Moderator: Thank you very much for coming. As you can see this is the UN way of meeting the press. I am kept standing. I have been told to remain standing according to the UN System and Mr. Annan strongly wished to maintain this UN style of staying standing. As you know, Mr. Annan traveled through Beijing now arrived in Tokyo. He went to the UN University. So this is the UN House opening ceremony that he attended. Tomorrow, in order to attend the Davos World Economic Forum he shall be departing. This is the fourth press meeting here to be held in this place. In 1999, it was November, when he came over the last time. He unfortunately did not come in the year 2000. Here this time Mrs. Annan is with the Secretary-General. Thank you. We have simultaneous interpretation today. Therefore may I ask Mr. Annan for a very brief of five minute presentation at first, followed by questions and answers, Mr. Annan please.

SG: Thank you very much and I am glad you noticed that the UN way to stand for press conferences. Maybe we want to impress you that we work very hard and we do not have time to be sitting down.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I am extremely happy to be able to join you again today, and to be back in Japan with my wife and the team from New York. I have had very productive and friendly discussions with Prime Minister Mori, Finance Minister Miyazawa and Foreign Minister Kono. I have also met many members of the Diet and various leaders of the political parties.

Today, as you heard I opened the UN House in Tokyo, and I hope that it would become not only the UN House but also the Japanese will consider it their house as well. After all, the UN, it is your organization. It is an organization of "We, the peoples" and we have really tried to open it up.

I consider Japan to be a true global player on the international scene, and there is a growing recognition of this fact worldwide. I just came here from Yaounde in Cameroon, where I attended the France-Africa Summit. The African leaders I met there were impressed by the historical visit of Prime Minister Mori to Africa which to them and to me implied the strong bond between that continent [and] Japan and the importance Japan attaches to the developing world. And I am also heartened to see that the Japanese leadership is being felt in the United Nations as we speak at the beginning of a new century.

I had a chance during my discussions to discuss a human security commission that the Japanese Government is helping to set up which will be headed by Mrs. [Sadako] Ogata and Prof. [Amartya] Sen. I think it is an important topic for us at the United Nations and I am happy that Japan is taking a leadership role in this because we are the UN, which places the individual human being at the center of all what we do. And I think the work that the commission is going to do is going to be helpful to the work of the United Nations and I have assured Mrs. Ogata and the Prime Minister that they will have my full support and support of the United Nations.

Let me say that as I traveled around the world and as the head of the United Nations one cannot overemphasize the importance of Japan's development assistance to countries in need around the world. I would also like to stress the indispensable role played by Japan in the field of disarmament and the emphasis you place on that. And I think it is important that we keep that subject alive, lest people become complacent about it.

And let me, through you, express my gratitude to the Japanese people for their contribution generally to all the areas of UN activity from humanitarian to development assistance, to contributions you have made to peace-keeping operations in one kind or the other, and the major contribution you made in East Timor for example has made quite a lot of difference in our work there.

As we move into the New Year we will all remember the Millennium Summit which took place last year and up to the Millennium Declaration which in effect gave us our marching orders as we enter this new century. The Declaration we see as a plan of action with specific datelines and specific targets, which we have to meet by specific dates. And the millennium plan of action coerces the fight against poverty to reduce abject poverty by 50 percent in the year 2015. It enjoins us to fight against AIDS, to be sensitive about the environment and to let the governments and people and public know that we cannot continue to exploit the resources of the world the way we are doing it and expect to hand over a healthy world to our children and their children. It also deals with Governance and it touches on the issue of globalization and the need to make it work for all. So we do have a big agenda to implement but it is not going to be implemented by the bureaucracy in New York alone. Each Government has a role to play, the private sector, civil society and individuals, we all have to work in partnership to make it happen.

This evening, after this press conference, I will be meeting Japanese UN Goodwill Ambassadors to see how best we can expand their advocacy role on behalf of the United Nations and the work we do and as you heard, I then leave tomorrow morning for Davos to attend the World Economic Forum. I will now take your questions.

MC: Thank you very much. We would like to take your questions. If you have any questions, please raise your hand. Please tell us your name and your organization. Please use the standing microphone.

Q: My name is Harada, Nikkei Shimbun. I would like to talk about the UN Security Council reform. According to all the information that we hear, there are different opinions and discussions that the permanent seats and the non-permanent seats, both should be increased. That for the specific seats, not 21 in total but 24 or more seems to be the big wave or the trend. This is my impression. May I ask your opinion, Sir.

SG: I think you are right that the discussions have been going on for a while. And the figures for expansion have hovered around those who wanted 20, 21, and 24, 26. My sense is that as of today, the most member states are thinking in terms of 24 seats, but of course, they haven't come to agreement on the nature and the extent of the expansion yet. But [at] the last Millennium Summit, there were quite a lot of supportive statements by Governments and the President of the General Assembly intends to pursue this reform issue in the course of this year. Thank you.

Q: (TV Asahi) I understand you are leaving here tomorrow for Davos Conference in Switzerland, and I have two questions about it. The first question is, how do you evaluate the significance of Davos Conference? And the second question is, Japan's Prime Minister Mori will join the conference for the first time as the Japanese but he speaks no English. What do you think of this point?

SG: Let me start with the last question. I think we live in a global village but it is also a diverse world. It is that diversity that makes it an exciting place. And I think the fact that he doesn't speak English would not prevent him from getting his points across. I've had a very good discussion with him here, and he made his points very forcefully and got across to me without speaking English himself, and I'm sure he will be equally effective in Davos.

On the question of the importance of the World Economic Forum. Let me say that it is important in the sense that it's a good convenient place. It does bring together business leaders from around the world to discuss economic and financial issues of the day and to exchange ideas. But over the years, it's expanded beyond economics. You will find in Davos poets, artists, politicians, and people from areas of conflict. So whenever I go to Davos, apart from speaking to corporate leaders and challenging them to accept their global responsibility whether it's in the form of the Global Compact where I advice them to embrace three core principles in the areas of human rights, quality of labour standards and environment. I'm also able to hold discussions with a whole range of leaders. I may even see Prime Minister Mori again in Davos but I would be taliing to the new Mexican President, privately speaking to some of the leaders from the Middle East areas where I'm engaged in. And so from that point of view, it is important. And it's always good to be able to exchange ideas. But of course, we would also have the demonstrators there today. Since Seattle whenever you have this sort of gathering, they also come and I think what they represent cannot always be ignored. It does imply the anxiety, the concern, the uncertainty people have about globalization and how it is impacting on their lives or way of lives, and some believe that it is taking their jobs away. So we need to understand these concerns and find ways of addressing them.

MC: Yes, please.

Q: Hajime Ozaki from Kyodo News. I'm very glad to see you here in Tokyo. Two questions; the first one is, on Monday, President Bush announced that he is not going to support the organizations which are performing or assisting the abortion worldwide. The same rhetoric we heard from Mr. Helms sometimes ago when he said that the United States is not going to pay the arrears, as long as the United Nations is assisting the abortion. Do you see any attitude from Mr. Bush toward the United Nations? The second question is a little bit shorter. What about your second term? Thank you, sir.

SG: On the first question, yes, I have also read about the declaration by the President and as far as the UN activities are concerned, and here you are talking about UNFPA. I think UNFPA and the U.S. have clarified the misunderstandings and they know the nature of our work and the work UNFPA is doing around the world. And so I hope this new declaration, this new policy statement by the Bush Administration will have no impact on the work and their support for UNFPA. I know it's a bit [of a] divisive issue internally and that I will leave them to sort it out between themselves, the Americans, that is. As to your second question, I have indicated that it is a difficult decision and that I need to think it through, but I will give an answer in March so you will. I will give you a signal as to whether how I will react, if the member states were to wish me to continue. After all, the decision is theirs.

Q: I'm a member of this Club and also a member of the Foreign Correspondents' Club of Japan. I used to work for UNESCO for four years from 1954 to 1957 as the first Japanese working for UNESCO in Paris. At that time, two political issues occurred. One was McCarthyism in the United States. Two or three US officers came to Paris to interview American employees in UNESCO, and one or two were dismissed as a result of this interview. My first question is that you can assure the independence of the UN organization from a member state intervening in their affairs. The second question is that it has been reported in papers that there are a lot of inefficiency in terms of budget activities of the UN, and also disciplinary inadequacy in the UN. This is my second question. How are you going to improve the efficiency or the performance of the UN staff members? I have noticed in Paris from 1954 to '57 some very lazy staff in UNESCO. My last question is...

SG: Three questions. Please limit your question so that others will have a chance.

Q: All right. My last one is my son was captured by the Iraqi army, when Iraq invaded Kuwait. At that time, nothing has been done efficiently by the UN to alleviate that kind of international conflict. My third question is very important, if you could answer these three questions.

SG: Where is your son, by the way?

Q: My son, luckily, after four months of captivity in Iraq was released safely. Thank God.

SG: I'm very happy to hear that for him. Let me start with your first question about what happened during the McCarthy era. Thank God, I hope those days are behind us, and I don't think it's going to happen that our staff members are being dismissed in the UN, because their government came to ask questions or wanted them fired. So, from that point of view, you can be assured that it doesn't happen and will not happen now. I know that period you are referring to and it is unfortunate that those things happened.

On your second question about efficiency. I have read some of those articles that you have referred to. I must say that I'm not going to claim that the UN, like all other organisations, doesn't have some problems. But I think one has to put this in context. First of all, some of the things I have read about and these investigations, we undertook them. We undertook these audit investigations, because we want to run an efficient and effective organisation. We wanted to find out where are the problems and to correct them.

Secondly, these articles that I have seen do not make any reference to the fact that they are covering a period of five years or more, and it keeps accumulation of things that create an impression that it is a norm. It does talk about the peacekeeping budget, and some excesses or some malpractices that were found in some operations.

You have to understand that these operations are not mounted in ideal situations. We often have to rush into these crisis posts to get things going, and it is not always easy to get the most efficient staff that we borrow from governments and get them there on time. So, sometimes, there are mistakes which are made have been made and mistakes will be made. But what is important is that during the period under review, the peacekeeping operations cost about 10 billion dollars or 1.2 trillion yen. So, when one talks about 80-50 million-yen, you have to put that in context, because in absolute terms it seems big, unless you put it into context and what percentage of operations it represents. But we are pursuing reform in the UN, and reforms are ongoing process, and searches for excellence are constant. And we want to make the organisation as efficient and effective as possible. I think over the last years, we've made quite a lot of progress, and it will continue. But what I plead is that when we do these reports, it has to be balanced.

When I was a young man at the age of 15, I will never forget the experience I had with the headmaster walked into a classroom. There were 45 of us. In those days, small classes were not the order of the day. You were lucky to get an education. So, there were 45 of us in the room, and he came in and put a sheet of paper on the wall with a black dot. The paper was quite white. It was about 1 meter by 1 meter with a dot. So, he asked boys, "What do you see?" Almost in unison, all of us shouted, "The black dot." He stood back and said, "So, none of you saw the broad, white sheet of paper. You all saw the black dot. Don't go through life focusing on the minor issue. See the total picture." When you cover the UN, I hope you see the bigger picture of what we do in the humanitarian area, what we have done in the rule of law and the norm we have set, or what we have done in health, what we have done in education, what we have done in development, and what we are doing all over the world. That's my only plea.

On your last question, wars will always be with us. We cannot avoid or prevent all wars. Men have been fighting each other since Mesopotamia and they've been fighting for over two million years. I hope that we will not need to send peacekeepers, that we don't have to mount peacekeeping operations or do peace building, because the world will entirely be at peace. We are trying to create an atmosphere where these kinds of wars will be avoided, and where we fail, we try to work with protagonists to end the wars. It requires education to end wars. It requires education to get people to understand that we can solve our differences politically and through dialogue and not through arms. You said that you worked in UNESCO, and it is in the UNESCO charter. Since it is in the mind of men that war begins, it is in the mind of men that we should build defenses. I think you will agree with that. Thank you very much and I will take the next question.

Q: My name is Hasegawa from Nihon Keizai Shimbun (Nikkei). My question concerns the financial difficulty of the United Nations. How do you appreciate the donation of Ted Turner to the UN. Another question is, tell me about your ideas to sort out the financial difficulty of the UN?

SG: I will start with the second one. I think it's simple to convince and encourage each member state to pay its dues in full and on time and without conditions. Quite frankly, if the Member States did that, we would not be talking about financial difficulties of the United Nations. The financial difficulties arose because some member states withheld their contributions to the UN, and imposed conditions for paying them. So, I have appealed to the member states that as part of the reform of the United Nations, and reaffirmation of their belief in the organisation, they should all undertake to pay their dues in full and on time and without conditions.

On the question of the Turner contribution, it has been extremely helpful. It has enabled us to undertake activities that we would not otherwise have undertaken. The Turner $1 billion donation, which is over 10-year period, is not used to cover regular UN operations or activities. We have used it to do other things: in caring for children in health and population that we could not have done otherwise, which has always been conditional. Besides that, the Turner donation has encouraged other major donors to come forth and make contributions. The Gates Foundation has up to today given us about up to 1 billion dollars. You may recall they made a major donation of 750 million dollars for vaccination, for us to work on vaccination. And they have made other contributions since then. Other corporations are becoming to engage or beginning to think of participating. This, also underscores the point I have been making all along that the UN cannot tackle these major issues alone, and that we need to work in partnerships, partnerships with governments, with the private sector, with NGOs and I really appreciate what Ted Turner and all the others are doing. So, where the private sector and civil society working with the government, we are able to do much, much more and to expand our capacity. Thank you.

MC: The next question, please.

Q: I am working for Asahi Evening News. I have two questions. One concerns about your term. What kind of message has been conveyed to you from the Chinese and Japanese governments where you have been visiting so far? The second question is what kind of role the UN can play for the stabilization of the reconciliation process in the Korean Peninsula? Have you decided on your schedule to visit North Korea?

SG: On your first question, let me say that I'm not travelling around the region to discuss my future, or my second term. We focus really on the essential issues of concern to Japan, China, or Japan in the UN and China in the UN. I think that's the way it ought to be. On the question of my visit to North Korea, I have been to South Korea, and I will go to North Korea, or perhaps the two Koreas together. I have not been able to set a time yet, but I'll arrange it. Ideally, I could have done it and should have done it now, but it's not convenient and I have other obligations. But I do intend to visit North Korea. I think the UN and all of us should encourage the positive signals, which are taking place. We should encourage the reconciliation between the North and South, and we should do whatever we can to reduce tensions in the Korean Peninsula. I discussed this also when I was in China and they shared this view. Your Government does as well. I believe that if all of us were to work together and encourage the two Koreas, we will be able to succeed, I hope.

Q: I am Yukihiko Machida with Mainichi Newspapers. Mr. Secretary-General, let me ask you the question with the so-called inefficiency if I might follow-up. What is your assessment of the activities of OIOS [Office of Internal Oversight Office] and are you going to strengthen its role in the United Nations? Thank you.

SG: They are doing a very good job. The OIOS is a UN version of Inspector General. It was set up about seven years ago to help us audit ourselves and to strengthen our management practices. But like all UN organizations, it is a bit short staffed and this year we would be looking at our budget. And one of the issues on the table is possible increase in their staff. Thank you. It is interesting that almost everyone who has asked questions has spoken to me in English and I think that is why you asked me about the question in Davos. It is quite interesting.

Q: Thank you, my name is Kharduri Azhari, I am correspondent of Petra MBC from the Middle East. I think that you said that the United Nations style is standing so it seems to some people that the United Nations resolutions are standing also especially in the Middle East. So you see many resolutions not being applied or done by Israel, namely, so how do you evaluate this and do you consider it as a very reason why the escalation of violence is raging in that area now? And do you think that the United Nations forces or armies would be deployed to that area? Thank you.

SG: Let me start by saying that the UN has been involved in the Middle East for quite a long time and on the Palestinian issue that you referred to. We were there at the beginning and even though the UN resolutions have not yet been implemented, not all of them, and I will come back to that, have not yet been implemented. They have formed the basis of most of the discussions on settlement. Whether it is resolution 242 or 338 or even 194 on the return of refugees, so the UN contribution has been an important one qualitatively. I would also say that in addition to that we have a military presence on the border between Lebanon and Israel and in Syria on the Golan between Israel and Syria. We have our presence in Jerusalem, in the form of UNTSO. And yes, not all UN resolutions have been fully implemented, but interestingly enough we implemented 425 of the big four covering the border between Lebanon and Israel. When the Israelis withdrew and we implemented 425, which is the first time over 20 years that one of the resolutions has been implemented. And that resolution was very instrumental in the peaceful demarcation of the border where the UN went in and drew a blue line and asked both parties to respect it and not to violate it. And by and large they have done it. UN resolutions are not necessarily self-fulfilling. Sometimes the parties have to get together to discuss it and use it as a basis for discussions and to move forward. I had hoped that the talks that are taking place between the Palestinians and the Israelis beginning in Oslo and recently in Camp David and the efforts of President Clinton would have left led to a settlement. That didn't work and the parties themselves came together in Taba to discuss this issue. And unfortunately as a result of the killings yesterday it has been suspended but I hope that they would go back to the table.

If one is having peace talks, you are having peace talks because there are serious disagreements or fighting is going on. And one is having talks because there is fighting. And I think it is unfortunate that one would stop the process because this has happened, and if we do that, then we can create a situation where those who are against the peace process can always stop it by undertaking violent act here or there each time you decide to come together. So the UN will continue to work for peace, we will continue to put forward in resolutions, basis that we believe should be used for peace settlement, and where the parties are willing and cooperate with us, both of them, we are able to do it, but we cannot impose it. We need to work with the parties and often they also have to come together. I know in the Middle East because of what has happened in Iraq, we are accused of double standards that we have imposed it on Iraq. "Why can't you impose it on another situation?" But this is something that we have tried to explain and I hope that it is understood. *****