Document Library

Rome, 15 March 2018

THE SECRETARY-GENERALREMARKS AT MINISTERIAL CONFERENCE

ON SUPPORT FOR THE UNITED NATIONS RELIEF AND WORKS AGENCY

FOR PALESTINE REFUGEES IN THE NEAR EAST

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I thank Egypt, Jordan and Sweden for co-chairing this gathering.

I also welcome the high-level presence of the League of Arab States, the Organization for Islamic Cooperation and the European Union.

I would like to start by recalling a memorable encounter I had last year with students at an UNRWA school in Gaza.

We all know the pressures that Palestinians in Gaza face -- the poverty and power shortages, the closures and restrictions, the periodic violence and fear that yet another conflict could erupt at any moment. Yet in that place of uncertainty, the young people with whom I met were composed in talking about their situation. They spoke with passion about their commitment to democracy and their thirst for human rights. They shared with me their desire to make a difference in the world. In that place where hope is eroded daily, these students held on to their aspirations for the future. If only, I thought, the world could do more to respond to their plight, and more to translate their dreams into tangible improvements in their lives.

That is precisely what UNRWA does every day with such steadfastness, not only in Gaza but in the camps, communities and countries across the region that host Palestinian refugees. We have gathered today to fortify that mission and to uphold our responsibility as an international community to support and protect the vulnerable. We are here to help UNRWA overcome the worst financial crisis in its history. In the early days of the United Nations, the General Assembly created UN Relief and Works Agency to provide Palestine refugees with assistance, and to help them achieve their human potential.

Today, UNRWA’s mission is just as crucial as it was sixty-eight years ago. But until a just and lasting solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is achieved, the work of UNRWA remains vital. Vital to providing life-saving humanitarian relief and health care. Vital to building the future of Palestinian society through education. Vital to ensuring human security, rights and dignity for over five million Palestine refugees. UNRWA has a solid record of achievement. Its schools are among the best performing in the region. Its health, relief and social programmes are low-cost and high-impact. And by keeping half a million children in school and millions of people healthy and nourished, UNRWA is contributing to stability in the occupied Palestinian territory, as well as in Jordan and Lebanon -- and has undertaken extraordinary efforts to support Palestinians who have suffered as a result of the tragedy in Syria.

UNRWA is an asset to the international community that we must protect and support. Unfortunately, today’s financial crisis places all of UNRWA’s achievements at risk. Without a collective solution, UNRWA will soon run out of money. We must not allow this to happen. I have spoken to many of you about the situation. UNRWA’s Commissioner-General has also been seeking your support. We sense a very high level of concern. Now we need high-level action to translate concern into cash.

I deeply appreciate the generosity of donors who support UNRWA, including those who have already pledged their contribution to its 2018 budget, including through multi-year agreements. We are also grateful to donors who have fast-tracked their contributions. Recognizing the urgent needs, the UN’s Central Emergency Response Fund is releasing an exceptional combined rapid response grant and loan allocation of $30 million. I thank all donors to CERF who have made this possible. But we must also recognize that the financial crisis facing the Agency today is unlike those in the past. It is far more grave, and threatens to cut programmes far more savagely.

For 2018, with pledges reduced, UNRWA faces a shortfall not of millions, not even of tens of millions, but an estimated $446 million. Critical services could be reduced or eliminated entirely – from schools to sanitation, from medicine to microfinance to food security for some 1.7 million refugees in abject poverty or affected by conflict. This would have severe impacts – a cascade of problems that could push the suffering in disastrous and unpredictable directions.

So today I ask you to bridge the Agency’s shortfall for 2018 with predictable, sustained and additional funding. I also appeal to you to increase support in the years ahead to ensure schooling, health care and food assistance. Such spending is an investment with wide-ranging dividends – in the human development of the Palestinian people, in stability today and in a peaceful future in and beyond Palestine. It can also address some of the despair and other factors that lead to radicalization.

I commend UNRWA’s dedicated and highly skilled workforce -- the teachers, doctors, emergency responders and others who operate 700 schools and 140 clinics under often dire conditions. Let me also acknowledge the extraordinary solidarity of the host countries in accommodating Palestine refugees over seven decades.

As you know, I have prioritized UN reform and I appreciate the advances made by UNRWA and its current leadership. This reflects our commitment to all stakeholders, including beneficiaries in our field operations, to be effective while constantly enhancing our efficiency.

In that spirit, I appeal to all donors – each government and organization in this room today – to step forward and give UNRWA what you can. Truly, what you can.

If each of you does that, we will be able to address UNRWA’s shortfall.

More importantly, we will send a strong message to Palestine refugees that we are committed to their rights, their well-being, and meeting their daily needs.

To those who may question the expense, let me echo UNRWA’s fundraising campaign: Dignity is priceless.

As a matter of human solidarity, and as a matter of smart steps for peace, let us give UNRWA our full and generous support.

Thank you.

Readout of the Secretary-General’s meeting with H.E. Mr. Mahmoud Abbas, President of the State of Palestine

The Secretary-General met today with H.E. Mr. Mahmoud Abbas, President of the State of Palestine.

The Secretary-General and President Abbas agreed on the importance of moving the Middle East Peace Process forward and underlined their shared commitment to the two-state solution as the only viable option to sustainable peace.

The Secretary-General expressed his concern about the dire humanitarian situation in Gaza and the funding shortfall of the UNRWA (United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees) programmes. He stressed the importance of continued humanitarian and development assistance to the Palestinian people from the international community.

New York, 20 February 2018

THE SECRETARY-GENERAL

REMARKS AT SECURITY COUNCIL

New York, 20 February 2018

AS DELIVERED

President of the Security Council, Your Excellency Ambassador Mansour Al-Otaibi, Permanent Representative of Kuwait,

Your Excellency, Mr. Mahmoud Abbas, President of the State of Palestine.

Welcome to you and your delegation,

Excellencies,

I have just returned from a visit to Kuwait.

Kuwait generously hosted a conference on the reconstruction of Iraq and helped mobilize critical resources.

The international community showed its gratitude to the Iraqi people for their courageous victory over Daesh.

The support is a vote of confidence in the government and people of Iraq.

Kuwait, Mr. President, has played a very important leadership role in this very successful meeting.

But, unfortunately, positive developments in Iraq are an exception in the region.

This context underscores the need for a political solution to the Israeli- Palestinian conflict which has lasted for far too long.

I am here to reiterate my full personal commitment – and the commitment of the United Nations – to supporting the parties in their efforts to achieve a two-State solution.

A solution of two democratic States, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace within secure and recognized borders.

A solution that addresses all final status issues on the basis of relevant United Nations resolutions, international law and mutual agreements.

There is no Plan B.

Yet, we must face today’s sad reality.

After decades of support, the global consensus for a two-State solution could be eroding.

Obstacles on the ground have the potential to create an irreversible one-state reality.

It is simply impossible to square the circle of a one-state reality with the legitimate national, historic and democratic aspirations of both Israelis and Palestinians.

At the same time, conditions for Palestinians in Gaza – which has been under the control of Hamas for a decade – are dire.

Shortfalls in UNRWA funding are a matter of international concern.

The human security, rights and dignity of five million Palestine refugees are at stake.

So, too, is the stability of the region.

I appeal to the international community to step up its generous support.

Excellencies,

This is a time for dialogue, for reconciliation, for reason.

At this moment of grave consequence, I appeal for effective concerted action by all parties. It is more important than ever.

Mr. President,

Allow me to ask you to give the floor to the Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process, Mr. Nickolay Mladenov, to deliver his monthly briefing to the Security Council on the situation in the Middle East.

Thank you.

Secretary-General’s address at the Opening Ceremony of the Munich Security Conference [as delivered]

Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,

It is an enormous pleasure for me to be back since last year’s session.

And if I remember well, last year, on discussing the global threats we are facing, I concentrated on, in the absence of power clear relations, on the multiplication of new conflicts and at the same time the fact old conflicts seem never to die, be it in Afghanistan, Somalia, or in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

And indeed, when power relations become unclear, unpredictability and impunity became the name of the game, and as my grandfather used to say, “there is no longer any respect.” And some things happen, conflict appear everywhere with devastating humanitarian consequences.

And I remember having noticed that those conflicts are becoming more and more interrelated and more and more related to a set of a new global terrorism threat to all of us.

If you look at the map from Mali to Nigeria to Libya to Somalia to Syria, Iraq at the time, to Afghanistan, Yemen, all these conflicts are interrelated, with people fighting going from one to another, people there going back to their countries of origin, and all these conflicts are clearly related to this new threat of global terrorism.

Now, we also noticed that in this context, dramatic violations of international humanitarian law, human rights law and refugee law were taking place, with people suffering enormously, and that it was practically impossible to guarantee accountability in relation to these terrible violations.

Now one year afterwards, I have to recognize that the situation has not improved. On the contrary, the problems I described remain. But we have two new qualitative changes that make things considerably worse.

Number one for the first time since the end of the Cold War we are now facing a nuclear threat. A threat of a nuclear conflict. And I am naturally referring to the developments in relation to nuclear weapons and long-range missiles by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea: a development made in total contradiction to the will of the international community and in clear violation of several resolutions of the Security Council.

It is important to note that the unity that the Security Council has been able to demonstrate the will of the international community and has been able to put through sanctions a very meaningful pressure over North Korea, and that pressure in my opinion is absolutely essential to be maintained.

But the pressure also creates the opportunity for diplomatic engagement aiming at the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula; a denuclearization that I believe we all want to be peaceful and within the framework of a regional security framework.

It is true that in recent weeks we witness an improvement in Korean relations.

I was myself in the Olympic games of PyeongChang and it is always with emotion that we see North Koreans and South Koreans together in a competition like this one and of course that fact that the dialogue within the two Korea’s was re-established is a positive one; and especially the fact that the hotline between the military of the two countries was reestablished was an important factor to avoid misunderstandings and escalations.

But even if the relations between the two Koreas improved, let’s be clear that is not the central question we are facing. The central question remains the question of denuclearization.

And the question of denuclearization, in my opinion, requests that we all engage actively in order to be possible for, I would say, the two key stakeholders in relation to this crisis, the United States and North Korea, to be able to come together and have a meaningful discussion on these issues.

I believe United States is ready to do so and recent statements by the Vice-President demonstrate that it is absolutely essential to keep the pressure over North Korea and to convince North Korea that it is absolutely vital for them to come to the table and to be able to find a way for this denuclearization, a peaceful denuclearization of the Korean peninsula to be possible.

Obviously, there is a role for all the other countries of the so-called six party talks, obviously there is a role for the international community. It is important that we all abide by Security Council resolutions. It is important that we all participate in this need for pressure over North Korea but it is also important not to miss the opportunity of a peaceful resolution through diplomatic engagement as a military solution would be a disaster with catastrophic consequences that we cannot even be able to imagine.

The second qualitative change that, I believe, exists relates to what we are witnessing today in the broader Middle East, where I think we are facing a true Gordian knot.

We always had conflicts in the Middle East since the beginning of civilization and in the last few decades, we got used to a succession of conflicts and crisis but always with this idea, perhaps naïve, that the international community would be able to deal with each one separately or in succession.

We have witnessed the Arab-Israeli conflict and then progressively transformed into a Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

We have witnessed the civil war in Lebanon and then the conflict between Hezbollah and Israel.

We have witnessed the different conflicts in which Iraq got involved and the most recent developments in the country and finally with the so-called Arab Spring, we have seen the conflict in Syria, in Yemen, in Libya.

But as I said until recently we always got the impression that things were more or less under control and each of these situations could be handled separately, even if it was more and more obvious that there was an interrelation among them.

And that interrelation became even more clear when Da’esh with its operations made the Iraqi crisis and the Syrian crisis so obviously interconnected.

What I think has changed, clearly, is that today, the whole global Middle East became a mess.

It became a mess with a number of different fault lines that are completely crossing each other and interconnected: the fault line that remains between Israelis and Palestinians; the fault line that represents the memory of the Cold War, that is still there; the fault line between Sunni and Shia.

And if you look at these fault lines I described, it is clear that there is a very special position of a country like Iran that has a fault line with Saudi Arabia and its allies, a fault line with Israel and a fault line with the United States; all these things naturally making the situation extremely complex.

And more recently, I would say a Sunni-Sunni fault line, very clear in relation to the crisis of the Gulf Cooperation Council that has, I am sure, many reasons explaining it, but in which a central aspect must be the different perspectives that exist about the role of the Muslim Brotherhood in the context of the region.

Now, all these different fault lines crossing each other have created a situation that is an authentic quagmire.

And if you look at the perspective of the different countries, that quagmire becomes more and more evident with the possible exception of Iraq, where, even if things could have gone tremendously wrong, if there was a civil war after the referendum in Kurdistan, the truth is that it was possible to overcome that difficulty.

And I have been in Kuwait just two days ago, and there was a very clear show of confidence by the international community in the process of stabilization in which Iraq seems to be embarking at the present moment. And let’s hope the elections will confirm the vision of a democratic, non-sectarian Iraq.

But with this exception, all the other situations are getting worse.

The Israeli – Palestinian peace process is at a dead end.

If one looks at Syria, after the hopes created by the de-escalation that has reduced the conflict in several areas of the country, the truth is that we are now seeing a reignition of that same conflict in Idlib and in eastern Ghouta, with dramatic humanitarian consequences.

We have seen the Turkish operation in Afrin.

We have seen chemical weapons again reappearing.

We see risks of fragmentation of the country.

And I remember that in the past, Israel used to look into the Syrian conflict as some kind of a distraction in relation to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. But in my recent visit to Israel, I noticed that the perception of the presence of militias very close to Iran, close to the Israeli border, and the perception of a potential arc between Teheran and Beirut allowing for the enhancement of the Hezbollah capacities, seems to be to many Israelis an existential threat.

And the events of just one week ago show how dangerous this can [be] for the situation in the Syrian context.

I would say, the worst nightmare we might be able to face, would be - and I know that both Israel and Hezbollah do not want it - but the worst nightmare would be a new war between Hezbollah and Israel, that would mean the devastation of large parts of Lebanon.

And we know that any spark can trigger it, and that we are far from being reassured that that conflict is impossible.

On the other hand, we see that in Yemen, still no chance of a political dialogue starting.

At the same time, we see that different perspectives in the Gulf Cooperation Council has not only very complex implications within the Gulf, but it has now destabilizing effects in Somalia and in other areas of the Horn of Africa, which means that all these situations seen together represent, what I said, a Gordian knot.

Obviously, we have not been idle in the United Nations.

We are actively engaged in any initiative that can relaunch a peace process that seems to be, as I said, in a dead end, in relation to Palestinians and Israelis with the deep belief that only a two-state solution can address both the interests of the Palestinian people and the Israeli people.

We are totally committed to relaunch the Geneva process, finding a political solution for Syria – the intra-Syrian dialogue in Geneva - now that in Sochi, it was possible - and I have to pay tribute to the Russian Federation on this - to fully abide by the engagements that were taken and to guarantee that Sochi was not a parallel process, but on the contrary, was reaffirming the role of Geneva, and channeling into Geneva the results of what was decided there, fully in line with Security Council resolution 2254.

We will do everything possible to reactivate, to energize the Geneva process.

At the same time, we are totally committed in supporting the stabilization in Iraq. Just to give you an example, the United Nations is involved – in Mosul – in 700 projects that employ about 10,000 people. Which means how strongly we are committed to helping Iraq regain its role in the region.

And we will do everything possible also to stimulate the possibilities of a political dialogue to take place in relation to Yemen.

And simultaneously we have been supporting the Kuwaiti mediation and the efforts of the United States of America, in order to make sure that the Gulf Cooperation Council crisis comes to an end.

But it is obvious that we are dealing in a fragmented way with the reality that is now a holistic reality and requires a common vision.

It is the common vision that is absent.

If, in relation to the Korean situation, we see the unity of the Security Council, unfortunately, that unity is completely absent in relation to the situation in the global Middle East, and particularly in relation to the situation in Syria.

Now, I believe that there is an effective risk of escalation in several of the areas of the region, and some of these forms of escalation that can have absolutely devastating consequences that it is difficult for us to even imagine.

That reason justifies in my opinion that, even if the contradictions of interest of both the global powers and the regional powers are clear, I think the threat for all of us, and the threat for them, first of all, would justify a serious effort to come together and to try to cut this Gordian knot.

There are several interesting suggestions on the table. For instance, I remember that during the Cold War – the old Cold War - the Helsinki process was an important moment to help the two groups come together and establish a platform for discussion.

When I look at the Cold War in the Gulf, I ask myself whether something similar could not be put in place, allowing for at least some form of dialogue to encourage these countries to come together and to find ways to address the very complex contradictions that they face and the very complex differences of interests that indeed exist.

The situation in the global Middle East, is in my opinion today a qualitatively different threat that we face that requires the mobilization of all our efforts, in order to be able to fully address it.

Let me say a few words about another global threat that I believe is more and more in the concerns of us all: and that is related to the cyberspace.

When one looks at today’s cyberspace, it is clear that we are witnessing, in a more or less disguised way, cyberwars between States - episodes of cyberwar between States.

The fact that is we have not yet been able to discuss whether or not the Geneva Conventions apply to cyberwar or whether or not international humanitarian law applies to cyberwar.

I think it’s high time to have a serious discussion about the international legal framework in which cyberwars take place and I think it would be essential to use what is the competence of the First Committee of the General Assembly of the United Nations to do it, and to do it sooner rather than later.

But the concerns go far beyond cyberwar, the concerns relate to what is today the permanent violation of cybersecurity.

What is the multiplicity of activities – some by States, some by different actors, and even by amateurs? What are the different uses that criminal organizations and terrorist organizations are making of the web?

All of these create a level of threat that is becoming higher and higher and for which we have not yet found an adequate response.

Not only the different methods of regulation, both at State level and through international conventions do not easily apply to a situation like this, but there is even an absence of consensus in the international community about how to regulate the so-called internet of things.

I am one of those that defend that only through a multiple stakeholder approach we will be able to make progress. I believe it is necessary to bring together governments, the private sector involved in these areas, civil society, academia and research centres, in order to be able to establish at least some basic protocols to allow for the web to be an effective instrument for the good.

I don’t intend that the United Nations has a leadership role on this, but I can guarantee that the United Nations would be ready to be a platform in which different actors could come together and discuss the way forward, in order to find the adequate approaches to make sure that we are able to deal with the problem of cybersecurity… especially now that artificial intelligence that is providing enormous potential for economic development, social development and for the well-being for all of us, is also in the opinion of many an existential threat to humankind.

All this creates the need for a serious effort in which we need to all embark to be able to have in relation to the web, a proactive form - if not traditional regulation - at least the level of discipline that would be necessary and the capacity to take into account the ethical values that are necessary to make it an element of good for mankind.

Now, it is clear that all these threats are taking place in the context in which simultaneously, we feel that climate change is running faster that we are, in which we feel inequalities are growing in the world, even if the progress generated by globalization and technical development is enormous; and in which we feel that governments and other entities have been unable to properly manage the problems of human mobility of refugee and migration flows.

And all these facts combining are creating levels of mistrust between public opinions, citizens, and political establishments, and international organizations like the UN, that put into question the cohesion of societies, and also that creates doubts about globalization and multilateralism.

And this is a reason why, I believe, we need to be able to unite, we need to be able to affirm that global problems can only be addressed with global solutions and that multilateralism is today more necessary than ever.

That unity is essential if we want to combat the polarization of our societies and if we want to affirm the importance of multilateralism.

And this is also the reason why I am so committed to reform the United Nations, to make the UN more able to respond to the needs and aspirations of we, the peoples, that generated this organization.

But it is also very important that we unite ourselves, in order to make sure that the Paris Agreement is respected and with an enhanced aspiration, with an enhanced ambition, as we are all aware that even the commitments made in Paris are not sufficient in relation to climate change.

That we engage together in making globalization a fair globalization: and we have through the Agenda 2030 an important UN contribution for what could be a meaningful debate for global cohesion in relation to the global development process.

And especially, to engage ourselves to unite the decision makers, leaders all over the world, to understand that the peace and security problems that we are facing today are so serious, at the level of threat [that] is so high, that it is much better to come together than to persist in the level of divisions that we are witnessing today and still paralyze the Security Council for instance, in many of the dramatic crises that we face.

It might be naïve to think that with the level of contradiction that exists today in the world that unity is possible; but I think it is more naïve to believe that divided, we can survive facing the challenges that we are facing in today’s world.

And so my strong appeal is to overcome our differences, to overcome our contradictions and to understand that to face all the challenges that today that mankind, humankind, is facing, we absolutely need to come together.

And this is the raison d'être of the United Nations.

And this was the vision that led many visionaries in the end of the Second World War to create the United Nations.

And what I believe we need is to learn with what happened with the League of Nations to make sure that the same will not be repeated at the present times.

We need to understand that the level of threat we have demand, from all of us, a much stronger bet in the cohesion of our societies and in the unity, building a true and strong multilateralism to address the challenges of the present times.

Thank you very much.

Secretary-General's remarks at opening of the 2018 Session of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People [as delivered]

31 January 2018

Secretary-General's remarks at ceremony marking the International Day of Commemoration in Memory of the Victims of the Holocaust [as delivered]

20 January 2018

Secretary-General's remarks at Ceremony marking the International Day of Commemoration in Memory of the Victims of the Holocaust

This year marks the 80th anniversary of Kristallnacht – the night of broken glass, on which so many Jewish synagogues, shops and other centres of life were destroyed.

Rabbi Schneier has spoken movingly of how as a young boy of eight, he saw his temple in Vienna attacked and in ruins.

As terrible as that night was, we know it was a warning sign of far worse to come.

And so on this day, we have two fundamental duties.

The first is to remember the utter evil and systematic attempt to eliminate the Jewish people.

Our second duty is to be ever watchful of dark clouds on the horizon.

After all, the Holocaust did not happen in a vacuum.

It was the culmination of hatred and hostility toward Jews across the millennia.

We remember the pogroms dating back centuries.

The rise to power in the 20th century of Nazi racists filled with resentment.

The adoption of laws that enshrined discrimination against Jews and so many others.

The propaganda that poisoned millions of minds.

The ghettos, expulsions and round-ups.

Step by step, social order broke down and people were drawn in – as perpetrators, as passive supporters, as victims.

Warning Signs for Today

All of us today have a special obligation.

An obligation to never lose sight of what went wrong and how it happened.

And an obligation to be ever vigilant in the face of persistent anti-Semitism and other forms of hate in our time.

As I scan the global landscape today, I am sorry to say that the state of our world is messy.

And the state of hate is high.

Neo-Nazi Threat is Growing

Almost eighty years after the fall of the Nazi regime, its symbols, mindsets and language are very much with us.

Some still seek to deny or diminish the fact of the Holocaust.

Others downplay the complicity of their citizens and former political leaders.

And we see example after example of the rise of the neo-Nazi threat.

•Anti-hate organizations are now tracking hundreds of pro-Nazi and other such groups.

•With just a little research, we were able to quickly identify 65 groups in 25 countries. These are located not just in Europe and North America but in every region of the world.

•Their followers – and the “likes” they receive on social media – number in the tens of thousands.

•Sixty thousand people marched recently in one country in support of the continent’s far right movements, with placards reading “White Europe” and “Clean Blood”.

•The neo-Nazi group called “Combat 18” has re-remerged, including through a concert in a European country attended by thousands

•A recent far right march – called “Revolt Against the Traitors” by the participants – sought to march near a synagogue on Yom Kippur, the holiest day on the Jewish calendar.
•Last year, hundreds of neo-Nazis gathered to mark the 30th anniversary of the death of Rudolf Hess, one of Hitler’s leading associates.

•A prominent nationalist in one European country described a Holocaust memorial as a “monument of shame” and pledged to “rewrite the history books” of the Nazi era.

•In another, a leading figure questioned the national consensus accepting responsibility for the country’s involvement in deporting Jews.

•In yet another, plans to build a statue to a government minister who persecuted Jews were set aside only after alarm bells went off around the world.

•Another new memorial to the Second World War omitted the country’s own history of collaboration with the Nazis and persecution of the Jews.

•At one far-right gathering commemorating a wartime battle, a neo-Nazi delivered a speech in which he claimed that as a result of the end of the Hitler regime “darkness fell on Europe”.

•On college campuses, recruitment efforts of white supremacist Nazi sympathizers are on the rise.

•On the internet, the white nationalist online ecosystem is phenomenally larger than any other extremist groups.

•Some national armies have had to step up their efforts to keep neo-Nazis from joining and spreading their messages through the ranks.
•And just a few hours’ drive from this nation’s capital, we have seen marchers praising Hitler and chanting “blood and soil”.

Not surprisingly, all of this is having an impact.

According to the Anti-Defamation League, anti-Semitic incidents in the United States rose 67 per cent last year.

In United Kingdom, they rose by 30 per cent.

Hate Moving from Margins to Mainstream

Neo-Nazis and their supporters are very actively doing something else that is a source of concern.

They are busy trying to rebrand themselves.

To come across somehow as something different – as kinder and gentler to win wider favor.
They are less crude and more dangerous.

Their goal is clear: as one said, “to make the mainstream come to us”.

To align with others on the far right to push the boundaries of acceptable conversation farther and farther.

And it’s working. Hard core extremists have been described as being unable to contain their glee at the newly opened doors to their hateful ideas.

They sometimes seek to falsely claiming that they have no problem with Jews, their target is the other group, the other religion, the other minority.

Scratch the surface and we see their true essence. One member of a growing global movement of millions said his dream was of a Europe in 2050:

“….where the bank notes have Adolf Hitler, Napoleon Bonaparte, Alexander the Great. And Hitler will be seen like that: like Napoleon, like Alexander, not like some weird monster who is unique in his own category — no, he is just going to be seen as a great European leader.”

Whenever and wherever humanity’s values are abandoned, we are all at risk.

As the former Chief Rabbi of the United Kingdom, Lord Jonathan Sacks, said “The hate that begins with Jews never ends with Jews”.

We must stand together against the normalization of hate.

We must stand up to political opportunists who profit by scapegoating and vilification.

We must reject those who fail to understand that as societies become multi-ethnic, multi-religious and multi-cultural, diversity must be seen as a source of richness and not a threat.

Need for Education and Leadership

The theme of this year’s Holocaust Remembrance Day highlights the importance of education as a shared responsibility.

The United Nations and the Holocaust Outreach Programme will continue to do its part.

Leaders across the board must step up.

Words matter.

It matters what leaders say. It matters what kind of example is set by public officials from mayors to ministers to heads of state.
As Rabbi Schneier has said, all of us have a responsibility to act against indifference.

We must never be bystanders when lives and values are at stake.

Let us stand up to hatred.

Let us work together to build a world of pluralism, mutual respect and coexistence for all.

Thank you.

https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/statement/2018-01-20/secretary-generals-remarks-ceremony-marking-international-day

16 January 2018

Secretary-General's press conference - full transcript

Watch the video on webtv.un.org:

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Thank you very much for your presence. It is very good to see all of you and let me start by wishing you all a very happy and healthy new year.

I have just spoken to the Member States about the year ahead.

Last year, on my first day as Secretary-General, I issued an appeal for peace and called for a surge in diplomacy to end the crises that were causing so much suffering.

On the first day of this year, I issued a red alert.

At the beginning of 2018, we must recognize the many ways in which the international community is [failing] and falling short.

It is my duty as Secretary-General to tell the Member States where this is happening -- and to suggest ways out of our predicament.

I am sounding an alarm about protracted conflicts and the spread of terrorism.

We face a Gordian knot in the Middle East and potential nuclear catastrophe on the Korean Peninsula.

Climate change is moving faster than we are.

Inequality and nationalism are on the rise, while trust and solidarity are on the decline.

In the face of today’s challenges, the world needs bold leadership.

We need less hatred, more dialogue and deeper international cooperation.

With unity in 2018, we can make this a pivotal year that sets the world on a better course.

Later this month, I will join African leaders for the African Union Summit in Addis Ababa.

One of my main goals as Secretary-General has been to strengthen ties with the AU, a key strategic partner across our agenda. Our relationship with the African Union is one of shared interests and mutual respect.

This year, I will continue to advocate for strong international support for Africa’s Agenda 2063 and for Africa’s peace and security efforts, including through clear mandates and adequate, predictable financing. Africans are changing the narrative on their continent, and this represents a gain for the entire world. Last year, we signed a new platform of cooperation for peace and security and I will be very happy to sign, during the summit in Addis Ababa, our new joint platform for cooperation in relation to development, including the alignment of the Agenda 2030 with the Agenda 2063 of the African Union.

In February, I will visit the Republic of Korea for the opening ceremony of the Winter Olympic Games in Pyeongchang. I hope the Olympic spirit of friendship among nations will spread across the region and beyond.

Finally, let me share some news about our efforts to ensure gender equality at the United Nations. With yesterday’s announcement of a new Special Adviser on Africa, we have achieved a milestone. For the first time in history, we have full parity in the top leadership of the United Nations, the 44-member Senior Management Group. We will continue to do more to empower women and uphold our core commitment to equality and gender parity.

I look to seeing you many times in the year ahead in this room, at the stakeout and in other settings, probably not as much as you would wish but I will do my best. And at a time of troubling crackdowns on the independence of the media, I want to express that I will continue to defend freedom and safety of the press both in public and through diplomatic engagement.

Thank you again for the work you do to illuminate ours, and I will be of course very happy to answer your questions.

**Questions and Answers

Spokesman: Thank you. Sherwin.

Question: Sherwin Bryce-Pease, South African Broadcasting. And, Secretary-General, welcome back to our favourite room at the United Nations, and we certainly look forward to engaging you throughout 2018. And good luck with the 12 points.

In your remarks to the General Assembly earlier, you said that the world had gone in reverse, that racism, nationalism and xenophobia were on the rise. You'll also be aware of the recent derogatory comments attributed to the United States' President as it relates to immigration from Africa and Haiti.

You'll also be aware, sir, of the statement from the Africa Group of ambassadors here at the United Nations and the African Union condemning what it called "outrageous racist and xenophobic remarks." Do you support their call for a retraction and an apology from the United States President?

Secretary-General: Well, as far as I understand, the United States President has denied that he has said that. Our position is very clear. We need to have relations of mutual respect with all peoples in the world, and in particular, migration is a positive aspect. And migrants contribute not only to the welfare of their countries of origin but to the welfare of the countries where they are a part of the development process. The respect for migrants and the respect for diversity, ethnic diversity, religious diversity, is a fundamental pillar of the United Nations, and it will be a fundamental pillar of the action of the Secretary-General.

Spokesman: Thank you. James.

Question: James Bays from Al Jazeera. You and your predecessor have repeatedly said there's no military solution in Syria. And yet right now we have Turkey readying itself for possible military action. We have the US planning a new Kurdish border security force, and we have the Syrian Government, backed by the Russians, actively pursuing a military solution with the bombardment in Idleb and eastern Ghouta and the same Syrian Government, when it goes to Geneva, not engaging fully with the political process. With that backdrop, how do you reinvigorate the peace efforts? And is Sochi part of that?

Secretary-General: I think that that backdrop only shows how important it is to reinvigorate the Geneva process, and to reinvigorate the Geneva process, we are making all efforts in order to make sure that both Government and opposition give positive contributions to make the process move forward.

We were in Riyadh, and I believe Riyadh II was a very important moment to bring the different strands of the opposition together and to have the opposition participating constructively.

We have been… as you know, the positions we have assumed in relation with the last Geneva meeting where, in our opinion, the Government was not delivering on what was necessary. So, a new meeting [will be] convened [in] Geneva or probably to another location close to Geneva. And we hope that this time it will be possible to have constructive dialogue between Government and opposition.

Our position in relation to Sochi is still dependant on how things will develop in between. We believe that what you said only proves that, after all these years, if so many are still betting on military operations, it is clear that there is no military solution.

Spokesman: Ali, go ahead.

Question: Thank you, Mr Secretary-General. Ali Barada from Asharq al-Awsat and from France 24. A follow-up to James' question. Do you see that there is a significant role that should be played by Bashar al-Assad in the solution planned for Syria? And are you happy about the work that has been done by your Special Envoy, Staffan de Mistura, and why? Thank you.

Secretary-General: I am happy with the work Staffan de Mistura has done. I think it's really almost a miracle that he was able to stay the course and make this process move forward with all the difficulties and all the problems and all the obstacles that we have witnessed, and we have asked both Government and opposition to put no preconditions for the discussion. And so I'm not going to put myself a precondition in relation to the presidency of Syria.

It is essential for the two parties to come and discuss without preconditions. And, of course, obviously, the questions of governance, the questions of elections, and the questions of constitution are very important. And each one is entitled to have each one's position, but what, for us, is more important at the present moment is to make sure that the meaningful dialogue starts between Government and opposition without preconditions.

Question: [Off mic] towards a transition?

Secretary-General: Sorry?

Question: Towards a transition, as called by Security Council resolution 2254…?

Secretary-General: Every aspect of the resolution is on the table: constitution, elections and transition. We have tried to organise the debate in a way to allow it to move forward, but none of these aspects is out of the table.

Spokesman: Carole.

Question: Mr Secretary-General, Carole Landry from Agence France Presse. I wanted to ask you about North Korea. Do you think that war is avoidable in 2018 with North Korea? And you mentioned small signs of hope, and some people are dismissive that sending musicians and figure skaters to the south is going to make a real difference. And while you're at the Winter Olympics, will there be an opportunity for diplomacy? Thank you.

Secretary-General: Well, I believe war is avoidable. What I'm worried is that I'm not yet sure that peace is guaranteed, and that is why we are so strongly engaged. As you know, I've sent my Under-Secretary[-General] of Political Affairs to Pyongyang. Today, I was very happy when the ambassador, the Permanent Representative of the Republic of Korea, said that his visit has contributed to the restart of the dialogue between the two Koreas. I think there some signals of hope.

What I believe is extremely important is to take profit of these signals of hope to make sure that a serious process leading to the peaceful denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula takes place. I think there is a window of opportunity. That window of opportunity will, in my opinion, hopefully, make the war avoidable. But it is important that we don't miss the opportunities that those windows can provide.

Spokesman: Edie. Microphone, please.

Correspondent: Sorry.

Spokesman: It's on. It's on. It's on.

Question: Edith Lederer from the Associated Press. Thank you very much. Mr. Secretary-General, first, a quick follow-up to Carole's… Landry's question on North Korea. Is the UN playing or offering to play any role in bringing the opposing parties together?

And my question is about US budget cuts. The Trump Administration's been in the White House for a year, as you have been here at the UN. They arrived talking about budget cuts, and they are most recently talking about dramatic cuts to UNRWA (United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees), the agency for Palestinian refugees. How concerned are you that the US, as the biggest contributor to the UN, will make further devastating cuts to… not only to UN agencies and funds but to the UN budget? And how has this threat of funding cuts affected your first year and your dealings with the Trump Administration?

Secretary-General: First of all, in relation to the Korean Peninsula, since the beginning, I have said that we were available for all possible initiatives that the parties would want. And our objective is to make sure that those that are more relevant in this process are able to seriously talk to each other and to seriously find a way for the denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula. And one of the messages that was very clearly conveyed by [Jeffrey] Feltman in Pyongyang was our belief that direct talks between those that are the key interlocutors in this process are absolutely essential.

We know the limitations of what we can do, but we are totally committed to contribute to the key actors to be able to engage in the kind of talks that can allow for the problem to be solved in line with the resolutions of the Security Council.

Now, in relation to budget cuts… just a moment. In relation to budget cuts, first, there were no budget cuts in relation to the regular budget of the United Nations. We kept a very strong dialogue with both administration and with Congress, and I have to say that the ambassador, Permanent Representative of the United States, was extremely helpful in this process. And even if, as you know, the budget is not yet entirely approved, but what is agreed and the figures that are agreed in the Senate and House of Representatives allow for the regular budget to be funded, and there were no cuts in relation to the regular budget. There are arrears, indeed, but arrears are a traditional aspect of the relationship between the United States and the UN.

In relation to peacekeeping, there is a problem in the sense that the Senate has approved the funding of 25 per cent, which doesn't correspond exactly to the quota. And we are, of course, hoping that the United States with the other Member States will be able to find ways to overcome this. It's not a catastrophic situation. It is a… I would say, specific problem that I hope will be… will have a solution in the dialogue among Member States.

Different is the situation of UNRWA. In UNRWA, I am very concerned. And I strongly hope that, in the end, it will be possible for the United States to maintain the funding of UNRWA in which the US has a very important share. I am… first of all, UNRWA is not a Palestinian institution. UNRWA is a UN institution created by…

Spokesman: General Assembly.

Secretary-General: … '48 if I… Sorry?... '48 by a UN resolution and UNRWA is providing vital services to the Palestinian refugee population, both in the occupied territories and in Jordan, in Syria, and in Lebanon. Those services are of extreme importance, not only for the well-being of these populations, and there is a serious humanitarian concern here, but also, in my opinion and the opinion that is shared by most international observers, including some Israeli ones, it is an important factor of stability.

So, if UNRWA will not be in a position to provide the vital services and the emergency forms of support that UNRWA has been providing, this will create a very, very serious problem. And we'll do everything we can to avoid the situation to occur.

In relation to other agencies, it is necessary to say that US has even in some aspects increased its funding. It's a different pattern from case to case. I would say, obviously, that the question that now is for us, the major concern is UNRWA.

Spokesman: Celia, all the way in the back.

Question: Thank you, Celia Mendoza from VOA Latin America. You just came back from Colombia, and during your visit, Secretary-General, you had spoken about sending more aid for Colombia and their help of migrants coming from Venezuela. Can you spend a little bit of what could be the plan and if you are thinking about doing something from the United Nations to help those migrants in the other countries they're coming to, but also in Venezuela? We know there has been a report about hunger and about the lack of medicines in Venezuela and what the United Nations could do to help those people that right now are facing the struggles of not having access to medical service or to not having access to food in Venezuela.

Secretary-General: As you know, the United Nations can only work in government… in countries at the request or with the support of governments of the countries. The Colombia Government has asked UN agencies and specifically UNHCR (United Nations Refugee Agency) and IOM (International Organization for Migration) have been active in the frontier areas in different forms of support in assistance to Venezuelans that cross the border.

There are several UN agencies that are now cooperating also in relation to different aspects of health and others in Venezuela itself, and in all parts of the world, we are doing the same. So, it's nothing exceptional. It's the normal way for us to operate in situations where there are massive movements of population. And we'll go on at the disposal of all governments to support governments that receive an influx of large groups of people. In some situations in the world, it's refugees. In others, [there] are people moving for other reasons, but we are always ready to support countries in helping not only the people that come but the communities, especially when those communities are poor and, in the case of Colombia, in areas where there is still a security concern.

Spokesman: Michelle.

Question: Thank you, Secretary-General. Michelle Nichols from Reuters. I'd like to ask you about Myanmar. Today Myanmar and Bangladesh announced a deal to return all the Rohingya refugees within two years. What concerns might you have about this deal? Have you also spoken with Aung San Suu Kyi about the detention of the two Reuters reporters? And what is your message to her about their arrest? And also, when do you plan to announce who will be your Myanmar Special Adviser? Have you decided who that will be? And, if so, who is it?

Secretary-General: I did not speak personally to Aung San Suu Kyi on the arrests. We had a very clear position and very clear contacts in the sense that we wanted those journalists to be liberated.

In relation to the agreement, usually, this is dealt with in trilateral agreements between the two states concerned and UNHCR. UNHCR was not involved directly in the management of the agreement even if they were consulted. And we believe it would be very important to have UNHCR fully involved in the operation to guarantee that the operation abides by international standards.

What is it that is essential on this is to make sure that the return is voluntary; it's in safety and dignity and that people are allowed to come back to their places of origin, which means that the huge effort of investment, because there is a lot of reconstruction to be done, and a huge effort of reconciliation is needed to allow it to take place properly.

The worst would be to move these people from camps in Bangladesh to camps in Myanmar, keeping an artificial situation for a long time and not allowing for them to regain their normal lives. We'll be, of course, ready to do everything possible, to support a movement taking place, as I said, based on voluntariness, safety, dignity, and in respect to international standards.

Spokesman: Phoenix TV. Sorry.

Secretary-General: Sorry? [Cross talk]

Correspondent: [Off mic, inaudible] ..the Special Adviser?

Secretary-General: It will be soon.

Spokesman: Go ahead.

Question: Thank you. I'm from China Central Television. My question is about climate change. It's estimation that climate change is one of your priority for 2018, and you said earlier that some large economies, including China, are strongly committed in leadership in climate action, and the Chinese President Xi Jinping also said in his New Year speech that China will honour its promises encountering global climate change. In this regard, do you think in what way the United Nations and China can work together?

Secretary-General: Well, I think, first of all, we welcome the strong commitment of China in relation to climate action, and China is, of course, crucial because of the dimension of its economy. It's important for us to recognise that the commitments made in Paris, in general, are not necessarily being fully met and the commitments made in Paris are not enough to make sure that the increase of temperature will stay below 1.5 or even 2 degrees, which means we need an enhanced ambition.

We are not yet winning this race. Climate change is still winning this race, and that is why I've been asking for an enhanced ambition, and I think the China role in this enhanced ambition is crucial. And I count a lot on the dialogue and cooperation that was established with the Chinese Government in this regard.

Spokesman: Ibtisam.

Question: Thank you. My name is Ibtisam Azem from al-Araby al-Jadeed Newspaper. I want to go back to the Palestine question. What would you say to millions of Palestinians that they have a problem since 70 years? Why would they put their faith in the international community since Israelis creating facts on the ground? Why would they… what would you say to them first? And the second question, why would they put any faith in… and trust in the UN and international community? Thank you.

Secretary-General: Well, what we say is very clear, that we understand the suffering and predicament and sometimes the frustration, but we are committed and we will remain committed to push for the two-state solution. We are committed and we remain committed to oppose any unilateral action that undermines the two-state solution, and you know the positions I have repeatedly taken in relation to the settlements. We don't have the power to solve all problems, but my belief is that, when we know what the solution is, we need to stay the course and fight for that solution.

I have one experience in my life, and that experience was in relation to East Timor. For many decades, many people thought that East Timor had no solution. In the end, there was a solution. So, we should never lose hope. I understand how difficult the situation is today. Our commitment and our resolve remains the same, and we'll do everything possible for the two-state solution not to be undermined and in the end, for it to become a reality.

Spokesman: Talal.

Question: Thank you, Secretary-General, for this conference. My name is Talal Al-Haj, from Al-Arabiya. My question is relating to the reports submitted by the Panel of Experts in… or relating… Resolution 2140 on Yemen. The Panel of Expert gave the resolution… their report on the 9th of this month to the Member States, and in it, they argue that, after examining the remnants of the missiles, UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicles) and military equipments in Saudi Arabia, fired by the Houthis, they found that they are of Iranian make. Now, the result of the panel finds that Iran is in noncompliance with the programme… with paragraph 14, Resolution 2216, and it failed to take necessary measures to prevent… to direct or indirectly… directly or indirectly supply sale and transfer of the missiles and UAVs to the Houthis.

We… we have discussed this point before, and you acknowledged the right of Saudi Arabia to protect itself. What can be done to convince the Iranian Government to stop supplying… after this is a UN document that find that they are in noncompliance, to stop supplying the Houthis with such advanced missiles that are shot against even the Royal Palace in Saudi Arabia and haphazardly can kill many civilians? [Off mic] What can be done to prevent [inaudible]…?

Secretary-General: We have clearly established since the beginning that there is an arms embargo, that the arms embargo needs to be fully respected, that even more attacks with missiles to cities are totally unacceptable. And we will do everything possible through diplomatic engagement, which is what we can do to avoid these kind of things to go on happening.

Question: [Off mic, inaudible] United Nations Verification and Inspection Mechanism (UNVIM) is doing its job…

Secretary-General: That… no, that I must tell you, I think UNVIM has been doing a remarkable job, but UNVIM is a… asked to make sure that, in relation to the access to a number of points of entry where humanitarian aid and other forms are taking place, this is not used for missiles or other weapons or other things to go into Yemen.

But Yemen has a big coast, and Yemen has several borders. And so I don't think it is fair to consider that it is because of UNVIM that the arms embargo has been violated. I am absolutely sure that UNVIM has been doing its work with a lot of professionalism, and it's not because of UNVIM's failures that, illegally, arms have entered the territory of Yemen.

Spokesman: I24.

Question: Thank you. On the Palestinian issue, please, again, the Jordanian Foreign Minister said last week that Jordan and other key Arab states were considering lobbying the UN and presenting a draft resolution to declare East Jerusalem the capital of Palestine and declare a Palestinian state in the coming weeks and months. What's your reaction to that? Is the UN the right forum for this?

Secretary-General: No, this is an area which is in the competence of the General Assembly, and it's strictly dependent on Member States. The Secretariat does no action on that. There are several resolutions, as we know, and, obviously, Member States are entirely free to adopt resolutions that they consider adequate to their purposes.

Our commitment and our interest is not in asking Member States to withdraw that resolution. It's to do everything we can for the promotion of the two-state solution to be a reality.

And, in my opinion, I've always said that I would like to see a Palestinian state and an Israeli state, both with capital in Jerusalem.

Spokesman: Erol.

Question: Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary-General. You have spoken and you was at the wrapping up of the work of 24 years’ work of the ICTY, International Criminal Tribunal for Former Yugoslavia. And you said many times also that, at the end of that work, that Srebrenica is still haunting the United Nations conference.

At the same time, there is a huge archive left of the documents, millions of documents. What do you think, sir, where that archive should have finished, in which country or to stay in Hague and whether United Nations is entitled or you would like to see part of that documentation because of that Srebrenica issue and all other things at the United Nations?

Secretary-General: No, I think what's essential is to guarantee that the archive is well preserved. We have full confidence in the institutions in The Hague. As you know, there is a mechanism that prolongs… continues, so we have full confidence in the institutions in The Hague to do it.

What is absolutely essential is that the archive is not lost and that the archive will be open for all independent analysts and people interested to be able to use it for a more widespread knowledge of the reality that has happened.

We are not claiming that we want to keep the archive in New York or whatever. We are open to discuss any solution guaranteeing the preservation of the archives. For the moment, we have a situation in which, as you know, the court is replaced because there are many remaining things for the future by the mechanism that was created, and we fully trust the mechanism.

Spokesman: Richard.

Correspondent: Thank you, Mr Sec…

Question: [Off mic] Just… just… is the UN… is the UN… since it's a UN court, would UN would like to have some kind of supervisional role? And what about the states that are involved in the Balkan… what about their right to have part of that archive?

Secretary-General: I think the states would have the right to consult the archive. I think it's good that an archive of this nature is kept by an independent institution.

Spokesman: Richard?

Question: Mr. Secretary-General, Richard Roth, Cable News Network.

Secretary-General: Sorry?

Spokesman: Richard Roth, over there.

Correspondent: Hello! Over here.

Spokesman: He's hard to miss. [Laughter]

Question: You have been in office here over a year. You promised transparency. The reform of the UN, the streamlining, big themes, but the public never really knows what has been accomplished in that spirit. Can you give me one example of something that you found that shocked, disappointed, horrified you, regarding the bloat, the labyrinth of the UN system, something that at meetings you say to people, listen, I can't believe that we have 200 people doing this or somebody's stupid brother-in-law was hired to do this. There's got to be one example. Otherwise, people just hear these theoretical complex ideas of reform. If I'm going too fast, I will slow down. [Laughter]

Spokesman: [Off mic, inaudible] something that you've shocked since you've come into office.

Secretary-General: No, the area that has worried me much and in which we are working hard and I hope that will be working successfully, there are some indicators that are very positive. For instance, the time that Member States were using to appoint the authority to investigate situations of sexual exploitation and abuse moved from [79] days to [6], just to give an example of how seriously Member States are taking this question.

But the area that I would say has corresponded to the biggest concern and the thing in which I felt more uncomfortable as Secretary-General of the UN are the forms of sexual exploitation and abuse perpetrated by UN staff, military or civilian, in several circumstances where they are supposed to protect the populations. And this is an area where we have developed a number of actions. You know that we have appointed the first victims advocate at global level, four at operations level, that we have now the compact signed by more than 80 countries, that more than 50 leaders have joined our circle of leadership.

As I said, we start to see, both in our own operational procedures and in Member States, an enhanced commitment, but the problem is not yet solved. There's a long way to go. And this is something that really I cannot accept, I mean, that UN members that are supposed to protect populations violate human rights and especially in the area of sexual exploitation and abuse.

Question: France yesterday said their peacekeepers did not abuse women, children in the Central African Republic.

Secretary-General: Well, there is a report I've seen on that. I've seen part of the things in the report are related to things that have happened long time ago. Others are more recent. This is exactly one of the areas where we are trying to be more active to make sure that we really change the situation on the ground. But we are not in a state of denial. We are in a state of recognition of a problem and of considering a priority to tackle the problem to eliminate it.

Spokesman: Maggie.

Question: Secretary-General, Margaret Besheer, Voice of America. A follow-up on the UNRWA. Have you received official notification from the Trump Administration? There were reports before we came down here this afternoon that they've sent a letter to UNRWA, $60 million to be withheld… withheld now and another 65 million under review. Have you been notified of this? And have you spoken to Ambassador [Nikki] Haley about it?

Secretary-General: It's probably my fault, but this is an information I have not [received]. I mean, I've been in close contact with UNRWA, but what you are saying now, I was not yet informed.

Question: So no… no official confirmation at all from the Americans… [Cross talk]

Secretary-General: No, there might be something I do not know, because, I mean, it's impossible to accompany things by the minute. Until I was informed, there was no official notification of a position, but it might have happened.

Spokesman: Thank you. Matthew.

Question: Sure. Thanks a lot. Matthew Lee, Inner City Press, on behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Access, hoping for more question and answer in 2018, as you said.

In November, there was a… there was an indictment announced in Federal Court downtown of the head of an ECOSOC (Economic and Social Council)-accredited NGO for bribing, allegedly bribing, the President of the General Assembly, Sam Kutesa, to benefit the China Energy Fund Committee. And I wanted to ask you, that remains still in the Global Compact, and there hasn't been even an audit or anything created.

What… why haven't you started an audit in that case? Why is the beneficiary of what's described as bribery in the UN still in the Global Compact? And how do your reforms preclude or make impossible this type of bribery that's now happened twice under John Ashe, may he rest in peace, and under Sam Kutesa?

And, also, on Cameroon, you visited, I know, in late October. Since then, some Anglophone leaders have been arrested… or abducted in Nigeria, where I know your deputy was. I wanted to know what the UN system is doing about this now cross-border problem. Thanks a lot.

Secretary-General: Well, as a matter of fact, in relation to that, we have done several initiatives, and some of them even led to the release of people, and we will go on engaging with all the states involved.

In relation to other cases, I would like to say that I'm not aware of presence in the Compact or whatever. I will have to look into it. I will look into it. What is clear for me is that we don't want the Compact to have companies that do not abide by the set of principles that were defined in the constitution of the Compact. There is a code of conduct that is there, and that should be respected. So, I don't know exactly what happened in the compact in that regard. I will look into that.

Spokesman: Abdelhamid.

Question: Thank you so much, Mr. Secretary-General. My name is Abdelhamid Siyam from the Arabic Daily al-Quds al-Arabi. And I’m thankful because you answer some of my questions about UNRWA, but I have two other questions. Since the US casted itself out…

Secretary-General: Since… sorry?

Question: Since the United States, Trump Administration took the side of Israel become unacceptable mediator in the Middle East process. Can the UN fill the void since the UN is all… the only frame of reference for peace talks in the Middle East, taking into account all these resolutions?

The second, we talk about two-state solution. Do you know, Mr. Secretary, how much land left in the West Bank to establish a Palestinian state? Do you know that when the UN start talking about the two-state solution 2002 by adopting Resolution 1397 and then Resolution 1550, from that day on, nothing left. Most of the land had been confiscating by Israel. There is no… do you believe there is land left to establish a Palestinian state? Thank you.

Secretary-General: So the first question… yes. Let me be very clear. The UN is ready to play whatever role both parties are ready to accept us to play. I have no doubt that United [States] as a negotiator at the leverage that the UN has not. And so I don't think that there should be a false hope that the UN can now do things that probably are very difficult to obtain. But the UN is always at the disposal of the parties for whatever is possible to do for a solution to be found.

Now, there has been, as you know, as you said, a lot of land that have been now used in settlements, and it's true, but we are believing and, according to the opinion of our people, that a solution… two-state solution is still possible, including eventually aspects of land swaps, including the possibility of… I mean, it can have one settlement in Palestinian territory and the Palestinian law. I mean, there are many solutions for that.

But we still believe that the two-state solution is possible. Obviously, as settlements grow, this makes it more difficult. But we still believe the two-state solution is possible, and we still believe that, without it, we don't see a Plan B.

Spokesman: Victor?

Question: Thank you. [Indiscernible name] Turkish News Agency. I'd like to ask about the US decision to establish a border security forces on the Syrian border. The decision has already led to tension between Turkey and the US, and Russia also warned about a possible division in the country, and Syria sees it as an attack on the sovereignty. I was wondering if you have a comment or any concerns about this decision. Thank you.

Secretary-General: As you know, too many countries have had troops in Syria. I think if the Syrian people could be able to solve alone its problems, it would probably be much better. [Laughter]

Spokesman: Benny.

Question: Hi. Benny Avni. Secretary-General, hello. The events in Iran… [Cross talk]

Secretary-General: Oh, sorry. You were covered by very important media outlet. [Laughter]

Question: The events in Iran, at least two dozen were reportedly killed. More than thousand… thousands were arrested.

Spokesman: [Off mic, inaudible] Please.

Question: Well, if you want to correct my questioning, please do that.

The international community has been relatively silent about this. Do you have anything to say about the situation there, which is volatile?

Secondly, yesterday, President [Mahmoud] Abbas delivered a speech in which he said there's no relation between Zionism and Jews and that Jews have no… and he indicated that Jews have no relation to the land of Israel. Does that present a problem for the two-state solution? He also used very colourful Arabic language towards the President of the United States and said that the United States can no longer be a mediator. Is that… does that factor in your assessment of the situation?

Secretary-General: First, you know, in my life, I have been in government against which there were demonstrations, and I was a demonstrator for different purposes. So, if there is something I cared a lot about is… and I must say, when I was in government, there was no demonstrator arrested or demonstrations repressed.

If there is something I care a lot is for the right of demonstration, of peaceful demonstration of any people. So, I care about the right of Iranian people to demonstrate, and we have clearly stressed that that right should be respected. We also appeal for demonstrators to do it peacefully, but the right of demonstration is an essential part of the human rights in any place in the world.

Now, one of the reasons why we believe that we need to have a two-state solution with Israelis and Palestinians is that we believe that there is a link between these two people with that land. There is no way we can solve in another form this problem.

I understand that the relationship between the United States and the Palestinian Authority is difficult and complex at the present moment. We have the recognition of Jerusalem, so there are many difficulties and complexities in that relationship. I hope that this will not undermine the possibility of Israelis and Palestinians to seriously discuss the way out for both to be able to construct finally a solution for this too-long-lasting problem.

Spokesman: Mr. Abbadi.

Question: Thank you, Mr Secretary-General. Thank you for this press conference. And happy New Year to you as well. Abbadi from Le Dossier du Maroc.

You said that the year 2017 should be the year of peace, and you just expressed your disappointment, saying that it remains elusive. My question is about global peace. And, in this instance, I would like to quote President… Chinese President Xi Jinping what he said about that. And I quote, a good China…

Secretary-General: What peace?

Spokesman: Can you speak a little louder?

Secretary-General: What peace your concern is about?

Spokesman: Peace.

Secretary-General: No, but he said…

Question: Global peace.

Secretary-General: Global peace.

Question: The Chinese President said, and I quote, a good China-US cooperation will serve as an anchor for global stability and a booster for world peace. In your capacity as the Secretary-General of the United Nations, what importance do you attribute to these bilateral relations in the promotion of peace and security in the world?

Secretary-General: A vital importance. As you know that one of the things that today is very widespread in intellectual discussions about the future is so-called Thucydides trap, according to which and based on the old war between Sparta and Athens, when a power emerges and another power has been dominant, there is a serious risk of confrontation between the two.

And so it is obvious that, with the rising influence of China and international affairs that I think is a welcome development and United States being traditional the biggest power, it's absolutely vital that these two countries have a constructive, positive relationship, as it is vital that the US and Russia and Russia and China and other big powers have a positive relationship.

Spokesman: Maurizio, Notimex.

Question: Thank you, Secretary-General. Maurizio Guerrero from the Mexican News Agency, Notimex. Portugal effectively decriminalised drugs…

Secretary-General: Sorry?

Question: Portugal effectively decriminalised drugs more than 15 years ago, a policy by…

Secretary-General: Which was done by me.

Correspondent:: Right, exactly. [Laughter]

Secretary-General: And it was not drugs. It was the consumption.

Question: The consumption of all drugs, yes. A policy that has been regarded and, by all metrics, has been successful, and it's perfectly in line with the conventions of the United Nations. So my question is, would you actively recommend Member States to consider these policies, given the high cost of the so-called war on drugs? Thank you.

Secretary-General: Well, it would not be nice if I would be now making self-propaganda, no? [Laughter]

First of all, the policy that was approved was not simply a problem of decriminalisation of consumption. It was not legalisation. It was decriminalization, in the sense that the state guarded the responsibility to support the people, looking into their health, into their treatment, and there was a responsibility, an interacting with the persons on this. And there was a number of other measures of prevention, of public health related to this, the introduction of several other policies to complement it, so it was not just one single measure. And we kept a very strict policy of criminalisation of traffic of drugs.

This policy, according to the indicators that are now available, proved to be successful, not only because it diminished the risks for the people and for society, but in the end, consumption decreased in the follow-up of the introduction of the policy.

I mean, it's up to each country to define its own policy. Not as Secretary-General of the United Nations, as former Prime Minister of Portugal, I'm particularly proud of what we did. It was not easy. It was not a [consensus] measure. I think it worked.

It's up to each country to decide its policies, but I think, if I can… I think that there is a serious discussion that is needed about drugs, the so-called war on drugs. And I believe the discussion should be without prejudice, without pre-established parameters, because this is one of the most complex problems that we face. It has a personal dimension. It has a dimension of public health. It has a dimension of impact on the structure of states. We see states being dramatically impacted in their institutions because of this.

So, this is an area in which I would suggest open discussion without prejudice and without predetermined positions, because I don't think anybody can be sure that there is one single solution for the problem. This is very complex in many dimensions, and it is a very serious problem that need to be addressed.

We tried in Portugal at the time, and I'm now speaking in my past capacity, to find what we thought was the best solution for a country that was a small country. We couldn't adopt a policy not taking into account the environment, so we were not entirely free, but a small country, for a small country that would optimize the situation of the people. No? Having the people as the centre, and I think it was successful.

Spokesman: Masood Haider. Masood.

Question: Thank you. Thank you. Secretary-General, my name is Masood Haider. I represent Daily Dawn Newspaper of Pakistan. My question is about 400 Palestinian children in Israeli jails, according to latest figures available, and one of the thing that is happening is, once when the children are picked up by the Palestinian… by the Israeli authority, they are then transferred to the prisons in Israel itself, which is considered to be a violation of the fourth Geneva Convention and that the children are brutal… treated brutally.

Have you been able to talk to the Israeli authorities about this treatment of the Palestinian children? They're between 12 and 17 years old. Thank you.

Secretary-General: The answer is yes. This is one of the things we have discussed in my visit to Israel and Palestine.

Spokesman: Kyodo News.

Question: Thank you, Secretary-General. I’m [inaudible], Kyodo News Japan. My question is about DPRK's (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea) visit… participation for Olympic Games. In General Assembly, you expressed that it is encouraging, but on the other hand, full implementation of sanction resolution is very important at this moment. And I have seen growing concern, which is that, if a large number of people come from DPRK to South Korea, especially with logistic help by South Korea, for example, for transport or where to stay, that could undermine the effort of implementation. What do you think about that kind of concern? And I'd like to ask you if you have spoken with South Korean government or US government about that point.

Secretary-General: No, I have to say that we have full confidence in South Korea to be able to handle that in a way that will present no risk. I think South Korea is a very developed country with very solid capacities. We are absolutely sure that this will be properly handled.

My only concern is sometimes that we look at these symbols of goodwill and positive indications, and we forget that the main problem is yet to be solved. And so, this is… if there is a risk is for people to think, oh, no, now things are solved. No. It's very important that we have these conversations between the two Koreas. It's very important that we have these Olympic Games, but let's not forget that the central problem is yet to be solved, and that’s to make sure that the international community commits strongly to that.

Spokesman: Sorry. Last question will be to Olga.

Question: Secretary-General, Olga Denisova with RIA Novosti Russian News Agency, and the question will be also about Olympic Games.

Secretary-General: About?

Question: Olympic Games, Winter Olympics. As you may know, Russian athletes will be going to South Korea without the right to play national anthem and to carry the national flag. What's your idea of… what do you think of such participation of the team in Olympic games?

Secretary-General: Well, as you know, this is a very complex question relating to rules and regulations about the Olympic Games and questions of doping and etc. I don't think I am the right person to comment on that. I would like to say that I have a lot of admiration; many times in my life I've seen Olympics Games and I've seen Russian athletes doing fantastic performances, and I hope that all these problems that have been existing will be solved to allow for, in the next Olympic Games, to have a full-fledged presence of Russian athletes.

Spokesman: Great. Thank you very much.

Secretary-General: Thank you very much.

https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/press-encounter/2018-01-16/secretary-generals-press-conference-full-transcript

From day one as Secretary-General of the United Nations, I have consistently spoken out against any unilateral measures that would jeopardize the prospect of peace for Israelis and Palestinians.

Jerusalem is a final status issue that must be resolved through direct negotiations between the two parties on the basis of the relevant Security Council and General Assembly resolutions, taking into account the legitimate concerns of both the Palestinian and the Israeli sides.

I understand the deep attachment that Jerusalem holds in the hearts of so many people. It has been so for centuries and it will always be.

In this moment of great anxiety, I want to make it clear : there is no alternative to the two-state solution. There is no Plan B.

It is only by realizing the vision of two states living side-by-side in peace, security and mutual recognition, with Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and Palestine, and all final status issues resolved permanently through negotiations, that the legitimate aspirations of both peoples will be achieved.

For my part as the United Nations Secretary-General, I will do everything in my power to support the Israeli and Palestinian leaders to return to meaningful negotiations and to realize this vision of a lasting peace for both people.

The Secretary-General spoke today with H.E. Mr Mahmoud Abbas, the President of the State of Palestine. The Secretary-General congratulated the President on the intra-Palestinian agreement signed earlier today in Cairo.

The Secretary-General was encouraged by the recent progress in allowing the Palestinian Government to take up its responsibilities in Gaza, and welcomed the efforts of Egypt to achieve this goal.

He emphasized the continuing need to urgently address the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, particularly with regard to the electricity crisis, and improved access to and from the territory.

The Secretary-General reiterated that the United Nations stands ready to continue working with the Palestinian authorities and the region in support of the Government in assuming its responsibilities in Gaza.