PRESS BRIEFING BY SECURITY COUNCIL PRESIDENT

PRESS BRIEFING BY SECURITY COUNCIL PRESIDENT

Briefing correspondents at Headquarters today on the Council’s schedule for September and taking several questions on Iraq, Emyr Jones Parry (United Kingdom) said that “the time had come to accept that we are where we are and we need to move forward as soon as possible to transfer responsibility back to the Iraqis”.

The aim of a further resolution on Iraq, he said, was to bring together the commitment of the international community to make a success of the situation, to heal any remaining divisions within the Council, and to carry forward the determination to assure a peaceful resolution, through progress on the political, security and economic fronts.

In opening remarks, Mr. Parry, whose delegation holds the Council presidency for the month, said that, as he had been here only six weeks, he was looking forward to that “accident of the alphabet”, that had put him in that chair.  He read out two statements to the press on the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and on the Western Sahara.  (See Press Releases SC/7862-AFR/695 and SC/7863 issued today.)

Turning to a possible ministerial meeting on 24 September, on justice and the rule of law:  the United Nations role, Mr. Perry said that the subject had been low key at first, but in its impact and what it meant for States emerging from conflict made it quite crucial.  The meeting would be about how to handle the whole question of justice in transition and identifying what needed to be done for a country emerging from conflict to achieve a democratic, law-abiding condition.  Members were excited by those issues, which ranged from reconciliation to the development of a system of law, a functioning judiciary, penal arrangements, and so forth.

He said he wanted to develop the security and economic aspects of that theme in a way that was open to all members of the United Nations family, adding that there was no one simple answer.  He hoped that out of such a ministerial discussion and follow-up, “we will all be the better placed to actually handle” such situations.

He hoped to take the Libya sanctions resolution to a vote at an early date, but he wished to achieve the necessary conditions for the text’s unanimous adoption.  The aim was very clear, namely, to take action as soon as possible.  Tomorrow, the Council would vote on two nominees for the two special courts in Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia.  The drafts were straightforward in endorsing the Secretary-General’s recommendations.

Iraq would take up much of the Council’s time this month, he said.  The precise format for those discussions would evolve, but his wish was to harness the view in the international community that it must now come together on the basis of Iraq as “she is today” and, as quickly as possible, permit the conditions for the transfer of sovereignty to the Iraqis, in a way that ensured a successful transfer. 

He said that discussions had been continuing on the content of a further resolution.  Those were crystallizing rapidly and a working text was emerging.  He envisaged that discussion broadening in a matter of days. 

Responding to a series of questions on Iraq, he added that he would not provide much detail on the content of that resolution, except that it would set the goal of transferring to the Iraqis, as soon as possible, “their own sovereignty”.  It would also address both the military and policing requirements of Iraq, and lay down crucial preparations for the donor conference in Madrid.  As Council President, his wish was to bring people together, in as inclusive a way as possible, so that a text could be adopted speedily and in a way that helped achieve those overall objectives.

He said he would not try to answer the question about which was more important -- the security or political aspects of that situation.  All aspects must be firmly pursued.  Advancing the political future for Iraq and tackling the security issues went together.  He did not want to leave the press in any doubt about the commitment of the Coalition forces on the ground to tackle the security crisis.  The intent was to make Iraq as secure as possible, to tackle terrorism and to defeat it.

It was not realistic to imagine that the Coalition was not going to be the catalyst, which tackled and solved that problem, he added.  That was the Coalition’s responsibility and it would live up to it.

Replying to a question about whether the issue now was about “ceding” control, he said he had not seen the question as being about ceding power to anyone, but rather about moving forward collectively.  The international community as a whole should come together and tackle the political, security and economic aspects, and that should be done in the most efficient and collegial way as possible.  The challenge in the text would be to create the conditions needed to actually maximize efforts to tackle those aspects.

To another question, he said he would not speculate on a timetable for the withdrawal of forces.  The situation in Iraq and the views of the Governing Council would inform a timetable.  The resolution should have content that addressed the question, but a timetable would have to be put forward by the Iraqis themselves. 

Asked if he would push the Council to endorse the Governing Council, instead of just welcoming it, he said there was a danger in getting “hung up” on individual verbs.  The new resolution should increase existing support within the Council, among Member States and in neighbouring countries for what the Governing Council was doing.  That support should also be extended to the ministers and to the whole process of the constitutional convention, leading to the eventual transfer of sovereignty.

The Council had welcomed the formation of the Governing Council, he said, adding that he was now looking for the Governing Council to offer a timetable.  That involvement, in practical terms, must happen.  Rather than arguing whether the Governing Council had been recognized legally, the question about a timetable should be asked of the Iraqis.  If not the Governing Council, whom should be asked? he said.

The premise on which everyone must now operate was that “we are where we are and we are determined jointly to make a success of Iraq from where we are”, he added.  The simple goal was to bring the Council together, heal any remaining divisions and take the process forward.  The incentive for the Council to act was to end up with a resolution that helped people to contribute materially to progress in Iraq. 

He did not know the extent of the Security Council’s ultimate involvement in Iraq until the resolution was adopted, he replied to a question about comments made recently by United States Secretary of State Colin Powell that the extent of the Council’s involvement would be to hear reports about the situation there.

On the military aspect, he said he envisaged a multinational force, authorized by the Security Council under Chapter VII, which would comprise the existing force deployments and any others who wished to join.  The text would be authorizing the forces to develop stability and security in Iraq from this point forward and intended for there to be a multinational force -- not blue helmeted, but authorized by the Security Council and operated within a unified command. 

Such a force was quite normal, he added, citing the examples of the Kosovo multinational security force (KFOR) and the multinational stabilization force (SFOR) in Bosnia and Herzegovina.  The draft under discussion envisaged a line of communication to the Security Council.  If the Council was to authorize that presence, it was probably entitled to monitor it.  That was not the only aspect of the resolution, but that was an important one.  At this stage, what was being discussed was not a classic peacekeeping operation, mounted out of the peacekeeping budget, he added. 

Turning to a question about Libya, he said there was a text in blue.  Discussions were continuing and agreement was “very close” between, on the one hand, representatives of the families and the French Government, and on the other hand, authorities and the foundation in Tripoli.  As soon as that arrangement gained the support of all Council governments, the draft would be pressed to a vote.  He kept offering a date for action, and that kept getting second-guessed by others involved in the talks.  So, he would not be rash and say a vote would take place in the next few days, but he would be disappointed if sometime next week the Council had not gotten that resolution in place.

* *** *