Press encounter following meeting with Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg of Norway, (unofficial transcript)

SG: Thank you very much, Mr Prime Minister, and ladies and gentlemen of the press. I think my wife and I are extremely happy to be here in Norway. We have had a rather invigorating walk in the mountains and everywhere we went people have been very kind to us. Our discovery of the Norwegian mountains began some years ago, when my brother-in-law, Bent Lagergren, who lives here, and his wife Ingeborg, invited us to walk in the mountains of the [inaudible] and then we decided that we will come back. And then when I came back here as Secretary-General, Oysten Dahle [spelling?] came and gave my wife and myself, having known that we walked in the mountains, lifetime membership in the Hiking Association, but as you know membership in any organization comes with obligation, and so I have now met my obligation by walking very, very long distances in the mountains. You have a beautiful country, and you are right, Mr Prime Minister, the mountains will be here next year, and we will be back. But next year would also be the year of the mountains, where we are all supposed to focus on sustainable development of mountain regions and conservation of the eco systems of the mountains around the world, and I think what I saw here leads me to believe that Norway has a lot to offer the rest of the world, and we have also been able to discuss with the Prime Minister in addition to what he has raised the fight against HIV/AIDS and to thank him for the contribution of Norway, not only for the fight against AIDS but in the whole area of economic and social development, the work you have done with us in the Middle East on peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians and the whole question of environment issues.

Q: United Nations has been in an economic crisis for many years. What is the situation now concerning the debt that is on the United States, and the United States I guess is one of the members of the family which draws quite a lot of profitable advantages, because they are equipping the Organization with huge amounts of various things, from military equipment to the administration as well. Could you please say a bit about these two things.

SG: Our financial situation has not considerably improved. Last December the Member States came to an agreement on the budget, reducing the U.S. contribution of the Regular Budget from 25% to 22%, and agreeing to reduce its contribution of peacekeeping budgets from 31% to 27%. On the basis of that agreement the U.S. Government was to have released $582 million in past dues. President Bush and Secretary of State Colin Powell have told me that they would want to see the money released and they are doing whatever they can. We have some problems in the Congress, where a Congressman has introduced a Bill that if the International Criminal Court is established and U.S. citizens are not exempted or are not immune from prosecution by the Court, then they will not release the money. This is an ex-post facto reservation that I don't think would please other Member States who had negotiated in good faith, and I hope the U.S. will release the money and continue to pay its dues in full and on time, without condition, as every Member State is expected to do. On the question of the U.N. contribution to the U.S., it is quite correct that the U.N. with its headquarters in New York brings lots of benefits to the city. The Ambassadors and their staff rent apartments, they rent offices, we do lots of purchases in the States, and in fact it is estimated that we put about $3 billion in the New York economy, so there is considerable benefits accruing to the U.S. as well, in addition to the political, economic and legal benefits that accrues to them.

Q: Mr Secretary-General, You have thanked Norway on repeated occasions for the country's large economic contribution in terms of GDP, or compared with the GDP. Norway's largest opposition party now suggests that the contribution from Norway to the U.N. system should be cut by more than $100 million. What do you feel about this proposal?

SG: Obviously this is a decision for the Norwegian Government and the Norwegian people to take, but as Secretary-General of the U.N., as you've heard me say in the past, Norway has provided leadership in the area of economic development, economic and social development, that I hope will continue. Norway has been the envy of many countries that would want to move in that direction. I think a cut of that magnitude will have a very negative impact on development assistance, at a time when we are encouraging other governments to follow the lead of Norway. I think this is something that I hope Norwegians are proud about, that they are providing leadership in this important area. I think the problem in our world today, which concerns most people, and we saw this in Genoa and other places, is the issue of inequality, the issue of exclusion, the inequality between states and within states, which we all have to do something about, and in fact we often talk about globalization. I think if globalization is going to work in the long term, it has to work for all, and I have often maintained that if we are able to help governments and other people to develop their resources, to make a decent living at home, we will be expanding world trade. We would also be able to take away the pressure from people to leave their countries to go and look for a living elsewhere, and I think it will have also a positive impact on mass migration, which as we know is also causing tensions around the world.

Q: The International Court in The Hague has ruled it is illegal to start nuclear war. Would you recommend all countries, including Norway, to support its stance in the upcoming General Assembly?

SG: You mean to fight against nuclear weapons, or nuclear war? Yes, I think as an Organization we are for nuclear disarmament. We have made a constant stand through the NPT non-proliferation treaty with CTBT agreement. We have not made real concrete progress either at the discussions in Geneva or elsewhere, and you may recall that in my millennium report to the General Assembly I recommended that maybe the time has come for Member States to come together and discuss nuclear dangers to this climate. Quite a few Member States were pleased with the idea, but not all the nuclear powers were amused.

Q: You spent a very long time at the Royal Castle and I was wondering if that was because you were discussing the foundation that the Crown Prince and his fiancTe are going to make for the coming wedding?

SG: No, we had a very pleasant chat with The King and the Queen and the Crown Prince and the Princess, and we talked a bit about the wedding. I was able to congratulate them and offer them a bit of advice. And also we talked about art and our travels around Norway, and where to go next time. The Queen has some very good and helpful suggestions, and we will probably take her up on that and try those regions, but it was a very friendly conversation and I was very happy to meet the young couple; I think they make a wonderful couple, and they are going to be great together. But don't ask me to tell you the advice I gave to them - it was for them! (laughter)

Q: Can you give some information about how the economic problems affect the peace operations around the world?

SG: I think, if there is, there has always been an economic basis for political crisis. An old professor of mine used to say "when the hay is not enough, the horses they can bite each other", and we have seen situations where people are fighting over scarce economic resources, and that often leads to discrimination of sorts where sometimes whole groups are discriminated against because of race, because of religion, or something else, and these people often believe that their votes don't count. Even if they vote for this party or that party, the government does nothing for them, and therefore sometimes that situation is exploited by leaders, to gain political advantage in at least a conflict, and so we are now trying to tell governments that they have to find a way of ensuring that the services of governments is shared equitably, that the cloth of government covers each citizen, that each citizen is made to feel that the government is their government too, and where this does not happen and you have sustained discrimination of one group or the other, you are really building up conflicts and they often fight to get their share of the limited resources, and so sustainable development and respect for the rights of the individual often is a good preventive action before conflicts break out.

Q: The Security Council is preparing for a meeting this afternoon on the Middle East. Would the issue of sending peace observers or peacemakers to the area be on the agenda, and what about the U.S. playing an active role in the Middle East?

SG: On your first question, let me say that I have no doubt that the issue will be raised. It is an open debate, and the speakers will not be limited to only the 15 members of the Council. Any Member State of the Organization will be free to speak, and I am sure the issue of the observers there will be raised; whether the Council will be able to take a decision or not is not certain. The role of the U.S. is a decision for the U.S. to take, but the U.S. has an important leadership role in the region, because both parties believe that U.S. can help them get an agreement or help them out of this difficult situation. All of us - Norway, myself, the European Union, the Russians - have all been working with the U.S. and the parties to try and get, to calm the situation if I may put it this way. I know that there is a sense that the U.S. should do more, but that is a decision for the U.S. Government to take. But what is important, and what is essential is for all of us to recognize that the current impasse in the region cannot be allowed to persist. It is dangerous, it is raising tensions in the region, and if we do not take concrete steps to contain it, it may spread to other parts of the region and beyond. *****