TRANSCRIPT OF PRESS CONFERENCE OF SECRETARY-GENERAL KOFI ANNAN AT HEADQUARTERS, 29 JULY 1998

Press Release
SG/SM/6656

TRANSCRIPT OF PRESS CONFERENCE OF SECRETARY-GENERAL KOFI ANNAN AT HEADQUARTERS, 29 JULY 1998

The SECRETARY-GENERAL: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. We have just held a successful third high-level meeting between the United Nations and regional organizations, with the active participation of a large number of regional organizations and their senior representatives. I trust that you have seen by now the concluding statement which I made at the last session. I will now try to highlight for you some of the main points that appeared particularly significant to me.

The meeting examined the potential for interaction and cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations in the field of conflict prevention. In particular, we discussed the challenge of conflict prevention: we viewed how the United Nations and regional organizations are responding to meet this challenge and identified possible areas of future interaction and cooperation in this area. We all felt that the challenge of conflict prevention goes to the very heart of our shared mission.

There was wide recognition of the critical need to develop a culture of prevention and specific forms of action and interaction. We discussed how our organizations can work together to achieve complementarity and share experience in this field. We also agreed that the key to conflict prevention lies with the Member States and their support for early external involvement to defuse disputes and crises.

Everyone present agreed that great emphasis needs to be put on how we develop specific modalities and more effective cooperation in the field of conflict prevention that are practical and implementable. They also stressed that we need to ensure practical follow-up of the meeting, and we are going to have a working-level meeting before the end of the year to follow up on some of the things we discussed this morning.

I am very pleased that there is a genuine will to cooperate and that we are going to hopefully see an improved relationship between the United Nations and regional organizations.

I will now take your questions.

QUESTION: On questions of follow-up, specifically what measures will be required for a successful follow-up?

The SECRETARY-GENERAL: I think what we have decided to do is to organize a working-level meeting for them to really look at the decisions we took and to determine what next steps ought to be taken. There are certain areas in which we are already working and which we can continue to enhance -- exchange of information, for example. In the room we discussed Kosovo, and I asked who is in touch with whom, what information are they sharing and who is in daily contact with each other. So in some areas things are happening already. What we are trying to do is to enhance that cooperation.

- 2 - Press Release SG/SM/6656 29 July 1998

QUESTION: What would you, or the United Nations, do to avoid the situation where the United Nations is being blamed for putting too much or too little into conflict prevention and peacekeeping? The second question is, three weeks ago we saw the World Health Organization (WHO) report which said that there is a lack of preparation for people going on the spot, before going. And yesterday the Spokesman said that the civilian population [in casualties] this year has surpassed for the first time the military and the police staff. Does the United Nations itself share a responsibility for avoiding such tragedies?

The SECRETARY-GENERAL: I think you have raised a very good question. Let me start with the first part: What should the United Nations do to avoid being blamed for failure -- either non-intervention or interventions which are not effective? I do not know how long you have been in this building, but you are going to discover very soon that whenever there is a crisis and there is a demand that something needs to be done, that something ends up here at the United Nations and with the Secretariat. I think that what is important -- and I think the Council has begun to do this -- is to look at the mandates of some of these peace operations very carefully, and not only look at the mandates carefully, but we should be given the resources which match the task. We should also do very serious analysis as to the nature of the crisis and how it is likely to develop, and, above all, assess critically the threat and risk factors involved. We have seen situations where some governments have been reluctant to put in soldiers because they feel it would be risky. But the aid workers, the humanitarian workers -- the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and the Red Cross -- are on the ground, doing what they have to do. And in some cases they have paid the ultimate price.

I think it is also important, apart from having the tools and resources necessary, that we should really get the message out that attacking peacekeepers, attacking aid workers is a very serious and heinous crime, and that the international community will take whatever action it can to deal with those responsible. And this is an issue that came up in Rome when they were discussing the establishment of a criminal court.

On the question of United Nations blame, obviously one can train some of the staff before they go to the field. Courses are now being offered to prepare people before they go to the field. Some are outside the humanitarian agencies; others are being organized. In fact, three weeks ago I was invited to go and open a course at Hunter College organized by Kevin Cahill, who is a former state health commissioner. This is a course that is being organized with Hunter and the University of Dublin; several of our staff, particularly from UNHCR and others, have participated in that course.

But I have asked for a review of this whole situation, which I intend to discuss with the Security Council. Of course, some judgements will have to be made as to what risks we should take in order to assist. And, in some of these

- 3 - Press Release SG/SM/6656 29 July 1998

difficult situations, are the risks worth the benefits, or should we reconsider our whole approach? I am really concerned about the level of casualties that we have taken this year.

QUESTION: Mr. Secretary-General, under your leadership the United Nations is in the process of being reorganized. Some of the regional organizations, like the Organization of American States (OAS), have the legacy of the World War. Don't you feel that those organizations should proceed in step with the United Nations, trying to reorganize themselves instead of -- The SECRETARY-GENERAL: I don't know about the specific situation of the Organization of American States, but some of the regional organizations are taking a critical look at themselves. I can only agree with you that it is healthy for organizations to look at themselves periodically to see what they are doing right and what they are doing wrong, and to ask the questions, "What should we be doing? What should our business be?" and not what our business is. I can only agree with you that organizations should periodically go through this sort of questioning, restructuring and reform for them to remain effective and relevant.

QUESTION: On Angola, there have been a number of reports over the last couple of days that some of Angola's neighbours are prepared to support the Government militarily in its fight against the National Union for the Total Independence of Angola (UNITA). Do you have any indication that that is true? And will Ambassador Brahimi be visiting some of Angola's neighbours as well to sort of try and urge them to stay out of it?

The SECRETARY-GENERAL: I have seen some of the reports, but I have no confirmation that it is indeed true. I will be talking to some of the leaders in the region. Mr. Brahimi will not only visit Angola to talk to President dos Santos and Dr. Savimbi; he will visit the neighbouring countries as well. And then when he comes back we will reassess the situation further.

QUESTION: What is your assessment of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) report on Iraq's nuclear capabilities? Apparently, Iraq and the United States disagree. I don't know how that is possible, but what is your assessment?

The SECRETARY-GENERAL: You are surprised, are you? Let me say that this is an issue that the Council is going to take up, and I would not want to prejudge what the Council will decide. But I think the report seems to be clear that, even though Iraq has not been forthcoming in all the areas that they would like it to be forthcoming in, they do not believe it has the capability now -- that it possesses nuclear capability now. Although, as I indicated, the talent may still be there for them to reactivate this in the future. But I think I will leave the Council to tackle that issue; those decisions belong to them.

- 4 - Press Release SG/SM/6656 29 July 1998

QUESTION: Do you fear a deterioration in the agreement you worked out if sanctions are not lifted by October, though, because of this report and the subsequent --

The SECRETARY-GENERAL: There have been a couple of major events, like the VX that was found on the missile; the letter Mr. Butler [Executive Chairman of the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM)] wrote to the Council about the piece of document which was not handed over to them. And Mr. Butler himself should be in Baghdad next week to have further discussions with them. I think we will have a better sense of what is going on when he comes back. I think we also have to be quite clear on one thing: the agreement I reached with the Iraqi authorities was not designed to solve all problems and eliminate all conflicts between UNSCOM and Iraq, or the United Nations and Iraq. It was about access, to remove the impediments for the inspectors, and for them to gain access, principally to the presidential sites -- which they did, and they have gone beyond. And Mr. Butler himself has indicated that access has not been the problem. But it was not intended to resolve all problems.

QUESTION: It is one full year now since you announced the set of United Nations reform proposals. Are you satisfied with the way reforms have gone? And how would you assess the situation of the Organization now as compared to a year ago?

The SECRETARY-GENERAL: I think we have made considerable progress since we initiated the reform process, and quite a lot has been achieved. There are areas where we are still in discussions with Member States -- some critical areas: the "sunset" clause, where apparently, I understand, the Member States don't want the word "sunset". They came up with a different expression: they prefer "time-limit" clauses, and not "sunset" clauses. That is still being discussed. We are also looking at the change in the budget: the question of switching to resource-based budgeting, which is also going to take time. And of course we are having final discussions on the Millennium Summit, which I expect to go forward.

But on most of the organizational and administrative and efficiency projects, I think we have moved ahead quite nicely. And of course Security Council reform is something which is on everybody's mind, but the Member States will have to decide.

QUESTION: Specifically on United Nations management: are you satisfied with the progress in United Nations management?

The SECRETARY-GENERAL: I think we have made considerable progress, yes.

QUESTION: Mr. Secretary-General, in terms of the report published today in the Financial Times about the allegations against UNHCR, how do you

- 5 - Press Release SG/SM/6656 29 July 1998

perceive them? What plans do you have in terms of taking it forward in the light of the fact that Scandinavian countries and Britain have already expressed grave concerns about possible financial misdoings in terms of confidence in Mrs. Ogata?

The SECRETARY-GENERAL: First of all, I have not received the report of the auditors, as you perhaps were informed this morning. The report was mainly based on the preliminary report of the auditors, and usually this preliminary report goes through various redrafts following responses and questions posed to the organization concerned. I have spoken to Mrs. Ogata about this issue this morning -- as you know, she is in New York -- and I have asked for additional information from UNHCR, which I hope to receive very shortly. What I can say is that Mrs. Ogata in a very difficult period has done very well and provided good leadership to the organization, which has more or less doubled since she took over. So I have confidence in what she has done and what she is trying to do with the organization, but I will need to look at all the papers and the facts when I receive them before I enter into the details you are trying to draw me into.

QUESTION: It's a two-part question --

The SECRETARY-GENERAL: We have eight questions and nine minutes. Make it a one-part question.

QUESTION: It comes out of your meeting with Prime Minister Guterres of Portugal yesterday. The first is on the question of East Timor. He essentially, as I understand it, asked you to push the Indonesians to agree to a negotiation process without preconditions. Up until now, they have always said they want the issue of sovereignty resolved before they are prepared to discuss other things. Are you prepared to ask the Indonesians to do that?

The SECRETARY-GENERAL: Well, first of all, the Prime Minister did not ask me that in specific terms. I am the one who has been asking the parties to show some flexibility so that we can move forward and make some progress. I am hoping that when we meet next week they will show the required flexibility so that we can make some progress. I think there has been a shift in the position of the Indonesian Government, and we will see what happens next week.

QUESTION: Do you detect a shift in the position of the Portuguese Government?

The SECRETARY-GENERAL: I am not unhappy with the position of the Portuguese Government at this stage.

QUESTION: Just for a second, back to the regional organizations. To what level could you agree with the kind of competition among them, regarding the Kosovo conflict, for example? In my opinion, it is a real inflation of recipes

- 6 - Press Release SG/SM/6656 29 July 1998

that are created through, let's say, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), Western European Union, Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and maybe some others.

The SECRETARY-GENERAL: This is an issue we discussed quite frankly at the meeting, that we should really understand that each of us has a comparative advantage and we should really work on the basis of complementarity and subsidiarity, and that in certain situations the advantage may belong to a subregional organization, a regional organization or the United Nations, and we should really let the organization with the best capabilities take the lead. I agree with you that one has to be concerned in situations where you have a multiplicity of mediators. That in itself can create confusion.

The problem is not that there are many organizations, or several organizations, operating in a specific crisis. The important thing is that they be coordinated and they share information, and that there is a clear division of labour as to who is doing what. The High Commissioner for Refugees knows its role on the ground, the human rights people should know that NATO is doing military and contingency planning and the Contact Group is handling the negotiations. I can understand why, when one looks at it, there seem to be so many players, and in the end you wonder who is doing what, but there may be some logic to it that is not apparent. This is what I can share with you.

QUESTION: Quick question on Sierra Leone between today's meeting and tomorrow's meeting. There has been a successful, obviously, African operation there. The Government has been restored, but now we run into the problem of continued human rights abuses and terrorism, basically, on the part of the rebels. Is there any discussion in some of these groups -- many of them do not want to go beyond restoring order, but when it comes to stamping out the kind of violence that is simply going to create another round of civil war -- in general, where do you think you stand now in Sierra Leone?

The SECRETARY-GENERAL: I think in fact the meeting did discuss a structural adjustment that will consolidate peace and really allow governments to establish good government and rule-based government. On Sierra Leone we do have some problems. There is still some fighting going on. I spoke to the President this morning, and, as you know, the Nigerian authorities have flown Foday Sanko [leader of the Revolutionary United Front] back to Sierra Leone, and I was told by the President that when he arrived, he appealed to his supporters to stop the killing, to stop maiming people, and that he had not asked them to do that and that it was not in the national interest. Will this hold or not? I also discussed with the President the question of those on trial and the fact that it was important to ensure due process. We are hoping that tomorrow's meeting not only will focus on raising funds for demobilization and reintegration but will go beyond, to the reconstruction stage and really prepare the ground for the international community to assist

- 7 - Press Release SG/SM/6656 29 July 1998

Sierra Leone to reconstruct and rebuild its society and establish its institutions.

But what I am pleased about is that at the meeting with the regional organizations this issue came up, and the need for us really to be aware of the importance of structural adjustments that will help consolidate peace.

QUESTION: To go back to the issue of staff security, as you noted, the United Nations has been sending humanitarian workers into areas where Member States refuse to send in soldiers. Do you anticipate a situation where the United Nations might say, "No, we can't send humanitarian workers into this area regardless of the crisis, it is too dangerous"?

The SECRETARY-GENERAL: No, I think we should. In fact, the review I have asked for could lead to putting us in that situation. Take Afghanistan, for example, where the international community has pulled back drastically. We have also cut back our activities, maintaining life-sustaining activities only. But I think that you have raised a question here where not only should we say, "It's too dangerous, we are not going in", but we should also be able to say that it has become too dangerous for us to operate and to be effective; it has become too dangerous for us to risk that many staff, and it is not worth the effort. We should be able to do that, yes.

QUESTION: How do you view the reluctance of some countries -- including my own, Norway -- to continue to supply troops to United Nations peacekeeping operations?

The SECRETARY-GENERAL: I think by that you are referring to the Norwegian decision to draw down its troops in southern Lebanon -- the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL)? Well, I think there may be different reasons why governments may not want to participate in one particular operation or the other, and the reasons differ. In some cases it may be the sense that this is too far away from our concerns, as we don't want to get involved. In some situations, it may be that the government feels that we have devoted so much in time and resources to the crisis and we don't think it's making any difference, and therefore we are going to withdraw. For others, the risk factor -- they don't want to take the risk of having casualties come back. And there may be other reasons.

QUESTION: A question on Algeria. The panel of eminent persons is still in the country gathering information, and tragically, the killing continues in Algeria. In the end, what do you hope this exercise will achieve? What will they achieve?

The SECRETARY-GENERAL: I really cannot say until they come back with their report. I hope that the fact that they are there would be the beginning of a new opening. I hope that, by being able to talk to people and travel

- 8 - Press Release SG/SM/6656 29 July 1998

freely and report on the situation -- and, as I have indicated, I will make their report public -- it will help the situation in Algeria. But I cannot tell you what the report will contain until they complete their work and give me their report.

QUESTION: What is your reaction to the elections in Cambodia, particularly the charges of electoral fraud?

The SECRETARY-GENERAL: Yes, I have read those charges. I think the observers did indicate that there were some problems and some difficulties, but by and large the assessment coming out of the international observers is that it was reasonably free and fair.

QUESTION: On Lockerbie, obviously, with heads of regional organizations present here -- the Organization of African Unity (OAU) in particular and the Arab League -- did you have the chance to discuss with them the latest developments, particularly that the United States and the United Kingdom seem to be ready to explore the possibility of having the trial held in The Hague, and how do you see the formalities of such an agreement? Would you then personally be involved and do you see them turning over the suspects before they become accused? Can you share with us in some detail how you see this playing out, given the new developments?

The SECRETARY-GENERAL: Let me first of all say that I have not had time yet to discuss with the head of the OAU and the League of Arab States representative. I will be seeing them later; yesterday and today were devoted to the group meetings, and I will see some of them later.

Secondly, no concrete understanding has emerged yet as to what will eventually happen to the trial of the Lockerbie two. Discussions are still going on, and when decisions are made or understandings are reached, I will then determine what role the United Nations has to play and what specifically the Secretary-General can do to facilitate the implementation of the Council decisions and the trial.

* *** *