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.
We are, therefore, entering a period marked by a more complex and less predictable distribution of power, in which the risk of potential conflict is greater than it has been for decades. There is no longer confined to conventional armed conflicts between states. Confrontations are increasingly taking the form of economic pressure, technological restrictions, competition for resources and markets, cyberattacks, disinformation, and attempts to influence other societies. Cultural and identity-based divisions are also becoming more pronounced, increasingly exploited for political purposes, and further deepening mistrust among peoples. The boundary between peace and conflict is becoming ever less distinct, while the consequences of confrontation among global and regional powers increasingly affect even those countries that are not directly involved. For small and medium-sized countries just like the Republic of Serbia, such an environment represents an enormous challenge. The space for independent decision-making is narrowing, while pressure on states to choose sides is steadily increasing. At the same time, disagreements among the most powerful actors are increasingly paralyzing the very institutions that should be protecting all countries equally.
Wars can disrupt food, fuel, energy, trade, supply chains far from the battlefield. Economic decisions made in the world's largest economy can reach an ordinary family in a small developing country. A mother buying food can feel the consequences. A farmer buying fuel can feel the consequences. Our small businesses facing higher transport costs can feel the consequences. And the developing countries trying to build roads, schools and hospitals can feel the consequences. This is why leadership in powerful nations carry responsibilities beyond your national borders. With great power comes great responsibility. Papua New Guinea respectfully asks leaders of the world's major powers to remember the ordinary people whose lives can be affected by decisions made far away from them. When wars disrupt food, fuel and trade, families far from the battlefield can experience higher prices and economic uncertainty. When climate changes, communities that have contributed little to global greenhouse gas emissions can nevertheless face rising seas, extreme weather, threats to food security, and damage to lives livelihoods. Mr. president, my appeal to leaders everywhere is really simple. Put human welfare ahead of war. Put humanity ahead of narrow geopolitical interests.
This purpose binds our national advancement to our continent's progress, and to our responsibility to contribute to a peaceful, equitable and prosperous world. We understand that governments and multilateral institutions and trusts, when their decisions improve lives. Yet none of these gains will matter if we turn a deaf ear to the trace gathering around our borders and further appeal, we inhabit the only planet known to sustain human life. And as long as that scientific park holds, we cannot pretend that we are insulated from complex as well geography or personal exemption from the consequences of a fractured world. Mr. president, we reject the false choice between development and climate action. Developing countries, most industrialised, eradicate poverty and expand energy access through low carbon pathways supported by technology transfer, capacity building and climate finance. Africa Contributes less than 4% of the greenhouse gas emissions yet via disproportionate consequences. Nigeria remains committed to the Paris Agreement and an equitable energy transition that reflects historical responsibility and capacity. While protecting people's right to development under our Energy transition Plan, we are working towards net zero emissions by 2060 while expanding access to affordable, reliable and sustainable energy. This approach combines renewable energy, clean cooking and gas as a transitional fuel with climate, smart agriculture and nature based solutions. Finance must be governed by equity and shared responsibility rather than charity. With international commitments translated into accessible, predictable and adequately funded mechanisms that enable developing countries to pursue climate action without compromising development objectives.
Cote d'Ivoire hopes that this process will result in the appointment of a figure of the highest caliber, whose moral values independence of mind, diplomatic experience and commitment to dialogue will enable the United Nations to pursue, with ambition and effectiveness its mission in the service of peace, development and solidarity among nations. Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen. Current international events remind us every day of the human, political and economic cost of protracted conflicts. Cote d'Ivoire remains deeply concerned about the resumption of hostilities in the Near and Middle East, the consequences of which weigh on peace and on food, energy and economic security throughout the world. The dire situation in the east of the Democratic Republic of the Congo and in the Sudan is equally alarming, with severe and endless humanitarian consequences. All these persistent conflicts are exacerbating the suffering of the affected populations and producing harmful effects that extend far beyond the borders of the states concerned. We therefore call for dialogue to prevail over arms. We also express our solidarity with the Haitian people. Cote d'Ivoire will continue to contribute to ongoing initiatives aimed at supporting the Haitian authorities and international partners in order to restore security in the sister nation so as to restore democratic legitimacy to its institutions. My country takes this opportunity to reaffirm its commitment to the peaceful settlement of disputes in accordance with the United Nations Charter. And to lend its full support for the many mediation efforts undertaken by the United Nations, the African Union and relevant regional organizations. Ladies and gentlemen.
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.
The first is the Tuvalu Digital Nation initiative that utilizes digital technologies to sustain our sovereignty, institutions and our capacity to deliver services to ensure that our national identity is not lost in the transformation. The second is the Tuvalu Digital Ark initiative, which seeks to preserve Tuvalu's culture and historical heritage in digital form. Mr. president, less than 24 hours ago, Member states endorsed in this very building the landmark United Nations political declaration on sea level rise, a monumental and gratifying achievement for Tuvalu, because Tuvalu was at the forefront of global efforts demanding such a declaration. For Tuvalu, sea level rise is not a future threat. It is a present reality. Tuvalu is therefore overwhelmed with joy and warmly welcome the commitments the declaration entails. Namely. Firstly, it affirms the continuity of statehood and sovereignty despite sea level rise. Secondly, it safeguards the permanence of maritime zones and rights established under the UN convention on the law of the sea. Thirdly, it recognises and protects the rights, dignity, culture, identity and heritage of affected people. Fourthly, it commits to strengthened adaptation and resilience. Fifthly, it calls for accessible, predictable and needs based climate finance. And sixthly. And it supports science, technology, data and knowledge systems that enable informed decision making and long term planning for vulnerable countries. The declaration affirms that Tuvalu's nationhood is not negotiable, that our maritime rights are not erasable, and that our people should never be forced to choose between their homeland and their future. Mr. president, for the Sustainable Development Goals, SDGs, Tuvalu is seriously concerned that the world is not on track to achieve them, because the consequences of such shortfall will be acutely felt by small island developing states. Of the SDGs, Tuvalu underscores the urgent need to accelerate progress on SDG 14 life below water, which is the least funded and least progressed. Yet it is the most fundamental to the survival and prosperity of small island developing states. Tuvalu calls on member States to expedite implementation of the commitments of the Third United Nations Ocean Conference, and to build momentum towards the fourth Conference in the Republic of Korea in 2028. Mr. president, climate change is and remains the single greatest existential threat to Tuvalu's survival, security and sustainable development.
We believe that a just and lasting peace must be achieved through dialogue and diplomacy. In Gaza, our responsibility begins with the protection of human lives. Civilians must be protected, and humanitarian assistance must reach those in need safely and without any obstruction. Israelis deserve lasting security, and Palestinians deserve dignity, freedom, and a viable state of their own. Montenegro supports a two-state solution, with the State of Israel and a viable state of Palestine living side by side in peace, security, and mutual recognition. The disarmament of Hamas remains an important element of a sustainable settlement, while full respect for international humanitarian law must guide us throughout. Different conflicts have different histories, but human dignity cannot have different standards. Neither can international law. The same commitment to international law applies to freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz, a route whose security has implications far beyond the region. Disruptions affect energy markets and global trade, but they also affect food security through the supply and price of fertilizers and other critical agricultural inputs, with particularly serious consequences for vulnerable import-dependent countries. At the same time, we must not allow conflicts that receive less international attention to become forgotten conflicts. In Sudan, in Myanmar, in Haiti, and elsewhere, civilians continue to endure violence, displacement, and profound insecurity.
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.
Mr. President, a few situations illustrate so painfully the gap between international commitments and lived reality as that of the East of the DRC. For more than three decades, millions of Congolese have been suffering attacks, forced displacement, and bereavement. Territories have been occupied, families dispersed, women and girls have suffered sexual violence, while children are recruited by armed groups or deprived of education. At the same time, the looting of our resources continues to fuel international trade. My country continues to face a war of aggression led by Rwanda through its proxy, the AFC M23, in violation of its sovereignty, our sovereignty, and our territorial integrity, as documented by the UN. The atrocities committed by other armed groups, especially the ADF and CODECO, are exacerbating this humanitarian crisis even further. To combat this challenge, the DRC has chosen the path of diplomacy without ever abandoning its rights. The peace agreement signed in Washington on June 27, 2025, the commitments made as part of the Doha process, and the roadmap coordinated by the African Union have opened up prospects that we have constantly supported. I commend the United States, Qatar, the African Union, African facilitators, regional partners, and all those who are sincerely striving to restore peace. However, for the sake of truth, we must recognize that for millions of Congolese, this peace remains only a promise. Resolution 2773 of the Security Council has laid out an unambiguous path. It calls for an effective cessation of hostilities, the withdrawal of Rwandan forces from Congolese territory, and, to all support for armed groups, the disengagement of the AFC M23, the dismantling of parallel administrations, the restoration of state authority, unhindered humanitarian access, and the safe and dignified return of displaced persons and refugees. But we don't need new texts to replace those that have already been adopted. What we need is their implementation. With regard to the issue of the Democratic Liberation Forces of Rwanda, the FDLR, long cited by Kigali to justify its military presence on our territory, the DRC is shouldering its responsibility. The protocol signed by the political and military leadership of the FDLR on May 30, 2026, provides for the disarmament, demobilization, and containment of their combatants, with a view toward their repatriation or resettlement without prejudice to potential judicial prosecution for serious crimes, until the movement is disbanded. The repatriation on September 8, with the support of MONUSCO, of 120 persons associated with the FDLR, is a first testament to the protocol's implementation. The issue of the FDLR, therefore, should no longer serve as a pretext for maintaining foreign military presence in our territory. The coordinated implementation of the mechanisms of Washington, Doha, and the African Union must be subject to a precise time frame, independent verification, regular information exchange, and clear consequences in case of violations. In this context, MONUSCO maintains a vital role in protecting civilians, monitoring the ceasefire, and supporting agreed-upon mechanisms. Any change to its presence must be determined by the conditions of security on the ground, the strengthening of national capacity, and the guarantee that no vacuum of power will remain to the detriment of populations. The DRC, for its part, will continue to fully shoulder its responsibility, especially through pursuing reforms of its defense and security institutions, through bolstering state authority, and through reconstruction on territories affected by the conflicts. And because the peace sought after in the subregion ought to go hand in hand with cohesion within our nation, the President of the DRC launched on August 28 a national dialogue for peace, cohesion, and the rebuilding of the state. This dialogue is open to the political and social forces that are committed to the Republic, our constitution, our territorial integrity, and to the rejection of violence.
This applies particularly to permanent members of the UN Security Council. China has the power, influence, and responsibility to help prevent conflicts, to escalate tensions, and contribute to ending wars. This includes using its influence to help bring Russia's aggression against Ukraine to an end. That aggression was launched and continues to be waged by another permanent member of the UN Security Council, Russia, in violation of the UN Charter and fundamental principles of international law. Russia's aggression continues to inflict enormous suffering on the Ukrainian people. Civilians and civilian infrastructure continue to be attacked indiscriminately. And the risks are growing day by day. Russia's aggressive posture poses a direct threat to European security as a whole. The immediacy of that threat was starkly illustrated by the recent attempted Russian drone attack on Leipzig Hala Airport in Germany, only 150 kilometers from the borders of the Czech Republic. The consequences of aggression reach far beyond Europe. Russia's war has undermined global food security, disrupting agricultural production, exports, and supply chains. Its effects are felt in my country, but even more acutely in parts of Africa and elsewhere, particularly in countries that depend on stable and affordable food supplies. While we need to raise costs of war for Russia, we must give serious diplomatic efforts a genuine chance. Diplomacy matters most not between friends, but between adversaries. That is where the United Nations remains indispensable as a forum for dialogue, even when agreement seems very distant. The UN was founded on principles. These principles matter in Ukraine. They matter in the South China Sea and across the Taiwan Strait. And they also matter in the Middle East, in Sudan, or DRC. The current developments in Yemen and Saudi Arabia demonstrate what happens when rules give way to force and coercion, when might replaces right, and how a regional conflict can, in an instant, have consequences for the entire world.
Mr. president, the pursuit of restorative justice gained new momentum with the adoption of the Resolution on Slavery and Transatlantic Trafficking of Enslaved Africans in this hall in March of this year. This development is relevant for Suriname and equally important for the countries of the Caribbean region. The discussion is no longer about whether slavery and colonialism have caused lasting consequences, negative consequences. We know we are living them. We increasingly must focus on how to overcome these effects. And on the question of what form reparations should take to achieve that. How countries that have benefited from slavery and colonialism will compensate the affected. That is the important issue now.
Provide the necessary legal, tax and customs facilities and guarantees for the growth of business and foreign trade. And build effective partnerships with the global market to accelerate achieving sustainable development. In the field of global energy. Iraq's influence is prominent as our government is adopting an ambitious program to increase the production of crude oil in a manner consistent with the size of our proven reserves. Our government is also working to develop gas fields and expand refining capacities and our capacities to produce derivatives, and we are also working to improve our petrochemical industry capacities. Our ambition is for Iraq to be a global hub for energy production and to leverage its potential to promote regional and international security and stability in a sustainable manner. Nevertheless, we express concern regarding developments concerned with freedom of transport and maritime navigation. And the crisis this has caused in terms of the rise of global energy prices. In order to contain the subsequent risks and the consequences on our peoples, we are working to diversify our oil export ports and develop energy lines and corridors linking Iraq, Turkey, Jordan and Syria. In order to reach global markets with the aim of contributing to energy security and diversifying supply routes. Excellencies. Economic diversification on the basis of genuine partnerships is a central strategic objective of our economic policy.
The rule of force, such as witnessed by Croatia during the brutal aggression and occupation of more than one quarter of our territory in the 90s in the war which claimed nearly 20,000 lives, and after which, more than three decades later, Croatia continues to search for 1725 missing persons a poignant example that the consequences of war do not end when the weapons fall silent. Instead, peace requires courage, credible institutions and rules that apply equally to everyone. Russia's ongoing war of aggression against Ukraine is a direct assault on those rules. Croatia will continue to support Ukraine's sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity and a comprehensive, just and lasting peace based on the UN charter. Peace cannot reward conquest and recovery cannot be separated from justice. The same compass must guide us in the Middle East. Protection of civilians, unhindered humanitarian access, respect for international law and a credible political horizon are essential to breaking the cycle of violence. Croatia supports a negotiated two state solution in which Israelis and Palestinians will live in peace and security. From Sudan and Myanmar to the Sahel and the Great Lakes region, civilians bear the highest cost when rules are ignored and diplomacy fails and no crisis remains local for long. War disrupts food and energy supplies, while insecurity from the Strait of Hormuz to the Black Sea affects shipping prices and livelihoods across continents.
Because the reality, the reality is that we still need to fight impunity, not least through the Special Tribunal for the Crime of Aggression Against Ukraine, which the Netherlands has offered to host in The Hague. And let me be absolutely clear we cannot accept impunity in this fight. Ukraine has no choice but to defend itself. But Russia makes a choice every day to wage war, and Russia must be held to account for its flagrant violations of the UN charter, for the immeasurable suffering inflicted on so many victims and families in this senseless war. And since the downing of flight Mh17, the Netherlands has come to understand this only too well, and many others understand it too. With Russia threatening global food security and millions of people experiencing the consequences. And history teaches us that the only way to resolve conflict is through justice. That was the idea underpinning the establishment 80 years ago of the International Court of Justice, the principal judicial organ of the United Nations.
Therefore, Mr. President, religious hatred must have no place in this world at all. Mr. president, Pakistan's economic revival remains a defining responsibility of my government and a mission that is very close to my heart. Through difficult, long overdue structural reforms and stringent fiscal discipline, we have restored macroeconomic stability and begun the journey towards sustainable and inclusive growth. We are modernising agriculture and industry, developing mineral resources, digitizing our economy, and equipping our youth with modern AI and IT skills. We are opening new pathways with China through the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, as well as with the Gulf, Central Asia and beyond. Here I pay tribute to the visionary leadership of President Xi Jinping for spearheading the Global Development Initiative, the Global Security Initiative, the Global Civilization Initiative, and the Global Governance Initiative. On these pillars, we can surely build a shared future for mankind. Mr. president, developing countries are in dire need of timely debt relief, affordable long term financing, and a stronger voice in global financial institutions. Development must receive the same urgency as security. Ladies and gentlemen, is it not an irony of fate that Pakistan contributes less than 1% of global emissions, yet repeatedly bears the horrific consequences of climate change? Developed countries must therefore honour their climate finance commitments without delay, fund loss and damage speedily and ensure support for adaptation and resilience.
Read around it: ·
ZA
No. 16
South Africa09/24 · first at about 10 min2 mentions
Unfortunately much of what we see runs counter to this. In the last two years, the world spent more on military budgets than on resourcing these important body tasked with maintaining global peace. We are reminded that meeting the SDGs by 2030, including ending hunger and expanding access to safe water and sanitation, will require not more than 5% of the 2.9 trillion USD spent on arms. The results of the choice we are making is an arms race, and a world as divided as it is dangerous. We see the consequences in Sudan, which is today the worst humanitarian crisis in the world. We see also the consequences in the Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo, in Iran, Ukraine and elsewhere. Humanitarian workers are caught in the crossfire of today's conflict when they are not being obstructed from reaching civilians in need. They are being killed in the line of duty to restore respect for international law.
These are not the actions of a country interested in peace. Russia could halt its brutal attacks at any time, yet it refuses to do so. Russia's actions have already had direct global impact in increased food and energy costs. This time last year, a bushel of wheat was just over $5. This year, it's more than $7. The fact that a permanent member of the Security Council is seeking to change borders by force, in clear violation of the UN charter is utterly unacceptable Sovereignty and territorial integrity apply equally to all states. The international community must remain steadfast in our response. In support of the UN charter and of a comprehensive, just and lasting peace. Ireland stands in solidarity with Ukraine and will continue to do so. We will continue to support efforts to hold Russia accountable for its actions. There can be no impunity for war crimes, not in Ukraine, not anywhere. And that is why Ireland is a steadfast supporter of the International Criminal Court. Ireland strongly opposes efforts to undermine the court. All measures against it should be immediately withdrawn. The international legal order, founded on our agreements to make the world a safer and more secure place, is being challenged. International law represents the collective lessons drawn from conflict, suffering and atrocity. The rules and institutions that we have built over generations exist to protect the rights, security and sovereignty of all states and all peoples. When these principles are disregarded, the consequences extend far beyond any single conflict. We all become less secure. Mr. president, 20 years ago, the Commission on War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity in Darfur saw the international community come together to fulfil our collective responsibility to protect. Despite the extraordinary efforts of the Sudanese people, the cycle of violence has continued. The conflict has been inflamed and prolonged by harmful outside interference. All states and external actors must cease arming, financing and enabling the war in Sudan. 15 million Sudanese people are displaced from their homes. Over 19.5 million face crisis levels of hunger. 33 million need urgent humanitarian assistance. Violations of international law including targeting on the basis of ethnicity, deliberate destruction of the means of survival, killing, torture and sexual violence are again being used as weapons of war. We need to act decisively to support the people of Sudan to end this conflict. We must support their aspirations for democracy, justice and development. Sudan has become a forgotten war despite its devastating impacts We must not allow the absence of daily headlines to become a license for inaction. The people of Sudan deserve the same attention, urgency and solidarity that we rightly extend to crises elsewhere. Mr. president, despite its prevalence, we cannot ever allow ourselves to become indifferent to conflict and human suffering it brings. To do so would deny the shared humanity of its victims. The peace plan on Gaza agreed last October was welcome, but it has not fundamentally changed the reality on the ground. Israeli strikes continue, humanitarian aid remains blocked. Civilians continue to suffer. We, the collective international community, have failed Palestine. Ireland, like most gathered here, believe that the only viable solution to the decades of conflict, misery and wasted human lives is a situation where a state of Palestine and a state of Israel live side by side in peace, security, and dignity. There are modest signs of progress. More countries have recognised the state of Palestine, and overwhelming majority of UN member states has endorsed the New York Declaration. More of us have taken steps to push back against the illegal and violent settler occupation of Palestinian land in the West Bank. But time is running out. What we are witnessing on the ground is a deliberate attempt by some to make the prospect of a two state solution impossible This is not some mad conspiracy theory. It is the stated intent of the Prime Minister of Israel who said clearly that, and I quote, we are going to fulfil our promise that there will be no Palestinian state. This place belongs to us on court, as he permitted the E1. Illegal development in East Jerusalem and the situation in Gaza remains an affront to all that is decent. How can we tolerate a situation where civilians are so desperate for shelter that they have to make their homes in war damaged and unsafe buildings where eight children died because one of them collapsed? Where the most basic humanitarian aid, food and shelter is deliberately impeded When the full truth of what has happened, what is still happening in Gaza is finally known. When the evidence is gathered, when the testimonies are heard, when the true horrors are finally and fully revealed. It will shame the world. Nobody will be able to say that we did not know. Let it not be said that we did not act in the West Bank. In the West Bank. The relentless expansion of settlements have reached a scale without precedent, further eroding, eroding the prospects for a just and lasting peace. Violent settlers continue to act with near-total impunity, while Palestinian communities face a sustained campaign of displacement and destruction amounting to ethnic cleansing. Entire villages have been razed, homes and vital infrastructure demolished, and thousands of Palestinian families driven from the places they have called home for generations and exposed to intimidation and violence. The United Nations reports that this year there have been almost 200 attacks against Palestinians every month, a stark reminder of a reality that is deepening conflict, suffering and despair. The International Court of Justice has been clear. Settlements in occupied Palestinian territory are illegal. Ireland has acted alongside others to prohibit the import of settlement goods. It is never too late to uphold international law. Mr. president, the conflict in the Gulf remains deeply concerning and is having a serious impact around the world. We need to get back to meaningful, good faith negotiations by all sides Ireland has consistently stated that Iran must cease its attacks on its neighbours and also end its destabilizing activities across the region, including strikes on ships in the Strait of Hormuz. Vessels must be allowed to transit the strait safely and without tolls in line with international law. If we are to build greater stability, Iran must never have a nuclear weapon. Iran's destabilizing influence across the region must cease. We need dialogue to achieve a negotiated settlement. Mr. president, since 1978, Irish soldiers have served with distinction in Lebanon in the Unifil peacekeeping operation. Ireland will continue to work with Lebanon, European Union and international partners to support Lebanon's future peace and security. We have consistently condemned Hezbollah's attacks on Israel, which must cease immediately. Israel must withdraw its military presence from southern Lebanon and bring an end to its military operations there. Israel's response has been wholly disproportionate. We honor the courage, professionalism and dedication of all peacekeepers who have served under the United Nations We remember with particular respect, those who lost their lives in the cause of peace. We welcome the Secretary-General's report on the Future of Peacekeeping, and Ireland will work with others to ensure that this essential capacity adapts to the 21st century. Ireland also welcomes wider reforms in efforts in the United Nations system. These are necessary if we are to meet the challenges of our rapidly changing world.
Mr. president, let us restore trust through the pursuit of peace and security. Trust in the international system begins with the conviction that everyone matters, and that the security of small states is as precious as that of great powers. International conflicts far from our shores in Ukraine and the Middle East continue to have devastating consequences for our daily lives, disrupting agricultural trade and global food stability, and driving up fuel prices and shipping premiums. We therefore join others here and call for an immediate end to the war in Ukraine, with full respect for state sovereignty and territorial integrity under the UN charter. And likewise, we call for a permanent ceasefire in the Middle East, the protection of civilians and the realization of a two state solution guaranteeing peace and security for Palestine and Israel. Mr. president, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines does not stand alone. We stand with our brothers and sisters in the Caribbean community, Caricom, which is not just a trading bloc, but a family whose members in these uncertain times need each other more than ever. For us in the Caribbean, peace and security are paramount concerns in our diplomatic efforts. Therefore, as we seek to restore trust, we reaffirm that Latin America and the Caribbean must remain a zone of peace where disputes are settled through peaceful means with adherence to international law and the UN charter. We urge that the territorial dispute between Venezuela and Guyana be resolved in this manner within our hemisphere. Other unresolved challenges require immediate, principled engagement. Haiti remains our urgent concern. Nearly four decades ago, the Trinidadian calypsonian David Rudder sang a lament to Haiti. His words are still relevant today. I quote when there is anguish in Port-au-Prince, it's still Africa crying. We are putting out fires in faraway places when our neighbours are burning. I refuse to believe that we good people will forever turn our hearts and our eyes away. Haiti I am sorry. And the song goes on. The insecurity of the Haitian people, plagued by gang violence and political uncertainty is a pain felt across our region. We support the efforts of Caricom and this organization to help fund and provide security, to build up critical institutions and create a viable path to general elections. We must confront the reality of arms trafficking, including assault weapons that are terrorizing Haitian communities and indeed communities across the Caribbean. We don't make these weapons in the Caribbean. They are manufactured in industrial nations and smuggled across borders into our region, into our countries. We therefore call upon all countries to take decisive action to stem the illicit flow of weapons and ammunitions across borders and into the Caribbean. Mr. president, Cuba has long been a valued member of our Caribbean family.
Mr. president of the General Assembly. Mr. Secretary general ladies and gentlemen, 12 years could be in politics. A mere temporal span, the length of a protracted crisis. But for a Yemeni child, 12 years are his entire childhood. An entire generation was born amid war, grew up amid hunger, fear and weapons. Learning the names of minds before learning the alphabet of life. Today, we do not ask the world to mourn every Yemeni child whose future has been stolen. Rather, we ask how many more children must be deprived of their future before the world stands resolutely with the Yemeni people in their struggle to restore their state and their stability? The people of Yemen. Yemen. This great nation, with its rich history, civilization, and human heritage, has been enduring for 12 years. The consequences of the coup carried out by the terrorist Houthi militia against the state and its institutions.
For Dominica, this is not an abstract question. When a hurricane destroys our infrastructure, when international energy prices rise, when access to capital becomes more expensive, when global markets change, or when climate finance remains beyond our reach, the consequences are felt immediately in our homes, in our businesses, in our schools and hospitals, and in the very lives of our people. Yet, Mr. President, I do not come before this assembly to speak only of vulnerability. I wish to speak of transformation and resilience. Dominica has made a choice. We have chosen not only to rebuild after disaster, but to build differently, build better, build stronger. We have chosen not only to adapt to climate change, but to demonstrate what a climate resilient economy and country can look like. And we have chosen to move from dependence to greater resilience. Mr. president, in 2017, category five Hurricane Maria demonstrated with devastating force the vulnerability of small island states like Dominica. The economic and human consequences were enormous. Hurricane Maria, however, also taught us an important lesson resilience should never begin after the disaster. Resilience must begin before disasters. The international community must therefore move from a model that primarily finances reconstruction after catastrophe to one that invests systematically in resilience before disaster strikes. For Dominica, this means resilient roads and bridges, resilient buildings, reliable communications, modern water systems, strengthened health infrastructure and disaster ready communities. But resilience is not only physical. A resilient country must have resilient institutions. It must have resilient public finances. It must have resilient energy systems and must have resilient food systems. Above all, a resilient nation must have people who possess the skills and confidence to withstand shocks and move forward. That is the Dominica that we are building. Excellencies.
Ladies and gentlemen, one of the biggest tests for the UN's relevance is Russia's aggression against Ukraine. For more than 12 years ago, since the illegal annexion of Crimea and occupation of eastern Ukraine in 2014, a permanent member of the Security Council of the Russian Federation has been perpetrating a war of aggression at the very heart of Europe. That aggression disregards the principles of the United Nations Charter to its very core. It violates the respect of sovereignty and territorial integrity of states, and the prohibition of the use of force against another state. The consequences of Russia's aggression, however, extend beyond Ukraine and Europe. For example, by increasingly targeting Ukraine's Black Sea ports, commercial shipping, crane infrastructure, and alternative export routes, Russia is putting global food security at grave risk. As such, this is a concern for all of us, and rightly so. Russia's actions have been condemned by a large majority of this Assembly. But condemnation is not enough. We need to collectively force Russia into peace in Ukraine, to force into a negotiation table by raising the cost of its aggression. For this, we can and should use the diverse instruments at our disposal, be they economic, diplomatic, or political. I strongly encourage more of my fellow heads of state and government to use this occasion to call on Russia to cease its aggression. Those of you who have done so already, be it the Global South or North, you have my appreciation. The principles of the UN Charter cannot be trampled on. It is our collective task to stand up for them. We should also support the efforts of international mechanisms to document the war crimes, ensure accountability, and provide assistance to those whose rights have been violated. Estonia is doing its part. We have completed all national procedures and taken the lead in discussions in Strasbourg to establish the special tribunal as soon as possible. A UN member state whose armed forces have been repeatedly cited in the UN Secretary's Report for Grave Violations Against Children and Conflict-Related Sexual Violence should have been no place in UN peacekeeping operations. This is a matter of ensuring that perpetrators' actions have consequences. But it is equally a matter of training trust in and the integrity of UN peacekeeping. I fervently call on the UN to stop reflecting and instead take appropriate actions immediately. Ukraine requires assistance in defending itself, but also in rebuilding the country. Estonia, together with its partners, have worked closely to support Ukraine's cybersecurity and resilience. In responsing to evolving threats through the Tallinn mechanism and the IT coalition, Estonia is also proud to be hosting the Ukraine Recovery Conference in 2027, organized in cooperation with our closest friends in the Nordic-Baltic region. Building on the outcomes of early conferences, next year's event will be advancing in practical terms long-term international support for Ukraine and its recovery. As such, it will be a multilateral effort and example of true cooperation for international peace and security. My fellow leaders, while in the situation in Ukraine and Ukraine's security that affects Estonia most directly, we are neither indifferent nor unaffected by the impact of other wars, threats, and conflicts. The situation in the West Bank and Gaza remains of great concern. Innocent civilians and children must not bear the devastating human cost of war. Estonia has consistently called for upholding international humanitarian law and ensuring safe, rapid, and unhindered access of humanitarian aid for those in need. We remain a stable donor in UNRWA and are committed to a credible political process leading to a negotiated two-state solution, with Israel and Palestine living side by side in peace, security, and dignity. We have provided food aid to hospitals in Gaza and stand ready to offer our digital transition expertise in its future reconstruction. Estonia has consistently condemned the act act by Iran against our close partners, the Gulf states, and has shown its readiness to contribute to ensuring freedom of navigation in the region. This is an issue that affects us all. We also see instrumentalization of migration as a means of exerting pressure on countries, whether on the European Union's eastern and southern borders or elsewhere.
Your. This Assembly has this week addressed the threats posed by sea level rise for Fiji. The legal consequences are not abstract. Statehood, once established, continues. Maritime zones once lawfully established and deposit deposited within the United Nations must remain. Notwithstanding the physical changes brought by the civil sea level rise, no state should lose its rights, its identity, or its seat in this hall because others have altered its coastline. Fiji urges the assembly, this assembly, to carry that principle from declaration into settled international law. Fiji welcomes the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the obligations of states in respect of climate change.
We now have capable people, institutions, policies that are proudly guiding our national transformation agenda. We must also ask ourselves why we continue to mobilize vital resources to respond to crisis, while investing far less in preventing them. The UN office for Disaster Risk Reduction estimates that every $1 invested in proactive measures, resilient infrastructure or early anticipatory actions saves between 3 to 15 USD in future damages and response costs. Therefore, we cannot remain trapped in a cycle of financing the consequences of the conflict while neglecting the peacebuilding or responding to humanitarian emergencies. While underinvesting in resilience and anticipatory actions. Prevention is more cost effective, it's more humane, and it's more sustainable. Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen. Now El Nino is strengthening and is likely to bring another period of significant climate stress across the world, with disproportionate impact on nations like Somalia. We must learn from what has happened before and be better prepared, not simply respond after the destruction it leaves in in its wake. As a community of nations Mr. President. Excellencies and gentlemen. Somalia is successfully leading on its own national development Our government is implementing the National Transformation Plan, strengthening public financial management, expanding domestic revenue, and investing in the capability of our national institutions.
And I do so at a moment of particular importance. As Greece reaches the end of our second year on the U.N. Security Council and is again preparing to assume its presidency next month. 12 months ago, as we marked the 80th anniversary of the United Nations, we spoke of the need to reinvigorate multilateralism And one year later, that need has only become much more urgent as we are living through extremely perilous times. Conflicts are multiplying, tensions are deepening, and perhaps most alarmingly, we're witnessing a further erosion of restraint and international affairs. The rules and understandings that have long provided a relative degree of stability in international relations between states are increasingly being tested. Secretary General Antonio Gutierrez has steered these United Nations through this exceptionally turbulent decade, with a steadfast commitment to its charter and the values it embodies, and the selection of the 10th Secretary general presents a historic opportunity for the reinvigoration of the organization when it is most needed. Ladies and gentlemen, the first step in restoring confidence in multilateralism is acknowledging where it has actually succeeded. And few examples are more powerful than the United Nations Convention on the law of the sea. With 172 parties, Unclose provides the binding legal framework within which disputes can be managed peacefully rather than through force, and from the Strait of Hormuz and the Red sea to the Indo-Pacific. Strategic maritime routes are increasingly becoming arenas of geopolitical confrontation. Commercial vessels are being targeted and vital trade routes are used as instruments of pressure, with grave consequences for supply chains, for energy markets and for future food security worldwide.
It also charged it to advance the economic and social well-being of all peoples. Peace and prosperity were never two mandates; they were one promise. Today, both sides of that promise are under strain. The crisis of multilateralism is not a shortage of commitments, institutions, or rules. It is the widening distance between the equality this system proclaims and the inequality that is inherent in its structures. That is precisely why we cannot accept its present limitations. On peace and security, the contradiction is increasingly difficult to ignore. Every nation in this hall has one vote. Every nation is sovereign and equal under the charter. Yet, on the gravest question of war and peace, five nations possess a permanent power that the other 188 do not. The equality proclaimed in this Assembly ends at the doors of the Security Council. That imbalance might have reflected the world of 1945. It does not reflect the world that we know today. Africa has 54 member states, more than a quarter of this Assembly, yet no permanent voice in the body entrusted with the primary responsibility of international peace and security. We are frequently the subject of its decisions: permanently discussed, yet permanently excluded. The problem is not that the world lacks law. It is that confidence in its consistent application is weakening. International law cannot be invoked loudly in one crisis, cautiously in another crisis, and disregarded when convenient. Every perceived double standard carries a price, and that price is trust. Trust cannot be restored by declaration. It must be earned by consistent application. But the cost of failure is measured in more than lost trust. It is measured in children driven from their classrooms. Children who go to sleep hungry. Children who learn the sound of gunfire before they know the safety of peace. When collective security breaks down, schools close, hospitals collapse, families flee, and economies are consumed by war. Peace is not separate from development. It is its first condition. When the institutions entrusted with peace fail, it is too often the youngest who inherit the consequences. Excellencies, Africa exposes this contradiction most clearly. In 1945, most of our continent could not speak for itself as San Francisco because it remained under colonial rule. Only four African states were represented. The architecture of collective security was therefore designed at a moment when most Africans had neither a nation at the table nor a voice in shaping the institutions that it would govern the peace. The world, ladies and gentlemen, has since transformed. The Council, the Security Council, has not. We cannot manage transformation with institutions that refuse to transform themselves.
The negative consequences of unjustified unilateral sanctions also affect small countries such as ours, which are at the stage of formation and development. In some cases, such practices led to interference in the internal affairs of independent states and contradict to the fundamental principles of international law. Some major states, in pursuit of their own interests, put pressure on smaller countries, such as Kyrgyzstan, attempting to force them to bargain over certain matters and issuing ultimatums. In this context, I would like to take this opportunity to note the decision made by the president of the United States, His Excellency Mr. Donald Trump, after taking office to halt funding of non-governmental organizations around the world. As a result, interference by NGOs in the internal affairs and policies of the developing countries has practically ceased. President Trump's decisions have created conditions for strengthening the sovereignty of states and enabling them to independently choose their own path of development. Therefore, taking this opportunity, I would like to express my appreciation to Mr. Trump for ending the funding of the NGOs. Distinguished colleagues, decisions to impose sanctions should be taken in accordance with the UN charter and exclusively within the mandate of the Security Council. We believe that the mandate to impose sanctions against the state should belong exclusively to the United Nations. In my view, this is the only possible way to improve the international sanctions system. First and foremost, we should introduce a mandatory mechanisms under which all sanctions and measures are reviewed in advance by the organization. The prior review of sanctions would help ensure that their potential humanitarian, economic and social consequences are taken into account. An important element of the proposed mechanism should be the enhanced transparency and accountability. States initiating sanctions should clearly indicate the legal basis for such measures, explain their necessity and objectives, and define clear criteria and conditions for their eventual removal. I believe it would be appropriate to establish, under the auspice of the United Nations, the Unified International mechanism for monitoring sanctions and reviewing them on a regular basis. Only then can the central role of the United Nations in maintaining international peace and security be strengthened and its mandate enhanced. This would also help eliminate the risk that sanctions being used arbitrarily by one country against another for political or economic gain. No state should act arbitrarily. The United Nations must be strong. Every country should tremble when the United Nations intends to impose sanctions. Only then, the strict international order can be established in the world. Otherwise, some decisions of the United Nations may no longer be taken seriously, while states simply act according to their own discretion. Every decision of the United Nations should be implemented without delay. If a state fails to implement such decisions and other countries cease cooperation with it, the effectiveness of sanctions will increase. Only then will a decision will be implemented promptly, and the United Nations will become a strong and respected organization. Otherwise, existing sanctions will become a sort of children's toy.
We wish them well, and they as they complete their tenure at the end of this year. Mr. president, fellow, few institutions embody the principle of sovereign equality as visibly as this assembly with the. Within these walls, differences in power, wealth and influence may shape the realities our nations confront, but they do not confer a greater claim to membership or participation. And perhaps more than anywhere else, this assembly reminds us of a simple truth. Our differences are real but so is our interdependence. This is why this organization was created with the understanding that disputes must be resolved through dialogue. Human dignity must be protected, and that nations must work together. If development, peace and human rights are to be sustained. In other words, that our common future requires common institutions. Eight decades later, we must ask ourselves whether we have remained faithful to that insight. And perhaps more importantly, do we still trust one another enough to act on it? Because today, Mr. President, trust is being tested. Geopolitical divisions are widening. Wars have become more protracted, with devastating humanitarian consequences. Respect for the United Nations Charter and international law is under visible strain, with developing countries facing intensifying debt burden. Climate vulnerabilities, huge gaps between commitments made and implementation, and feeling of marginalization and inadequate representation in the global system. Therefore, the task before us is building stronger, better equipped, representative responsive and effective multilateral system and global financial architecture that delivers for all nations and regions. Mr. president, the governments own experience within the. This organization gives us grounds for optimism. We have seen within this very institution that multilateralism can still deliver. During the 80th session of the General Assembly the government had the honor of chairing the second Committee at a time of profound disagreement over some of the most consequential economic and development issues before us. That experience reminded us that multilateralism does not require unanimity on every issue. It requires the willingness to remain at the table to listen, negotiate, and courage to make compromises. Our experience demonstrates that in this period of deep disagreement, progress remains possible.
True leadership requires both. Prudence, in this case, means not only knowing what we want; it also is about, um, pursue of goal while calling aggression by its name, and also condemning those who disrupt the world order without turning a blind eye when they violate the rules. Ladies and gentlemen, for many years, representatives of my country have been trying, in this chamber and in the Security Council, to point out that a situation in which a permanent member of the council, Russia, attempts unsuccessfully, but with ruthless persistence, to conquer a neighboring state and destabilize the entire region is a violation of the principles we all uphold as signatories to the Charter of the United Nations. Russia is destabilizing the situation in Europe through open aggression, hybrid operations, acts of subversion and sabotage, and by ignoring successive resolutions of this Assembly. It displays the same imperial arrogance that, in the past, led to unimaginable suffering and the tragedies of two world wars. Contempt for international law must not become the norm. It is not too late to restore the primacy of international law and strengthen the foundations of a system in which principles matter, and in which the international community, acting jointly and in solidarity, opposes aggression, which is prohibited by the Charter of the United Nations. Ladies and gentlemen, the Russian Federation, guided by an imperial and neo-colonial vision of the world, is attempting to impose its will on others. In doing so, it is effectively challenging the right of every nation to determine its own destiny. Neo-imperial and neo-colonial policies are, in essence, an attempt to return to a world in which the borders, security, and future of states and nations would be decided not by the states and nations themselves, but by other states that consider themselves stronger and predestined to dominate. And there might would replace law. It is an attempt to return to the concert of powers. This cannot be accepted. It is the force of law that should decide, not the law of force. Poland is particularly aware of the consequences of Russian colonialism and imperialism. History has taught us that freedom and sovereignty cannot defend themselves. That is why we are determined to counter the threats that the Kremlin's aggressive policies are posing to us, with increasing audacity. As a representative of a country neighboring Russia, I want to make it clear: we are not the ones seeking confrontation. We are strengthening our alliances, developing our military, and modernizing its equipment, not to wage war, but to prevent it. Our goal is deterrence and defense, the defense of two values that also form the foundation of the United Nations Charter: freedom and sovereignty. We continue to view the North Atlantic Alliance as the guarantor of European security. NATO remains united in the overarching goal of defending our community on both sides of the Atlantic, in Europe and America, on its eastern flank and along its northern border. We therefore welcome with satisfaction the strengthening of security in the Arctic region, which is now becoming a reality thanks to the agreement signed yesterday between our allies. Ladies and gentlemen, we must, however, make it clear: modern security threats are not limited to classical military actions. Russia is carrying out actions aimed at undermining the foundations of international stability, striking at global food security through attacks on ports and ships transporting grain, as well as by deliberately provoking crises that affect millions of people outside of Europe. At the same time, a large-scale hybrid war is being waged, involving sabotage, cyber attacks, and destabilization operations on an unprecedented scale, including an artificially induced migration crisis. These are planned, coordinated, and consistently executed actions. Their goal is to weaken states, undermine public trust, and shatter the unity of the international community. We are not dealing with isolated incidents, but with a sustained, well-thought-out strategy. And that is precisely why the response to these actions cannot be ad hoc or half-hearted. It must be firm, consistent, and it must also be united. For if aggression, whether military or hybrid in nature, is not met with an adequate response, it becomes an invitation to repeat it. Ladies and gentlemen, even if today we have reservations about the effectiveness of the Security Council, we respect the achievements of the United Nations in maintaining and building peace in many parts of the world. The role of UN peacekeeping operations in preventing the resurgence of conflicts is undeniable. Poland advocates for stable funding of peacekeeping missions and for granting them more transparent mandates that also take into account tasks related to the protection of the population and support for the reconstruction of state institutions. Poland also fulfills its commitments to global security through its participation in UN peacekeeping operations as well. Polish blue-helmet soldiers are currently serving in Lebanon, carrying out their duties with dignity despite the difficult security situation throughout the region. We will support efforts to de-escalate conflicts, protect civilians, and uphold international humanitarian law, and work toward the implementation of a two-state solution, ensuring the peaceful coexistence of Israel and Palestine. Ladies and gentlemen, this is precisely why the response to contemporary threats cannot be limited solely to reacting to crises. It must be based on clear principles and reliable partnerships.
Humanity will have to address this question, no matter how devastating the consequences may be. My friends, this was true in 1961 and sadly remains manifest today. This is why Barbados throws its full support behind the establishment of the International Panel on Inequality that is being proposed. Growing inequality is at the centre of geopolitical discussions, tensions, distrust in institutions and indeed the increasing number of conflicts that we see. It is for this reason that we reject the notion that governments must refrain from policy interventions that are essential to creating a level and fair playing field for ordinary citizens. We know that it is the policy choices of government that has led to this injustice, and it is the policy choices of governments that must now remove it. For us, this is as important a battle of the as the climate crisis. Mr. president, that brings me to that crisis.
We are already the victims of climate change. We must do it for them, and even more so for our children. Last but not least, we must hold fast and not yield on artificial intelligence. There are some who wish to make us believe that only two powers, the US and China, will be taking the decisions. They want us to believe that just a few economic actors will make all the decisions, the kinds of economic innovations that will be implemented, whether they want to take a break or not, the kinds of innovations that happen. Some of these technological developments might attack the security of our states, our hospitals or banks. They say that just a few will decide what kind of society we live in. No, no. Starting in 2018 at the G7 with our Canadian friends, we launched the Global Partnership for Artificial Intelligence under the auspices of the OECD to kickstart discussions on the need for regulation. At the AI summit in 2025. The AI Governance Summit. The next edition will be held in Switzerland next year. There was also the Indian edition. We advocated for two very simple things for everyone in the world to have their own LLM model capabilities, calculation capabilities, AI capabilities, so that we can craft a way of auditing these models instead of being reliant on just a few private actors. And in fact, Europe was the first with the AI Act to take forward these principles, to take forward these models, and we must continue down that path. Therefore, I wish to emphasize a particular point. Our young people and our children. We've spent far too long not protecting our young people and adolescents. And as a result, we're living with the consequence. Their capacity to learn is in decline. We're seeing mental health problems. The facts are stark, and the correlation is clear cut. That's why we've kickstarted a large scale initiative aimed at protecting our young people, our adolescents, to stop them accessing social networks before the age of 15. Underway in various countries. And I wish to commend our Australian colleagues, the first to take legislation on this front. We must continue down this path and see it through, but let's not wait for the consequences to come raining down on AI. We must act now to protect our children and our young people. Look at the impact chat bots have on our children. This is why, together with Kenya, Spain Australia, we've built a coalition on children's rights in the era of AI. We are mobilizing already this afternoon and also at the Paris Peace Forum on the 10th and 11th of November of this year. Governments, organizations, public and private actors, academics, private companies everyone will be rallying behind this agenda. So I hope to see you on the 10th and 11th of November in Paris. Going beyond that, we can clearly see the race that is underway in cutting edge models we must all be investing in. France is proud to have a competitive frontier model, and we will continue supporting them. So that we can have this kind of model. But we must also forge new kinds of cooperation. And I very much hope and wish for all sovereign states committed to their independence. India and Brazilian, African Gulf states, Singapore. The list goes on. This independent coalition, which I mentioned earlier, I don't want anyone to become the vassal of one of the great powers. Rather, we must come together to build an open source frontier model, a cutting edge model. Using all of the calculation capabilities you have pooling them. Our investment capabilities must be pooled to build a cutting edge, open source AI model, which we will share. We should not depend on somebody else. This is the agenda we must take forward and this through cooperation. Furthermore, there are other areas where we must set new rules AI in outer space, AI and defense, and cyber security. This has very serious consequences which affect the very heart of our national security. In Evian at the G7. Many of us lend our support for the call launched by our Finnish and Norwegian friends, and we want to continue within the framework of the G7, but also working closely with our UK colleagues who will hold the chairmanship of the G20 next year. We want to set a cooperation agenda on AI so as to protect the most sensitive components thereof, which affect our national security. We are coming to an agreement to build a new international architecture. We did this on chemical weapons. We did this when it came to other risks, and we must do the same when it comes to outer space defense, cyber security issues on which we must take control. And we need very specific kinds of cooperation, a specific framework for cooperation between member states in these areas, so as to be able to take this cooperation forward within a specific framework. We must not yield on this either.
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.
Everyone is being armed, from Asia to Europe, from Africa to the Americas. No country is immune. They have serious economic and social impact and are already having undesirable consequences for all of us and also for the parties involved. This is a senseless crisis because it's harmful to everyone. We must put an end to this collective masochism, and we must do it quickly to close this chapter, which is a chapter of widespread, widespread harm, we all have a duty to learn from the lessons of the crisis of the 1970s and avoid repeating what happened then. We will be judged by how we handle this challenge. On the one hand, it is urgent to put an end to the protracted conflicts and on the other hand, starting now, we must discuss and decide on complementary ways to mitigate the impact of this energy crisis and prevent its preventing it from being prolonged. It is my belief that it would also be beneficial to discuss the mechanism by which international oil prices are determined.
International law applies everywhere. International humanitarian law applies everywhere and human rights apply everywhere in Ukraine, in the Middle East, in Africa, in Asia or in Latin America. We are well aware that conflicts never remain purely local. They have repercussions on food security, energy markets, immigration development and global stability. We can see that with the war of aggression by Ukraine, Russia on Ukraine, this was a war chosen by Russia the consequences of which are worldwide in scope. This is a devastating aggression on a sovereign state committed by a permanent member of the UN Security Council, the violation of the UN charter and of international law. Attacks by Russia on Ukraine also threaten the security of civilian populations beyond Ukraine's borders, and it is unacceptable that over the last 12 months, Russia has on several occasions threatened the security of several European Union member states. Russia must bring an end to this dangerous escalation, and the international community must do its utmost and use all of the tools available to it to bring an end to this war and to create the conditions for negotiations for a comprehensive, just and lasting peace. This war must end. The same goes in the Middle East. We regret the current stalemate in Gaza and more broadly speaking, in Palestine, which is prolonging the suffering of millions of civilians. Despite the momentum towards the end of the conflict that we thought we saw at the end of last year, the European Union and its member states are made a their positions clear. The two state solution is the only one that can ensure lasting peace in the Middle East. With the State of Israel and the State of Palestine independent and living side by side in peace and security. And we also support all of the efforts to find a solution to the conflict in Iran. The cease fire must be fully respected. Freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz must be preserved without conditions and without hindrance. For a lasting solution. It is also necessary that security of the countries in the region be ensured. It is essential that Iran never be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons.
For Kiribati, this is an expression of our belief that even the smallest country can contribute to global peace. For Pacific peoples, the consequences of nuclear weapons are not merely historical. Our region still bears the human and environmental legacy of nuclear testing. As States Parties to the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW), we remain committed to advancing the Treaty’s and the humanitarian objectives and establishing an international trust fund for nuclear-weapons victims. As Co-Chairs with Kazakhstan of the recent International Meeting on Victim Assistance and Environmental Remediation, we thank the Secretary-General for convening this important meeting and for keeping the needs of affected communities at the center of our collective efforts. Peace and security must also keep pace with emerging threats in the digital domain. The East Micronesia Cable landed in Tarawa last year, connecting Kiribati with Nauru and the Federated States of Micronesia, transforming our connectivity and digital development. However, it also creates vulnerabilities. With limited redundancy and technical capacity, island States face threats including cybercrime, critical infrastructure attacks, ransomware and online harms that can undermine security and development. Your Excellencies, Kiribati comes to this Assembly not simply to speak of the challenges we face. We come to speak of the future we choose.
Mr. President. Excellencies, I want to tell you about my grandmother, Alice. Growing up in rural Sweden as the seventh of 11 siblings, her opportunities were very different from those of her brothers. Her parents expected her to focus first and foremost on family life. Yet she was curious, capable and determined to build a life of her own. A job at a local bank gave her not only an income but also independence and confidence. There at the bank, she met many women with little to no experience with finances and who were left vulnerable when circumstances changed. She wrote in her diary about some of the women she met, many of whom were recently widowed, coming to the bank in tears because they didn't know anything about their own family finances. One woman came to the bank holding two safe deposit keys without knowing which bank they belonged to. My grandmother was as independent as a woman in that time and place could be, but she worried deeply about the consequences for the women who were not. During her life, she witnessed extraordinary progress. But two generations later, far too many women are still entirely economically dependent on men. Mr. President, 80 years ago, when Sweden joined the United Nations, the foundations of our modern society were being laid. In the 1940s and 50s Swedish women joined the labour market in large numbers. This was not only a matter of principle, it also came from the realization that our economy needed women in the workforce. Women's economic empowerment is a matter of freedom. When women work and earn their own money, their self-determination grows. Gender equality is not only the right thing to do, it's also the smart thing to do. When women work, economies grow. Mr. President, each generation must fight for equality. In 1919, the same year my grandmother was born, Sweden decided that women should have the right to vote. That very same year, women in Afghanistan were also granted the right to vote. More than a century later, the contrast between women's freedoms in our two countries is as striking as it is saddening. It is a painful reminder that progress is never irreversible. Rights, once gained can be lost. Freedoms do not defend themselves. It is up to us to protect them, for women and girls everywhere and for generations to come.
For more than 80 years, this organization has stood for one answer. Power must be bound by rules agreed together, that answer secured Austria's sovereignty and our prosperity. It still does. We are a nation of 9 million people, an open, liberal democracy, and we are proud of it. Alone we cannot. We cannot keep trade routes open, stabilize energy markets, or prevent wars. Like most countries in this whole, we depend on a world in which borders are respected, agreements are kept, and strength is bound by law. When that order weakens, the gravest price is paid by those least able to bear it. By countries already in crisis. By populations heavily dependent on food imports and by people caught in conflict. In Austria, we are fortunate to live in peace, but the consequences reach us. Energy prices rise, factories close and families are forced to flee war and seek safety across Europe. This is why the United Nations matters. It is our life insurance. This is why we are a proud host country of the organization, why we successfully campaign for a seat on the UN Security Council. I would like to thank you wholeheartedly for your support at the elections in June.
Restoring trust, mutual respect and equality before the law is our collective responsibility. During this 81st session. Mr. president, distinguished participants, a year ago, we called in this very hall for peace to be the foundation of development and human rights. 12 months later, we must acknowledge that the gap between our commitments and reality remains evident everywhere around the world, from the Middle East to the Sahel, through the Great Lakes region, in Eastern Europe and Latin America, civilian populations continue to pay the high price of conflict, driven by interests that are often hidden. The devastating war in the Middle East, marked by massive civilian losses and destruction of critical infrastructure. Has spread to Syria and Lebanon As a result of Israeli military operations and has had major global economic consequences. In addition to its worldwide impact. The conflict threatens the food and energy security of vulnerable countries, such as the Union of the Comoros, which remain highly dependent on imports and whose population face declining purchasing power And this demands greater international solidarity. Given this shared insecurity. Mr. president, ladies and gentlemen allowing the conflict in the Middle East to continue directly weakens the United Nations by calling into question its ability to maintain world peace and by undermining its credibility amongst the peoples we represent. The theme of this 81st session acknowledges that something is broken, and that is why confidence must be restored. Through concrete actions that uphold the rule of law and collective security. It is time to move beyond power politics and establish a new human ethic that transcends divisions of race, color and belief. Whilst safeguarding our shared ecosystems. Created in 1945 from the ruins of the Second World War, our organisation was founded to guarantee peace, security and sovereign equality of states in strict respect for international law. Without these principles, it would be little more than an empty forum Since our last meeting here in September 2025, the genocide in Palestine has continued. Hundreds of thousands of Palestinian civilians, women, children and elderly have lost their lives and entire populations stands on the brink of extermination. The international community will regain its credibility first by taking urgent action to silence the guns to protect civilian lives. Whether Israeli, Palestinian, Lebanese or Syrian And ultimately implementing United Nations resolutions, including the two state solution. With Israel and Palestine coexisting peacefully This is a prerequisite.
The Indian Ocean must remain peaceful. It must remain as a region where trade can flow and where States can prosper. Regional competition among major powers must not limit the choices of smaller States. Conflict does not have to reach our shores to affect us. In today’s interconnected world, a crisis far away can quickly become a crisis at home. Interruption to maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz raises fuel prices. It affects food supplies and air travel. The consequences of this are felt across tourism and public finances in the Maldives. The Maldives, therefore, condemns the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. The Strait must remain open and safe. The Maldives further condemns the attacks on Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait, Oman and Jordan. The Maldives appreciates the diplomatic efforts of Oman, Pakistan and Qatar to de-escalate the crisis and bring the parties to dialogue. The right to a sovereign future must belong to all. And nowhere is that right more brutally denied than in Palestine. Israel's genocide and war crimes against Palestinians continue. And their actions are not confined to Gaza. Its military attacks across the region have violated the sovereignty of other States. Security cannot be built by exporting insecurity. Nor can any country demand respect for its sovereignty while violating the sovereignty of others. No State should be shielded from accountability by its power or political alliances. But condemnation alone is not enough. Every Member State must ask: what have we done to end this violence? The United Nations must ask itself the same question. The problem is not a lack of law. The rules are clear. What is absent is equal application. International law cannot bind the weak and bend for the powerful. The same rules. The same standard. No exceptions. Israel’s genocide in Gaza must end. Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestine and other Arab lands must end. Illegal settlements must end. Humanitarian assistance must reach Palestinians safely, rapidly and at scale. And the decisions of international courts and the resolutions of this Organization must be respected and implemented. For the Palestinian people, a sovereign future means freedom, dignity, self-determination, and the right to live with security in their own State. The Maldives will always stand with the Palestinian people and their undeniable right for that future. That is why I reiterate our call for the recognition of an independent and sovereign State of Palestine, based on the pre-1967 borders, with East Jerusalem as its capital. And if this Organisation is to restore trust and deliver for all, Palestine must become a full Member of the United Nations.
I wish I could stand here today simply to talk about development, democracy, peace, and the hopes of a young nation. Instead, I must speak about death and destruction of epic proportions, about families waiting for loved ones who will never come home, about communities searching through the mud, rocks, water for the people whose bodies may never be recovered, about bridges, about roads, schools, homes, livelihoods swept away in minutes, about a country whose steady progress to achieve Sustainable Development Goals has been interrupted. Four weeks ago, the world saw shocking images of catastrophic floods that swept away Nepal's mountain communities, with ferocity many have called" mountain tsunami" or "Himalayan tsunami." The Bhowtekosi-Trishuli disaster was not just a local tragedy; it was a warning to the world, and I ask you today, have you really heard that warning? Nearly three years ago, standing in the shadow of our Mount Everest, the Secretary-General of the United Nations warned humanity about the madness and impending climate disaster. That cry from the rooftop of the world was not heard enough, loudly. We in Nepal heard it. Our communities heard it. Scientists around the world heard it. They repeated it with evidence. But we, the political leaders, have been negligent to translate those warnings into action at the speed and scale that the vulnerable people require. Last month, we saw the tragic consequences: a warming climate that is destabilizing the fragile Himalayan ecology, melting permafrost that is fracturing mountains, slopes beneath the glaciers, and accelerating the risk of ice rock avalanches, floods, landslides, and other cascading hazards. The resulting devastation unleashed havoc on both sides of Nepal's China border. The flood continued downstream to India. This tells us something fundamental: climate change does not recognize borders. Glaciers and floods do not travel with stamps on passports.
It is less about doing things for others than doing things with them. This principle takes on particular significance in the face of current technological revolutions. AI is the most obvious illustration of this. It offers considerable new possibilities in science, the economy, medicine, education, and the management of resources. But it also highlights the risk of a new divide between those who have the skills and infrastructure needed to participate in this transformation, and those who are likely to feel only its effects. We must ensure that technological progress broadens opportunities without widening the gaps. This means that as many countries and societies as possible must be able to benefit from advances in AI, develop their skills and contribute to the debate on the rules that will govern its development and use. This is exactly the aim of the Geneva AI summit, which will take place on the 21st and 22nd of June 2027 under the motto Bridging Innovation and Trust. These two concepts must go hand in hand. Innovation in which societies no longer have confidence risks being rejected. Conversely, rules that would prevent all innovation would deprive us of enormous potential. Our responsibility, therefore, is to strike a balance to enable progress and promote its benefits, while creating the conditions for the reliable and responsible development and use of these technologies. Artificial intelligence thus reminds us of a simple truth. Certain changes are so far reaching and so fast moving, that no single state can manage all of their consequences by itself.
Trust is an intangible asset, perhaps the most valuable of all. It takes great effort to build, yet very little to destroy. When international commitments are relativized, when the charter of the UN ceases to serve as the shared framework guiding the actions of states, when international humanitarian law is violated with a frequency that risks normalizing horror, what is weakened is not only peace itself, but also confidence in the international order and in all the organizations that represent and promote it. From this Assembly, Andorra wishes to reiterate a conviction it has upheld for more than three decades: for small states, multilateralism is not a strategic option, but a guarantee that all countries, regardless of their size, can make their voices heard on an equal legal footing. It is the clearest expression of the principle that the force of law must always prevail over the law of force. It is precisely for this reason that we continue to firmly defend the need to uphold the charter of the UN and international law. We also support, more than ever, the efforts of the International Criminal Court to identify those responsible for the gravest crimes, and we condemn any act of aggression—once again, and unambiguously— that violates the sovereignty and territorial integrity of a state. In this sense, we continue to express our solidarity with the people of Ukraine in the face of the consequences of a war that has lasted for far too long already, and we reiterate our support for efforts aimed at achieving a just, comprehensive, and lasting peace in accordance with the principles of the charter of the UN and international law.
Because even the most complex historical differences can and must be resolved by peaceful means. We are deeply concerned by the persistence of armed conflicts in different regions of the world, and their devastating consequences for civilians. In every case, our position rests on the same principles respect for the charter and international law, the protection of civilians, safe humanitarian access and dialogue and diplomacy as indispensable paths towards a just, sustainable and lasting peace. We must not grow accustomed to war. We must not accept violence as a permanent condition of our time, or allow entire generations to grow up believing that force is the only way to resolve our differences. Guatemala stands for peace. This December, we will mark 30 years since the signing of the agreement on a firm and lasting peace, which brought an end to 36 years of internal armed conflict. After years of negotiation, we chose to replace armed violence with the pursuit of dialogue. That is why we understand the value of international support and the role of the United Nations. Our experience allows us to share one conviction. Negotiation is not a sign of weakness. Dialogue does not mean abandoning our principles. Seeking peace must never mean accepting injustice. We have also contributed to United Nations peacekeeping operations More than 6300 Guatemalan women and men have served under the United Nations flag in peacekeeping operations in different parts of the world. A country that knows the cost of war must also take responsibility for helping others preserve peace. Mr. president, we must strengthen the timely exchange of information, operational and judicial coordination, border security with respect for human rights, the protection of ports and transit routes, financial and asset investigations, and the recovery of assets derived from illicit activities. We must also work together on prevention. Lasting security cannot be achieved through law enforcement alone. It requires education, decent work, resilient communities, accessible institutions and opportunities for young people. It requires us to reduce the social, territorial and economic spaces that criminal structures exploit to recruit, exert control and supplant the state.
At home, we are investing a computing capacity, digital infrastructure and AI skills. We are forging new trusted partnership on AI governance and emerging technologies, and we have recently adopted law on artificial intelligence and new digital code. But without effective governance at all levels, it will also deepen inequality, create new security risks, as we have seen very recently, and widen the digital divide. We also should not let ethical norms fall behind this rapid evolution. AI must remain human centered, safe and subject to meaningful human oversight. These risks are particularly serious in the military domain, where the use of AI in warfare and cyber operations could have far reaching consequences for international stability. Kazakhstan supports stronger international rules and cooperation, including through the United Nations Global Mechanism on ICT security and UN Global Dialogue on AI governance. At the regional level, we invite partners to engage with the UNESCO Asia-Pacific Digital Solution Centre in Almaty city as a platform for sharing expertise and advancing regional digital cooperation.
President, this week has also seen an intense debate on harnessing the potential of artificial intelligence. But perhaps what we are discovering in these conversations are our own limits to understanding what the potential might be. Reporting from the most powerful and well capitalised AI companies tell us that we are on a precipice, either of a technology fuelled utopia or an apocalypse. Whether we achieve one or the other, unfortunately has been treated as a secondary priority to the AI race, one that has no clear finish line and, for that matter, a dubious prize. Liechtenstein supports the regulation of artificial intelligence. Unless we have a clear understanding of the methods, processes and purposes of the huge variety of AI systems, how can we risk the consequences to human rights, to our environment, to the long term capacities for our critical thinking, and ultimately, to the future of the human species? We are already seeing the impacts on civilians as armed forces increasingly integrate AI capabilities into their targeting systems in warfare. AI tools have to be made for humanity, lest we become the source material for AI systems to use, or merely the victims in its crosshairs.
The Security Council must become more representative, more effective, and more accountable to the entire membership of the United Nations. Africa in particular, and it was said many times today, should have a stronger voice. And when the Security Council is paralysed, the General Assembly must be able to play its rightful role. The United Nations must reform so that it can deliver more effectively, particularly when resources are constrained. But reform must never become an end in itself. The purpose of institutions is to serve people. Ultimately, the test of multilateralism is not how many resolutions we adopt or how many meetings we hold. It's whether a child is safer because of our decisions. Whether a young person can receive an education, whether a family can live in dignity, whether a small country can believe that international law will protect it when power alone cannot. This is why trust matters, and this is why Luxembourg will continue to defend multilateralism. Because we know what happens when it fails. Madam president, climate change reminds us, perhaps more clearly than any other challenge, that we cannot solve global problems by acting alone. It transcends borders and generations. Small island developing states are already experiencing consequences that threaten their very existence. Luxembourg may be landlocked, but we are deeply committed to this common effort, including by drawing on the expertise of our financial centre in green finance. Our interests may differ, but our future is shared. Madam president, the world is becoming more fragmented. The international order is under strain. We need to recognise this reality. But we should not mistake a world of competing centres of power for a more just or stable international order. For Luxembourg, the answer is clear. Our experience has taught us that international law and multilateral institutions give countries, whatever their size, a voice and place at the table. It is not about resisting a changing world, but to make multilateralism fit for that world. I believe this is ultimately what the United Nations asks of us, not that we agree on everything, not that we abandon our national interests, but that we recognise that there are challenges for which no nation, however powerful, can find lasting solutions alone. We can look at the imperfections of multilateralism and conclude that it no longer works, or we can reform it fairly, strengthen it, and make it worthy of the trust that future generations will place in us. I know which choice I want to make, because this is the world I want to leave to my children. A world where dialogue is stronger than confrontation, where respect between nations allows differences to become sources of strength rather than division. Where international law protects the weak as well as the strong. If we restore trust, if we listen to the next generation, and if we have the courage to act together, the United Nations can continue to be more than a reflection of the world as it is. It can remain an instrument for building the world we want to leave behind. A world worthy of the trust of those who will inherit it. Young people do not expect us to solve every challenge, but they do expect us to try. They expect us to act with responsibility. And above all, they expect us not to lose faith in our ability to shape a better future.
Excellencies, Mr. President, ladies and gentlemen, can we speak of development when international peace and security are being tested by multiplying crises around the world and persistent tensions? Restoring trust requires the United Nations to maintain and to restore peace. We must be concerned that the multilateral system is struggling to contain escalating tensions fueled by geopolitical rivalries. These crises now affecting different regions of the planet. Have consequences for our states. They directly impact our economies and the daily lives of our populations through disruptions in energy supply chains. And difficulties in the delivery of essential goods. These are all factors which further aggravate the vulnerabilities that we already face. Confronted with this reality, we must have the courage to recognize and to accept the limitations of the multilateral system in its current form and functioning. It is urgent to initiate concerted and lasting action to guarantee every people the right to pursue their development in dignity and in stability. Mr. president, excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, far from observing the world as a passive spectator, Madagascar positions itself as an actor fully aware of its strategic place and responsibilities. Our country remains a committed and operational partner in the service of peace, development and security, maritime security and the Mozambique Channel and the Western Indian Ocean remains at the heart of the regional initiatives in which Madagascar actively participates. We are determined to strengthen regional and multilateral cooperation founded on respect for national sovereignty. Whilst also welcoming partnerships that align with our priorities and serve as genuine drivers of development. We also want to be part of strengthened regional cooperation in order to guarantee the security of maritime areas. This approach will make it possible to ensure the sustainability of our energy supply chains.
Mr. president, as a low lying atoll nation with no higher ground, sea level rise is an immediate and stark reality. This week's UN high level meeting on sea level rise has helped achieve new understanding in international law. It is the seas that are rising around us and not our islands which are sinking. Our boundaries and baselines of today. The political footprint on the map will endure in the face of aggressive sea level rise scenarios. Our collective stability and security as Pacific Islands Forum members and as a UN member state will be now better addressed. As an atoll nation, our tide gauge is proof enough that far more action is needed, and we are acting. Confronted with rising seas on our most vulnerable shorelines. We completed the Ebeye Seawall and Footpath last week. 1.8km of oceanside protection built with support from the World Bank, the Green Climate Fund and our own resources. Engineered for rising seas, it now protects 8,400 people and critical energy infrastructure, reduces annual coastal flooding losses and anchors resilient future development on Ebeye, including schools, housing and the proposed new hospital, while providing a safe public space that strengthens community wellbeing. It cost $75 million, took 70,000 tonnes of rocks, took more than a decade to do, and it is just one island of over a thousand. We are taking action and we urgently need strengthened partnership to better protect our islands before sea level rise overtakes us. Mr. president, my nation underscores the importance of the law of the sea as a key pillar of our future. Even before we were a UN member, we fought closely both to participate in UN law of the sea negotiations and to secure these rights in our Constitution. Pacific Island leadership and that of all small island developing states has defined every multilateral milestone for oceans and fisheries. And we will continue to do so. As an ocean people, the consequences of getting it wrong are not from distant impacts, but adjacent to our waters, particularly in the North Pacific, both within the International Seabed Authority and unilateral actions. Collectively, the people and voices of Micronesia must be heard. We are joined by Guam, Northern Marianas, Federated States of Micronesia and Palau in expressing our alarm at seabed mining actions where the decisions are made before impacts are well understood and where adequate safeguards remain undefined. The Marshall Islands joins 45 nations seeking a moratorium on seabed mining. Responsible and science driven regulations need to be in place. Going on guesswork for global oceans is beyond dangerous. There are no do overs. The Marshall Islands looks forward to the first Conference of Parties to the Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction, to work across silos to advance high seas protection. We urge wide ratification of the agreement. The Marshall Islands looks forward to supporting its secretariat in a host nation, committed to upholding the law of the sea as a matter of both principle and law, in words and in actions. Mr. president, too often the word geopolitics is considered to refer only to the whims of superpowers and not the reality of our fragile place between them.
We further call for an end to the atrocities being committed in Gaza. The establishment of an independent Palestinian state, living side by side with Israel, in peace and security, remains a vital goal that we must collectively pursue. We call for the lifting of the unjustified economic embargo against Cuba, which had far-reaching consequences for the Cuban economy and the well-being of its people, including access to essential goods and services. We call for the end to the energy siege on Cuba and her removal from the unilateral list of states allegedly sponsoring terrorism.
This strategic canal for the free world, once again, is suffering the consequences of climate change. This is something that is a real paradox because we are a carbon-negative country and one of the very few carbon-negative countries in the world, but this does not mean that we don't have to face strong droughts followed by heavy rain that causes flooding. This leads us to a reflection that is, there's a lot of support for nations that assume the objective of decarbonization, but the fact is that we don't benefit from any type of economic aid, despite the fact that we remove more carbon from the world than we produce. So it will be the Panama Canal itself that grew under Panamanian hands and that saw billions of dollars of investments to build the Rio Indio project. This is going to be a reservoir of water to ensure that the canal can continue to be used and provide more predictability to international trade and water supply to hundreds of thousands of citizens. This is an endeavor of the United Nations to support responsible projects, both socially and environmentally, that represent real progress for our countries. It's fundamental not to give in to pressure from organizations that seek extortion under the coverage of social struggles and seek cover in international organizations such as the ILO, for example. Distinguished delegates, Panama is a global leader in the conservation of biodiversity and cultural legacy as a basis for our sustainable development.
We commend and thank him for his sincere and positive leadership of this organization. In the same vein, Saint Lucia wishes to express its endorsement of the candidate of the Republic of Guyana, Ms. Caroline Rodrigues-Birkett, for the post of Secretary General. Her distinguished record of public and international service speaks directly to the kind of leadership this moment demands. On 25th March 2026, the General Assembly approved one of its most historic and consequential resolutions that declared the trafficking of enslaved Africans and racialised chattel enslavement of Africans as the greatest crime against humanity. This resolution, and the subsequent establishment of the High level Global Advisory Council on Reparatory justice is a very significant step in the search for reparations for the transatlantic slave trade and the enslavement of Africans in the Americas and the Caribbean. I want to thank the President of Ghana for spearheading and championing this resolution. Saint Lucia congratulates the Government of Jamaica on its successful petition to the British monarch for him to refer three questions to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council over the legality of the enslavement of Africans in Jamaica. Mr. president, reparations are not about vengeance. They are about truth, acknowledgement, repair and transformation. Reparations are not about seeking charity or revisiting history for its own sake. History is not behind us when its consequences remain embedded in wealth, power, institutions, and opportunity. Reparations are about addressing the continuing effects of slavery and colonial exploitation, restoring dignity, advancing development, and building more equitable
Through ECOSOC, Sierra Leone will champion a development system that responds more effectively to Africa's priorities. Mr. president, restoring trust and delivering for all must also embrace the unfinished cause of Reparatory justice. In March, this Assembly adopted a resolution led by Ghana and supported by the African Union and Caribbean Community, recognising the trafficking and racialized chattel enslavement of Africans as the gravest crime against humanity. For Sierra Leone, this history is neither abstract nor distant. From Bunce Island, in our own river estuary, thousands of Africans were forcibly transported across the Atlantic into enslavement. Freetown, our capital, would later become a home for formerly enslaved and liberated Africans. This history is woven into our national identity. However, the consequences did not end with abolition. Their legacy continues to be reflected in enduring disparities in wealth, power and opportunity across our world. Reparatory justice is therefore not a plea for charity. It is a call for acknowledgement, formal apology the return of cultural heritage fair redress and guarantee of non-repetition. Sierra Leone stands with Africa the Caribbean and the wider African diaspora in advancing this cause, not to remain captive to the past, but to build a more just and equitable future.
Our most pressing threats are already reaching our shores. Transnational crime illicit drugs, illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing, cyber threats and unresolved consequences of nuclear testing and radioactive contamination remain. In this respect, our region is committed to directly utilising innovative technologies and working closely with our trusted security partners to address our security challenges. We are committed to protecting the rights of marginalised people and ending violence against women and young girls. This year, Tonga ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with disabilities, reaffirming our commitment to the dignity and the equal participation of persons with disabilities.
And I thought it's a good idea to share with you my thoughts. Gunpowder changed the battlefield. Nuclear fission changed the meaning of human survival. Artificial intelligence is changing something even more intimate: who can enter the minds of a citizen, imitate a trusted voice, manufacture a reality calibrated to one person's fears, and do so millions and millions of times at once. Albania is not a developer of frontier models, but we are a nation that has already lived the future others are still debating, and I think a simple message is what we owe to all of you. The greatest immediate danger is not that artificial intelligence will stop obeying humanity. The greatest danger is that it will obey the wrong human beings perfectly. The challenge comes in three layers. What artificial intelligence does instead of us, what it does to us. And who gains the power to reach us? First, what it does instead of us. The public debate imagines machines that awaken, acquire ambitions and turn against their creators. But the systems confronting us today do not wake up with hatred in their hearts. They multiply ours. They have no ambition of their own. They serve the ambition of others. They carry no flag. But they can be deployed by a state. They tell no lie for their own benefit. But they can tell a billion lies on others behalf. The machine has no conscience. But it can borrow the reach of a government, the precision of a weapon and the intimacy of a friend. At the same time, the economic incentives surrounding artificial intelligence increasingly reward the replacement of human effort, rather than the enlargement of human capacity. Write the code so that I do not have to understand it. Draft the report so that I do not have to think through it. Make the judgment so that I do not have to assume responsibility for it. When success is measured only by how much work the machine removes from the human being, we may create more efficient institutions, but will have less capable people. A civilization that outsources effort may eventually outsource knowledge. A civilization that outsources knowledge may eventually outsource judgment, and the civilization that outsources judgment may discover that it also outsources responsibility. This is not inevitable. It is a choice. We can build artificial intelligence that teaches rather than merely answers, guides rather than commands, and strengthens the human being instead of making the human being dependent upon it. The question cannot be only how quickly did the machine complete the task? We must also ask, what did the human being learn? Who understood the decision? Who can challenge the decision and who answers for the decision when it is wrong? Albania became the first country to bring an artificial intelligence instrument into the architecture of government through Diella, our worldwide known artificial intelligence minister. We did not do this to transfer sovereignty from people to a machine. We did it to make public services more accessible, procedures more transparent, and the state more accountable. No machine possesses democratic legitimacy. No algorithm inherits constitutional responsibility. Behind every consequential public decision, there must remain a legal mandate, a human institution, and a name that can be called to give answers. The second layer is what artificial intelligence can do to us. Artificial intelligence inside an accountable state can reduce the distance between citizens and public services. Artificial intelligence outside accountability can eliminate the distance between a lie and the human mind. Albania experienced this directly. I am sure you must have followed or just known the so-called Flamingo Revolution, a fabricated narrative of an Israeli invasion of the Albanian coast, an invasion that never occurred, was manufactured, was personalized and delivered through voices, pages and channels citizens already trusted. One citizen received a story of national betrayal. Another received a story of religious provocation. Another received a conspiracy of foreign occupation. Different fabrications entered different emotional worlds, all serving the same strategic lie. The consequences were real. Citizens had their own reasons to protest. Don't take me wrong. But suddenly they started to protest also against a phantom enemy. Antisemitic tropes entered our public discourse for the first time ever. Don't forget, Albania is the only country in Europe that ended World War Two with more Jews than it started it. Fear became anger. Anger became mobilization and fabrication became political reality. And this is not and was not a laboratory experiment. I'm not talking to you about a science fiction movie. It was a Tuesday in Tirana, our capital city. The algorithm did not invent the objective. A human actor did.
Instability being experienced in various regions of our continent is a direct consequence of that stance, as it can be seen in the conflicts currently unfolding in Europe, in the Middle East, in the Persian Gulf and in Africa, while tensions is mounting in the Asia-Pacific region. From what we have observed, we do not discern encouraging signs regarding the likelihood of reaching any peace agreement in the near future in the wars between Russia and Ukraine, in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the Middle East, and in the Persian Gulf. We condemned the genocide against defenseless population, the elderly, women, children, bedridden patients, health professionals, journalists and workers of international humanitarian organizations who are often deprived of access to most basic human rights and to essential goods for life, such as water, food and medicines. The expulsion of Palestinians from their homes and lands through expansion of Jewish settlements in the West Bank must elicit the strongest international outrage and condemnation. Attempts to dominate entire countries and regions of the globe by force of arms, are leading the world towards a catastrophe. The food security and energy and humanitarian situation of countries and the world in general, has deteriorated considerably following the outbreak of wars against Ukraine and more recently against Iran. The toll of these wars is disastrous, judging by the consequences arising from the strangulation of freedom of maritime navigation through the Strait of Hormuz and Bab al-Mandab, a situation that has created serious risk of disruption to logistic supply chains in general, and to food and energy supply chains in particular, with devastating effects on the most vulnerable countries. Today, we live in an environment of global anarchy in which the use of force prevails over the force of reason and law in blatant opposition to the norms governing international relations.
We meet at a time when the Arab Gulf is facing a security situation of a severity not witnessed in decades. The states of the Gulf Cooperation Council and the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan have been subjected to waves of unjustified Iranian attacks involving ballistic missiles and drones targeting civilian infrastructure, residential areas, ports, airports and energy facilities. This came in flagrant violation of international law and the charter of the United Nations. These are indiscriminate attacks without justification under any law. My country also condemns the attacks carried out by the Iran backed terrorist Houthi militia against civilian objects and Islamic holy sites in the brotherly kingdom of Saudi Arabia. We also condemn their threats to freedom of navigation in the Bab el Mandeb and the Red sea. Allow me to put the facts before you in figures. Our countries have been subjected to nearly 7000 attacks at the hands of Iran, involving 1700 ballistic missiles, 80 cruise missiles and 5220 drones. 2000 cargo vessels and tankers with 200 seafarers on board have also been detained, while 72 commercial vessels have been targeted, resulting in the deaths of 22 seafarers. These are not merely numbers. Behind every figure is a ship, a port, a market and families waiting for those that provide for them to return home. Commercial vessels have been targeted in the Straits of Hormuz. Mines have been laid in an international shipping lane. Restrictions on passage have been imposed in contravention of international law. The consequences of all the above extend far beyond the Arabian Gulf. It affects energy and food prices, shipping and insurance costs, as well as supply chains across the world. As the kingdom renews its full solidarity with the brotherly countries subjected to these attacks, it commends the professionalism of the Bahrain Defence Force and the Air Defence Forces of brotherly countries, and their readiness in confronting these attacks. We reaffirm the right of all states to take all lawful measures to defend their sovereignty and territorial integrity. Pursuant to article 51 of the UN charter and the Joint Defense Agreement of the GCC states. All the same, we continue to exercise the utmost restraint, seeking to ensure that security and peace prevail for the benefit of the people of the region. Mr. president, the position of the Kingdom of Bahrain is grounded in international law, the rights of peoples and. The Strait of Hormuz is an international strait, and the right of transit through it is established for the vessels of all states under the UN convention on the law of the sea. That right may not be suspended or obstructed, nor may it be subjected to conditions imposed unilaterally by any state. Accordingly, the Kingdom categorically rejects any permit or fee regime imposed on the passage. It rejects the use of international waterways as instruments of pressure or economic coercion, or any attempt at the seizure of vessels. Such actions would set an extremely dangerous precedent, because what is accepted today in one strait may be demanded tomorrow in every international waterway. Upon which global trade depends Alternative routes cannot be treated as a solution to conduct that violates international law. Mitigation measures are an emergency response. They should not be used as a pretext to claim that the strait is no longer necessary, or to accept a new status quo. The right of passage does not cease to exist because alternatives are available. Nor does the violation cease just because those affected have found ways to reduce the loss. This threat is not confined to the Strait of Hormuz. Security Council Resolution 2817 also referred to Bab el Mandeb. Recognising that a threat to one waterway is a threat to navigation through all waterways, the security of navigation in the Red sea, the Gulf of Aden and the Bab el Mandeb is part of the same system. We are now not only defending a regional interest, but a rule that applies to every international waterway, and if it does apply to one to our strait alone, it wouldn't have been a rule. The Kingdom of Bahrain has not only stated its position in principle on behalf of the Gulf Cooperation Council, states and the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and by virtue of its current presidency of the GCC and its non-permanent membership of the Security Council, Bahrain led efforts resulting in the adoption of Security Council Resolution 2817. With a historic and unprecedented support of 136 countries. The resolution condemned the attacks against our countries, reaffirming their sovereignty and rejecting any action intended to close the strait or obstruct navigation through it. The Kingdom also introduced a draft resolution under chapter seven of the charter to protect commercial navigation. The resolution, adopted by the Council of the International Maritime Organization on the 19th of March, together with the Human Rights Council resolution 61/1. Both have further demonstrated that the international rejection of such conduct extends beyond the Security Council. We stress the need for the full implementation of these resolutions to ensure that those responsible are held accountable, and there are compensation for the damage caused. On the 17th of this month, the Kingdom convened an Area Formula meeting of the Security Council dedicated to freedom of navigation. In this session, we heard from 53 affected states, the maritime transport sector and relevant international bodies. And we heard a conclusion expressed by all delegations. That is, the freedom of passage through international straits is a prerequisite for global economic prosperity. The Kingdom contributes to the protection of a rules based maritime order across an area exceeding 3,000,000mi² through its hosting in Manama, of the headquarters of the Combined Maritime Forces. This comprises 47 nations. We welcome the establishment of the Multinational Maritime Defence Alliance, led by the brotherly Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The Kingdom is proud to participate in the alliance as a founding member and supportive efforts to safeguard international trade routes and global energy supplies in accordance with international law. As efforts continue in the Security Council, this General Assembly has an equally important role to play as the forum in which all states stand equal. From this podium, we call upon Member States to support a firm collective position which upholds freedom of navigation and the right of transit passage in accordance with international law. It should also affirm that the security of maritime passages is a collective responsibility that cannot be subjected to bilateral arrangements. This is what restoring trust means in practice. This is not a call dictated by the present crisis. His Royal Highness Prince Salman bin Hamad Al Khalifa, Crown Prince and Prime Minister said from this very podium two years ago that the systems established to safeguard the international order were under severe strain. He noted that this organisation must evolve to confront the growing threats He called for comprehensive consensus based reform encompassing all decision making bodies, including the Security Council. What has happened since then has not altered that conviction. Instead, it has reinforced it. Mr. president. The test of the United Nation's credibility is not only confined to our waters The Palestinian cause remains at the heart of our concerns. The Kingdom reaffirms its steadfast position in support of the establishment of an independent and geographically contiguous state of Palestine, living side by side with the State of Israel in peace and security. The Kingdom has also joined the Board of Peace as a founding member. Pursuant to Security Council Resolution 2803. This reaffirms our unwavering support for the rights of the brotherly Palestinian people. The Kingdom also reaffirms its support for the unity, sovereignty, and territorial integrity of the Syrian Arab Republic, as well as for efforts to lift sanctions in a manner that enables the brotherly Syrian people to rebuild their country In Sudan, we call for an immediate cease fire, the protection of civilians, unhindered humanitarian access, and a political solution that preserves Sudan's unity. And in this state, institutions. Turning to Yemen, we renew our support for a political solution under United Nations auspices led by the legitimate government. We appreciate the efforts of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in this vein. Our position on other conflicts, including the conflict in Ukraine, is guided by the same principles, regardless of the parties involved. That is adherence to the charter, respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity, and the peaceful settlement of disputes Mr. president, the kingdom of Bahrain. Where mosques, churches and temples have stood side by side for generations, believes that tolerance and coexistence are not simply policies to be adopted.
Although Bangladesh has contributed little to global carbon emissions, it is bearing the adverse consequences of climate change. In these circumstances, Bangladesh has chosen the path of building resilience and developing the capacity to survive and adapt. Therefore, Bangladesh expects stronger global cooperation at Cop 31 on climate justice. Climate finance and adaptation support. The Government of Bangladesh has strengthened its programmes for environmental protection. As part of these efforts, the government has launched a programme to plant 250 million trees across the country over the next five years. Emphasis has been placed on the use of clean energy and solar energy, with the aim of freeing the country from the scourge of floods and droughts. The government has also launched a programme to excavate 20,000km of canal across the country.
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.
Mr. president, Brazil does not underestimate the challenge represented by organized crime. We are ready to face the criminal organization that terrorize our local communities. Workers are robbed. Mothers lose their children. Police officers do not make it back home. People are tired of violence. But we will not. We will not outsource the responsibility of defending its borders and guaranteeing our population the right to live without fear. We do not need aircraft carriers guarding our waters. We need cooperation to block the flow of weapons and money that feeds crime, organized crime. That's the spirit of the proposal that I personally handed to the US president. We want to fight money laundering carried out by Brazilian criminals abroad. For a long time, Brazilian states acted each in their own way. Crime made the most of the lack of coordination. But this is changing in Manaus, a city of the Amazon state. We created the Amazon International Police Cooperation Center, bringing together public safety authorities from nine Amazon region countries. In 2025, we carried out the biggest operation against organized crime in Brazil's history. We broke records of drug seizures as well as unlawful assets and resources. We are facing all levels of crime, including the crime tycoons, the anti faction bill that we just have passed. Establish heavier sentences for organized crime than those carried by terrorism, organized crime and corruption. Walk hand in hand. The fight against corruption shall remain relentless. No matter who it hurts. No one is above the law. Ladies and gentlemen, the pillars of multilateralism are being eroded. The World Trade Organization is being kept on life support. When governments capsulate vis a vis those who use tariffs as weapons of coercion and blackmail, consequences are harmful. In the age of misinformation, obscurantists resist the evidence of science.
We must also empower Africa to play a more active role. Africa, with its 55 states and more than 1.4 billion inhabitants, cannot remain on the margins of the bodies that shape the rules of global trade. On behalf of the African Union, I reiterate our continent's call for full and equitable representation within the World Trade Organization. This is not a favor we are seeking. It is a demand for justice. It is also a guarantee of progress for the entire multilateral trading system. With the African Continental Free Trade Area, our continent has already demonstrated its capacity to develop rules and to integrate markets. It is now up to global trade governance to draw on this. But in order to succeed, we must be more resilient in order to preserve an environment favorable to agriculture, a source of life, and food security. Indeed, Mr. President, climate change strikes the most vulnerable populations particularly hard. Africa has contributed little to historical greenhouse gas emissions, yet it is already suffering severe consequences. We, therefore, call for stronger international solidarity on adaptation, climate financing, and technology transfer.
What has changed is the world around it. What has changed, first and foremost is Chile. For the vast swathes of the 90s and until the beginning of the 2000, Chile was a success story and a model for many regions and nations. Our country implemented economic policies that prioritized economic stability, openness to trade, and private investment in the Latin American context in which many nations were facing inflation crises and external debt. Chile distinguished itself because it continued to show fiscal responsibility, display high rates of growth and poverty reduction. What happened then? Chile ground to a halt. Things stagnated. It took bad decisions. Public policies were implemented that increased taxation, regulation and obstacles to entrepreneurship. We also weathered a very difficult juncture. In October 2019, Chile then fell to its knees in our streets. For months, there was an outbreak of violence. Chaos reigned and disorder prevailed. All of that brought consequences. With it, investment plummeted, employment ground to a standstill and homicide levels rose to an extent that Chile had never seen in modern history as a result of the rising tide of organized crime. And that all happened until very recently. Until now. Distinguished. I've come to this forum to tell you that Chile is back, and that is no slogan. It is the very reality of a country that today begins to stride towards development. Our government took office with one conviction. Order does not run counter to freedom. Order is one of the preconditions of freedom. The freedom to walk home worry free and to not be a victim of crime. The freedom to run a business and not be stymied by the action of the state. The freedom to invest and not find ourselves in a situation where the rules of the game are continually changing. We have been in government for six years and we're getting our house in order. Today, Chile is a safer, more competitive country and a nation with far less red tape.
No human institution is perfect. All can be improved perfected, and the United Nations is no exception. There is one specific area that Colombia wishes to reflect on further. That is the international fight against terrorism. This organization has done significant work here. Since 1963, the international community has developed 19 universal legal instruments aimed at preventing different terrorist acts. However, after decades of discussion, there is still no legal definition of terrorism that is universally agreed by member states. The UN Office of Counterterrorism itself has recently flagged that the lack of a universally agreed definition begets legal uncertainty. Discrepancies among national laws and causes difficulties in international cooperation. The Republic of Colombia believes that the time has come to move ahead. We need a common international definition that is sufficiently clear and precise, compatible with international law and fundamental safeguards, but also useful enough so that states can cooperate effectively in combating acts of terrorism. A serious definition should avoid two extremes. On the one hand, a political disagreement being arbitrarily characterized as terrorism, and on the other hand, allowing an organization to hide murders, kidnappings, bombings, or deliberate attacks against civilians behind a political label in order to evade the legal consequences of its actions. Terrorism must be condemned regardless of the perpetrator, where it is committed or the cause they invoke. The United Nations has repeatedly reaffirmed that terrorism, in all its forms and manifestations, represents one of the most serious threats to international peace and security. Now, a better definition is not enough. States need better tools to combat this phenomenon. We need faster mechanisms for exchanging information and intelligence. We need better judicial cooperation, effective tracing, freezing, seizing instruments for assets related to terrorist financing. And we need closer cooperation to deal with networks that operate simultaneously across different countries. Colombia stands ready to participate actively in that discussion. My country wants to see United Nations, where the effectiveness is measured less by the volume of documents it produces, and far more by the results that it delivers. A UN that is less inclined to multiply processes and more determined to translate international cooperation into concrete action. That is the sort of multilateralism that Colombia is ready to defend, one that respects the sovereign equality of states as the charter itself provides, but one that is also capable of acting effectively when threats recognize no borders, drugs, trafficking, terrorism, transnational organized crime and illicit economies are precisely those threats.
In this context, I wish to state clearly and unequivocally that Egypt's water security is an existential issue that is not open to compromise. The Nile is not merely an economic resource it is the lifeline upon which the existence and development of Egyptian society have depended throughout history. Egypt believes that transboundary water resources should be a field for cooperation and integration, not conflict. We also believe that water security and development are not contradictory objectives, but complementary ones when political will exists, when intentions are sincere, and when international law is respected. We do not oppose the right of any people to development. Rather, we defend a clear and just principle that the development of one party must not be built upon causing harm to others. Shared resources cannot be managed through unilateral measures or fait accompli policies. They must be managed through cooperation, good neighborliness and the conclusion of binding agreements in accordance with international law that preserve the legitimate rights and interests of all parties. In this regard, Egypt reserves its legitimate and internationally recognized right under the charter of the United Nations and International Law to protect its water security and preserve the existential resources of its people. Amid the multiple threats facing our region, we recall the crisis of brotherly Sudan, a crisis whose consequences extend beyond military confrontations to affect the security and safety of civilians and threaten to dismantle the state institutions.
And of course, with her president speaking here, you never know whether this will be the low point or the high point of her career. Be that as it may, former Secretary General Kofi Annan once said, and I quote, whatever our differences, we stand or fall together. End of quote. When we forget this wisdom of Kofi Annan, disorder is what happens. Last year, from this very podium, I stated that foreign policy is based on three pillars values, interests and power. This year I come with something much simpler a choice, a choice between cooperation or conflict. In today's world, cooperation is undermined by a lack of trust, disregard for rules, and the weakening of institutions. And we've heard that in so many speeches here today. Conflicts are spreading, bringing suffering, violence and injustice. According to some accounts, there are currently 65 active armed conflicts, more than at any time since the end of the Cold War. Now competition will always be there. Nations compete now harder than they did a generation ago. This doesn't worry me. What does is that more and more of them now compete against the rules on which the international order rests. So this speech defends these rules, and it calls for cooperation. It calls for multilateralism. Small nations need it to survive, and large nations need it to be great. Upholding the most basic rules, values and institutions is our best option to ensure that competition does not escalate into conflict and that cooperation gains ground. Now, I want to begin by analyzing how the world is changing today. And as a pragmatic Finn, I will always try to deal with the world as it is, because it often helps in building a world that I wish we would have. In other words, a world which we can build together. I will then make a few suggestions about what we should do next. So here we go. I think we should all be steadfast defenders of multilateralism. As Strobe Talbott reportedly remarked, multilateralism is hell and can be a real pain in the neck, but it is the best option for humanity as a whole. We need multilateralism in order to address our shared agenda, ranging from conflicts and climate change to sustainable development and artificial intelligence. Currently, however, we seem to be going the other way more towards a non-cooperative and multipolar world order. This order, as it turns out, is based on zero sum deals, transactions, and unrestrained power. This is a short sighted approach. Tempting as it may be for some, such a multipolar order will ultimately lead to conflict. It will turn against us, whether you represent a great power, a middle power, or a small state like Finland. Between these two approaches, there is of course, a third option: plurilateralism. It means building ad hoc coalitions when global cooperation is unattainable. And this is my first observation today the emergence of flexible forms of cooperation around different themes and interests, be it in the economy, climate, defense, or technology. Coalition building can be a force of good but with one condition it should not challenge multilateralism, but build on it. It should support the UN system, not substitute it. The coalition of the willing for Ukraine is particularly close to my heart. It's a group of countries working to end Russia's war of aggression. The war is unlawful, unjustified and unprovoked. Its solution will have far reaching consequences for Ukraine and beyond. It is really about upholding international rules. The coalition works for a just and lasting peace in Ukraine, in accordance with the UN charter.
Second, Japan is devoted to enhancing cooperation towards peace and stability. Since the end of the Second World War, Japan has consistently and seriously pursued efforts towards nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation. At the very heart of our aspiration for a world without nuclear weapons lies the earnest plea of the hibakusha. The catastrophic consequences of nuclear weapons must never be repeated. It is Japan's mission as the only country to have ever suffered atomic bombings during war, to lead the efforts of the international community towards a world without nuclear weapons. Japan strongly calls for solidarity within the international community to maintain and strengthen the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty NPT regime, to which both nuclear weapon states and non-nuclear weapon states are parties. Further, Japan will persistently advance realistic and practical efforts, including enhancing the transparency of nuclear forces and promoting a deeper understanding of the realities of atomic bombings. The situations in Ukraine and North Korea have reminded the world of growing risks and threats posed by nuclear weapons. There are also concerns regarding the proliferation of nuclear and missile related technologies through the strengthening of military cooperation between Russia and North Korea. The security of the Indo-Pacific and Euro-Atlantic is inseparable. The advancement of North Korea's nuclear and missile programs, as well as its use of malicious cyber activities, including cryptocurrency thefts as a source of funding, are clear violations of relevant Security Council resolutions and pose a serious threat to international peace and security. The full implementation of Security Council resolutions under the principle of the complete denuclearization of North Korea is essential. Moreover, the issue of abductions by North Korea is an ongoing matter with lives at stake. The abductees are still denied their freedoms and their families continue to suffer. This is a matter of grave concern not only for Japan, but for the international community. As the abductees and their families are aging, the abductions issue must be resolved immediately.
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.
And how can we make cooperation a genuine partnership among nations, rather than a carving-up of spheres of influence? We, in the Arab and Islamic world, and on our African continent, do not approach this question as observers, for we live its consequences every day. That reality unfolds before us at every moment in Palestine, whose delegation, we regret, has not been able to participate with us in this session. There, the plight of the Palestinian people continues to worsen after decades of occupation, repression, and alteration of their identity, yet they remain steadfast in their adherence to their right to life and to self-determination. These are rights guaranteed without discrimination by international law and international humanitarian law. All of humanity yearns for international instruments and resolutions to move from texts and promises to a reality, and for the right of the Palestinian people to their state to be realized in accordance with international law. The continued undermining of these prospects for its establishment not only squanders opportunities for peace; it also drives the region toward a widening cycle of conflict, the spread of extremism, and a search for alternatives amid major expansionist projects that extend beyond occupied Palestine to Syria and Lebanon. Neither the Islamic and Christian holy sites, nor civilians, nor civilian infrastructure in Palestine have been spared the ravages of this conflict. Its repercussions have extended to the Arabian Gulf, most recently in the attack against the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. We affirm our full solidarity with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in safeguarding its security, its territorial integrity, its citizens, and its holy sites. We reject any targeting that threatens it or endangers Islamic holy sites. The security of the Kingdom and the Gulf, given their Arab and Islamic weight, is not a national matter, but it is a pillar of the security and stability of our region. The ongoing armed conflict in the Sudan, our brotherly neighbor, has made its people the victims of a devastating war for which they are paying a hefty price. In that war, interests and interventions collide, and its effects extend beyond the borders of Sudan, endangering the security and stability of the region and the unity of its states. The instability in the Sahel region represents an existential threat to the integrity of its states. That threat stems from the nexus of terrorism, organized crime, poverty, climate change, displacement, and migration, and from the widening of the cycle of armed conflict in the region.
They are asking whether it works. Yes, there have been wars and conflicts that we could not prevent, and issues we could not resolve. The Palestinian issue continues unresolved for decades. Wars and conflict and their aftermath are ravaging Sudan, Gaza, Ukraine, Myanmar, and the Middle East. But even as those wars raged, the United Nations stayed and served. I’ve seen this in my own country, where the United Nations country team in Cox’s Bazar is striving to do more with less to support Rohingya refugees in the camps. Just recently, a representative from a war-torn nation said to me: “Your peacekeepers from Bangladesh were not just blue helmets. They built roads and communities. They fed children. They helped rebuild societies and put us on the road to proper governance.” In Iraq, the United Nations system helped nearly five million people return home. It rehabilitated hundreds of schools, electricity stations and water-treatment plants. And right now, in Haiti, the entire United Nations family is delivering amid immense security and governance challenges. These stories rarely make the headlines, but we should never lose sight of what is working. (BRIEF PAUSE) At the same time, let us not turn a blind eye to where we have fallen short, particularly in a world where challenges seem to multiply by the day. The war in Gaza has left over 70,000 people dead, including thousands of children. Humanitarian support has been a fraction of what is needed. The ongoing wars across the Middle East and Europe have consequences far beyond the frontlines. And the heartbreaking disaster in Nepal and China, was not just an isolated event, but yet another horrible climax to our collectively insufficient response to climate change. The circumstances and politics of these crises differ. But our commitments under the Charter do not. The principles of multilateralism, international law, the protection of civilians and humanitarian access cannot be applied selectively, not if we want the world to trust us.
By the end of May, rainfall was 44% below the long-term average. We are investing in resilient infrastructure. But no small island developing state can adapt indefinitely to a crisis the world continues to intensify. Adaptation cannot excuse inaction elsewhere. Distinguished colleagues, the science is unequivocal. The years 2015 to 2025 were the warmest on record, and in 2025, global average temperature remained about 1.43 degrees Celsius above the pre-industrial baseline, while global mean sea level stood approximately 11 centimeters higher than in 1993. For island nations, this is a question of sovereignty and statehood. If our coastlines retreat, our sovereignty must not. Mr. President, climate-induced sea level rise must never erase a state's international legal personality. Extinguish its UN membership, deprive its people of nationality, or diminish lawfully established maritime zones of sovereign rights. The International Law Commission has laid foundations for continuity of statehood, sovereignty, and maritime entitlements. This Assembly must turn them into firm guarantees. International law has spoken with increasing clarity. Saint Kitts and Nevis welcomed the International Court of Justice's advisory opinion on states' climate obligations. Clarification must now become compliance. Compliments must become conduct. And promises must become performance. States must reduce emissions, strengthen adaptation on climate finance responsibilities, and cooperate with countries bearing consequences vastly disproportionate to their contribution to this crisis. Mr. President, those contributions least must not pay the greatest price. Our oceans must also move from promises to protection. Saint Kitts and Nevis ratified a BBNJ agreement in 2025. Implementation now matters. Large ocean states need access to capacity building, marine technology, scientific knowledge, and financing, while benefits from marine genetics resources must be shared fairly. For island nations, the ocean is not the space between us and the world; it is our highway, heritage, livelihood, and lifeline.
I repeat: the Malvinas for us are a national cause. They are also a test of the gulf that can exist between the words of international institutions and the reality upon which they purport to act. Fifty years ago, this very Assembly adopted Resolution 3149, which calls on parties to refrain from introducing unilateral modifications while the dispute remains unresolved. Fifty years on, the situation has not changed, yet unilateral modifications continue. Today, the Sea Lion Project is moving toward oil extraction on the Argentine continental shelf in the North Malvinas Basin, under British licenses that Argentina rejects as illegal and illegitimate. Any such activity not authorized by the Argentine Republic in this regard constitutes an unlawful act under both international law, including the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, and Argentine domestic law. That is why I wish to ask a question: what use is a resolution if, for decades, the other party can act in direct contravention of it, while that resolution remains intact in the archives but powerless in the face of reality? There's no shortage of words or resolutions. What is lacking is consequences. Because an institution that cannot ensure that its words carry weight in the real world loses the most important thing of all: its authority. In these circumstances, those who follow the rules receive no reward for doing so, while those who break them suffer no repercussions whatsoever. That's why the Malvinas are not merely an issue between Argentina and the United Kingdom. They also raise a question regarding the ability of this organization to enforce its own resolutions. Argentina has taken note of that reality, and in the face of the unauthorized exploitation of our resources in the disputed area, we've acted. We've submitted formal notes of protest. We've availed ourselves of the legal remedies at our disposal. We've imposed sanctions on the companies involved and their suppliers. And we've submitted a national sovereignty defense bill to Congress. For far too long, Argentine governments opted for a rhetorical defense. We have chosen a peaceful, practical, and effective defense. I repeat: we have chosen a peaceful, practical, and effective defense. I also wish to reiterate our position regarding the population of the islands. As this very Assembly has determined in numerous resolutions, the principle of self-determination does not apply in this case, since the population was implanted by the occupying power on a territory whose sovereignty is in dispute. That principle exists to liberate colonized people, not to legitimize situations arising from colonization. If the United Kingdom maintains a selective interpretation of the principle of self-determination with regard to the Malvinas Islands, it must also explain how it reconciles that position with the debates on self-determination taking place within its own territory. Once again, we call on the United Kingdom to resume negotiations with a view to finding a peaceful solution to the sovereignty dispute, as required by international law. We also reiterate our invitation to proceed without delay to an exchange of views with a view to resolving the issue concerning the aforementioned dispute over the exploitation of our natural resources. And I want to say something more to the global energy sector. Waka Mwertha represents a historic opportunity, with the potential to become one of the major players in the energy sector in the decades ahead. Come, invest, develop it with us. But there's a limit to this invitation. We will not remain indifferent to those who exploit resources under illegal foreign occupation.
And very often the countries with the least economic room to maneuver bear the greatest burden in proportionate terms. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea confers rights, but it also imposes obligations. The safety of navigation, the protection of the marine environment, and respect for the rights of coastal states. A smaller navy doesn't mean fewer rights, nor does a larger one confer the right to impose its will. No country should have to surrender the rights the law gives simply because another can send more ships. That is why maritime disputes must be settled by law, not by intimidation. And that is why freedom of navigation depends on common rules, so that every country can exercise its rights while respecting those of others, but keeping our sea routes open also means keeping them safe all the way into our ports. The International Ship and Port Facility Security Code, the famous ISPS code offers a very concrete example of what multilateralism can achieve when it works. Piracy, terrorism and crime are scourges that we must fight together, and that code must be strengthened. Belgium understands its importance. Freedom and security are not opposing ideas. Security is a condition of freedom. I dwell on freedom of navigation because it illustrates something larger. Sovereignty doesn't require isolation. We can defend our interests while accepting that others have rights too. And when rules are clear and predictable enough, a space of competition can still remain a space of cooperation. The ocean, moreover, are far more than the highways of our trades. They feed populations, regulate our climates, and absorb much of the excess heat caused by global warming. For many small island states, rising sea levels affect the land on which the citizens live, in some cases, the culture and the very ability to remain where the families have lived for generations. The freedom to use the ocean, therefore, comes with a responsibility to preserve it. And on this point, allow me to be optimistic. The BBNJ Agreement entered into force this year after almost 20 years of negotiations, almost 20 years. Measured against a political cycle, this is close to an eternity. Measured against the building of international law, it is sometimes the time needed to reach a compromise strong enough to last. The agreement proves that even today, we continue to build international law rather than dismantle it, and Belgium has invested greatly in this process. It helped launch the Blue Leaders, a coalition of countries working to protect at least 30% of the ocean by 2030 and secure an ambitious high sea treaty. The agreement now gives us an essential tool to advance toward that protection goal. But 20 years of negotiations must not be followed by years of waiting. It is in that spirit that Belgium is offering to host the treaty's future secretariat in Brussels. We are ready to enable it to work from day one. It will be able to draw on our scientific expertise and on a community that brings together international organizations, embassies and civil society so that we have agreed together becomes real protection at sea. Beneath those same oceans run other vital routes: the cables that connect the continents and carry much of our digital communications and energy. Here too, our interdependence is plain to see. A break, an act of sabotage or an attack can have consequences thousands of kilometers away. Protecting those connections is essential, but our responsibility in the digital world doesn't end with infrastructure.
It's the opposite of genocide. So to all those that are spreading these lies about my country and about our brave soldiers, whether they sit in this hall or in the office of the anti-Semitic mayor of New York, I say this, shame on you. Shame on you for distorting the facts. Shame on you for inverting victim and aggressor. Shame on you for spitting in the face of truth. Mr. Mamdani, since you were elected mayor of this city, many Jews no longer feel safe in New York. They talk to me. They tell me this isn't the city we remember. It changed so quickly now. It's no wonder you praise criminals convicted of supporting Hamas. You count as friends. People like Hasan Piker, who said America deserved 9/11. Some friends you have you invite into your home a Palestinian journalist who filmed Hamas terrorists beating and torturing Israeli hostages, and later admitted that he refused to publish the videos in order to protect, you guessed it, the terrorists. Your wife liked a post praising the October 7th massacre. She liked another post saying Tel Aviv shouldn't exist. You refuse to condemn any of that. You falsely repeatedly accused Israel of genocide. Mr. Mamdani, you tried to stop me from coming here. You tried. You tried to silence me. Well, you can't silence me. You can't silence the truth. And here's the simple truth. Here's a simple truth. Israel didn't commit genocide. Israel prevented genocide. And that's exactly. That's exactly what Mr. Mamdani's Hamas buddies would have done to us had we not stopped them. They would have killed every last one of us. The lies you and other anti-Semites spread about the Jews and the Jewish state have real consequences. In New York, Jews are threatened on the way to synagogue. Jews have been stabbed in the streets. Jews are demonized, targeted. They're targeted simply for being Jews. Jews have been murdered in Sydney, Manchester, Montreal, Boulder, Colorado. They've been attacked in Los Angeles, London, Paris, Berlin, Washington, D.C. the anti-Semites of the world want to terrify our people. I have news for them. The days when Jews were defenseless victims marched to the slaughter. Those days are over. Today we have a state. Today we have an army. Today we have a people ready and willing to defend ourselves. So today. Today, I have one message for Jews around the world. Raise your head high. Be proud, be confident. Don't be intimidated Stand up.
That is the only way that we will manage to find paths to progress on the all too many, all true, all too intractable conflicts blighting our world today. In Malta, the smallest member state of the European Union, we have always been a bridge between Europe and the Middle East. So allow me to focus on two of those conflicts on our doorstep. Firstly, Ukraine. It is all too easy and all too great a mistake for us to fall in the trap that repelling the invasion of Ukraine becomes another never ending conflict, a grinding tragedy on the corner of our continent about which we can do nothing. Malta will never accept that despair. Europe must never accept that despair. The world must never turn its head away in despair. Malta remains as adamant in our condemnation of that invasion today as we were on day one in February 2022. And Malta is equally as adamant that a just and lasting peace must guarantee Ukraine's sovereignty within its internationally recognised borders. That will only come about through a diplomatic process that the Ukrainian people can have full trust in. They will only have such trust if the process follows a full and unconditional cease fire and the full participation of Ukraine and its people in the subsequent peace talks. Rightly the Ukrainian people will never have trust in any search for a settlement which involves their government being frogmarched to the table, one arm tied behind its back, whilst the guns still blaze. The issue of trust is clearly also central to the very worrying situation in Gaza The people of Israel need to have trust that Hamas will be disarmed, and that they will play no future role in the governance or security structures of Gaza. But the people of Gaza need to have trust that there is a path to a just peace. It is impossible to build that trust with a humanitarian situation as acute as that being experienced in Gaza right now. Malta's voice remains unwaveringly with the global calls for safe, sustained and unhindered humanitarian access throughout Gaza in accordance with international law. We firmly believe that the Gaza peace plan provides the best path towards ending the conflict and advancing credible political progress. To achieve that progress, all parties and I emphasize all parties must fully respect and implement the objectives and commitments set out in the plan. And naturally, no progress can be made. If there is any question of the forced displacement of any of the Palestinian population. Indeed, it is incumbent on each and every one of us in the international community to rebuild the trust needed to underpin the conditions where genuine progress can be made towards a negotiated and lasting two state solution. That is the only solution. Nobody, however, is under any illusion how out of reach? Unfortunately, that seems at the moment. But nor is this the moment to shy away or run away from the only goal that will guarantee the people of Israel and Palestine living side by side with the peace, prosperity and stability that they both deserve. Sadly, any progress towards a long term solution is being endangered by the situation in the West Bank settlement expansion, running directly counter to the resolutions of this General Assembly and designed to undermine the Palestinian territorial integrity, must stop and stop now. So too, must the violent settler attacks on Palestinian communities increasing at an alarming rate. Behold, they must be halted. These are all essential preconditions to a just and lasting peace, as is a credible and reformed Palestinian Authority that can demonstrate to citizens of both Palestine and Israel that it has the transparency, the accountability, the institutional effectiveness, and, above all, the democratic legitimacy to be a truly effective partner for peace. Malta stands ready to play its part in building the capacity of both a renewed Democratic Palestinian Authority and the robust civil society that must underpin it, not just in Ukraine, Gaza and Israel, but across the world. Be it the conflict in Sudan, the ongoing violence in Myanmar or the instability across the Sahel. It is evident that diminished trust means diminished chances of finding solutions. You could put it as starkly as no trust equals no peace. Of course, no matter the conflict, each with its own individual and particular circumstances, there is no easy way of building trust. But equally, there is no easy way of avoiding the need to build trust. We all know from our lives as much as from the experiences of our own countries, just how hard it is to rebuild trust when it has evaporated. Yet we also know the consequences if we give up trying, and the rewards that can come. If, however, slowly and however tentatively, we can start. If it is hard enough to build trust human to human face to face, it can be, of course, infinitely harder to build trust.
This assembly also calls on us to manage transformation. No one here needs me to tell them what the great transformation of our age is. Every great era in human history has had its driving force. Steam powered the Industrial Revolution. The transistor powered the digital age. No force in our time is as profound as artificial intelligence. We can already see its power in warfare, in the economy, and in our everyday lives. Unlike tools that merely transmitted what we said, these systems are part and parcel of the decisions that we make. The potential is immense. Paraguay today feeds 100 million people. And with this tool, it could feed 1 billion. It could enable us to cover, in years, distances that once took generations. This transformation cannot be held back. And no one should be left out of it. However, we're not blind to the risks. But we cannot allow fear to guide us. Like a child, artificial intelligence repeats what it has learned from those who trained it. If it has learned to deny freedom, then that lesson will not arrive in the form of a law that we can debate. It will arrive covert, in some minor task, in some action that no one regards as a decision. Democracy endures, provided that the decisions that govern us can be traced back to the will of those who must live with their consequences. When that thread is severed, the will of the people risks being replaced without ever having been defeated. Protecting that delicate thread doesn't mean forgoing the benefits. It means refusing to ignore the risk that truly matters. Artificial intelligence must serve human dignity and not replace it. As His Holiness the Pope reminds us in the recent encyclical Magnifica Humanitas, the values embedded in these systems are not a technical constraint. They are a choice made by those who trained them. The future demands that the choice be freedom, democracy, and equality before the law, and that those who make that choice be held accountable for it. It may seem that, so far, I have only talked about an endless series of problems and challenges.
