Webinar: Global Leadership and International Cooperation in the Context of COVID-19 and Beyond

Dr Robin Niblett CMG

…again, who’ve been joining us during our centenary week, as we’ve been calling it, to mark the first meeting held by the Royal Institute of International Affairs, known as Chatham House, which was on the 5th of July in 1920, and here we are, 100 years later, not able to meet in person, which is a little sad for us. But, as I was discussing with our two distinguished guests today, we seem to be having more meetings through the wonderful technologies provided to us today through the internet, and, in this case, Zoom, than we might have done even normally. So, I am especially pleased and delighted that we have such a great group of people coming to join us today and have this conversation, which I think is very appropriate to be able to have, at the end of our centenary week, the last in the series, on Global Leadership and International Co-operation in the Context of COVID and Beyond, which is a suitably huge title.

But I think, as we are the heirs of an institute founded at a time of great global upheaval in the 1920s, where the world tried, but failed, to establish structures of international co-operation and governance through the interwar years, tried again in 1945, and Chatham House predecessors of ours were involved with others in helping design what became the Bretton Woods institutions, it strikes me that this is an especially good time to be having this very large conversation about the future of global leadership and co-operation.

Lionel Curtis was the name of the individual who conceived the idea of Chatham House. He was a delegate to the Versailles peace treaty negotiations taking place in 1919, and he had a great phrase, which we have now stencilled into our wall in 10 St James’s Square, saying that the challenge was to move from a world led by the rule of force to the one led by the rule of law. And, obviously, this still remains an ambition, in many parts of the world, but in others, it has become reality, and I think that gives us a great framework for this conversation, where, hopefully, we’ll get into how the COVID crisis obviously is presenting new challenges to global governance, whether it’s in health or trade or climate, but also, new opportunities, hopefully, to be able to do things differently, to build back better, as many people are using that phrase.

As I said, we are delighted to have our two speakers closing with us this week. Mary Robinson, Chair of The Elders, and The Elders have been great partners of Chatham House, hopefully partners to each other, in these last few years, on a whole range of issues, currently universal healthcare, which I think is a topic very dear to the hearts of many of The Elders, and very dear to Rob Yates and our Centre on Universal Health. So, delighted to have that partnership with The Elders recognised, here in our centenary week. Mary Robinson obviously known to all of you here, President of Ireland 1990 to 97, the first woman President of Ireland, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, a UN Envoy for Climate Change, and somebody who’s kept a hand very firmly and now, through the vehicle as Chair of The Elders, a position she took over from Kofi Annan. So, wonderful, Mary, to have you with us.

And Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, delighted to have her with us, as well, to welcome her back, I can’t say, sadly, to Chatham House, but to have her with us again. Also a member of The Elders, currently Chair of ECOWAS, the Economic Community of West African States, and she is somebody who, as everyone knows, I think, who’ve been looking at the news, was nominated yesterday by Dr Tedros Ghebreyesus as Co-Chair of the Independent Panel for Pandemic Preparedness and Response. It’s got a good acronym, thankfully, IPPR – IPPPR, and I don’t know how you do the triple, never mind, I, triple PR, I’ll make up the name right now, but with Helen Clark, and somebody who is perfectly and very well-placed to take this role, and not only because of her current role in ECOWAS and a lot of the work she’s done on global health, but was the first female elected President of an African state, as President of Liberia, and has been also, for all of the work she’s done there and other aspects of leadership in Africa, awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2011.

So, two very distinguished guests to join us, but also to have this conversation. I’ll remind you, we are on the record, perhaps obviously. We are livestreamed. You can tweet, if you wish, at #CHCentenary, and what I would encourage you to do, if you have questions that you’d like to raise for this conversation with our two guests, please write them into the ‘Q&A’ box, which is available to you there at the bottom. I will pick them up and be able to give an opportunity for people to be able to ask their questions, and we can – I think we have the option to clearly, to unmute you if we need to. So, do, please, ask your questions in the ‘Q&A’ box, and we’ll call on you if we can.

So, look, with all of those words of introduction, I want to turn, first to Mary Robinson. Mary, delighted, as I said, again, to have you with us, to see you again, though, sadly, not in person. But I’ve given you a huge canvas on which to maybe make some opening remarks of ten minutes, or five, ten minutes. I could say to you what’s top of your mind on global leadership and international co-operation, and that question would be a complicated one in any circumstances, but with COVID-19 into the mix, I can only imagine how you’re trying to manage all of your different responsibilities? What are your opening thoughts to share with our guests today? Over to you, Mary.

Mary Robinson

Thank you very much, Robin, and, indeed, it is a huge challenge that we’re going to be addressing during this conversation. But I want to begin by warmly congratulating Chatham House on your centenary of your founding, and I’m glad we’re in the actual week of it, the week of the 5th of July. And I so admire how the institute has provided exceptional research, exceptional convening and expertise, over the past 100 years, and we will need you, over the next century – centenary – and next century, as well.

But let’s talk about the tough issues. I mean, multilateral co-operation today is in a state of profound crisis. COVID-19 has swept through every part of the world since the start of 2020, leaving a devastating cost. First and foremost, in human lives, but also, in terms of economic growth, in terms of political momentum, in terms of social inequality, and it has also brought into question many aspects of our interconnected world that had been increasingly – well, had been taken for granted, in recent decades. A crisis such as this one would never be easy to tackle in the best of circumstances. Unquestionably, many national leaders have worked tirelessly and with great determination to bring this pandemic under control, and I’ve been pleased, and I know my dear friend, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, will be equally pleased, that women leaders have stepped up well during this crisis, and have, you know, led their countries well.

However, this is also a global crisis, and it requires a global solution. It has therefore been deeply disappointing to see the distinct lack of global leadership, in recent months, as national leaders have, by and large, turned inward, and have failed to prioritise a multilateral approach to the pandemic. Frankly, the complete abdication of leadership and moral responsibility by the President of the United States has certainly not been helpful, and stands in stark contrast to the historic leadership role played by the United States in previous comparable cases. It has also been, I’m afraid, sadly unsurprising, coming in the wake of the barrage of assaults on the multilateral system, orchestrated by the Trump administration, since 2017, which basically has sought to undermine some of the crowning achievements of multilateralism. And the United States has certainly not been the only bad actor undermining multilateralism.

Both China and the United States bear responsibility for the counterproductive public in-fighting over the origins of the virus in recent months, which has contributed to almost paralysing the UN Security Council, and to undermining the work of the World Health Organization. And I know myself that the China of today is not respecting international human rights in the way it was when I served for five years as UN High Commissioner, which was 1997 to 2002. I made many visits to China, talked about human rights issues, could address these issues. Sadly, that time – that has now – that window has closed, at least for the moment, it would appear.

It has also been alarming to see some populist leaders use the crisis as a means of subverting democracy and accountability, from the Brazilian Government’s complicity in the destruction of the Amazon Rainforest and lack of attention to COVID, to actions to undermine democratic safeguards and human rights in countries as diverse as Hungary, Israel, and the Philippines. However, the current void of global leadership cannot simply be blamed on the actions of populists and authoritarian leaders, deplorable as their actions may be. It has been particularly disappointing that even those world leaders, who are most sympathetic to multilateralism, have very rarely spoken out forcibly – forcefully against the US-led assault on the UN and broader multilateral system. You know, that absence of any take – holding to account or criticism.

The crisis we are facing through – at the moment, COVID-19, the associated prospect of sustained economic slowdown, and high unemployment, the climate emergency, the threat of a new nuclear arms race, which is very real, entrenched in systemic racism, and I’m pleased to see the Black Lives Matter rise against that, gender inequality, and oppression, are all too complex and multifaceted for any one nation to tackle them on its own. What is needed is an effective system of multilateral co-operation to tackle the shared problems we face. And I think, in this anniversary week in particular, it’s important to recall that Chatham House was founded in the immediate aftermath of great human catastrophe and suffering, followed not only the end of the First World War, but also the 1918 flu pandemic, which, ultimately, killed many millions more than the war itself.

Chatham House also shares its centenary year with the creation of the League of Nations, the first serious, albeit ill-fated, global experiment with multilateral governance. In the aftermaths of both the First and Second World Wars, national leaders responded with the recognition that a strong global governance system was needed to prevent the recurrence of war, and to tackle the key global threats shared by all of humanity. The network of international covenants and institutions, which was ultimately constructed after 1945, with the United Nations at its core, has been far from perfect, but it has decisively promoted peace, security, and the protection of human rights over seven decades, and it led to the 2030 Agenda with its 17 Sustainable Development Goals, and the Paris Climate Agreement in 2015, frameworks which are relevant to taking us forward.

So, we currently need the same sense of common purpose to emerge from our current global crisis, or we are likely to face – be faced all too soon with further, and potentially even more devastating, global catastrophes, whether caused by climate change, by another pandemic, or even, sadly, the prospect of possible nuclear war. It’s therefore critical that global leaders come together in the aftermath of the pandemic and commit themselves to sustained and co-ordinated efforts to tackle the key global threats facing humanity, and to help build a better and fairer world, based on common principles of human rights, sustainability, justice, and equality. You know, these are really big issues, and I look forward to the conversation. Thank you.

Dr Robin Niblett CMG

Thank you very much, Mary, for those opening remarks. Before I turn to President Sirleaf, just – if I could just do one little follow-up question for you, because you noted, in your remarks there, while bemoaning the tragic loss of multilateral co-operation, in the wake of the COVID crisis and the contrast with previous moments of crisis, where the world has at least tried to come together in a different way, you noted that some democracies have performed well, and I’m just wondering, you know, as somebody who’s been a political leader obviously yourself, what do you think it’s been about those democracies that have been able to hang it together? It is about being democracies, or is it simply about competence? Is there something that you’re picking up at the moment – before we get to the international questions, something about domestic leadership or domestic approaches to government that have stood out to you as being the best?

Mary Robinson

I think it is democracies that have listened to the science, listened to their health experts, taken it seriously, and started with taking tough decisions. Tough decisions about quite – you know, really strong lockdown, followed by phased, careful reopening, and varying the phase depending on the help, advice, that was being received. And, somehow, because of a democracy, bringing people with you, having a trust, both in the Scientists and in the government, that the wellbeing of the wider population, and the protection of those most vulnerable, and the protection of health workers and care workers, that’s all part of the mix. And I am proud, as I know Ellen is, of the fact that women-led countries, from Angela Merkel in Germany to the Prime Ministers of Norway, Sweden – sorry, Norway, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Jacinda Ardern in New Zealand, and the President of Taiwan, close to China, I mean, there has been a real sense of being prepared to take tough decisions, but bring your people with you, that I think has been the key.

Dr Robin Niblett CMG

Very important point there, I think this trust factor, when you trust the government, and we think, obviously, the US was founded partly through a lack of trust in government, and maybe it’s no wonder that, you know, there’s a level of suspicion about when big recommendations come from the middle. But I like your comment about tough decisions, because tough decisions often are not popular, so it’s almost the opposite of being populist to be able to take tough decisions at moments of crisis like this. Thank you very much.

I’m going to turn to President Sirleaf now, if you’re able to unmute yourself, that would be wonderful, or somebody could unmute President Sirleaf, so we can hear her remarks would be great. But, President Sirleaf, obviously you’ve taken on, or you’re about to take on, an additional responsibility in addition to all of your others, so we’re going to look forward very much to your remarks, and thank you so much for joining us. We can see you’re unmuted, please go ahead, and welcome to our centenary week. Over to you, President Sirleaf.

Ellen Johnson Sirleaf

Thank you, Robin. I’m very pleased to speak at this event, to mark the centenary of the founding of Chatham House. This institution has a well-deserved reputation for providing exceptional analysis and expertise on key global issues. I wish we were celebrating this important milestone at a better time for our world. Unfortunately, COVID-19, a virus, which we have yet to fully understand, has slipped the securities of countries’ borders to infect big and small countries alike. COVID-19 is indiscriminate in its painful effects on precious lives and livelihoods. The rich and the poor, the young and the old, the haves and the have-not, first worlds and third worlds, men, women, and children, Christians and Muslims, worshippers of all religions, combatants on opposing sides of conflict, all of us, are experiencing the agonising effects of COVID-19.

From climate change to nuclear proliferations, from social injustices and exclusions to gender inequalities and inequities, from ending poverty to ending the many senseless wars, the truth is that the presenting unfortunate global reality of this pandemic is a clarion call. In its transmission of this deadly virus and its stinging effect on all of us, our differences in race, gender, religions, sexual orientation, and where we worship, none of it has come to immune us from this effect. The simple truth is that we face a global problem, and, unless we own the solution globally, none of us can pretend to be truly spared. This, therefore, is not the time to retreat from the world. Where might we hope to hide by this retreat? Certainly, it is not the time to imagine that any one country can go it alone. We need each other. If there’s a lesson to be learned, it’s that we have always needed each other.

Indeed, COVID-19 has exposed our mutual vulnerability, and has acerbated a deep inequalities that continue to exist, both within and between countries. Africa and the Global South, more generally, face particular risks, given the widespread presence of weak healthcare systems and the impracticality in many situation of maintaining social distancing and appropriate hygienic standards, particularly in urban slum communities. Many governments in this Global South have limited fiscal space to take the necessary health and economic measures needed to limit the impact of the pandemic, leaving populations particularly exposed in crushing economic and social costs. The only way to effectively contain COVID-19 is therefore through global multilateral co-ordination. Indeed, there’s no issue on which the case for multilateral co-operation is clearer or more essential and in the tackling of this pandemic, which is the pre-eminent example of a global public good.

In containing this presenting threat to global public health, economic stress, and social disorder, we are only as strong as the weakest link in our human chain. The virus will not be overcome, unless all states work together, pooling resources and expertise, to strengthen health systems, develop and distribute an effective vaccine, protect healthcare workers, provide the necessary care to all who are needed in the society. This must particularly include vulnerable groups, such as refugees, migrants, the elderly, and the infirm. Special attention must also be given to the needs of the Global South. Once an effective vaccine is developed, it is critical that it is made accessible and affordable for all countries. Admittedly, the depth of co-operation that is required to tackle this pandemic would be challenging to achieve, even in the best of times. It is therefore particularly concerning that the virus has struck at a moment when the multilateral system has been under sustained attack, ironically led by the very country that played the leading role in the creation of existing global governance systems.

However, as COVID-19 is taking away our lives and livelihoods, what we must not let ourselves lose to the virus is our common sense, which is at the heart of all humanity. It is common sense that none of us is safe until all of us are safe. We came to understand and appreciate this in Liberia, as we struggled with Ebola. It was predicted that at least 20,000 of Liberians would die every month to the epidemic. As the leader, I rejected the prediction. I knew a firmer prediction would not be enough because solutions are never found in what we wish them to be. It is found when we are willing to work for a solution to the problem. I therefore appealed to the world for support, and the world was kind to respond. I immobilised Liberians across the differences of our cultures, religions, gender, and ages to own the epidemic and its solution. As Liberians began to respond, we truly began to fight back. To fight a virus like COVID-19, which we did not know, unlike today, was taking away the lives of our loved ones and depriving us of our livelihoods.

This, too, is how we must globally respond to this pandemic. It is how we save ourselves and save the lives of others that we love. We do so by fighting back together. While no one solution will work for all countries, all countries must work together, sharing experiences and knowledge, in contribution to a global solution. As we do, we must act to ease financial trade and other restrictions, so that smaller economies do not crumble and collapse, thereby leading to further threats to global peace and security. Rather than restrict democratic practices and offset the growing need to make government more responsive, transparent and accountable, we must be strong and decided in our rejection of the temptation to return to authoritarianism. In Liberia, this is how we overcame Ebola. This is how we will overcome COVID-19. Not fighting back alone or against each other, we will win, we will survive this pandemic by fighting together knowing that we are connected to each other and, as such, we are each responsible for the lives and wellbeings of each other.

2020 was always going to be a significant year, but those of us who are committed to the principle of multilateral co-operation, as we mark the 75th anniversary of the United Nations, and the end of the Second World War, it is crucial that this anniversary is used as a moment for leaders to come together and recommit to the principles of multilateral co-operation, which continues to be essential in successfully tackling the global challenges that we face currently, and will confront in the years ahead. Once again, I congratulate Chatham House on this centenary celebration, and wish you success in the coming years. Thank you.

Dr Robin Niblett CMG

Thank you very much, President Sirleaf. Thank you for those warm words for Chatham House, and those very important words about the importance of international co-operation. As you said, we’re only as strong as the weakest link in the human chain, it’s a – it’s one of those fundamental elements that’s been brought particularly to home to everyone by the COVID crisis, and I appreciate you making that point. And, as you said, using this anniversary moment to try to look for opportunities. If I could do one follow-up question to you, and then I’ll maybe bring a couple of our – I’ve got one other question I’ll ask to both of you, but one specifically for you, President Sirleaf, before we start to go to the members and our guests with us today.

As you will imagine, and I thought maybe it best to get this out of the way at the beginning, there’s lots of questions coming in about your recent appointment to the new WHO panel for pandemic preparedness and response, and there’s a question in particular from Antonello Guerrera of the la Repubblica newspaper in Italy. And let me paraphrase the question for you because that way you can say what you feel you can say at the moment, I know it was only announced yesterday, and there’s a huge amount to be developed, but the phrase, as Antonello says, in there is about “An honest assessment,” and that’s an interesting phrase, and I’m just wondering what, for you, do you feel that you and Helen Clark and this panel will be able to achieve with this honest assessment? How much of it is looking back, and how much of it, obviously, is looking forward, because it is about learning lessons, I think, for the future? And, obviously, how central is it to have the US in, and can the WHO get the US back to be able to do that? Would you be – feel comfortable sharing a couple of opening thoughts about that?

Ellen Johnson Sirleaf

Clearly, you know, as you – right, as you said, the appointment was just made a day ago, and the modalities for the workings for the committee have yet to be established. I’m honoured to work with Prime Minister Helen Clark, as together with the rest of a panel that has yet to be organised. We will do what we can. I think it’s a matter of looking at the institution, founded after World War Two, along with other multilateral institution, where it stands today in meeting the requirements and the complexities of today’s world. It also, in keeping with the mandate, look at how the COVID-19 has been responded to by the institution, what are the challenges ahead, and how do we ensure that partnership, in keeping with all the things I said, that we’ve got to be together in the world, if we’re going to solve the world complexities. And so, I hope that our study, our report, will be able to make some recommendations for ensuring that the world stays together, prepared for any other pandemic that may come.

Dr Robin Niblett CMG

Thank you. I can see that Dr Tedros has picked a Diplomat as well as an expert in being able to answer these questions, so that’s a good – and probably a good sign, as well, on his part, and I would simply note that my colleagues in our Centre on Universal Health for Chatham House actually did a study on WHO reform, I want to say at least four/five years ago. So, I’ll be encouraging them to dust it off and check some of the most relevant recommendations and share them with you and others, when it comes to it. I’m sure you’ll have a lot of information, though I noticed it’s a quick agenda, I think you’re meant to have an interim report out by November. So, we wish you the best of luck with what will be, I’m sure, a very busy process coming along here.

Let me just follow-up on that point, ‘cause I think you made a very important element, and I’m going to come to Mary Robinson in a second now. You said, President Sirleaf, that, you know, this was an institution, after all, founded – it is a UN institution, the World Health Organization, founded off the back of World War II, all sorts of structures that maybe were suited to that time, and, Mary, if I may come to you, you know, we are all very quick to bemoan and criticise the failure of multilateral institutions. We did have the US Trade Representative, Bob Lighthizer, speaking at a centenary event yesterday, and he made, I think, the not unfair comment that the WTO, a successor to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, you know, has really not served all countries well.

It was designed with an assumption that markets would open, that if everyone was brought in – it had no conception of what state-led markets might be, and so you have a WTO, World Trade Organization, that assumes all countries are on the same track. But, actually, you have some that want to hold on to state-led economies, some that want market-led economies, how can you have the same rules? And I’m wondering to the comments that President Sirleaf said, maybe it is the fact that we shouldn’t be criticising quite as much the critics of multilateralism, maybe we need to listen to them. Things needs fixing, and I’m wondering, you know, yeah, how would you respond to that element, those who say these institutions are past their sell by dates, some of them, they need reinventing? Is that a fair critique?

Mary Robinson

I’m very much in favour of critical examination. When I served in the UN System as High Commissioner for Human Rights, I remember frequently repeating that famous saying of Winston Churchill about democracy, “That it’s the worst system except for all the others,” and that’s what I would say about the UN. It’s the worst system, but, actually, we should be very grateful that it’s there and, of course, it needs reform, always, and it needs accountability, it needs scrutinising, and it needs this tension of precisely being, you know, looked to, to do better. And I think, you know, with COVID on top of the climate crisis, we have another reason to think – you mentioned the WTO, a good deal of the basis of the WTO was that the global trade could go up and up and up, with no accounting for nature, no accounting for the fact that it was beginning to destroy the ecosystem that sustain us, that the fossil fuelled economy, etc. And so, I believe we have a moment where, partly because we’re at home, with COVID, we have more time to reflect, and we have to reflect that business as usual was not getting us to a safe world, for a start, and we were not on course to meet the advice of the Climate Scientists in October 2018, that we had to stay at 1.5o and not go above it if we wanted a safe world for our children and grandchildren. We were nowhere close to that and we also had a world of great inequalities that COVID has just exacerbated and made – it’s like a mirror, it’s shown us this.

So, I think let’s reflect in our homes on Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Article 1 says, “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.” How far from that we have become. How far we have, and the dignity comes before the rights, and the dignity is that sense of self, and if you’re lying in a doorway, you’re homeless, you’re, you know, suffering from hunger, and people walk past you and ignore you, you have no dignity, you have no sense – in that sense. So, you know, I just won – I wonder if we can somehow, just for a little while, go back to the basis of human rights, gender equality, tackling racism, and actually come out of this in a better place.

Dr Robin Niblett CMG

And you – very interestingly, you use the word ‘dignity’ because – I don’t mean to keep harking back to it, but I think it was relevant that Bob Lighthizer yesterday specifically said, “What is one of the key roles of trade policy? It should be to enable human beings to have dignity in a country,” and his view was the global trading system had stripped dignity from many in the working class, without the kind of education, or rather qualifications, to succeed in a rapacious global economy. And I’m wondering, when we talk about dignity in that sense, is it the case that member states, that nation states, are going to have to be more responsible for protecting the dignity of their citizens, rather than multilateral organisations? ‘Cause that seems to be the trend at the moment, is that people are saying we can’t trust these big organisations to look after the dignity of our populations, we need to take care of it. Do you sense a tension there, Mary? And then I’m going to ask the same question to President Sirleaf.

Mary Robinson

I think I’d put it slightly differently. Member states have always had that primary responsibility. That’s what all the work that I did, as High Commissioner with my office, and my successors have done, is to hold to account, to try and – and we need more support from countries in doing that. But, actually, since the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, we’ve realised that also the private sector has a huge responsibility, and that was – the UN Guiding Principles make it clear governments have a responsibility to protect their people, but corporations have responsibility to respect all human rights. They should have a due diligence way of assessing how the corporation and its supply chain is or is not performing in respecting human rights and dignity. So, it’s not just – it’s the wider corporate world, as well and I think I’m seeing in the corporate world, a new thinking about getting away from shareholder to stakeholder, thinking about workers, employees, and communities, and thinking in terms of some values that weren’t on the table before, and I welcome that.

Dr Robin Niblett CMG

That’s – to see that shift happening, is very pleasing. President Sirleaf, could I ask you that same, sort of, question? Do you see some, sort of, structural problem with the way international organisations were built up after World War II? Are there some, sort of, principles of reform that you think are missing at the moment? Mary Robinson was mentioning the importance of getting the private sector more actively involved, and obviously the Global Compact that Kofi Annan pushed through had that partly in its mind, and I can imagine the WHO, there’ll be a lot more role for private companies on vaccine development. Is there something about international institutions that you think have been failing that’s common to them, that you would like to see change? Anything you’d like to share, maybe even from your regional experience in ECOWAS?

Ellen Johnson Sirleaf

Well, let me put it this way. All stakeholders in nation states have the prime responsibility to protect everyone and provide equal opportunities for everyone in the state. Institution must also ensure that their own priorities, their own policies, must be aligned to the policies of nation states that must produce the conducive environment, not only for carrying out official functions, but ensuring that the private sector is an equal participant, equal contributor, to the processes of development. And, yes, they have to ensure the dignity of the people in the state, and the government takes the primary responsibility, in full co-operation with the private sector and other stakeholders of the society.

Dr Robin Niblett CMG

Thank you. Very clearly put.

Mary Robinson

Robin, could I…?

Dr Robin Niblett CMG

Good thing is we are…

Mary Robinson

Could I…?

Dr Robin Niblett CMG

We’re recording this, so we’ll be able to bottle some of your – both of your comments. Mary, you wanted to come back in again.

Mary Robinson

I just wanted to come back very briefly. A lesson from COVID, an important lesson, is that government matters, and international co-operation matters. We will see the governments that didn’t take steps early, didn’t take those tough decisions, have let their people suffer a prolonged, far too great illness and death. We will see that rawly visible, it’s already visible, and we will see the governments that were responsible. If we had international co-operation, we would deal with this much better. We would get the vaccine in a way that would be accessible to everyone. We must have it as a common good, etc. We need this language. We need a recovery package that addresses what Ellen pointed out, the developing countries, and it’s – that’s – you know, that’s why COVID is a lesson to us of what we need, and I hope we’ll take that lesson.

Dr Robin Niblett CMG

Thank you. I’m going to bring in one of our guests, members, who’s got a question, Susanne Schuler. Hopefully, Susanne, you can be unmuted and we can take your question now. Susanne, are you there?

Susanne Schuler

Yes, thank you for giving me the opportunity, and thank you, President Sirleaf and President Robinson, for your crucial points, and also pointing out female leaders, which I think leads me to my question of leadership, because, for me, I’m from the Centre for Effective Dispute Resolution, and we’re dealing with many young leaders, in a lot of organisations, those organisations you just mentioned. We help them to resolve conflicts within their organisations better, and a lot of donor money actually goes to internal conflict resolution, and they can’t really take care of the conflicts they are supposed to resolve. And, for me, because there’s often a question I get asked, so what are the skills and competences the new generation of leaders need to have and to develop to bring about the change we so urgently need? And I follow-up with a more philosophical question, as well, to both of you. So, what gives you hope in these dark times and with all the experience you’ve been through and what you’ve achieved?

Mary Robinson

Ellen, you go first.

Ellen Johnson Sirleaf

As we’re talking about women leaders, let me start off by saying women leaders are not selected because of entitlement. They are selected because they are equally endowed with competence and knowledge, but there are certain characteristics of leaders, all leaders, that should stand out. First, I think, self-confidence, one being able to be assured of what they do, and the action that they take, the policies they promote, the courage to take hard decisions when it’s necessary to do so, the ability to communicate with the public in an honest and thoughtful way, to be able to gain their confidence, to be able to ensure compliance with some of the policies that have to be taken. A certain amount of empathy, compassion, are necessary if one will get the support.

Working for the welfare of all, now, that one depends a lot upon endowment, resources, capacity, and all of that, but a leader must be able, with all of that, to continue to promote those, and to be able to uplift others through the policies that they make, and the decisions that they make. So, all leaders, I think, must bring to the task a certain amount of commitment to promote the welfare, to address the vulnerabilities in the society through their policies, through the examples, self-examples, that they are going to give to the public, to be able to bring the confidence and the co-operation to ensure that their vision and their goals are achieved.

Mary Robinson

I very much agree with what Ellen has just been saying, and I just want to, kind of, build on it a little bit with the focus on young people, because that was part of the question. For young girls, young women, very often, they don’t feel the same sense of confidence that young men do. Young men are somehow encouraged to feel, “I’m more than capable of anything that comes along,” girls are somehow induced to have doubts about it. I think that that can be seen to be a, sort of, problem at that age, but, actually, I want to make the point that women leaders have a great advantage of self-doubt. It’s actually an advantage, because it means that you listen to the science, that you listen to experts, that you try to improve, that you listen to those who will guide you to good solutions, rather than thinking, “I know it all, I have the solutions.” So, it’s actually interesting. So, that’s just one point I wanted to make, that, very often with women leaders, and Ellen will know this, as well, we actually discuss how we might have done better. I never hear male leaders discuss how they might have done better, I mean, in a group.

Anyway, the second thing to encourage young people is a saying that Kofi Annan used all the time, I heard him frequently, “You’re never too young to lead, and you’re never too old to learn.” It’s a lovely sentence.

Ellen Johnson Sirleaf

Yes.

Mary Robinson

Now…

Ellen Johnson Sirleaf

Yes.

Mary Robinson

Yeah, Ellen, you remember, too. Now, I think we have a world where there’s a disconnect, because, sadly, we have a very young world in most of the world, the major part of the world, very young in Africa, for example, but, actually, quite old leaders, as Ellen would also recognise. I think…

Ellen Johnson Sirleaf

Yeah.

Mary Robinson

…that has to change, and I think it can be changed by making space for young people. You know, those of us who are at a certain stage of having held office are asked to go on high level panels. I now always ask, “Is there going to be – are there going to be young people on?” I didn’t ask it this time because I knew you had a particular focus, but I want to make the point, I would prefer if it had been Ellen and myself and a young person…

Ellen Johnson Sirleaf

That’s true.

Mary Robinson

…three of us talking, you know…

Ellen Johnson Sirleaf

Yes.

Mary Robinson

…or maybe two young people, you know, let’s make space for young people, let’s hear their voices, hear their imagination, their commitment. Look at what the children are doing with their Fridays for Future, and look how…

Ellen Johnson Sirleaf

Yeah.

Mary Robinson

…much they’re questioning effectively truth to power, and we need young people to feel they can be part of the solution.

Dr Robin Niblett CMG

And you could not have tipped me off better, Mary, but thank you for making that point about needing this publicly on fora like this, as well. But I’m proud to say the one thing is we kicked off ahead of our centenary year was a theme called the Common Futures Conversations, which is pulling together young people from across Europe and Africa, where we’re getting them to tell us what is most important to them about their futures, rather than us being, you know, the providers of analysis to them. And, actually…

Mary Robinson

But the…

Dr Robin Niblett CMG

…the next question…

Mary Robinson

But, Robin…

Dr Robin Niblett CMG

…on the list…

Mary Robinson

But Robin, the…

Dr Robin Niblett CMG

…is – yeah.

Mary Robinson

…intergenerational is also important. The intergenerational.

Dr Robin Niblett CMG

Yeah.

Mary Robinson

Yeah.

Dr Robin Niblett CMG

No, no, so, I was going to say, so, you’ll have a chance to be intergenerational because Salome [Nkuzi– 48:29], who’s a Member of our Common Futures Conversation, is on the line, and is going to ask you her question, because is a member of this group and has the most liked question, so I thought I’d better get it in now, and I think it flows nicely, Mary, from your point, and also Ellen’s. So, please, go ahead, Salome, if you’re on – hopefully you’re unmuted.

Salome Nkuzi

Thank you for the opportunity. My name is Salome Nkuzi. I am a Founding Member of the Common Futures Conversation community, and I am a Youth Leader at Labour Party of Kenya, and, in 2017 General Elections, I ran for political office, but I lost. Thank you to President Robinson and Sirleaf for your awesome presentation. My question goes to President Sirleaf. What was the key ingredient to your success as President of an African nation where patriarchy largely undermines women leadership? Thank you.

Dr Robin Niblett CMG

I hope you got that, President Sirleaf, yeah? Where patriarchy generally undermines women’s leadership, over to you.

Ellen Johnson Sirleaf

I mobilise women. I listened to women. Women at all levels in society, professionals, activists, farmers, marketeers, I listened to them and said, “If I were elected, I would make their lives better. I would try to break the chains that bound them. All of the stereotypes and the obstacles that they face to be able to achieve their goals and to be leaders.” And so, that was the key ingredient, working with women, making sure that women support – women are supported, and, frankly, I can say that, because of that, I was elected, because of the women vote, and the women came out just massively, and so I owe that – I owe my presidency, I owe my victory, to them. And so, I also want to say to Salome, because I heard her say she ran and lost, do not be afraid of losing. Losing is a part of the leadership joining, because you won’t win all the time. The biggest thing is, with your self-confidence, you can rise above the obstacle that prevented you from winning. So, losing, and losing the lessons of the experience from losing, can make you stronger, can provide you with that added impetus and determination to succeed. So, run again, Salome. Run again.

Salome Nkuzi

Thank you. Thank you.

Ellen Johnson Sirleaf

It’s those lessons.

Dr Robin Niblett CMG

Very clearly put. Thank you so much for those inspiring words, President Sirleaf. Did you want to come in, Mary? I saw you unmuted, but – no, okay. Look, we’re – we could keep going on this side, but I thought, as global co-operation also has some rather hard edges to it, let me bring in Rob May, who I think has an appropriate question to remind us of some of the hard edges of the world we’re dealing with at the beginning of our second century. Rob, over to you.

Rob May

Thank you very much, and thank you, President Robinson and President Sirleaf, for your points this afternoon. Mary Robinson alluded to the tension between an unstoppable, rising China, and an immovable America, which could propel the world towards nuclear conflict. I think that COVID-19 has been a Jupiter sling for the vulnerabilities, suspicions, and inequalities, which tend to exist in the underlying nature of international relations, which has come to a head very prominently and very publicly in the clash between the US and China, and so, my question is this. How can leaders and Diplomats on all sides come together to pull those states back from the brink of catastrophe, in order to free up energy and agency for international co-operation?

Mary Robinson

That’s a very interesting question, and a difficult one to answer with great confidence because one of the points that I was making was that there isn’t a, kind of, overt defence of multilateralism. Actually, there was one forum that I attended recently where I was surprisingly pleased at the strong affirmation by that forum, and that was a forum of small states, which Singapore was the Chair of, had a virtual meeting under the UN, and I presented The Elders’ report on multilateralism. It was actually a pre-launch, we launched it on the 26th of June, this was about the 11th of June, if I remember, and these were small states, 100 of them, who were participating. There were a significant number of Ministers who chose to come in virtually, some Deputy Prime Ministers, a President or two of small islands, and a number of Senior Ministers of Foreign Affairs, etc., and all of them asserted so strongly their belief in multilateralism.

Now, what The Elders have made clear in our report is multilateralism is good for both large and small countries, but it is a system that, you know, is geared towards more fairness for all countries, because all countries would have a voice, would have a say, in decision-making. I do regret that we’re getting into a stage of almost a bipolar in a bad sense world, a stronger China, assertive, not so good on human rights, a weaker United States, I have to say, under the Trump administration, weaker because it’s not coping well with the COVID-19, and it has pulled out of, you know, the Paris Climate Agreement, and most recently, out of the World Health Organization, etc., it’s actually moving in the other direction.

Now, this is not good, to have this kind of world at a time when we desperately need to have nuclear disarmament. We need a new START Treaty. The Americans are trying to bring the Chinese in, which I don’t think is appropriate, to the new START renewal, and, you know, this is a very serious time. The Elders have also been very concerned, and we have our policy on nuclear non-proliferation and nuclear disarmament. So, I don’t – I would like to see more voice in favour of the importance of multilateralism, even just in the context of COVID. If we had a global response to COVID, the world would be in a much better place, because the G20 did do something about the vaccine, the eight billion, but it needs to do far more for debt relief for developing countries who are facing a huge problem, as Ellen knows better than I do, of, you know, lack of remittances, to the same extent, debt accumulating at a time when COVID is also hitting hard. It’s the global response that is essential, and that requires a system of multilateralism that is defended by countries and believed in, and we are in a bumpy time, so The Elders are very keen to see countries stepping up.

Dr Robin Niblett CMG

…very much. I’m just wondering, we may have lost the connection briefly to Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, so I’m just going to keep moving on for a second, ‘cause the camera had, kind of, gone dark, so I’ll just wait, and we’ll bring her in a minute. Mary, you’re going to have to carry the load for the moment, which I know is not going to be difficult for you, and obviously you’re chairing The Elders, so this is par for the course for you.

Mary Robinson

The buck stops.

Dr Robin Niblett CMG

I wanted to ask you a quick question also, because it was a little more on the – oh, right, we’ve got President Sirleaf again, which is good. You’re muted now. Sorry, you’re muted. We need to unmute you. Oh, now, that’s it, you’re unmuted. It’s good, you’re unmuted. No, there we go, that’s it. Perfect. Do you mind…?

Ellen Johnson Sirleaf

The problems…

Dr Robin Niblett CMG

Sorry.

Ellen Johnson Sirleaf

The problems of our nation, our lights went off.

Dr Robin Niblett CMG

We thought we could see you, it’s true, but we’re – I could see a bit of you in the dark, it was very strange, no wonder. Luckily, you’re wearing your very elegant head covering, which I knew you were still there. Actually, I did want to follow-up the question, if you don’t mind, Mary, if I could hold for a second…

Mary Robinson

Yeah.

Dr Robin Niblett CMG

…because this question about the US and China, you know, there may be a very different perspective from African nations about the role of China and this US-China co-operation, and I didn’t want to miss the chance, President Sirleaf, for you to share your view of how you see this competition, how you view China’s support for Africa’s development, and, you know, how you avoid getting caught in this vice of competition.

Ellen Johnson Sirleaf

You know, Liberia has developed a partnership cycle that includes not only the United States, which is a main supporter of Liberia’s effort, but China, the European Union, other countries in the Arab states. So, we have always felt that Liberia needs to not only work with, benefit, contribute to, all those institutions in which all the nations of the world participate. That’s why we have the United Nations, that’s why we have the African Union, and all the other bodies, the multilateral bodies, in which we are part of, even though we’re not the main leaders of.

And I think the message from us is, as a means of getting people to see what’s happening in the world today, as a result of COVID-19, that has been the storm, to be able to bring a realisation to where we are and where we could be if we had a disunited world, with nationalism being the order of the day. Poorer countries, more migrants, more refugees, more terrorism, taking over certain parts of the world, which would lead again to more protests. What would the world be if we were to descend into that state of chaos? And I just hope that all the leaders of the world looking at what’s happening as a result of COVID-19 will stop, will think a bit, will reflect upon where we are and where we could be, unless we all came together to be able to address what really, are global issues that require global co-operation. China…

Dr Robin Niblett CMG

Very good.

Ellen Johnson Sirleaf

…they’re all part of it, and I think they, too, have to be the main players to help us promote this unity that we need.

Dr Robin Niblett CMG

Very well put. Look, we are coming close to the close. We may just drift over by five minutes from the official closing time, if that’s alright with both of you, President Robinson and Sirleaf. What I’d like to do is ask you both a question myself. Well, maybe a different question to each of you, rather than having you both answer the same question, if you see what I’m saying, and then I’m going to bring in, hopefully, Pauline Ottey for a last outside question, and then that should be it. So, if I could ask you a question each individually. First to you, Mary Robinson, the Human Rights Council. You referenced earlier on the UN Declaration of Universal Human Rights. It strikes me that one of the most fundamental divisions in the world right now is between governments that believe they represent their own citizens’ rights, and they will take the dominant view of that and represent the majority, and other governments for whom they feel they’re there to represent their citizens, and their collective rights, including of minorities, are the priority. And I don’t need to say more than that, you can imagine which governments I’m referring to on each side of that equation, and it is one of the dividing lines that seem strongest, and it’s manifested now in the Human Rights Council. And I’m just wondering, as a former UN Commissioner for Human Rights, how optimistic or worried are you about this idea of human rights being at the core of multilateral institutions for the future? What can be done about it?

Mary Robinson

I do believe that the actual job of being UN High Commissioner for Human Rights is more difficult in this current, very divided and angry, kind of, world. I know this because there are actually fewer countries that defend the way the High Commissioner is seeking to do the job on behalf of the international community. When I served as High Commissioner for Human Rights, I could look to quite a number of countries to really support politically, you know, what needed to be done. That’s harder now, and that’s a great pity. It’s all part of what I’m saying, the need to step up and value. But, at the same time, all around the world, people are coming out in numbers for their rights. That’s the extraordinary thing.

There is a global movement for human rights. It’s a movement for human rights defenders of land and water rights in different parts of the world, particularly Latin America. It’s a movement for climate justice of the young people. It’s a movement for Black Lives Matter, of the – you know, these are all not connected enough, but could be connected because they’re all basically for the values of human beings. I mean, the United Nations Charter starts with the three words that I said I served as UN High Commissioner, “We, the peoples,” and then gives far too much power to states. That’s one of the weaknesses in the UN System, as we know. But, actually, there is a culture of human rights, even in China. Even in China, and strongly in Hong Kong, where we see these demonstrations with what China is doing in Hong Kong. And we see it in Lebanon, we see it – you know, we see it in so many different parts of the world, when people are deprived of their rights and what that means. And I think that’s what we have to understand, that we’re going through a bumpy time of populism and nationalism. We’ve been through this before. It’s more a case of holding onto our values, and recognising, as I said, in 2015, not so long ago, we got two global frameworks that are hugely relevant, the 2030 Agenda with its 17 Sustainable Goals, and the Paris Agreement, as interpreted now by the IPCC about 1.5°C. They are the way forward in our recovery, in – you know, in every country, they’re relevant to every country.

Dr Robin Niblett CMG

Thank you for that. Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, I wanted to ask you a different question, especially given the context of large levels of debt that are likely to affect countries around the world, including in Africa, and this is a question from Dina Mufti, and I think there was maybe somebody else, as well. How worried are you about debt burdens, you know, about servicing them, about their impacts on social development and even social unrest, the financial dimension of this? How much of this is a concern for you right now, and what could be done about it?

Ellen Johnson Sirleaf

Very concerning. African nations, in the last decade, did very well to be able to relieve measures, to settle debts, and to become current in meeting debt service obligations. Many have had, over the years, to be able, with this fiscal space that opened, to once again resort to credit means for being able to expand economic activity. They now have to pay back, and, at this particular time, with COVID-19 having hit, it means that they will be called to pay back debt at a time when the economies have shrunk because of these disruptions in supply chains, disruption in productive systems, joblessness, the means to respond to this COVID-19 and all that it means. So, economic growth rates are falling at a time when debt service is rising. Our nations are going to be in a bad, bad situation, and so, we have to be concerned, and this is why President Ramaphosa, in his position as current Chair of the African Union Authority, has appointed three of our eminent professionals to be able to start that process of making the case for debt relief. And, in some cases, we’re calling for a moratorium for certain years. If they don’t get that debt moratorium, many of our countries that have been doing so well, the economies doing well, with us, you know, looking forward to the African Free Trade Agreement, providing the impetus for more regional co-operation and integration. All of those efforts would be dampened, if we don’t resolve the debt problem to enable them to continue to meet the requirements of growth. So, I hope that our messages calling for the relief, calling for moratorium, is taken seriously by the world leaders, by the partners, by the multilateral institutions, and they will bring some relief.

Dr Robin Niblett CMG

Thank you very much. I’m going to – if you’ve got time, a last question from outside and then we will close up this meeting. We’ve not been able to take all the questions, I apologise for that, but I think we’ve got to a good number of the – a good number of them. Pauline Ottey, if you’re there, we’d like to call on you to ask your question about a very important topic, information and misinformation. Pauline, if you’re there?

Pauline Ottey

Yes, I am.

Dr Robin Niblett CMG

Please, go ahead.

Pauline Ottey

Excellencies, sorry, I’ve got voice challenge at this time, I have flu. With the overwhelming wealth of experience, what advice will you give on how to reconcile the postshow and misinformation to the public and international community on COVID situation by political leaders to gain political leverage against [inaudible – 68:12] advice by public health experts, more so in the context of mistrust at both national and international arena, for meaningful multilateral co-operation? Thank you. I hope you had – my voice is croaking up, sorry. Thank you.

Dr Robin Niblett CMG

Well, you did very well, Pauline, I think we…

Pauline Ottey

Thanks a lot.

Dr Robin Niblett CMG

…got that. The impacts of…

Pauline Ottey

Thank you.

Dr Robin Niblett CMG

Thank you, Pauline, impacts of misinformation are – to the public on COVID-19 leveraging, you know, suspicion of science, leveraging public mistrust. Maybe Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, let me go to you first, and then give a last word to Mary, and let’s do it that way round, and then I’ll close up. First to Ellen Johnson Sirleaf.

Ellen Johnson Sirleaf

The government have the responsibility, through the agencies of government that have the mandate to be able to respond to COVID-19, to provide regular, honest, timely information to the public on the effects of this disease, of the virus, on the responses, on the requirements that are needed on the part of citizens, in terms of compliance and co-operation. That is likely to mute a certain way the kinds of speculations from misunderstandings, the accusations that sometimes are levied against officials who are responsible. There will always be, in any society, those who – the sceptics, who will always find a reason why the responses are not effective, that government policies are not addressing the issues properly, that they’re too slow, but I think that can be minimised with what I say, honest, regular, timely information to the public. And I think when there are criticisms and disinformation, I think one has to just again go back and say, you know, anyone who takes the responsibility must do so with a certain amount of understanding, and, if not, and they’re irresponsible, then I think the government would have to, in a very peaceful and legal way, try to address that misinformation from wherever it comes.

Pauline Ottey

Thank you.

Dr Robin Niblett CMG

Thank you very much for those. So, over to you, Mary, this – your answer to that question and any closing point you wanted to make.

Mary Robinson

Okay. Well, again, building on what Ellen said, there is a lot of misinformation in so many different ways, undermining trust in information, but, actually, I believe COVID is possibly helping us there, because it doesn’t listen to misinformation. It’s a pandemic. It just hits, and those countries and those governments that are not listening to the science and taking the tough decisions are exposed now. They’re exposed in the United States and different states, and they’re – you know, the states that are coping better are very angry with the states that aren’t, you know, and there’s almost an argument, very strongly, going on in the United States. Look at Brazil, where, again, they – so, I’m rather hopeful that at least that part of misinformation may be exposed, and people will begin, as I said, to trust two things. Trust the science, and trust that government has to play a role in our countries, and have the responsibility for the basics of life, and take that responsibility. I think these are the two strong lessons that we can draw.

And The Elders always have to bring hope, and I think maybe I should quote the wonderful expression that Archbishop Tutu ended up with when he was accused of being an optimist, and he said, “Oh, no,” he said, “I’m not an optimist, I’m a prisoner of hope.” And that’s how I approach the complex issues that we’re dealing with at the moment. It is not easy, and, indeed, COVID has really, you know, given us huge problems, Ellen mentioned the debt problem in Africa. COVID is not a great leveller, it has exacerbated the inequalities, but it has shown us very clearly that business as usual, as we remember it, was not equal and was not bringing us to a safe future. So, we have to, in the words of the UN, build back better, and that means taking account of the need for a global recovery response that helps developing countries, the need for all action to be focused on clean, green jobs and nature-based solutions, so that we live with Mother Nature in a sustainable way, and stay at that level of 1.5o. This is a time when young people have to lead, because we’ve made so many mistakes with our business as usual. I have great hope that young people will do far better, if we just give them the chance.

Dr Robin Niblett CMG

Thank you for those strong words at the end, and returning to the climate theme, which is so important. And, as I look back at my little notes from this conversation, I realise that, in your remarks, you’ve touched on pretty much all of the core themes that we’ve set ourselves for our second century, which starts, in essence, next year, green recovery, which you just mentioned there, Mary, how to avoid the, kind of, geopolitical standoff, that either/or that President Sirleaf was mentioning there, she’s – I think you talked about your ‘partnership cycle’, I thought was a very interesting phrase. Obviously the references to health, and Chatham House has put universal health at the core of its work in – on global health, the whole dimension of international economic co-operation and making sure that the poorer countries of the world are very much included in those models, which, again, President Sirleaf mentioned and which my colleagues are working on at Chatham House, and the whole nature of democracy, how we can strengthen it, what drives trust, how you take tough decisions, and the concept of inclusive governance, which I think is one that we have an initiative on right now, which, again, touches on many of your remarks that this – we can’t just leave it all to governments, all of us have to play a role in the response.

And I want to do a shoutout for my colleague, Patricia Lewis, who runs our International Security programme, who’s been sitting quietly in the background in case I lost my Wi-Fi. She’s leading our work on resilience, and how we make sure we build up in a truly resilient way in the future, which is incredibly important, as well. So, I think, with your remarks, you’ve made us, as well, prisoners of hope. Thank you very much, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, thank you, Mary Robinson, for giving us the benefit of your wisdom and your experience, and right at the end of our centenary week, and laying out some challenges for us to pick up as we go forward. And thank you to all of our members and guests who joined us for this call, for the very good questions. Sorry I didn’t get to them all, as always, but hopefully, you had a chance to read them, even if they weren’t asked. Thank you very much. We look forward to seeing you in person soon. Good luck with all your good work.

Mary Robinson

Okay.

Dr Robin Niblett CMG

Goodbye, goodbye. Thank you. Bye now.