This is a truly historic event--because in the history of the AIDS epidemic, after well over 20 million deaths and 60 million people affected--the world is recognizing that this is a global crisis that requires global action. I think that that full recognition was lacking up to now. We have a global plan--targets commitments which now will be extremely useful to translate into country action.

How would you assess your own contribution as head of UNAIDS in these years?

Several things have been truly achieved. One is that AIDS is now at the top of the agenda in the UN throughout its agencies. Look at the Secretary General's personal commitment, which is absolutely enormous and is a great source of job satisfaction for me. Secondly, I think also that we have contributed greatly to this mobilization of the world's leaders. This event in New York, frankly, for me, represents the crystallization, the expression, of what is going on in many countries, North and South, East and West. And so, this is really where we have to raise the world's consciousness and the awareness about this epidemic. And thirdly, I believe that we have also defined a road map for where to go; what works, what doesn't work. We've documented that with the policies, the activities, best practices. That has also been a major achievement. Because it's not enough to say this is a bad problem, this is a catastrophe. No. Now, the agenda is: "What can we do about it?"

And what can you do about the situation?

We basically have the choice between two options. The first option is, business is usual. We continue as we've done the last 20 years and continue doing that for the next 20 years--and there will be not tens of millions of people who die but hundreds of millions. The other option is to get our act together and to finally plan for success. Make sure the resources are there, the political will is there. I think then we will save tens of millions of lives.

What have been your frustrations in these five years?

The main frustration is that things have moved so slowly. Five years ago, it was already clear that this was going to become the largest epidemic in human history. And it took so long to put this on the political agenda, even in the very advanced countries. Another frustration I have is that we don't always seem to learn from our experiences. When I look at most countries in Asia, Eastern Europe, they seem to have a relatively small problem today. But they may well have enormous problems tomorrow. And it doesn't seem that they are using enough of the experiences learned in Africa as to what one can do about this epidemic. Still another frustration has been how difficult it is to change institutional behavior. They always talk about personal behavior change when it comes to AIDS--and, of course, that's really important in terms of prevention. But institutions have to put their parochial interests aside. For example, when it comes to building a global fund, collecting the resources, we should have only one thing on our mind and that is the interest of the people who are infected, the interest of the populations who we should make sure will not become infected, the youth of tomorrow--rather than bickering about the number of seats on a board of a fund and who controls what. That's a high frustration for me. And then there is the fact that today, 20 years of the epidemic, we're still struggling with the stigma, the discrimination, the prejudices that are associated with AIDS. These are, in a sense, the greatest friends and allies of the virus and the biggest enemy of the results.

What would be the self-interest of constituencies like business to participate in your effort?

One of the good news stories over the last few months is that the business community is becoming more and more involved. We're working very intensely with the Global Business Council on AIDS which is chaired by Bill Roedy from MTV, with Ambassador Richard Holbrooke now moving in in a big way. Recently in South Africa--at a meeting of the World Economic Forum--I heard how business leaders were now talking about what to do about AIDS in their own business and in their community. And that it was a combination of humanitarian considerations--the moral imperatives--and on the other hand, they said this was good for the bottom line, to keep their employees healthy, to keep markets alive. That's why they're now increasingly starting HIV prevention programs in the workplace and even offering treatment to those who are affected among their employees. I know that in Thailand and in Brazil, for example, companies have instituted a major response to AIDS. Unfortunately, that has not been the case elsewhere and that's one of our goals for the next 10 years.

How do you assess the importance of the AIDS in the context of poverty alleviation?

AIDS belongs now to the list of global problems which require a global response--of the same order of magnitude for the future of mankind as preserving the environment, making sure there is peace and eradicating poverty. So that, I really believe we should put it in that category. There is a very intrinsic link between poverty and AIDS, and therefore also between poverty alleviation and fighting AIDS. It goes into both directions. We know that poverty is a driving force behind this epidemic. It's poverty, for example, that is pushing men to seek work in cities, in the mines and so on and separating them from their families for months, if not years--and that's a major factor in the spread of HIV. AIDS pushes people and entire communities into poverty. At a microeconomic stage, there is a measurable decrease in gross domestic product. We have good estimates for that from African countries to the Caribbean countries. At the individual and the household level--because of the soaring medical costs--there is the loss of income. So, this is like a vicious circle.The AIDS factor has to be included in poverty alleviation programs.

What do you see to be the role of UNAIDS after this general Assembly special session?

We're entering a new phase. Now we speak with one voice in the UN system. We have our leaders taking the lead-- and the policies are right. And I think that after this special session, the next phase is one of translating this into action using the UN's powerful leverage, powerful machinery and agencies in the service of the developing countries, especially the countries and economies in transition. And we will have to continue, I think, to sustain the momentum, the political momentum. We should help with resource mobilization for UN agencies as well as individual countries. And we need to provide a technical and capacity building support that's still very important, very necessary in many countries.

What do you see as the immediate steps?

We have to now look far more outward. Whereas we started with an effort in terms of coordinating the UN system, this effort has expanded to involve government players, the bilateral donors and the NGO community. That's a very good evolution. And I hope that that's going to be the path that the UN will take in general. We have to look far more outward and get engaged in the society as a whole.

Is there anything special that you see yourself doing in your personal capacity?

In my personal capacity, where I can have most impact is really mobilizing the leaders of this world. That's what I see as my top priority. And I feel that in Africa, for example, the leaders are absolutely very energetic and fully on board. I would say that is less so in parts of Asia, in Eastern Europe, in Central America, regions that are highly vulnerable to an epidemic tomorrow. And this is where I believe I will concentrate my efforts.