TRANSCRIPT OF PRESS CONFERENCE OF ASSEMBLY PRESIDENT THEO-BEN GURIBAB (NAMIBIA) AT HEADQUARTERS, 14 FEBRUARY

Press Release
GA/SM/152

TRANSCRIPT OF PRESS CONFERENCE OF ASSEMBLY PRESIDENT THEO-BEN GURIBAB (NAMIBIA) AT HEADQUARTERS, 14 FEBRUARY

The President Thank you, Under-Secretary-General Hogen, for organizing yet another press conference for me to meet with the United Nations Correspondents Association (UNCA).

Ladies and gentlemen, when I met with you last September, I stated that I was especially honoured to be presiding over the fifty-fourth session of the General Assembly, as it dealt with some 170-plus agenda items. I thought I should come back at this first press conference at the start of the new millennium as the General Assembly finalizes the preparations for convening the Millennium Summit and Assembly. Now that I have been on the job for exactly five months today, I thought I should report on the progress, and no doubt some setbacks, with regard to the preparations for the Summit, as well as highlight the ongoing work on other issues before the Assembly.

First, with regard to the Millennium Summit, on Wednesday, 9 February, I held another in a series of informal consultations and brainstorming sessions. I intend to communicate to the delegations of Member States my understanding of what would be the parametres for carrying the process forward. However, those consultations revealed a broad convergence of views on a number of important issues, including co-chairmanship by the current presidency of the fifty-fourth session and the presidency of the fifty-fifth session; the overarching theme for the Summit, “The United Nations in the twenty-first century”; and the dates for the Summit being 6 to 8 September.

As to what should emerge from the Summit, there was again general agreement that the outcome -- the final document -- should be robust and concise and should avoid what happened at the end of the fiftieth anniversary of the United Nations. It should be a document that would propose action on the major issues confronting the Organization in the twenty-first century.

There is still no consensus on the sub-themes. I am sure that you correspondents have heard the different sub-themes that have been mentioned. I would simply enumerate some of them. In addition to one sub-theme that all the Member States are agreed upon, namely, “Peace, security and disarmament” -- there are sub-themes such as “Development and poverty eradication”, “Globalization”, “Strengthening of United Nations institutions”, “Human rights”, and so on. Even though the selection of those issues that would become sub- themes is not too controversial, it is just a matter of how to arrange the format of discussions that would enable the heads of State or government to deal with as many sub-themes as they would feel necessary.

So it is a question of determining the overall format of the Summit -- that is, the practical arrangements for the holding of the plenaries where heads of State or government will deliver brief statements, as well as interactive round tables in which they will participate. In other words, it is a two-tiered format: one of plenaries and the other an interactive arrangement where the Heads of State or Government would meet and exchange views on such sub-themes as they would collectively feel they would like to exchange views on. I wish to inform you that informal consultations on all these issues relating to the Millennium Summit will be held in due course.

About the causes of conflict in Africa: In adopting resolution 54/234 on 22 December 1999, the Assembly requested its President to “put into effect the establishment of the open-ended ad hoc working group to monitor the implementation of the recommendations made by the Secretary-General in his report ... on the causes of conflict and the promotion of durable peace and sustainable development in Africa”. The Secretary-General's report is contained in document A/52/871. In fulfilling that request, I recently designated two vice-chairpersons of that working group, which I chair. They are Ambassador Kishore Mahbubani of Singapore and Ambassador Inocencio Arias of Spain.

As President of the General Assembly, I welcomed the Security Council initiative under the presidency of the United States to devote January, as the “Month of Africa”, to examining problems confronting that continent. As you will recall, the Council considered the HIV/AIDS pandemic, the African refugee crisis, as well as the conflict situations in Angola, Burundi and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Seven heads of State from eastern and southern Africa attended the landmark Security Council meeting on the Democratic Republic of the Congo, which I also had the opportunity to address in my capacity as Foreign Minister of Namibia.

I believe strongly that the work that the Working Group on Causes of Conflict in Africa can, and will, undertake will contribute immensely towards making the African continent a land of peace and prosperity for all its peoples. The General Assembly attaches high priority to this issue, and the Working Group is scheduled to hold its first meeting in March.

About Security Council reform: Last December, after extensive consultations that I conducted, 85 delegations addressed the General Assembly when it devoted four meetings to a debate on Security Council reform and enlargement. Member States debated the “Question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council and related matters”. Given that heightened interest in the subject, the Working Group on Security Council reform will meet over the coming months to examine the extent to which differences can be narrowed on this vital issue. As you know, as Chairman of the Working Group, I am being deputized by the Ambassadors of Sweden and Sri Lanka. This is a subject that you are all, I am sure, fully conversant with. We are now into the seventh year of the consideration of the reform and enlargement of the Security Council. I sincerely hope that I can make a contribution in this regard. Clearly, this is one of the main challenges that the United Nations is going to be facing now and in the coming years.

Financing for development, another major area of concern to the international community and to the United Nations in particular: Just last week, I chaired the organizational meeting of the Preparatory Committee for the High-level Intergovernmental Event on Financing for Development. As you know, a summit is planned for 2001. I started in January with consultations on the election of the Bureau, so that the Committee could go about the business of preparing for the 2001 gathering, which will be a high level coming together. Twelve members of the 15-member Bureau were elected on 10 February, and we expect to complete the process this week. That high-level event -- on financing for development -- will address national, international and systemic issues relating to financing for development in a holistic manner in the context of globalization and interdependence, and, by so doing, will address development from the perspective of finance.

Two special sessions of the General Assembly will take place during my presidency: one on Women 2000 (Beijing + 5) from 5 to 9 June in New York; and the other on the World Summit for Social Development, from 26 to 30 June in Geneva. Preparations at the national, regional and international levels are well under way for staging those two events.

The special session on women will conduct a five-year review of the Beijing Platform for Action, which is an agenda for women's empowerment. It will focus on examples of good practices, positive actions, lessons learned and obstacles and key challenges remaining, and it will consider further actions and initiatives for achieving gender equality in the new millennium. At its conclusion, governments are expected to issue a political declaration calling for recommitment to the Beijing Platform for Action.

The second of the special sessions will review the progress made in implementing the outcome of the 1995 World Summit for Social Development and will recommend further initiatives to advance the social development agenda. The Programme of Action adopted five years ago in Copenhagen called for greater efforts to eradicate poverty, to promote employment possibilities and to promote social integration. Governments agreed at that forum that the individual should be at the centre of all development efforts. This special session is expected to result in a political declaration calling for a reaffirmation of the commitments made at Copenhagen, an assessment of implementation efforts and a plan for moving forward.

As you all very well know by now, I have devoted as much time as I could, given my very busy schedule, to speaking up everywhere on the plight of the world's children, particularly those in armed conflicts, refugees and AIDS orphans. In this regard, for the record, I would like to commend Mr. Hogen for his leadership in bringing, not only the United Nations family together to address social problems, including those relating to AIDS and children, but particularly for sensitizing the private sector to enter into partnerships with the United Nations and thereby helping the Organization to raise consciousness in the wider world. I hope that he will continue this work. He can always count on me in this regard.

These, then, ladies and gentlemen, are some of the significant activities that are or will be taking place now and in the next few months. I am proud, indeed, to be associated with the United Nations during this exciting period in its history.

With these, as we say, few, brief remarks, I am now ready to field any questions.

Mr. Hogen: Thank you, Sir, for your kind words regarding me and my Department, though, of course, the whole exercise is being carried out by the United Nations as a whole.

Now, as the President says, he is prepared to take questions.

Question: If my memory is right, at your first press conference, when you became President of the General Assembly, you said that you attached a lot of importance to the restitution of African cultural property and art to African countries. Five months on, what progress, if any, have you made towards this goal?

The President: This is a long, long-term struggle, but I have been heartened to learn, as I focus on this issue, that there are other places around the world -- in this country, in the United Kingdom, in Africa itself -- where similar initiatives have been launched. It is a question of coordinating these several efforts so that we speak as much as possible with one voice. That voice may come through the structures or leadership of the Organization of African Unity, or it may come through other arrangements -- through universities or through specific organizations and groups that have been set up to pursue this campaign, to raise consciousness about it and to fund restitution along the lines that I have mentioned.

Last year, for example, there was a major conference towards the end of the year at the New York University, and the whole broad spectrum of anything from slavery to reparations and so on was discussed. In Washington, Congressman John Conyers of Michigan is tackling one of the aspects of the broad question by trying to introduce a bill in the United States Congress for reparations. Right here in Harlem and in Brooklyn, there are individuals who have been doing extensive research into this question. All these efforts will enrich the campaign that has now become an international campaign.

Question: You seem to have won a small victory, if what you said is correct. Because as I understand it, there was quite a dispute between the developing countries and the European Union over co-chairing the Millennium Summit. I would just like to confirm that, in fact, there will be co-chairs of the Summit. And could you please tell us what seems to be the substance of the debate over the sub-themes. Is it that the number has to be limited? Or are there big differences between various groups on what those sub-themes should be?

The President: In regard to the first point, I am not sure whether it is a victory, but I thought that it was a practical and, in a way, symbolic thing that somebody from the developing countries and somebody from the industrialized countries would co-chair, at the beginning of a new millennium, a very important conference or summit which would deal, as a start, with the role and efficacy of the United Nations in the twenty-first century, or in this millennium, generally speaking. There is clearly a consensus on this now.

With regard to the sub-themes, as may be noticed in the list that I have provided, these are all issues of concern to all the countries, developing countries and industrialized countries alike: peace, security and disarmament, for example, or the question of development and poverty eradication. We are all affected by globalization, for all the good and sometimes bad reasons. The strengthening of United Nations institutions: United Nations reform goes by this very name. Human rights affect us all, developing countries and developed countries alike.

So it is simply that, given the limited time, the Presidents and the Prime Ministers have to devote their time on these issues. Perhaps not all 188 of them will attend the Summit, but a sizeable number of them will come. How best can we organize and manage the two-tier setting -- that of the plenary and of the interactive round tables -- in order to do justice to the purpose that will have brought these leaders here?

It is really not so much a disagreement. It is a question of which sub- themes should form part of the discussion in the overall theme. That theme is “The United Nations in the twenty-first century”. Under it are listed sub-themes under which everything can be discussed. We are discussing these issues as representatives of Heads of State or Government. But these heads of State or government may very well come here and decide -- collectively, once they get here -- that they would rather discuss something other than the themes that we will have placed before them. But I hope there will be order, that the heads of Missions here will keep their capitals duly informed that these are the sub- themes we are recommending, so that we know in advance, as much as possible, in order to prepare for the discussions in a manner that will make them fruitful and will meet the purpose.

Question: Just as a quick follow-up. When do you expect to have a final decision on what the sub-themes are going to be?

The President: After the consultations I held last week, I asked the heads of Missions to reflect on the discussion that we held -- which I found, for my purpose, quite useful -- and on how we proceed.

But I also informed them -- and I am busy doing that now -- that I would send a letter to each head of Mission in which I would not only indicate my reflections, but also suggest the way forward. So the issue is rather urgent, as the Secretary-General is expected to prepare a report and submit it to the Member States next month. We are, thus, under pressure to speed up our end of the preparations.

Question: Mr. President, you have characterized the Millennium Summit as very important. Insofar as substance is concerned, in what ways would it be different from a general debate in a regular General Assembly?

The President: Well, it is not my decision. I am not ignoring the force of your question. But it was felt that preceding the first Millennium Assembly, in September, heads of State or government should meet in New York, inspired, hopefully, by the enlightenment brought by the new millennium and that the twenty-first century represents, to see -- bearing in mind the ongoing efforts to reform and strengthen the United Nations -- what kind of institution the United Nations should be in order to better deal with the challenges out there and transform those challenges into opportunities for peace and security in the world; to deal with all the problems I have mentioned, such as HIV/AIDS, the plight of children and women's issues; and to make this planet Earth a safe and happier place for all of its inhabitants.

Even if it is yet another gathering of Heads of State or Government, it will be a moment in history that will instil new inspiration in the minds of leaders and peoples, and I would like to think that this is that kind of moment. This generation has never known a new millennium, and the ones we know of in history have been times of great decisions and great thoughts; that is what we are hoping for.

Question: The only unscripted debate I have heard in about 10 years here was the one last year at which the Secretary-General sort of forced Foreign Ministers to rewrite their texts because of his opening speech. Is that subject -- human rights intervention -- going to be a subgroup that will not make it to the main group, or is that definitely going to be included? And secondly, is that round-table idea a forum where you would get less scripted? The President: I suppose you have in mind humanitarian intervention. There was a discussion of the subject after we listened to the Secretary- General's introductory remarks, made at the beginning of the general debate. A number of delegations have suggested ways in which we can keep that issue alive and debate it, because it was felt that this was an important subject. The Secretary-General simply put the issue before the General Assembly for the Member States to address it.

One suggestion was that it should be taken up in the existing Working Group dealing with peace. Others felt that the General Assembly itself should devote some time to its discussion. Quite obviously, it will come up in one way or another in the discussion of the sub-themes that have been mentioned. The question as to which sub-themes are really going to be the ones that will be, so to speak, agenda items, is an open question. We are trying to do as much as we can in terms of preparations, knowing that when Heads of State or Government come, they may decide that that is more important than something else and will discuss it. We are aware, and, incidentally, I, as the only Foreign Minister around, am aware that we cannot tell our Heads of State or Government that they should discuss only these sub-themes and nothing else.

We try to be flexible, but at the end of the day it is entirely up to them. They might have a look at the sub-themes we are proposing, and as good servants we would suggest to them that it is important that they address questions related to security, peace and disarmament, as well as development- related questions such as poverty eradication, globalization, human rights and so on.

The interactive set-up is one where Heads of State or Government would have their own way of organizing their discussions. We would suggest that the round tables be chaired by people decided upon through consultations with the regional groups, and there they would be much, much freer.

I attend the executive sessions of the Commonwealth, where Heads of State sit down, unlike in the setting of the General Assembly, and engage in what I think are much more productive discussions. That is what I hope will happen.

Question: It has been nearly two years since the Secretary-General came out with his report on Africa. Apart from the many sessions and meetings that have been held at the level of the Security Council and the General Assembly, what difference do you think that report has made for the continent?

The President: You are referring to the Secretary-General's report? After the Secretary-General issued his report -- I was here in September 1997, and actually again during the American presidency of the Security Council where the report of the Secretary-General was discussed. The Security Council had specific reactions to the list of recommendations which the Secretary-General put forward. The General Assembly itself, in the framework of the discussions to set up the open-ended Working Group, also debated some of the priorities, and in one of the sessions on industrialization in Africa, some very interesting ideas were generated.

The bottom line is, of course, twofold. First, Africans themselves have to put an end to the conflicts that are ravaging the continent and killing the African people. Africans must assume the responsibility and leadership to put an end to the conflicts, which, instead of diminishing, are increasing in number. That is the responsibility of the Africans themselves. Africans, and I am one of them, should not, in that respect, look to the international community. We must design the solutions, set the agenda and work together to end conflicts in Africa, including military coups. We are grown up enough now. We are the cradle of humanity. If we have been sleeping, this is now the turn of the century and a new millennium, and we must wake up.

Secondly, it is a question of resources. Financing for development is one place where we will be looking for resources as part of putting an end to conflicts. We must also level the playing ground and engage the international community in mutually productive business through investment, trade and joint ventures. It is in this way that we will attract resources for development on the continent.

Question: You mentioned that we should avoid what happened in the fiftieth anniversary. In your view, what happened? What was wrong with the fiftieth anniversary and how do you plan to avoid that?

The President: Speeches were wonderful. Attendance was very impressive. There was truly a celebration that this Organization, which started at the end of a major war, the worst yet in human history, had survived 50 years -- with all its faults, but also with a promise that, if only world leaders and the Member States should will it, the United Nations could be indeed the instrument that we all need -- big and small, rich and poor -- to serve humanity. That was recognized. The problems that stood in the way of such transformation, such progress, were also listed.

At the end, the challenge was how to summarize all that in a brief document that the Governments would use as an inspiration for their policy formulation and that the rest of the world would grab also as a beacon of hope. That did not quite happen. That is the shortcoming that people are pointing to. So we learned from that and will try to produce a document that will indeed serve the purpose for which the Summit will have been convened.

Question: I think the Secretary-General will propose the agenda of the Millennium Summit based on the outcome of the General Assembly debate. What can you do if Member States cannot agree on them by the end of next month?

The President: On the sub-themes?

Question: Yes. Will you ask the Secretary-General to postpone the deadline?

The President: No. The three days have been reaffirmed, namely, from 6 to 8 September. There is no reason why we would not be able to speed up the process, agree on the number of sub-themes and inform the Secretary-General that this is the thinking of the Member States so as to allow him to prepare his report.

Question: The Secretary-General has to propose his agenda by the end of next month based on the outcome of the General Assembly debate. The President: Well, the General Assembly has already debated this issue in informal consultations. The broad outlines are there. The Secretary-General has himself issued the report already in which he suggests some of the elements that will go into his next report.

Question: It seems that there are still big differences among Member States on some themes.

The President: Certainly, when the Secretary-General has issued his next report, that will be the basis and the only basis for proceeding with the final preparations for the Summit. There is a difference.

Question: May I ask what you can do to make this document different than others? How can the document that comes out of the Summit be made to be implemented?

The President: After the document is adopted -- a beautiful, crisp, concise and robust document -- you, Ruth, may ask me: “Now, Ben, what are we going to do with it?”. And I will tell you.

* *** *