Q: Mr. Secretary-General, was there any progress during your talks with the Foreign Minister on getting UN weapons inspectors back into Iraq and resolving the other outstanding issues?
SG: We had a very useful and frank discussion. And for the first time since the departure of the inspectors in December '98, they brought to the table their topics, first in the disarmament area, and interestingly enough, I think Dr. El Baradei and Dr. Blix knew most of them and they were able to get the clarifications and discuss the future and where we go from here.
Yesterday when I was in Washington discussing the Middle East peace process, there were technical level discussions between Dr. Blix and Dr. El Baradei and the Iraqi team, and I think this is the first time we have this sort of thorough discussion, as I said, and we did move forward, and they are going back to report to their principals. We will have another meeting where I hope they will come back with further progress and constructive proposals.
Q: In terms of the next stage, what is your estimation on where and when that will take place and what is the next area you get into? How do you move beyond their questions, your clarifications, to what?
SG: We focused mainly on, this time, as I said there were technical talks on the disarmament issue for a full day yesterday. We did talk about it on the first [day] and today also we have discussed that issue. I would hope when we meet next time, as I have indicated, there would be real progress on that issue. They have questions that they would want to get some answers to, which I raised with the Council. Of course the issue of the no-fly zone is of concern to them. And also the discussions about regime change, and the impact this is likely to have. I mean our discussions, if the inspectors were to go in, would it make any difference, and all that. These are issues on their minds and of course the answers to those questions have to come from the Council or specific Council members.
Q: As to the where and when for the next round?
SG: The next round will be within a month. I don't want to drag this thing out, and so I hope we will do that within a month.
Q: Here?
SG: We will have to discuss. It could be here, it could be elsewhere.
Q: Could it be in Baghdad? [Laughter]
SG: It's a big world. We don't have just two cities.
Q: How confident are you, Mr. Secretary-General, that now you and Dr. Blix have answered the questions of the Iraqis and that the next step will be an actual step from Baghdad - number 1. And number 2, there were some rumours in this building that Dr. Blix might be invited to Iraq, personally. Was that a discussion point this time around and what is the prognosis for that?
SG: I think the discussions this time round on the issues were quite thorough and I hope once they have reported back, next time we meet I hope we will be able to take some decisions, or they can take some decisions and come back to us with some positive news. On the question of an invitation to Dr. Blix, I didn't hear an invitation extended to him whilst I was in the meeting, but I may have to let him talk in case he got it directly that I don't know of.
HB: No, not even outside the meeting, but good practical discussions, yes.
Q: Mr. Secretary-General, you mentioned the no-fly zone and regime change. To what extent are these two issues keeping you from making true progress in getting inspectors back?
SG: We will know about that when they come back next time. Because, as I said, we have focussed on the disarmament issues. They indicated that they would like to get answers to some of the 19 questions that we three gentlemen were not in a position to answer. I did mention that to the Council also this afternoon.
Q: Mr. Secretary-General, as for UNMOVIC, would the Iraqis be assured of a time limit on it, or would it drag on for ten years like UNSCOM? And would you tell us about the progress that the Iraqis have made concerning whatever accreditation or certification by the IAEA?
SG: First of all, there was one more thing that I should have mentioned to you, that I didn't. And then will let my two colleagues here say something about that question. The Foreign Minister of the Arab League called me to say that the Iraqis were ready to return the archives of Kuwait, the Kuwaiti national archives, and that he has also informed the Kuwaiti Foreign Minister. The Foreign Minister of Iraq did confirm that information, and Amre Moussa, the Secretary General of the Arab League, indicated that they would want to work with the UN to transfer the assets back to Kuwait. I will of course also want to the Kuwaitis about it. If this does happen and the archives are transferred to Kuwait it will be a positive development and I hope it would help improve relations in the region.
HB: Well, the question was asked whether this would drag out for another ten years, and I certainly, for one, hope that it will not, but I had the same hope in 1991, I should say, when we started. I have advised the Security Council that if the Iraqis were to provide cooperation in all respects, then if you follow the resolution and if they make the progress that is required under the resolution, then one could come to a result within a time span of a year.
El B: On the nuclear issue I think, as you recall, in 1998 I reported to the Security Council that we believed that we neutralized the Iraq nuclear programme at the time, but during our discussion I reminded of course the Iraqi counterpart that we have been out for three and half years, and the major task for us, should we return back, is to make sure that the situation has not changed in any material way, for us to be able to conclude again, that the programme has been neutralized. Like also Dr. Blix, we have indicated, if we get full cooperation we should be able to move toward the suspension of sanctions foreseen under 1284 in a matter of around a year's time.
Q: Mr. Secretary-General, what happened today, anything similar one way or another, to the discussion, to the Memorandum of Understanding on 986, which the Iraqis did not want to deal with, and yet implemented in effect in the Oil for Food...was there anything happening along the lines of 1284, similar to the MOU, and the second part is, you spoke to the Council of some of the questions that you three were unable to answer, did you urge the Council members to come through with answers? Where do you stand on that?
SG: I think the Council members know very clearly my views. They have the questions in writing. And we discussed it the last time the Iraqis were here and I have indicated to them that they are interested in getting answers on that. Let me, on your first question, we did not discuss MOUs. We did not really focus on specific resolutions, I mean, we talked about 687 but focussed on the implementation of their obligations and responsibilities under the relevant UN resolutions, and I think that was the important thing.
Q: Mr. Secretary-General, have the Iraqi, maybe this is a segue to the next topic, have the Iraqis made the connection between their agreement to finding the facts about their weapons inspections and the Israeli part, and do you...
SG: The Israeli part?
Q: The Palestinian issue. And do you see such a connection in your mind?
SG: That issue did not come up. We didn't have a discussion on that issue at all. It was a very focussed discussion, as the two gentlemen told you. Yesterday all day, they had these serious discussions. One more question...
Q: On the fate of Mr. [Jose] Bustani at OPCW, did that arise at all in your talks with the Iraqis or in your consultations with the Council?
SG: No, it didn't come up, it didn't come up either in my discussions with the Iraqis nor in the Council. Thank you very much. On the Middle East I will take one or two questions...
Q: On the Kuwaiti detainees, you mentioned progress on the archives, any progress?
SG: No, we don't have any progress on that.
Q: Mr. Secretary-General, on the Mideast and fact-finding, the Arab Group is now talking about convening an emergency Special Session of the General Assembly. A function of that might be to call on you again to resume your fact-finding duties. How relevant or how possible do you think it is for you to conduct a credible fact-finding mission now, in the context of a General Assembly mandate, given the fact that you weren't able to do so in the Security Council.
SG: Obviously, as you have seen from the correspondence I have had with the Council, I am disappointed that the team, led by former President [Martti] Ahtisaari, did not go in. They are also disappointed. They did give me a preliminary report which I will share with the Council. I think it would have been much better for everyone if they had gone in to clarify issues. As it is, I think the long shadow which has been cast over Jenin will be with us for a while. I don't know what the General Assembly will decide, but if they were to ask us to collate the facts along the lines of what we did for Har Homma [Jabal abu Ghneim] I think that this is something we would have to do - we work for the Member States.
Q: Sir, two weeks ago tonight you thought, and both the Israelis thought you had an agreement, and obviously honest people can have honest differences of opinion. It is understood that perhaps your office may have had some sort of a transcript of the conversation between Shimon Peres and yourself. Is there any way perhaps of making that available to see exactly what was agreed to or understood at that time?
SG: Make it available to whom?
Q: The press for instance?
SG: Which serious governments or organizations releases their conversations between senior politicians and statesmen to the press?
Q: But it is obvious that a difference of opinions still exists to this very day.
SG: It is not going to happen, and I think the facts are put out, the details to the Member States you have the correspondence I have had with them, and I think it has also been corroborated by other sources.
Q: Mr. Secretary-General, earlier in the week Ariel Sharon in a broadcast interview indicated that he thought you were biased in dealing with the situation regarding the inspectors you were trying to get into Jenin. How do you respond to that?
SG: I don't have to respond. It's his opinion.
Q: Mr. Secretary-General. Mr. Sharon said that if [Yasser] Arafat attends the peace conference in the summer he will not attend. Will Arafat be assured of a seat on the table?
SG: The details are being worked out. I don't know who will attend, where it will take place, when it will take place. All these are details which should be worked out.
But let me go back to your earlier question about the UN or the Secretary-General being biased. I think throughout this issue my statements stand for themselves. I have been very clear. I have been impartial. I have spoken very firmly about wrongdoings by either party, and indicated that there is no military solution to this conflict and the only way to resolve it is through political negotiations, and that is why I am encouraged by what happened in Washington yesterday.
I would also want to hope that, given the disaster and the tragedy that has happened in that region, the suffering of the people, both Israelis and [Palestinians], the innocent civilians who have been caught between this conflict, that the military option is going to be so totally discredited, that we will all turn around and focus on the political search for peace. And I would hope that the two peoples would wake up and move in that direction, and I am really, really hopeful that they will. We should remember that it wasn't long ago that the vast majority of Israelis were in support of peace and the peace process, and the vast majority of Palestinians were too. But today there is nothing on the table. The only option appears to be the military option and I hope with the discussions going on in Washington will give the people a chance to hope again and to move in the right direction. Thank you very much. *****