“The members of the Security Council welcome the holding in Paris, on 12 June, of the ‘International Conference in support of Afghanistan,’ co-chaired by the Governments of Afghanistan and France and the Secretary-General of the United Nations.

The members of the Security Council welcome the reaffirmation of the long term partnership between Afghanistan and the international community, the aim of which is to give the people of Afghanistan a better future, including in terms of security, prosperity, and human rights. The members of the Security Council also welcome the review of progress in the implementation of the Afghanistan Compact and the commitment of Conference participants to work more closely together under Afghan leadership to support the Afghanistan National Development Strategy (ANDS), including by making generous and unprecedented financial pledges, which demonstrated continuing international resolve. The members of the Security Council further welcomed the commitment by the Government of Afghanistan to pursue political and economic reform, to work with the international community across the board, and to take leadership for its development.

The members of the Security Council welcomed in particular the commitment by Conference participants to support the central role of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General and the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA)
as defined by Security Council Resolution 1806 (2008), both with regards to coordination of international efforts and coordination between the Afghan Government and the international community.

The members of the Council reaffirmed once again their strong commitment to the sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and national unity of Afghanistan. They stressed the need to continue to address the threat to the security and stability of Afghanistan posed by the Taliban, Al-Qaeda, illegal armed groups, criminals and those involved in the narcotics trade.

The members of the Council looked forward to the publication of the report of the Secretary-General on the outcome of the Paris Conference, as requested in Resolution 1806 (2008).”

Thank you.

Reporter: Today the Security Council unanimously approved a PRST on Sudan and the ICC. I wanted to ask you if the approval of such a statement under the U.S. Presidency represents a kind of shift in the U.S. attitude towards the ICC. At the beginning the United States rejected it, it’s not an official party to it, but it seems now that there is a recognition on the U.S. side that it is an important tool in certain situations such as the current one.

Ambassador Khalilzad: Our policy in general of course with regard to the ICC is well known and there is no change. With regard to this specific situation – with regard to Darfur we have supported the PRST and - but that’s no reflection in terms of our overall approach to the ICC.

Reporter: Last week White House spokeswomen Dana Perino said that she would like to see the Security Council immediately take up the issue of Zimbabwe and what’s going on there. How is the U.S. mission to the UN going to follow up on that-how quickly are we going to see talks in the Security Council about what’s going on there? Or are you basically going to wait until Menkerios gets back?

Ambassador Khalilzad: Well, we have raised, as I reported to you I think maybe the same day or the day after that comment, that we had raised it, the issue of Zimbabwe, and that we had called for a public debate on the issue, and that there had been a division inside the Council, some favoring and some not. There is further evidence now given developments since our discussion that indicates the importance of having such a debate. You’ve heard statements from President Mugabe, you’ve seen actions on the ground. Now, the U.N. representative envoy will get there, I think in the next day or so. We’re going to consult with colleagues. We want to focus on this very important issue as soon as possible and I understand that he is going to be there for a few days, three or four days or something like that, but we would want to have a meeting as soon as possible, with or without him.

Reporter: For the thematic debate on rape this week on Thursday, will the U.S. raise its own human rights record on sexual violence against civilians?

Ambassador Khalilzad: With regard to the open debate that we have proposed, we are going to put forward the resolution how to address this issue in conflict and post-conflict situations. The effort that is the focus of this debate in our view will be the systematic use of rape and mutilation as a weapon of war in conflict or post-conflict situation. There is no evidence that the U.S. forces anywhere have involved themselves in a systematic use of rape and mutilation of women as a means to conduct warfare. Therefore I take strong exception to the implication of what you’ve said.

Reporter: (inaudible) the Security Council to address the Israeli decision to build in Jerusalem. Given what Secretary Rice said today, will America support such a resolution, statement, whatever?

Ambassador Khalilzad: Well, I had a meeting, requested by the Palestinian delegate here on Friday. He informed me that a delegation has been selected by the Arab League to come and visit with me on this issue. Our view has been, with regard to the discussion of Palestinian-Israeli issues, the following, it shouldn’t be anything new to you but let me repeat. One; that there is a sensitivity to have these meetings because when we have had them before, to discuss what to do, it has tended to get destructively polarized, very quickly. Two; that in turn has caused Israel to be particularly sensitive about the discussion of the issue in the Council but at the same time of course we want to make sure anything the Council does, if it was to do it, it has to be balanced. And it has to be timed in a way that helps move the process forward. And you know Secretary Rice is in the region so we will – I look forward to my meeting with the representatives of the Arab League and we’ll see where we go as to what the proposal is and take the considerations that I mentioned into account in our response.

Reporter: In that meeting on Wednesday that you want passed what exactly is it going to be calling for?

Ambassador Khalilzad: Well, number one, of course with regard to the debate, the fact that a debate will be held itself at such a high level is important because this is in my judgment it’s an issue that has not received the attention that it deserves. And the fact of the meeting should help to send a message that the world is paying attention and therefore have a deterrence effect. In addition, we believe it is very important that a message is send that there is no impunity for such crimes. It is also a message for the peacekeepers, especially in areas where there is peacekeeping, when we say in our mandates that the mission in part has to protect civilians that our understanding of protection of civilians includes protection against the crime of systematic rape and mutilation of women and that therefore make sure that in the reports that we get not only that the peacekeepers see this as their mission but that the reports that we get, attention is paid to this violent crime. And also that we want the Secretary-General to do a report on this issue that would look at cases across a broader set of cases and propose things that he thinks would be appropriate in addition to be taken by the Council. We are - there is a draft that we have circulated that has some other elements, too, and it has been discussed at the expert level several times. And we are not there yet, there is no yet agreement but we are close.

Reporter: Ambassador, on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border there is this tension escalating, as you know, with Karzai saying that he will go across the border to attack Pakistan and Pakistan retaliation. Do you have an opinion on that at this point in time or what do you have to say to…

Ambassador Khalilzad: Well, my opinion is of course that there is need for cooperation between Afghanistan and Pakistan against extremism, against terror. These two countries have a lot of common interests. You know they have along border that they share. Afghanistan’s success is important for the future of Pakistan and Pakistan’s success to become free of extremism and terror is important for the future of Afghanistan. And therefore everything has to be done – any agreement that’s signed has to take the interests of both countries into account. For example, if there is an agreement with some groups in Pakistan not to operate against Pakistan I think it is important that that group also agree not to attack Afghanistan from Pakistan. So, it is they have important common interests and we believe it’s important that they cooperate against the common threat that faces both countries, the threat of extremism and terror. Thank you very much.