Deputy Secretary-General of the U.N. Sweden’s Jan Eliasson confronts the present at the world body and reflects on its future By Roland Flamini Photography by: Zacarias Garcia, Diplomatic Connections
Deputy Secretary-General of the Sweden’s Jan Eliasson confronts the present at the world body and reflects on its future By Roland Flamini Photography by: Zacarias Garcia, Diplomatic Connections
S
wedish diplomat Jan Eliasson has been in and out of the United Nations in different roles since the early 1980s. He has been Sweden’s representative to the world body, president of the U.N. General Assembly, the first U.N. Under-secretary General for Humanitarian Affairs and a U.N. cease-fire negotiator in several conflicts, starting with the Iran-Iraq War in 1980, then the fighting in NagornoKarabakh in 1993 and more recently Darfur. In between, he was successively Swedish ambassador in Washington and his country’s foreign minister. So it hardly came as a surprise when U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, in March 2012, named him to the highly-esteemed post of Deputy Secretary General. In an interview with Diplomatic Connections at U.N. headquarters in New York during the closing days of 2013, his main focus was on the then forthcoming Syria talks in Geneva, expressing his concern for the lives lost daily in that conflict and the people it displaces. But he also covered some of the other issues that crowd his workload. Diplomatic Connections: Your job description on the United Nations website is enormous. It seems to boil down to the fact that what the Secretary General isn’t doing at any given time, you are doing. But is there something which actually engages you more than anything else? Deputy Secretary General Eliasson: In the United Nations you tend to focus on today’s crisis, and that absorbs all the oxygen and takes up all the energy. Syria as well as the Central African Republic have very much been issues for the Secretary General and myself. I hope I will not lose touch with the long-term objectives that I have to work for, prevention of conflicts and U.N. development. When I was president of the [General] Assembly in 2005 – 2006, we decided on a formula which summarizes the work of the United Nations: there is no peace without development, and there is no development without peace and none of the above without respect for human rights. In my works as Deputy Secretary 18
w w w. d i p l o m at i c c o n n e c t i o n s . c o m
General I can bring these different elements together. I think that is a new positive trend that we try to integrate security, development and human rights. Diplomatic Connections: As a foreign minister you had a perception of the U.N., but now that you are at the very heart of it are you discovering things you didn’t know about the U.N., and you think, “Oh, is that what happens?” Deputy Secretary General Eliasson: I started working for the U.N. in 1980. For over 30 years I have had different functions inside the United Nations and in my own government. I’ve seen changes [in the U.N.] and I really think it’s important that we adapt to and find a role in that new landscape. What is new in today’s global landscape? A geo-political shift first of all to the East, Asia, economically, but also politically. Huge changes in information and communications technology, which I think is underestimated. You have the new global issues, climate change. Did your parents, did my parents talk about climate change? No. Other trends which are new, fortunately. There’s the role of women. This century will be the century of women. If this is the new global landscape, how does the U.N. adapt? We need to have a holistic view to bring together the different elements: security, human rights and rule of law. We need to work horizontally and not vertically, which bureaucracies tend to do, both in government and in international organizations, that will make us more adapted to this new global landscape. Diplomatic Connections: You didn’t mention religious fundamentalism, another new element on the global landscape. Deputy Secretary General Eliasson: I should have mentioned that also. Of course, we are extremely worried about polarization and dividing people in ethnic, religious, sectarian terms. We see that in every conflict. We see it in Syria, in the Central African Republic. We see it on the larger scale of Shi’ia and Sunnis, and then Christians in the Middle East, and so forth. It’s a huge issue; it is not new but it has
U.N.
Jan Eliasson Deputy Secretary-General of the United Nations
DIPLOMATIC CONNECTIONS | S e p t e m b e r 2 0 1 4
19
United Nations become dramatically evident that we have to deal with this much more seriously. Diplomatic Connections: How does the U.N. institutionally change to cope with this new global landscape, or has it changed already? Deputy Secretary General Eliasson: That’s our challenge. And here I’d say we have to do better. The problems that you and I have enumerated now are problems that the United Nations alone cannot solve, or even deal with. We have to engage the economic front, the Bretton Woods system, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund. We need to engage regional organizations like the European Union, the African Union, ASEAN, etc. We need to engage the private sector for technology, for jobs, for innovation as well as civil society and parliaments. The first three words of the United Nations charter are “We the peoples…” What we do here must be meaningful for the peoples among the population of the member states. So I think we need to reach out. Diplomatic Connections: Are you referring to the muchdiscussed U.N. reform? Deputy Secretary General Eliasson: Yes. One of the important issues we are discussing both among ourselves within the Secretariat and with the member states is the degree of partnership that needs to be developed in order to deal with these global issues. How do we engage with outside actors and still retain our old mandates and do our own job? But we see it as part of the whole. That is one of the most important debates we have. Then, of course, you have other reforms which are not within the realm of my responsibility, but which are crucial for the future of the organization. The reform of the Security Council is an extremely difficult issue. Diplomatic Connections: It doesn’t seem to have moved very far… Deputy Secretary General Eliasson: No. This issue is related to national interests to a degree that no other part of the U.N. is engaged in. When competing national interests get involved then this issue becomes so much more difficult. There is a discussion about the legitimacy of the representative nature of the United Nations with the present configuration, particularly with those who have veto power. That discussion continues; it is very evident among some countries, the emerging powers, that they want to have a stronger voice. But I think there will also be a discussion about the use of the veto and to what degree the use of the veto could be limited. There was a very interesting French proposal a couple of months ago. The French suggested that when it comes to 20
w w w. d i p l o m at i c c o n n e c t i o n s . c o m
mass atrocities, the veto should not be applied. There’s a discussion about the sometimes far too frequent use of the veto.
Diplomatic Connections: So the way of limiting the veto might possibly be to list situations in which it would not be applicable? Deputy Secretary General Eliasson: I’m not the one to carry on that discussion. It’s in the hands of member states and I’m an international civil servant. But I noted, with interest, that the French pointed in the direction of limitation of the use of veto for certain situations. Diplomatic Connections: But member states are not going to agree on any change on their own that reduces their power. Has the U.N. got no authority to push what it feels would improve representation? Deputy Secretary General Eliasson: We would, of course, like to have as strong a Security Council as possible, and as legitimate a Security Council as possible, but this issue is definitely in the hands of the member states. Sometimes we pay the price for the lack of unity of the Security Council, most recently in the Syria situation where we for so long have been waiting for unity. Finally, we saw unity when the use of chemical weapons issue was approved, and that led to the present process of destroying chemical weapons in Syria. That is the result of a unified Security Council resolution. We would have liked to have seen that unity when [former U.N. Secretary General] Kofi Annan was mediating [in Syria], and Lakhdar Brahimi [U.N. mediator in Syria] is now at it. That would have given them more muscular power. Anything that can be done to improve the working of the Security Council is most welcome for us. Diplomatic Connections: If Lake Success [temporary home of the U.N. after its formation] were now, would we still have the United Nations? Deputy Secretary General Eliasson: Well, my line is that if we were to abolish the United Nations today we would have to rush tomorrow to start the negotiations about a new U.N. charter. I think we would be surprised to note how similar that new charter would be to the present one. The most sensitive issue would be in the veto powers, but apart from that, this charter is a model for any organization. To me it is diplomatic poetry, I have in my back pocket, and the first three words “We the peoples…” sets the direction and gives me help in my work. Diplomatic Connections: But the veto would not necessarily be in the hands of the same countries, or perhaps it would be in the same hands?
HOW FAR WOULD
YOU GO ? FOR AN ACCURATE DIAGNOSIS. FOR UNPARALLELED EXPERTISE. FOR GROUNDBREAKING TREATMENT.
YOUR LIFE IS WORTH THE TRIP.
When it comes to your life, distance should never be a factor. As soon as you know you need help, come to Johns Hopkins Medicine. We’ve been innovating patient care at every point of the journey for over a century. That includes making your journey to us as easy as possible. Let us help you plan your trip. The sooner, the better the outcome.
For appointments, trip planning and more
1.855.88.HOPKINS (U.S. TOLL-FREE) +1-443-287-6080 (INTERNATIONAL) PROMISEof MEDICINE.ORG 21
Deputy Secretary-Gen Deputy Secretary General Eliasson: Let’s not speculate on that.
Diplomatic Connections: About Syria, the U.N., of course, is very much involved in the refugee issue, supposedly one of the largest refugee problems ever to happen. What is the U.N. doing as far as the refugee situation is concerned, and what can it do that it isn’t doing? Deputy Secretary General Eliasson: When I was in Lebanon in the Syria refugee reception centers in December 2012, there were 150,000 refugees. Today, we have 850,000. In a country which was already at that time strained by the pressures of schools, clinics, jobs — you can imagine that pressure today, being five or six times higher than when I was there a year ago. Jordan is under similar pressures. There’s Turkey which, of course, has a larger population and reception capacity. The problem is, of course, that the refugee flows reflect the sectarian, ethnic and religious elements. So this conflict is not only a conflict in Syria. It is already a conflict in Lebanon and in Jordan, and could become even worse. In Tripoli, I think the population is 40 percent Syrians — yet it’s the second largest city in Lebanon. So it’s a huge human problem, but also a political problem. Nearly 9.5 million Syrians are in desperate need of humanitarian assistance, with 2.2 million living outside the country, half of them children. So today there are a million kids in these squalid conditions. And now, by the way with this very tough winter, it’s just unacceptable. We’re doing everything we can. But it’s a huge task. We still have probably 2.5 million people that we can’t reach. This is a great humanitarian challenge, both inside Syria and in the region. Then, of course, there are two other developments that we should point to when it comes to Syria; one is the chemical weapons destruction, which I think is good news. By the middle of next year we hope that all chemical weapons in Syria are gone and destroyed. I’m very proud of the fact that we can set up together with the OPCW [Organization for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons], the body in The Hague that worked on this so quickly. I commend my colleagues for doing that job so efficiently. Diplomatic Connections: And the third issue? Deputy Secretary General Eliasson: The last issue is the most important one. That is, to stop this war. We are now preparing for the talks to start in Switzerland on January 22. We are in contact with the parties, of course, but also with Russia and the U.S., which play a very important role in this process, and Lakhtar Brahimi is working day and night on the preparations, together with our staff here in New York. 22
w w w. d i p l o m at i c c o n n e c t i o n s . c o m
Jan Eliasson Deputy Secretary-General of the United Nations Photo taken at his official office inside the United Nations
We hope that we will be able to move in the direction of a solution, based on the agreement that Kofi Annan negotiated on June 30 last year, which talks about the need to set up a governing body with full executive powers, and then later let the Syrian people decide through their free choice what kind of government they want to have.
Diplomatic Connections: To set up elections? Deputy Secretary General Eliasson: That’s the next stage.
Diplomatic Connections: As far as the insurgency is concerned, will you be talking to the right people? Deputy Secretary General Eliasson: I’ve been involved in several mediations in the past, and the normal consequence of starting talks is that you have a reduction of
eral
violence, in the best of cases a cessation of hostilities in the form of a cease-fire. I don’t know whether we can expect this to happen before January 22. But I hope that all countries and actors on this scene will move in the direction of requiring both sides to reduce the level of violence, so that we create a climate conducive to settlement. Whether then the negotiating team in Geneva will have full support of the different actors in the field is a very important, difficult and relevant question. There has been quite a proliferation of movements of different political, religious and sectarian color. It is a problem to identify the negotiating team in Geneva that can speak on behalf of as many Syrian groups as possible. Diplomatic Connections: But is that something that has yet been determined?
Deputy Secretary General Eliasson: We have a meeting in Geneva on December 20 and we will discuss this with the U.S. and Russia, and with Mr. Brahimi present. I think decisions will be taken at that meeting, hopefully on the delegations, not only on the Syrians, but also which other delegations that have an interest in the talks. We have around 30 countries that have expressed interest to be present at the talks, and it is up to this meeting to decide on the road forward. Diplomatic Connections: Is there a specific number of delegations that you envision? Deputy Secretary General Eliasson: No, there is no number. This is not for the concrete negotiations. You will most probably have an opening session, but then the negotiations will have to take place between the Syrians, with the DIPLOMATIC CONNECTIONS | S e p t e m b e r 2 0 1 4
23
United Nations assistance of Lakhdar Brahimi and his team. Diplomatic Connections: And not with any of the other countries — Deputy Secretary General Eliasson: Well, no. My experience of negotiations is that the more the parties on the ground can talk together, the better the chances are to achieve results. On the other hand, there is a need for the main organizers, the U.N., Russia, U.S., to be in contact with the different parties. They play a role in pushing the parties to a solution. Diplomatic Connections: How close are we at this point to one question that needs to be addressed and that is: the willingness of the current leadership in Syria to step aside? Deputy Secretary General Eliasson: Now you enter an area which I’m neither authorized nor able to speculate about. Diplomatic Connections: What I’m trying to say is, do you have any indication other than what is generally known about the intentions of Bashar al-Assad? Deputy Secretary General Eliasson: Well, the indications are that both sides will come to the negotiating table. We, as a premise for negotiations, have stated that the formula of Kofi Annan from June 23 is to be the basis of the talks, then we hope that we will find some formula. That’s what negotiation is all about. It’s up to the Syrians to decide what kind of future they want and should have, and how they end this horrible conflict. Then it’s up to the member states who can influence their decisions to push them to finally end this nightmare. Diplomatic Connections: All conflicts end in talks… Deputy Secretary General Eliasson: Exactly, I’ve heard so much about “military victory.” First of all, I don’t believe in military victory in this case. There was talk of military victory from both sides during the last two-and-a-half years, and what happened? The nightmare continued. But even if there were to be a military victory, it would probably just prepare the ground for another horror when the revenge starts, when the mobilization on the other side starts again if there’s no agreement on a peaceful future for the country. So it’s very futile to believe in military victory. Diplomatic Connections: Is a peacekeeping force to keep the warring parties separate possible? Deputy Secretary General Eliasson: It has been discussed, but it’s far too early to talk about that. Diplomatic Connections: So is this what occupies most of your time these days? Deputy Secretary General Eliasson: It is the issue 24
w w w. d i p l o m at i c c o n n e c t i o n s . c o m
that occupies us, and has occupied us most. I would say, in the last few years. In October, I went to the Secretary [General] and I told him that Brahimi was going to see President Assad, and the Secretary General asked me when. I said in 10 days’ time. The Secretary looked at me rather sadly, and he said, “Listen, 10 days! That’s between 1,000 and 1,500 people killed.” He counted, not the days but the number of people dying. That demonstrates how we feel about this, and we really hope that we can end this horrible war as soon as possible.
Diplomatic Connections: The U.N. peacekeeping force in Cyprus has a good record of keeping the parties apart, but in other situations its record is more mixed. What would make U.N. deployments more consistently reliable? Deputy Secretary General Eliasson: Well, first of all I would just add on Cyprus that, yes, we haven’t had open warfare or military confrontation. On the other hand, the basic problem still remains. Peacekeeping operations cannot be used to cement a situation which is, in fact, detrimental to long-term peace and security. Diplomatic Connections: But if the situation cannot be cemented, it’s a very good way to — Deputy Secretary General Eliasson: You are right. I myself negotiated, together with Russia, the cease-fire in Nagorno-Karabakh. When I am commended for that I say, OK, fine. People don’t kill each other, but the problem still remains; and you have the same thing in Cyprus. But it’s much better to have a situation where you don’t see any fighting. Diplomatic Connections: To take this a little further, it may end up being the solution in Cyprus. Deputy Secretary General Eliasson: I wouldn’t go that far. There are still aspirations to find a solution. Kofi Annan had a good proposal in 2004, and we are working hard on that, and I hope that the talks will start soon. And you have another of those long-standing conflicts in the Middle East, Israel-Palestine. But if I go to the second part of your question on peacekeeping, yes, in the new generation of peacekeeping we are seeing more and more difficult challenges. The classical peacekeeping where the U.N. easily maintained a neutrality and impartiality are not as common as they were in the past. We usually had international conflicts in which we were watching over a cease-fire line or something like that. Today, we are often in internal conflicts, civil wars, destabilized situations where the fighting may still go on, or is threatening to explode. We go in there, and we need to have both the classical peacekeeping component and a more muscular component to deal with the threats that come, for in-
structure, and now you don’t have those institutions. As we devise the course for the post-2015 development agenda, we have had Millennium Development Goals for the period from 2000 – 2015. We are now starting the negotiations with the member states for the next set of goals which have to contain poverty eradication, sustainability, but we also have to think of qualitative elements like good institutions, because if we don’t have those institutions, things fall apart so easily. It’s the institutions that make sure that we can achieve poverty eradication and sustainability. If we don’t have strong, honest institutions things don’t work. This is one of my main conclusions from watching the Arab Spring or Arab Renaissance — the importance of setting up credible institutions which can really make sure that you can go the road you want, not only politically, but economically and socially. That is such a great asset.
Diplomatic Connections: The Egyptians had the institutions, though they were perhaps institutions that required correction. So did the Tunisians. Deputy Secretary General Eliasson: And Tunisia is still the example, that’s why I think developments in Tunisia are still encouraging. n
UN Photo
stance, in the case of Mali, from extremist or terrorist groups, or from different groups in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, where you have the risk of military confrontation. Therefore, we have what we call an “intervention brigade.” When they are being used, this challenges the impartiality and neutrality [of the peacekeeping force] inside the country; and the people who could be exposed in such situations are humanitarian workers, human rights observers and civilian personnel. So it’s an issue we discuss practically every day in our new operations — to combine the classic, neutral, impartial U.N. presence with having that muscular capacity when we meet with what is sometimes called asymmetrical threats, which is the euphemism for terrorism. Diplomatic Connections: Could you reflect a little on the Arab Springs that have gone sour for one reason or another? Is that a situation which would involve the U.N.? Deputy Secretary General Eliasson: Of course, we’re very interested in what happens to the countries in that region. There were high hopes when the changes came about — deeper respect for the desire of the majority of the people, modernization and so forth. I think many of us warned that this would be a bumpy ride, that we would see ups and downs. We need to take a longer perspective of this process; there’s going to be progress and there’s going to be setbacks. What I find very interesting is the importance of the institutions. Libya is an example of a country that is in a difficult situation now. Libya’s still a population of five million people. They have oil, so they could easily get the resources. Still, you see huge problems coming from terrorists moving into southern Libya, historical baggage like tribalism, but with the disappearance of [Libyan strongman Moammar] Gadhafi everything that looked like institutions were gone. All the institutions were related to the Gadhafi leadership
DIPLOMATIC CONNECTIONS | S e p t e m b e r 2 0 1 4
25