Annan Calls for "Global Security"

Al-Jazeera ^ | Today | Kofi's allies at Al-Jazeera

[Giant Conservative]

Annan calls for global solidarity

Annan's term as UN secretary-general
expires on December 31, 2006

Kofi Annan, the outgoing UN secretary-general, in a speech given at the Harry S Truman's presidential library in Independence, Missouri has said that human rights and the rule of law are vital to global security and prosperity.

In his speech on Monday, one of the last of Annan's speeches before he leaves his post on December 31, he said that there are five principles which he considers essential: collective responsibility, global solidarity, rule of law, mutual accountability and multilateralism.

Annan chose the Truman museum for his final major speech in part because it is dedicated to a president who was instrumental in the founding of the United Nations. His text repeatedly praised the Truman administration but never mentioned Bush by name.

 

Annan said: "As President Truman said; the responsibility of the great states is to serve and not dominate the peoples of the world.

"He believed strongly that henceforth security must be collective and indivisible. That was why, for instance, that he insisted when faced with aggression by North Korea against the South in 1950, on bringing the issue to the United Nations.

 

"Against such threats as these, no nation can make itself secure by seeking supremacy over all others."

Annan also called for a reform of the Security Council, saying its membership "still reflects the reality of 1945".

He suggested adding new members to represent parts of the world with less of a voice.

He said the permanent members, the world powers, "must accept the special responsibility that comes with their privilege".

"The Security Council is not just another stage on which to act out national interests," he said.

 

American model

During his two five-year terms as UN leader, Annan has tangled often with George Bush's administration, particularly over the invasion of Iraq in March 2003, launched without consent from the UN Security Council.

He said: "More than ever, today, Americans, like the rest of humanity, need a functioning global system through which the world's peoples can face global challenges together. And in order to function, the system still cries out for far-sighted American leadership, in the Truman tradition."

Bush administration officials have argued that Washington should use the UN only to serve its national interest.

 

Annan said: "None of our global institutions can accomplish much when the US remains aloof. But when it is fully engaged, the sky's the limit."

 

Annan steps down at the end of the month, to be succeeded by Ban Ki-Moon of South Korea.

A multilateral century

 

As Washington reviews its policies in Iraq, Annan has pushed for greater involvement by Syria and Iran, a more inclusive political system and greater human rights protections.

 

Truman, who ordered two atomic bombs dropped on Japan in 1945 making the US the sole power in history to use nuclear weapons, learned from that experience that security from then on "must be collective and indivisible", Annan said.

 

He said: "You Americans did so much, in the last century, to build an effective multilateral system, with the United Nations at its heart. Do you need it less today, and does it need you less, than 60 years ago?

 

"When power, especially military force, is used, the world will consider it legitimate only when convinced that it is being used for the right purpose, for broadly shared aims, in accordance with broadly accepted norms."

 

Rights promotion

 

Annan said that the US has historically been a leader in human rights.

 

"When it appears to abandon its own ideals and objectives, its friends abroad are naturally troubled and confused," he said in an apparent reference to charges of abuse at US prisons in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and Iraq's Abu Ghraib.

 

Annan hit out at Washington's opposition to expansion of the 15-nation Security Council as part of a reform drive.

 

He said: "It is only through multilateral institutions that states can hold each other to account.

 

"And that makes it very important to organise those institutions in a fair and democratic way, giving the poor and the weak some influence over the actions of the rich and the strong."

[ReleaseTheHounds]

May I be the first Freeper on this thread to get to say: this person is a real idiot. Apologies to all idiots out there.

[Giant Conservative]

Kofi Annan's dream of a one-world Marxist government will easily survive the end of his own remarkably corrupt reign at the United Nations: it is time to kick the U.N. out of the U.S. and convert the building to affordanble family apartments, which New York needs much more than it does the pampered bureaucrats of the anti-American U.N.

[Texas_Jarhead]

Hey Crook Kofi, FOAD you sorry SOB!

[Soothesayer]

Apology accepted...

[Centurion2000]

He said: "It is only through multilateral institutions that states can hold each other to account.

No, that would be war. Only through WAR and Diplomacy can states hold each other to account.

[AmericanExceptionalist]

As Washington reviews its policies in Iraq, Annan has pushed for greater involvement by Syria and Iran...

I wonder if it has dawned upon Kofi that Syria would want to devour Lebanon through its proxy, Hezbollah; and Iran would want unfettered access to nuclear weapons, in exchange for their "help." But perhaps that doesn't really matter to him.

[rocksblues]

Meanwhile millions of people are living under the thumb of Dictators, Islamic fascists worldwide.

Without the UN lifting a finger.

But Kofi blames the US!

[Vn_survivor_67-68]

I thought comrade annan looked awful transparent while talking about doing "the right thing"

[Cold Heat]

What Annan-us!

[plain talk]

... and the deafending silence from our administration in responding to this speech is sickening.

[AdvisorB]

[Gay State Conservative]

Funny how Coffee Anan chose the Truman Museum for his speech.Harry,for all his faults,would have known how to deal with today's followers of I Slam.

[DuncanWaring]

...Annan has tangled often with George Bush's administration, particularly over the invasion of Iraq in March 2003, launched without consent from the UN Security Council.

Didn't have any problem though, as I recall, with King William's Great Patriotic War Against Serbia.

[Brilliant]

Kofi, you can't even maintain peace in Haiti.

[hgro]

Kofi Annan is a crook and should be behind bars along with his minions. As usual, the Dimocrats have given this guy a pass and now, he will retire with a handsome penion from the U.N. at U.S. taypayer expense. Is it a great world or what.

[Bigg Red]

Kofi, if Truman were around today he would call you out for what you are, you lyin', corrupt sack of billclinton.

[elhombrelibre]

He has good reason to be upset with the US. This was personal for him. A lot of people forget it, but his son lost money when Saddam was overthrown. So Kofi has good reason to take Saddam's overthrow personally.

[Neo-Luddite]

An artillery officer from Missouri with a High School diploma whose personal conduct was above reproach. He ordered the use of Atomic weapons and showed mercy when a man of lesser faith could have become a despot.
In my book, THE greatest Democrat to ever hold that office.

His troubles came with Mac on the Korean peninsula. But that's another story.

I fly the U.N. flag from my pole on a special holiday ever year: April 1st. It drives my wife nuts.

[LibFreeOrDie]

...he said that there are five principles which he considers essential: collective responsibility, global solidarity, rule of law, mutual accountability and multilateralism.

Well, Kofi, the first two principles sound like they're from the Communist Manifesto. The third principle ("rule of law") you and your family disregarded in the Oil For Food scandal. Mutual accountability? For what? The mutual destruction of Israel? And as far as multilateralism goes, it's funny how the U.S. is supposed to be multilateral on everything except nuclear weapons. UN-ites screamed for the U.S to disarm unilaterally in the 60's and 70's. I don't see the UN-ites protesting for Iran and North Korea to disarm today. If they can have nuclear weapons, why can't we?