SECRETARY-GENERAL CONFIDENT THAT UNITED STATES AND UNITED NATIONS CAN FIND WAY TO MUTUALLY SUPPORTIVE RELATIONSHIP
Press Release
SG/SM/6754
SECRETARY-GENERAL CONFIDENT THAT UNITED STATES AND UNITED NATIONS CAN FIND WAY TO MUTUALLY SUPPORTIVE RELATIONSHIP
19981016 In Washington Address to Empower America, Kofi Annan Says UN Offers Crucial Comparative Advantages to Member StatesFollowing is the text of an address made by Secretary-General Kofi Annan to the Fall Conference of the non-governmental organization Empower America on the theme, "Why Conservatives Should Support the United Nations", at the Willard Intercontinental in Washington, D.C. today:
It is a distinct pleasure to join you today. This is my fifth trip to Washington since taking office. On previous visits, I met with the Clinton Administration, with members of the Senate and House from both sides of the aisle, and with the diplomatic corps. This visit is devoted to you, the leaders of Empower America, and to freedom of expression, which I will speak about later today before the World Press Freedom Committee.
I would like to start by saying how much I like the title of William Bennett's new book, The Death of Outrage. I must admit that I have not read it yet, but the title says a great deal. After all, the United Nations spends much of its time trying to rouse the world's conscience.
In any case, it is another book of Dr. Bennett's -- the renowned Book of Virtues -- from which I would like to take my cue here today. Parables, legends and morality tales are indeed among our most effective teachers. My visit today, for example, recalls the old saying that if the mountain would not come to Mohammed, then Mohammed must go to the mountain. Such stories have a clear lesson for us in this room, above all, that of coexistence and cooperation. The United Nations and the United States must face this world together.
If myths are powerful, it is equally true that myths can be powerfully damaging. In this, I speak from lengthy experience, for there are more myths about the United Nations than possibly any other organization on the world scene today.
Myth number one is that the United Nations intrudes upon national sovereignty. In the United States, this takes several forms, from those who fear constraints on United States military might to those who oppose limits on free enterprise, to those who think the United Nations has designs on United States territory and resources. But, working together with other countries at the United Nations is an exercise of sovereignty, not a limitation on it. Despite globalization and the emergence of more and more problems that transcend borders -- which I call "problems without passports" -- nothing, I repeat nothing, has yet challenged the status of the State as the cornerstone of international relations.
The United Nations is where sovereign States can come together, of their own accord and free will, for pragmatic problem-solving and burden-sharing. The United Nations Charter itself is one of the strongest safeguards of sovereignty, enshrining it is a central principle and giving the United States special power as a permanent member of the Security Council.
Myth number two is that the United Nations is concerned above all else with peacekeeping. Peacekeeping operations claim the headlines, of course. But, by far the lion's share of our budget and personnel are devoted to the lower-profile work of preventing conflict; helping countries to create jobs and raise standards of living; delivering relief aid to victims of famine, war and natural disasters; protecting refugees; promoting literacy; and fighting disease. To most people around the world, this is the face of the United Nations.
Myth number three is that the United States still stands alone at the United Nations, voting regularly in a minority against a motley majority of autocrats and unsavoury regimes. Jeane Kirkpatrick delivered a famous speech to this effect in 1981. Since then, of course, the world has seen a wave of democratization, a wave that is not complete, but which has, increasingly, isolated tyrants and others who fail to submit to the will of the people.
Moreover, according to the State Department's analysis of voting patterns, the United States and a majority of the General Assembly are on the same side of the issues as never before. In the Security Council, the United States has used its veto just three times since 1991, all on questions relating to the Middle East. The convergence of views has been nothing short of startling.
There are more such myths. I would prefer to leave them behind, once and for all, since they are a terrible burden on our work. Instead, let us focus on reality: on what the United Nations really does; on realism in international relations, and on the reasons why conservatives should give us their support.
- 3 - Press Release SG/SM/6754 16 October 1998
I do not want to overdramatize how much is at stake. But what we make of the United States-United Nations relationship matters greatly to millions upon millions of people, here in the United States and around the world. That relationship needs new oxygen, a new lease on life. Conservative Americans are among the key players, and it is to you, I now turn with an appeal for common sense and common cause.
I could cite polls that show rising public support for the United Nations in the United States. Instead, I would like to play to our strongest suits: values and interests. Values such as human dignity; democracy; human rights and the peaceful settlement of disputes. And interests such as free trade, open markets and economic development.
In short, American values are United Nations values, American interests are United Nations interests, and vice versa. Consider what the United Nations does on a range of high-profile issues of concern to the United States.
To ensure that democracy prevails over despots, the United Nations has provided electoral assistance to scores of countries, helping them to hold elections and referendums, draft constitutions, strengthen judicial systems and uphold the rule of law.
The United Nations is second to none in its concern for human rights. It has led the way in creating an impressive body of human rights law, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, whose fiftieth anniversary we commemorate this year. This is a great success, on paper. A new United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, the former President of Ireland, Ms. Mary Robinson, is working hard to bring those rights to life, where they count, in people's daily lives.
To promote free trade and open markets, the United Nations works to advance market-oriented reforms, reduce paperwork and regulation, protect copyrights and property rights, promote entrepreneurship and the spread of technology. It helps governments develop business-friendly legislation, and defines the technical and legal standards that are the soft infrastructure of the global economy.
Indeed, the United Nations has developed a stronger appreciation for the private sector's expertise, entrepreneurial spirit, and unparalleled ability to create jobs and wealth. I have done everything I can to promote close ties since taking office. I have met regularly with business groups such as the International Chamber of Commerce, and I am heartened by their enthusiasm about getting more deeply involved in our work. Put simply, the goals of business and the goals of the United Nations can, and should be mutually supportive; we need each other.
- 4 - Press Release SG/SM/6754 16 October 1998
To combat the scourge of illegal narcotics, the United Nations strives to make sure that drugs are available only for medical and scientific purposes, and supports programmes which encourage alternative crops or livelihoods for farmers of illicit drug crops. The well-known Italian crime-fighter Pino Arlacchi is now in charge, and I encourage you to watch his efforts.
And to resolve conflicts, the United Nations employs both quiet diplomacy and peacekeepers. Have we been satisfied with all of the results? Of course not. We have had some sobering experiences. But, let us look also at El Salvador, Namibia and Mozambique, where peacekeepers have helped war-torn societies regain stability and set out on the path of economic growth. Or Guatemala, where the United Nations helped end a 36-year civil war and is now responsible for verifying implementation of a complex set of peace accords.
The common thread running through all these endeavours is that of the United States working within the United Nations -- and with the United Nations -- in concert, around the globe, on a broad agenda of issues where American interests coincide with those of global security and prosperity. Despite setbacks and unmet goals, we see a solid record of achievement.
American leadership under Presidents of both parties has been an indispensable ingredient. This should be no surprise to you. But, it is true that conservative and Republican contributions have sometimes been overlooked. Many people remember President Roosevelt's original vision but lose sight of the fact that Presidents Eisenhower and Bush presided over some of the United Nations' most important successes. Conservatives have been caricatured as isolationists, but we should never forget that Arthur Vandenberg became a leading advocate of international engagement and international organization.
Earlier this month, 11 prominent Republicans -- including former Attorney General Richard Thornburgh, who came to know the United Nations from the inside as Under-Secretary-General for Administration and Management -- said that the United Nations can advance important United States interests and deserves support.
"The United States must be fully engaged", they declared on behalf of a coalition of government officials, business, labour, religious and humanitarian organizations.
So why has our relationship become so problematic? Why have we reached such an impasse? I have already mentioned some of the myths and misconceptions that have gotten in the way of United States-United Nations ties. Ideological and political differences have played a role, as have problems with a few peacekeeping missions, most notably Somalia.
- 5 - Press Release SG/SM/6754 16 October 1998
Another fault-line over the years has been your keenly felt sense that the United Nations was not delivering value for money. Some of you in this room have been among our most severe critics in this regard, calling for sweeping, top-to-bottom reforms.
Today I can say to you unreservedly, that we have demonstrated our seriousness about reform for everyone with goodwill to see. Most fair-minded people will agree that there has been more reform and more significant change throughout the United Nations in the past year and a half than ever before. We have today a leaner, more efficient, more effective United Nations. This is not to say that we have finished; reform is a process, not an event. But, it is time to stop using reform as a justification for withholding your support, including financial support.
I understand that budget negotiations between the Administration and Congress are at a critical juncture. I am pleased that International Monetary Fund funding is about to be approved. While we can have a fair-minded debate over International Monetary Fund policies, there is no doubting that replenishing its lending capacity is an essential step towards halting the contagion effect of the global financial crisis.
But the news for United Nations funding is grim indeed. It appears that the United States will squeak by, paying just enough to avoid losing its vote in the General Assembly, which happens to nations who fall two years behind in their contributions. I wish to stress that this is something that happens automatically, under Article 19 of the United Nations Charter; it is not something that other Member States do to others.
So while the United States will avoid this fate for this year, on the larger question -- its legal commitment and moral obligation to the United Nations and the 184 other Member States -- the United States will have failed.
Conservatives believe in the sanctity of treaties and contracts; they take a strong stand on responsibility and morality as well. I would like to think that you are as disturbed as I am by this outcome.
Great nations keep their word. They do not inflict wounds on their own prestige or undermine their claim to leadership at crucial moments in world affairs. I can only hope that when Congress reconvenes, we can get this issue behind us. The United States needs an effective United Nations; the United Nations needs an engaged United States.
Abba Eban, the former Foreign Minister of Israel and now an elder statesman once said, "History teaches us that men and nations behave wisely once they have exhausted all other alternatives".
- 6 - Press Release SG/SM/6754 16 October 1998
In today's world, there is less and less time to consider those alternatives. We confront a mass of urgent problems and challenges. Globalization has brought great gains and created wondrous opportunities.
But it has also brought enormous costs, which could produce a backlash of social unrest and political instability. We have a responsibility to act wisely, sooner rather than later.
To do so, both conservatives and the United Nations will have to keep changing. We are both -- conservatives and the United Nations -- lampooned as resistant to change. It is said that bureaucracies such as the United Nations have a unique ability to be simultaneously inert and self-sustaining. As for conservatives, as Bob Dole writes in his new collection of political wit, they "refuse to look at a new moon out of respect for the old one".
Such caricatures are wrong. Such myths are untrue. The reality is a United Nations and United States of shared values and shared interests.
There is no doubting the capacity and the commitment of the United States as a world leader. But there is also no doubt that the United Nations offers crucial comparative advantages for its Member States, including the United States.
So let us not let outdated practices and perceptions obscure our shared vision. And let us not let fear or pessimism deter us from our path: the path of partnership. Despite the current political and economic turmoil, global conditions today offer unprecedented prospects for peace and prosperity.
The major Powers are at peace with one another. There is widespread acceptance of the basic tenets of democratic governance. Technological advances are making possible, a free and unfettered global flow of information and ideas. If we have not yet fully harnessed this potential, it remains only for us to continue trying.
I am confident that we, the United States and the United Nations, and in particular conservatives and the United Nations, can find our way to a new and mutually supportive relationship. Global interdependencies are knitting us together; they pervade our lives and bind for us a common fate. The United Nations is here to serve. An urgent agenda awaits. Let us get on with it.
* *** *