Â鶹´«Ã½

Q: Mr. Annan, I would like to start asking about the siege of the Palestinian President in the occupied Arab territories who is under the captivity of Israeli tanks. What do you say about that? Is that legitimate?

SG: Let me first say that I am very happy to be back in Doha. I have had a very good discussion with the Emir this afternoon. We covered lots of issues of importance and of interest including the situation in the Middle East that you just referred to. I briefed him on my visit to Kabul, developments in Afghanistan and also my discussions in the region and the work that the UN was trying to do to help the Afghans establish a new administration.

Coming back to your question on the Middle East. The situation in the Middle East is very grave and very serious and we are all concerned about finding a way of breaking the impasse. I have been on the phone with Chairman Arafat myself and discussed the situation and also I am in touch with other leaders to see what steps we can take to break the impasse and get the parties back to the table. I am hopeful that if the entire international community works together and we take collective international action we'll be able to bring the parties back to the table.

Q: How do you see the American and Israeli accusations to Mr. Arafat of supporting terror?

SG: I know that the issue of the boat has been a major problem in the Middle East. I know the American Government has indicated that Chairman Arafat should do more to bring down the tension and to reduce violence. I know there is pressure on everyone in the region to fight terrorism and Chairman Arafat is in an extremely difficult situation. I'm not sure he controls everything that happens in the territory and I'm not sure that given the current situation that he is in his leadership is not going to be affected. And we need to really find a way, as I said, of getting the parties to take reciprocal steps to come back to the table.

Q: You did a lot for Afghanistan at the United Nations but we don't see anything more serious, concrete towards the Palestinian question, the Israeli-Arab conflict, in recent times. What do you think you are going to do now?

SG: Mainly the parties concerned have tended to look to the US as a mediator, both the Israelis and the Palestinians, and I have myself been in touch with both parties and I have been working with the European Union, the Americans and the Russians to try to find a way of breaking the impasse, as I referred to earlier, and those efforts are going to continue and I think they should intensify.

Q: Now let's ask about the Afghanistan issue - the international troops are located in Kabul only. Do you have any plans to deploy more troops in other Afghan cities, especially in the areas, large areas, that are out of the new government's control?

SG: The agreement in Bonn which the Afghans signed which was negotiated by Mr. Lakhdar Brahimi, who is here with me today, requested that the international force come to Kabul and its surroundings for a period of six months. And that is the agreement that the Security Council used as a basis to authorize the multinational force to go in. So for the moment their activities are limited to Kabul and the surroundings. We have 2,000 troops there. They are not fully deployed. When they are fully deployed there will be 4,500. For the time being, as I said, they are limited to that. I do agree with you that there is a security problem outside Kabul and we need to find ways of dealing with that security problem. For that purpose, we are also discussing urgently the formation of an Afghan national army and Afghan police, and that would also help. I don't know if between now and the time that the six month period is up all the decisions will be taken but, for the time being, the force is committed to Kabul.

Q: You visited Iran. We have some reports saying that you handed to the Iranians some American demands regarding the Afghan issue. Can you tell us something about that?

SG: I did not carry any message for anybody nor hand any demands to the Iranians. We did discuss the allegations that there are some al-Qaeda elements in Iran and also the question that the boat that was carrying weapons to Palestine, there have been indications that Iran had been involved. Of course the government denies that.

Q: I have a question [inaudible] we talk about Iraq, you talk about American threats to Baghdad. Do you think that there is any reason for the United States to wage a new war against Iraq under such circumstances at such a time?

SG: Obviously, I'm not the US Government and I'm not privy to the discussions that take place in Washington. I'm not sure if any decision had been taken to hit Iraq yet. But I know that there have been discussions going on. I personally have indicated that I think it would be unwise to attack Iraq, at this stage. Besides I have no evidence linking Iraq to the terrorist attacks that took place on 11 September.

Q: What about the sanctions on Iraq, that were imposed on Iraq over the last eleven years, maybe. And the Iraqi people are suffering. Do you think that these embargo and sanctions will remain forever?

SG: I hope not. I hope not and the Security Council resolutions are clear as to what is demanded and required of Iraq and I believe that the moment Iraq has complied the sanctions should be lifted. As it stands now, this has not been fulfilled. The requirements are that the inspectors should be in Iraq and they should certify whether Iraq has weapons of mass destruction. And that certification has to come from the inspectors. And so we are in a catch 22 situation. The inspectors are out of Iraq and yet they are the ones who are supposed to certify the status of Iraqi disarmament for the Council to lift the sanctions. I am hearing rumors that the Iraqis may be open to cooperation with the Security Council but I have no further [unintelligible].

Q: We have some kind of American statements from time to time accusing Iraq of developing mass destruction weapons which you spoke about now. Do you think that Iraq still has such a programme and developing such weapons?

SG: I have no means certifying what they do have or do not have. As I said, the inspectors have not been in and I know that for the first six years of the disarmament process the inspectors did make some progress on some of the weapon systems. Considerable progress had been made. But they have not completed their work.