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.
And I would like to begin by talking not about the government, but rather the people, the Bolivian people, the homeland people that has gone through difficult times, a people that knows poverty, but also that knows the meaning of work, that knows division, but also knows how to recognize one another in unity. That has been through economic and political crises, social conflicts, and times of uncertainty, but which has never lost sight of something fundamental. And that is the hope of building a better life. I come from a country that today is facing a reality that we cannot hide. But first of all, allow me to say one thing. A part of those 20 years of the reality of a country that has been dragged along, is due to the consequences of a time of ideological construction on our continent. In the case of part of South America, where one leader came here and said, this smells of sulfur. It was part of a political and ideological line, which was, uh, being built upon by another leader who brought a coca leaf here. And he turned a traditional leaf into a historic leaf, a leaf that is part of our culture. He turned it into a betrayal. So that construction and development and the vision of a the development of a nation would be betrayed. Today the Bolivian economy. In 2026 had inflation of more than 20%. But it was a country that was an energy power in gas and hydrocarbons and mining. Nevertheless, we were reduced to a country that now has to be negotiating with multilateral institutions and with various different nations, and that is not right. They said that they were socialists. However, we carried out a campaign a ten months ago, in the ten months since I've been president, with the concept of capitalism for all of resources financial capacities, being able to invest and develop socialism and ideology does not put food on the table. What does is employment and the development of our economies and our production. When I took on the challenge of government, there were $51 million in our reserves because the reserves of the central bank had been entirely liquidated. Now, ten months on, we have nearly 1.2 billion and we, by the end of the year, are heading towards nearly 4 billion. And in the following 18 months, nearly $10 billion. For many nations, that might not be much, but for Bolivia it is a record, a milestone, a challenge, and a process of construction to build, strengthen our democracy and to strengthen our productive model within the country. I say this clearly, being able to look at the reality in my country, which decided to engage in a change and a transformation and to not turn back to the past. We are indeed doing this. We are ordering our economy. We are putting our house in order. We are facing up to the shortage of fuel. We are rebuilding our reserves. We are reforming our institutions. We are trying to restore internal and external trust in the country. We are doing something that we thought was even more important. We are trying to restore that trust in Bolivians so that we can move forward, because a nation that does not rebuild its trust cannot move ahead with money alone, with clear rules, with labor, with institutions that work, education, security and justice. It's one thing to have a government which we do have. It's quite another thing to have governability, which we do now have, because the Parliament is now drafting and approving laws and governance is yet another thing. Governance, governability and governance are not the same things. And in governance there was a deep rooted danger that we should denounce in this space of the United Nations, 53 days.
Today, Central Asia is becoming an example of constructive inter-state cooperation as well as economic, infrastructural and technological development. In this regard, we are ready to share the experience we have accumulated along this path. Distinguished heads of delegations. For the first time in its history, Kyrgyzstan has been elected as a member of the United Nations Security Council for the 2027 2028 term. Taking this opportunity, I would like to express my profound gratitude to all countries that supported our candidacy. The support of 142 member states not only confirms Kyrgyzstan's readiness to contribute to international affairs, but also demonstrates the growing role of the Central Asian region in international relations. This achievement is clear evidence that even small states can make a meaningful contribution to addressing global challenges. We fully understand that membership in the Security Council is not a privilege or reward. It is a great responsibility. One year ago, standing at this stage, I stated with confidence that Kyrgyzstan is among those states whose experience enables them to put forward substantive issues for consideration by the Security Council. We do not forget the promises we have made and will make every effort to implement them fully. Therefore, I would like to reiterate Kyrgyzstan firmly adheres to international law, justice and the protection of human rights and supports the multilateral system based on mutual respect, balance of interest and responsibility towards future generations. We intend to work closely with every country and remain committed to productive cooperation. Distinguished colleagues as you all may know, since the establishment of the United Nations in 1945, its member states and leaders have attempted to undertake systematic reforms. Reforms have ranged from expanding the membership of the Security Council to modernizing mechanisms of governance, peacekeeping and the protection of human rights. These initiatives continue to be actively discussed at the international level. However, despite numerous efforts and years of discussion, the institutional structure of our organization continues to face various challenges. Therefore, I believe that expanding the membership of the Security Council is one of the reforms that the international community expects. I consider it fair to grant two permanent seats to the African continent, with a population of more than 1 billion people and one permanent seat to Latin America. Today, the world has changed. At the same time, a number of developed countries have also expressed their aspiration to become members of the Security Council. I believe that the request of this country should be also considered. Another issue, in my view, the weakness of effective mechanisms for ensuring the implementation of the decisions of the organization. The systematic failure to implement the organization's decisions undermines the legitimacy of multilateralism concept, creates the impression that international law is not binding and encourages disregard for international obligations. Therefore, we must expand and strengthen the authority of the United Nations. In this regard, we propose to develop the United Nations mechanism for the implementation of decisions and accountability. First, it is necessary to establish, within the framework of the General Assembly, the permanent Public registry of the implementation of resolutions and obligations by Member States. This registry could include the following information and ensure the implementation of such mechanisms as. First, systematically record and verify the level of implementation of adopted decisions. Second, establish the obligation for Member States to regularly submit report in accordance with the agreed standards. Third, provide analytical reviews on sectors and regions. Fourth, ensure transparency and equal access to information for all states. The registry could be administered by the United Nations Secretariat with the support of independent experts. If decisions of the organization are systematically not implemented, I propose the gradual response mechanisms. The first stage an official notification to the concerned state, followed by consultations with the relevant bodies of the organization. The second stage deployment of a monitoring mission to the country concerned to assess the objective obstacles, preventing the implementation of the decision and to prepare recommendations. The third stage consideration of the case right here at a plenary meeting of the General Assembly to determine the status of the concerned state in terms of its systematic implementation or non implementation of United Nations decisions. The fourth stage, the initiation of appropriate procedures under the charter of the United Nations with regard to states that fail to comply with the requirements. In particular, the matter could be referred to the United Nations Security Council for consideration of restrictive measures provided for under international law, including the first temporary restriction on participation in United Nations programs. The second, recommendations to review existing formats of cooperation and other diplomatic measures, where appropriate. Distinguished colleagues, I believe that when cases of systematic non-implementation of United Nations decisions are considered, the permanent members of the Security Council should voluntarily refrain from using the veto. If a mechanism designed to ensure the implementation of the organization's decisions is systematically blocked by permanent members through the use of the veto, such practice would no longer be consistent with the spirit of the UN charter and the principle of equal responsibility of Member States. Therefore, we should once again consider the possibility of voluntarily restraining to use the veto in matters related to the implementation of the organization's decisions. This approach could promote universality, the equality of all states, regardless of their size, the primacy of diplomacy, and avoid the double standards. In order to implement this initiative, I propose establishing to open a working group within the General Assembly with the participation of the interested Member States. The working group could conduct inter-governmental consultations and prepare a report on possible models for the proposed mechanism. Following these consultations, the General Assembly and the Security Council should consider adopting the relevant resolutions and decisions. The strategic objective of this initiative is to ensure that the decisions of the organization are treated not merely as political recommendations, but as genuine international obligations. Improvement of their implementation would strengthen the rule of international law and reinforce confidence in the United Nations. Kyrgyzstan is ready to initiate interstate discussions on the development of such a mechanism. Starting from the 1st January 2027, as a member of the United Nations Security Council, we intend to formally submit all these proposals to the relevant committee. Distinguished colleagues, I would like to address separately the issues of sanctions. As we have all observed today, sanctions are in some cases, used by individual countries as an instrument to interference to the internal affairs of sovereign states.
Supply chains built up over decades of interdependence are being reorganized or fragmented as a result of geopolitical tensions. The multilateral trading system has been weakened, and the WTO can no longer fully carry out some of its essential functions. Yet what is at stake here is not merely a technical issue of trade policy. The question is whether relations between states will continue to be governed by common rules, or if they will increasingly depend on the weight and power of each individual state. For Switzerland, this is a fundamental issue. That is because my country is an open economy with few natural resources. A large part of its prosperity, therefore depends on trade, but also on the stability and predictability of the rules that make such trade possible. Economic resilience requires us to diversify relationships, forge new partnerships, and keep trade between different regions of the world as open as possible. This is particularly important for economies with fewer resources or limited market access. Access to markets knowledge and technology can create opportunities that would not otherwise exist. These abstract concepts encompass quite concrete realities a business that can take on an apprentice, a family that can secure a more stable income, a producer who can trade beyond their local market. Young people for whom the range of possibilities suddenly widens. That is also what we mean when we talk about a global economy. Trust is built when the rules offer everyone a genuine opportunity to participate.
We will work with all Member States to advance essential consensus based priorities for Guinea-Bissau as a developing country, multilateralism and respect for international law are not mere concepts. They are an existential necessity. Ladies and gentlemen, Guinea-Bissau follows with concern the humanitarian consequences of the measures imposed against Cuba. We therefore reiterate our call for the lifting of the economic commercial and financial embargo, as well as other restrictive measures that affect the Cuban people and essential sectors of that country's economy.
This is a fundamental flaw. We must remember the past so as not to repeat it. That is why Lithuania is promoting the concept of historical remembrance. My personal wish is to see the Pan-European Memorial to all victims of 20th century totalitarian regimes, unveiled in Brussels as soon as possible. There is one lesson Lithuania, having survived and overcome numerous occupations and the waves of repression, can share with international community. Freedom can be delayed, but it cannot be extinguished. Justice can be challenged, but it cannot be defeated.
The ocean is an important source of life and is our most extensive border, and that's why protecting it is a state obligation. President, serenity, clarity, and unity. With these concepts, we should be able to build a more representative United Nations that are more efficient and able to fulfill the demands of the people that we serve. For the whole of humanity who are watching us, it will not be enough to just adopt resolutions. Rather, the resolutions that matter will be the ones that we duly implement. Ladies and gentlemen, the urgency before us is imposed by the nature of these new times. The future is no longer a distant prospect; we are living it alongside the present. As changes in the conditions of human existence occur with such speed that we no longer need to wait decades before they become part of history, many of our peoples run the risk of living through this era without benefiting from the great advances humanity is achieving.
Mr. president, universal health coverage remains central to our development agenda. While investments have been made, we continue to face serious public health challenges, including a high burden of communicable and non-communicable diseases and inequalities in access to health. Lesotho is undertaking reforms to strengthen our health care system and invite partnerships to ensure universal access to quality primary health care, medicines, vaccines, diagnostics and robust disease surveillance and pandemic preparedness. The social and economic costs of cancer are profound. With support from the International Atomic Energy Agency, Lesotho is developing its first radiotherapy and nuclear medicine facility to provide domestic oncology services. We therefore call for enhanced cooperation in technology sharing, capacity building and sustainable health financing to build resilient health systems capable of responding to current and emerging challenges. Mr. president, migration is not an abstract concept for the people of Lesotho.
We expect his successor to have the vision, courage, and leadership skills to restore trust, overcome divisions, and to act for change. Your Excellencies, peace and security are among the main responsibilities of the international community. In light of conflicts that have taken thousands of lives and caused immense destruction, we must step up our efforts to prevent and end hostilities. The main challenge remains the war against Ukraine, the consequences of which have spilled far beyond the immediate combat zone. Can we resolve this problem? Can we find a solution? Of course we can. I am convinced of this. Is it not time to rethink European security policy? Bulgaria, as a member state of the EU, calls for the holding of a debate on this topic and on the broader goal of the future of a post-war Europe, as well as the Europe before the war. And to begin this debate, it is high time to transfer this conflict from the military sphere to the political and diplomatic realm. This involves negotiations which require dialogue and a minimum level of trust, supported by the appropriate guarantees. Europe, however, cannot be a simple mere observer. It must be a real participant in negotiations on the post-war security architecture of the continent after the end of the war. Europe must be able to guarantee its own security. Military security must be complemented by the second pillar of security. That is to say, the contractual and legal pillar, which must guarantee that defensive capacity building provides more security rather than a new arms race. For the security of Europe, we must add robust diplomacy to military and economic security, because we cannot, dear colleagues, negotiate without the participation of two countries, Ukraine and Russia. It would be irresponsible if, after the end of the war in Ukraine, we were unable to offer anything better to European citizens than a new cold war, or worse. We need a vision for tomorrow, in line with the concept of a Europe of peace, thanks to dissuasive defense and shared security. From this lofty platform, we call for Europe to move toward this goal. Bulgaria believes that security and stability in the Black Sea region is an integral part of its national security in all of its aspects. But it is not only our national security that is at stake; it is global security. The war in Ukraine and other territories has expanded beyond the territories of the conflict parties and directly affects Bulgaria today.
Why does a state such as mine believe so strongly in international law? The answer goes for all. When might makes right. It is the smallest states who are the first to be threatened when force is regulated by the law. All of humanity is protected. Sovereign equality between states, honoring commitments, peacefully settling disputes are therefore not abstract concepts. They are our front line of protection. And yours too. With the balance as is set out by the charter between the three pillars peace and security, development and human rights. Nevertheless, this protection is today under assault. Rearmament is accelerating throughout the world. We are seeing the use of force once again as being another political tool for some Trade is breaking down and we are seeing a race to capture critical resources. The private sector is also part of this. Of these power relations. We are now in the era of the geo economy, and this is fertile ground for disinformation, which undermines people's trust in their institutions and leads them to question verifiable facts. Our belief has never been tried to such an extent since 1945 in Ukraine, the Middle East, Sudan, the Sahel in many other places out of the media spotlight. Civilians are paying the price for conflicts which have discarded the most basic rules of humanity. And never, since 1945 has the very legitimacy of states and multilateral bodies such as the UN, been called into question to such an extent. Given this danger, let us recall our mission. In the words of Dag Hammarskjöld, the second Secretary general of the UN.
Allow me to begin my speech by quoting the sentences that I delivered, uh, 14 years ago on this rostrum on behalf of Slovenia and also on behalf of vast number of current and former heads of states at that time who signed our declaration for. And, uh, allow me to quote This was, uh, 14 years ago, this year's team of the United Nations Assembly is peaceful resolution of disputes. Last year, we celebrated the 60th anniversary of the entry into force of the convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. The convention was the fruit of the tireless effort of the Polish jurist of Jewish descent, Raphael Lemkin. I would like to remind you that since the end of the Second World War alone, there have been more than 80 countries witnessing mass atrocities. At least 53 million innocent people lost their lives. And behind these numbers are concrete men and women as well as children. They had a future, but they were not allowed to leave that future. For this reason, I call on the member states of the United Nations, regional organizations and the United Nations system to develop a new approach and a strategy for the prevention of genocide and other mass atrocities. In addition, an intergovernmental forum of like minded states should be established in order to propose a United Nations resolution that would give a clear mandate for preparation and adoption of an appropriate legal mechanism, legal mechanism that would give the concept of the responsibility to protect a new tool, a legal mechanism that will enforce the prevention of crime, a mechanism that will enable a faster and more effective response to acts of genocide and other mass atrocities. I would like to inform you that this initiative also comes from international civil society. The Institute for Cultural Diplomacy has gathered thousands of supporters and inter international non-governmental organizations among lawyers, lawyers, students, journalists and others. As early as 1960. 1946 Raphael Lemkin declared our heritage is the result of the contribution of all nations, all nations, as well as the United Nations, as we all have great responsibility, as well as an enormous opportunity to prevent atrocities in the future. We cannot escape history, but we can learn something from it. I firmly believe that the mistakes we made yesterday, we do not want to repeat tomorrow. We talk. We. We took responsibility for this word from our fathers, and we have a great responsibility to make it better for our children. I call on you to improve it by joining all our efforts for a world free from genocide and other mass atrocities. End of quote. This was 14 years ago, after 14 years. I know that despite the great initial support, our initiative has not been realized. And we can all say that today world is not better.
There's another doctrinal concern that I wish to raise just as honestly globalism. Allow me to begin by clarifying what I mean by that. I'm not talking about international trade or cooperation among states, nor am I talking about a humanity that shares common problems and responsibilities. All of those things are absolutely necessary I'm talking about a concept according to which nation sovereignty, distinct identities, traditions, and the values of peoples are obstacles that gradually give way to increasing political and cultural uniformity decided by supranational bodies. I don't share in that doctrine, which I consider perverse and harmful. For me, multilateralism isn't about dissolving nations, but rather about facilitating cooperation among them. Loving one's homeland isn't compatible with respecting others, defending history, culture, values, and traditions doesn't mean disparaging those of another. International cooperation is richer when those who sit around this table know who they are, where they come from, and what the people in whose name they speak represent. Several of the questions that I've asked are not unfamiliar to this organization. The UN 80 initiative has placed on the table issues of duplication, fragmentation, administrative burden, and the way mandates function as part of an effort to make the United Nations more efficient and more effective. President, Secretary general, heads of State and government. Excellencies. Acknowledging an institution's imperfections doesn't mean overlooking its value. On the contrary, it might be a way of strengthening it. It has never been my style to hide behind political correctness or to tell my interlocutors what I imagine they want to hear. I'm not looking to please anyone, but rather to set out the position of the Republic of Colombia respectfully, cordially and clearly.
We have done so through our official development assistance and have deepened our solidarity with the Global South. To date, Japan has provided ODA totaling over 670 billion USD to developing countries and regions, and has dispatched almost 60,000 Japan Overseas Cooperation volunteers to 99 countries. Additionally, Japan has been promoting initiatives towards achieving universal health coverage UHC across the globe. Since 1993, Japan has co-organized the TICAD together with the United Nations. TICAD has served as a platform for reflecting Africa's voice in the Sustainable Development Goals, SDGs and for Japan to first put forward the concept of FOIP. Africa is endowed with a dynamic young population and possesses enormous economic potential. Japan will continue to promote its diplomacy towards Africa, so that Japan and Africa can become more resilient and prosperous together. For example, we will promote industrial development, job creation and enhanced connectivity in Africa.
Ladies and gentlemen. We meet today as the world undergoes a profound transformation, not only in the balance of power but in the very concept of power, and the ethics of its use. This transformation is reshaping the meaning of security, the nature of alliances, and the capacity of the international order to uphold the foundations and principles upon which and for which it was established. At the heart of these transformations lies a question that transcends the borders of states and continents: how can we build an international order in which the rule of law is an equal right, not a privilege of the most powerful?
This has led to a blurring of standards and concepts. Alliances have become open to question. International law is frequently violated. And its capacity to regulate international relations faces numerous challenges. End of quote from His Majesty the King We are therefore facing a world whose fundamental features are the following. First, the escalation of acute and diverse international crises military, economic, energy related and environmental. Second, the spread of confrontational tendencies as a key determinant of relations between states. Third, the difficulty of predicting the outcome of crises. We know when they begin but not when they will end. Fourth, the diminishing capacity of existing regulatory structures to play the role in preventing and managing crises in this complex international context. Mr. president, I wish to focus on three areas to which the international community must accord priority. First, confronting non-state armed groups as a threat to international security and stability.
When member states approach negotiations with political will, mutual respect, and a sense of responsibility. Mr. president, the stakes are perhaps greatest in international peace and security. One of the foremost purposes for which this organization was created. If diplomacy can bring countries together to find common ground on difficult questions on global development, then surely we can summon the same political courage to prevent conflicts, resolve wars, and build lasting peace. The Gambia speaks on this not merely from principle, but from experience. In 2017, our country stood at a moment of acute constitutional uncertainty. The democratic choice of the Gambian people faced a grave challenge at that critical moment. The preventive diplomacy of the United Nations working in partnership with African Union and ECOWAS, helped uphold the will of the Gambian people and support a peaceful democratic transition. We have not forgotten that solidarity. It taught us that preventive diplomacy is not an abstract concept. It is a practical instrument for preventing confrontation, creating space for dialogue and protecting institutions. Sometimes it can change the course of a nation. That experience also gives us an obligation. If the international community could stand with The Gambia at a moment of fragility, then countries facing similar moments should be able to count on the same solidarity. Across the world, however, conflicts continue to destroy lives, displaced populations and reverse decades of development. Civilians bear the greatest costs, while humanitarian workers operate under increasingly dangerous conditions, and the resources available to respond to crisis remain far below what is required. The protection of civilians, respect for international humanitarian law and humanitarian access are not political conveniences. They are legal obligations and expressions of a shared humanity. We need stronger early warning systems that enable us to act before crises escalate. Timely mediation before positions become entrenched, and peace building that addresses the conditions that allow conflict to take root. The question before us must therefore not only be how to end the ongoing wars, but how to prevent the next war from beginning. Prevention should not have to wait for a crisis to become sufficiently destructive to attract international attention. It is infinitely less costly in human political and financial terms to prevent conflict than to manage its consequences after violence has begun. We therefore welcome the Secretary-General's continued good offices and in preventing diplomacy and call for these efforts to be matched with predictable and sustained resources. Mr. president, peace must be built and nurtured through institutions that command public confidence. Societies in which trust can be restored and justice pursued, and a future in which women and young people have a meaningful voice and economic opportunity is within reach. The government has experienced the value of peace building firsthand since our democratic transition. The Peace Building Commission and the Secretary-General's Peace Building Fund have been steadfast partners in our nationally led efforts to strengthen institutions, advanced transitional justice and consolidate peace. We therefore support a stronger and more responsive Peace Building Commission, adequately resourced to support countries emerging from conflict or navigating delicate political transitions. The implementation of the outcomes of the Building Architecture review must translate into stronger prevention, greater national ownership and closer coordination across the United Nations system. We also reaffirm our support for United Nations peace building operations, and pay tribute to the men and women who serve under the UN flag, including government, military and police personnel who have contributed with distinction, international peace and security. There are. Safety and security must remain a priority, alongside performance, accountability and strict adherence to international law. Partnerships between the United Nations and regional organisations, particularly the African Union, must also be deepened with sustained and predictable funding. Mr. president, the ongoing conflict in Sudan remains a matter of profound concern to The Gambia, together with continued instability across part of the Sahel. It reminds us that peace cannot be separated from development and governance. The suffering of civilians in the affected conflict zones globally demands sustained international attention and renewed diplomatic efforts towards the escalation, dialogue and a durable political settlement in the Sahel and other conflict zones. Our response must be comprehensive and holistic. Security measures are necessary but they must be accompanied by increased support for democratic governance, institution building, education job creation, development and climate resilience. Mr. president, for millions of people around the world, poverty, lack of human rights, democratic governance, etc. continue to pose greater insecurity.
The responsibility for the world we will leave to future generations. It is our duty to future generations to leave them a clean, safe environment. Poland supports environmental protection efforts, recognizing their impact on security, including food security. Caring for the natural environment is undoubtedly our duty, but fulfilling this duty must not lead to the weakening of our economies or the shifting of problems beyond our borders. Pushing for ambitious environmental policies without considering their global consequences may result in deindustrialization, longer supply chains, and the relocation of production to countries that do not apply comparable standards. This path does not lead to genuine climate protection. It merely leads to the export of emissions to other parts of the same globe, accompanied by job losses in the country of origin and the erosion of production capacity. We need solutions that combine environmental responsibility with economic competitiveness and economic security. In this spirit, it is worth recalling the message of Saint Francis of Assisi, who saw nature not as a resource to be exploited, but as a gift entrusted to humankind, our common home, for which we are responsible as its guardians and stewards. To put it short, ladies and gentlemen, we cannot give away the protection of our environment to fanatics. Careful, nature is much older than the left-wing concepts. It stems from an ethic that took shape long before the emergence of post-Marxist ideologues.
