Secretary-General's press encounter with Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende of the Netherlands (unofficial transcript)

Prime Minister Balkenende: The Dutch Government is very pleased that they have had the opportunity to share views and have a discussion with the Secretary-General. We talked about the role of the International Criminal Court, we talked about international justice. And this institution is very important for the improvement of international justice and, of course, the Netherlands is very proud to be the host of the ICC.

Then we discussed the issue of Cyprus. A very important issue in Europe, it has to do with the relationship between Greece and Turkey, it has to do with the future of the European unity and we really admire the efforts of the Secretary-General to find solutions for this complicated issue. Until now there has not been a concrete result but it is very good that, in any case, the United Nations has taken its responsibility to bring the solution forward, and I think that the Secretary-General has played a very important role to bring parties together and we really hope that the parties will come to an agreement. It is not easy, we know that, but I think that the Secretary-General has taken his responsibility and we admire him for that.

And then we talked about the very important issue of Iraq. It is also a very important issue here in The Netherlands but also in many, many other countries. What we have seen, the United Nations have given a clear signal in resolution 1441. And it is not a first moment, years and years, Saddam Hussein did not comply with resolutions of the UN. We are talking about weapons of mass destruction and that must be clear that Saddam Hussein has to comply with the resolution 1441. And, of course, we have the work of the inspectors. The inspectors can only work if there is a full cooperation, unconditionally, from the side of Iraq and that has not been the case until yet. Things have to change. We only need that Saddam will move, can move, if there is international pressure. And now we have seen for too long that the international community was divided: we could see it in NATO, we could see it in the European Union, and that must change. And that is the reason why we believe that we need pressure and the best thing that could be done is that the Security Council of the United Nations would come to a clear resolution, with clear disarmament tasks and with a clear deadline. We need that pressure because Saddam Hussein has to move and the best direction of Iraq and united international community and that is what is important now.

Mr. Secretary-General:

SG: Thank you very much, Mr. Prime Minister, Ladies and Gentlemen,

Mr. Prime Minister, let me thank her Majesty the Queen and you and your Government for hosting the International Criminal Court here. You've really become a center of international law with all these various courts, here in The Hague and in your country.

I am also very happy to have had the opportunity this morning to exchange views with you on the three topics you have mentioned. I think the Court is going to play a key role in providing individuals the right of redress, the right to be able to take action and measures against people who have committed crimes against humanity and I think it is also a warning. It is a warning to people who will commit these crimes that impunity will not be allowed to stand and they will be made to account, individually and not hiding behind a government or leaders saying "I was following orders". I hope, in time, many more countries will join the Court and I think we brought together an outstanding group of judges, we will soon appoint a wonderful prosecutor, I hope. And as the team goes ahead and does its work and demonstrates what the Court can do, I think that the governments and peoples around the world are going to have confidence in this new Court that we are going to build.

On Cyprus, we brought the parties here yesterday and I had asked them to answer one specific question: if they would be prepared to put my plan to a joint referenda in both the Turkish and the Greek Cypriot parts by 30 March to be able to, and if they were to approve the referenda, for united a Cyprus to accede to the European Union on 16 April. That was not possible. One party had indicated he would not put the plan to referendum and, of course, did not seem to seize the urgency of the work that had to be done for us to meet that deadline and so we did not get the results we wanted. But the parties, the leaders, have agreed to go to the island and continue talking and I have wished them well, and, of course, if it gets to a stage where they think we can be helpful, we will always be prepared to help and they also know where to find us.

On Iraq, I agree with the Prime Minister that what is needed is united international action, constant and persistent pressure on the leadership of Iraq to disarm. On the question of disarmament, we all agreed. The people in the streets, the government, everybody, is insisting on disarmament and that is why the public mood must not be misread by the Iraqi authorities. Obviously, we need to exhaust all possibilities to resolve this issue peacefully before force is considered. But a united Council working with unity of purpose and direction can make that difference and I think attempts are being made, as difficult as it is, by the Council to come together and to move forward. We are also making plans on the humanitarian front to assist the Iraqi civilians should war come. I hope it does not but we shouldn't be caught unprepared if it does come, so we have done serious contingency planning to be able to assist.

Thank you very much, we will now take your questions.

Q: I would like to ask a question about Iraq. What do you think about extending the deadline of March 17th and what do you think about the possible veto of Russia and France?

SG: I heard yesterday that there may be further amendments to the resolution. I don't have the details of it but some governments believe that the 17 March deadline is too short. Whether it is an issue for the Member States, whether they will be able to extend the date and for how long, is something that I am waiting to see evolve.

On the question of possible veto by France and the Russian Federation, this is a right of individual Members to vote whichever way that they deem fit. They have indicated that if the issue were to come to a vote they may vote "no" but of course it depends what sort of resolution is going to be on the table if indeed there are further discussions on the resolution. But if they were to cast a negative vote, it is their right.

Q: It is not very good for the unity you would like to see.

SG: Not very good for the unity but we have seen this before. Many vetoes have been cast, I hope we will be able to come together on this one but to be able to come together on this one and avoid the vetoes implies that we need to come with a compromise that everybody can rally around and say this is the direction we are going to go and put pressure on the Iraqi authorities to disarm. If we are not able to find that compromise and the divisions remain then we are likely to have these vetoes.

Q: I would like to ask Prime Minister Balkenende whether the Netherlands would be willing to support coalition to disarm Iraq even if there are vetoes?

PM: I just talked about the necessity of unity of the international community. The worst signal in the direction of Saddam Hussein and the Iraqis is a divided international world. And I think something must be clear, Saddam Hussein has to disarm. The issue of weapons of mass-destruction is very important and I must say the international community draw one line in resolution 1441 and what is now at stake, to my opinion, is having a unity. That signal we need. And that is the reason why I said, "it is important to have a resolution with clear disarmament tasks and with a clear deadline". I think the countries involved should try to find such a compromise because if there are different signals in the direction of Saddam that is the best thing for him. And at this moment, if you talk about countries who are taking up one point and then another point I think that mean the international world is divided and at this moment we need unity. That is the reason why, of course, that there is a legal possibility to veto, but there is a common responsibility of all the countries and that is to give a clear signal to Saddam. That is what has to be done now. I am sure that when the international community would draw one line it will be the best in the direction of Saddam not on a divided world. That, I think, is the essential element of this moment. In the Dutch Government at this moment, in our diplomatic contacts, we are trying to improve that situation to get more unity.

Q: If there is no Security Council decision to disarm Iraq by force, with the Dutch government join the Americans and the British?

PM: I think that everybody is convinced that there shouldn't be a war. Nobody wants to have a war, that is for sure. But the important thing is, it is not a matter of war at the one side and peace on the other side, the essential element is to disarm Saddam Hussein and Iraq, this is what is at sake now. At this moment, I think, there must not be a situation that Saddam [Hussein] can count "I have so many countries that they will be active in an eventual war and other countries not". But at this moment it is relevant to try to get unity and that is the reason why I think it is not very wise to speculate on what we should do. We need military pressure. If you talk in resolution 1441 about serious consequences, then to our opinion, of course, that has to do also with military pressure. And that means the signal must be clear and that also the position of the Dutch Government, everybody will try to avoid war but as a last instrument, the last choice, can be the military action. And that is, I think also, what has been meant with talking about serious consequences.

Q: For the Secretary-General. Is it true that France has the right to veto the decision of the Security Council? The Dutch Government has stated that France will blow up the United Nations if they will do so. Do you disagree in this point with the Dutch Government?

SG: First of all, when it comes to voting in the Security Council, the Permanent Members have veto rights and have used them in the past. As I have indicated, on this issue, I myself have always pleaded for unity of the Council and for them to get a common position compromising and move forward together and put on their collective pressure, because it is when they work together that they are most effective and have the greatest impact. If that were to fail and France, and maybe other countries, were to exercise their veto, I don't think that would be the end of the United Nations. Obviously, we've all indicated that it would be better if they had worked together as they worked on [resolution] 1441 but what I would want to say is that no matter how this issue is resolved at the end of the day the UN is going to be as important as ever and the UN will have an important role, the Security Council that is, in how we handle the situation in Iraq, and in the region, regardless of how the conflict is resolved.

Thank you very much for joining us.