UNITED NATIONS: When in September of 2004, United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan said in an interview with the BBC that US invasion of Iraq was illegal under provisions of the United Nations charter, the right wing lobby of US Capitol Hill and the media criticised him, calling for his immediate resignation. However, the reaction among most UN member states, especially in the Third World countries, was the other way round: they gave him a resounding vote of confidence in the UN General Assembly.

For a man, who was once described by Richard Holbrooke, the US Ambassador to the United Nations at the fag end of the Clinton administration, as being the "best Secretary General in the history of the United Nations," it was perhaps the most depressing period. It also triggered calls for investigation into UN-run Oil-for-Food programme for Iraq which Republicans in Washington claimed was mismanaged and riddled with corruption.

Despite a plethora of allegations and charges against Mr Annan, an independent inquiry commission headed by the former head of US Federal Reserve Bank, Mr Paul Volcker, ultimately exonerated Mr Annan of any wrongdoings. The inquiry itself – after spending some 45 million dollars of Iraqi money — did not reveal much about so-called charges of corruption except implicating one UN official for an unexplained $124, 000 in his bank account. But the UN official was never charged.

Born in Kumasi , Ghana, in 1938, Mr Annan studied in Kumasi , Minnesota, Massachusetts and Geneva before joining the UN in 1962 as an administrative and budget officer with the World Health Organization. He has served with the UN Economic Commission for Africa in Addis Ababa, the UN Emergency Force in Ismailia, the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) in Geneva, and at the UN Headquarters in New York where he was head of Peacekeeping Operations.

Elected for a five-year term that began in January 1997, and re-elected for a second five-year term that began in January 2002, he is the second candidate elected from Africa , following Boutros Boutros-Ghali of Egypt. He heads an organization in perpetual financial crisis and with a very small budget, that nonetheless is expected to address (and resolve) most of the world's problems. He must accommodate the most powerful countries, while still acting in a way that appears even-handed, and he must struggle for peace in a world where violence and warfare are still the norm.

Mr Annan is widely admired for his efforts on behalf of Africa, where problems of war, famine, disease, and displacement of millions of civilians continue to undermine the development and progress. When in 2001 Mr Annan and the UN received the Nobel Peace Prize, the judges said: "The only negotiable road to global peace and cooperation goes by way of the United Nations. Mr Annan has been pre-eminent in bringing new life to the organisation."

Responding to criticism from the Bush administration in April 2003, Mr Annan initiated UN reforms which he agreed were essential. He propounded his philosophy — of intervention — above the rights of sovereign states when necessary to protect civilians from war and mass slaughter.

He appointed a high level panel of "wise men" which drew up a report agreeing that the UN should assume a role when a state had failed in its responsibility to protect its citizens. In September 2005, a UN declaration stated that every sovereign government had a responsibility to protect its citizens and those within its jurisdiction from genocide, mass killing, and massive and sustained human rights violations.Although the application of this principle remains to be worked out in practice but the principle, Mr Annan claims, to be his best and important legacy.

In a recent interview with four journalists who have covered the world body for their respective newspapers when asked to reflect upon the Iraq war which divided the international community and literally ruptured relations between the United States and the world body, Mr Annan said: "Let me say that I think we are all aware that the Iraq war led to a major division in this organization and in the world. And it has not healed yet. I see it in my work, I see it in my travels and I think it is going to take quite a lot of work (to fix)."

"At the early stages the leaders themselves were quite divided and they were very vocal about it. These days they observe and they keep their views to themselves and they are trying to mend fences and work together but we are not there yet. On the question of the kind of leaders that we have, it's often difficult to say whether it's the circumstances that create the leaders or going back to this question: are leaders around waiting to exploit a certain situation to demonstrate their greatness – each country seems to get the leaders it deserves. When you look back in the past we talk of giants and great leaders, but that was also a time of considerable turmoil. I would hope that our times would also produce some of these great leaders," he added.

Being the top diplomat of the world also means that Mr Annan has to walk a real tight rope, particularly in the case of occupied Palestine vis-à-vis Israel. Most Third World countries have accused the world body of applying double standards. On this question, Mr Annan said: "The question of double standards is a question you never get away from when you touch the Middle East, whether you are discussing the Middle East in the region or outside the region. We've often been accused that UN resolutions are implemented selectively. And I try to explain that we can only implement these resolutions with the cooperation of the member states. In situations where the members states concerned do not cooperate it's extremely difficult for the UN to impose any resolutions. And besides, these resolutions are not self-imposing and you do need cooperation when you are stuck. This summer we saw member states, when they finally decided to ask for cessation of hostilities, showed considerable political will in deploying troops to Lebanon as fast as we did. I was impressed. I discussed it with them. I think it was the fastest we've ever deployed, but the will was there. Where there is no will, it's extremely difficult. But when it comes to the broader question, of the impact of wars on populations, we need to be very, very careful in all these situations to protect civilian population. You will recall that during the conflict I kept saying that they should not destroy infrastructure. Not only to protect them (civilians) but you should really try not to destroy infrastructure, factories and things that the civilian population will need for their livelihood after the war. And I think in this particular situation both sides violated international humanitarian law. The Human Rights Council has made that clear because one has to distinguish between civilians and fighters. I don't think it was done effectively or that well in this particular conflict civilians have paid the price.”