WEB EXCLUSIVE | Posted on 6 May 2006

Nepali Times interviewed Norwegian Minister for Development Cooperation, Erik Solhem who was also the architect of the Sri Lanka peace process during his visit to Kathmandu this week. Excerpts:

Nepali Times: You have just met the new prime minister and members of the interim government and the parties. What are you impressions?
Erik Solheim: I was very impressed by their dedication, they believe firmly in the peace process. The prime minister told us that he has a very short time left in politics he will not stay on for long, this is what he wanted achieved before he left Nepali politics. The UML is of course very energized by the mass movement, they believe that they played an important role in it and they think they can move this process forward. They are dedicated, they are optimistic and they are planning to move ahead fast, not wait around wasting time.

The new government has announced a ceasefire and the Maoists have said they want to start negotiations. What are the pitfalls we should be on the lookout for?
The sun is shining over Nepal now, from skies without any clouds. Anything seems possible. It's terribly important to keep up that momentum and that optimism and to move forward rapidly. However, there is also a cynical point of view from my experience with other peace processes we should all be patient because it usually takes a longer time than people hope for. There is a need to sustain a process which will take some time.

From your experience in Sri Lanka where do those difficulties come from?
The number one is intentions. If the government and the Maoists very clearly want this to be a success, then the chances of it being successful is very high. But even when that is a starting point it is always easier to make a general agreement, it is much more difficult to resolve all the nitty-gritties and the details which will have to be addressed. There will be a lot of unfulfilled expectations. At this time Nepalis naturally demand democracy, but they also demand tangible benefits in their lives and a better future for their children from all this. But this can't happen all of a sudden, and they may blame political leaders or the Maoists and this may create many obstacles down the road. But one mustn't always take a pessimistic view, just being cautious that that there may be difficulties ahead would be a realistic approach.

Did you make any offers for facilitation or mediation while here?
No, we made no offers of facilitation or mediation, but we did offer to help them in anyway in anything they decide to do. Of course it must be a two-side approach whatever the government and the Maoists agree to we will be ready to support with the rest of the international community. The key difference between the Nepal situation with other conflicts of course is that the two sides have met before, they speak the same language, they know each other. So if the parties still feel the need for facilitation for expertise it is for them to decide and if both agree they should make a request to bring in external facilitators.

You have been involved in the Sri Lankan peace process what has been India's geopolitical role there?
I think everyone understands that India is in a very different position than anyone else in the international community. If anything goes wrong in Sri Lanka, of course Norway can go home we will be sad we may even be in tears, but it won't affect Norway as such. The same in Nepal, if things go wrong and Nepal become a failed state, all the outsiders would go home. But India will be around because it is a neighbour and it may have to deal with an influx of refugees, whatever happens in Sri Lanka or Nepal will have a major impact on that country. So we should respect that India is in a different position than any other foreign country and that they have legitimate national interest in what happens in let's say Sri Lanka or Nepal which Norway and for that matter the United States don't have.

India is against outside mediation in Nepal but had no problems with you mediating in Sri Lanka.
I never speculate on what the motives of other countries are. We've had an excellent relationship with India and in our endeavours in Sri Lanka we have kept them informed and have got a lot of good advice from them throughout.

Are the ceasefire violations in Sri Lanka jeopardizing the peace process?
This is the most serious threat since the parties entered into the peace process in 2002. And it can't continue with these huge numbers of ceasefire violations every day from both sides. The LTTE can't attack the army commander in the middle of Colombo and nor can the government bomb the Tamil positions, I mean this has to stop. If you listen to the pessimists then nothing will work, and there will be plenty of them around. Sometimes they are right but if you listen to them then your life is not moving forward. At the end of the day both the government of Sri Lanka and the LTTE they both realise that there is no military solution to the conflict in Sri Lanka which means that they have to meet at the table in Geneva and work towards a political settlement. So we think why not do it sooner rather than later, because a lot of peoples' lives will be saved.

Norway doesn't have any enemies, yet your flags are burnt on the streets of Colombo. How does that make you feel?
One newspaper in Colombo wrote that with George Bush I was the most well-known foreigner in Sri Lanka. We have to accept this because we have been so closely involved there. Some people are opposed to the peace process, others are opposed to certain aspects of the process. That's simple a part of the game. And Sri Lanka is a democracy, so if you can't accept it you shouldn't be involved.