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.
Own country · at 1 min · 2 mentions in this passage
I am appearing once again before this assembly on behalf of the Republic of Panama, a nation whose own geography defined its destiny. It's the bridge of the world and connects continents, cultures, and markets. At a time in history in which geopolitical fractures threaten to polarize us in a dangerous manner, Panama reaffirms its historic vocation to bring people together and seek common understandings. I must say that polarization is coupled with a large mass of people who feel that international organizations have forgotten the values and priorities of the majority of citizens.
In more than 80 years, no woman has led this organization. We trust that the Security Council and the General Assembly will rise to this moment. Ladies and gentlemen, renewing peacekeeping operations, without a shadow of a doubt, is our most urgent task. Today, transnational criminal networks control territories, they traffic arms and people, and they recruit children. Haiti, our neighbor, is the clearest example of this. Since 2021, the Dominican Republic has warned in each and every forum that this crisis is a threat to the peace and security of the region, and particularly for my country. A year ago, from this same rostrum, I called upon the council to act without delay. Six days later, the council adopted Resolution 2793 that authorized a banned suppression force with a strong mandate and with the support of a United Nations support office. I thank the United States and Panama for their leadership, as well as Canada and other donors for their support, Kenya for their commitment, and the commitment of all of the countries who today have their men and women serving in Haiti. However, the reality does not allow us to wait. One month ago, in the Haitian community of Kentscoff, in just one night, gangs murdered no less than 47 people, including 5 children. Close to a million and a half of Haitians have been displaced from their homes. Half of them are children. This assembly cannot resign to seeing massacres become the norm for the long-suffering Haitian people. What the council approved now requires the means to implement it. First, the deployment of the force that today is only funded up to a fifth of and only has up to a fifth, rather, of the troops authorized. Second, fulfilling the arms embargo and sanctioning those who are financing and protecting gangs. And thirdly, strengthening the police, the armed forces, and the Haitian justice system so that the security can be sustained. The mandate of the force expires on the 30th of September. It's for the council now to renew it and for the international community to contribute troops and the resources that are required. Renewing it without completing it would be prolonging a promise that's not fulfilled. None of this requires a new decision. The Dominican Republic has played its role. We will not practice a diplomacy of mere declarations, but rather a diplomacy of solutions. We will contribute to building the consensus that made a resolution possible, and we are committing our financial contributions that's proportional for the trust fund of the force and facilitating from our country transit, logistics, and a UN support office. We are cooperating with the sanctions regime and supporting the personnel of the mission in our hospitals. We are doing this because this is, above all, a question of national security for our country, and we must repeat this as clearly as possible: there is no Dominican solution to the Haitian crisis, and no state or organization can impose on our country to do it in their place. We will continue to protect our borders, to implement our migratory laws, and strengthen and equip our armed forces in exercise of sovereign equality that the United Nations recognizes for each state, and all of this fully respecting the international obligations that we freely assumed.
For my country, Belgium, it is anything but technical. As early as the 19th century, the port of Antwerp had immense potential, but ships sailing up the River Scheldt had to pay a toll. In 1863, an international agreement abolished that toll once and for all. The abolition was to apply to all flags, all of them. An international route has real value only if it remains open. Passage cannot depend each time on a fresh contest of power. That is precisely what freedom of navigation represents today. It is not merely the abstract right of a ship to travel from a point to another. It allows economies that may share neither the same interest nor the same alliances to remain connected. It allows a landlocked state to take part in global trade. It allows grain, medicines, gas and industrial components to cross several maritime areas without the passage having to be negotiated at every stage. That seems perfectly normal while everything is working, but it takes only one route closing for us to remember how much it matters. Think of the Strait of Hormuz, the Bab el-Mandeb Strait at the entrance of the Red Sea, the Suez Canal, the Bosporus, the Strait of Malacca or the Panama Canal. More than 80% of global merchandise trade by volume is carried by sea. When a ship is attacked, when a strait becomes dangerous, or when a carrier has to sail around an entire region, the effects are felt thousands of kilometers away in our ports, of course, but also in the price of energy, fertilizer and food. The price of a tank of fuel, the price of a loaf of bread, even having a bread.
