IRIN Interview with Ketumile Masire

Former President of Botswana Ketumile Masire was appointed by the OAU in December 1999 to serve as facilitator of the inter-Congolese negotiations provided for in the Lusaka ceasefire agreement on the DRC. The negotiations, to include Congolese signatories to the Lusaka accord as well as representatives of the unarmed opposition and civil society, are to decide on the country’s political future. The following is an interview Masire accorded to IRIN in Nairobi. QUESTION: What was the outcome of your most recent visit to Kinshasa? ANSWER: I would say that during my first visit, the government performed superbly. They responded to my questions and there was a convivial atmosphere... But when I came back the second time [in March]... I was vaguely thrown out of Kinshasa by the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Minister of the Interior. I had to go back home and lick my wounds... So, I went back to Kinshasa [last week] to do what I had attempted to do in March, namely to brief all and sundry on why the dialogue is delayed. It can’t take place until the Congolese have decided on the venue, until they have decided on the groups to be represented and how many people should participate. That would give us the material with which to go into the second phase of preparations... So we briefed them on that and then said it’s time we should conclude the consultations to give way to the preparatory phase. And that seemed to have gone well. Q: Who did you consult this time? A: I met President [Laurent-Desire] Kabila. We had some discussions, but he said he wouldn’t like to respond to any questions I put to him because he wanted me to see the other people first and then I would report to him the outcome of my encounters and he would come up with his response... I also saw members of civil society and the political opposition and now we are en route to the armed opposition-held areas. We’re going to Goma, Bunia and Gbadolite [the headquarters of the rebel Rassemblement congolais pour la democratie (RCD), the RCD-Mouvement de liberation (RCD-ML) and the Mouvement de liberation du Congo (MLC), respectively]. Q: What is your reaction to President Kabila’s announcement that he will create a transitional parliament because it was taking too long to organise the negotiations and he could not wait any longer to proceed with democratisation? A: I think it’s an announcement which is intended to derail the process of the dialogue because there’s absolutely no earthly reason why it should be made. The pretext is that I say the conference should start on 3 July and that, therefore, I am going against the Lusaka agreement, which says the conference should be held within 45 days. But that, of course, is inaccurate because there is a D-day and what was supposed to happen between D-day and the commencement of the conference has not been completed yet. They have not come up with the venue, they have not come up with the representation and so forth. Q: What have been your major achievements since your appointment as facilitator? A: First, I have consulted all the Congolese, meaning the government, the [armed and unarmed] opposition and members of civil society. I’ve gone to Kampala to meet [RCD-ML leader Ernest] Wamba dia Wamba and his group. I went to Kigali to meet [RCD-Goma leader Emile] Ilunga and his group. I have detailed the Botswana High Commissioner in Lusaka to meet [MLC leader Jean-Pierre] Bemba. I have spoken to Mr. Bemba by phone...They all seem to be very supportive of the dialogue. Having seen these people, I went around to the people who back them. I thought if I approach the Kabila camp and the rebel camp, but those who back Kabila and those who back the rebels didn’t know what was going on between me and their agents, it would be useless. So, I went to [Ugandan President Yoweri] Museveni, I went to [former Rwandan President Pasteur] Bizimungu, I went to [Zimbabwean President Robert] Mugabe, I went to [Namibian President] Sam Nujoma. We have a political power in southern Africa - South Africa - and I went to see [President Thabo] Mbeki. Had I the money and the means to fly around, I would have touched everybody including [Angolan President Jose Eduardo] dos Santos. I think that was my second achievement. My third achievement is that I have briefed the Security Council twice, and twice I have had very supportive encouragement. My fourth success, I would say, is I have held a donors’ conference and ... I have received pledges from honourable people whom I hope will honour their pledges. Q: Have your efforts been affected by the fact that you have not yet received the pledged funds? A: It has affected it immensely because we can’t recruit, we can’t invite knowledgeable people to come and brief us on the subject because we can’t pay for their tickets or hotel accommodation. And indeed it could have totally crippled us had we not had good relations with the Botswana government. We have raised loans from them, hoping that one day we’ll be paid and we shall refund their monies... We are going full steam as if all the money has been paid. But those who have the money must know that when we finish all these preparations, we shall grind to a halt unless they respond. Q: What is your work plan from now? A: We hope, over the next one month, we shall conclude the consultative process and that we shall go into the preparatory phase. In the preparatory phase, having decided on the venue, we will go to the place to discuss with the authorities, see the conference facilities, boarding and lodging facilities, open a bank account and so forth. Q: When and how will the choice of a venue be decided? A: Having met various groups and having got varied answers, I thought I should now get together a small group where these varying responses would be synchronised and reduced to definitive ones, on the venue for instance. So, with a few Congolese, we will get together somewhere and decide on the venue. They will include representatives of the political parties, civil society, the armed opposition and the government... It’s going to take place from 5 to 7 June. Q: How will the representatives of the unarmed opposition and civil society be selected for the June meeting? A: They were going to meet during this week and if on Sunday when we get [to Kinshasa], they haven’t made up their minds, I’ll make up my mind because I’m choosing people to advise me. The [Lusaka] agreement doesn’t stipulate whose advice I shall seek. Therefore, I’ll say: ‘I gave it over to you, you have not reacted, so I’m going to act’. Q: What are the different venues now being proposed for the inter-Congolese negotiations? A: Kinshasa, Lusaka, Gaborone, Port St. Louis, Maputo, Nairobi, Addis Ababa and Cairo. Q: Do you have a preference? A: Yes, my preference is where all Congolese would agree to meet. My personal idiosyncrasies really don’t come into it. I’ve told them I’ll be happy anywhere. Q: Realistically, could it be held in Kinshasa? A: I have said again and again that if it’s in Kinshasa, I would go there but, I’ve no means of assessing whether or not people would feel safe there. All I know is that all the armed rebels, almost all the political parties and most of the civil society would prefer it outside Kinshasa... President Kabila has consistently said it should be in Kinshasa and he said he would make it safe, even bring soldiers from other countries to come and help. But safety and security is not one of those things where you get a lecture and then you get convinced you are secure. People must feel secure. Q: Do you think the venue issue will be resolved? A: I don’t think its going to break the dialogue... I think at the end of the day, they will be flexible. Q: The Lusaka agreement calls you the “neutral facilitator.” What do you feel is your exact role as facilitator? A: I’m trying to meet people and synthesise their ideas because a facilitator should really mean somebody who is not imposing himself on the people but who is mainly helping people to relate and to come up with something and when they meet a hitch, to be able to help them get out of that hitch. Q: How will the proceedings of the negotiations be conducted? A: We shall have working groups, but I don’t want to say much about that because we still have to decide, one, at this small meeting we’re going to hold [in June] and, two, in the dialogue itself. Q: Do you think its going to be a one-time meeting or will there be several rounds, like in the Arusha peace process for Burundi? A: In our work plan, we envisaged two rounds: a debate for two weeks and then two weeks reflecting on what has gone on and then another two weeks to finish it. But that was a worst-case scenario. The best-case scenario is just to forge ahead for 45 days and hopefully before the end of 45 days, to come up with the outcome of the dialogue. Nobody I’ve met favours doing it in stages. They all want it to be done and finished with. Therefore, I don’t think the worst-case scenario will lend itself to being approved. Q: Do you really think the negotiations could start on 3 July? A: I am confident. Q: What will be the outcome? A: Hopefully, they will decide on a new political dispensation, the terms and components of which will be decided by them. I think there are many examples of how people who had daggers drawn at one time have decided they have been warring long enough, they must settle down and live peacefully and develop their country. And I hope that will be what the Congolese also decide. Some examples of how that has happened include South Africa, Namibia, Zimbabwe, and various other countries even in Latin America, in Europe and in Asia. Q: Do you think the negotiations will create a transitional government? A: Yes. I think the current government would like to be the transitional government, but I have said to them that, really, that is usurping the dialogue. It’s the right of the dialogue to say how the transitional government will be constituted and who will be in it. Q: Is it possible that the parties will decide to form a transitional government not led by Kabila? A: Yes, it could be that he would not be the leader, it could that he would be the leader. My own approach to Kabila has been that the more he manages the change, the more everybody will have confidence that he can run a transitional government. That would put him in a better stead, to show that he is not against the transition and can therefore be entrusted with the housework, with “midwifing” it. Q: Will the Mayi-Mayi [local Congolese militia groups] be invited? A: That is yet to be discussed because who should be represented is not my responsibility, it is the responsibility of the Congolese... [The Mayi-Mayi] have not featured formally. But it’s a matter that needs to be raised, whether they are a factor to reckon with and should they therefore be included or not. Q: The Lusaka agreement states that the OAU is to help organise the inter-Congolese negotiations, but what do you feel is the UN’s role in the negotiations and how could the UN assist you? A: The UN has not done as well as they should have, but they have not disowned the process... They are trying to do something to assist me. The Security Council passed a resolution saying MONUC [the UN Mission in the DRC] should give support to the facilitator... But there’s no umbilical cord which connects us to the UN. Q: At this point, are you pleased with the level of cooperation you are receiving from the DRC government? A: Yes, I would say I am pleased in a qualified way... Although the Kinshasa government has quarreled about 3 July 2000 [as the start date for the negotiations], I say to them that, unless they agree on the venue and unless they agree on the groups to be represented, this thing will not have taken off even by 3 July 2001. I would also like to say to the donors that, even though they have pledged $6 million, if the money doesn’t reach us, we will still not have started by July 2001 because we can’t start without money. And we certainly wouldn’t want to be put in this ‘chicken and egg’ situation where those who are to decide on the venue say ‘what’s the use of deciding on the venue because there is no money’ and those who have money say ‘what’s the use of giving money because there is no venue.’