Kofi Annan ’s remarks to the International Rescue Committee
Tom, Alan, Jonathan, Maureen, John, George and Winston, sponsors, patrons and friends.
I am honored to be with you tonight and to receive the International Rescue Committee’s Freedom Award.
I am only too well aware that the list of people the IRC has honored in this way includes individuals such as Nelson Mandela, Winston Churchill, Vaclav Havel and Daw Aung San Suu Kyi.Men and women who through their personal courage, vision and commitment to freedom have helped shape our world for the better.
So it is with great honour that I accept this award, made all the more special for me because it comes as we celebrate IRC’s 75th anniversary.
I would like to offer my warmest congratulations on this landmark occasion. And also my thanks for the extraordinary efforts of everyone associated with the IRC over the last three quarters of a century.
It is a period in which we have seen remarkable progress in our world, but also abject suffering on a truly horrific scale.
Founded at the prompting of Albert Einstein to help those escaping Hitler’s Germany, the IRC has evolved and grown to become a friend and saviour of refugees from subsequent crises.
Over the last 75 years, this organization has saved and changed the lives of millions of people.
On their behalf as well as my own, I offer our heartfelt thanks. Let me also pay tribute to George Rupp, whose leadership has steered this organization so effectively.
I also know your efforts have come, at times, at a huge personal cost and sacrifice.
International humanitarian law is less respected today than in recent memory.
Emblems and flags no longer automatically protect their bearers. The status of neutrality is increasingly being challenged or ignored.
I want to add my tribute to the many people who have lost their lives in working for the Rescue Committee.
I would like, in particular, to express my deep regret and sympathy for the recent tragic loss of your colleagues in Afghanistan.
They gave their lives in the service of unchanging humanitarian principles.
Of impartiality – that all people are of equal worth, no person or entity is to enjoy privileges over another.
Of neutrality – to stand apart from conflict, rather than be a party to it.
And of independence – that relief is subject only to ethical considerations, not political conditions.
So as well as celebrations today, there is also sadness. Sadness for the loss of lives of humanitarian workers who are serving in all corners of the globe.
Sadness as well for the plight of the people they are trying to help.
I suspect that the founders of the IRC would have hoped that in the intervening 75 years we would have learnt the lessons from history.
They would have wanted to believe that conflict and our inhumanity to each other would, by now, be a relic of the past.
(Bernard Shaw)
That the world would have come together to find solutions to problems before they forced hundreds of thousands of people from their homes.
As we look around the globe, we can see that these hopes have not been realized.
The cause of this misery may no longer mainly be conflict between states.
But the need for humanitarian assistance has sadly never been more pressing.
And it is how, as an international community, we respond to these changing needs that I want to talk about tonight.
The challenges we face are immense. But I remain a stubborn optimist.
I have seen how human beings respond with fresh thinking and determination to challenges.
Recent events in this country prove this again. So let me take this opportunity to send my warm congratulations to President-elect Obama and, as importantly, to the people of the United States of America.
As President Bush himself said, Americans, whichever way they voted, can take pride in making history last week.
The election of an African-American as President of the United States is an event I had not imagined to see in my lifetime.
It has been a great example of public democracy but it also demonstrates again America’s extraordinary capacity to renew itself.
The impact of the election has reverberated around the world.
It has restored faith in the American ideal that anyone, regardless of their background, can fulfill their talents through their own efforts.
I also believe it offers a tremendous opportunity for America in the world.
An opportunity to re-engage in a more positive way with the international community and to re-invigorate multilateralism without which progress is now impossible.
As the global financial crisis has again underlined, no country, no matter how powerful and wealthy, can hope to tackle problems on its own.
In an inter-connected world, it is only through multilateral cooperation that we will be able to find the right and lasting answers.
But American engagement and leadership remain, as ever, absolutely crucial if we are to find these solutions.
I am optimistic that America under Barack Obama will fulfill this role. There remains
I promise, tremendous goodwill for this wonderful country.
We need your engagement and leadership, perhaps most importantly in ensuring we urgently and decisively combat the challenge of climate change.
I have mentioned already the changing nature of the humanitarian crises we face.
Conflicts, within countries and across borders, continue to disfigure our world and cause untold human misery.
But it is economic and environmental causes which are now the main reason people are forced to flee their homes and communities.
Already seven times more refugees and displaced people are attributable to the environment than to conflict.
The number of people displaced because of climate change is expected to shortly become the largest body of migrants of any category.
On current forecasts, “climate migrants” could well exceed 100 million by 2020.
If our humanitarian responses are to be effective, we need to understand the nature of these emerging threats and improve our capabilities to deal with them.
Ladies and gentlemen,
The evidence is now overwhelming that our planet is heating up.
There is scientific consensus that man’s activity is largely to blame.
We are seeing the impact on ecosystems, lives and livelihoods in every continent.
Extreme weather is becoming commonplace. Violent storms are causing havoc with increased flooding and destruction.
The speed of desertification is accelerating, further shrinking the availability of water already under pressure from growing populations.
Water is now becoming a major source of conflict. In the Sahel, we are witnessing regular clashes over scarce water resources.
We will see these tensions and conflicts spread – and quickly – around the world.
At the same time, sea-levels are rising. Threatening not just islands and coastal areas but poisoning fertile land and water sources with salt.
The announcement by the new President of the Maldives – a country only eight feet above sea level at its highest point – that he will seek to buy a new homeland for its citizens dramatically illustrates the scale of the threat.
As the polar icecaps melt – a process happening faster than predicted or feared – these problems will spread and become more serious.
We have seen, too, in recent months the potential impact of climate change on food costs and supplies.
There are many reasons for the soaring costs and shortages of food we have just experienced.
But climate change, by making large plains inhabitable and flooding some of our most fertile land, is already major factor – and will put greater pressure on global food security.
Taking decisive, coordinated steps to slow and then halt climate change is vital.
But it is also a matter of fairness: of climate justice.
It is the richest, most industrialized countries who are most responsible for what is happening in our atmosphere.
But it is the poorest countries and people who will pay the most severe price and who also have the least resources to cope.
Experts have warned that because of climate change already underway, for example, agricultural productivity across large parts of Africa could fall by as much as 50% by 2050.
It sounds like an alarming prospect and indeed it is.
But I am consoled by the lessons from history that we possess the ingenuity and resilience to cope with even those problems that we have foolishly caused ourselves.
As I said earlier, I remain an optimist. So I believe that the international community will in Copenhagen next year live up to its responsibilities to address this challenge.
We need a binding agreement on major cuts in carbon emissions led by the most developed nations.
And we are obliged to find the additional means to assist the poor to adapt to the changes, including appropriate technologies, and financial support. The polluter must pay.
Reaching agreement will not be easy. But I believe it is possible – and my confidence has increased since events last week here in the United States.
What is certain, even if agreement is reached next year, is that for decades ahead climate change will increase the demand for humanitarian action.
Humanitarian organizations must adapt to this shift if they are to continue providing the support people need at the time of their greatest distress.
So too must the international community. Those people displaced because of persecution or war are protected by international law.
We recognise that they are vulnerable and they are granted rights and support.
But these protections have not been extended to those forced to leave their communities by environmental disaster including climate change.
We need to accept that their displacement has been as involuntary as those fleeing war or terror and provide similar protections and assistance, guaranteed by international law.
This will require fresh thinking and courage from, in particular, the developed world.
But it is vital to help us prepare properly for the humanitarian problems of the future. Ladies and gentlemen,
We have seen that when the responsibility to protect is put into practice it is clear that good can come.
The people of Kenya faced a calamity which seemed unavoidable. But, in this case, the worst was avoided.
The necessary elements were political will from outside Kenya and the willingness of Kenya’s leaders to accept help and agree on compromises.
All of this was achieved in the name of the protection of their people and disaster was therefore avoided.
Kenya is an example both of what can be done and the evolving nature of sovereignty.
No longer do we believe that what happens within the borders of a country is the responsibility alone of its own Government.
Today we see State sovereignty not as an absolute good in itself but as an instrument – albeit a very important one – which has value only if used to protect human life, ensure respect for human dignity, and uphold human rights.
While Kenya may have succeeded, Zimbabwe is a model of moral failure.
We have seen a tragic failure on the part of President Mugabe and his Government to protect and provide for their own people.
And the exclusive focus by the international community on forcing President Mugabe to change his longstanding approach and the recent stale mate on meaningful power-sharing has let down millions of Zimbabweans.
The economy has collapsed. Families are starving. The country’s citizens are in utter despair. A fundamental human tragedy is being ignored.
The World Food Programme has warned that by early next year some five million people – almost half the country’s population – will need emergency help.
Yet such is the shortage of food and funding, they have been forced to cut rations this month – with no food in the pipeline for January or February.
This is simply not acceptable. We need urgent and creative steps to pull people out this misery and degradation.
We must draw up an emergency package of humanitarian assistance to save their lives.
We need the same urgency and courage in coming to the rescue of the long-suffering people of the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
I don’t pretend there is any easy solution to this crisis as the IRC knows better than most.
We are dealing with decades of recurring conflict and division. It is hugely complex.
But it is also a conflict which has cost more lives than any other since the Second World War.
And we saw in 2003, when the conflict again worsened markedly, that decisive action can protect lives.
As UN Secretary-General, I worked with President Chirac of France and the European Union to send a rapid reaction force which helped to stabilize the region.
We need similar action today and the responsibility falls squarely on the Security Council and, in particular, its five Permanent Members, to act.
Such action must provide vital protection for the hundreds of thousands of innocent men, women and children living in fear of their lives.
It must provide security for the courageous humanitarian workers and UN staff and peace-keepers, without whom the lives of the Congolese are at even greater risk.
I know such action can be hard to sell to your electorate.
But the privilege of permanent membership of the Security Council gives you a special responsibility for the maintenance of peace and security.
It is high time to be direct. I have some simple questions for the P5.
Have we learnt no lessons from Rwanda and Srebenica?
Are we prepared to turn away when such horror takes place again in the 21st century?
And if we are not, where is the surge of troops which can provide the breathing space for a political solution to be found?
This is, I’m afraid, your responsibility. It is not the responsibility of the UN Secretary-General or of the peace-keeping force. You can’t hide behind them.
And along with a direct response led by the Permanent Five, we also need firm and decisive steps internationally to disrupt and end the illicit trade in natural resources which has underpinned this war since 1998 in Eastern Congo.
We need to stop the war profiteers.
Almost all the main armed groups that are involved in this conflict, including the national Congolese army, have been trading illegally in minerals with impunity.
If buyers and companies stop trading minerals from Eastern DRC, the economic incentive to continue this war would be removed.
It would prevent criminals from benefiting from this conflict and help bring about a climate where compromise and peace will be much easier to achieve.
Ladies and gentlemen, the world has now changed for good. We need, correspondingly, to change the way we work.
We need to step up efforts to try to prevent problems rather than pick up the pieces afterwards.
We need to change the way we provide humanitarian assistance.
The form in which we must provide help evolves. The need for such help, unfortunately, never changes.
We need to prevent disaster from occurring in the first place.
It means better planning, deployment of information and increased co-operation between different actors, all pooling their efforts in concerted action.
This has been a memorable few days where the message here in the United States, echoing across the world, has been about coming together to meet the challenges we face.
This has been a noble ambition for as long as human beings have walked the face of the earth.
But in a world in which flaws in one capital market are exported around the globe in days and weeks, I don’t believe that coming together to tackle problems is any longer just an option. It is an imperative.
I don’t under-estimate the scale of the task. But if you were to ask me whether we can meet the challenge, I would borrow a phase and answer “Yes We Can.”
Thank you again for the honor you have given me tonight.
