The transcripts are AI-generated from the UN's English audio and can contain mistakes. We are checking them against the statements the missions publish; some errors are still expected.
One of the most urgent threats today is the loss of human control over weapons. Every Austrian, and I believe maybe a lot of people here, knows the Terminator movies about a machine sent to kill humans. This killer robot was played by a famous Austrian born Arnold Schwarzenegger. In the movies, Skynet learns to choose its own targets and starts a war. Well, in 1984, this was science fiction. Today it is not fiction anymore. Today, weapons with increasing autonomy or are already used on the battlefield. The direction is clear. Machines are gaining more freedom to find and strike targets. But a machine cannot understand surrender nor mercy. It cannot face a court or answer for a death. It must never have the final say over who lives and who dies. We therefore need international rules for autonomous weapons built around one clear principle no machine may decide to take a human life. Some will say that agreement is impossible when technology moves so quickly and major powers distrust one another. History says otherwise. Imagine this hall.
Mr. President, Excellencies, Ladies and gentlemen, The faultlines in our world are widening. Cracks have become canyons. Over the last decade, wars erupted with devastating consequences and dragged on with despicable cruelty. Civilians were targeted. Human rights trampled. Hunger weaponized. Humanitarians killed. International law cast aside. Geopolitical divides have deepened. Inequalities have intensified. Trust has frayed. The climate crisis went from distant warning to daily reality. And artificial intelligence moved at a speed that has blindsided even those who created it. These are not separate crises. They are chapters of the same story. The story of power. Who has it. Who is denied it. How it is used. And how it is changing. Excellencies, Power is being reshaped in three fundamental ways. First, among States. New centres of economic, political and technological influence have emerged. Second, we are witnessing an extraordinary transfer of power away from governments to a handful of private corporations and individuals. Their reach now extends across politics, economies, information flows, technological development, and the civic space on which societies depend. And, third, humans are increasingly handing over power to machines – with Artificial Intelligence agents going rogue, and lethal autonomous weapons going from science fiction to military reality. Yet our institutions and systems of global governance continue to reflect the power realities and interests of a largely bygone age. That is the defining challenge before us. At the very moment when humanity faces an unprecedented convergence of threats, our mechanisms for collective action are under growing strain. Excellencies, We are clearly moving towards a multipolar world. And that movement is irreversible. But there are different ways that multipolarity can take shape. One possibility is a world of fragmentation and transactionalism. A world of rising tensions and deepening mistrust. Of fractured markets and weakened institutions. Of shrinking cooperation and zero-sum calculations. In many respects, that is the trajectory we are on today. But there is another path. A path towards networked multipolarity. A world built on interdependence – and sustained by a dense web of economic, political, social and technological connections. A world in which multiple centres of influence coexist within a common framework of international law and shared rules. Such a world can help us avoid hegemonic tendencies and what I have called the Great Fracture: The division of the world into two rival blocs with separate economic, technological and security systems. A networked world recognizes that no power can solve today’s challenges alone. Of course, competition will remain a permanent feature of international relations. But competition does not have to mean confrontation. Healthy competition can drive innovation, strengthen resilience, and expand opportunity. But only when it operates within frameworks that preserve stability and enable cooperation where cooperation is indispensable. Building a networked future begins with a recognition, especially by superpowers: That their power isn’t so super. That their power has limits. The events of recent years have made that unmistakably clear. Military power alone cannot secure peace. Economic power alone cannot command stability. And technological power alone cannot guarantee security. A networked multipolar world can create the conditions for more balanced and representative global problem-solving. But it requires a multilateral system centred in the UN that is balanced and representative. Strong, effective institutions that reflect the realities and the progressively changing relative weight of countries and economies in today’s world – not the power arrangements of 80 years ago. Fortunately, we are not starting from scratch. We already have a binding foundation: The Charter of the United Nations. And the principles that give it life. The primacy of international law. Upholding human dignity. And the pursuit of justice in all its dimensions. These are the backbone for the effective, legitimate and responsible exercise of power in the 21st century. Excellencies, It comes down to this: Will we act to ensure that power is governed by law or by force? By cooperation or coercion? By responsibility to young people and future generations or indifference to their fate? Because the defining challenges of our age are not separate from the question of power. They are expressions of it. And they will determine whether we drift deeper into division and instability – or move toward cooperation, justice and collective security. Looking ahead, our future will be shaped by how we address four great tests of power: The power over war and peace. The power that concentrates wealth and drives inequality.
If AI is available only to a few, new divisions will appear. Entire communities may be left behind. The growing use of AI-powered weapons and autonomous systems also requires urgent attention. One principle must remain clear: machines should never be allowed to make life or death decisions on their own. Just as the international community developed rules for nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons, we also need strong international frameworks for these new technologies. The United Nations can and should play a leading role in this effort. AI is not only a potential threat on the battlefield; it is already having a negative impact on society, especially in education. An entire generation of young people is being affected. Recent assessments show declining test scores across the vast majority of countries. This is a concerning trend that deserves open and serious discussion on international platforms such as the United Nations. At the same time, we should not see AI only as a risk. It can be also a tool for peace. It can help us analyze information, identify patterns, and overcome language barriers in real time. It can support better decisions, faster responses, and more effective prevention. With responsible use, proper human oversight, and good governance, we can move this technology away from the battlefield and toward diplomacy, mediation, and conflict prevention. And prevention matters. Every conflict we prevent saves lives. It protects development. It preserves human dignity. Once violence begins, every solution becomes harder, more costly, and more painful. There is no need to reinvent the wheel when we reform international institutions. AI may be revolutionary, but we did not need to reinvent the personal computer in order to build it. The same is true in global politics. We should improve what already exists, not start again from zero.
And then we had talked about artificial intelligence and global security. Today, I want to agree with President Trump that we are now talking about a call for practical, practical AI to be renamed superintelligence. S I we commit to that. Mr. president, the illicit flow of firearms and narcotics is a major security concern for Trinidad and Tobago and the wider Caribbean. Although the region does not manufacture these weapons, the availability fuels gang violence, organised crime, drug trafficking and loss of life across our societies. While serving on the council, Trinidad and Tobago will advocate for greater international cooperation to address the sources, movement and diversion of illicit weapons, stronger tracing mechanisms, information sharing border and maritime cooperation and deeper cooperation among source transit and destination countries to disrupt weapons, narcotics and international financial flows. Trinidad Tobago will bring the experience of the Caribbean to the council, where the impact of illicit farms demonstrates how transnational organised crime can threaten the security and stability of states, even in absence of traditional armed conflict. On the priority area, a super intelligent and global security should not Tobago encourage a greater consideration of the implications of S, I and emerging technologies for international peace and security, including cyber attacks, disinformation and deepfakes, autonomous weapons, criminal misuse of sea, and threats to critical infrastructure.
