Norway's Trygve Lie, the first UN secretary general, described the post as "the most impossible job in the world". The words are emblazoned on a wall at the UN headquarters in New York, but each time the job is up for grabs, there is no shortage of candidates for this poisoned chalice.
With Kofi Annan stepping down at the end of the year, the jockeying among his would-be successors is getting serious.
At the end of last month, the 15 members of the UN security council held a secret straw poll - no points here for transparency - on four men. The results soon leaked.
South Korea's foreign minister, Ban Ki Moon, came out on top. The career diplomat who once served at South Korea's UN mission received 12 "encourages", one "discourage", and two "no opinions".
The UN undersecretary general for public information, Shashi Tharoor, came second. The British-born Indian and fan of PG Wodehouse received 10 "encourages", two "discourages" and three "no opinions".
It is early days yet and if past experience is any guide, the eventual winner may well be someone other than the early front-runners. However, Mr Annan's successor will almost certainly be an Asian, the first since U Thant from Burma occupied the post from 1961 to 1971.
Under the convention of buggin's turn, Asia's time has come after some 35 years, following Africa, the Arab world, Latin America and Europe.
Singapore's former prime minister Goh Chok Tong, who has yet to throw his hat in the ring, is also on many people's lips.
Whoever it is, that person must have the support of the US in order to have any chance of getting the job. But the US has to be discreet in its backing; support too overt is seen as the kiss of death.
In the case of Mr Annan, everyone knew that the Clinton administration favoured the soft-spoken Ghanaian, but the White House had to keep silent in what has become one of those comical rigmaroles of the selection process.
The US seal of approval is no guarantee of success. Mr Annan's Egyptian predecessor, Boutros Boutros-Ghali, found favour with the first Bush administration partly because of his determination to energise the institution.
He soon fell out of favour for being too keen to make the UN a more effective body. In particular, the US had little appetite for his idea to have troops from member states available "on call" to establish and maintain ceasefires in conflicts.
Mr Boutros-Ghali had the misfortune to be the first secretary general not to win a second term, after a veto from the Clinton administration. Mr Annan was never going to have an easy time with the Bush administration and its contempt for multilateralism.
The rift became irreparable once Mr Annan called the US-led war against Iraq illegal. In fact secretary generals have a habit of falling out with the US. The mild-mannered U Thant saw his good relationship with Washington fall apart after he publicly criticised the Johnson administration over the Vietnam war.
As the race to become Mr Annan's successor picks up steam, the US - as in the past - will insist on a candidate who will implement reform of an organisation badly tarnished by the Iraq oil-for-food scandal.
But while the US - and probably the other major powers - talk about reform, they have never shown much interest in seeing the UN function effectively, except for humanitarian purposes. It suits the US and others to have a weak global institution that does not impede their scope for action.
If the five permanent members of the security council - the US, China, Russia, Britain and France - want to make the UN more effective, they have had the perfect opportunity to lead by example by reforming their comfortable club.
But after stacks of policy papers and lots of hot air, the council has still to make itself more representative by broadening permanent membership to include someone from Africa or Latin America. Regional rivalries have not helped either. The chances of Pakistan backing India as permanent member are as a likely as unilateral Pakistani nuclear disarmament.
With the UN buffeted by all these political cross-currents it is a wonder that anyone wants the thankless task of running the organisation. There is one prediction that can be safely made. The new secretary general will fall out with the US soon enough.
South Korean foreign minister Ban Ki Moon and UN undersecretary Shashi Tharoor of India are the early leaders in the race to succeed United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan who retires at the end of this year. 

In late July the 15 members of the Security Council conducted a secret straw poll on who should succeed Annan. Monday's edition of the ''the Guardian'' newspaper reports the leaked results which have Ban leading with 12 "encourages", 1 "discourage" and 2 "no opinions" ahead of Tharoor's 10 "encourages", 2 "discourages" and 3 "no opinions". The other two official candidates thus far are Thailand's Deputy Prime Minister Surakiart Sathirathai and former U.N. disarmament chief Jayantha Dhanapala from Sri Lanka. Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong of Singapore is also a possible contender, according to ''the Guardian'' but has not officially declared his interest. 

Prime Minister Helen Clark of New Zealand dismissed a report, Monday, that she was lobbying for the position calling it "a piece of fiction". The ''New Zealand Herald'' reported in its weekend edition that Clark had sought support for her possible candidacy from British Prime Minister Tony Blair during a recent visit to London.

Coincidentally, Ban was in Auckland Monday seeking New Zealand's support for his bid. New Zealand Foreign Minister Winston Peters met with Ban but made no public comment on his country's position on the contest. 

Traditionally, the position of Secretary-General rotates among the continents suggesting that Annan's successor will likely be an Asian, the first since U Thant filled the post from 1961 to 1971.