made statements based on Resolution 1483 that the time when Iraqi govern themselves must come soon, and we shall work towards achieving that in every area in every possible way we can as long as the Iraqis want us. Ultimately it will be up to the Security Council to decide when Iraq retrieves fully its sovereignty, when it can sit behind the name of Iraq in international organisations, at the General Assembly, when it can appoint ambassadors -- this is a decision which the secretary-general will not make, it will be the Security Council that will make it presumably based on the outcome of democratic elections in this country. So we must manage the transition, which is why I am saying give the governing council a chance to assume fully the executive authority it has, perhaps even gain additional authority through its credible and responsible performance and let's bring the date of those elections closer as much as we can with a view to restoring fully Iraqi sovereignty. Why haven't we heard you speak with a louder voice about the reported CPA abuses of the human rights of Iraqi detainees and the conditions under which they are held, there have been such reports, what have you been saying to the CPA in this respect? I have been discussing this on many different occasions with them and at all levels, including the highest. I've raised this with Foreign Secretary Jack Straw when he was here, I have discussed this with Ambassador Bremer and Ambassador Sawers time and again. I have even submitted a paper on this question to them not so long ago. There are many different concerns here. There is international humanitarian law, there is the laws of war, the Geneva Convention and there are broader human rights concerns. So far I have detected an awareness of these difficulties on the part of the coalition, willingness to engage in discussions point by point; detention of prisoners, detainee rights, family access, central data base, duration of preventive detention, access by defence lawyers, conditions of detention, we have even visited the new detention facility at Abu Gharib. I have also visited a small camp at the airport here in Baghdad where over 400 detainees are held. We have had a very open and frank discussion on these issues and I am happy that the coalition is taking them seriously; the coalition has recognised that a lot is still left to be desired and is acting on it. Always we hope and we appeal to them to show respect for the culture and traditions of this country. With the continuous deterioration in the security situation here in Iraq and with the current deliberations between the US administration, UN and with other countries -- are we likely to see a new UN resolution mandating the dispatch of UN-led peacekeeping forces? I am not going to give you any substantive answer to that question. That is strictly and rigorously within the competence of the Security Council. I know there have been suggestions in public to that effect from different governments, they will have to raise that in the Security Council and it will be up to the 15 members to decide whether that formula is a desirable one and when to apply it. But obviously there is a need to broaden the peacekeeping presence here and to relieve the American forces, which as a fighting force has not been trained for civil policing and peacekeeping. Do you feel there is such a need on the ground here? I am not going to answer you on that question. I don't have a military mandate here. The mandate that was given to me by the secretary-general and by Resolution 1483 is a civilian mandate. What is to be featured in the secretary-general's report to the Security Council, what other areas are you likely to highlight in your presentation to the council? Apart from military issues, the report of the secretary-general and indeed my presentation on the 22nd are as comprehensive as possible. We have clearly indicated that the UN is prepared to play a stronger, more active political role and that includes support to the GC, support to interim ministers, support in the constitutional and electoral processes, strengthening the ties between Iraq and the rest of the international community, from which it has been isolated and secluded for so long. We will continue to play our humanitarian role until the oil for food programme comes to an end in November, and ensure a smooth transition to the GC and the regional government in the North as well as the CPA after that. We will play our role in the repatriation of refugees, the UNHCR is working actively on that. We will also play a role in the physical reconstruction of the country, which is why we're preparing, with the UNDP and the World Bank, a donors' conference for the reconstruction of Iraq in October. We will play our role in a variety of areas. Human rights will be a central one. We will launch a number of projects in support of the media, in support of human rights organisations, in support of women's rights in Iraq, which is a topic that is not receiving sufficient attention, and you will see us active to the extent that the Iraqis will want us to be putting in place a new civil service, a new civil administration and, if necessary, even supporting the formation of a new police and of a new army.
