TRANSCRIPT OF PRESS CONFERENCE OF ASSEMBLY PRESIDENT THEO-BEN GURIRAB (NAMIBIA) AT HEADQUARTERS, 5 SEPTEMBER

Press Release
GA/SM/193

TRANSCRIPT OF PRESS CONFERENCE OF ASSEMBLY PRESIDENT THEO-BEN GURIRAB (NAMIBIA) AT HEADQUARTERS, 5 SEPTEMBER

- 2 - Press Release GA/SM/193 6 September 2000

Mr. Hogen: Good afternoon again, ladies and gentlemen. It is always a great pleasure and honour for me to introduce the President of the fifty-fourth session of the General Assembly, Theo-Ben Gurirab. Of course, this gentleman needs no introduction. You have been with him for one year, and for many years in his previous capacity. Now I understand this will be his final press conference as the President of the fifty-fourth General Assembly. I am sure Mr. Gurirab is very happy to discuss with you or to review whatever he himself or the ladies and gentlemen of the Press may wish to discuss, so the floor is yours, Your Excellency.

The President: Let me, through you, Mr. Hogen, thank the Department of Public Information for all the assistance rendered to me in my capacity as President of the fifty-fourth session of the General Assembly. In a way, that assistance facilitated my task and my work. Special thanks go to my spokeswoman, Shirley Brownell; she was a true professional and a hard-working international civil servant. She continues to do the work still, now that I am a former President.

Ladies and gentlemen, we have come full circle in a presidency that commenced last year on 14 September and concluded this morning with my closing address to the General Assembly. I take it that the text of my closing statement is available to you. It was a trip down the memory lane of my presidency, and I also took that opportunity to encapsulate those areas of concern which I intend to address in greater detail when I address the regular session of the General Assembly in about two weeks’ time.

A very memorable experience for me -– the main, and indeed the most lasting, memory that I will treasure -– was the responsibility of preparing the Millennium Summit, because the Millennium Summit not only will bring together the largest number of world leaders, but is an event of very far-reaching meaning for the United Nations and its Member States. It will be, in the true sense, what we call in Africa a three-day historic indaba, a coming together of world leaders -– elders, we call them at home -– because the world itself is on fire, and its inhabitants are crying for help.

In resolution 53/202 of 17 December 1998, the General Assembly designated its fifty-fifth session, which started this morning, as the Millennium Assembly of the United Nations. It is in that context that the Millennium Summit is going to start tomorrow. My responsibility was to prepare for that Millennium Summit and also to prepare the final declaration which the heads of State and government will adopt at the end of their deliberations. That was one tall order, in that we agreed -– myself and the Member States – that, in order for that document to meet the test of being something special, commensurate with the uniqueness of the Millennium Summit itself, it had to be a brief, concise, crisp and politically authoritative document, which would also have the power to uplift the spirits of the peoples of the world.

That was the challenge, and it took us protracted and lengthy discussions to produce a document of that nature which 188 countries will sign. And, as you know, many languages are used in the United Nations, and what a word means in one language is not necessarily what it means in another language. So, to produce a document that has the kind of language, terminology, words and phrases to which all countries would say amen, was not an easy task.

But we did it. We produced a document which was adopted by consensus by the Member States, and, just this morning, the Assembly adopted draft resolution A/54/L.89, annexed to which is a draft United Nations Millennium Declaration. The Assembly then transmitted this draft Declaration for consideration and adoption, on Friday, by the heads of State and government.

It is a document that I hope the world leaders will see in the light in which we adopted it, a document complete with a renewed and collective commitment to, and a road map for, the United Nations, as it must strive even harder to realize its universal goals for peace, human security, cooperation and sustainable social development for all in the twenty-first century.

To adopt it required, of course, compromise and flexibility on the part of all the Member States. It took us some 19 informal consultations and many hours of very tough negotiations, but again I am happy that under my presidency we adopted that draft Declaration.

Among other things that I will remember were three special sessions -- one last year on Small Island Developing States, and the other two dealing with social development, and, of course, the review special session on Beijing + 5.

I am also happy that, in addition to the existing working groups dealing with different topics, we were able to establish a new working group, dealing with the causes of conflict and the promotion of durable peace and sustainable development in Africa. This working group was established on the basis of the Secretary-General’s report placed before the Security Council and the General Assembly in 1998. But it took some time, and I was happy to have been able to establish it.

The establishment of the Preparatory Committee to deal with the forthcoming major conference next year, whose subject will be financing for development, is also a source of gratification for me. It is a conference that will be very important because it will deal with all the issues relating to development, poverty eradication, financing for development itself, debt cancellation and the mobilization of resources to finance the recommendations made from 1992, starting with the major United Nations summit on environment and development held in Rio, through to the world summit on food security held in 1996 in Rome. So financing for development is obviously a major issue before the United Nations and, indeed, the international community.

In my closing statement, I reflected on certain matters of great importance to me, because I feel they have direct and critical impact on the United Nations, Member States and the world at large. I particularly underscored my views in relation to the functions and powers of the United Nations General Assembly. Each organ of the United Nations has its own responsibility. But for me, the General Assembly, more than others, has a history that inspires me; there are experiences that reinforce my belief. Because of its transparency and representative character -- it is the most deliberative policy-making organ in the United Nations -- its authority and integrity must be reinforced. It is here, in the General Assembly, where all the nations, big and small, rich and poor, are represented, that democracy really comes alive. It happens nowhere else.

I have strong views about giving life to Articles 10 and 11 of the Charter of the United Nations. If you read those Articles, you will see, if you will, the extraordinary responsibility that the General Assembly is given by the Charter to deal with those issues that come before it, as reflected in the agenda adopted at the beginning of each session. Also, the other organs of the United Nations, important as they are, are nevertheless still expected to report to the General Assembly, and the General Assembly has its own mandate to take up issues and responsibilities that are assigned to other organs.

I think the reason here is that the authority and the mandate of the General Assembly have been [inaudible]. There are, perhaps, reasons for that. Perhaps the success of the decolonization of former colonies, too, has something to do with it. But perhaps the other organs have usurped the responsibility of the General Assembly. I am one of those who feel that the authority, the integrity and the mandate of the General Assembly should be restored.

I also called for renewed efforts to promote closer and productive cooperation, coordination and action among the of four organs of the United Nations: the General Assembly, the Security Council, the Economic and Social Council and the Secretariat -- headed, obviously, by the Secretary-General. It is through that kind of institutionalized and regular consultation, coordination and joint action that the efficacy and performance of the United Nations can best be achieved. That, too, is the issue on which I will elaborate further when I address the General Assembly.

I also lamented the lack of political will and the absence of adequate resources needed by the United Nations to carry out the responsibilities given to it by Member States to meet the needs of people, as well as the resources to implement the agenda for peace and development. I also said that democracy and government that are accountable and transparent require back-up, not only political back-up but also resources for democracy to grow, become stronger and be sustainable.

Once again, I highlighted the plight of children; that was a theme of my presidency. I particularly put stress on those children who are trapped in armed conflict. I am very proud of this engagement, and particularly proud that it was a responsibility that kept me busy here for a whole year.

You know that I am Namibia’s Minister for Foreign Affairs, Information and Broadcasting. I am proud because my President and his Government gave me all their backing and support and did not mind that I would be away from home for a full year. During my presidency, I visited Namibia three times: once for a week, a second time for two weeks, and a third time for the longest period, three weeks, during the tenth anniversary of my country’s independence. For the rest of the time, I stayed here in New York and occasionally undertook visits on official trips at the invitation of Member States.

I must congratulate you, Mr. Under-Secretary-General, because my stay here has informed me better about the most admirable work that the Department of Public Information is carrying out. You have succeeded, with the encouragement of the Secretary-General, in reaching out to people who usually do not know much about the United Nations. Perhaps the Internet had something to do with it. But the Internet needs leadership and vision and direction. You, therefore, made use of that tool to put a human face on the United Nations and to help open the doors of the United Nations to the public.

You were kind enough to have invited me to participate in some of the meetings organized by your Department, where not only United Nations people, but people from the entertainment world, people from academia and the churches, not to mention the different representatives of non-governmental organizations, were able to come to the United Nations and feel at home -– and to feel at home not only as guests of the United Nations, but because they felt that the United Nations actually belongs to us, the people. That is what the Preamble of the Charter of the United Nations says.

I congratulate you and I entreat you to continue making the United Nations known worldwide and to continue bringing the representatives of the non- governmental organizations and others from civil society here to make the United Nations their own concern. It is only when that happens that we can talk about united nations, meaning bringing together peoples of the world not only to share pain, but to also dream together about a better and prosperous future.

I am getting carried away. I will stop here.

Question: There has been a report in the American press that Namibia has been displeased with Finland during the preparatory stage of the Declaration, because Finland was leaking information in Europe. How would you comment on that report?

Mr. Gurirab: Don’t believe everything you read in the papers. It was a spin on something that might have been relevant had it been reported differently. The preparation of the Millennium Summit was, as per the resolution of the General Assembly, the sole responsibility of the presidency of the fifty-fourth session -– therefore, my responsibility.

But a number of things became obvious: first, that Finland would be the next President of the General Assembly and that it would therefore make some sense that, even though it was not a joint responsibility, it would be a good thing to bring Finland on board. Secondly, it was decided, subsequent to the adoption of the resolution, that the President of Finland and the President of Namibia would co-chair the Millennium Summit. That gave more reason why the delegation of Finland here should be closely identified with the preparations of the Millennium Summit. Thirdly, Namibia and Finland enjoy a longstanding friendship of over 130 years. Finns brought Christianity to the north of Namibia that long time ago, and there are many Namibians who walk around carrying Finnish names and speaking the Finnish language fluently. Finland and Namibia are two friendly countries. By happy coincidence, perhaps designed in heaven, the Presidents of these two friendly countries are to co-chair the Millennium Summit.

It is true that, to my greatest regret, a person from the Finnish delegation here at the United Nations did prematurely, and for reasons not clear to me, not leak -– leaking is something that you do secretly -– but give a document to the members of the Western European and Other States Group, contrary to my express decision not to do so. That is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, and not what the papers said.

Question: Last week, the Australian Government decided to withdraw its involvement from many of the United Nations committees, because it felt that the United Nations committee system had been captured by non-governmental organizations and that the committee system should not play a role in criticizing legitimate democracies. Do you believe that the committee system of the United Nations has been captured by non-governmental organizations, and does the United Nations committee system have a right to intervene or criticize countries that are strong democracies?

The President: I do not want to speak for the non-governmental organizations. I do not know which non-governmental organizations are critical of the democracies of the kind that you characterize. We believe -– I made some remarks on this point -– that the United Nations would be fully representative -– we, the peoples of the world -– as States and peoples alike. I know that the United Nations is an organization by treaty and that the treaty was signed by sovereign States, and joining the membership of the United Nations is a preserve solely of States and not of non-governmental organizations. But we have been trying to be inclusive at the United Nations. It is for those efforts that I commended Under-Secretary-General Hogen and his Department -– indeed, the Secretary-General himself. That is also partly what I have been doing. That is, to open the doors of the United Nations to non-governmental organizations.

I do not see a big problem for non-governmental organizations. I do not know who they are, so do not hold me responsible for the non-governmental organizations that you, perhaps, know, or that the country you mentioned is complaining about specifically. But we have all agreed -- most delegations -- that the contributions that non-governmental organizations can make, that others from civil society can make, to the work of the United Nations will make the Organization richer, not poorer, including criticism of it and criticism of its Member States. But I am not responsible for non-governmental organizations; I represent Namibia, which is one of the States.

Question: With the publication of Mr. Brahimi’s report on peacekeeping, we have become aware that this operation is moving towards peace enforcement, which worried a lot of delegations. What is your view on this type of move?

The President: I do not know what any move is. What we have welcomed throughout the system is the Brahimi report, the subject of which is United Nations peace operations. It’s a very comprehensive report about the whole aspect of United Nations peacekeeping, peace enforcement, peace-building, post-conflict reconstruction and all that.

The report has been placed before the Security Council and the General Assembly, and I have no doubt that the Millennium Summit itself will consider it. It is only after those competent authorities have made a pronouncement on the Brahimi report that we can say this, that or the other is on; this, that or the other is not on. Right now, any views that I express would be premature.

Question: Your Excellency, the North Korean delegation to the United Nations Millennium Summit has cancelled its trip to New York after accusing a United States airline of subjecting them to searches, including a body search. Do you have any comment on that?

The President: I do not know anything about the case.

Question: It happened a few hours ago.

The President: I don’t know. I wouldn’t have known even if it had happened yesterday. I don’t know anything about it.

Question: Mr. President, under your leadership, the United Nations entered the third millennium. I think no President has spent as much time at the United Nations as you have during your term of office. When you look at the world, is it a better world we are facing than a year ago?

The President: It all depends. It is perhaps worse, judging by the increasing number of armed conflicts; the death toll of innocent men, women and children; economic woes; the plight of children; and the effects of organized crime, which also affects children. There is a growing protest by people who feel that the ever-growing gap between the rich and the poor has become a source of crisis. So they took to the streets in Seattle, and they repeated the same in Washington, D.C., and they continued to do it at Davos, at the World Economic Forum. They have now become the watchdogs of how inter-State relations are conducted, and what globalization really is, whether it is a force for social change or a force terrorizing people; whether it is there to create full employment or whether it is there to impoverish people.

So those forces of confrontation have multiplied and intensified. The flip side of that is that there is a growing dialogue, and symbolically, at a time when the Millennium Summit is about to start tomorrow, there is a meeting going on here dealing with dialogue among the civilizations of the world. So the emphasis is on dialogue. Because of the Millennium Summit, perhaps, so many other meetings have taken place and are taking place as part of the Millennium Summit, here at the United Nations and on the margins of the United Nations: of world religious and spiritual leaders; of the speakers of the world’s parliaments; of non-governmental organizations -– there was a non-governmental organization Forum earlier in the year.

There are so many meetings taking place. This morning, some of us were guests at the Waldorf Astoria, at a prayer breakfast organized by an interdenominational group of church leaders. So there is dialogue, and we are beginning to short-list the problems that are no longer problems of the poor and the needy, of the third world, but are problems that are general to the rich and the poor alike.

It is through this dialogue and the short-listing of these problems that we will begin to address them with a view to finding solutions, to eschew finger-pointing and dividing the world between democracies and those that are not democracies, and to see these problems that I mentioned as common challenges to the very survival of the human race on planet Earth.

So in that sense, I am encouraged that, perhaps not today, but tomorrow will be better.

Question: On the Millennium Declaration, since there are certain countries, including the United States, China and France, that have expressed reservations, do you think these reservations will spill over into the Summit and prevent consensus on the final document?

The President: I do not believe so. The heads of State: that’s where the buck stops. I can very well see that somebody who is under instructions from a capital might not be in a position to agree to any conclusion contrary to their instructions. But those people who are giving instructions from the capitals are all going to be here, and I do not believe that those reservations will stand at the level of the Millennium Summit.

Question: Is it not supposed to be a consensus document?

The President: It is a consensus document. Consensus does not mean unanimity. As it is, it is a consensus document. What we are talking about is whether at the adoption of the Declaration there will still be reservations. I doubt very seriously that there will be any reservations.

Question: The question about non-governmental criticism of a Member nation’s human rights record was brought up. It has frightening implications, first to the press: should we feel intimidated in observing that some Member nations, including democracies and those who quote human rights articles and conventions most often? Should we feel intimidated that there are objections and that there appears to be this rule that you cannot criticize democracies; they are above the law and even human rights norms.

As a Namibian representative, then, if not as President of the General Assembly, how do you feel about that extraordinary reaction by a democracy which has made a considerable contribution to the United Nations and all its good causes, including human rights?

Another thing: I understand that you are considered something of a patron saint of the non-governmental organizations; they are very proud of the fact that you first entered the United Nations under the auspices of a non- governmental organization. That was some time ago. Would you please tell us the details of that; it is quite intriguing. Are you, as far as you know, the only General Assembly President who was part of a non-governmental organization?

The President: I want to remain the only one who has that special connection with the non-governmental organizations. It is a great honour.

I didn’t know what the gentleman was talking about; I don’t have the information on it.

But on the principle of free speech, which includes the right to criticize, this is what is being lectured to us all the time, as we are being urged on to democratize, to exercise government on the basis of transparency and accountability. You folks can very often be a source of annoyance to governments. But at least that is your role, and the people, particularly those in democratic countries who are telling us not to get jumpy when we are criticized by the media, should be the very first to be on your side.

One of the things that we are proud about in Namibia is that it was in our capital city, Windhoek, that the Windhoek Declaration -– on free speech and press freedom -– was adopted in 1993, I believe it was. I was there. I am not a press person, but I was invited. That was before I became Minister of Information and Broadcasting.

So it is a strange, strange thing that was said, and I don’t want to speculate on something that I don’t know. But I hope that the gentleman is wrong, because the implications are ominous.

Question: Mr. President, you established the working group on the causes of conflict in Africa. Are there any preliminary reports already available? And will you personally still be involved with this group?

The President: Actually, the report is available. The resolution was adopted by the General Assembly at the fifty-third session, in December 1998, asking the President to set up the working group, but I ended up setting it up. The report is available; it is a useful report. You should be able to get it, I don’t have the numbers, but Shirley can help you. It is available. It makes good reading, but it’s ongoing work. But this is the first report of the group.

Mr. Hogen: Thank you. We would like to thank you once again for sharing this long time with And may I at this time congratulate you on successfully concluding your presidency.

* *** *