SECRETARY GENERAL KOFI ANNAN 10/1

[moe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]

16 October 1998 

TEXT: SECRETARY GENERAL KOFI ANNAN 10/16 PRESS FREEDOM
REMARKS 

(Free speech essential for understanding, cooperation) (1480)

Washington -- Freedom of speech, says U.N. Secretary General Kofi
Annan, "is the essential vehicle for that exchange of ideas between
nations and cultures that is a condition for true understanding and
lasting cooperation."

There are those who question the value of freedom of speech to their
societies, and who argue that it threatens stability and endangers
progress, but the argument is made by governments, not the people,
Annan told the World Press Freedom Committee October 16.

Delivering the 1998 Harold W. Anderson Lecture on "Regardless of
Frontiers: Article 19 in a World of Sovereign States," the secretary
general said "the only test that matters" is the choice of every
people "to know more or know less, to be heard, or be silenced, to
stand up or kneel down."

Following is the text of Annan's remarks:

(Begin text)

Mr. Ottaway,
Friends,
Ladies and Gentlemen,

I am very pleased to join this distinguished audience for a discussion
of a subject that holds particular interest for me: how to assert and
advance the universality of the right to freedom of expression
regardless of frontiers in a world of sovereign states and diverse
civilizations. How to ensure the most fruitful and mutually beneficial
exchange of ideas between nations and peoples; how to put the right to
free speech at the service of peace.

You may be surprised to know that that is a right I sometimes find
easier to defend for others than for myself.

And yet it is.

As Secretary General of the United Nations -- an organization of
Member States represented by governments -- I am bound by the Charter,
by precedent and by enlightened self-interest to weigh my words
carefully; to speak up and speak out when no other voice will be
heard; but also to respect the privilege and duty of governments to
defend their people's interests as they deem fit.

But what if some governments are not defending their people's true
interests, or have a view of those interests which the people don't
share and do not endorse; what if governments are an impediment to the
people's wishes, instead of being the vehicle for their fulfillment;
what if some of those "peoples" in whose name the Charter is issued
see the United Nations not as an instrument of their aspirations, but
as a haven for oppressive governments?

Then, we must and we will speak out, for democracy, for human rights,
for the rule of law, for the proposition that governments are the
servants of the people and not the other way around. Some may say that
speaking out is not enough, that words win never effect change, but I
say it is a beginning.

It is a way for the United Nations to pay the peoples of the world the
tribute of truth the tribute without which we can never hope to retain
their support, or to improve their lives. That is why I have sought as
Secretary-General to speak clearly and candidly on every issue - -
from Kosovo to Rwanda to Iraq; from the universality of human rights
to the need for Africa's leaders to take hold of their own destiny
and, most recently, to the need for the global powers to understand
the human and political implications of globalization in a time of
crisis and contagion.

Only by speaking these truths can we ensure.-that ordinary Men and
women in every part of the world hear their United Nations speak in a
voice that recognizes the realities they face, day in and day out.

Now, as you in this audience know well, there are those who still
question the value of freedom of speech to their societies; those who
argue that it threatens stability and endangers progress; those who
still consider freedom of speech an imposition from abroad and not the
indigenous expression of every people's demand for freedom.

What has always struck me about this argument is that it is never made
by the people, but by governments; never by the powerless but by the
powerful; never by the voiceless, but by those whose voices are all
that can be heard. Let us put this argument once and for all to the
only test that matters: the choice of every people, to know more or
know less, to be heard or be silenced, to stand up or kneel down.

Friends,

Freedom of speech is a right to be fought for and not a blessing to be
wished for. But it is more than that: it is a bridge of understanding
and knowledge. It is the essential vehicle for that exchange of ideas
between nations and cultures that is a condition for true
understanding and lasting cooperation That is why I believe we must
look at this question of civilizations anew.

Civilizations have always been enriched, and not weakened, by the
exchange of knowledge and arts, the freer and more peaceable the
better. In the relations between nations, it is rather the lack, of
education, and the dearth of knowledge which is a chief source of
dispute and conflict. Never the opposite.

Ignorance and prejudice are the handmaidens of propaganda, and in most
modern conflicts, the men of war prey on the ignorance of the populace
to instill fears and arouse hatreds. That was the case in Bosnia and
in Rwanda, where murderous, even genocidal ideologies took root in the
absence of truthful information and honest education. If only half the
effort had gone into teaching those peoples what unites them, and not
what divides them, unspeakable crimes could have been prevented.

This is not to say that ideas and interests do not clash. They do, and
always will. But one must never confuse the clash of ideas with a
clash of civilizations. Clashes of ideas can and must be conducted
peacefully and politically to the benefit of all.

Perhaps there is no greater need for such appreciation today than
between the Islamic peoples and those of the West. Too often, this
question is discussed only through crude, invidious generalizations
about the beliefs of one group or the behavior of the other. Too
often, the rhetoric of resistance from one group or other is deemed
representative of the views of millions.

What is ignored is the historic and ever-growing - interaction between
peoples; the ways in which individuals and states - regardless of
religious affiliation - define, defend, and pursue their interests;
and the propensity of states as well as individuals to form alliances
and allegiances on other grounds than ethnic belonging or religious
affiliation.

In his address to the United Nations General Assembly last month,
President Khatami of Iran proposed that the United Nations designate
the year 2001 as the "Year of Dialogue Among Civilizations" and
expressed eloquently the promise of a genuine dialogue among cultures
and nations. And I quote: "Establishment and enhancement of civility,
whether at national or international level, is contingent upon
dialogue among societies and civilizations representing various views,
inclinations and approaches.

As you no doubt will recognize, these are brave words from a visionary
leader whose own respect for truth and for tolerance - against
powerful domestic opposition -- led him to declare unequivocally at
the United Nations that the government of Iran will do nothing to
threaten the author of the "Satanic Verses."

I refer to these words of President Khatami not only to highlight what
I believe to be an important development in one country, but also to
illustrate the growing global understanding of the meaning and promise
of dialogue and communication. Indeed, I believe that history should
teach us that, alongside a global diversity of cultures, there exists
one, world-wide civilization of knowledge within which ideas and
philosophies meet and develop peacefully and productively.

This is the civilization for which the United Nations labors every day
in every part of the world; it is the civilization which recognizes
that true progress is based on lasting peace and prosperity; the
civilization within which clashes of ideas take place peacefully and
productively.

Friends, Ladies and Gentlemen,

Socrates taught us that "There is only one good, knowledge, and only
one evil, ignorance." By speaking up and speaking out, by promoting
that vital exchange of ideas and information regardless of-frontiers,
we will have done our part to enhance our "one good, knowledge" and
defeat our "Only one evil, ignorance."

We will have done our part to make possible a global Civilization that
is defined by its tolerance of dissent, its celebration of cultural
diversity, and its insistence on fundamental, universal human rights
-- a civilization that is proud to protect Article 19.

Thank you.

(End text)