Press briefing by Ahmad
Fawzi Spokesman for the SRSG on Afghanistan 27 Nov 2001
Following is a near-verbatim transcript of today's briefing
at 2 pm Bonn time by Ahmad Fawzi, Spokesman for the Special
Representative of the Secretary-General for Afghanistan,
Lakhdar Brahimi:
Its good to see so many of you are still here. As you know
the UN Talks on Afghanistan opened this morning with four
Afghan groups, the United Front, the Peshawar group, the
Cyprus group and the Rome group. There was a speech from
Foreign Minister Fischer, a message from Secretary-General
Kofi Annan, in which he said that he hopes that history would
record this day as the beginning of a new age for Afghanistan
and we have copies of his statement available. They were made
available in the morning, I hope you've all seen them, I've
seen some of them on the wires already, so you're working very
fast.
The agenda we have also released. As we discussed yesterday
and the day before you will see that the agenda is quite
simple. It speaks about the structure and duration of the
transition in Afghanistan, including three main points. The
first is the formation of an interim supreme council of
Afghanistan, the second is the formation of the interim
administration of Afghanistan, and the third is the convening
of an emergency Loya Jirga. All the delegates to the
conference have agreed to this agenda and it has been adopted
so it is no longer a proposed agenda as it says on this sheet
of paper. The second item is measures to ensure security for
the people of Afghanistan, and we've been debating this issue
for some time now, and as you can see, the title is open and
flexible and it leaves it up to the Afghan people and
delegations what kind of security they would like to see in
the country.
A very interesting and dramatic development happened in the
second plenary after all the cameras departed: we received a
telephone call from Syed Hamed Karzai, who is a Pashtun leader
in southern Afghanistan. Syed Hamed Karzai, in a telephone
call that was broadcast on the loudspeakers throughout the
plenary hall, said a few very important points that I would
like to summarize to you and that really reflected the mood of
everybody in the hall. He said, we are one nation, one
culture, we are united not divided, we all believe in Islam,
but we believe in Islam that is the religion of tolerance. We
have been made extremely poor and vulnerable, he said, but we
are a strong people who would like to assert our will and our
sense of self-determination, so that we can really live in an
environment of brotherhood and mutual respect. This meeting,
he said, is the path towards salvation. All the people I've
talked to in Afghanistan believe in a Loya Jirga as the
vehicle for bringing in a legitimate government. The interim
authority is a means of getting to a Loya Jirga.
I've had these points typed out for you and these notes
will be available in the back. This was the message from Syed
Hamed Karzai to the UN talks in Bonn this morning. And they
really reflected what the heads of delegation said in the
second plenary. You all saw what was said in the first
plenary. In the second plenary, let me just summarize that all
four leaders spoke of this meeting as the beginning of a new
era for Afghanistan, one that promises dignity and peace to
its people. These are the words of the four delegation heads
in summary. They all used more or less the same phrases to
describe their thirst for peace, and this is a direct quote
from one of the leaders: "We have a thirst for peace. We are
here to work for a comprehensive settlement and to find the
comprehensive groundwork we need to build a new Afghanistan".
They were unanimous in expressing this desire to work for
national reconciliation and to create a political system that
guaranteed respect for human rights and human values.
We heard very clear calls for an end to the long suffering
of the Afghan people - this was repeated in every speech - and
a strong desire to rebuild the country and to join the
international community. One of the speakers said, and I'll
conclude with this, and it's a quote: "We are here as
Afghanis, we should put our differences aside, this could be
the secret of the success of this conference". So, very
encouraging words from the heads of the delegations this
morning, and in concluding the second plenary, which was held
in closed session as you know, Mr Brahimi, the Special
Representative of the Secretary General for Afghanistan, who
was chairing the meetings said it was clear that you all want
to put the past behind you, that you do not want to repeat the
mistakes of the past, that all of us at the United Nations
recognized that we must make sure not to repeat our mistakes
of the past either, the mistakes of the international
community and to work with the Afghans to realize their dream
of achieving peace and national reconciliation; and as the
Secretary-General said, "of entering a new age for
Afghanistan, an age of peace, of harmony, of good relations
with its neighbours, and of growing prosperity for all its
people under the rule of law".
One final item: the definitive list of who is here is now
available. All these people are in the hall. And I must point
out here, if I may, that the question of numbers is no longer
really an issue. The sensitivities that emerged in the run-up
to this conference before the delegations arrived, seemed to
have melted away when the conference started this morning, and
the number of people on each delegation no longer seems to be
an issue. As Mr Brahimi put it, we hope for consensus at this
meeting, we're not going to take a vote, we hope all the
decisions will be taken unanimously.
A final word about the structure of the conference and then
I'll gladly take your questions. They have adjourned for the
morning session, they adjourned at about 12 noon. They are
talking amongst themselves this afternoon, and will meet with
the UN side again at 8 p.m. In the meantime, Mr Brahimi is
having some bilaterals with representatives of the
international community.
And now I'd be happy to take your questions.
Question: Is there a Shiite presence at this conference?
Answer: Yes there are Shiites at this conference
Question: There's been a request by the UN organizers for
the participants to come to an agreement within three days, as
opposed to the earlier time frame of a week or two?
Answer: Well, a week or two was really stretching it. We
don't want to abuse the hospitality of our German hosts, and
as I said yesterday, speed is of the essence in this matter.
Yes, the parties agreed that they would like to spend three to
five days in Bonn working on these issues. They hope to
achieve an agreement within that time period on the issues on
the agenda.
Question: Can you tell us something about the background of
this Pashtun leader that phoned this morning?
Answer: No, I'm sorry I can't, but I'd be happy to find
someone who can later to talk to you, so if you'll see me
after the briefing later. But he's a highly respected Pashtun
leader in southern Afghanistan.
Question: We're hearing from diplomats in the region and
also from participants here that one of the ideas floated is
for a much shorter temporary interim administration that will
last a few months until the longer two year administration can
be put together. Is that a plan that's been taken up by the
participants here, or is it just one of the many that's been
floated?
Answer: Yes, I can tell you that the plan that is being
discussed now is an interim administration for a period of say
three to six months, until Nawruz for example, in March of
next year, and an interim (national) council until that time
as well, leading to a Loya Jirga, which will then approve a
transitional authority and a transitional (national) council,
which would govern the country for a period of up to two
years, leading to a constitution and a final Loya Jirga.
Question: The Loya Jirga would not have to actually approve
this short interim government or would it also approve that?
And secondly will the discussions then go straight back to
Kabul rather than again being in a more neutral place?
Answer: No, the discussions happening here in Bonn are
among the four parties, and we hope they will come to some
agreement on an interim administration that will run the
country until the Loya Jirga meets in spring of next year.
Where will the discussions go after Bonn, God knows. We would
be very happy to go to Kabul, in fact Mr Brahimi has said that
a number of times: "We will go where the Afghans would like us
to go".
Question: You told us that the participants are discussing
security issues right now. Did this take place in the second
plenary and could you tell us something more about the
different positions on security.
Answer: No, they did not discuss any details in the
plenary. They discussed the agenda, they said we are happy to
be here, we want to work with the United Nations, we appeal to
the international community to work with us, to help us
achieve the peace that we need to rebuild our country. And in
fact, there was a great sense that this was a momentous period
in the history of Afghanistan. It was referred to as a golden
opportunity again, to achieve the lasting peace that they have
been longing for, for so long. On the security issue, they are
breaking up into groups and will discuss that, and I cannot
give you a read-out of the positions of the four parties, but
we discussed in some length yesterday - but I'd be happy to go
into that again if all of you want me to - what the options
are. And if I can say one more thing, there's a donors'
conference in Berlin next week, and the message that comes out
of Bonn is going to be of vital importance to the donors who
are meeting next week to decide what kind of support to give
Afghanistan. Then there's another very important donors'
conference in Japan in January, where they will be pledging
sums of money to the development of Afghanistan. That's where
they actually make a commitment to spend their billions, and
the message coming out of Bonn is going to be crucial for the
leaders and the economists who are gathering in Berlin and in
Japan.
Question: The phone call that came this morning that you
described as dramatic. Did someone broker that call - what is
the background to that call arriving?
Answer: It was arranged through our people in Kabul and
Islamabad, and we had arranged to have it put through to the
meeting today. I describe it as dramatic because it was a
voice from Afghanistan, from inside Afghanistan. We at the
United Nations knew it was coming, but it was a dramatic
moment for everyone.
Question: Did the participants know it was coming?
Answer: No I don't think the participants knew it was
coming in advance.
Question: What is the difference between the interim
administration and the interim (national) council? And
secondly, when would the United Nations like to see the follow
up of this conference to take place? Until the Nawruz or would
you like to sit again in Kabul or elsewhere and meet earlier?
Answer: The difference between the interim administration
and the interim national council is that one is a
cabinet-style administration that would be composed of maybe
20 members or 25 members or less. But an interim national
council (administration) - and let me get my phraseology here
right - is a larger body that oversees the work of the
government, a parliament if you will.
Question: You repeat all the time that this meeting is very
important, but I want to know why all the leaders refuse to
come here and are you prepared to talk with them in the
future?
Answer: The people who have assembled here from Afghanistan
are decision-makers. If you look at the list you'll find that
we have some of the most important people from these groups
present in Petersberg today. They are decision-makers. We feel
very strongly that they have been given a mandate from the
people they represent and that they will go home and fulfil
whatever agreement they achieve here in Bonn, at least we hope
they do, because the destiny of the Afghan people and the
future of the Afghan people rest on their shoulders here
today.
To answer a former question if I may, somebody said would
we have to meet again or will we meet after the interim phase.
It's entirely up to the Afghans, if they want us to meet again
in two weeks or three weeks or before Nawruz, before March we
would be happy to do so. But let's see what this conference
achieves first.
Question: I'd like to return, if I may, to the phone call.
What criteria did you use for allowing this particular Pashtun
leader to speak to the conference? For example, there are
women outside who say they have been excluded from the
conference, these are various exiled groups. They say they
have no access to the conference, couldn't a phone call from
them be put through to the conference?
Answer: Yes, I have it from reliable sources that Karzai
was due to attend as a member of one of the delegations but he
couldn't make it so he chose the phone instead.
Question: I asked a second part to that question: Is there
no access for other people who are here, other Afghan groups,
to at least have a phone call if they can't be represented in
the conference itself.
Answer: No, I think that we're going to proceed with the
groups that are here. I haven't heard requests for phone calls
for other groups at this time.
Question: ... Last night with the Northern Alliance, did
they make a point that they are in Kabul right now and that
they have a sort of stronger position rather than the other
three groups?
Answer: Surprisingly not. Surprisingly, they were very
flexible in their approach to this conference. They came
saying that we have a long history of resistance, but we are
here because we have a thirst for peace, that we have a
willingness to share power and that we would like to see a
transfer of power because we believe that that is in the
interests of our country.
Question: I want to ask, you said the delegates are now
talking amongst themselves. Are these talks following the
prescribed format or are they basically left to their own
devices, and is it your sense that the groups are going to
need some nudging, that they are actually not quite prepared
to open up to each other?
Answer: No. I didn't get that sense at all. None of us did.
I think anyone who was in the hall was impressed to see how
conciliatory the tone was from the leader of each group and
no, there is no specific format for the bilateral talks
between the groups.
Question: I wanted to ask you about two points that were
made in the speeches by the Foreign Minister and the UN Envoy.
One, insisting that women be empowered and be included, and
two, asking other countries with an interest in Iran to keep
their fingers out of the pie for the time being. I'm wondering
if you are satisfied that the presence of one woman delegate,
who spent a lot of time in exile, is representative of the
women in Afghanistan, and, secondly whether there have been
any attempts by the countries surrounding to throw their
weight around in the corridors and impose their own agendas.
Answer: Yes we are very satisfied with the composition of
the group. We had suggested indeed that they include women and
we are very pleased that there are women in both big
delegations, and more than one woman I must say. If you look
at the list there are three or four women. There were three or
four women in the hall today either as delegates or as
advisors in delegations. On the question of the neighbours,
yes, that's a very crucial issue. We are appealing to the
neighbours to cooperate with the international community in
helping Afghanistan achieve peace and to learn from the
mistakes of the past, and that means not to interfere in the
internal affairs of Afghanistan and to respect its sovereignty
and territorial integrity. There are Member States with us in
Bonn. There have been no attempts whatsoever, to answer your
question, to influence the talks in any way.
Question: Excuse me, you are talking about multi-ethnic
government but now you said Mr Karzai said one culture. What
is the difference between this one culture and multi-ethnic
group because if it's all-Afghan, then why multi-ethnic group
and this kind of thing. Because it's all fighting in the last
25 years for this one culture because the other they don't
want one culture because Arab don't want Turkish culture and
Turkish people don't want Tajik, Tajik don't want Uzbek. This
is the fighting for, so after 25 years you are going back to
the first starting point.
Answer: Thank you very much. That's an academic question,
but if Mr Karzai calls again I'll be sure to ask him.
(Laughter) Joking aside I really don't want to try to
interpret Mr Karzai's words. I think they are very encouraging
and what he is saying in the rest of his statement is that
they are one people and that they should try to live together
as one people.
Question: Can I just ask you on the question of the three
days? You gave an answer that was almost clear but not quite.
You said that they have all agreed that they want to do it
within three to five days but the question was, is it the UN's
view that you want them to do it within three days, is that
what you are pressing? Secondly, you gave us some very useful
quotations from heads of the delegations. Can you put names to
those quotations, or is that impossible?
Answer: The question of the time. Time is of the essence.
Speed is very important in concluding a deal. We don't want to
rush them but the situation on the ground is changing so
rapidly that we have to bear that in mind. The land needs to
be ruled. It needs an authority. It needs an administration,
and we need to put it in place as quickly as possible and the
people who have come to Bonn, the four groups who have come to
Bonn, have said more or less the same. We are eager to move
ahead, to rebuild our institutions and our economy, so that's
the question of time. We haven't imposed a time frame on them
but we have all agreed on three to five days.
The quotations, I really summarised so I can't give you
names to the quotation. The last quotation was Mr Jareer, who
is the head of the Cyprus delegation, which is the one on, "We
are all Afghans, working together as one may be the secret of
the success of this conference". We are going to put together
a transcript of the opening statements of each leader, which
you heard this morning, and they more or less reflect the same
feelings.
Question: The German Foreign Minister mentioned this
morning, one of his three expectations is a commitment to
human rights. Has there been any basic discussion there, for
example universal suffrage, that the vote will be extended to
women, and have any other specific human rights been discussed
at this point?
Answer: No. As I said, we just had two plenaries. One was
an open, public plenary and one was a closed plenary, with
general statements being made. But in the course of the
negotiations that led up to this conference the question of
human rights of course was mentioned, as some of the guiding
principals for the creation of new institutions. To be an
inclusive authority that includes all sectors of society,
including women, was also mentioned as one of the guiding
principals. And in some of the meetings before today's
ceremony - yesterday I believe in one of the meetings - one of
the leaders of the groups did mention the fact that they would
like to see an all-inclusive government including women and
other sectors of society.
Question: I heard some information that four parties
already almost agreed to support Mr Zahir Shah as new leader
of the interim government. Is it true?
Answer: We have not any specific announcements of names of
potential leaders of the interim administration, or the
provisional or the interim council, but there has been talk in
the past of the former King being a viable candidate as Head
of State.
Question: I would just like to ask you to possibly pin down
a little bit more information about the relationship between
the Northern Alliance and King Zahir Shah, the former King.
Where is this going to? Is he part of the solution or is that
still under debate and negotiation?
Answer: The question is, can I be more precise about the
nature of the relationship between the Northern Alliance and
the situation of the King, are they working together?
It's early days yet to answer that question because the
structure, the composition, of both bodies has not even been
discussed in detail. They have made general statements about
their willingness to talk and their willingness to reach an
agreement but all I can say is that the parties are talking to
each other already. Both the United Front and the Rome
delegation and the Peshawar and the Cypriot delegations: they
are all talking to each other, in the halls and in each
others' working spaces. I am going to take one last question
and then we'll wrap it up.
Question: (Start of question inaudible)….. talk about a
temporary council and a temporary administration leading to
another Loya Jirga and then another temporary council, another
temporary thing, leading to a constitution. Does the United
Nations have a view on what that constitution should be like
or is this simply about appropriate sharing out of power from
the people who already have it and want it? I mean, what is
the way that the people of Afghanistan have a say in what ends
up ruling them.
Answer: The first half of the question for those of you who
didn't hear it is that I didn't use the word democracy at all
today. So I would like to start using it. Democracy is indeed
a very important component for the future of Afghanistan and
I'll tell you how it's going to work. There's an interim phase
and then there's a transitional phase. What we are talking
about here today is the interim phase, getting these two
bodies together. During the transitional phase after the Loya
Jirga, which will last up to two years, the transitional
authority in power and the transitional national council will
work on a constitution. A constitution that protects human
rights, that establishes a democratic system of government,
that ensures equal rights of all, that ensures good relations
with its neighbours, that ensures education for girls, that
combats terrorism wherever it is. Leading up, hopefully, to
democratic elections, and the approval of the constitution by
a Loya Jirga.
Question: You used the terminology Nawruz, you've made a
couple of references to Nawruz. Can you just elaborate at all
whether this is being looked at as some kind of an important
milestone for launching a second phase because this is the
most important national celebration in Afghanistan, which was
banned under the Taliban, despite its popularity.
Answer: It has its symbolism. Nawruz has its symbolism of
course and the beginning of the new year. It was chosen as a
date that might be a good time for a new beginning in
Afghanistan.
Thank you very much.