USUN PRESS RELEASE # 133(08)June 3, 2008 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Remarks by Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad, U.S. Permanent Representative, on the Security Council's Program of Work for June, Iran, Lebanon tribunal, Sudan, Iraq, and Burma, at the Security Council stakeout, June 3, 2008
Ambassador Khalilzad:
Good morning,
This morning, the Council approved its “Program of Work” for the month of June. We have copies of that calendar for you so you can see the details of the program.
I would like to focus on five of the main areas for our presidency:
First, the problem of rape and other forms of sexual violence in conflict and post-conflict environments.
This is a significant problem that further undermines conflict ridden societies and has not received adequate attention by the international community. Given the persistent and barbaric use of sexual violence as a method of warfare we believe the time has come for renewed action on this critical issue. For example, an estimated 30% of the women raped in Congo’s war are infected with HIV, as many as 60% of the combatants are believed to have the virus. An average of forty rapes a day occurred.
Secretary Rice will come to New York to preside over a formal meeting of the Council on this topic on June 19. At this meeting we hope the Security Council will adopt by consensus a resolution to be proposed by the United States calling for an end to the use of sexual violence against civilians as a weapon of war.
By turning international attention to the increasing scope and brutality of incidents of rape and other sexual violence being committed by soldiers, rebels, demobilized combatants, and unfortunately even UN peacekeepers we hope to strengthen our collective ability to curtail these abhorrent practices so we can better protect civilians especially women and girls. For example, we believe we should empower UN peacekeeping operations so they are better equipped to recognize and respond to sexual violence.
We also believe the Council should be more aggressive in considering the applicability of sanctions against those who abuse women and children in conflict. We want to encourage the entire UN family as well as our regional partners to intensify the identification of concrete ways and means to come to grip with this scourge.
The second theme will be focusing on conflicts in Africa:
We will receive a report from Council members who are traveling throughout Africa early this month including visits to Djibouti to see Somalia officials, Sudan, Chad, Congo and Ivory Coast. The report from our own colleagues should give us a good sense of what’s actually happening on the ground.
We will also hear a briefing this month on the situation in Sudan including presentations by UN envoy Jan Eliasson and African Union envoy Salim Salim. We will also hold consultations on the Great Lakes, and take up the issue of Liberian sanctions.
Third, we will hold mid-year review of the Multi-National Force in Iraq as well as the Development Fund for Iraq. We expect Foreign Minister Zebari to participate in these discussions and we anticipate that Iraq will seek continued Council authorization through the calendar year for the MNF-I and the DF-I mandates.
Fourth, we will consult informally regarding the latest IAEA report to the Security Council on Iran’s compliance with resolution 1737, 1747 and 1803 as well as implementation of the Nonproliferation treaties safeguard agreements. As you know the IAEA report notes that Iran has not been forthright about its enrichment program. The IAEA report also says that the nuclear agency has serious concerns about Iran’s alleged research into nuclear weapons. In our view, it is only appropriate for the Security Council to remain vigilant about these ongoing violations of Iran’s international commitments.
Fifth, we will take action on several mandates before the Council including the extension of the monitoring team of the al-Qaida / Taliban sanctions committee as well as Peacekeeping Operations in Cyprus & the Golan Heights. We will continue to closely monitor events in Burma. Finally we expect the Council will consider how best to support any actions taken in Paris at the conference on Afghanistan’s compact scheduled for June 12.
Thank you. I’ll be happy to take your questions.
Reporter: Ambassador, could you be a little more specific – expand on what you said about the informal Council talks on the subject of Iran and implementation of the relevant resolutions?
Ambassador Khalilzad: Well, as you know, one thing that I did not mention besides the IAEA report is that a visit will take place to Tehran by Mr. Solana and the team with him on the 14th of this month and we’ll see what he comes back with. And I think we’ll take the fact that the 90 days after the last resolution where we expected Iran to respond, that would have passed by then. Also we have this IAEA report and we’ll see what the results of the Solana mission will be and based on those we’ll consult as to what appropriate action the Council can take to deal with the situation. This is an important issue, it remains very important. It affects peace and security in the region and in the world and the Council has expressed itself clearly, repeatedly at least three times.
So, based on all the factors that I just mentioned we’ll hold discussions as to what we do.
Reporter: (inaudible)
Ambassador Khalilzad: Well, of course initially, but ultimately we’ll see what these bilateral -- and it could be multilateral -- discussions among members will lead us, would lead us to…
Reporter: Mr. Ambassador, early in the year or late last year we were expecting the tribunal on Lebanon to start in February – in May there was some statement to that effect. Now with the renewal of (inaudible) mandate do you think – or do you see that at least – not the completion of the investigation but at least a start of the tribunal by the end of the year – by December 31?
Ambassador Khalilzad: Well, of course we think this issue is very important. I mentioned it again yesterday that it’s important for Lebanon and it’s also important with regard to the issue of no impunity for political assassination. We, of course, look forward to the commission to be the prosecutor’s recommendation as to when he is ready to present the case because the tribunal is getting ready in terms of logistics, the site, judges, and so on – funds. We want him to do it as soon as possible of course but at the same time when he is ready.
Reporter: (inaudible)
Ambassador Khalilzad: Well, we hope as soon as possible and if it is this year when he is ready that will be good, of course.
Reporter: Ambassador, will there be a discussion on June 24th with the briefing on Sudan, will you discuss the deployment of UNAMID and where we are now and will it be possible to discuss sanctions in case, you know, benchmarks have not been met.
Ambassador Khalilzad: Well, of course we are working on UNAMID. It hasn’t gone as well as we would have liked. There has been the problem of the cooperation of the government that has delayed things. There have also been issues with regard to the poor infrastructure. There has also been the problem with regard to availability of capabilities that are relevant. Now, I am speaking of course for the United States on this issue. And the two envoys will be focused largely on the political track but I’m sure in the context of the discussion of that track that at least we in the United States would deal with other aspects of the situation including the military, the security, the humanitarian, and the regional dimension, and also the problems of north and south will be brought up.
Reporter: About the MNF in Iraq, where are you now between the government of Iraq - force status after this year?
Ambassador Khalilzad: Well, those discussions on the strategic framework as well as on the SOFA, Status Of Forces Agreement, are continuing. We know that the Iraqi government has stated that it prefers that those agreements be concluded before the end of the year so that there is no need for further renewal under Chapter VII of the MNF-I mandate and we just have to wait and see but I can tell you that those discussions are going on and I have repeated the preference of the Iraqi government.
Reporter: On Sudan, sir, from speaking to Prosecutor Ocampo, he is coming on Thursday to inform the Council their intentions of more indictments in Sudan? How forceful will the representative of the United States will raise this issue with the Sudanese government (inaudible)
Ambassador Khalilzad: Well, of course, not only the United States, several Council members have raised this issue, I believe the Secretary-General has raised this issue. There has to be accountability for what has happened and we will of course express our views and we believe that accountability is important.
Reporter: The issue of responsibility to protect in Myanmar, is that still alive in your view, do you expect any discussion of that this month?
Ambassador Khalilzad: Well, there is of course two issues with regard to Burma that is important and is of continued interest in our view - the United States view – in the Security Council. One is the humanitarian access. While there has been some progress we recognize that it didn’t start as early as it should have - that we expressed our outrage early on and that the government had the responsibility to protect its people and it shouldn’t stand in the way. But we have been encouraged by some of the recent decisions – we want to see more access.
At the same time, besides the humanitarian situation there is the political track that you know we have been concerned about. We have not seen satisfactorily progress on that and as a matter of fact the referendum did not meet the standards that the Security Council had expressed itself on and the easing of the conditions on Aung San Suu Kyi has not taken place besides the issue of the referendum. The reconciliation process has not moved forward the way that the Council has expected itself.
So, we have both continued concern about the humanitarian situation as we also have continued concern as the United States on the political track and therefore I think it is appropriate and it was adopted today as you saw, that we have a placeholder for discussion – possible discussion of the issue in the Council. It’s at the bottom. Yes?
Reporter: Ambassador, where does the, what is the status of talks that’s going on concerning UNAMID on preparing a set of timelines or benchmarks for the deployment of UNAMID between now and the end of the year?
Ambassador Khalilzad: There has to be reconfiguration--you’re talking about Sudan, UNAMID, yes. There has to be a benchmarking reaching to 80 percent of the expected force levels by the end of the year that DPKO has committed itself with.
We are very active, for our part, to get the assets in particular that are needed—helicopters—to be made available. We have engaged a number of countries. There have been discussions about the possibility of Jordan contributing some helicopters. Those discussions are taking place right now. We know there are four helicopters that Ethiopia has offered.
But, we are very much focused on the 80 percent by the end of the year and benchmarks to make sure we are on target to
reach that goal.
Reporter: Are we going to see those benchmarks presented to the Council in some fashion during your presidency? Perhaps for endorsement by the Council? How is it going to proceed?
Ambassador Khalilzad: We, of course, will raise this issue, although this particular meeting towards the end of the month is more a report on the political track. But we will of course, during our intervention, make clear our concern with regard to the other tracks and our expectations with regard to the other tracks.
Reporter: Iran again, President Ahmadinejad is in Rome for the FAO meeting. And among other things, he said that, he attacked the UN, saying that the UN is used by few countries for their own interest. And I think he even said, ‘for their [sic] own evil interest.’ What is your reaction to that?
Ambassador Khalilzad: Well, nuclear activities of Iran have been dealt with by the Security Council without any opposition. Since I have been here, there have been two resolutions that have passed, I believe, at least the most recent one, of course, was a few months ago. And I think the last two ones that I am particularly aware of were passed without any opposition, that included countries that otherwise disagree on so many things that you all are very much aware of. And, it is really Iran versus the world on this. It is not Iran versus the United States.
The issue of proliferation of nuclear weapons in general is one of the most serious issues in the evaluation of people around the world. But there is particular concern with regard to Iran because of the statements of the president of Iran; because of the policies of the government of Iran, its support for extremist and terrorist groups; because of the sensitivity of this region in particular because you’ve heard me say repeatedly that many of the challenges for the world in security terms emanate from this region at this time.
And therefore adding a nuclear power, particularly a nuclear power with a government such as Iran to the equation will not add to increased security, stability and reduction of threats from this region to the people of the region but also to the people of the world
So, therefore, this is a serious issue, it remains a serious issue. We have no quarrel, as I have said repeatedly, with Iran having access to peaceful nuclear technology for generating power. We understand that. And we understand also the need for Iran to have access for fuel for its reactors. No question, no problem with that. But it is—given what I just described—having Iran access to capabilities that can produce nuclear weapons or actually Iranian acquisition of nuclear weapons is a serious problem for the future of the world and therefore the Security Council—without opposition from anyone—has repeatedly asked Iran to halt, to suspend its enrichment capabilities, its enrichment programs and to sit down and discuss issues with regard to the security of fuel supply -- if that is what motivates Iran to pursue enrichment. If the justification is nuclear fuel for its reactors, the world is willing to sit down and find a reasonable answer to that problem.
Thank you, very much. Thank you.
