The Hindu : Opinion / Interviews : Investigating and addressing terrorism should be done voluntarily: Ban Ki-moon

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Saturday, Feb 07, 2009
ePaper | Mobile/PDA Version

Opinion

Opinion - Interviews

Investigating and addressing terrorism should be done voluntarily: Ban Ki-moon

N. Ram

`If India and Pakistan cooperate fully, there can be much greater synergy.'

— Photo: V. Sudershan

United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon speaks on key international issues in this interview to N. Ram.

Ban Ki-moon responds to questions on the Mumbai terror attacks, India-Pakistan relations, Afghanistan, Gaza, Iran, and climate change. The United Nations Secretary-General, who was in New Delhi for a day on Thursday following his visit to Afghanistan and Pakistan, gave this half-an-hour interview to The Hindu in his suite at the Ashok Hotel.

Pakistan

You have just had discussions with the President and Prime Minister of Pakistan. You have called on Pakistan to have a “full investigation” into the Mumbai terror attacks and to “fully cooperate” with the Indian government in this matter. “Fully cooperate,” I take it, means two things: bringing those responsible [for the Mumbai attacks] to justice; and eliminating the terror infrastructure in Pakistan so that future attacks can be ruled out. Are you confident that both will happen given what has happened?

I would not pre-judge at this time what the Pakistani government will say. But I am convinced that the Pakistani government is also committed to addressing terrorism. Prime Minister [Yousuf Raza] Gilani told me that his government was going to enact the legislation to allow them to punish those Pakistani people who engage in terrorist acts outside Pakistan. It seems that there is no such law by which they can punish those people, as we have seen in the Mumbai terrorist attack.

The United Nations Security Council has adopted a battery of resolutions against terrorism, requiring a number of actions by state parties. Are you satisfied with the response of the concerned state parties to the terror attacks in Mumbai? And have you had a chance to look at the evidence provided by the Indian and other governments [that the Mumbai terror attacks originated in Pakistan]?

First of all, it was just totally unacceptable — the terrorist attack [in Mumbai] on the citizens of India and foreigners. Terrorism under whatever reasons and grievances cannot be justified. That should be addressed in the name of humanity and eradicated in the name of humanity. The United Nations has been leading this effort to address and eradicate and fight against international terrorism. Since the early 1960s, member states have had 13 international conventions on different aspects of terrorism. Now they have been discussing the way to adopt a comprehensive convention against international terrorism. Unfortunately, we have not been able to reach there because of some technical — but it seems to be a very sensitive — issue on the definition of terrorism and the scope of terrorism. But I think at this time the political will among the international community is important. When I was working in the office of the President of the [UN] General Assembly eight years ago, 2001-2002 — that was the year 9/11 happened — that was the most appropriate time for the international community to reach a deal on this issue. But we missed the opportunity. Now, as we have seen in Mumbai, this really gives us some resolve, strengthens our resolve to work on this comprehensive international convention against terrorism. I would once again urge this and I will work towards that end.

The question is being asked here — and let me mention that our newspaper has taken a sober stand in this crisis and said, ‘don’t be hawkish, this issue has to be resolved through dialogue’ and so on — but there are many voices in India which raise the following question. Why should an aggrieved India, not just the government but also the people of India, have faith in Pakistan’s investigative and judicial systems when Pakistan itself is expressing its lack of confidence in these systems by asking the UN to inquire into the assassination of Benazir Bhutto? You made an announcement in Islamabad that there would be a three-member inquiry commission and Dawn newspaper has speculated that it will be headed by the Chilean Ambassador to the UN, Heraldo Munoz. But the point is their systems are very fragile.

We’ve been discussing the terms of reference and the scope and nature of this Bhutto assassination inquiry commission. This is not going to be the same commission as was established by the mandate [Resolution 1595] of the Security Council on the assassination of the former Lebanese Prime Minister [Rafik] Hariri. This is a fact-finding commission, it’s not a criminal investigation. That was the understanding between the United Nations and the Pakistani government after extensive consultation on this matter. I have written to the President of the Security Council who has taken note of my intention to establish this one. I will not at this time say anything about the exact composition but it will be made known very shortly. He [Ambassador Munoz] is one of the candidates.

The Indian government has made it clear that it relies a good deal on what the Indian press calls “international pressure” to ensure that Pakistan does the right thing to get to the bottom of the Mumbai terror. What are the instruments available in this regard? Diplomats will talk about “persuasion” but whatever it is, there is an international factor here, including the United Nations. Do you think something more could be done? Some people even talked about smart sanctions like a travel ban, freezing of assets and so on. What’s your thinking on this?

In investigating and addressing terrorism, that should be done voluntarily by any member state [of the UN] even before any pressure, so-called pressure, comes. This is, after all, a crime against humanity. It is not some small crime, which may happen anywhere around the world. Terrorism, terrorist activities should be addressed in the name of humanity and there should be active efforts by the whole international community regardless of where it happened. The whole international community should fully cooperate.

During your visit to Pakistan, you called on Pakistan and India to address and resolve longstanding issues, including Kashmir, peacefully through dialogue. You expressed hope that the composite dialogue will be resumed.

Yes.

There is some disquiet in India — I’m not referring to your statement in Pakistan — about this tendency on the part of some western leaders to bring in Kashmir in the context of resolving the issue of cross-border terrorism between Pakistan and India. There is sensitivity here about speaking about cross-border terrorism and Kashmir as proximate issues.

I’m aware of all the historical and political background of the Kashmir issue. That’s one of the longstanding issues in the world. Therefore what I can tell you at this time is that this issue should also be resolved harmoniously through dialogue. Now it was very encouraging that India and Pakistan have initiated a composite dialogue. There were many high-profile exchanges between the two countries. That I hope will continue and proceed. When you are having such serious problems in addressing the terrorist attack in Mumbai, that is a particular case, though it is a very serious crime which must be punished. But that should not be an obstacle in strengthening your [relationship] in a comprehensive dimension between the two countries. India, Pakistan — they are the largest countries, democratic countries, and countries of great potentialities. If the two countries have full cooperation, there can be much greater synergy.

Afghanistan

You have just made what the press calls a “surprise visit” to Afghanistan where you declared that Afghanistan would be a priority area for the UN in 2009 and pledged strong UN support to help deliver peace and stabilise democracy, especially in the context of the elections due in August 2009. But everyone knows the security situation in Afghanistan is deteriorating in the face of a resurgent Taliban. So how do you propose to go about helping deliver peace, democracy, and development in what looks like a very grim situation?

That is exactly the source of deep concern for me as a Secretary-General and for the international community. That with such massive support — political, economic, and military support — the security situation has been deteriorating. Now there should be a political consensus, a political process. This is exactly what I urged President [Hamid] Karzai, to further engage in inclusive political dialogue. The military option can be a very effective tool. But that cannot be the sole option. A military option should always be complemented by a political solution. Afghanistan is going through a very crucial period this year. Now depending upon how they, and how the international community, do, it may be very crucial. They may be standing at a crossroads. They are going to have a presidential election this year, on August 20. That can be a very important occasion to bring Afghanistan into a fuller democracy and a participatory democracy. The United Nations stands ready to provide technical assistance to make this election a fair and democratic and objective one.

UN reports have noted the high number of civilian casualties caused by the U.S. and allied international forces in Afghanistan. But now President [Barack] Obama is promising a surge of new troops. The military compone nt seems to be getting greater weightage in Afghanistan. Doesn’t that concern you?

Civilian casualties have been a concern for me for long, particularly since 2007 when I became the Secretary-General. I have raised this issue with the ISAF [International Security Assistance Forces] commander and also the Secretary-General of NATO and I have of course discussed it with senior American authorities — not to have any civilian casualties. In the course of military operations, it may be the case that civilians become victimised. But what we have seen has been very tragic and therefore it is absolutely necessary that the military commanders, when engaging in military operations, must ensure that they avoid civilian casualties. For that I have urged the strengthening of these civil-military coordination systems. My Special Representative [for Afghanistan], Mr. Kai Eide, is now coordinating with all international actors, including ISAF.

Sri Lanka

Closer home (to where our newspaper is based), in Sri Lanka, you have one combatant, which is banned or designated as terrorist in 31 countries, boxed in a very narrow territory with about 120,000 civilians. What is your reading of this? You must have got many reports.

Again, the situation in Sri Lanka has been a source of concern and I discussed this recently with Sri Lankan leaders. Even today I am going to speak with President [Mahinda] Rajapaksa [They spoke over the telephone and the Sri Lankan President assured Mr. Ban that “military operations to defeat terrorism in Sri Lanka would be carried out without harassment to the civilian population” in the north]. First of all, evaluating this situation and expressing my concern about the humanitarian situation, the civilian casualties. About ten days ago, before my departure, I received the Special Envoy of President Rajapaksa in New York and we discussed this issue. I have asked, through our Special Envoy to President Rajapaksa and his government to ensure that there should be no civilian casualties. There should be full guarantee of the security and safety of United Nations staff and humanitarian workers. And I was assured by President Rajapaksa that he would ensure this. There are very serious humanitarian concerns. I am considering dispatching a humanitarian assessment team.

Gaza

What do you say to a young Palestinian in Gaza who feels the failure of the United Nations to get the Israelis to stop their aggression proves the ineffectiveness of the world body? Or is it expecting too much of the U.N.?

I won’t agree to the so-called failure of the United Nations. This Middle East situation has been there for six decades. It is the United Nations that has been leading this Middle East peace process during the last six decades. Largely because of the lack of political will on the part of the parties concerned, peace has not been established. Genuine peace. During the last six decades, we have seen many wars. It is almost unprecedented in history. So that’s very tragic and unfortunate.

Now, if we talk about this Gazan situation, it was the United Nations together with major leaders, powers, in the region and elsewhere that has brought this ceasefire. And I travelled to many countries, I met so many leaders in the region and outside the region to bring about this ceasefire. I think the United Nations played a pivotal role this time, a key role. Now Egypt has also been playing a key role and there are many other leaders (I don’t mention their names because there are so many). It is not one country or individual leaders. It has been a joint diplomatic effort.

This ceasefire is very fragile, as we have already seen through several cases of exchanging rockets and bombings. This ceasefire must be turned into a durable and sustainable one. That’s what I am doing. The United Nations is now mobilising humanitarian assistance, immediate and only recovery assistance. I have appealed Monday last week for urgent humanitarian assistance, made an urgent appeal for $ 613 million [to help people affected by Israel’s three-week military offensive in the Gaza Strip], and there is going to be an international donors conference in the first week of March in Cairo. I am going to be the co-sponsor of this international conference. Now I know the frustrations and challenges to the pride of Palestinian people in Gaza, particularly young people who have been victimised, women and children. I’d like to give them some hope, a sense of hope. They have the full support of the international community, the United Nations. We are working very hard to help them overcome this humanitarian suffering and also meet their long-term socio-economic rehabilitation.

Iran

President Obama has promised a new approach to Iran but the clock of UNSC sanctions continues to tick. Do you think suspending or holding sanctions in abeyance till Washington and Tehran get a chance to have a better relationship and resume a bilateral dialogue could be one way to proceed?

With a new administration in the United States, there is hope that the dynamics of negotiation may change. That is what I would also hope and expect. Before everything, it is important for Iran to fully comply with the relevant Security Council resolutions. That is, first and foremost, important. [As for] the rest of the issues, I hope with the change of administration and change in the political dynamics, there will be very in-depth negotiations so that we can be free from those nuclear concerns.

Climate Change

On climate change. First, congratulations on your award [the Sustainable Development Leadership Award 2009, presented at the Delhi Sustainable Summit on February 5]. You’ve said climate change was a priority for the United Nations. There are many priorities. How high, how important a priority is this?

My top priority and target is to have an international agreement by the end of December this year in Copenhagen. An international agreement that is comprehensive and balanced and effective. A ratifiable one that will be a successor regime of the Kyoto Protocol. India can play a very important, crucially important role. That’s why I am here. I am going to meet with senior Indian government officials. Everybody is looking at India, what India will do. Now President Obama and his administration are very positively engaged, unlike the previous, Bush administration. This is a very good sign. While I fully understand the challenges of India, when it comes to greenhouse emissions in per capita terms the level of these greenhouse gas emissions by India, Indian industry is far less than those [the levels] of industrialised countries. But at this time, when this is by far the most urgent and serious existential threat for all humanity and planet Earth, the whole international community must act together. Now is the time to act. Therefore I would sincerely urge and appeal to the Indian government to really engage in in-depth negotiations. This year we have only ten months left.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Opinion

News Update

Stories in this Section

Hindu Taliban

Protecting heritage

India: challenges in agriculture

Corrections and clarifications

Demolition man

Shocking

Investigating and addressing terrorism should be done voluntarily: Ban Ki-moon