It worries me that in this great country [the U.S.] that's not the perception: They don't see the suffering of the Palestinian people; they don't see the impact of collective punishment. They do immediately see and empathize -- and rightly -- with the suffering of Israeli civilians who are killed, or injured, or just frightened, and of course I do too. But I find it very disheartening that there is not more understanding here of the appalling suffering of the Palestinian population, nor appreciation that this is not going to lead to a secure future. It's going to lead to greater hatred and desperation, of further suicide bombings.
You believe your views on this issue were the reason why the U.S. so vigorously opposed an extension of your term?
Yes, combined with the Durban conference. I urged and begged the U.S. and Israel to stay. I told them that all the draft language, which was unacceptable, would be taken out -- and it was. But once they left, there are those who refuse now to accept that any good came out of Durban.
I'm not defensive about my record on the Middle East or the Durban conference. I think we achieved an extraordinary breakthrough in Durban against all the odds. But there are two very different perceptions. I was in Mexico last week for the first of the follow up regional conferences from Durban, and it was a joy to see how much it means for countries in Central and Southern American, Mexico, the host, Brazil, Chile, the way it has brought new hope for indigenous peoples, for people of African descent, for black Brazilians. I was hearing the plans for action to follow up on Durban from civil society and government -- and I thought, "At last! The true agenda is resurfacing." Of course, we need it more than ever following the Sept. 11 attacks.
Now, after five years as high commissioner, do you think you have made a difference?
Certainly there's been a change ... I [recently] addressed the Security Council on the Democratic Republic of the Congo and they will publish my report as a document. Five years ago, the S.C. would not have listened to a high commissioner!
There's also been a dramatic shift, and one that I do take some credit for, in the developing world's attitude. When I started back in September of 1997, I was quite taken aback by how many leaders of developing countries told me: "Don't you know human rights is just a Western stick to beat us with? It is politicized, nothing to do with real concern about human rights."
You know, there was an element of truth in that, and so I found it necessary to find, first of all, the true agenda of human rights at the international level. That is to be strong in civil liberties, in the protection and promotion of civil and political rights, and strong in the protection and promotion of economic, social and cultural rights, and to fulfill the express vision and mandate of the establishment of the high commissioner's office, which was to seek consensus on the right to development. That's an individual and a collective right, the right of the people to gain the full flower of their human rights.
And that led to more linkage being made by leaders of developing countries between human rights and economic and social development. They began to realize that if you got your human rights right, you accelerated human development, economic development ... What is very clear is that human rights need protection at national and local level, and therefore unless there is more attention to strengthening human rights, and law and administration of justice at national level, then we are not really going to make great progress.
It's reflected very dramatically in the New Economic Partnership for African Development, the NEPAD. The text of that is an extraordinary indication of how far human rights have moved to become the priority tool of developing countries in making progress. They identified the four priority areas: to strengthen the administration of justice, the rule of law, tackling corruption, and adhering fully to international human rights norms and standards ... To me it is a moral as well as a practical issue. If countries give priority to these issues and cannot find the resources domestically -- then that's certainly an area I'm going to address by trying to build quiet alliances for it for when I quit the day job.
Do you have a new day job lined up?
I do feel energized at the end of this quite demanding job, so I have a real sense of wanting to bring this experience into a different and broader field. I have specific ideas for what I want to achieve, but I need to work out practical ways to do it.
I'm very interested in the whole debate on shaping globalization and I think that the international human rights norms and standards have a contribution to make to a more ethical globalization.
We have the international norms and standards, we have the treaty bodies working more effectively, we have the rapporteurs, there's an ability to name and shame, it's accepted that human rights don't stop at borders -- that if there are violations in a country, the international community is rightly interested. The crucial issue now in human rights is national capacity building.
Your concerns have not always been shared by some international organizations: the World Bank and IMF traditionally never let a few prison camps interfere with their appreciation of a good GDP growth rate. Have you turned them round yet?
Certainly, our office is working, particularly with the World Bank but also the IMF and WTO, and we're engaged in a very significant analysis of poverty reduction strategies and we're developing human rights guidelines for them, with close involvement of the W.B., the IMF, and the WTO. This would not have happened two years ago. It's a really interesting intellectual development. Human rights lawyers are listening to economists and vice versa in seeing how the human rights norms and standards can be a positive framework for addressing poverty, because they address participation; it gives civil society tools to measure whether there is progressive implementation of the right to education, right to health, to food, without discrimination against minorities, indigenous people.
Next page: The experts are concerned about the deteriorating human rights situation after Sept. 11