PRESS CONFERENCE BY Security Council president

 

Briefing correspondents at Headquarters today on the Security Council’s calendar for September, Council President for the month, Adamantios Vassilakis ( Greece), said that events in the Middle East would continue to preoccupy the 15-member body, which would also take up several ongoing situations in Africa.

He also announced that, as of today, there were now five and not four candidates to succeed Kofi Annan as the next United Nations Secretary-General:  Jordan’s Ambassador to the United Nations, Prince Zeid Ra-ad Zeid Al-Hussein, had joined the list.

He said that consultations were scheduled for 15 September on the situation in Lebanon.  Proposals for the implementation of resolutions 1559 (2004), 1680 (2006) and the relevant provisions of the Taif Accords were also expected.  The report of the Secretary-General, as requested by Council resolution 1701 (2006), was due on 11 September.  There was also a possibility that the Secretary-General would brief the Council on his latest trip to the Middle East.  If so, the format of the meeting would be decided accordingly.  Certain Council members might wish to raise the issue of the Secretary-General’s report on the incident at Qana last July during the hostilities in Lebanon, he added.

On 29 September, Serge Brammertz would brief on the work of the International Independent Investigative Committee investigating the circumstances of the assassination of the former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, he said.

Concerning Iraq, the regular quarterly briefing on the United Nations Assistance Mission for that country (UNAMI), as well as on the efforts and progress of the Multinational Force (MNF) would take place on 14 September, he noted.  The Secretariat would brief on UNAMI, and the United States delegation would brief on the MNF, on behalf of the Coalition forces.  Dimitrius Perrikos would brief on 7 September on the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC).

As correspondents knew, the Arab League had requested a ministerial-level meeting of the Council to consider the settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict “on all tracks”, he went on.  That request was under discussion by the Council members.  The Middle East situation deserved the international community’s urgent attention, and a well-organized and focused meeting might be useful in advancing the cause of peace there.  Taking into consideration the sensitivity of the issue, however, everything should be studied thoroughly and prepared, so that whatever the Council decided to do in that regard would be helpful and fruitful.

Turning to several African issues on the Council’s agenda, he said that a private meeting would be held on 25 September on Somalia, following receipt of a letter from the Foreign Minister of Kenya, in which he asked to brief on behalf of the Intergovernmental Authority for Development (IGAD) on a detailed plan for the possible deployment of a peace and support mission in Somalia.  In scheduling the private meeting, the Council had taken into account the very precarious situation in Somalia and the legitimate and well-founded concerns of the countries of the region and of the international community as a whole, he said.

Hoping for representation at “a very high level”, the Ambassador drew attention to a debate on the situation in the Sudan, on the calendar for 8September.  This morning, the Secretary-General had expressed the wish to be present at that meeting, and, therefore, it had been rescheduled for Monday, 11 September, to await the Secretary-General’s return from the Middle East.

Also on the Sudan, he noted that the mandate of the United Nations Mission in the Sudan (UNMIS) expired on 24 September, the Secretary-General’s report on UNMIS was due on 11 September, and the regularly monthly report on Darfur was also due before the middle of the month.  The Council had scheduled an open briefing for 18 September, during which the Secretariat -– probably Jan Pronk, the Secretary-General’s Special Representative in the Sudan -– would present the reports, followed by an exchange of views on that troubling situation.

The Ambassador also drew attention to the meetings on Ethiopia/Eritrea, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Liberia, and Sierra Leone.  Jan Egeland, the Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs, wished to brief the Council upon his return from visits to the Sudan, Democratic Republic of the Congo and Uganda.

The new Special Representative, Joachim Rucker, would present the Secretary-General’s report on the United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK) on 11 September.   Martti Ahtisaari would brief the Council in consultations on 22 September on the status talks.  If Serbia expressed a desire to participate in the meeting, the Council would follow the modalities of the previous such meeting.

On Iran, he noted that the “E3 + 3” (the five permanent members of the Security Council plus Germany) would meet in Berlin on 7 September to discuss the issue; he was not telling correspondents anything new in that regard.  He did not expect anything to happen in the Security Council before then.

He also drew attention to an open debate with regional organizations on 20 September to take stock of the progress made since adoption of Council resolution 1631 (2005) and to strengthen partnerships with regional and subregional organizations and other intergovernmental bodies.  A concept paper had been circulated to Council members and would become an official document this week.  A text of a presidential statement had also been circulated to Council members, and discussions on it at the expert level were set to begin tomorrow afternoon.

If a Security Council meeting was convened pursuant to the request of the Arab League, it would take place on 21 September during the General Assembly’s general debate, Mr. Vassilakis replied to a question.  Unfortunately, there were very few open dates.  Everyone was trying to do something positive and forward-looking about that situation and seeking to rejuvenate the peace process.

After informal informal consultations tomorrow, the Council would see how it would proceed with respect to the next Secretary-General.  No one, including the Arab countries, was interested in having a debate for the sake of debate only, he replied to a further question by the correspondent about the “hesitation” in convening a meeting at the request of the Arab League.

On Somalia, he reminded correspondents that Kenya’s Foreign Minister currently held IGAD’s presidency and he had also heard some news this morning that the Government and the Islamic Courts had reached some kind of agreement, although he was not yet aware of the details.  So, it was reasonable for the Council to have a discussion about how to proceed.

He said he knew that a text had been prepared by the United Kingdom, but it was up to that delegation to decide if and when to bring it to the Council.  If it chose to do so, he would accommodate it.

To a question about Burma, the Ambassador said he had received a letter from Ambassador Bolton on Friday.  He presented it to the members, which, in turn, had expressed their different views.  They agreed to consider a response in the coming days.  Now, if the American delegation sought a vote on the matter, of which he was not aware, he would try to find the best solution.

On the Sudan, he said there had been two statements concerning the African Union troops.  One indicated that the Sudanese Government did not want African Union troops.  Another later said that the Union could stay as long as its troops were paid by the Arab League.  So, that was a conflicting position, which had to be clarified in the coming days.

The Council voted on a resolution last week whose implementation required the agreement of the Sudanese Government, he said.  The Council wished to have a discussion on the ways and means to implement the text.  It was fully aware of what was happening and, for the time being, it did not feel it was urgent to call another meeting.  The Secretary-General had shown an interest in the matter, which was why the meeting on 8 September had been postponed to 11 September.

“We were not going there as an occupying force, as some others said, so we want the agreement of Abuja to be implemented and to have all the humanitarian issues solved”, he said.

Since it was now being said that the election in Côte d’Ivoire could not take place by 31 October, did he anticipate the Council taking action on whether the President would remain in power under the transitional agreement? another correspondent asked.

Definitely, he replied.  Because the Council addressed the issue last year, it had to address the issue now, too, the Ambassador said.

To a further question, he said that the high-level meeting would involve many countries of the area, and it had been called by the Secretary-General and not the Security Council.  To a follow-up question concerning past reports on the situation in Côte d’Ivoire, the Ambassador asked, “What is more important:  justice or peace in the country?”  It was very difficult to supply an answer on the spot.  It was very important to see how the peace process proceeded.

* *** *

For information media • not an official record