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.
It is precisely a state that is confident in its democratic and strategic choices that can engage and cooperate with greater confidence, with countries that have different histories, different interests, and different political perspectives. The world does not need yet another division into permanent camps. It needs competition with limits and rules that all must respect, alliances that take responsibility, and international institutions that remain a space for a dialogue precisely when dialogue is most difficult. That is why the United Nations matters, not because they can resolve every conflict. Clearly they cannot. Not because every resolution is given effect. Clearly, that is not always the case, and that should not discourage us. It should strengthen our determination to protect these United Nations and the rules upon which they are founded, and to stand for multilateralism grounded in values, mutual respect and rules. Because a world without a place where all states, regardless of their size, can sit under the same roof and invoke the same principles, would be even more dangerous than the world we see today. In 1954, Dag Hammarskjöld reminded us of a thought: the United Nations were not created to take us to heaven, but to save us from hell. Seven decades later, it is worth understanding the essence of that statement. We should not demand perfection from United Nations. We should demand relevance, the capacity to prevent and to mediate the capacity to protect human dignity and ultimately, the capacity to uphold principles, even when applying them is politically inconvenient. Today trust in the international system is being jeopardized precisely because too many people have a justified sense that the rules do not apply equally, that power sometimes take precedence over principle, that commitments are conditional, that agreements last only as long as interests remain unchanged. For small sized states, this is an especially dangerous world. Our own history has taught us that international compromises are very difficult and that peace, stability and integration require political courage and hard sacrifices.
It was achieved through dialogue, through compromise, and through the determination to put the future of the country above division. The United Nations was an important partner in that process. Three decades later, the same belief in dialogue continues to guide our relations with our neighbors. Recent agreements with Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan have helped resolve long standing border issues, and opened a new chapter of cooperation in Central Asia. Borders that once divided us can now connect us. Our experience has strengthened our convictions. Even the most difficult disagreements can be resolved when there is political will, dialogue and mutual respect.
At the same time, climate change is worsening and constitutes a concern at a planetary scale. Floods, droughts and wildfires are recurring and do not spare any region in the world. These climate events prevent many populations from benefiting from the marvelous technological progress that we have made. President, excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, in this situation, it is our collective duty to work together in order to overcome these challenges and effectively respond to the expectations of our peoples, and the United Nations offers us, in this case, an ideal framework to engage in discussions and find compromises, find consensus in order to seek solutions to these challenges that concern all of us. Cameroon is firmly committed to this path, and we support the UN 80 initiative, as well as any other initiative that could contribute to strengthening cooperation and international solidarity.
Monsieur le président. Mr. president of the General Assembly. Mr. United Nations Secretary general. Excellencies heads of delegation. Ladies and gentlemen, president of the General Assembly. Allow me to begin by conveying to you the warm congratulations of His Excellency, Mr. Brice Clotaire Oligui Nguema, president of the Gabonese Republic, on your outstanding election to preside over this 81st session of the General Assembly. I wish to assure you right now of my delegation's full support and express the hope that your term of office will be marked by a spirit of listening and dialogue, and by the tireless pursuit of compromise in the service of international peace and cooperation. As the Secretary General of the UN, Antonio Guterres comes to the end of his second term, the president of the Gabonese Republic pays special tribute to him for his steadfast commitment to multilateralism and to upholding the principles enshrined in the United Nations Charter. Ladies and gentlemen, Gabon fully aligns itself with the theme for this session Restoring Trust, Managing Transformation: a United Nations that delivers for all.
Mr. President, Secretary-General, Excellencies. There is an idea that has accompanied Andorra for more than 270 years, and that continues to shape the way that we understand politics. The Manual Digest, one of the great works of our institutional heritage through which Antoni Fiter i Rossell condensed and recounted the essence of Andorran identity, reminds us that the legitimate exercise of power only makes sense when it places the common good above any other interest. This idea, written in 1748, long before modern international organizations came into existence, remains remarkably relevant today because multilateralism is nothing more than the application of this same principle to relations among nations: the understanding that the common good of the international community is inseparable from the well-being of each of our countries. In Andorra, this approach toward politics has enabled us to preserve more than seven centuries of peace, dialogue, and coexistence in harmony, not because history has been easier for us, but because we have learned the best way to protect freedom is to build trust, seek balance, and make compromise a form of governance. Perhaps it is precisely this experience that a small country such as ours can share with this great Assembly today.
Indeed, the problem of the Black Sea has gone from regional to global in scale, with negative regional consequences that come from the war in Iran and the drying up of the Danube River. This is leading to a food crisis in the world, especially in the Middle East and Africa. The inability to export grain and fertilizer poses a real risk of famine this winter in a number of countries in these regions and may compromise the harvest of 2027. Bulgaria cannot and will not remain indifferent.
And in this regard, the Republic of the Congo is following very closely the selection process for the next UN Secretary General. We believe that Africa a continent at the centre of many UN challenges and global geopolitical issues, must remain at the heart of the future Secretary-General's agenda. The next Secretary General must embrace a truly universal vision of the United Nations, one that leaves no continent at the margins and which fully takes into account Africa's place, responsibilities and legitimate interests. Your excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, for the Republic of the Congo, restoring trust and managing transformation of our international institutions is a collective imperative. The theme of this session, Restoring Trust and Managing Transformation, resonates as a call for clarity and courage in a world where trust is eroding, tensions are rising and double standards and relationships of force threaten to replace both the spirit and the letter of the UN charter. Humanity has never needed a renewed, inclusive and representative multilateralism more than it does today, a multilateralism that can reflect the realities of a multi-polar world in which Africa occupies its rightful place. This renewal requires a deep reform of international institutions, foremost amongst them the Security Council. Africa, strengthened by its history, its demographic dynamism and geopolitical importance, can no longer remain on the sidelines of decisions that shape its destiny. It must become a full and legitimate actor in accordance with the consensus. Africa's demand for two permanent Security Council seats with veto power is not a request, but a right, a legitimate right, grounded, which reflects the realities of the 21st century. The world has changed and our institutions must evolve with it. This is an imperative, and Africa is not asking for a favor. It is claiming its rightful place. The Republic of the Congo is a member of the Committee of Heads of States and Governments of the African Union on Security Council reform. The C10 Committee will not compromise on this shared demand. Your Excellency, ladies and gentlemen, the Republic of the Congo reiterates its willingness to serve the international community. With your support, we renew our aspiration to serve as a non-permanent member of the UN Security Council for the 2030 2031 term. This candidacy of ours is rooted in a long diplomatic tradition, our sustained commitment to peace and a strong sense of international responsibility.
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.
The next Secretary-General must work with member states to chart an ambitious vision for the next phase of reform, while ensuring implementation of the decisions already taken. At a time of multiple and overlapping crises and growing constraints, we need a United Nations that is focused on its core tasks disciplined and accountable, one where every dollar delivers maximum impact, one that measures success not by the number of mandates it creates or the meetings it holds, but by the difference it makes in people's lives. Meeting this challenge means exercising your powers to achieve the most impact from the resources available. It means demanding a culture of continuous improvement, one that focuses on effective implementation and results. It means setting the highest standards for performance within the Secretariat and holding staff accountable for delivering. In this regard, we ask you to demonstrate independence in your senior appointments. New Zealand has never accepted the right of any country to assert ownership of UN positions by virtue of power or status. We encourage Secretary-General candidates to commit publicly to making senior appointments on the basis of merit. Reform is a joint responsibility. We as Member States must avoid the trap of regarding reform as something that others will deliver for us, and instead live up to our own responsibilities in building the organisation we need. We cannot expect the UN to continue to lurch on in a state of constant financial crisis. Member states must meet their financial obligations in full on time and without conditions, in accordance with their obligations under the charter. We need to focus our attention on the issues that really matter, and that can genuinely deliver benefits for our citizens. Resolution 80/251 equips Member states to tackle the long standing challenge of mandate accumulation and overload. It commits us all to take a more disciplined approach to setting the organisation's priorities. It provides the framework we need to create a more focused, coherent and impactful UN. Yet its success will depend on whether we are willing to act differently. If we aren't prepared to make the necessary choices, we will be left with an ever growing set of responsibilities, supported by an ever shrinking pool of resources. That will do nothing to strengthen confidence in the UN's relevance and effectiveness. Reform begins with us. It requires member states to make the decisions that only member states can make. That is the only way we can truly achieve an organisation that is fit to meet the challenges that lie before us, and that our citizens need and expect. Fourth, and finally, we urge the next Secretary-General to ensure that the UN works for all states. The sovereign equality of states is one of the most central principles of the UN Charter. It must be central also to your approach. The fundamental premise of the United Nations is that every state, regardless of size or circumstance, has a stake in shaping our shared future. We also call on the president of the General Assembly to remain a steadfast champion of the voices, prerogatives, and interests of the entire UN membership across all pillars of its work. The next Secretary-General's leadership in these areas will be essential, but we must also find it in ourselves to demonstrate leadership. Ultimately, the health, relevance and effectiveness of the United Nations depends primarily on its members, not its Secretary-General. As member States, we must acknowledge our role in the financial and legitimacy crisis facing the UN. We must ask whether we have the collective will to change our behaviour. Do we have the discipline to focus our attention and resources on the issues that really matter to our citizens and deliver impact to their lives? Do we have the honesty to admit what is working and what is not? Do we have the will to invest in the multilateral system, both politically and financially, to enable it to deliver results where we can truly make a difference, coupled with the courage to make bold and consequent decisions on UN reform that can deliver a more effective organisation. Collective action has changed the course of global challenges before. These achievements were not inevitable. They were the result of political leadership, persistence and a willingness to work together despite differences, to build understanding and compromise. The most fundamental step we can all take to revive this organisation is to unequivocally recommit ourselves, both in words and deeds, to the principles that the charter requires us to follow in our relations with other states. Respect for sovereignty, international law, the pursuit of dialogue and cooperation, and the peaceful settlement of disputes. At a time when conflict is rising, trust is eroding and geopolitical competition is intensifying, we should not conclude that multilateralism has failed. We should conclude that it is needed more than ever. Thank you.
Today, however, these ideas are not only being called into question; they are being attacked by political actors and governments that want to take us back to a dark past. And I don't need to point them out; we all know who they are and what their modus operandi is. They start by questioning the rules, then they break them, knowing full well that nobody will dare to hold them accountable. They cut their contributions to multilateral bodies like this one. They point to their leaders and officials. They obstruct these organizations' ability to act, to then write them off as useless entities that we can do without. What they're doing, nevertheless, is a planned and coordinated demolition attempt that is presented as something that we can't stop and that's necessary. However, the reality is that it runs counter to the structural currents of history and is based on three misguided pillars. The first of these pillars is selfishness, the absurd belief that the world is a zero-sum game, where some winning must imply that others losing. The second pillar is ignorance, disregarding scientific evidence and assuming that there are countries that are so powerful that they can abuse all of the others and they don't need anyone else to prosper. And the third pillar, the worst in my opinion, is cruelty. Cruelty that isn't even moved when it sees the ribs of a starving child or a hospital reduced to rubble. Over these 8 years, I've seen these selfish, ignorant, and cruel forces grow. I've seen how they took off their masks and seized power in many places. And then I saw them start illegal wars, massacre innocent civilians. I've seen them treat millions of human beings like livestock and take away aid from those suffering the most, from poverty and disease. I've seen them pollute the atmosphere and also the ocean as if it's their own property, and conspire to destroy this organization and everything it represents. I'm saying this because bearing witness to these things has changed the way that I understand the world. However, it hasn't led me to lose hope. Because also, over these 8 years, I've seen wonderful things that allow me to still have confidence in humanity. For example, I've seen millions of people mobilized to defend nature, peace, and civil rights. I've seen thousands of activists and public servants confront these reactionary powers, knowing full well that they're putting their professional careers and even their own lives at risk. I've seen scientists make progress that we thought was impossible. And I've seen many governments do things right, opting for cooperation, social justice, and environmental sustainability. All of this has taught me something that I want to share with all of you, and that is that humanity is not intrinsically good or bad. Humanity can actually be both. And every day, every year, and in each and every crisis, we must decide how to act. The United Nations is one of these spaces where these decisions are made at the highest level. And the UN doesn't always do it well. Of course, I myself, on several occasions, have called out the contradictions and lackings of this body. However, with the same belief, I must call out the fact that the majority of the voices that today insist on criticizing the United Nations are not describing its failure; what they're doing is trying to cause its failure. And I must also say that multilateralism is the best tool that humanity has to manage its diversity and its interdependence, especially in a globalized and multipolar world like the world we're living in today. And this is why what we need to do is ramp up our trust in this organization. We must renew it and strengthen it so that this century it can play the same key role that it played last century. And doing this will not be easy. However, the good news is that all of the guidance we need is right here, in the United Nations Charter. In this charter, they wrote the best chapters. Our forefathers wrote it, the men and women who saw the world burn, and even then, they dared to imagine a better future. These men and women laid down their wisdom and their hope in this charter. And they didn't ask us to keep it in a glass case. They asked us to fulfill it. They asked us to defend it, and for us to turn back to it in times of uncertainty and extraordinary difficulty. And today is one of those times. And therefore, it's our duty to rise to the courage and the ambition present in this text, in the United Nations Charter. And this is why, ladies and gentlemen, we need to reform the Security Council so that all of the regions in the world have fair representation, and so that we can do away with the right of veto of the permanent members. Because as the UN Charter sets out, no country should be judged in its own case, no matter how powerful they are. We therefore need to strengthen all of the other main bodies and reorganize the agencies, funds and programs, and provide them with more resources and more executive capacity so that they can have a more decisive impact on the great challenges that beset humanity. We must strengthen bodies like the International Criminal Court so that they can investigate, prosecute, and punish those that break the rules. It took humanity centuries to replace might is right with the rule of law. And we must not be the generation that backtracks on this. It's for this very reason that we must rebuild the nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament architecture to avoid a poorly designed security policy that brings us back to another global conflict. And we must impose strict regulations on the tech oligarchs who control the functioning of social networks and the development of artificial intelligence. Because at the end of the day, the future of our children is more important than the pockets of these tech oligarchs. And of course, doing all of these things will require compromise, time, strong leadership, being able to build agreements, to listen, to look beyond our known reality, and imagine a better alternative. And what I'm advocating for, for this leadership, is very clear. Nine men have served as Secretary-General of this organization in its 80 years of existence.
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.
We wish them well as they complete their tenure at the end of this year. Mr. president, few institutions embody the principle of sovereign equality as visibly as this assembly. 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 Gambia's own experience within 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 Gambia 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 when member states approach negotiations with political will, mutual respect, and a sense of responsibility.
In addition, for four and a half years now, I have been listening to lectures on how many in the West remain last beacon of democracy in the world, the protectors not of Ukraine's but of the rules and principles of international law. And when they raise their voices thinking that they are being highly moral and that their positions are the only right ones, we simply smile and ask ourselves: And how did you treat Kosovo and Metohija and the territorial integrity of Serbia, which is guaranteed by the UN Charter and the resolution of the UNSC 1244? To that, either there is no answer, or they supposedly give us some well-intentioned advice and tell us not to look to the past, but to the future. When we ask them, do you also say to Ukraine that the territories they are fighting for are not important?, we end the pointless conversation and move on to another subject. And I want to warn all of you, all of you here who belong to the Global South, pay the utmost attention while signing all the agreements with great powers. That is how we signed the famous Brussels Agreement in 2013, wishing to resolve problems between Serbs and Albanians in Kosovo and Metohija by compromise. All the obligations that were to be met by Serbia have been met, and the only one that was to be met by Albanians, the one about the establishment of the community of Serb municipalities, has not been met to this day. It is interesting that the agreement was accepted not only in the presence of the EU, but it was also confirmed with the signature of the EU, but it meant actually nothing. As the President of Serbia, for ten years I have been facing all possible tricks and pressures to give up on full implementation of what was signed. It is a lesson to us Serbs, but also to all others in the world who want to protect their country. In spite of everything, Serbia will defend its country, its territorial integrity, the UN Charter, the UN Security Council resolution 1244. I wish to thank individually every 107 countries, states that have not recognized the unilaterally declared independence of the so-called Kosovo. We know that many of you, that many of those states, have been subjected to pressure, and we know that maintaining a principled position is sometimes far more difficult than it appears from the outside. Thank you for being consistent in not recognizing the independence of a part of Serbia's territory. Excellencies, Serbia is on its European path, and it will have to do many more things in order to become a full-fledged member of the EU.
They are what we allowed, what we still allow, and what we will answer for. There is a painful cry for a better world order as we witness the weakening into irrelevance of multilateral institutions. No country, regardless of size or power, can address today's interconnected challenges alone. Excellencies, leadership is not merely discovering the angriest instinct of the electorate and amplifying it. Leadership is sometimes telling our own supporters that they are wrong. It is explaining complexity when a slogan would be easier. It is asking people to consider tomorrow when they are angry about today. It is persuading citizens that humanity of others who may worship differently, speak another language, or vote for another party does not diminish their own freedoms. Statesmanship requires patience, persuasion, courage to compromise. And above all, it requires an understanding that power brings responsibility, not exemption. The Charter of the United Nations was not written to make the strong weak. It was written to prevent the strong from making the world unlivable. Soon we will elect a new Secretary-General. The regional rotation precedent must be preserved. Africa had an unprecedented continuous three terms: Boutros Boutros-Ghali, 1992-1996, Kofi Annan, 1997-2006. Now the Security Council will elect a Latin American as our Secretary-General for 2027-2032. And after more than 80 years of men at the helm of our organization, needless to say, we ought to have enough wisdom and elect a woman with unquestionable integrity, unblemished record, and in defense of human rights, a strong advocacy of gender equality and inclusion, rule of law, democracy, solid experience in senior management in national and multilateral institutions. Mr. President, Excellencies, for developing countries, particularly small island developing states and least developed countries, efficiency must translate into stronger delivery on the ground, not reduced essential support. Timor-Leste urges comprehensive reform, expansion in both the permanent and non-permanent categories, so that developing countries and historically underrepresented regions have a stronger voice in decisions concerning international peace and security. The veto is inconsistent with the sovereign equality of member states. President, Timor-Leste reaffirms the principles of climate justice, common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities in the light of different national circumstances. Greater climate ambition must be accompanied by accessible, predictable finance: adaptation support, technology transfer, and capacity building. Artificial intelligence and other emerging technologies reshape our societies. Developing countries must actively participate in their governance and development.
