Interview

A vision of an integrated Europe

What has been the impact of the European Union (EU) enlargement on the region covered by the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) ?

The unprecedented enlargement of the EU in 2004 and the prospects for EU accessions in 2007-2008, together with the opening of negotiations with Turkey, have major implications for the UNECE region. The EU accession proved to be an engine for reforms for the new EU Member States and it is a driving force for reforms in the Western Balkans. The new Neighbourhood Policy of the EU will have an inevitable impact on the other UNECE Member States located at the border of the enlarged EU. At the same time, new efforts are necessary in order to prevent new divisions between the enlarged EU and non-EU Member States, particularly from the CIS. This effort, as is now recognized, requires international and particularly regional cooperation.

Is the UNECE still needed after the EU enlargement ?

My immediate answer to your question is "Yes". This is true, even more so as UNECE is developing a legal framework for regional cooperation and assists in regulatory convergence, which stimulates markets and international trade. While UNECE is approaching a mature age – its 60th anniversary will be celebrated in 2007 – it will continue to be a relevant, demand driven, efficient organization. Furthermore our vision of an integrated Europe could lead in the future to a free trade area in the UNECE region. I believe this vision when implemented could help to bridge the dividing gap between the richer and the poorer nations of our region.

What is the role of a regional institution like the UNECE in a globalized world ?

Its role is double. The regional institution is there to promote regional interest but also to try and extend regional experience to the world as a whole. In reverse, the regional institution is there to implement the global decision at regional level and to assess its level of implementation. That was true for the various summits on sustainable development, be it Rio or Johannesburg, which were preceded by regional conferences and where the follow-up is ensured at the regional level. The same holds true for the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS). The Geneva Declaration of Principles and Plan of Action adopted at the first part of WSIS in December 2003 was without doubt inspired by a Regional Ministerial Declaration endorsed in Bucharest in 2002. Some of UNECE's work is mandated as "global", such as its World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations and its work on the transport of dangerous goods. The UNECE, with its existing expertise, is also playing an important role in improving global road traffic safety.

How do you see the future of the region in, let us say, ten years from now?

There are a number of scenarios available. The optimistic one could be that in ten years from now the region could become more homogenous from the economic as well as the social point of view. For the time being, the less developed countries in the region are facing increased poverty incidence, and degradation of human capital, particularly in the education and health sectors. An optimistic scenario could assume that these trends will be reversed. EU will include 30 or 31 Member States and some other candidate countries will be in the process of acceding. The region will be on a good path to transforming its economy into a knowledge-based economy, relying more on knowledge and human development than on any other factor of growth. The optimistic scenario could also see a region with greater social cohesion and fewer disparities between countries but also within countries.

And the pessimistic scenario ?

The role of UNECE is to work hard to avoid the pessimistic scenario.

How will the UNECE look in 10 years´ time ?

The Commission will still be needed, as the optimistic scenario will not be fully realized. UNECE will remain to play its "double role" as a United Nations body. As long as Member States do not decide otherwise, it will have its global responsibilities as well. However, it is likely that the UNECE will be affected by a number of elements, such as the current reform of the United Nations.

What impact will the UN reform have on the work of UNECE ?

For the time being it is unclear how the Member States will adopt the suggestions of the High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change. There could be implications especially insofar as there is a suggestion to change the role of ECOSOC into a development forum and to strengthen its normative and analytical role. We have an advantage as we have a long tradition in normative work. We could expand our global role as a regional commission. Another finding of the report is about different threats to security and not making differences between soft and hard threats, in other words to recognize economic threats to security on the same footing as terrorism or organized crime. UNECE in this context is well advanced, as we have been involved in the issue of economic threats to security for quite a while. We recently signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the OSCE on cooperation in the economic and environmental dimension of security which starts a new and more intensive round of cooperation with this security organization.

Why did Member States ask for a review of UNECE activities ?

UNECE underwent a major reform in 1997 and it is gradually adjusting to the changing international environment. Member States wanted to have an independent view to evaluate whether there is a need for new adjustments due to the changing European architecture. It is always valuable to have an independent analysis. We hope we will get good recommendations to improve our efficiency and to better respond to the changing needs of our Member States.

You have been here now for three years. How has it been ?

During these almost three years I have realized that the UN is more needed than some Member States think. I have never had any doubts about the importance of the UNECE but now I have even stronger arguments to say so. However, I am disappointed, or perhaps, to put it another way, I would appreciate the Member States really trying to get better value for their money. What I have in mind is that they should benefit much more from the accumulated knowledge in the organization. They could get much more from the fast and efficient implementation of our conventions, norms and standards, guidelines or policy advice. Sometimes I am frustrated to see that the implementation is too slow. And this is really a loss for the Member States. Regarding the governance of UNECE, I would prefer less micro-management and more strategic thinking and guidance from Member States. I would also appreciate it if ECE Ambassadors could allocate more time to the work of UNECE, which is less political than many other organizations but remains very important for Member States. On the side of UN management, I would welcome less reporting required. It is extremely time consuming. We could use this time in a much more efficient way. Also more decentralization and less decision-making at the UN headquarters level would be welcome. This would make the Organization more flexible, more efficient and better responding to the needs of its membership. And this is – I believe – the joint goal of the secretariat and the Member States.