New or restored democracies pulling the curtain up on negotiations.

In the early hours on a Tuesday morning in November 2003, the mood in the second-floor office of the Permanent Mission of Mongolia to the United Nations was rather upbeat. After some 45 days of late evening marathon negotiations and informal diplomacy, the end was in sight. In the coming weeks, the newly scripted draft on new or restored democracies was to be formally tabled in the UN General Assembly by the Mongolian Ambassador.

Mongolia's main negotiator and Deputy Permanent Representative. Purevjav Gansukh, was at his Mission office sitting in front of a computer set on a wooden desk. "Dear Colleagues", he typed, "I am sending herewith the draft resolution entitled "Support by the United Nations system of the efforts of Governments to promote and consolidate new or restored democracies". It was then faxed to Member States for co-sponsorship. Mr Gansukh explained that co-sponsorship indicates that Member States fully support the draft, which covers issues of importance to them.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

In September 2003 in Ulaanbaatar, the capital city of Mongolia, the Fifth International Conference of New or Restored Democracies took place, with the goal to "encourage and strengthen democratic institutions". Kang Kyung-wha, Minister Counsellor at the Permanent Mission of the Republic of Korea, told the UN Chronicle.

In fact, development of new or restored democracies dates back to the late 1980s, when the first conference originated in Asia, on the initiative of the Philippines Mr. Gansukh said that around the same time, "many countries were making a transition from a socialistic form of governance to a free market system".

The United Nations was introduced to the Conference process almost ten years ago, in 1994, for its insight and resourcefulness for problem-solving at various levels.

The primary idea was that democratization of States could be supported through international cooperation. This process continued with a second conference in 1994 in Managua, Nicaragua. From there, the baton was passed on to Romania, which hosted the third conference in Bucharest in 1997. The fourth was held in 2000 in Cotonou, with Benin as the host.

On that November morning, with just twenty-four hours remaining for the draft to be published. Mr. Gansukh looked away from his office window facing the Manhattan skyline for one last glance at the freshly printed papers. It was time for the draft text, which he and his colleagues had worked on for over three months, to be sent for co-sponsorship. "We were targeting for some 110 co-sponsors", Mr. Gansukh said, "but we got the support of 130 Member States". Finally, weeks after the Ulaanbaatar Conference, resolution 58/13 was unanimously adopted by the General Assembly on 24 November. On 10 February 2004, the Assembly welcomed Oatar's initiative to hold the next conference on new or restored democracies in 2006. Sitting relaxed in the backdrop of the General Assembly Hall. Mr. Gansukh scanned through his papers and unfolded for the Chronicle the diplomatic parleys that shaped the draft resolution.

Much of the draft's success, he said, began at the Fifth International Conference, held from 10 to 12 September 2003. It opened the door for countries and various other parliamentary forums to submit proposals and inputs to be included in the draft text. Soon after the Conference, the new draft papers from Mongolia landed on Mr. Gansukh's desk. By the following week, copies of the draft were sent to countries for co-sponsorship, with the Mongolian representatives explaining the draft's nitty-gritty. This ushered in a phase of informal get-togethers and bilateral talks with some forty delegations, especially Benin, the Philippines, the European Union, India and the United States, who were expected to provide concrete ideas for the draft resolution.

As the informal meetings continued, the Mongolian representatives carefully nudged core issues and made language changes to the draft. One such phrase to be included in the text, proposed by Ireland representing the European Union, was "good governance". In an interview with the Chronicle, Aisling De Burca of Ireland said that "the idea of binding good governance was to incorporate transparency" During the meetings, the mood among delegates looked promising. Mr. Gansukh said. No heated debates and no standoffs had taken place. The negotiations were rather a "smooth process", according to Ms. De Burca.

Nicole Elisha of the Permanent Mission of Benin also confirmed that there had been "no controversy" during negotiations and that there was "conformity with the decisions" on the draft text which had emerged from the Fifth Conference. She further stated that conferences like the one in Mongolia and the upcoming one in Oatar were signs of progress. "Follow-up conferences are good for all democratic countries in knowing how far they have gone in implementing the recommendations", she told the Chronicle.

However, according to Mr. Gansukh, to establish the concept of democracy, by itself, was "difficult". He said that it was a complex task to devise strict criteria for democratic governance, as not many countries would fit in the same bracket were conditions to be laid out. "It will be discussed in future conferences whether countries are democratic or not", he said "However, during the Ulaanbaatar Conference, we had decided it was better to have this concept open in order to bring more countries together."

As time progressed, the Mongolian Mission organized an informal meeting on 29 October. Delegations descended upon the brightly lit interiors of Conference Room A at UN Headquarters, to meet eye-to-eye, work together and sow the seeds of the deal. It started with the scrutiny of the language, phrases and words that formed the draft. "Our focus was to have an action-oriented language". Mr. Gansukh said. For that reason, according to one paragraph of the draft text, "a working group to study the ways and means of making the Conference and its follow-up more effective and efficient" was established. "That was the new element we introduced", he added.

However, the idea of setting up a working group was resisted by some Member States. According to Mr. Gansukh, the United States, Japan and the European Union were among those countries. Their main concern, he explained, was the financial burden it might entail in the near future. "We felt that there were other mechanisms in the UN body to assist in strengthening support to the Conference", and that the working group would be efficient and effective only in a "limited way", Ms. De Burca told the Chronicle. "To set up the working group, the UN will have to pay for its members, for the secretariat and so on". Mr. Gansukh said. So through a spirit of consensus, the words "working group" were removed from the draft. "This was understandable when countries are working on budget control", he added.

The sequence of events from informal rendezvous to the draft presentation in the General Assembly was guided with the efforts of Mongolia and the cooperation of many others. With Qatar hosting the next conference on new or restored democracies, Mr. Gansukh said that for him this was only the beginning of the process rather than the end. "The Conference was a great success", he concluded, "and is the start of the cycle for broader activities for countries to implement recommendations from the Ulaanbaatar Conference."

By Namrita Talwar, for the Chronicle