^Jt T^UsL\ M *• a HJi&~*/(jb£'*/ ( UNITED NATIONS NATIONS UNIES POSTAL ADDRESS - ADRESSE POSTALE : UNITED NATIONS, N.Y. 10017 CABLE ADDRESS - ADRESSE TELEGRAPHIQUE : UNATIONS NEWYORK EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY-GENERAL CABINET ou SECRETAIRE GENERAL 29 July 2005 On behalf of the Secretary-General, I would like to thank you for your letter of 21 July 2005. We are pleased to be able to inform you that the remarks attributed to Mr. Christopher Burnham, Under-Secretary-General for Management, regarding the "mafias" within the United Nations were entirely false. I attach a transcript of the interview, and a letter that Mr. Burnham has sent to the Sunday Telegraph requesting a correction. The Secretary-General has asked me to convey his appreciation for your letter, and his assurance that he takes the issues you have raised extremely seriously. Please accept, Excellency, the assurances of my highest consideration. Mark Malloch Brown Chef de Cabinet His Excellency Mr. Aminu Bashir Wali Permanent Representative of Nigeria to the United Nations New York Dear Editor, I must take exception to a portion of an article by your UN correspondent Charles Laurence ('Deep -rooted culture of secrecy and arrogance will take 'at least 7 years' to correct, 17 July). Mr. Laurence accurately quoted me as saying "I don't believe you come to the UN to make money but to serve mankind. If the intent is to make money, this is not the place for you." But in the next sentence of his story, he referred to the alleged existence of "dominant national blocs" such as the "Swedish mafia" or the "Nigerian mafia". By his use of quotation marks, Mr. Laurence implied that I used these words. Nothing could be further from the truth. A transcription of the interview clearly shows it was Mr. Laurence, himself, who suggested the existence of a "Swedish mafia" and a "Nigerian mafia" at the United Nations. My unequivoval response to his question during our interview was no, I had not heard of these terms. Clearly, the suggestion that I referred to such "mafias" in our interview is offensive both to me and to the international civil servants of the United Nations. Please correct the record. I enclose a copy of a transcription of that portion of the interview. Christopher Burnham Under-Secretary-General for Management United Nations Rough Transcript - USG Bumham Sunday Telegraph Interview Charles Laurence (see bolded portions below related to the letter to editor above) Q: What do you see as the problem? Here? Like many global organizations, both public and corporate, we are struggling to catch up with the technology and the corporate governance of the twenty-first century. Now I have an American-centric view on those things, formed by the effect of Sarbanes-Oxley. So what I think of a 21st century corporate governance I immediately am going to go to the internal controls, as a vehicle for assessing the Organization. Q: Put that in plain English... I came here for three broad categories - accountability, transparency and ethics, and within accountability you have both the internal control portion that corporate America is no embracing if not grappling with and that includes a culture from the very top of leadership on accountability, responsibility, accuracy. But there are below that a series of circuit breakers that ensure that what we say we are doing, we in fact are doing. And that includes an internal audit, independent external audit and independent audit committee training, training in accounting standards and training in ethics. All those come in under the rubric of accountability. Transparency.... And by the way the final piece of that is do the systems support your effort to determine ROE. Now your readers will know ROE as return on equity which is an impossible calculation in any public or government entity. So let's change the "E" to effort, and try and measure our return on effort. And the backbone of that measurement is having a financial system that aggregates the data, that does so accurately, that does so in a timely basis around the world. It is something that huge corporations are struggling with. It is something that we have spent four years at the US Department of State implementing - a global financial management system - and it is clearly something that we are going to have to modernize here if we are going to be able to link budget and performance together. Let's talk about transparency. Transparency means that, as a public entity, our shareholders around the world - the global taxpayer - is entitled to this information in a timely manner, and thanks to the world wide we, timely now means immediate. It also starts with a corporate-like structure of reporting. Every corporation - or at least public corporation, uses MD&A - management discussion and analysis. And so we have to go from what I have seen is the best annual report that we have within the United Nations, which is the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. But from my American-centric standpoint, it still lacks the auditors' statement, the financials, performance measures, outcomes, self- assessment. In other words, it still doesn't encompass ROE - return on effort. And so part of transparency is presenting the information that is readable, accessible, understandable to global shareholder of the United Nations. Ethics.... It is recognized by all, and being led by Kofi Annan in an effort to establish an independent ethics office, to establish an independent training programme in ethics, to take senior managers annually on a retreat to talk about these issues - issues about how to create a culture of the highest ethical standards so that the United Nations becomes the example for the world of probity. Now of course, we know that we have reached a low with the scandals of the recent years, and I believe that in coming here, and being her for just a month as of today, that there is a broad and deep commitment to this and I am bolstered by that. There is no doubt that when the Whitehouse nominated me for this position, that that was why they asked me to come here. And certainly I believe that is why Kofi Annan and a group of my fellow Under-Secretary-Generals who I interviewed (with), selected me because I have come here with that commitment. Q: How deep does that really go, do you think. Are they... I think there's a common perception that the process is certainly underway -1 think Mark Malloch Brown shares that view and he also -I have seen him on a number of occasions - he is quite clear that it's a rescue operation - that if the Organization is going to survive as a useful institution it has to reform, basically in his words, both institutionally, which I guess is your job, and politically... because it has to stop being a US-bater. And he is up front about that. Do you see yourself as part of that? I've done turnarounds before. I wouldn't use the word rescue I would use the word turnaround , and again - forgive me but I have spent half my life in the corporate - in the financial world— and half my life in the .... most meaningful in my training has been my financial experience and so forgive me as I use the comparisons of ROE and turnaround and MD&A but I think these are very applicable to what we are trying to do. Q: The article I was telling you about earlier (pre-interview), I think Dick Thornburgh was here at the time... um... we were talking about some culture that seems to have been built in over the years, which includes things like -1 am sure you have heard all these terms - the Swedish mafia, regional mafias where they doled out jobs and the promotions... Well I haven't heard that but... No. Q: Well perhaps I am getting out of date... the way the jobs were divided up among different international groups, like we are going to have this section, you are going to have this section, and that that seems to be part of the culture. And the other side seems to have been that it has become almost accepted that you fiddle your expenses basically — the journalistic equivalent is bolstering your expenses or playing the exchange rate. And that's kind of within the bureaucratic culture. Is that something you are interested in... ? I don't know what you mean by playing the exchange rate. Q: Well the article I wrote had one example of a lady with the Refugee Commission (sic) who went early into Phnom-penh in Cambodia and used her overnight allowance to rent an apartment block. This may or may not have been true - it was a sort of apocryphal story that went into the story and kind of went around the United Nations.. So she managed to parlay her New York- based overnight allowance into renting an apartment block, which she then sub-let to the next wave of UN officials that came in and made enough money in six months to buy an apartment on the Upper East Side. This kind of story - (unintelligible) .. .so as I say without going into every dot and comma, is that something that a) you perceive as part of the problem, and secondly that is something it is in your brief to stop. I haven't heard of that before. I am focused on bringing accountability, transparency and ethics as the three categories that I want to focus on, and beneath those certain actions that have to take place. And I have no doubt with annual ethics training, ethics retreats for senior managers level Dl and above, you know ... annual certification of your training the inculcation within the UN system from indoctrination ... or introduction to the UN ..., through career development that we will adhere to the highest standards of honour and character would address these ... you know ... these "cafeteria stories" that perhaps... 0: Ha. Well the Volcker report is also full of them.... It says they are not far away. In fact, some the guys... Stephanides for instance ...was just doing that... I don't believe you come the United Nations to make money. You come to the United Nations to serve mankind. And if you have any other intent than that then this is not the place for you. And it is that kind of culture that we have to create. For the most part, in my 30 days here, the men and women I have met with are here because they believe in the mission of the United Nations. Never-the-less there has been no office of ethics in the past. Nor has there been ethics training on the past. So clearly the Secretary-General recognizes this vacuum and collectively his senior team and the Deputy Secretary-General I know are addressing it, and I am here to help in that process. 0: As you say with the American-centric view point, what about the other question of the way, in a sense, the whole bureaucracy is structured... I think there is no bad intention when it was set up because you are drawing all these nations together and they felt that just as their representative were here in the Council (sic) their representatives should be here in the bureaucracy. How does the American view take to that? Should it be a strict meritocracy? After all, it doesn't matter what your ethnic background is in the States, and of course it is rather un- American to have essentially x number of jobs reserved for this group, x number for that group. Is that something on your radar screen? It is, because I have come here with the understanding that we are a meritocracy and that we hire first based on ability, and second based on a desire to have regional representation throughout all ranks of the United Nations. O: Right.... And I very much appreciate the need for regional representation and I am very sensitive about under-representation by those who pay the bill. 0: Actually, that strays very nicely perhaps over more into Mark's territory, because that's the sort of thing he's addressing, which is exactly that sensitivity to those who pay the bill, because of course, again I am sure you have had this conversation .. if I have had this conversation then I am sure you have ... there's a sense, in the sixties, for instance, in this air of decolonization that it was considered almost a legitimate function of the UN to be a forum where those being decolonized could, in a sense, get even, or ... yen... get even really with those who had been colonizing. And that again... sort of out-of-date notion... is that reflected here? As I came out of... as Acting Under-Secretary for Management of the State Department and before that I was in banking ... in business... and I am here as the Under-Secretary-General for Management and so I am focused on trying to manage a global multi-billion dollar organization, with all the twenty-first century controls that we would expect of any entity that is taking our money. My guiding responsibility is to the global taxpayer that pays my salary every day. Q: In broad brush terms, do you think you can actually cut the budget? ... or can you simply make it more efficient within that budget? Do you see an expansion...? I think we have to reprioritize the budget to focus of those things that are the core competency of the United Nations. The world has changed dramatically in 60 years. And some of these legacy programmes ... mandates ... in some of these legacy mandates and programmes we are still reflecting a 1950s world and not addressing 21st century problems. Moreover, you did not have the dramatic change that took place in the eighties where foreign direct investment, for the first time, passed government development dollars. And with the exception of... 19981 believe... during the Asian currency crisis, foreign direct investment has dwarfed development dollars ever since. Q: That's a good point actually The United States alone last year had over $250 billion of FDI. That is a different world to operate in today. It requires different programmes. It requires a different focus. It requires a shifting from programmes that were built on the alleviation of human misery to a focus on rule of law anti-corruption and open market development. I believe we need to reprioritize the budget. Q: That actually fits in with the political change, isn't it... It is a huge new paradigm. Q: Something that some people might see as a very cynical view of what Washington thinks of the UN and evaluates its usefulness. You are the guy in the middle here, because you represent them. You are a fundraiser for President Bush so obviously you are close to him .... I don't know why the press focuses on that, you know... Q: Well, it is an easy way to tag you.. .if you are raising money for him you must at least be sympathetic about him. The question is, can you give me any idea of your view of how possible it is to transform this institution into something that is going to work for the 21st century. It took Jack Welsh seven years to institute a culture of "six sigma" at General Electric, and that was with the benefit of being able to bring in executives from around the world at any time to a campus thirty miles north of us on the Hudson River to inculcate a culture of "six sigma". Now we take an Organization that has zero budget growth, that is far more dispersed, far more stove- piped, and we also have to change that culture and it is an impossibility that we will do that quicker than General Electric. So it is at least seven years or more. Q: So do you think it can be done? We are beyond the word "can". We are into the realm of "must" - otherwise the United Nations will cease to function as the world's premier organization to advance peace and prosperity around the world. Q: How long will you be here? I am on loan. The loan can be recalled at any time. Q: Well, for the first month you seem to be confident.... It is an honour for me to be here. I came here many times as a boy when my father was a correspondent here for the New York Times, and I have this legacy connection that makes me want to do my best to make the UN more effective and more productive. O: Thanks very much... ***:(:************************#******************** Deep-rooted culture of secrecy and arrogance will take 'at least 7 years' to correct The Sunday Telegraph (London). [News Story]. Charles Laurence 07/17/2005. THE UNITED Nations is so steeped in its culture of political bias, internal secrecy and arrogance that it will take "at least seven years" to reform, a senior American official of the secretariat has claimed. Christopher Burnham, 49, who was placed in the top ranks of the organisation in New York by President George W Bush, took up his post as undersecretary-general for management a 6 month ago. The job gives him effective control over the UN's purse strings because America is the biggest individual contributor to the organisation's budgets. It is due to hand over $440 million (pounds 240 million) for this year's budget. In a frank interview, Mr Burnham told The Sunday Telegraph that his "American-centric" vision would transform the scandal-plagued institution for the 21st century, but conceded that the turnaround would be an enormous task. He compared his mission with the corporate rescue of the General Electric (GE) conglomerate achieved by Jack Welch, its former chief executive. "It took him seven years," said Mr Burnham, "and it will be quite impossible to do a turnaround on this scale in less. "But we have to go beyond the 'can we' turn around to 'we must', or the UN will cease to function as the world's premier organisation to advance peace and prosperity around the world." In his UN, Mr Burnham said, officials who line their own pockets "will have no place", the era of jobs-for-the-boys will be over, there will be "transparency" in the secretariat and the organisation will project the interests of "those who pay for it". Last week the Senate in Washington launched a Bill, introduced by the Republicans Richard Lugar and Norm Coleman, which would give America the automatic right to withhold funding if the UN fails to enact wide-ranging reforms. "We are going to reprioritise the budget on to the core competency of the UN," said Mr Burnham, who came to the UN from a senior management role at the State Department with a clear mandate to reflect the President's demand to speed up reform. There is widespread anger about the corruption scandal surrounding the Iraqi oil-for-food programme. Designed to ease the impact of sanctions and overseen by the UN, the programme is believed to have allowed Saddam Hussein to make up to $10 billion (pounds 5.46 billion) in illicit revenue. The United States wants to put an end to the UN's record of corruption and its political bias, which is perceived as being anti- American. "We have to change the culture," said Mr Burnham. "It is a different world and we need different programmes and different focus. The UN still reflects the 1950s world, not 21st- century problems. "We must go from the relief of human misery to the rule of law, anti- corruption and open market development." He plans to replace the shadowy, secretive culture of international diplomacy with "accountability, transparency and ethics", treating the UN as a business that needs urgent attention. "Our shareholders around the world - the global taxpayer - are entitled to all this information in a timely manner, which in the world of the internet means immediately," he said. "We all know we have reached a low plateau with the scandals of recent years. The UN must become the world standard of probity. I am going to manage the turnaround. That is why I came here." Mr Burnham spoke out as American prosecutors in Manhattan announced that they were formally pursuing the case against Benon Sevan, the former assistant secretary-general at the UN who ran the $64 billion oil-for-food programme. Mr Sevan, a Cypriot, is already being investigated by a UN-backed team over his handling of the programme. He denies allegations that he steered allocations of Iraqi oil to a trading company as part of a system of bribes and kickbacks. The third interim report by the UN's Volcker inquiry, is expected on July 31 and it has said that new information will place Mr Sevan at the heart of the report. Mr Sevan has disappeared from New York, where he had enjoyed diplomatic immunity as the holder of a UN consultancy contract worth a nominal dollar-a-year following his official retirement. He returned to Cyprus when his American visa expired this summer, and is organising a new home. He is known to have inherited a flat from an aunt, a former government photographer, who he has said gave him $160,000, a sum the Volcker team suggested may have come from his dealings with Saddam. The Volcker team has also criticised Kojo Annan, the son of the UN secretary-general, Kofi Annan, for concealing his relationship with a Swiss company, Cotecna, which was granted inspection contracts under the oil-for-food scheme. It criticised him 7 for making false statements to the investigating committee about his receipt of money from Cotecna through third parties and a failure to co-operate fully with the committee's enquiry. Meanwhile Mr Burnham said: "I don't believe you come to the UN to make money but to serve mankind. If the intent is to make money, this is not the place for you." There was no place at the UN for nepotism, personal corruption or the institutional bias that created dominant national blocs such as the "Swedish Mafia" or the "Nigerian Mafia" within the secretariat and in UN agencies. "We are a meritocracy and hiring will be based first on ability and then on a regional representation in all ranks of the UN. We are very sensitive to the under-representation of the people who pay the bills. We have to change the culture," said Mr Burnham. Among his first tasks is to find a temporary office building for the secretariat while the landmark United Nations tower on Second Avenue is torn apart to remove asbestos and install modern communications technology. He sees a metaphor in such prosaic housekeeping: "Like its building, the UN is magnificent but in need of total renovation." Mr Burnham seems determined to be the man to do it. Deep-rooted culture of secrecy and arrogance will take 'at least 7 years' to correct The Sunday Telegraph (London). [News Story]. Charles Laurence 07/17/2005. THE UNITED Nations is so steeped in its culture of political bias, internal secrecy and arrogance that it will take "at least seven years" to reform, a senior American official of the secretariat has claimed. Christopher Burnham, 49, who was placed in the top ranks of the organisation in New York by President George W Bush, took up his post as undersecretary- general for management a month ago. The job gives him effective control over the UN's purse strings because America is the biggest individual contributor to the organisation's budgets. It is due to hand over $440 million ( pounds 240 million) for this year's budget. In a frank interview, Mr Burnham told The Sunday Telegraph that his "American-centric" vision would transform the scandal-plagued institution for the 21st century, but conceded that the turnaround would be an enormous task. He compared his mission with the corporate rescue of the General Electric (GE) conglomerate achieved by Jack Welch, its former chief executive. "It took him seven years," said Mr Burnham, "and it will be quite impossible to do a turnaround on this scale in less. "But we have to go beyond the 'can we' turn around to 'we must', or the UN will cease to function as the world's premier organisation to advance peace and prosperity around the world." In his UN, Mr Burnham said, officials who line their own pockets "will have no place", the era of jobs-for-the-boys will be over, there will be "transparency" in the secretariat and the organisation will project the interests of "those who pay for it". Last week the Senate in Washington launched a Bill, introduced by the Republicans Richard Lugar and Norm Coleman, which would give America the automatic right to withhold funding if the UN fails to enact wide-ranging reforms. "We are going to reprioritise the budget on to the core competency of the UN," said Mr Burnham, who came to the UN from a senior management role at the State Department with a clear mandate to reflect the President's demand to speed up reform. There is widespread anger about the corruption scandal surrounding the Iraqi oil-for-food programme. Designed to ease the impact of sanctions and overseen by the UN, the programme is believed to have allowed Saddam Hussein to make up to $10 billion ( pounds 5.46 billion) in illicit revenue. The United States wants to put an end to the UN's record of corruption and its political bias, which is perceived as being anti-American. "We have to change the culture," said Mr Burnham. "It is a different world and we need different programmes and different focus. The UN still reflects the 1950s world, not 21st-century problems. "We must go from the relief of human misery to the rule of law, anti-corruption and open market development." He plans to replace the shadowy, secretive culture of international diplomacy with "accountability, transparency and ethics", treating the UN as a business that needs urgent attention. "Our shareholders around the world - the global taxpayer - are entitled to all this information in a timely manner, which in the world of the internet means immediately," he said. "We all know we have reached a low plateau with the scandals of recent years. The UN must become the world standard of probity. I am going to manage the turnaround. That is why I came here." Mr Burnham spoke out as" American prosecutors in Manhattan announced that they were formally pursuing the case against Benon Sevan, the former assistant secretary-general at the DIM who ran the $64 billion oil-for-food programme. Mr Sevan, a Cypriot, is already being investigated by a UN-backed team over his handling of the programme. He denies allegations that he steered allocations of Iraqi oil to a trading company as part of a system of bribes and kickbacks. The third interim report by the UN's Volcker inquiry, is expected on July 31 and it has said that new information will place Mr Sevan at the heart of the report. Mr Sevan has disappeared from New York, where he had enjoyed diplomatic immunity as the holder of a UN consultancy contract worth a nominal dollar-a-year following his official retirement. He returned to Cyprus when his American visa expired this summer, and is organising a new home. He is known to have inherited a flat from an aunt, a former government photographer, who he has said gave him $160,000, a sum the Volcker team suggested may have come from his dealings with Saddam. The Volcker team has also criticised Kojo Annan, the son of the UN secretary-general, Kofi Annan, for concealing his relationship with a Swiss company, Cotecna, which was granted inspection contracts under the oil-for-food scheme. It criticised him for making false statements to the investigating committee about his receipt of money from Cotecna through third parties and a failure to co-operate fully with the committee's enquiry. Meanwhile Mr Burnham said: "I don't believe you come to the UN to make money but to serve mankind. If the intent is to make money, this is not the place for you." There was no place at the UN for nepotism, personal corruption or the institutional bias that created dominant national blocs such as the "Swedish Mafia" or the "Nigerian Mafia" within the secretariat and in UN agencies. "We are a meritocracy and hiring will be based first on ability and then on a regional representation in all ranks of the UN. We are very sensitive to the under-representation of the people who pay the bills. We have to change the culture," said Mr Burnham. Among his first tasks is to find a temporary office building for the secretariat while the landmark United Nations tower on Second Avenue is torn apart to remove asbestos and install modern communications technology. He sees a metaphor in such prosaic housekeeping: "Like its building, the UN is magnificent but in need of total renovation." Mr Burnham seems determined to be the man to do it. <7 Ref No: PMN/PR/C.06/II 21st July 2005 Mr. Kofi A. Annan Secretary-General United Nations Headquarters New York, N.Y 10017 Your Excellency, PUBLISHED COMMENTS OF THE UNDER-SECRETARY-GENERAL FOR MANAGEMENT I have read, with disquiet, and disappointment, a story in The Sunday Telegraph of London of July 17,2005 with the caption "Deep- rooted culture of secrecy and arrogance will take 7at least 7 years' to correct", based on a recent interview purportedly granted by Mr. Christopher Burnham, the new Under-Secretary-General for Management of the United Nations. I find it necessary to bring its content to your attention in view of its implications for the smooth and effective functioning of the United Nations Secretariat. 2. Although Mr. Burnham is a nominee of a Member State, I thought that his appointment to that exalted position should ordinarily vitiate the espousal and promotion of national position that runs counter to the established norms and practices expected of individuals who elect to work in the United Nations in whatever capacity. Regrettably, the opposite would seem to be the case, judging by his rather intemperate comments as published in the paper, a copy of which I attach herewith. 3. I need not belabour the obvious fact that the United Nations belongs to all its 191 member-countries, large and small, rich and poor and that each Member State in consonance with the provision of the Charter, cherishes its membership and stake in the Organisation. As Under-Secretary-General for Management, Mr. Burnham's role at the Secretariat, I believe, is to execute the mandate of Member States in the area of his competence. There is, therefore, no gainsaying that, for him to enjoy the confidence and respect of the generality of the UN membership, he would be well advised not to show bias and partiality. For him to see his duties as the promotion and satisfaction of 'the interests of "those who pay for it"../ as he was reported to have said in the interview, is a misconception which needs to be corrected before harm is done to the Organisation, considered by all, including its few critics, as the embodiment of multilateralism. 4. I am no less concerned, Mr. Secretary-General, by Mr. Burnham's assertion, in the report, that "There was no place at the UN for nepotism, personal corruption or the institutional bias that created dominant national blocs such as the "Swedish Mafia" or the "Nigerian Mafia" within the secretariat and in UN agencies". It is either that Mr. Burnham has been fed with wrong information or that 2 he deliberately brings to the new office an agenda, which we consider troubling. Taken together with another comment to wit, "the era of job-for-the-boys" in the same story, his remarks smack of calculated ploy to denigrate Nigeria, as a Member State, impugn the integrity and selfless devotion of its nationals working as international civil servants, as well as paint a distorted picture of Nigeria's staff strength and representation within the Organisation. The correction of institutional bias in the recruitment and promotion of staff to reflect the letter and spirit of the Charter as well as the combat against perceived lapses within the Organisation should not be misconstrued as opportunities for pursuit of vendetta against some groups and individuals. 5. I consider Mr. Burnham's comments, as prejudicial to his impartiality expected in his new position, with possible deleterious impact on staff morale and performance. I, therefore, request a formal substantiation of his disparaging remarks on Nigerians working at the UN Secretariat and other agencies, as well as a public retraction of his pejorative identification of these hard working nationals with a mafia within the Organisation. The time has surely come to remind all employees of the need for the highest professional ethics in the performance of their work on behalf of Member States and demand of those who willingly undertake to serve the UN membership, not arrogance, but humility and maximum cooperation in advancing shared goals and objectives. Arninu oasnir Wali, mni Ambassador/ Permanent Representative Deep-rooted culture of secrecy and arrogance will take 'at least 7 years' to correct The Sunday Telegraph (London). [News Story]. Charles Laurence 07/17/2005. THE UNITED Nations is so steeped in its culture of political bias, internal secrecy and arrogance that it will take "at least seven years" to reform, a senior American official of the secretariat has claimed. Christopher Burnham, 49, who was placed in the top ranks of the organisation in New York by President George W Bush, took up his post as undersecretary- general for management a month ago. The job gives him effective control over the UN's purse strings because America is the biggest individual contributor to the organisation's budgets. It is due to hand over $440 million ( pounds 240 million) for this year's budget. In a frank interview, Mr Burnham told The Sunday Telegraph that his "American-centric" vision would transform the scandal-plagued institution for the 21st century, but conceded that the turnaround would be an enormous task. He compared his mission with the corporate rescue of the General Electric (GE) conglomerate achieved by Jack Welch, its former chief executive. "It took him seven years," said Mr Burnham, "and it will be quite impossible to do a turnaround on this scale in less. "But we have to go beyond the 'can we1 turn around to 'we must1, or the UN will cease to function as the world's premier organisation to advance peace and prosperity around the world." In his UN, Mr Burnham said, officials who line their own pockets "will have no place", the era of jobs-for-the-boys will be over, there will be "transparency" in the secretariat and the organisation will project the interests of "those who pay for it". Last week the Senate in Washington launched a Bill, introduced by the Republicans Richard Lugar and Norm Coleman, which would give America the automatic right to withhold funding if the UN fails to enact wide-ranging reforms. "We are going to reprioritise the budget on to the core competency of the UN," said Mr Burnham, who came to the UN from a senior management role at the State Department with a clear mandate to reflect the President's demand to speed up reform. There is widespread anger about the corruption scandal surrounding the Iraqi oil-for-food programme. Designed to ease the impact of sanctions and overseen by the UN, the programme is believed to have allowed Saddam Hussein to make up to $10 billion ( pounds 5.46 billion) in illicit revenue. The United States wants to put an end to the UN's record of corruption and its political bias, which is perceived as being anti-American. "We have to change the culture," said Mr Burnham. "It is a different world and we need different programmes and different focus. The UN still reflects the 1950s world, not 21st-century problems. "We must go from the relief of human misery to the rule of law, anti-corruption and open market development." He plans to replace the shadowy, secretive culture of international diplomacy with "accountability, transparency and ethics", treating the UN as a business that needs urgent attention. "Our shareholders around the world - the global taxpayer - are entitled to all this information in a timely manner, which in the world of the internet means immediately," he said. "We all know we have reached a low plateau with the scandals of recent years. The UN must become the world standard of probity. I am going to manage the turnaround. That is why I came here." Mr Burnham spoke out as'American prosecutors in Manhattan announced that they were formally pursuing the case against Benon Sevan, the former assistant secretary-general at the UN who ran the $64 billion oil-for-food programme. Mr Sevan, a Cypriot, is already being investigated by a UN-backed team over his handling of the programme. He denies allegations that he steered allocations of Iraqi oil to a trading company as part of a system of bribes and kickbacks. The third interim report by the UN's Volcker inquiry, is expected on July 31 and it has said that new information will place Mr Sevan at the heart of the report. Mr Sevan has disappeared from New York, where he had enjoyed diplomatic immunity as the holder of a UN consultancy contract worth a nominal dollar-a-year following his official retirement. He returned to Cyprus when his American visa expired this summer, and is organising a new home. He is known to have inherited a flat from an aunt, a former government photographer, who he has said gave him $160,000, a sum the Volcker team suggested may have come from his dealings with Saddam, The Volcker team has also criticised Kojo Annan, the son of the UN secretary-general, Kofi Annan, for concealing his relationship with a Swiss company, Cotecna, which was granted inspection contracts under the oil-for-food scheme. It criticised him for making false statements to the investigating committee about his receipt of money from Cotecna through third parties and a failure to co-operate fully with the committee's enquiry. Meanwhile Mr Burnham said: "I don't believe you come to the UN to make money but to serve mankind. If the intent is to make money, this is not the place for you." There was no place at the UN for nepotism, personal corruption or the institutional bias that created dominant national blocs such as the "Swedish Mafia" or the "Nigerian Mafia" within the secretariat and in UN agencies. "We are a meritocracy and hiring will be based first on ability and then on a regional representation in all ranks of the UN. We are very sensitive to the under-representation of the people who pay the bills. We have to change the culture," said Mr Burnham. Among his first tasks is to find a temporary office building for the secretariat while the landmark United Nations tower on Second Avenue is torn apart to remove asbestos and install modern communications technology. He sees a metaphor in such prosaic housekeeping: "Like its building, the UN is magnificent but in need of total renovation." Mr Burnham seems determined to be the man to do it.
^Jt<VO-Vl£'^ T^Usla Hji&~*/(Jb£'*( UNITED NATIONS NATIONS
