INTERVIEW WITH JOSE RAMOS-HORTA: WHERE DID THE MILLIONS IN EAST TIMOR AID END UP?

By Mario de Queiroz and - - Reprint | | Print |

This column is available for visitors to the IPS website only for reading. Reproduction in print or electronic media is prohibited. Media interested in republishing may contact romacol@ips.org.

LISBON, Mar 21 2006 (IPS) - His name is mentioned with increasing frequency in predictions of who will succeed Kofi Annan as Secretary-General of the United Nations, but Jose Ramos-Horta, foreign minister for East Timor, denies it, though not emphatically: \’\’I continue to say that I\’m not a candidate for Secretary-General, at least for now,\’\’ he stated during a visit to Lisbon. Ramos-Horta is the chief diplomat of the youngest country in the world, born on May 22, 2002, after almost five centuries of Portuguese colonisation and twenty-two years of occupation by Indonesia, which ended with the genocide of a third of the territory\’s population, which was 660,000 in 1975. His indefatigable international activity against the occupation by Indonesia brought him the Nobel Peace Prize in 1996, together with the bishop of Timor, Jose Ximenes Belo.

Born in Dili in 1949, the man who could become the second Asian UN Secretary-General studied in the United States, Holland, and France, receiving a bachelor’s degree in political science and a doctorate in international relations and peace studies.

However, he does not openly admit that he is being considered for the UN position, because ”our government backed the candidacy of the vice-prime minister of Thailand, Surakiart Sathirathai, a diplomat with considerable experience, a charming individual, and personal friend.”

Does that mean you would rule out your own candidacy in favour of Sathirathai?

It is obvious that I would make this compromise in the name of my government and my own position. In all honesty, though, the fact that we take this position on Sathirathai’s candidacy doesn’t mean that someone like myself, given my origins and my experience, both human and cultural, diplomatic, and political, is not interested in the post of secretary-general, because from this position it is possible to contribute to international solidarity, peace, and harmony in the world.

Given the very specific characteristics that unite the Portuguese- speaking countries on four continents, you can certainly count on the support of Brazil, which has immense influence in Latin America, the five Luso-African countries, and of course Portugal, whose foreign minister, Diogo Freitas do Amaral, has already officially announced his support.

I must confess I am perplexed to hear my name has been cited not only by the international press but also in the UN and various countries. I am very grateful to those who believe I would make a good secretary-general. Nonetheless, I must repeat that I am still not a candidate.

What is the principal problem with the UN today?

I share the concern of the United States and other countries: one of the top priorities of the next secretary-general must be reforming the internal machinery of the UN, which is an immense and paralysing bureaucracy. Kofi Annan has made radical proposals which I hope can be implemented. Reducing the bureaucracy, cutting waste, and increasing functionality are all clear necessities. Without this, other reforms will be very difficult to achieve, particularly the expansion of the Security Council.

The most urgent issue is resolving the nuclear dispute with Iran and North Korea, as well as taking leadership in the fight against international terrorism. The UN has an indispensable role to play in bringing together the international community, small countries, superpowers, rich and poor alike.

Many analysts believe we may be on the verge of a war in Iran.

I don’t think so. In contrast to the build-up to the war in Iraq, the Security Council is more united in its determination to avoid the military ”nuclearisation” of Iran. No country of the region wants to see Teheran have nuclear weapons. In the final analysis, Iran will feel the pressure from the international community, including its neighbours.

Criticism is increasing of how poor countries use international development aid. What is your opinion?

The UN and various donor nations state that they have spent hundreds of millions of dollars in East Timor, yet the Timorese simply haven’t seen evidence of these funds. It is the responsibility of the UN and these donor countries to explain where the money went – to the people of East Timor or to their own consultants and technicians, the endless studies they carry out, the evaluation missions, and the famous ”training programmes” that follow, one after another.

For decades, you were known not only for your fight for Timor but also for your denunciation of the situation in Burma, now called Myanmar.

I am saddened and worried by the situation in Burma, which is a country frozen in time. The capital Rangoon is falling apart, after 45 years of incompetent and irresponsible rule by military governments whose ferocious repression drove the country deep into a state of fear. What shocked me most was not seeing a single smiling face. It is plain to see that what lies in the heart of the Burmese is fear and sadness.

I think that the international community should hope Burma’s neighbours, especially India and China, do even more to induce a democratic opening of the country given the extreme instability of the current situation, which affects neighbouring countries as well.

Given the systematic refusal of the military rulers to free 1991 Nobel Peace Prize laureate Aung San Suu Kyi and initiate a serious process of dialogue for democratisation, the UN could take more active measures. Kofi Annan has done so during his tenure, but the regional powers have a responsibility to do more.

In contrast to your case, in which the Nobel Prize was fundamental to making the world take a more critical look at the repression in Timor, the award was not very effective with regard to Burma.

It was not, but it could still be. What has happened in Indonesia, where the people and the students were fed up with the dictatorship, misery, suffering, corruption, and misgovernment, and took to the streets, could happen in Burma. These situations are impossible to predict but occur in country after country — the Philippines, Thailand, Ukraine, Ecuador, and Peru to name a few — where oppressed people, whether defrauded or robbed, lose patience and take action. (END/COPYRIGHT IPS)