�鶹��ý

Ladies and Gentlemen, I am extremely happy and delighted to have this opportunity to visit the Woodrow Wilson Center. Your work here does a great deal to promote a broader understanding of the threats and opportunities that we face today, from poverty to AIDS to terrorism and weapons of mass destruction.

As a living memorial to the vision of Woodrow Wilson, who did, perhaps, more than any other American to inspire the idea of the United Nations, you are also carrying forward the belief that a world of laws, and a world of order based on multinational cooperation is a world where all states pursue their aims in peace. Just as important is your unique ability to connect the world of ideas and the world of action by directly informing and influencing policymakers as they grapple in real time with the challenges of our world. There is nothing more valuable when one is in the midst of a crisis than to be able to step back and consider larger implications of day-to-day decisions. Those of us in the front lines are not always able to do that because of time pressure. So the work some of you are doing in your office is of extremely importance and interest to us.

I believe one of the great advantages of your Center is your ability to devote resources to problems on the horizon -- to be able to anticipate major problems that may confront us. It is extremely important to anticipate and focus attention before we are confronted. I am thinking here of your projects on generating thinking about water; your efforts to force a deeper dialogue among policymakers and academic specialists on US policy toward Africa, for example; and your program on conflict prevention. Needless to say, these are all key concerns of my organization.

Let me take the opportunity of this visit to suggest a few other areas of study that deserve your attention. I am thinking in particular of our common fight against poverty -- specifically by generating real, political will towards achieving the Millennium Development Goals. These are eight commitments drawn from the Millennium Declaration -- which was endorsed by all the Member States of the United Nations at the Millennium Summit -- ranging from halving extreme poverty to halting the spread of HIV/AIDS and providing universal primary education, all by the target date of 2015. They represent a set of simple but powerful objectives that every man and woman from Washington to Warsaw or Nairobi to Delhi can easily support and understand. You can play a crucial role in drawing the attention of policymakers to the connection between these priorities and our chances of achieving and maintaining peace and security in the developing world.

Let me end my brief remarks by urging you to think of new ways to incorporate the work of the United Nations in your research. There is much we can offer by way of experience on the ground -- and much you can do to deepen our understanding of the complex courses of conflicts and the many ways they can be resolved.

Let me open it up for discussion. Ask any question you want and I reserve the right to refuse to answer (laughter).

Q (Lee Hamilton): Mr. Secretary-General, you might want to comment on your expectations with regard to the inspections in Iraq.

SG: So far, so good. But it's only been a week and it's not a one-week wonder. So the Iraqis will have to sustain the cooperation with the inspectors. I have spoken to Mr. Blix and Mr. ElBaradei since they returned from Iraq and they were pleased with the assurances they got from the Iraqi operators. Now we are testing those assurances. We are into the fifth day and things seem to be going well. What they have is a new resolution that strengthens their hand, that allows them to go anywhere they want to go without being prevented by the Iraqis and without having to wait. They have been using that new authority very effectively since they started the inspections. We hope that that if they are able to get the full cooperation of the Iraqis -- and the inspections are to be done in accordance with Security Council resolutions -- the arguments for war will be considerably diminished and that we may be able to resolve this issue without conflict. It is important that all the members of the Council who voted for Resolution 1441 act in good faith -- in good faith in the sense that if Iraq does comply and is disarmed and the inspectors confirm that there are no weapons of mass destruction, we accept that. On the other hand, if Iraq were to continue to defy the international authority and the Council, then the members of that Council will have to face their responsibilities.

Q: The so-called war against terrorism has raised important debates about the protection of civil liberties, particularly in the United States. Do you see this as a potential success of terrorists in the sense that it will eventually restrict civil liberties, particularly in this country?

SG: It is a topic that has concerned me for some time. In fact, I was in the Netherlands a week ago and spoke at the Peace Palace. A lot of my comments were on that particular topic. I had a chance to state in the Security Council that we have to be extremely careful not to think that there is a trade-off between effective action against terrorism and human rights and civil liberties. If an individual is required to give up his civil liberties or freedoms for security and safety, do you really have security and safety if you do? I am concerned that certain basic principles -- certain basic rights, certain democratic principles -- can be eroded. And it is not just here. We are seeing it all over the world. We have seen situations where political leaders tag opposition members and legitimate opposition with a “T” word and then go after them. We really have to careful that we do not let the fight against terrorism erode human rights and democratic societies. Because if we do allow that, we have given the terrorists a victory they could not have won themselves.

Q (Bob Hathaway): Welcome to the Wilson Center, Mr. Secretary-General. Those of us who work here were pleased with the acknowledgement of the important role that President Wilson played in popularizing the notion that lies behind the United Nations. It has troubled many of us, however, that many Americans seem to be skeptical of the United Nations -- or even suspicious of it. This is something you must have pondered or puzzled over. I would be interested in your assessment of why so many Americans seem to have difficulties with the United Nations -- and, moreover, what it is that all of us together can do about this.

SG: Thank you very much for that question. I think part of the problem had been the UN itself. We don't seem to be able to tell our story -- even the successful ones. You may recall that when I took over as Secretary-General, one of the first things I said is that we need to bring the UN closer to the people. For some, the UN is quite remote and distant. In other parts of the world -- where we are active on the ground with humanitarian action, development activities and peacekeeping -- they see another face of the UN. All these humanitarian and economic and social workers working in the communities represent the UN. In the US, we don't have that sort of exposure with the public. I did ask a politician who really knows the constituents -- I asked why is it that poll after poll indicates that the American people support the UN, the idea of the UN, but it is not translated into action on the Hill. His answer was interesting. In fact, the person I asked the question of was President Clinton. He said: “Well I'll tell you.” Without batting an eye, he said: ”Yes, they do support the UN. But when the congressmen and senators go back to their constituents, nobody asks them about the UN. When they vote against the UN, they don't pay a price. You don't have a lobby that will go and tell them 'why did you vote against us' and put pressure on them to make sure they do not do it next time. Those organizations that have that active lobby -- who ask questions at the constituents' level -- often have much greater impact.”

But I have been encouraged recently. When you look at the debate and the discussion on Iraq, it was not just politicians and diplomats pleading with the Administration to go to the Council. The American public was saying: go to the Security Council, work with allies. That was also an interesting development. I know that's the situation in Europe and around other parts of the world. When you looked at the polls, it indicated the percentage of Americans who would support a war. But if it was a war approved by the Security Council, the number jumped almost 40% or 50%. That, I thought, was a very significant development. It gives me encouragement that the public is beginning to pay attention to what we do. I hope those of you here -- though your own writing, your own speeches and discussions -- can put across to them the important role the UN can play in an interdependent world, in a world which we all describe as a global village. If it is going to be a village, we need to have common values that hold us together. We need to have a common language. For the time being, that language is international law. And if we begin to undermine that international cooperation and the role of the UN, I think it's going to be quite a miserable place. Thank you.