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.
Indeed, trust among states today is at its lowest point since the Cold War. The necessary reforms are stalling. More and more voices are saying that the UN is not working in the interests of all and is incapable of managing change. This is largely because we, the Member States, have in large part, become mired in endless debates, but have failed to give the organisation a real opportunity to act. That is precisely why the theme of this session sounds today like a verdict on our collective indecision, and at the same time as a diagnosis, calling for urgent treatment. We are surrounded by a systemic crisis in international relations. We see this everywhere. The air is thick with anxiety from Europe to the Middle East, from Asia to Africa and Latin America.
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.
After the unimaginable World War II, started by Christian civilized Europe, we could not have hoped for anything less. But it seems that human beings can never really have enough wars, and never really learn lessons of history, never really care. After the Holocaust came the glorious birth of the State of Israel, but then came the Palestinian Nakba, 1948. Over the following years, we read about the wars of partition, famines in South Asia, the Korean War, the onslaught in Cambodia, Laos-Vietnam, the infamous Khmer Rouge genocide, later the Bosnian genocide, Rwanda genocide, and so many other wars. Then came the end of Cold War, bringing us euphoria, celebration, new promises of peace. The Berlin Wall collapsed, apartheid ended, but the seeds of future wars were sown, just as NATO and Gorbachev inked the post-Cold War arrangements. The ink had not even dried, and NATO began its fast eastbound expansion. As expected, for more than 4 years we have had this devastating war in Ukraine, a war that now has backfired into Russia.
With this in mind, I propose that we take the following four steps. First, we should safeguard the postwar international order and foster lasting peace based on common security. The world wants peace not war. The international system centered on the UN and the international order, underpinned by international law that emerged after World War Two must be upheld. We should turn into action the vision of common, comprehensive cooperative and sustainable security and reject the Cold War mindset and block confrontation. We should settle differences and disputes through dialogue and consultation, and oppose unilateral military actions that violate the UN Charter and circumvent Security Council authorization. Major countries shoulder special responsibilities for safeguarding international peace and security, and they should take the lead in complying with the rules, upholding the rule of law and doing what's right. China holds that the sovereignty and security of countries in the Middle East, including the Gulf should be respected. International industrial and supply chains should be kept stable and unimpeded, and global trade should be safeguarded. China calls for advancing the governance of the West Bank and the post-conflict reconstruction of Gaza, in accordance with the principle of the Palestinians governing Palestine. It also calls for bringing the Palestinian question back onto the right track of the two state solution at an early date. On Ukraine, President Xi Jinping has put forward four points on what must be done, which are the fundamental guidance for China in playing a continued constructive role in its own way for achieving a political settlement of the crisis. China urges the relevant country to immediately stop using threat of force against Cuba, and immediately and completely lift the blockade and sanctions against Cuba. Second, we should address the global development predicament and promote prosperity for all through openness and cooperation.
During our Security Council term, Austria will make emerging technologies the protection of civilians, children in armed conflict, and women's full participation in peace processes priorities. Children must never be treated as collateral damage. Women must have a real voice at the negotiating table as leaders and peace builders, not as an afterthought. Peace also requires dialogue. Dialogue is not and will never be weakness. It is the refusal to give violence the last word. During the Cold War, states that deeply distrusted one another still met in Vienna.
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 decades after the Cold War saw genocide in Rwanda, horrific wars in the former Yugoslavia and the Congo the rise of international terrorism, and the devastating civil wars. 25 years ago this month, terrorist attacks in the United States changed our world profoundly. 30 years ago, the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty was established, yet the threat of nuclear proliferation remains with us.
Your excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, this session of the General Assembly is of particular significance to my country as it takes place in the year in which we celebrate the 50th anniversary of the Republic of Angola's admission as full member of the United Nations organization, which took place in December 1976. At that time, it was a historical achievement for the Angolan people, who waited more than 12 months from the date of proclamation of the national independence for the country to be accepted as a full fledged member of the international community. That event of great significance for the history of my country took place in a global context in which Angola became a victim of confrontation between world powers in the struggle for control of sphere of influence within the spirit of Cold War. Our entire journey towards the attainment of peace in 2002 was closely linked to the spirit of that period, which hampered the fulfillment of the dreams of Angolans and their plans to building a prosperous nation committed to its own development. These facts belong to the past, but have left us with a wealth of experience and lessons that we have drawn upon to build peace, understanding and reconciliation among all Angolans, and to chart the course of our foreign policy. Peace and national reconciliation is now a reality as shown through concrete gestures, including the holding of award ceremonies to honor the main political leaders of national liberation struggle and representatives of all segments of civil society, within the framework of the 50th anniversary of national independence. Still, within this framework, a monument in memory of all victims of the political conflict that occurred in Angola, from the proclamation of national independence until achievement of Peace in April 2002 will be inaugurated in October this year.
It has held back conflict where it could and named it where it could not. It has given the powerless a language of rights. It has built one instrument at a time, the body of international law, on which every state in this hall, large or small, now depends. It has survived a Cold War, as it has division and doubt, because each generation that comes through its doors understood the same simple truth. No nation, however powerful, can secure peace, prosperity, or a habitable nation on its own. That was true in 1945. It is truer today. The Charter is hope. It speaks to our common humanity. It speaks to the rule of law, to the dignity of every person, to the sovereign equality of states, and to our duty to keep the peace. These are not the words of one region or one era. They belong to all of us. They bind all of us. Few in this hall would question that mission. But let us be honest with one another.
Estonia, for example, is contributing its share. We have reduced our emissions by 66 percent over the past 35 years while transforming our energy system. Yes, the world is on fire, troubles and problems mounting before our eyes. The cooperative spirit in international relations that emerged after San Francisco and was clearly present after the end of the Cold War is fading away.
Madam president, excellencies, the international order is experiencing a period of great instability. The free and open international order, based on the rule of law that we have fostered, is facing difficult challenges on multiple fronts. Amid a shifting balance of power and intensifying geopolitical competition, innocent civilian lives are being lost around the world every day. The stable post-Cold War era is now a thing of the past. The distribution of goods is stagnating. People across the world are suffering from high cost of living. Progress towards development goals is not on track, and human rights issues are rising in various places around the world. Against this backdrop, has the United Nations, now 80 years on since its foundation, been failing to fulfil its role in promoting peace and stability around the world? We are even hearing such concerns today. Madam president, despite these concerns, the United Nations has never been more important than it is today in bringing about peace and stability to the world and enabling the international community to overcome new challenges and prosper. Japan will continue to fulfil its significant responsibilities towards the United Nations, and I am here today to express that resolve. This year marks the 70th anniversary of Japan's accession to the United Nations. In this milestone year, I would first like to address how Japan has been tackling the challenges facing the international community, working hand in hand with the United Nations. Then, together with you all, I would like to take this opportunity to revisit the role of the United Nations in the international community.
Artificial intelligence will transform professions, industries, and the ways in which decisions are made. Energy will be governed by a new configuration and a new logic of operation. Climate change will affect economies, agriculture, cities and the movement of people. Demographic change will reshape labour markets and social protection systems. Security will no longer depend on armies and borders, but also on power grids, data centers, cables, satellites, algorithms and trust in the information we receive every day. And yet today, as we prepare for the future, millions of people are living through war or under the threat of war. More than 100 million people have been displaced by force, more than 270 million children and young people are not in the school. This is the paradox of our time. Humanity has never possessed such immense scientific and technological capabilities, and yet it has never been more evident that technological capability does not automatically produce political wisdom. That is why the real question before this assembly is not simply how we will manage the crisis of 2026. The real question is this: what kind of international order will we leave to the generation that is entering school today? For a small size country like mine, this is not an academic question. It is a question of survival. 33 years ago, since we become a part of the United Nations, the world looked very different. The Cold War had ended. There was hope that a new era was beginning, an era in which cooperation would gradually replace confrontation. Our region, however, was living through a very different reality. Yugoslavia was disintegrating in bloodshed. Wars were being fought just beyond our borders. The fear that the violence might spread was real. And yet my country chose peace. It chose stability. It was in those circumstances on our territory that the United Nations did something it had never done before. It established the first preventive peacekeeping mission in the history of the organization. That experience left a profound lesson in our national memory, a lesson to which I will return towards the end of my speech. Peace does not begin when war ends. Peace begins when politics is wise enough to prevent war from beginning. Perhaps that is why small countries sometimes see international politics differently. Great powers have room for strategic shifts that small sized states simply do not have. For a great power, a mistaken geopolitical calculation may mean a change of strategy. For a small sized country, the same mistake can mean a lost decade. That is why we cannot afford to be indifferent to the rules, nor can we afford to believe that the rules will defend themselves. The world taking shape before us is a world of sharper competition. Power is being redistributed.
No more exploitation. Excellencies, The fourth power test is technology, and above all artificial intelligence. For centuries, power came from territory. Then industry. Then finance. Today, power increasingly comes from data, computing capacity and algorithms. This new power is highly concentrated. It is advancing at extraordinary speed. And racing ahead of our ability to understand its full consequences. In 2017, AI was barely on the world’s radar. Yet in my first address to the opening of the General Assembly, I warned – and I quote: “Artificial intelligence is a game changer that can boost development and transform lives in spectacular fashion. But it may also have a dramatic impact on labour markets and, indeed, on global security and the very fabric of societies.” Unquote. Here we are, almost a decade later. AI is indeed a game changer – with enormous promise to advance medicine, accelerate scientific discovery, expand opportunity, and improve lives. Make no mistake. The danger is not technology. The danger is technology without accountability: Capability without oversight. Decision-making without transparency. And that danger cannot be minimized. The very developers building these systems are now pulling the alarm. Excellencies, The first duty of government is to protect its people. Governments must assume their responsibilities. And governments with the greatest AI capabilities have the greatest responsibilities to humanity. To establish channels for dialogue, transparency, trust and cooperation. Not despite geopolitical rivalry – but precisely because of it. At a pivotal moment during the Cold War, strategic rivals came to recognize the need to manage shared existential risks. They built mechanisms to reduce misunderstandings, manage escalation, and prevent catastrophe. Artificial intelligence demands the same clarity of purpose and sense of urgency. Those countries leading this technological revolution must share information on emerging safety risks. Cooperate on testing and evaluation. And work towards common safeguards that protect us all. But because this affects us all, global coordination is indispensable. And there is only one place where every country has a voice in shaping our common future: The United Nations. Through the Global Digital Compact, you agreed for the first time on universal principles for AI governance. Through the Global Dialogue on AI Governance, we created a platform for governments, scientists, industry leaders and civil society to work together. Through the Independent International Scientific Panel on AI, we have brought together global expertise to ensure that policy is guided by evidence. Just yesterday, the AI Scientific Panel released a thematic brief on AI safety and risks from loss of human control. Building on these efforts, we must take the next steps. First, to advance the conditions for the responsible pacing of AI and the additional safeguards needed to address risks. Second, to work towards a multilateral AI Risk Management Framework, supported by credible and independent oversight. And in all our efforts, we must ensure no country is left behind. Artificial intelligence must be shaped by humanity, with humanity, and for all humanity. And as we confront the challenges ahead, let us not retreat from two fundamental principles. Let us say with one voice: Children must never become the test subjects for unregulated systems. And let us resolve that life-and-death decisions must never be surrendered to machines. Killer robots must have no place in our future. Excellencies, Peace and security. Inequality.
We must equally reform the Secretariat to better support peacekeeping and the resolution of conflicts. We've been told that there are more conflicts today than at any time since the United Nations was established, and regrettably, these conflicts are in almost every corner of the planet. The Oslo Peace Institute reported that in 2025, last year, 245 000 individuals faced battle related deaths. That is almost Barbados's population. I'm told that this makes it the third most violent year in the post-Cold War era. My friends, the scale of human tragedy is mounting, and whether it is in Gaza or the West Bank or Lebanon, or Yemen or Sudan or Ukraine or elsewhere. Last year we feared that there was a risk of conflicts in the Middle East widening even further, and the conflicts continue. These fears, regrettably, have come to pass and with a global impact. Nevertheless. Indeed, conflicts are more protracted and more fragmented. And when coupled with hunger and unsustainable debt and a warming planet, it becomes a veritable hell for the citizens of those countries. Increases in energy and transport costs and in interest rates have spurred inflation. It means that no one, even on the other side of the world, can escape the hardships in meeting their daily needs. The truth is, until there is a two state solution that respects the rights and territories of both the Israelis and Palestinians, we will continue to live on the edge in this world. And you may well ask, how have we gotten here? We need to address with laser like focus each and every one of these conflicts. Legitimacy demands that of us. And let us let the UN deliberately and systematically deploy nimble mediation teams led by political leaders, current and retired. On behalf of the Secretary-General and enjoying the Secretary-General's confidence and authority and the respect of Member States. This, my friends, will help lift the heavy weight necessary to end these multiple conflicts and to bring peace and dignity to those affected populations. We know that many hands make light work and we can't ignore it. These conflicts need to be supported by a quicker and technology enhanced observer force, capable of rapid deployment to monitor and support ceasefires and peace agreements to be given the resources. These peacekeeping forces must be given realistic mandates, predictable financing and true partnership. Let us work my friends together with the parties to these conflicts, to build dialogue and to bring opportunities for investment and jobs to the affected populations so that they too, can live properly. And as for the wider international legal order, we know that countries of every size and capacity depend on a system in which rules are made collectively and applied consistently and fairly. But if we don't act early enough, we have trouble. And that is why we say that the UN must receive the resources and the resolve to act before the guns speak, and not after the guns start to fly. My friends, without an equitable rules based order, smaller states like mine will simply cease to exist in this world.
