16.01.25 - Conférence de presse donnée à Genève par l'envoyé spécial des Nations Unies pour la Syrie, Staffan de Mistura, sur les pourparlers Intra-syriens
Conférences de presse
Moderator : Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen and thank you for your patience. I know you have been waiting for a little while, but also for a few days, maybe a few weeks for this moment and it’s finally here, I’m glad to say. The special envoy for the Secretary-General for Syria Staffan de Mistura needs no introduction, so we’ll go straight into the meat of the matter. I’d like to first, for housekeeping let you know that we do have simultaneous interpretation, Arabic and French. And the channels, for those of you who are guests here, with these earpieces you can hear the original floor on Channel 1, English on Channel 2, French on Channel 3 and Arabic on Channel 7. The Special Envoy will have a few remarks to make at the outset of this press conference on Syria and then we will open the floor to questions. I would urge you please, I am so glad to see such a large turnout, to give everybody a chance. No double-barreled questions, please. One question and one follow-up per person. We will recognize you in the order that we see your hands up. The Special Envoy will also introduce my colleagues to his left and without ado, I would invite you Mr. de Mistura to make your opening remarks. The floor is your, sir.
Mr. Staffan de Mistura: Thank you. First of all, thank you and my apologies again for a few minutes of delay. I was, as you can imagine until the last moment, on the phone with various capitals and other groups in order to make sure that I have the latest update. As you should think, things move very fast at the end. Let me first of all introduce, Khawla Matar who is my director in Damascus, but also has a very special background in the communication. She was director of communication and information office in Cairo. She will be the official spokesperson of the Geneva Intra-Syrian Talks on my behalf. Jessy will be remaining very much my main focal point for the media, interviews or any type of comments or a background, and at the same time, collecting the information I need to have. So that is the team that you should really be getting familiar with.
Now, let me get to the point. You must know, and you know very well. There has been a different, very different opinions and positions regarding the list of invitations. That has been, and you know it very well, the issue. The stalemate so far. Discussions have been taking place in various capitals, there have been contacts between the Secretary of State Kerry, the Foreign Minister Lavrov, foreign ministers of the region, visits to Riyadh, to Ankara and they are still ongoing. I’ve been very much aware of the danger of what happened in Geneva II. So that’s why, I’ve been, and am, particularly careful about the issue about invitations, because they do have an impact on making sure that we don’t have a repetition of Geneva II. The Syrians don’t deserve it, Geneva doesn’t deserve it and the Secretary-General is feeling very strongly about it. That is why we have been careful and extremely thorough in wanting to make sure that when and if we start, we start at least on the right foot. It would be uphill anyway. Well, discussions are still ongoing. Let me remind me some points and then to give you where we are.
Security Council 22/54 is very clear in assigning to me, Special Envoy of the Secretary-General, the task to finalize the efforts of the list of Syrian participants, taking note of the meetings in Moscow, Cairo and in particular, the youthful (?) meeting in Riyadh on the 9th of December. That’s basically the mandate that I’ve been assigned to by the Security Council. Security Council is also 22/54, urging me to bring the broadest possible spectrum of the opposition. Now, due to the intense disagreements, frankly, and different opinions on who should be on the list, the actual beginning of the talk, which was meant to be today, 25 January, have been delayed. And today, therefore, instead of announcing the beginning of the talks, I am in a position of still announcing to you the date in which, in my opinion, we will be in a position to send invitations – tomorrow. And the date which we will be aiming at having the beginning of the Intra Syrian Talks – 29th of January. The invitation will be issued based on the criteria of inclusiveness, substantive weight. The agenda will be the one set by the 22/54. The invitations will clearly want to be also addressed to women and civil society, I’ve made a point, and the Secretary-General has been extremely clear on that, whatever list of various delegations want to come, we will make sure that there is a substantial presence of women to advise me and make sure that we are in the right position regarding the future of Syria of which there are 51 per cent, at least, of them in Syria. The agenda will be already set up. It’s the governance 22/54 resolution, about the new governance, a new constitution and new elections. However, here comes a major point that I think you should be aware of, the first priority will be the focus of the talk of what most Syrians, if not all, want to hear. The possibility of a broad ceasefire and the possibility of stopping the threat of ISIL. And therefore and thanks to a broader ceasefire, an increase of humanitarian aid. You will hear tomorrow, we will have a special press conference, which we have been supporting very much, of my colleagues from the humanitarian side, in order to be able to explain to you how urgent, how important and what needs to be done, in order to make sure that those who are, in a way, getting here to talk about the future of Syria, don’t forget that the end of the day, every day lost is a day lost for a ceasefire and for humanitarian aid. There will be no opening ceremony. I regret from the camera point of view, I know from the photo point of view, you will not have the type of feeling of a large group of people sitting, and probably arguing publicly, among them. That will not be what you will be seeing. We are going to aim at proximity talks. Starting on the 29th and ongoing for six months on a staggered, chronological proximity approach. That will be the way we try to make it different from the past. This is not Geneva III. This is leading to what we hope will be a Geneva success story, if we are able to push it forward.
There are political risks. And you will hear them as soon as you will hear the fact that I am announcing that I intend to do on the 29th, and that I will be issuing invitations tomorrow. But those political risks, intentions and prepositioning should also be taken into account that our line and the Security Council has been clear: no preconditions. At least to start the talks, and while the talks starts. The rest is open. It’s going to be uphill. They are not in an agreement yet. But we are all feeling that what have been happening in the past, and what all the regions and the main stakeholders feel, the time has come to at least try hard to produce an outcome. Imagine if we did have a ceasefire discussion, seriously starting, and then following the rest, all political risks of starting a conference, in fact of Intra Syrian Talks, without having a total clarity what direction they will all go, is worth it.
That’s where we are at the moment. Thank you very much.
Moderator : Thank you Mr. de Mistura.
Question: Thank you very much. I have many questions, of course. But I think I will just start with the Geneva Communiqué that we have not talked about for a long time. Will the Geneva Communiqué be a central base for the negotiations that will be unfolding in the next days? Thank you.
Mr. de Mistura: The answer is yes. No question, everything is starting with the Geneva Communiqué, which is still considered the chapeau, the umbrella for everything we are going to do. The proof is that it has been approved by everyone, and no one has put in doubt, especially now. That doesn’t mean that what we have in 22/54, which lays down very clearly three areas: governance, new constitution and new elections under UN supervision, is a further refinement and more precise of what could be the umbrella of the Geneva Communiqué. Thank you.
Question: Mr. de Mistura, permit me to ask about the scenario of the negotiations, if I can say. You were talking before about four working groups in the negotiations in parallel. Are you going to start like this, or are you going to contact each party in separate and after you will go to the working groups? Thank you.
Mr. de Mistura: Thank you. It’s a good opportunity of clarifying this. Remember, when we did not have yet the Vienna process starting. When we did not have the refugee crisis, we didn’t have the Russian military intervention, when we didn’t have the feeling that ISIL was moving further and forward, there was an attempt by us to still have a framework of what could be a discussion preparing to what we are doing now. Things have moved forward. Now we have a Vienna clear message about starting the three arguments, the three issues, therefore the working groups don’t exist anymore. They are the past. Now, we have only one Intra Syrian Talk about governance, about constitutional review and about future elections. Hopefully, starting with discussing first what is the most urgent thing for the Syrian people, who have heard already constitution, they want to hear about ceasefire and about humanitarian aid. That doesn’t mean that we will not, at any occasion of the proximity talks, not establish special working groups in order to address specific scientifically specific areas. For instance, the type of monitoring of ceasefire. That is a special working group with specialists.
Question : Vous venez de nous préciser que vous allez envoyer les invitations demain. Est-ce que c’est lié à la réunion qui se tient demain à Riyad de l’opposition syrienne ? Nous avons le représentant des Kurdes qui a annoncé qu’il pouvait ne pas participer à la réunion de Genève. Merci.
Mr. de Mistura: Je pense sans doute que la réunion à Riyad sera beaucoup plus utile et concrète sur la base du fait de savoir qu’il n’y a pas (il s’interrompt en raison d’un problème technique).. Je recommence, OK ? Je pense que la réunion à Riyad sera quand même assez plus proactive basé sur le fait qu’ils vont savoir que les invitations seront envoyées demain. Et donc, ce sera aussi très utile à nous parce qu’ils vont savoir que la chose est devenue urgente et sérieuse.
Question: You’ve clipped the most important question here. Clearly, you’re not going to read us a list of who you’re going to invite, but is who you’re going to invite. And you are going to be shuttling between the different delegations. How many rooms will you be shuttling between? How many delegations are there going to be?
Mr. de Mistura: You see, the issue about rooms and delegations will be part exactly of the creativity of these proximity talks. And you will see it youself: there will be in my opinion a lot of shuttling because there are not only different delegations, but there is also civil society, women and others who deserve to be heard. The issue is, they will be meeting me and my colleagues and those we will be assigning as facilitators, so negotiators. So you could have quite a lot of simultaneous meetings taking place.
Question: I was more on the format. Is there any possibility of getting direct talks do you think going? And also, if you’re going on for six months, could you say a little about how you see that process continuing? Because I guess if people, if delegations, coming here are going to be staying here for six months...?
Mr. de Mistura: Very correct. In terms of vision, things may get faster, things may get slower, I can tell you in advance, don’t be surprised. There will be a lot of posturing, we know that. A lot of walk-outs and walk-ins because a bomb has fallen or because someone has done an attack and you will see that happening. We should not be impressed, neither depressed, but it’s likely to happen. The important thing is that we keep the momentum.
The first plan would be that the first part of the talks should be lasting between two and three weeks. And then give time for the various interlocutors to consult their own supporters and consult themselves about the next steps. And give us the time to prepare also for the next round. So it’s not six months full time, everybody in one room, not walking out. The name of the game is to be as flexible and creative as possible to adjust to the different challenges of this time of intra-Syrian talks.
I will now give the floor — can I just do it by myself? Good. No. And I will otherwise have to start looking all the time here. Yeah. Good. I prefer not.
Question: You’re definitely going ahead on Friday, maybe if even you send out invitations and people just don’t come? You’re going to start?
Mr. de Mistura: There is never the word “definitely” or “never” in this type of job. But we are definitely going to aim at starting the meetings on the 29th. Okay? And the invitations should be tomorrow. People may find it difficult to travel. People may have visas which may be delayed, things like this. But remember, proximity talks doesn’t mean an opening ceremony. We will be some, and the other ones on Monday or Tuesday. Proximity talks.
Question: Actually, I was going to ask, you said about the sending of invitations. Are you going to send the invitation and will these two groups be in the list of the persons who are invited to the talks? I’m talking about ISIL and Nusra Front. They are terroristic according to the Russian Federation. Please.
Mr. de Mistura: I hope you will bear with me the fact that I am not going — and James was very correct — in asking me about details about the invitations. I’m just simply saying that I’m going to send invitations based on the mandate that I’ve been given by the Security Council to actually issue invitations, and I will do that tomorrow.
Can I look on the left side? Yes, please. Please.
Question: Originally, I think you had a cease fire, and also a list of terrorist groups that were supposed to be on the table on the day that you started the talks. Neither of those things is yet in sight. What is your expectation, not your hope, but what is your expectation for when you might get those two things? Thank you.
Mr. de Mistura: You see, things are moving, and I think probably there is a much better understanding by those who have been insisting on pre-conditions, such as, “we need the list in advance of who is a terrorist” or “we need to have a clarity of who is the opposition”. In terms of understanding also that what matters is also starting the talks with some type of minimum common understanding. The process of deciding on who should be in a terrorist list is still ongoing. Jordan have been very kind and generous in wanting to take that very difficult job. There are other processes which are taking place in the Security Council in the UN. There are committees on it. So all that may continue and probably will put more clarity on what is being considered “terrorist”. At the moment, I am basing myself on what the Security Council tells me. The Security Council has been telling me ISIL and Al-Nusra. This is what I’ve been hearing from the Security Council. Yes.
Question : J’ai deux questions. Nombreux de mes collègues ici présents et moi, nous avons couvert il y a deux ans, déjà, la deuxième conférence internationale sur la Syrie. À ce moment-là on travaillait de Montreux et à Genève. Deux ans ont passé : la situation en Syrie, au lieu de s’améliorer, est devenue pire encore. Alors, Monsieur, selon vous, quels sont les principaux obstacles pour rétablir la paix en Syrie ? C’est ma première question. Deuxième question : que peut-on attendre pour les pourparlers de paix de cette fois-ci? Merci beaucoup.
M. de Mistura: Vous me posez des questions grandes et très profondes. Je pense que pour les obstacles, c’est surtout le manque de confiance et le manque de volonté politique de respecter ce que l’on a toujours dit mais que l’on n’a pas encore fait : qu’il n’y pas de solution militaire, il y a seulement une solution politique. Dans les mots, c’était présent ; dans les faits, ce n’était pas présent. Ça c’est le premier obstacle. On va faire un test – si ça c’est la vérité ou pas actuellement. Pour le reste, attendons les résultats de la conférence - hein, s’il vous plaît – et des rencontres.
Question : La chaîne arabe Al-Mayadeen a annoncé ce matin que vous auriez dû vous rendre à Riyad pour des contacts et que vous avez dû annuler ce voyage et que les Saoudiens vous aurez déclaré persona non grata. Est-ce que vous pouvez apporter des commentaires à cette information de Al-Mayadeen qui a été reprise dans beaucoup de médias arabes ? Merci.
M. de Mistura : Et oui. Tout à fait. Moi-même, j’ai été très surpris quand j’ai lu que j’étais en voyage à Riyad, parce que j’étais ici et mon intention était de rester ici pour préparer, justement. Je n’ai aucun plan et je n’avais aucun plan d’aller à Riyad. J’étais en contact avec le Prince Mohammed hier au téléphone et nous avons de très bons rapports de travail. Je pense que vous devez tous être prêts – et franchement vous le verrez – you will always be ready : there will be a lot of disinformation and messaging in order to create this type of things. Be kind, like you are doing, to check with me. None of that is correct. Neither one nor the second. Yes, please, and then we go back down there. Yes, the gentleman in the light-blue jacket.
Question: I appreciate that you mentioned that you do not want to provide details on the invitations but just today the Turkish foreign minister mentioned that the YPG in particular, if they were to be invited, that would spell the end of the talks in their view, and I would appreciate if you just comment on that. You obviously made a reference to the fact that both the Al-Nusra Front and ISIL are not here because of UN sanctions. Should we read between the lines that because those two groups have been specifically mentioned by the United Nations Security Council, then it is open to everyone else?
Mr. de Mistura: No, you cannot do that because it will depend very much on the interaction between both the Syrians, who will be there, and on those countries who have any influence on the conflict. So I will not make a comment beyond that. I will not make a comment on that.
I will turn down there, and then back there.
Question : Je voulais poser la question sur la modalité de réunion du 29 est-ce qu’il y aura deux équipes de l’opposition, une seule équipe élargie ou bien deux équipes différentes, séparées.
M. de Mistura: Je ne vais pas rentrer dans les détails organisationnels de la réunion à ce point-là, parce que ça va dépendre aussi de mes discussions avec ceux qui sont invités pour organiser les réunions. Ce que vous devez savoir, c’est que les proximity talks me donnent une énorme flexibilité sur comment et combien et qui pouvoir rencontrer. Un seul élément est clair, c’est que l’on va maintenir ces proximity talks jusqu’à quand il y aura le moment dans lequel on pourrait avoir des direct talks. Pour le reste, je suis tout ouvert à une certaine forme d’adaptabilité et créativité, parce que la situation le demande. Il faut apprendre et nous on essaie d’apprendre de la Conférence Genève II.
Question : L’opposition de Riyad – appelons-la comme ça : celle qui a été appelée « opposition de Riyad » – répète depuis plusieurs jours qu’elle ne viendra pas tant que les bombardements se poursuivront et tant qu’il n’y a pas de cessez-le-feu. Est-ce qu’elle a changé d’opinion ? Est-ce que vous allez la convoquer dans un deuxième temps ? Et en attendant peut-être qu’elle change d’avis. Et puis à propos du cessez-le-feu, visez-vous un cessez-le-feu général ou encore une fois un cessez-le-feu local, région par région ?
M. de Mistura: Chacun a le droit de décider quand et comment venir. Mais, comme ligne principale, on a lancé le message : pas de préconditions de aucune part ; venez ici et discutons tout ce qui vous préoccupe. Dans le cadre spécifique, c’est déjà clair que l’on va pousser…je pense que du côté, aussi, américain et russe il y a un intérêt à ce que cela puisse se passer…que l’on commence à discuter surtout, au commencement, sur la question du cessez-le-feu. Donc le choix, c’est commencer à en discuter avant ou pendant. Normalement, les négociations on les fait quand on est là et en mettant comme priorité, pas comme condition, le fait qu’au lieu de parler de quelque chose pendant six mois sur le futur de la Syrie, on commence immédiatement à parler de ce que – franchement et c’est aussi mon sentiment personnel, parce que les Syriens nous disent quelque chose : ils nous disent nous voulons une chose concrète, au moment où vous faites une conférence, donnez-nous quelques signes concrets, vous tous. Et la réponse est : on va pousser sur la question du cessez-le-feu. Alors quelle forme ? Petits cessez-le-feu, suspension of fighting, pause the fighting….il y a plein de formules, à condition qu’on puisse avoir de vrais cessez-le-feu et non pas des local ceasefire, un peu comme Homs, qui évidemment ne sont pas ce que nous souhaitons, mais quelque chose qui arrête le combat. Mais cela fait partie du débat.
Question: Vous avez dit que vous ne vouliez pas donner de détails sur qui va pouvoir recevoir une invitation. Est-ce que vous pouvez nous dire quels sont les critères d’exclusion de groupe(s) précisément ?
M. de Mistura: Non, je ne peux pas. Je peux seulement vous dire que le critère c’est de répondre à ce que le Conseil de sécurité m’a dit et donné comme devoir d’être le plus inclusive as possible. Je m’arrête là. Mais sans doute une catégorie dans laquelle on va être très ferme, c’est la catégorie des femmes et aussi de la civil society parce que souvent, elles sont marginalisées.
Question: My question is about the suspension of fighting. How do you negotiate a suspension of fighting while you have a terrorist group fighting? With whom do you negotiate? Is it a ceasefire just amongst some groups and they are allowed, for example, to keep on fighting the terrorist group. Because if your center is the Syrian population, they will be affected anyway.
Mr. de Mistura: You are touching a very crucial point and valid point. As claimed by all those who are attending the Vienna process and also the Security Council meeting, that the suspension of fighting regarding ISIL in particular and Al-Nusra is not on the table. But there is plenty of other suspensions of fightings that can take place.
Thank you very much.
Speaker: Do not forget the conference tomorrow on the humanitarian situation in Syria after the Tuesday briefing at 11:30. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. De Mistura. And ladies and gentlemen, do not forget Khawla Matar is his chief spokeswoman for the Syria talks, Jessy Chahine continues to be his main focal point for the media. And thank you for being here.
25 January 2016
Mr. Staffan de Mistura: Thank you. First of all, thank you and my apologies again for a few minutes of delay. I was, as you can imagine until the last moment, on the phone with various capitals and other groups in order to make sure that I have the latest update. As you should think, things move very fast at the end. Let me first of all introduce, Khawla Matar who is my director in Damascus, but also has a very special background in the communication. She was director of communication and information office in Cairo. She will be the official spokesperson of the Geneva Intra-Syrian Talks on my behalf. Jessy will be remaining very much my main focal point for the media, interviews or any type of comments or a background, and at the same time, collecting the information I need to have. So that is the team that you should really be getting familiar with.
Now, let me get to the point. You must know, and you know very well. There has been a different, very different opinions and positions regarding the list of invitations. That has been, and you know it very well, the issue. The stalemate so far. Discussions have been taking place in various capitals, there have been contacts between the Secretary of State Kerry, the Foreign Minister Lavrov, foreign ministers of the region, visits to Riyadh, to Ankara and they are still ongoing. I’ve been very much aware of the danger of what happened in Geneva II. So that’s why, I’ve been, and am, particularly careful about the issue about invitations, because they do have an impact on making sure that we don’t have a repetition of Geneva II. The Syrians don’t deserve it, Geneva doesn’t deserve it and the Secretary-General is feeling very strongly about it. That is why we have been careful and extremely thorough in wanting to make sure that when and if we start, we start at least on the right foot. It would be uphill anyway. Well, discussions are still ongoing. Let me remind me some points and then to give you where we are.
Security Council 22/54 is very clear in assigning to me, Special Envoy of the Secretary-General, the task to finalize the efforts of the list of Syrian participants, taking note of the meetings in Moscow, Cairo and in particular, the youthful (?) meeting in Riyadh on the 9th of December. That’s basically the mandate that I’ve been assigned to by the Security Council. Security Council is also 22/54, urging me to bring the broadest possible spectrum of the opposition. Now, due to the intense disagreements, frankly, and different opinions on who should be on the list, the actual beginning of the talk, which was meant to be today, 25 January, have been delayed. And today, therefore, instead of announcing the beginning of the talks, I am in a position of still announcing to you the date in which, in my opinion, we will be in a position to send invitations – tomorrow. And the date which we will be aiming at having the beginning of the Intra Syrian Talks – 29th of January. The invitation will be issued based on the criteria of inclusiveness, substantive weight. The agenda will be the one set by the 22/54. The invitations will clearly want to be also addressed to women and civil society, I’ve made a point, and the Secretary-General has been extremely clear on that, whatever list of various delegations want to come, we will make sure that there is a substantial presence of women to advise me and make sure that we are in the right position regarding the future of Syria of which there are 51 per cent, at least, of them in Syria. The agenda will be already set up. It’s the governance 22/54 resolution, about the new governance, a new constitution and new elections. However, here comes a major point that I think you should be aware of, the first priority will be the focus of the talk of what most Syrians, if not all, want to hear. The possibility of a broad ceasefire and the possibility of stopping the threat of ISIL. And therefore and thanks to a broader ceasefire, an increase of humanitarian aid. You will hear tomorrow, we will have a special press conference, which we have been supporting very much, of my colleagues from the humanitarian side, in order to be able to explain to you how urgent, how important and what needs to be done, in order to make sure that those who are, in a way, getting here to talk about the future of Syria, don’t forget that the end of the day, every day lost is a day lost for a ceasefire and for humanitarian aid. There will be no opening ceremony. I regret from the camera point of view, I know from the photo point of view, you will not have the type of feeling of a large group of people sitting, and probably arguing publicly, among them. That will not be what you will be seeing. We are going to aim at proximity talks. Starting on the 29th and ongoing for six months on a staggered, chronological proximity approach. That will be the way we try to make it different from the past. This is not Geneva III. This is leading to what we hope will be a Geneva success story, if we are able to push it forward.
There are political risks. And you will hear them as soon as you will hear the fact that I am announcing that I intend to do on the 29th, and that I will be issuing invitations tomorrow. But those political risks, intentions and prepositioning should also be taken into account that our line and the Security Council has been clear: no preconditions. At least to start the talks, and while the talks starts. The rest is open. It’s going to be uphill. They are not in an agreement yet. But we are all feeling that what have been happening in the past, and what all the regions and the main stakeholders feel, the time has come to at least try hard to produce an outcome. Imagine if we did have a ceasefire discussion, seriously starting, and then following the rest, all political risks of starting a conference, in fact of Intra Syrian Talks, without having a total clarity what direction they will all go, is worth it.
That’s where we are at the moment. Thank you very much.
Moderator : Thank you Mr. de Mistura.
Question: Thank you very much. I have many questions, of course. But I think I will just start with the Geneva Communiqué that we have not talked about for a long time. Will the Geneva Communiqué be a central base for the negotiations that will be unfolding in the next days? Thank you.
Mr. de Mistura: The answer is yes. No question, everything is starting with the Geneva Communiqué, which is still considered the chapeau, the umbrella for everything we are going to do. The proof is that it has been approved by everyone, and no one has put in doubt, especially now. That doesn’t mean that what we have in 22/54, which lays down very clearly three areas: governance, new constitution and new elections under UN supervision, is a further refinement and more precise of what could be the umbrella of the Geneva Communiqué. Thank you.
Question: Mr. de Mistura, permit me to ask about the scenario of the negotiations, if I can say. You were talking before about four working groups in the negotiations in parallel. Are you going to start like this, or are you going to contact each party in separate and after you will go to the working groups? Thank you.
Mr. de Mistura: Thank you. It’s a good opportunity of clarifying this. Remember, when we did not have yet the Vienna process starting. When we did not have the refugee crisis, we didn’t have the Russian military intervention, when we didn’t have the feeling that ISIL was moving further and forward, there was an attempt by us to still have a framework of what could be a discussion preparing to what we are doing now. Things have moved forward. Now we have a Vienna clear message about starting the three arguments, the three issues, therefore the working groups don’t exist anymore. They are the past. Now, we have only one Intra Syrian Talk about governance, about constitutional review and about future elections. Hopefully, starting with discussing first what is the most urgent thing for the Syrian people, who have heard already constitution, they want to hear about ceasefire and about humanitarian aid. That doesn’t mean that we will not, at any occasion of the proximity talks, not establish special working groups in order to address specific scientifically specific areas. For instance, the type of monitoring of ceasefire. That is a special working group with specialists.
Question : Vous venez de nous préciser que vous allez envoyer les invitations demain. Est-ce que c’est lié à la réunion qui se tient demain à Riyad de l’opposition syrienne ? Nous avons le représentant des Kurdes qui a annoncé qu’il pouvait ne pas participer à la réunion de Genève. Merci.
Mr. de Mistura: Je pense sans doute que la réunion à Riyad sera beaucoup plus utile et concrète sur la base du fait de savoir qu’il n’y a pas (il s’interrompt en raison d’un problème technique).. Je recommence, OK ? Je pense que la réunion à Riyad sera quand même assez plus proactive basé sur le fait qu’ils vont savoir que les invitations seront envoyées demain. Et donc, ce sera aussi très utile à nous parce qu’ils vont savoir que la chose est devenue urgente et sérieuse.
Question: You’ve clipped the most important question here. Clearly, you’re not going to read us a list of who you’re going to invite, but is who you’re going to invite. And you are going to be shuttling between the different delegations. How many rooms will you be shuttling between? How many delegations are there going to be?
Mr. de Mistura: You see, the issue about rooms and delegations will be part exactly of the creativity of these proximity talks. And you will see it youself: there will be in my opinion a lot of shuttling because there are not only different delegations, but there is also civil society, women and others who deserve to be heard. The issue is, they will be meeting me and my colleagues and those we will be assigning as facilitators, so negotiators. So you could have quite a lot of simultaneous meetings taking place.
Question: I was more on the format. Is there any possibility of getting direct talks do you think going? And also, if you’re going on for six months, could you say a little about how you see that process continuing? Because I guess if people, if delegations, coming here are going to be staying here for six months...?
Mr. de Mistura: Very correct. In terms of vision, things may get faster, things may get slower, I can tell you in advance, don’t be surprised. There will be a lot of posturing, we know that. A lot of walk-outs and walk-ins because a bomb has fallen or because someone has done an attack and you will see that happening. We should not be impressed, neither depressed, but it’s likely to happen. The important thing is that we keep the momentum.
The first plan would be that the first part of the talks should be lasting between two and three weeks. And then give time for the various interlocutors to consult their own supporters and consult themselves about the next steps. And give us the time to prepare also for the next round. So it’s not six months full time, everybody in one room, not walking out. The name of the game is to be as flexible and creative as possible to adjust to the different challenges of this time of intra-Syrian talks.
I will now give the floor — can I just do it by myself? Good. No. And I will otherwise have to start looking all the time here. Yeah. Good. I prefer not.
Question: You’re definitely going ahead on Friday, maybe if even you send out invitations and people just don’t come? You’re going to start?
Mr. de Mistura: There is never the word “definitely” or “never” in this type of job. But we are definitely going to aim at starting the meetings on the 29th. Okay? And the invitations should be tomorrow. People may find it difficult to travel. People may have visas which may be delayed, things like this. But remember, proximity talks doesn’t mean an opening ceremony. We will be some, and the other ones on Monday or Tuesday. Proximity talks.
Question: Actually, I was going to ask, you said about the sending of invitations. Are you going to send the invitation and will these two groups be in the list of the persons who are invited to the talks? I’m talking about ISIL and Nusra Front. They are terroristic according to the Russian Federation. Please.
Mr. de Mistura: I hope you will bear with me the fact that I am not going — and James was very correct — in asking me about details about the invitations. I’m just simply saying that I’m going to send invitations based on the mandate that I’ve been given by the Security Council to actually issue invitations, and I will do that tomorrow.
Can I look on the left side? Yes, please. Please.
Question: Originally, I think you had a cease fire, and also a list of terrorist groups that were supposed to be on the table on the day that you started the talks. Neither of those things is yet in sight. What is your expectation, not your hope, but what is your expectation for when you might get those two things? Thank you.
Mr. de Mistura: You see, things are moving, and I think probably there is a much better understanding by those who have been insisting on pre-conditions, such as, “we need the list in advance of who is a terrorist” or “we need to have a clarity of who is the opposition”. In terms of understanding also that what matters is also starting the talks with some type of minimum common understanding. The process of deciding on who should be in a terrorist list is still ongoing. Jordan have been very kind and generous in wanting to take that very difficult job. There are other processes which are taking place in the Security Council in the UN. There are committees on it. So all that may continue and probably will put more clarity on what is being considered “terrorist”. At the moment, I am basing myself on what the Security Council tells me. The Security Council has been telling me ISIL and Al-Nusra. This is what I’ve been hearing from the Security Council. Yes.
Question : J’ai deux questions. Nombreux de mes collègues ici présents et moi, nous avons couvert il y a deux ans, déjà, la deuxième conférence internationale sur la Syrie. À ce moment-là on travaillait de Montreux et à Genève. Deux ans ont passé : la situation en Syrie, au lieu de s’améliorer, est devenue pire encore. Alors, Monsieur, selon vous, quels sont les principaux obstacles pour rétablir la paix en Syrie ? C’est ma première question. Deuxième question : que peut-on attendre pour les pourparlers de paix de cette fois-ci? Merci beaucoup.
M. de Mistura: Vous me posez des questions grandes et très profondes. Je pense que pour les obstacles, c’est surtout le manque de confiance et le manque de volonté politique de respecter ce que l’on a toujours dit mais que l’on n’a pas encore fait : qu’il n’y pas de solution militaire, il y a seulement une solution politique. Dans les mots, c’était présent ; dans les faits, ce n’était pas présent. Ça c’est le premier obstacle. On va faire un test – si ça c’est la vérité ou pas actuellement. Pour le reste, attendons les résultats de la conférence - hein, s’il vous plaît – et des rencontres.
Question : La chaîne arabe Al-Mayadeen a annoncé ce matin que vous auriez dû vous rendre à Riyad pour des contacts et que vous avez dû annuler ce voyage et que les Saoudiens vous aurez déclaré persona non grata. Est-ce que vous pouvez apporter des commentaires à cette information de Al-Mayadeen qui a été reprise dans beaucoup de médias arabes ? Merci.
M. de Mistura : Et oui. Tout à fait. Moi-même, j’ai été très surpris quand j’ai lu que j’étais en voyage à Riyad, parce que j’étais ici et mon intention était de rester ici pour préparer, justement. Je n’ai aucun plan et je n’avais aucun plan d’aller à Riyad. J’étais en contact avec le Prince Mohammed hier au téléphone et nous avons de très bons rapports de travail. Je pense que vous devez tous être prêts – et franchement vous le verrez – you will always be ready : there will be a lot of disinformation and messaging in order to create this type of things. Be kind, like you are doing, to check with me. None of that is correct. Neither one nor the second. Yes, please, and then we go back down there. Yes, the gentleman in the light-blue jacket.
Question: I appreciate that you mentioned that you do not want to provide details on the invitations but just today the Turkish foreign minister mentioned that the YPG in particular, if they were to be invited, that would spell the end of the talks in their view, and I would appreciate if you just comment on that. You obviously made a reference to the fact that both the Al-Nusra Front and ISIL are not here because of UN sanctions. Should we read between the lines that because those two groups have been specifically mentioned by the United Nations Security Council, then it is open to everyone else?
Mr. de Mistura: No, you cannot do that because it will depend very much on the interaction between both the Syrians, who will be there, and on those countries who have any influence on the conflict. So I will not make a comment beyond that. I will not make a comment on that.
I will turn down there, and then back there.
Question : Je voulais poser la question sur la modalité de réunion du 29 est-ce qu’il y aura deux équipes de l’opposition, une seule équipe élargie ou bien deux équipes différentes, séparées.
M. de Mistura: Je ne vais pas rentrer dans les détails organisationnels de la réunion à ce point-là, parce que ça va dépendre aussi de mes discussions avec ceux qui sont invités pour organiser les réunions. Ce que vous devez savoir, c’est que les proximity talks me donnent une énorme flexibilité sur comment et combien et qui pouvoir rencontrer. Un seul élément est clair, c’est que l’on va maintenir ces proximity talks jusqu’à quand il y aura le moment dans lequel on pourrait avoir des direct talks. Pour le reste, je suis tout ouvert à une certaine forme d’adaptabilité et créativité, parce que la situation le demande. Il faut apprendre et nous on essaie d’apprendre de la Conférence Genève II.
Question : L’opposition de Riyad – appelons-la comme ça : celle qui a été appelée « opposition de Riyad » – répète depuis plusieurs jours qu’elle ne viendra pas tant que les bombardements se poursuivront et tant qu’il n’y a pas de cessez-le-feu. Est-ce qu’elle a changé d’opinion ? Est-ce que vous allez la convoquer dans un deuxième temps ? Et en attendant peut-être qu’elle change d’avis. Et puis à propos du cessez-le-feu, visez-vous un cessez-le-feu général ou encore une fois un cessez-le-feu local, région par région ?
M. de Mistura: Chacun a le droit de décider quand et comment venir. Mais, comme ligne principale, on a lancé le message : pas de préconditions de aucune part ; venez ici et discutons tout ce qui vous préoccupe. Dans le cadre spécifique, c’est déjà clair que l’on va pousser…je pense que du côté, aussi, américain et russe il y a un intérêt à ce que cela puisse se passer…que l’on commence à discuter surtout, au commencement, sur la question du cessez-le-feu. Donc le choix, c’est commencer à en discuter avant ou pendant. Normalement, les négociations on les fait quand on est là et en mettant comme priorité, pas comme condition, le fait qu’au lieu de parler de quelque chose pendant six mois sur le futur de la Syrie, on commence immédiatement à parler de ce que – franchement et c’est aussi mon sentiment personnel, parce que les Syriens nous disent quelque chose : ils nous disent nous voulons une chose concrète, au moment où vous faites une conférence, donnez-nous quelques signes concrets, vous tous. Et la réponse est : on va pousser sur la question du cessez-le-feu. Alors quelle forme ? Petits cessez-le-feu, suspension of fighting, pause the fighting….il y a plein de formules, à condition qu’on puisse avoir de vrais cessez-le-feu et non pas des local ceasefire, un peu comme Homs, qui évidemment ne sont pas ce que nous souhaitons, mais quelque chose qui arrête le combat. Mais cela fait partie du débat.
Question: Vous avez dit que vous ne vouliez pas donner de détails sur qui va pouvoir recevoir une invitation. Est-ce que vous pouvez nous dire quels sont les critères d’exclusion de groupe(s) précisément ?
M. de Mistura: Non, je ne peux pas. Je peux seulement vous dire que le critère c’est de répondre à ce que le Conseil de sécurité m’a dit et donné comme devoir d’être le plus inclusive as possible. Je m’arrête là. Mais sans doute une catégorie dans laquelle on va être très ferme, c’est la catégorie des femmes et aussi de la civil society parce que souvent, elles sont marginalisées.
Question: My question is about the suspension of fighting. How do you negotiate a suspension of fighting while you have a terrorist group fighting? With whom do you negotiate? Is it a ceasefire just amongst some groups and they are allowed, for example, to keep on fighting the terrorist group. Because if your center is the Syrian population, they will be affected anyway.
Mr. de Mistura: You are touching a very crucial point and valid point. As claimed by all those who are attending the Vienna process and also the Security Council meeting, that the suspension of fighting regarding ISIL in particular and Al-Nusra is not on the table. But there is plenty of other suspensions of fightings that can take place.
Thank you very much.
Speaker: Do not forget the conference tomorrow on the humanitarian situation in Syria after the Tuesday briefing at 11:30. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. De Mistura. And ladies and gentlemen, do not forget Khawla Matar is his chief spokeswoman for the Syria talks, Jessy Chahine continues to be his main focal point for the media. And thank you for being here.
25 January 2016