A/59/329 authorities and the openness and active cooperation of the principal political and civil society actors in the crisis, prerequisites for the credibility and objectivity of his mission. During his visit, the Special Rapporteur met with the country’s highest officials, including President Laurent Gbagbo and the President of the Economic and Social Council, Mr. Laurent Dona Fologo. He was particularly keen to integrate his visit in the democratic process under way by meeting with the country’s main political groups, including Forces nouvelles. He also met with victim populations, representatives of civil society, human rights defenders, diplomats and representatives of the communities concerned. In addition to Abidjan, the Special Rapporteur travelled to Yamoussoukro, Bouaké, Duékoué, Gagnoa and Guiglo. 14. At the end of his visit, the Special Rapporteur concluded that, owing to its strong inter-ethnic network, there is no tradition of xenophobia in Côte d’Ivoire, although it has experienced ethnic tensions during its history. However, it has become caught up, in the context of the current crisis, in a dynamic of xenophobia. In his view, this dynamic stems from a concatenation of several factors, which, if they are not adequately analysed and if proper solutions are not found urgently, may lead to the emergence of real xenophobia, that is a system in which the perception of the other has a profound impact on individual consciousness and behaviour, shaping social, economic and political relations and being reflected in laws and institutions. The first factor identified by the Special Rapporteur is the ethnic tension that arose in 1990 with the transition, in a context of multi-ethnicity, from a one-party system to a multiparty system. Precisely in this context of democratic transition, the instrumentalization of the ethnic group in politics and the media constituted a temptation that politicians were unable to resist in their pursuit of power. Objectively, this temptation to exploit the ethnic factor found ideological expression in the emergence of the concept of ivoirité (“Ivorianness”), which, in a climate of political competition marked by ethnic tension, was given an ethnicist interpretation and application, whatever the “cultural” motives proclaimed by its originators. This concept profoundly influenced the political debate, perverted the democratic process and gradually reshaped the perception of inter-ethnic relations. Then, the outbreak of war, in a context of aggravated ethnicism and communal tension, had a radicalizing effect, accelerating this dynamic of xenophobia. Lastly, the Special Rapporteur believes that the tendency he observed during his stay to confuse ethnicity and religion, the feeling of impunity on the part of those responsible for acts of xenophobic violence, notably members of the security services, but also some factions of Forces nouvelles, and the conflictual and antagonistic interpretation of cultural and ethnic diversity are particularly worrisome manifestations of the role of ethnic factors in the conflict in Côte d’Ivoire. 15. Given the scale of the political crisis and the split in the inter-ethnic fabric, the Special Rapporteur underlines the need for all those involved in the crisis in Côte d’Ivoire, including the most senior political leaders, to broadcast a clear message acknowledging the risk of a division along ethnic lines and asserting their resolve to combat this dynamic of xenophobia in all its forms and to punish all acts of violence. He also believes that any lasting political solution to the crisis facing Côte d’Ivoire must be accompanied by a democratically prepared programme to rebuild coexistence and intercommunity dialogue in Côte d’Ivoire, because this would contribute to rebuilding the deeply torn inter-ethnic and social fabric. The Special Rapporteur also stresses the fact that the imperative of rebuilding coexistence among the communities must be the yardstick in analysing and solving 9