 |
| |
VOL. 28, NO. 08, Oct 24 , 2008 (Kartik 08 2065 B.S.)
|
|
“I Can Assure You We Don’t Blindly Support Anything”
Ian Martin
IAN MARTIN, Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General in Nepal, addressed a press conference recently. Excerpts of his press conference:
Girija Prasad Koirala asked you that if Maoist army is integrated into Nepal Army, it will tarnish its image internationally. Do you want to say anything on that?
First, let me say that neither I nor UNMIN have ever been an advocate for or against integration. We have never taken a position on this issue. We have always made it clear that like other aspects of the peace process, this is for Nepalis to decide and the political actors reached agreements as to the process by which they would decide it
How do you see the presence of PLA?
Of course as long as the PLA remains an army outside the State, and not a State Army, it cannot be considered by the United Nations for peace keeping. It is national armies, of course, that participate in United Nations peacekeeping. But, there are national armies participating in United Nations peacekeeping that include former insurgents who have become part of a fully professional State army.
NC and MJF are now saying that because the PLA has political indoctrination, it should not be integrated in the national army. What is the UN’s reaction to statements coming from major political parties?
I am not going to be drawn into public discussion with the political parties about the different views that they hold. The fact is that they have agreed upon a process to take that discussion forward through a special committee, composed now not only of governing parties but also of parties outside government. I think that’s the place where that discussion needs to take place.
How do you see the special committee?
Of course, the special committee is not going to have an easy task, finding a way forward with the sufficient degree of consensus. But the only way, as in other aspects of the peace process, is to begin that dialogue. And maybe a dialogue at the political level can be assisted, as the 25th of June agreement envisages, by some discussions at the technical level and by a look at the experience of other countries as well.
Do you think whatever has been labeled against you about your not being impartial is a fair assessment?
I have been here quite a long time now and during that time there have been criticisms from different parts of the political spectrum, left and right, towards the way we have played our role. I can assure everyone that we have done our best to play it impartially and objectively and without favoring any political party or side to the peace process.
With the Nepali Congress, especially, coming out pretty vocally raising reservations about UNMIN’s role, do you see a historical legacy of UNMIN is kind of squandered?
I don’t see in the views that Nepalis throughout the country express to us about the role that UNMIN has played through the peace process, any major criticism. What is usually expressed to me is a strong desire that the United Nations should continue support to a process that has come a long way and which most Nepalis think has been assisted by the presence of UNMIN and the United Nations as a whole.
A senior leader of Nepali Congress Sushil Koirala has said UNMIN has been supporting the Maoists blindly. What do you say?
I can assure you we don’t blindly support anything. As I’ve said, we seek to play our role as objectively as possible. And I’ve stressed again in my opening statement the consistent concern that we have had for victims of the conflict, and that’s a concern that I think got somewhat lost during the election campaign. Peace process commitments towards victims have not been fulfilled; they should be fulfilled, and they should be fulfilled irrespective of whether we’re talking about those who are victims of the Maoists or those who are Maoists and were victims of others, or whether they are people of no political affiliation at all who were caught up in the conflict. The responsibility of the state towards victims is one that the state should apply impartially to victims of all kinds.
Some armed groups in the Terai are seeking the UN’s role or UN mediation. Does UNMIN want to play a role to mediate the peace process with those groups in the coming days?
This, too, is a question that has come up at earlier stages, so let me again make it very clear that UNMIN has never sought political contacts or had political contacts with any of the armed Terai groups, despite misunderstandings that sometimes continue to get repeated in the media. Yes, the Terai groups have sometimes asked for United Nations involvement, but United Nations good offices, obviously, can only apply if that is a request of the government and all parties to a situation of conflict. Let me say, I certainly welcome the fact that the government is, as they are committed to do, making fresh efforts to bring about a peaceful resolution to the situation in the Terai, but UNMIN is not seeking any involvement in that.
