MARK DAVIS: Shashi Tharoor thanks for joining us.

SHASHI THAROOR, UN UNDER SECRETARY: Thank you.

MARK DAVIS: Last night's speech was a very important one for George Bush, how persuasive do you think it was for some of the more sceptical nations?

SHASHI THAROOR: Well, I think the President was attempting to put across, of course, a number of messages in his speech and I think they will have been listened to very attentively. All of us at the United Nations were interested to hear what he had to say about the organisation, about the larger purposes for which the organisation stands as well as what the US had in mind on Iraq. And I think we got a little bit on all of those issues.

MARK DAVIS: Well, the broad international response to Iraq specifically seems to have been that America broke it, America can fix it, perhaps with some help from other coalition of the willing members, Australia and Britain. Did George Bush's speech change that attitude in any way?

SHASHI THAROOR: That remains to be seen because, of course, member states in the Security Council still have a fair amount of discussing to do ahead of them. What's clear with this speech is that the President is reiterating his conviction that the US did the right thing in the right way to implement earlier decisions of the Security Council which he reminded the General Assembly were the right decisions, and then the question of what this means for the next steps is something the Security Council members will be discussing, we believe, in the next week or 10 days.

MARK DAVIS: Kofi Annan was unusually blunt in his criticism of actions like Iraq. What response were you getting from American officials after this speech?

SHASHI THAROOR: Well, I think there was a great deal of understanding for the way in which he put forward his concern. His concern was actually not just a criticism of the doctrine of pre-emption - which, of course, was there and was very clearly articulated, and which Kofi Annan said that we have to be sure that other people don't go around doing this because then we'll have a lawless world - but he went on to say to the member states, what about those situations in which the countries that are tempted to take unilateral action have very genuine worries, very genuine concerns. Can we find a way of meeting those concerns through effective collective action? So in other words, he was not just denouncing pre-emptive - the doctrine of pre-emption, he was saying if we want to avoid people being tempted by the doctrine of pre-emption, what can we do collectively within the international institutions of the UN to find them better solutions. And that was of a piece with his larger message that the institution which is so precious, so necessary for a world of laws rather than a world of force and might, needs revitalising.

MARK DAVIS: The Americans are likely to have seen today as yet another test of the UN's relevancy. Can the United Nations afford to spurn the United States for a second time?

SHASHI THAROOR: No, I think spurning is not really the issue. For example, none of the members of the Security Council with the veto power have talked about vetoing an American resolution whatever it may contain and there are, of course, others on the council who don't have the veto but who have also said they will not vote against the US. Everybody on the council is anxious to put behind them the divisiveness and recrimination that so bedevilled this organisation earlier this year. On the other hand, we have to ask ourselves whether agreement alone is enough or whether it has to be agreement that actually translates into something different on the ground.

MARK DAVIS: Well, this year's been a year of ups and downs for the UN - mostly downs, you'd probably have to say. What's the mood amongst the senior UN staff today?

SHASHI THAROOR: Well, the mood has been fairly grim for a while. We all suffered a terrible blow with the bombing in Baghdad on 19 August. A lot of us lost not just valued colleagues but dear friends. Sergio Vieira De Mello for instance was somebody I'd known for 25 years. One doesn't likely recover from a blow like that and for a long time now we've all felt ourselves metaphorically, if not literally, picking ourselves out of the rubble. Having said that, we're also conscious that this is a momentous occasion in the history of the UN, a time when looking at the shape of the new

Source: http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2003/09/24/shashi-tharoor-interview