Mr. President.

Mr. Secretary General, the more I reflect on the theme of this session of the General Assembly Restoring Trust and Managing transformation, a United Nations that delivers for all the more convinced I become of the wisdom of that choice. Without mutual trust, peace and security cannot take root among states, nor can cooperation among them flourish. More than 80 years ago, the United Nations was founded on the promise that the force of law would replace the law of force. Yet we still live in a world of multiplying wars and conflicts, a world that spends more on armaments than on development. Civilians remain the primary victims, while millions face displacement, hunger and deprivation. The problem is not the absence of rules. It is their selective application, if not their outright non-application. The sovereignty of states cannot be untouchable in one place and negotiable in another. Nor can the rules of international law apply to some, but not to others. Restoring trust requires respect for international law. It requires investment in preventing conflicts before they erupt, and in development before poverty and deprivation become a source of violence, extremism and terrorism. Development, too, is a matter of peace.

There can be no sustainable peace in a world of widening economic disparities, where some states spend more on servicing their debt than on the health of their citizens and education of their children. This does not absolve developing countries of their responsibility to undertake reform, combat corruption and build institutions. But those efforts require a fairer and more equitable international economic order, one that offers them genuine opportunities to advance. Mr. president, our shared responsibility is equally evident in the face of the profound transformations our world is undergoing. Climate change threatens the lives and livelihoods of millions. Those countries that have contributed least to it bear its gravest consequences. This calls for equitable adaptation, finance and technology transfer. At the same time, the artificial intelligence revolution is opening unprecedented horizons for progress across every sphere of life.

Yet it also raises challenges for the future of work and for human rights and fundamental freedoms This calls for international governance that places the human being with his or her freedom and privacy at the heart of this transformation. Above all, we must not allow an artificial intelligence divide to emerge on top of the existing gaps in wealth and development. Restoring trust requires that every individual feel that the law protects them, that development does not exclude them, and that progress leaves no one behind. Mr. president, if restoring trust is a challenge facing our world today for Lebanon, it is not a mere slogan.

Just as managing transformation is not an option up for debate. Together they constitute the very essence of the mission. We pledged before our people, before our Arab brothers, and before the entire world. On the day I was entrusted with leading the government of Lebanon, we assumed this responsibility at a time when our country faced three existential challenges. The first was to regain the trust of its people. After the financial collapse and the Beirut port explosion and the tragedies and wounds they left behind. The second was to reclaim its national decision making so that no authority stands above that of the state. No weapons exist outside its armed forces, and no decision on war and peace is taken outside its constitutional institutions. The third was to recover all of its territory from Israeli occupation, and to extend its sovereignty over the entirety of its national soil through its own forces. In implementation of the Taif Agreement and in sincere respect for the relevant international resolutions on Lebanon. Foremost among these is resolution 1701, which remains to this day a fundamental point of reference governing relations between Lebanon and Israel. Trust rebuilt decision making. Reclaimed. Land liberated. That is the equation for Lebanon's recovery. These are not three separate challenges. They are three facets of a single cause. Restoring a state that its citizens trust that is master of its own decisions, and that exercises sovereignty over the whole of its territory. Mr. president, first, the trust we seek to restore is not trust in words. It is trust in institutions that protect rights in a judiciary that guarantees justice, in an economy that restores prosperity to the people and gives young people the opportunity of a better future. We cannot speak of restoring trust without recalling the Beirut port explosion. The wound of the 4th of August remains open. It cannot heal without truth, justice and accountability, and these will inevitably come. Some may feel that our government has not yet fulfilled all of its commitments. We do not claim that the task is complete, but fairness demands that we not overlook the scale of legacy we inherited paralysed institutions, a public administration of diminished effectiveness, an economy stripped of the foundations of growth, and a state weakened by compounding crises and by decades of external interference. Even though we have not used the difficulty of our circumstances as a pretext to retreat from our commitments and we will not retreat. Lebanon has launched reforms on several fronts, namely revitalizing the public administration, strengthening the independence of the judiciary, modernizing the media law and abolishing the death penalty. It is also advancing towards the completion of financial reforms aimed at restoring order to the financial system and recovering depositors funds. These reforms should pave the way for an agreement with the IMF. Such an agreement is an indispensable tool for restoring international confidence in Lebanon, and a gateway to securing the financing needed from all our regional and international partners for economic recovery and reconstruction. Our aim in pursuing reform is not to ask our people to renew their trust in the state. Rather, through reform, we seek to rebuild a state worthy of its people's trust.

Second, a state does not regain the trust of its citizens through reform alone, but also by reclaiming its national decision making. In that spirit, we did not merely affirm the principle that weapons must be exclusively in the hands of the state, and that decisions on war and peace rest solely with its constitutional institutions. We translate that commitment into decisions taken by the Council of Ministers, notably in August and September of last year and again in March of this year. That was after Lebanon found itself in a war that it did not choose. It was imposed upon us despite our repeated warnings. Again repeated warnings of the dangers of being drawn into it. As the war in the region widened and initiatives to end it multiplied, we held fast to a non-negotiable principle. No one speaks for Lebanon and no one negotiates on its behalf except the Lebanese state through its constitutional institutions. It is true that Lebanon is affected by developments in its surroundings. That does not mean, however, that we accept its becoming once again an arena for the conflicts of others or a burning bargaining chip in their hands. Lebanon's future. Will not be decided on its behalf, nor may its security and stability become the price of settlements concluded in its absence. Third our position on the war has been clear from the outset. We want it to end. We want the cease fire consolidated. We want Israel to withdraw from all Lebanese territory up to our internationally recognised borders, in accordance with the 1949 General Armistice Agreement and as affirmed by resolution 1701. We want the release of all our detainees, the safe and dignified return of our people to their villages and towns, and the reconstruction of what the war has destroyed. It was in that spirit that the Lebanese state entered into negotiations with Israel under the kind auspices of the United States of America and its president, for which we are grateful. With a view to reaching arrangements that ensure an end to the war and the restoration of Lebanon's full sovereignty. The sovereignty to which we are committed is indivisible. It requires Israel's withdrawal from all Lebanese territory. It equally requires the extension of the authority of the Lebanese state through its own forces, over the entirety of its territory, with weapons held by the state alone. It is on these two principles, and on the basis of reciprocity and phased implementation, that the tripartite framework reached in the negotiations rest. However, the success of any agreement is measured not by declared intentions but by fulfilment of commitments. What is required today, therefore, is to complete the translation of this framework into practical steps within a clear timetable and with a verification mechanism that ensures the implementation of all its provisions. Mr. president, in this context, I must pay tribute to the role played by the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon, UNIFIL, and to the courage of its leadership, personnel and staff and their sacrifices in preserving stability, supporting the Lebanese Armed forces and implementing resolution 1701. To all the countries that have contributed troops to this force, Lebanon extends its profound thanks and appreciation. We have taken note of Security Council resolution 2790 of 2025, which decided to terminate UNIFIL's operations at the end of this year and to begin its gradual withdrawal, and requested the Secretary general to explore available options for the continued implementation of resolution 1701. What we wish to stress here and today is the need to avert the vacuum that UNIFIL's withdrawal could create, were it to take place without agreement on a new international force to replace it. Such a force should ensure the continuation of monitoring, reporting and liaison functions and its role should complement the requirements for implementing the tripartite framework.

Mr. president, recovering the land does not mean only the withdrawal of occupying forces. It also means the return of its inhabitants and the revival of life in their villages and towns. The war has left behind a vast humanitarian crisis in Lebanon. It has caused extensive destruction to housing, public facilities, infrastructure and productive sectors, and has deprived large numbers of Lebanese of their homes and livelihoods. While we thank the United Nations entities and our international partners for their humanitarian contributions, we call at the same time for continued funding to meet the basic needs of those affected, particularly the displaced. In parallel with the requirements of early recovery as well as reconstruction and development. The reconstruction of the South is not merely the rebuilding of stone. It is the rebuilding of people's lives, the restoration of their livelihoods, and the affirmation of their right to live in safety and dignity on their land.

Mr. president, the Lebanon that stands before you today does not shirk its responsibilities, nor does it ask others to do what it is duty bound to do itself. We are shouldering our responsibility for reform and for extending the authority of the state over the entirety of our territory. But we are entitled to ask the international community to shoulder, in turn, its responsibility to ensure respect for Lebanon's sovereignty and the implementation of resolutions of international legitimacy. Mr. president.

There can be no lasting stability in Lebanon without lasting stability in our region. And there can be no stability in the region as long as this organisation remains unable to enable the Palestinian people to exercise their inalienable right to self-determination. Like all other peoples of the world, no less and no more. This is despite the dozens of resolutions adopted by this Assembly and by the Security Council that lay clear foundations for that right. Not to mention the Arab Peace Initiative. As for the tragedy of wounded Gaza, it has put the conscience of the world and the important inability of its institutions to a test from which there can be no escape. I must stress here that cutting off funding to UNRWA or undermining its mandate does not end the rights of Palestinian refugees. Even if that's what some seek. On the contrary, it compounds their suffering, jeopardizes the prospects for a just and lasting solution to their cause and increases the burden on host countries, foremost among them Lebanon. With regard to the security situation of region, Lebanon wishes to renew its solidarity with the states of the Arab Gulf and with Jordan in the face of Iranian attacks that threaten regional security and the freedom and safety of maritime navigation. The effects of these attacks are not confined to theatres of confrontation. They extend to supply chains to the prices of goods, particularly food and energy, and to inflation rates.

Mr. president, allow me to conclude by returning once more to the theme of this session of the General Assembly, Restoring Trust and Managing Transformation for a United Nations that delivers for all. The truth is that we cannot call on the states of the world to change their conduct, while failing to make the necessary changes within our own organization so that it delivers the results expected of it and regains the trust of the peoples of the world. The reality is that the world has changed profoundly since 1945. The membership of the United Nations has grown nearly fourfold. Colonialism has ended Africa has risen. Asia has been transformed and new powers have emerged. The balance of the global economy has shifted. Yet the basic composition of the Security Council remains captive to a historical moment dating back to the end of the Second World War. Africa and the Arab world cannot remain without permanent representation on the Council, nor can small and medium sized states remain mere spectators to decisions that concern their security and their future. We know that Security Council reform is a complex matter, but the difficulty of reform is no argument against its necessity. Indeed, reform of the United Nations must begin here with the Security Council. For it is the Security Council that bears primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. I therefore once again add Lebanon's voice to that of the majority of the members of our organisation in calling for an expansion of the Security Council that achieves more inclusive and equitable representation. Being realists, we do not call for the abolition of the veto. Rather, we call for restraint in its use in cases of genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and serious violations of international humanitarian law. We insist on reform of the United Nations only because we want it to be more representative, more democratic and more effective organization We want an organisation true to the purposes and principles of its charter, yet ever renewed, so that it may rise to the challenges of our rapidly changing world and meet the aspirations of our peoples and their new generations.