PRESS CONFERENCE BY UNDER-SECRETARY-GENERAL FOR PEACEKEEPING OPERATIONS

ON DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO, MIDDLE EAST

Applauding the successful holding yesterday of the Democratic Republic of the Congo’s first multiparty elections in over 40 years, the United Nations top peacekeeping official today said the long-troubled country had made a “first and fundamental step” towards recovery, and called on the international community to make every effort to help consolidate that achievement.

“When you think of where Congo was just three years ago and where it is now, what happened yesterday, in this vast country in the centre of Africa, was really of historic proportions,” Jean-Marie Guéhenno, Under-Secretary-General for Peacekeeping Operations told correspondents at a Headquarters Press Conference.  “If this county consolidates peace, it would make a difference not only for the Congo, but also for the rest of Africa.  It would change the perception of Africa,” he said.

Mr. Guéhenno said the Department of Peacekeeping Operations and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and other United Nations agencies, had pitched in to make sure the colossal undertaking -- the Democratic Republic of the Congo is a country roughly the size of Western Europe -- had been successful.  He added that there had basically been no serious violence in the county yesterday, and most people who wanted to vote had been able to.

There had been two provinces where there had been difficulties, but the Independent Electoral Commission had agreed to open the polls there today, and balloting was now under way.  When one got the reports from the United Nations Organization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUC) or saw the emotions of the Congolese shouting “I voted, but my mother never got to vote”, one realized that something truly meaningful had occurred. “We all worked together with the Congolese to get it right,” he said.

But, he stressed that the presidential elections were only the beginning, and that the next six months would not be easy.  The current ballot had to be tabulated to determine whether a second round of voting would be necessary, and the country was already preparing for a first round of provincial elections.  “In every election, there will be winners and losers …so managing the aftermath becomes very important”, he said, but added that he was deeply convinced that, if the overall election process proceeded without major difficulty, it could make a difference for the entire continent.  “There’s a lot a stake in this election.”

Responding to questions about reports of problems at several polling stations, he said that, of course, in a country the size of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, which had tens of thousands of polling stations, the elections would not be totally free of problems.  There had been some incidents of arson associated with the ballot, as well as reports of armed groups trying to keep some people from voting, he acknowledged.

But, the problems had not been widespread and had not caused entire administrative districts to be cut off from voting.  “What we are happy about -- and I checked with the Mission this morning -- is that none of the problems developed to a point where the voters would challenge the legitimacy of the elections,” he said.

On the Democratic Republic of the Congo’s restive eastern region, he said that it had largely been the remarkable work of the United Nations Mission that that ballot had been carried out peacefully.  Indeed, the Kivus and Ituri, among others, had recently seen fresh fighting, but the people in most of those areas had voted peacefully. “It went remarkably well, considering the state of the country,” he said, adding that militias had not held the elections hostage as they could have done.

“Let’s really look at the facts and not the spin machine”, he said in response to a question.  MONUC was hard at work to prevent militias that had done immense damage in the eastern part of the country from continuing their work of destruction and death.  MONUC had, as the elections had showed, largely succeeded.  The ultimate responsibility was with the forces of the Democratic Republic of the Congo to establish law and order.  MONUC could only support that effort.

On a positive note, to what did he attribute the successful elections? a correspondent asked. 

He replied that the logistical challenge had been huge.  What the United Nations had done right was to organize itself for an immensely difficult task.  Organizing elections in a country the size of Western European, with less than 2,500 kilometres of paved roads, was no easy logistical challenge.  There was also a political dimension.  A political process was needed for an election to work.  The elections were not the last step, but the first.  The political process had been driven by Congolese agreement, supported by the international community.

Congolese ownership was important in that regard, he added.  The political process in the country was imperfect.  Moving from the bullet to the ballot was not an easy task.  Many things could still go wrong.  Continued political engagement was needed.  The recipe for moving forward was national ownership, international support, good organization and a measure of peace, which had been assured by the remarkable contribution of the United Nations 17,000 peacekeepers.

Over the years, the Security Council had been very united on the issue of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, he said in response to another question.  The international community’s support for the political process had been solid and unwavering.  The Council’s substantive consensus on an issue made a huge difference for peacekeepers, who were only as strong as the backing of the international community.  When there was a division, it was much harder.

The transformation of the Congolese army into a solid professional force would be a long term effort, he said.  The Department of Peacekeeping Operations was working with the Government in that regard.  Part of that effort would be the integration of former militias into the army, to get the kind of training and professionalism they had not shown.

On the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), were the troops consolidated and why had that not been done earlier on? a correspondent asked.

The United Nations had seen the importance of unarmed military observers in reporting objectively the facts on the ground, he replied.  Lebanon’s Government had stressed the importance of that presence.  The Department of Peacekeeping Operations had a better knowledge of what was going on in the UNIFIL area of operation than in any other part of Lebanon.  That role had to be balanced with the risks to United Nations staff.  Unfortunately, United Nations peacekeepers were not completely safe.  The United Nations continued to make clear representation to Israel and Lebanon for the responsibility of their safety.  All UNIFIL positions were clearly marked and had to be respected.  In some exposed positions, the United Nations had limited the number of personnel.  The United Nations was making tactical adjustments to minimize the risk to its personnel.

Pulling out in the hour of greatest need would send a terrible signal on ongoing efforts to bring about a cessation of hostilities and a ceasefire on the Blue Line between Israel and Lebanon, he added in response to another question.

Asked to comment on the future of UNIFIL, he said there were high-level discussions on the kind of international force needed, as part of a broader package leading to a cessation of hostilities and then to stability in the region.  The international force would be deployed on the basis of a ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon.  That force would have to be in support of Lebanon’s Government.  That was essential.  No force would be successful if it became part of a new war within Lebanon.  That had to be avoided at all costs.  One could not discuss the force’s mandate in isolation of the political process, which would underpin the mandate.  The mandate would be defined in large part by the result of the political process.  The force would be there to implement whatever had been agreed between the various actors.

Asked whether there was Hizbollah activity in the afternoon of the Khiyam bombing, he said the United Nations would be launching a full investigation itself.  Khiyam was a village known to give support to Hizbollah.  On that particular afternoon, to the best of his knowledge, there was no military activity from Hizbollah in the area.

Asked what the United Nations did when Hizbollah was in proximity of UNIFIL positions, he said the United Nations did not have the mandate or capacity to engage the Hizbollah militarily.  If attacked, UNIFIL had a right to defend itself within the confines of humanitarian law.  The United Nations was governed by the same law as any other military force in the world.

Had there been any change in the protocol for informing Israeli forces for when and if the United Nations perceived its forces were in danger?

Responding, he said there were three levels of liaison with the Israel Defense Forces, including an operational level with UNIFIL, liaising with the northern command to convey any immediate information that needed to be conveyed.  Another level was through the headquarters of United Nations Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO) -– General Lilley -- who could go directly to the Israel Defense Forces headquarters of the Ministry of Defence and convey messages.  There was also the political level in New York, where he could convey concerns with Israel’s Ambassador or the Secretary-General.

In the case of Khiyam, there had been repeated shelling in close proximity of the position, aerial bombing and direct hits from artillery, which had been protested to the Israel Defense Forces, he said.  Unfortunately, with the last hit, the United Nations had lost communication.

* *** *

For information media • not an official record