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.
Defending multilateralism does not mean defending the status quo. The United Nations must become more effective, representative, transparent and responsive to people. It must make better use of its resources, reduce duplication and respond more swiftly without weakening the purposes for which it was created. Efficiency must strengthen, not erode, its three pillars peace and security, sustainable development and human rights. Effectiveness cannot be measured solely in administrative terms, but rather by the ability to prevent a war, protect a population under threat, combat hunger, confront transnational criminal networks, or support a state in strengthening its institutions. We do not need a United Nations that is smaller in purpose. We need a United Nations that is stronger in results and firmer in defending democratic principles. That transformation must also reach the Security Council. Its composition must better reflect the realities of the 21st century and remedy the long standing underrepresentation of entire regions. When the veto causes paralysis in the face of serious threats to international peace and security, confidence in the entire system suffers. We also face an important decision for the future of the organisation the selection of the next secretary general. Guatemala hopes that the process will be transparent and inclusive, and will identify an independent leader able to build bridges, defend the principles of the charter and lead the reform our organisation needs. The Latin American and Caribbean region stands ready and prepared to shoulder its responsibility to the international community. The time has come for a Latin American woman to serve as secretary general of the United Nations. Excellencies. Distinguished delegates.
Against this backdrop, we reiterate our grave concern at the situation in Nicaragua. The erosion of fundamental freedoms, the persecution of dissenting voices, the shutdown of civic space, religious persecution and reports of human rights violations continue to draw the country further and further away from democratic principles. As a neighboring nation that has welcomed hundreds and hundreds of thousands of Nicaraguan citizens, we remain staunchly committed to defending their rights and to the restoration of the rule of law in Nicaragua. We also note the situation in Cuba with concern, and we once again hear appeal for the full respect of human rights and fundamental freedoms. We also continue to closely follow the situation in Venezuela as it unfolds. We harbor the hope that dialogue will prevail along with the respect for the people's will, the restoration of democratic institutions, and the provision of care and services to particularly vulnerable individuals.
And this is why Andorra will continue to work, both within the Group of Friends of Multilingualism and the Group of Francophone Ambassadors, to ensure that new digital tools, as well as the UN itself, continue to reflect the plurality of peoples and cultures that we represent. This organization exists because the international community understood that the destiny of peoples is shared. No nation can prosper while ignoring the suffering of others, because the security of one depends on the security of all. In this regard, I would like, first and foremost, to commend the excellent UN80 Initiative, which proposes improvements to the work of the Secretariat, a stronger mandate lifecycle, and simplification of structures to avoid duplication and overlap. Secondly, I would like to emphasize the need for reform of the Security Council so that the UN can reflect the realities of today rather than those of 80 years ago. But the most important reform is to ensure that this organization remains a space where states not only defend their legitimate interests but are also capable of exercising a shared responsibility to address the great challenges facing humanity, and above all, continue to believe that what unites us is stronger than what divides us. I would like to also offer a few words of recognition to Secretary-General António Guterres. Since 2017, he has exercised his mandate during one of the most difficult and uncertain periods the international community has known, consistently defending the principles of the UN Charter and reminding us, even when it seemed most difficult, that multilateralism remains the best hope for preserving peace and cooperation among peoples as well as human dignity.
In Lebanon, the stakes affect the entire region. The Washington Agreement of 26 June opened a door. Italy is proud to continue hosting negotiating sessions in Rome that have helped keep that door open. For decades, Italian troops have served the cause of peace in southern Lebanon through UNIFIL and have helped train the Lebanese armed forces. We have also recently approved new development projects for the area, and we will continue to play our part even after the mission's mandate has come to an end. Dear colleagues, 61 active conflicts mean that war is advancing even far from the television cameras. And as war advances, the principles on which we have built 80 years of international relations retreat: the prohibition of the use of force, international humanitarian law, and freedom and security of navigation. Defending freedom of navigation means defending trade, jobs, growth, and dialogue. Because where goods can move freely, weapons are less likely to do so. The Strait of Hormuz must reopen. Gulf must relaunch dialogue and ask Iran to abandon any form of nuclear threat and any aggressive policy towards other countries in the region. Attacks on shipping in the Red Sea must cease, as must Russia's reckless attacks in the Black Sea on shipments of Ukrainian grain destined for Africa.
Without that capacity, sovereignty over the land, over the sky becomes just an illusion. And then comes the third layer: reach. For centuries, the great threat to freedom of speech was censorship. Today, freedom of speech is threatened by the weaponization of the freedom of reach. Speech is the right to express an idea. Reach is the power to place that idea before millions of people. Speech belongs to human beings. Reach can be purchased, automated, manipulated and secretly assigned by platforms, corporations, criminal networks and foreign states. The right to speak is universal, but there is no universal right to anonymous, unlimited and artificially amplified reach. When one lie can be multiplied a billion times, truth does not need to be censored anymore because it is simply buried. The citizen remains formally free to speak, but speaks into a storm that no human voice can match. Freedom of speech can therefore be defeated without banning a single book, without imprisoning a single journalist, without deleting a single post. The answer to bad speech remains more speech, but the answer to covert industrial amplification must come and must come sooner, more than it will be too late. And it's called exposure. Who created the message? Who paid for it? Was it spread by people or by machines? Why was the citizen targeted? Was the apparent public reaction authentic, coordinated or foreign directed? Defending democracy and defending a way of life and defending the freedom of each and every nation to live in its own way does not mean controlling what people are allowed to think. It means revealing the hidden powers, seeking to control what people are made to see. If we protect freedom of speech while leaving the control of reach completely opaque, we defend the door while surrendering the whole room. Some respond by demanding that artificial intelligence be slowed or stopped. We are too small, but we respectfully have to disagree. A pause by democracies will not produce a pause by dictatorships.
None of that happened because the powerful suddenly found their conscience. It happened because the balance of power in the room was changed. That is the lesson of history. Change is not given. It is organized. It is not the small states who are dismantling the rules based order. Small countries cannot dismantle a rules based world, but we will be the first to be crushed beneath its collapse. Great powers can survive the end of the rules. Small states cannot. For us, a rules based world is our shield. The rules have not always been applied fairly. But the answer is not a world without rules. It is rules that bind the strong as firmly as the weak. An international order whose rules apply only to the weak is not order. It is a hierarchy. When the Bahamas defends multilateralism, we're not defending a bureaucracy. We're defending the only successful arrangement in which a nation of 400 000 people can stand at this position as the sovereign equal of a nation of a billion people. A world without rules is not a free world. It is Milos. Mr. president, I do not appeal to conscience. Small states have done that for decades. Today, I appeal to your interests. What is in your best interest? No wall is high enough to keep out rising, warming seas. No border strong enough to stop a pandemic. Narrow self-interest asks what you can take today. Enlightened self-interest asks what kind of world you will have to live in tomorrow. The international rules based order. It benefits all. They're not arbitrary, having been arrived at through lived experience. Every rule you break today is the rule you will need tomorrow. Every institution you starve is one you will want one day. Every small nation you abandon
Common rules do not hold us back. They provide the stability and predictability necessary for countries to advance their ambitions. The world is being transformed by technology, climate change, demographic pressures, illegal migration and geopolitical rivalry. Our responsibility is to govern them so that change expands human freedom and security instead of weakening them. The United Nations must begin with its own transformation. Croatia supports a UN that is more effective, accountable and financially sustainable and stronger across all three pillars peace and security, sustainable development and, of course, human rights. Reform must also produce a more representative and effective Security Council. When the council is blocked, the General Assembly can and must act, but it cannot replace the council's primary responsibility under the charter. This makes the selection of the next secretary general all the more relevant. I thank, therefore, Secretary General Guterres, for his work over the last decade. The United Nations needs leadership capable of bringing member states together, defending the charter and turning reform into measurable results. No country alone can successfully respond to the global transformations we witnessed today.
And we'll come out of this stronger, precisely for this reason, because Spain does not choose the easy route. We always choose the fairest route. And I also want to recognize that the world knows this. At the end of the day, the reactionary forces that want to destroy this multilateral order won't stop attacking us for it. They want us to be intimidated. They want us to give up. They want us to end up believing that the SDGs are a lost cause, that defending the common good is naive, that cooperating is an act of weakness. Well, I'm here, and I've come up to this rostrum to tell you loud and clear that they are wrong and that we will not keep quiet. The Spanish people are not going back. We will not stop believing that humanity can continue to progress and that working together, we can build a better world. And we're not going to do this because we believe that delivering for our children, because we know that in a few years, future generations will look back. They will study this decisive decade, and they will ask us what role each and every one of us played. They will ask us, what did we do when some countries started to break the rules and others decided to look the other way? They will ask us what we did when defending what we believed in started to cost us dearly. And when this happens, we want to be able to tell them that we did not give up the fight. Not us. We want to be able to tell them that we gave everything to leave them a more peaceful, more sustainable, and of course, a fairer world. That's what we want to be able to tell them. And this is the commitment that I want to make here, at this rostrum, not in my own name, of course, but rather on behalf of the country that I represent, Spain. Thank you very much.
I would like to use this opportunity to pay tribute to all victims of the cowardly barbarism of terrorism who have sacrificed their lives. I also would like to pay tribute to our defense and security forces for their courage, their professionalism and their unwavering dedication in defending sovereignty, territorial integrity of our countries and protecting our people. I pay special tribute to the memory of the General Sadio Camara, Minister of Defense and Veterans Affairs, whose legacy of patriotism, courage and sacrifice will continue to inspire future generations of Malians and people in the Sahel. Mr. president, to reinforce security and ensure the sustainable return of peace, the government is implementing a comprehensive and integrated strategy for stability and prosperity of our country, and for this, the state continues to extend a hand to all those willing to lay down their arms and return to the Republic, in line with the conclusions of Inter Malian dialogue and the National Charter for Peace and Reconciliation.
Yet putting this vision into practice is rarely simple at a time of tectonic geopolitical changes. In the Middle East, the Gaza peace plan agreed last year must be effectively implemented. It is of paramount concern to ensure that Hamas surrenders its arms. It can have no role, I repeat, no role in Gaza's future. At the same time, reconstruction needs to move forward, with Palestinians themselves taking ownership of Gaza's future. Greece will continue to advocate for a two state solution, with Israel and Palestine living side by side in peace and security. However, developments in the West Bank remain a source of deep concern. Actions that are illegal under international law and undermine the viability of a future Palestinian state cannot be allowed to continue. We strongly argue that this is also to the benefit of the long term security of Israel itself. Greece has established a durable and deep strategic partnership with Israel, while at the same time maintaining strong ties with the Arab world. It is precisely the strength of this partnership that allows us to engage in an open and candid dialogue. In Lebanon, there is now a real opportunity to lay the foundations for a lasting peace. The US facilitated negotiations with Israel are an important step forward and should be sustained. Greece strongly supports a sovereign, resilient and united Lebanon and the government's efforts to restore the state's monopoly over arms. Ultimately, a stronger Lebanese state will serve both domestic security and regional stability. Therefore, we will continue to deliver concrete assistance to the country, including to the Lebanese armed forces. With the UNIFIL's mandate ending, joint action is crucial to avoid a security vacuum and maintain an effective international and European presence. Syria is another key player in the region. Lasting stability in the Middle East requires a stable Syria, a Syria that is inclusive, a Syria that is free from foreign interference and regional rivalries. A Syria where every citizen can and should feel secure. The new Syrian authorities have taken steps in this direction. Yet further concrete progress must be demonstrated, particularly when it comes to protecting the rights and security of all religious and ethnic communities. And this, of course, includes the Orthodox Christian minority, which unfortunately continues to face the violence of Islamist extremists. The search for stability extends to Libya, a neighbour with whom we share many common interests. We praise all reunification efforts. A stable Libya free from foreign interference, would benefit not only the Libyan people, but our entire region. And Greece is ready to support Libyan institutions in border protection and migration management. And we remain fully committed to reaching an agreement on the delimitation of our maritime zones. Ladies and gentlemen, let me now turn to our relations with our neighbour, Turkey. Over the past three years, we have made a sustained effort to improve our relationship, rebuild trust and keep channels of communication open in order to prevent the escalation of tensions that could lead to unwanted crises. It is a delicate relationship. It's a relationship that carries the weight of history. And indeed, given broader and regional challenges, the situation urgently calls for a common understanding on how we move forward, an understanding grounded in full respect for international law and the principles of good neighbourly relations. After all, as I've said repeatedly, we cannot change our geography. We are destined to live side by side. And I repeat that the UN convention on the law of the sea provides the only institutional framework to solve our only long lasting dispute concerning the delimitation of our continental shelf and our exclusive economic zones. Dialogue is essential for peace and prosperity, but meaningful dialogue cannot coexist with unilateral actions that challenge the international legal order. Nor can meaningful progress be made when faced with threats of war in response to the exercise of lawful rights, according to international law. Such actions do not resolve differences. They end up by only deepening them, and they risk undermining the stability of our wider region, a region which we should not forget, still bears an open wound: the unresolved Cyprus issue. 52 years have passed since Turkey illegally invaded Cyprus and continued to occupy it, a flagrant violation of international law whose consequences persist to this day. For the United Nations, Cyprus remains a litmus test of its credibility, of its ability to uphold its own resolutions and the principles of the charter, and Greece fully supports the recent efforts of Secretary-General Guterres to create the appropriate conditions for the resumption of substantive negotiations, and we sincerely hope that progress can be achieved during his remaining time in office. And we expect these efforts to continue under his successor with the same objective the reunification of Cyprus, free of occupation forces in accordance with the relevant UN Security Council resolutions. The principles at stake in Cyprus are being tested elsewhere too. Today, two other major conflicts continue to challenge our ability to defend the values upon which this organization was founded. The war in Ukraine is now in its fifth year, five years since Russia's full scale aggression brought back war to European soil. The Ukrainian people have shown extraordinary courage defending their freedom and Greece continuously stands with them. We strongly, strongly condemn attacks against civilians and civilian infrastructure. Diplomacy must now deliver an immediate cease fire and a lasting peace anchored in the principles of the United Nations Charter. Ukraine must have a decisive say in its own future, and Europe cannot be absent from these negotiations. Against this backdrop, another devastating war demands our urgent attention. In Sudan, the nearly four year conflict has resulted in a staggering humanitarian catastrophe. Reports of atrocious war crimes continue to emerge, while the conflict is fuelling instability far beyond Sudan's borders. We should not permit this tragedy to endure. Foreign interference must also cease with no impunity for war crimes. Ultimately, the way forward lies in a credible, Sudanese led political process that reflects the aspirations of the citizens Sudan. The European Union ought to leverage its capacity to play a more active role in supporting that process and assisting in bringing this destructive conflict to an end. After all, it has real skin in the game. Should the devastating war continue, our continent will be the first to suffer from a possible massive new migratory wave. Ladies and gentlemen, Greece's confidence abroad rests on a profound transformation at home. At a time when the effectiveness of governments all over the world is being challenged by populists and extremists, and public trust is being eroded in the echo chambers of social media, Greece serves as an example that sound reform oriented policies can deliver real results for people and improve their lives.
Russia's bet on cruise missiles and Shaheds didn't work the way Putin planned. They still caused damage, but they didn't break us. We built our defense. What is truly difficult for us now is Russian ballistic missiles and their new jet-powered Shaheds, Iranian technologies. Just imagine this: since the beginning of this year, Russia has already used more than 2,100 missiles of different types against us, against Ukraine, our people, and our children. More than 950 of them were ballistic missiles. In 8 months of this year, Russia used 63,000 attack drones of different types against Ukraine, our people. And more than 7,700 of them were jet-powered Shaheds. Truly destructive and very dangerous weapons. Just think about it. The Russians launch jet-powered Shaheds every hour, every hour, against our cities, our economy, our infrastructure. Our combat aircraft are fighting them 24/7. And this is part of Russia's strategy: to create an air threat every hour, to make life harder for the economy, and to disrupt people's lives, and to stop children from being able to study, just to study at school. Would your country survive if, God forbid, you had to face something like this? Ukraine has. Our soldiers have already successfully tested four new jet-powered interceptor drones against Russian jet-powered Shaheds. So we are scaling up production, and we will build, of course we will build, protection against these threats too. We have also launched an anti-ballistic program, FREYJA, together with our partners. Ten countries are already part of it: Ukraine, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Germany, France, Italy, the United Kingdom, Spain, and the Netherlands. Last week, I invited Poland to join. And we are also in consultations with a couple of other allied governments who want to join FREYJA. And we remain open to every country that can contribute to building protection against ballistic missiles. Our FREYJA program does not replace proven and effective systems, like, for example, Patriot systems or upgraded anti-ballistic SAMP/T systems. We want to build a system that can be produced on a much larger scale and at a lower cost, a system that can become an integrated part of Ukraine's defense and Europe's defense. One that can help any freedom-loving nation. The global waiting list for anti-ballistic systems is very long. There are more and more ballistic threats, and the industrial capacity of those who choose war is very large. So we need to produce enough protection so that every person sitting in this hall can say," My people are truly protected." That is our approach to security. Today, even the richest countries in the world can't find enough missile interceptors. Current production is simply not enough. And even those who spend years building up interceptor stocks have already used a large part of them. Unfortunately, this is the reality, even in the Gulf, where countries really worked to build strong anti-ballistic system, anti-ballistic defense. So we need a new program. We need FREYJA. Join these common efforts. And yes, sometimes it may seem that Ukraine is focused only on war, because we speak about weapons, we speak about defense and sanctions against the aggressor. But Ukrainians did not choose this war. We choose not to die, not to lose our country, our families, not to lose our independence, our freedom. And we are defending ourselves. And this matters not only for us, I'm sure. Most of you here are like Ukraine was before this war. You are peaceful nations. And you do not think about war every second. But that does not mean you are weak. And those who may wish you harm should not make that mistake. Most of you do not have nuclear weapons. You do not have a habit of attacking your neighbors. And you may not have the money to finance years of war. But that does not mean you have no chance to stay safe, to deter those who may threaten you, to make anyone who may threaten you think twice, and to protect your life and, of course, protect your people. Ukraine has proven that even against a much bigger enemy, you can stand and survive. And we also have the drone deal format. This is not simply about selling drones. Not, of course. It is cooperation with other countries to build a modern, integrated defense system against drone threats in the air, at sea, and on land. And this is not only about protecting the sky. Drones help us control our borders, it's important, mountain areas and, of course, roads, and without them, this would simply be impossible. And it is also about protecting infrastructure, critical infrastructure, about resilience, about organizing resources and defense forces so that critical infrastructure and transport can keep working even in the most difficult conditions, this is also part of the deals we offer. These are ready-made security formats that we adapt to each specific country and each specific region. We are already working with partners in the Gulf, the South Caucasus, and across Europe through drone deals. Today, I signed a drone deal, serious drone deal, with Finland, and this is significant. Also, today, I signed a security agreement with Australia, and drones are part of it too. And we are preparing drone deals with Canada and with other countries as well. When Russia started this war, it could never have imagined that Ukrainian long-range drones would one day reach its factories, its military factories, somewhere in Siberia and on the Yamal Peninsula, thousands of kilometers from our borders. Thousands. No Russian admiral expected that we would be able to sink Russia's pride cruisers that were supposed to dominate the sea but could not survive our naval drones. And along with different types of drones, we also produce a wide range of conventional weapons quickly, at lower cost than in many other countries, and tested in modern war. Ukraine is building its security so that we reinforce our role of a real provider of security and help others get the protection that has already worked for us and that can truly reduce the space for starting and spreading wars in the world. Peace through protection. Ladies and gentlemen, just think about it. No Russian official ever imagined that Army General Winter, which had fought on Russia's side for centuries, would one day switch sides and support those defending themselves from Russia. We will make that happen this winter if Russia continues to target our energy system and our heating. Ukrainians understand that this winter could be very harsh for us. But in response, we will have no choice but to make it painful for Russia too. And that's exactly why we say that de-escalation steps are important, are needed before winter, now. We need diplomacy, and we need strength. And step by step, we are closing the gaps in both. Yesterday, we met with the President of the United States, and this is exactly what we discussed. Unfortunately, we have not had a chance to speak directly with the leader of China, who is in America today, but not here. And he is someone who can influence Russia too, more than many, many others can. And we would like him to want peace as much as we do in Ukraine. We believe the world has the power to make this happen. We are sure the world needs this. This is about energy, about critical infrastructure. This is about food security.
Climate. Artificial intelligence. These are the four great power tests of the future. And they are linked. War deepens inequality, destroys development and accelerates hunger. Inequality determines who has the means to face climate and other shocks and who is left exposed. The climate crisis fuels instability and displacement. Artificial Intelligence could help solve all these challenges, or make them worse. Excellencies, Across all four tests, the decisive issue is power. Power over force, money, energy, technology, rules and the future. That is why the UN Charter – and the work of the United Nations – matter more than ever. The United Nations exists because power requires rules – and humanity needs a place where power answers to principle. And the Charter leaves no room for selective reading. The Charter created an Organization rooted in three pillars. Peace. Development. And human rights. These are not competing agendas. They are one reality: There is no peace without development. No development without peace. And no peace or development without human rights. To pretend that peace can be separated from dignity, opportunity and rights is an illusion. But defending this truth does not mean defending the status quo. The Pact for the Future and the UN80 initiative are about making the UN: More responsive. More effective. More coherent. More transparent. More focused on results. More disciplined with resources. And more present where people need us. The world does not need a weaker United Nations. It needs a UN strong enough to face the world as it is – and determined enough to build the world as it should be. Excellencies, After ten years, I hold one conviction even more strongly than when I arrived: The greatest power is not the power to dominate. It is the power to build a future that works for everyone. Our shared future will be forged by whether humanity can govern power wisely. By upholding the law before impunity becomes normalized. By ending wars before they consume generations. By tackling inequality before societies fracture. By accelerating climate action before tipping points are crossed. And by governing artificial intelligence before it governs us. This is the challenge before this General Assembly, the United Nations, and humanity itself. Excellencies, In the face of global catastrophe more than 80 years ago, the United Nations was created as an act of defiance. The defiance of people who refuse to surrender the future to fear. The defiance against the self-defeating notion that might makes right. The defiance of countries that know our futures are bound together. The defiance of hope.
Ladies and gentlemen. 14 years ago, I stood on this podium and I drew a red line. I vowed to prevent Iran's murderous dictatorship from developing atomic bombs, nuclear weapons aimed at destroying Israel, nuclear weapons that could threaten the entire world. That's exactly what we did. Now let me say something that might surprise you. Devastating Iran's nuclear facilities was hard. It was very hard to do. But for me, it was one of the easiest decisions I've ever had to make as prime minister, because if we hadn't done it, we'd all be dead. Now you want to hear the ultimate irony in defending itself? Israel is also defending many of the countries whose delegates just left this hall. In fact, I want you to know that many of their leaders even thank us privately for taking out Iran's nukes. It's hard to imagine more mind blowing hypocrisy, but that's exactly what it is. Now, this isn't the first time we are faced with a threat of annihilation. On June 5th, 1967 Israel was surrounded by enemies who openly swore to destroy us. We weren't then in Judea, Samaria, the heart of the historic homeland of the Jewish people. We weren't in Gaza. We weren't on the Golan Heights. Oh, and Mr. O'Hara, you should know, the Jews have been on the Golan Heights since the days of Moses. You can read it in the Bible. No. At that time, on the eve of the Six-Day war in 1967, we weren't in any of these places.
Ladies and gentlemen, as Secretary-General António Guterres nears the end of his mandate, we commend his efforts to reform and modernize the United Nations. The next Secretary-General will face a defining task: adapting the United Nations to a world of growing geopolitical rivalry and fragmentation. We expect her or him to carry forward the UN80 agenda and turn reforms into results. The success of UN reforms will be judged not by new structures or new language, but by whether the multilateral system can deliver, uphold international law, and make its rules matter. The future legitimacy of the United Nations will depend on it. Nowhere is this more important than in peace and security. The international community must become better at preventing crises, protecting civilians, and defending the rules it has agreed to uphold. The Czech Republic is ready to do its part. Let me reiterate that we are seeking a non-permanent seat in the United Nations Security Council for the period 2032-2033. If elected, we will contribute actively to its work and shoulder our share of responsibility. We will continue to help preventing and resolving conflicts through political engagement, humanitarian assistance, and practical cooperation. We will stand for the protection of civilians and critical infrastructure, and for accountability when international law is seriously violated.
We see this clearly in Ukraine. Russia's illegal war of choice could end tomorrow if Russia withdrew to its own territory and stopped trying to redraw borders by force. The vast majority of UN member states and the UN secretary general support calls for an immediate and comprehensive cease fire in Ukraine. It is the only basis for good faith talks aimed at a just and lasting peace in line with international law, including the UN charter. Ukraine has been offering this for a year now. Denmark's support to Ukraine will remain steadfast. This is not only a matter of helping Ukraine defend itself, it is a matter of defending the universal principles upon which this organization was built. Excellencies in Sudan, the war continues to inflict immense human suffering. Millions are displaced, famine has been confirmed, and the international community has been warned of mass atrocities over and over again, but has failed to act. The responsibility for this horrific war lies in the hands of the warring parties, yet it is fueled by outside actors and permitted by international inaction. We must act now to prevent further mass atrocities against the Sudanese people. We must put our political will and weight behind a stronger demand for peace and accountability. The warring parties must come to the negotiation table, engage in dialogue and agree to a much needed truce. Denmark's fully support the Quintet's efforts to advance a civilian led political process, and welcomes the improved coordination among mediators. Excellencies in Syria, the fall of the brutal Assad regime offers a historic opportunity to build a brighter future for all Syrians.
Honduras makes good on its promises. It honors its agreements and its treaties. These principles are neither selective nor biased. I visited Ukraine three months ago. There I saw a people defending its freedom and fighting for it, in full respect of its territorial integrity and its political independence. I saw a country protecting civilians and working to achieve a lasting peace. Security cannot be imposed by decree. It is something that is built with resources, with training, and with political resolve.
Where disputes can be resolved through dialogue, not force. Where international law protects the strong and the weak alike. That was the promise of the United Nations 81 years ago. It remains our responsibility today. It is not a Christmas wish for this year. We must stand by our principles, always. The world has changed. The threats have changed. But our fundamental purpose has not. And the fundamental purpose is to maintain international peace and security. That purpose is worth defending. And this organization is worth reforming so that this organization can deliver. Let us make the United Nations work for peace, for security, and for all of us. Thank you very much.
World leaders have pointed out that these are matters of survival. Excellencies, human rights, the third pillar of the organization, was another clear thread throughout the general debate. The test of our commitment to human rights is not when they are easy to defend. It is when defending them is difficult. We see the test wherever civilians are dehumanized, wherever minorities face hatred, wherever migrants and refugees are denied dignity, and wherever women and girls are excluded from education, employment and public life. It was clear from the debate that gender equality cannot remain peripheral to our agenda. They go to the heart of the principles we have gathered here to uphold and defend. Excellencies, the human rights agenda is also moving rapidly into the digital space. Rights must be protected online as they are offline. Member states were clear incendiary rhetoric and hate speech, the first step towards dehumanization and violence, are spreading rapidly and taking root across global societies, with hostile actors using automated tools to falsify narratives.
If we smile together, it is not because we have no problems, but because we are stronger than our problems. Ladies and gentlemen, for half a century , the Comorian state still striving for full sovereignty within its internationally recognised borders, remains under what it considers an illegal French occupation, despite the many relevant resolutions of this assembly. The Comorian side has always favored a peaceful settlement of this dispute, and has always believed that dialogue is the only alternative, and we have engaged in such a dialogue with France for two decades in an effort to reach a peaceful solution of this dispute, once described by former French President Francois Mitterrand as unpleasant. And we regret that this dialogue has not succeeded. On the contrary, France's unilateral actions, particularly in Africa, run counter to our expectations. We deeply regret attempts by some neighbouring brotherly and friendly countries, which have long defended the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Comoros, to establish relations with what we regard as an occupied part of our territory. We appeal to the solidarity that African countries have always demonstrated in defending sovereignty, and, in particular the territorial integrity of the Comoros. We strongly condemn initiatives of cooperation with the local authorities of Mayotte, as well as the recent statement by the French Prime Minister linking development assistance to the pursuit of migrants. Under General Assembly resolution 3385 of 12th November 1975 and 31/4 of the 21st November 1976 and Security Council Resolution 376, Comorians are at home in Mayotte. For the Comorian nation, sovereignty of the entire archipelago is not for sale. We therefore urge the French authorities to rethink their political narrative, to reconsider recently announced measures and productive cooperation and mutually beneficial partnership for both France and the Comoros.
For the first time in two centuries of independent life, Mexico is being governed by a woman. And this did not happen alone. Um, and she's not governing alone either. She, uh, has a cabinet with gender parity, a Congress with gender parity, and a reform that made substantive equality a constitutional mandate. And today, girls in Mexico grow up knowing that they can achieve anything they want to. The fifth action is the exercise of a foreign policy with sovereignty and independence. Mexico has shown that a country can cooperate closely and respectfully with its partners and at the same time fully uphold its sovereignty. This independence is also measured by how we protect Mexican citizens that live outside of our territory overseas. Mexico supports its diaspora, its community abroad, by defending their human rights wherever they are, always strictly respecting international law. This Mexican transformation is designed to benefit precisely those who historically have been left behind. Our policies are based on a very clear gender perspective, boosting the rights of women, prioritizing the poorest indigenous peoples, persons of African descent, persons with disabilities, children, infants, older persons and people of different sexual and gender identities.
Partnerships that deliver when they are needed, formed by the belief that in times of need we must act together. This is the choice to make. We can allow divisions to weaken the institutions we built together, or we can choose to strengthen them. We can allow differences in power to determine whose voice matters, or we can reaffirm the principles on which this organization was founded. For Cyprus, there is no such dilemma. We believe in a United Nations that protects the principle of its Charter and has the capacity to act upon them. We believe in a multilateral system in which every state has both rights and responsibilities. And we believe that small-sized states have a particular role to play, not on the margins of international affairs, but as active participants in shaping our common future. And for the Republic of Cyprus, that means defending the principles on which we depend, contributing to the institutions which we believe, building partnerships for the common good, taking initiatives to create useful synergies, and acting responsibly when we can affect change. Your Excellencies, despite the challenges because of the Turkish occupation, we remain resilient and steadfast in our faith in the multilateral system. Because in the end, the strength of multilateralism is measured by whether every member state believes that its voice matters, its rights are protected, and its contribution has value. That is how we restore trust.
But at the same time, they also carry risks of being misused for sinister purposes. Highly volatile present era urgently calls for strengthened UN, capable of handling challenges and crises facing humanity in conformity with the common interests of mankind. The most pressing issue to be addressed is none other than building the UN into a UN for all faithful to the purposes and principles enshrined in the charter, and fully guaranteed of impartiality and objectivity in the face of the arbitrary practices of the anti-peace forces that are abusing the UN as a tool for implementing their hegemonic strategy. The United Nations should no longer be misused for the sinister political purposes of specific forces. The United Nations should firmly secure its authority and future by promoting equality and cooperation among sovereign states. It's about time the UN undertook a reform. Not the reform, centered on specific countries, but the one aimed at democratization of the United Nations in the true sense of the word, so that the organization would represent the views and interests of the entire membership evenly and equally. Gone are the days when an individual member state unilaterally impose its will on the rest of the world and dominated the international political arena. Instead, multilateralism and multipolarization have emerged as an irresistible aspiration and trend of the times based on justice and equity. The DPRK will always be with the anti-imperialist, independent countries aspiring after the building of a just and peaceful world, and is committed to undertaking the historic mission of leading the movement for global independence under the uplifted banner of independence. Mr. president. This year marks the 35th year of the DPRK's entry into the UN. The DPRK joined the UN out of the desire to defend peace and security of the region and the world, and to achieve common prosperity of mankind together with the entire UN membership. To this end, we have remained faithful to the purposes and principles of the UN charter. As a UN member state, the DPRK government maintains its invariable stand to actively work towards the establishment of genuine international justice and a new fair international order in compliance with the UN charter and international law. In particular, I affirm that the DPRK government, led by the present Head of State of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, will direct positive efforts to promote international justice, co-prosperity, peace and security of the region and beyond while firmly defending her national sovereignty, security interests and the right development.
Mr. president, your theme for this session could hardly be more timely because today, trust is in short supply. Wars and conflicts are devastating communities and displacing millions. Geopolitical tensions are deepening. Climate change is destroying lives, livelihoods, and decades of development in a matter of hours. New technologies, including artificial intelligence, are offer extraordinary promise while presenting risks we have not yet fully understood. And at the very moment when collective action is most needed, confidence in multilateralism itself is being tested. Jamaica's position is clear. The shortcomings of multilateralism cannot be solved by abandoning multilateralism. For small states like ours, a rules based international order is not an abstract diplomatic preference. It is fundamental to our sovereignty, our security and our development. But neither can we safeguard multilateralism simply by defending it. We must reform it. We must make it more representative, more accountable, more efficient and more responsive to the needs and realities of the people it was created to serve. That is why Jamaica has chosen not merely to call for reform, but to help lead it. Our permanent representative was privileged to co-chair with New Zealand, the UN 80 initiative's informal ad hoc working Group on mandate implementation review. That work culminated in General Assembly Resolution 80/251, an important framework for improving how UN mandates are created, implemented and reviewed. Jamaica now continues that work alongside Norway. Our objective is straightforward a United Nations that spends less time sustaining process for its own sake and more time fulfilling its purpose. That is the multilateralism Jamaica believes in. Mr. president, the selection of the next Secretary General will be one of the most consequential decisions before Member states this year. Jamaica proudly joins our CARICOM family in supporting the candidacy of Her Excellency Carolyn Rodrigues-Birkett of the Cooperative Republic of Guyana. Her candidacy also speaks to something larger. Small states have long served the international system as bridge builders, consensus makers, and problem solvers. We learned very early that influence does not depend only on size or power. It can come from credibility, from dialogue, from principle and the capacity to bring people together.
We remain committed to the multilateral humanitarian system, as well as to all those who are providing assistance where it is most needed. The same level of responsibility applies to peace and security. Conflicts affect all human beings women, children, older persons, persons with disabilities, as well as people who are already vulnerable. Protecting civilians and defending human rights cannot take a back seat to other considerations.
The theme of this session, Restoring Trust, Managing Transformation: A United Nations that delivers for all, reflects the core of our responsibilities towards the common goal of this organization that was established after the horrors of the 20th century. They decided to rely on the strength of law and not that of the might. They decided to choose dialogue instead of confrontation. Our responsibility today is to maintain the scores, and we have to counter the selectivity in applying international law, especially when there is a systematic avoidance of collective commitments. Some countries do not want to uphold the same rules that they call on others to uphold. This leads to weakened collective cooperation mechanisms. We no longer can prevent conflicts or settle them. This danger extends to institutions that might falter and fail. Multilateralism is not limited to the interests and sovereignty of states. It is not an example of weakness. Instead, it is a necessity to ensure human dignity, bring peace, and confront challenges. Defending the United Nations is a defense of the right of all peoples to determine their future and participate in decision making. Those decisions that define their destiny. We want a more just United Nations. A United Nations capable of confronting the current challenges. After more than eight decades since the establishment of the UN, the Security Council reform has become a necessity to ensure a fair representation of Africa, including permanent and non-permanent membership.
Our fight for truth and justice will be seen through to the end. The objectives of our special military operation will be achieved and threats to our security will be eliminated. Peace will reign again. This will happen despite anything that might happen, including the inability of the current leadership of the UN to espouse the only correct position in this situation surrounding Ukraine. A position of defending the principles enshrined in the UN charter as a whole, in full, in their interrelated nature.
Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine is a flagrant violation of the United Nations Charter and a direct assault on the sovereignty and territorial integrity of a member state. Russia's occupation and attempted illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014 challenged the fundamental rule of our international order: territory cannot be acquired by force. As Mustafa Dzhemilev, the leader of Crimean Tatars, reminded us at yesterday's Crimea Platform Summit, the international response to Russia's aggression in 2014 was too little, too late. Russia was never effectively stopped. Its impunity began in Crimea. The full scale invasion of 2022 was the consequence. The Russian leadership chose this war. Russia is the aggressor. Ukraine is defending its people and its independence. For my country, for Slovenia, sovereignty and territorial integrity are fundamental to our own security. If a powerful state can seize its neighbors territory by force, every smaller state becomes less secure. The United Nations has documented torture and executions of Ukrainian prisoners of war by Russian forces, as well as grave abuses in occupied territory. Those responsible must face justice. Prisoners of war and civilian detainees must return home. Ukrainian children forcibly transferred or deported must return to their homes. Our goal must remain a just and lasting peace, based on the United Nations Charter and Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity. Ukraine must participate fully in decisions concerning its future. Any settlement must provide credible security guarantees against renewed aggression, and Slovenia will continue to support Ukraine on its European path. Ukraine's future belongs in the European Union. A permanent member of the Security Council of this organization, entrusted with the special responsibility for international peace, is waging a war of aggression against another member state. This is waging war against another member state, and Russia's permanent seat cannot place it above the charter. Its veto cannot erase aggression or responsibility for international crimes.
We need even more multilateralism and even more UN, a stronger UN in defending its principles, more effective in preventing and peacefully settling disputes, more representative in its decision making structures, and closer to the realities of the people. The world needs a UN that strengthens and re-establishes trust. A UN that listens without turning away from the concerns of those people that it serves, who decide without losing sight of those for whom it works and which promises, without forgetting that it needs to keep its promises. International trust cannot be restored just through speeches. It is established through the respect of shared rules. And here we're talking about international law. Unfortunately, we are seeing a worsening of geopolitical tensions and a worrisome return to war at the heart of international relations. Violations of international law and of the United Nations Charter are increasing in number. And the weakness of our responses are akin to a type of tolerance that we seem to be willing to accept. Given this situation, Togo would like to reaffirm its firm belief in international law is not an obstacle to power. It guarantees its legitimacy, its predictability, and its stability. It protects the most vulnerable states and also serves the lasting interests of the most powerful, by preventing uncontrolled clashes by shoring up exchanges, and by establishing trust. Togo thus defends a pragmatic type of multilateralism that transforms commitments into results that scaffolds power dynamics with shared rules and organizes the peaceful coexistence of interests. Mr. president, Togo supports efforts as part of the UN80 Initiative to improve the effectiveness, the coherence and the accountability of our organization.
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 20,000 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 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 Arria-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 in support of 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.
However, nor has humanity ever been so acutely aware of the need to make collective decisions about how these means should be used to serve the common good. This is why the theme of this 81st session, Restoring Trust, Managing transformation: A UN that delivers for all, resonates so strongly. The true challenge of our time is not just managing a succession of crises, but it is restoring our collective capacity to anticipate, to make decisions, to act before these crises become irreversible. Mr. President, Benin believes in multilateralism. We believe not because we harbour nostalgia for the world of 1945, but because in 2026, the world more than ever needs a forum where states can talk to one another, listen to one another and act in concert. Defending multilateralism also means taking a lucid look at the United Nations organization. Trust, indeed, is not something you can order. It takes shape when our organization can respond to the expectations of our people, the people it serves, when the organization can deliver concrete results. It is in this spirit that Benin supports the efforts undertaken within the framework of the UN80 Initiative. We need to achieve greater efficiency, coherence, transparency and responsibility. Nonetheless, we should remain cognizant of a key requirement. Reforming the UN doesn't simply mean cutting costs. What it should mean is boosting the organization's impact. A more effective United Nations should be better positioned to prevent conflicts, to respond to humanitarian crises, to shore up development, and anticipate the transformations which are already shaping our future. It should also remain true to the principles which underpin its legitimacy, universality, the sovereign equality of states, solidarity and respect for the UN charter. Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, there is one reform without which all the others will remain incomplete. The reform of the stewardship of international peace and security. The Security Council, for the most part, reflects a balance of forces in a world which is no longer today's world. Africa does not have a permanent seat. This situation raises issues of justice, equity and the legitimacy. It calls into question the very legitimacy of the entire multilateral system. Benin would like to reaffirm its unswerving support for the common African position set forth in the Ezulwini Consensus and the Sirte Declaration. We are not demanding a privilege. We are demanding for the stewardship of international peace and security, for that stewardship to be in keeping with the world we claim to serve.
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 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.
Africa must be listened to more. It must be better represented and more closely involved in the decisions that shape the future of our planet. This is what must build trust between Africa and other continents, as well as with international institutions. We no longer wish to see the Human Rights Council become a forum for oppressing countries that are deliberately singled out because they defend and fight for the interests of their peoples. We want to see this council working for justice and equity for all states, without distinction. International human rights law must apply without exception to all states of the world, both in its corrective function as well as in its regulatory function. The Human Rights Council cannot be instrumentalized by other countries to the detriment of others, given that all member states of the United Nations enjoy a status of sovereign equality. Burundi wishes to reiterate, once again, its opposition to the imposition of a special rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Burundi, who was appointed without any prior dialogue or consultation. Burundi is a responsible country that respects human rights. It has fought impunity for decades. It upholds the rights and freedoms of all and ensures security as well as the guarantee that crimes it has experienced in the past will not be repeated. Mr. President, Africa intends to be a full-fledged actor and not a mere observer called upon to applaud decisions in whose preparation it played no part. Africa is not seeking any privileges. It is demanding justice, equity, and representation. We, therefore, strongly reaffirm the need for reform of the United Nations Security Council in order to allow for permanent African representation and more equitable participation by the continent in the international community's decision-making mechanisms. In this regard, Burundi believes that discussions on reform must also address the financial viability of the United Nations system by strengthening the predictability, transparency, and sustainability of its financing. It would not be coherent to entrust the organization with ever greater responsibilities without guaranteeing it the resources necessary for their implementation. We, therefore, call on member states, particularly the wealthiest, to demonstrate responsibility and solidarity in order to preserve the organization's financial stability. President, Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, as part of this process of reform, strengthening, and consolidation of our organization, Burundi also wishes to contribute to the debate on the selection process for the next Secretary-General of the United Nations. In the current international context, marked by deep geopolitical divisions and growing challenges to multilateralism, this process must be conducted in a spirit of transparency, openness, and collective responsibility. Burundi believes that this process must be based above all on qualifications, experience, integrity, independence of judgment, diplomatic skill, and the ability to bring together the positions of all member states. We need a true bridge-builder, a leader capable of engaging in dialogue with all parties, of bringing positions closer together even when divergences appear unsurmountable, but also of showing firmness, courage, and independence when it comes to defending the principles of the United Nations Charter and ensuring that the collective interest prevails. Mr. President, Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, peace remains the primary condition for development. The African Union is deeply concerned by the persistence of conflicts and crises that continue to cause massive population displacement, destroy infrastructure, and deprive millions of children of their right to education and to a better future.
There's another doctrinal concern that I wish to raise just as honestly globalism. Allow me to begin by clarifying what I mean by that. I'm not talking about international trade or cooperation among states, nor am I talking about a humanity that shares common problems and responsibilities. All of those things are absolutely necessary. I'm talking about a concept according to which national sovereignty, distinct identities, traditions, and the values of peoples are obstacles that gradually give way to increasing political and cultural uniformity decided by supranational bodies. I don't share in that doctrine, which I consider perverse and harmful. For me, multilateralism isn't about dissolving nations, but rather about facilitating cooperation among them. Loving one's homeland is compatible with respecting others. Defending history, culture, values, and traditions doesn't mean disparaging those of another. International cooperation is richer when those who sit around this table know who they are, where they come from, and what the people in whose name they speak represent. Several of the questions that I've asked are not unfamiliar to this organization. The UN80 Initiative has placed on the table issues of duplication, fragmentation, administrative burden, and the way mandates function as part of an effort to make the United Nations more efficient and more effective. President, Secretary-General, heads of State and government. Excellencies. Acknowledging an institution's imperfections doesn't mean overlooking its value. On the contrary, it might be a way of strengthening it. It has never been my style to hide behind political correctness or to tell my interlocutors what I imagine they want to hear. I'm not looking to please anyone, but rather to set out the position of the Republic of Colombia respectfully, cordially and clearly. 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.
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, grain 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-General's reports 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 retaining trust in and the integrity of UN peacekeeping. I therefore 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 responding 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 earlier 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 it is 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 attacks 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.
I also commend the tireless efforts of Secretary General Antonio Guterres. Since he assumed the leadership of our organization amid the major divisions the world has experienced over the past decade, he has emerged as a voice of wisdom, consensus and pragmatism, defending tirelessly and courageously the United Nations system and international law as the two fundamental pillars for the maintenance of international peace and security. Mr. Guterres has remained a symbol of multilateral diplomacy and of international cooperation in overcoming the turmoil and obstacles facing our world today. Mr. president, the most apt description of our international reality is the one expressed by His Majesty King Mohammed the Sixth, may God assist him, when His Majesty said, and I quote, the world is changing at an unprecedented pace and certainties are steadily receding. This has led to a blurring of standards and concepts. Alliances have become open to question. International law is frequently violated. And its capacity to regulate international relations faces numerous challenges. End of quote from His Majesty the King. We are therefore facing a world whose fundamental features are the following. First, the escalation of acute and diverse international crises military, economic, energy related and environmental. Second, the spread of confrontational tendencies as a key determinant of relations between states. Third, the difficulty of predicting the outcome of crises. We know when they begin but not when they will end. Fourth, the diminishing capacity of existing regulatory structures to play the role in preventing and managing crises in this complex international context. Mr. president, I wish to focus on three areas to which the international community must accord priority. First, confronting non-state armed groups as a threat to international security and stability.
Finally, Mr. President, distinguished colleagues, for 81 years this institution has represented a bold conviction that despite our differences, nations can come together across common rules, responsibilities, and human dignity. That conviction is worth defending. But institutions cannot live indefinitely on those founding promises. They must be judged by what those promises produce. Saint Kitts and Nevis remains ready to do its part and to work with every nation here towards a more peaceful, sustainable, equitable, and humane world. Mr. President, trust is not something we can demand. It must be earned by promising less, delivering more, and letting the proof speak where our words once stood alone. Let this Assembly be remembered not for what was said here, but for what was done after.
Let me deal with the first point. The consistent compliance with international law. Consider UNCLOS, the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. In fact, UNCLOS is one of the great achievements of multilateral law making. It was concluded under the presidency of Professor Tommy Koh of Singapore, who called it the Constitution for the oceans. For over four decades, it has set out the legal framework for activities in all our oceans and seas. But the current war in the Persian Gulf has put us close to a severe stress test. The Strait of Hormuz is closed. We have to collectively reject this. Transit passage through straits used for international navigation is a right for all of us. It's not a privilege subject to fees and tolls. And this is customary international law, which means it is binding on all states whether or not they consider themselves parties to UNCLOS. How we deal with the Strait of Hormuz will have implications for navigational rights and freedom around the world. At stake is the legal architecture for freedom of navigation and overflight, and we cannot allow any single country to exercise a veto on these navigational rights and freedoms. Beyond the legal and political implications, the economic impact is also very stark. The Strait of Hormuz carried around a fifth of the world's oil supplies, as well as critical supplies for other industries everywhere. Its disruption has meant higher energy prices for all of us broken disrupted supply chains and stranded seafarers. And this is why shared rules like UNCLOS matter. Defending them is not just a matter of principle or debate. It is in our collective interests. The largest economies depend on the open sea lanes as much as the smallest. And we in Singapore hold ourselves to the same standard. The Strait of Singapore is less than two nautical miles at its narrowest and yet nearly a quarter of the world's seaborne trade passes through the Strait of Singapore. Singapore, Indonesia and Malaysia, the three littoral states of the Straits of Malacca and Singapore, have worked with other users of these straits to keep the straits open, secure and accessible to everyone for decades, including through the Cooperative Mechanism on the Safety of Navigation and Environmental Protection in the Straits of Malacca and Singapore. Madam President, excellencies, the second point is that we should and must reform existing institutions and processes where necessary. In fact, free trade is another success story of the post-war multilateralism.
He stood firm in defending our organization against attempts to undermine its foundations. He worked tirelessly to strengthen its role whenever efforts were made to diminish it, he devoted himself to keeping the voice of multilateral action strong whenever attempts were made to silence it. Today we meet at a crossroads. In many parts of the world, tensions are rising, conflicts are expanding, and crises are deepening. Meanwhile, trust among nations is declining. Isolationism and polarization are intensifying. Whereas selfishness and exclusion are prevailing at the expense of cooperation. Unilateral coercive measures are increasingly being imposed, and the logic of power is once again reasserting itself, eclipsing the virtues of dialogue and disregarding the benefits of consensus and understanding. In such a turbulent international context, the danger lies not only in the outbreak of wars, but also in the normalization and acceptance of war itself. It lies in the transformation of the exception into the rule, to a situation where the rules of international law become applicable at times and suspended at others, subject only to the dictates of power balances. What sort of international order can function properly when principles are selected according to the identity of those who violate them? What confidence can remain in international law when the aggressor is granted the right to self-defense, while the victim is required to justify even the right to survive? And what future await humanity if imposing fait accompli and once again becomes a tool for managing conflict or determining their outcome. This matter is not simply a temporary crisis facing the international system. Rather, it is a profound review of our collective conscience and our capacity to preserve and develop the order we established after two world wars, so that future generations would not suffer the scourge of war. Because we fail to learn the lessons of a not so distant history, and because we did not heed these lessons, and we did not transform them into measures that would protect us from the catastrophes of the past finally and in full. And because we built a system of international relations whose central purpose was to reject war. And to safeguard a lasting peace, but without providing the system with the means and instruments necessary to achieve an ambition of this size. For this reason, the theme that was chosen by the president of our General Assembly for this session, namely restoring trust and managing transformation: a United Nations delivering results for all, this theme not only reflects the challenges of our time, but also presents us with a fundamental question how do we restore confidence in an international system whose rules and institutions have lost credibility? Algeria believes that the starting point must be from the place where the will of the international community must be embodied, namely the United Nations itself, this very place and this very hall. Particularly reforming the United Nations system is no longer an institutional luxury, nor is it a choice that can be postponed indefinitely. It has become a necessity imposed by the profound transformations the world has undergone. It is imposed by the need for a more just international order, an international order that is more representative and more equitable. We cannot ask peoples to trust in multilateralism if its institutions continue to reflect the balances of a bygone era. We cannot speak of international justice without addressing the historical imbalances that still mar the structure of international decision making. Nor can we advocate for international peace and security while the system of international relations continues to favor war as a means of resolving dispute. Accordingly, Algeria calls for strengthening the role and the authority of the General Assembly. We call for a profound reform of the Security Council that would make it more representative, more equitable and more effective, and that would put an end to selectivity and double standards in the application of international law. In this regard, Algeria reaffirms its steadfast support for the common African position. We stress that correcting the historical injustice suffered by Africa requires permanent and fair African representation in the Security Council with full powers. If restoring trust begins with institutional reform, then it cannot be complete without doing justice to the peoples aspiring to self-determination and the realization of their national projects.
We believe in alliances, and above all, in nations. Argentina speaks from the experience of a country that knows its own mistakes. We know the cost of isolation. We know the cost of destroying a currency. We know the cost of turning the state into a permanent obstacle to human initiative. For a century, we tried almost every conceivable way of preventing our own greatness, and we survived. Not unscathed, but we survived. Perhaps that is why today we understand something that other nations may forget: decline is not destiny. It is the result of repeated decisions. And if a course can be chosen, it can also be changed. And that is what Argentina is trying to do. We have the energy that the world will need. We have food. We have critical minerals. We have human talent. We have the South Atlantic, and we are a natural gateway to Antarctica. And we have something that for far too long we lacked: the will to transform our potential into national power. We want an Argentina that is prosperous, influential, and powerful. Not to subjugate others, but to be free. Not to conquer others, but so that our destiny may be decided by Argentines themselves. That is why I say to the free men and women of the world, to scientists, entrepreneurs, and creators, to those who have dreamed of a land where they can make a new beginning: look south. There you will find a vast land of fertile fields, oil, minerals, and human talent. A land that has welcomed millions who crossed oceans in the hope that their children would live better lives than they had, and who built one of the most prosperous nations on Earth. We have a responsibility to live up to that legacy. We do not know exactly what the world now being born will look like, but we do know what kind of nation we want to be when it arrives: a free nation, a prosperous nation, a sovereign one, a nation capable of defending what is its own and open to the world. A nation unafraid, once again, to utter a word that for far too long seemed forbidden: greatness. No nation is guaranteed a place in history. It is built generation after generation, through work, through freedom, and through the determination of a people who refuse to accept that their best days are behind them. We believe that Argentina still has a great story ahead of it. And we have decided to go out and claim it. May God bless all peoples of the world. May God bless the Argentine Republic.
Dialogue is not the opposite of resolve. Diplomacy requires both. It also requires institutions capable of functioning. Defending the United Nations doesn't mean pretending that everything within it works well. The UN80 process is necessary, but there is a difference between reforming an organization and weakening it. We cannot ask more of it, steadily strip away its resources and then express surprise when it's not effective enough. Reform must preserve what gives the organization its purpose peace and security, human rights and development. It must also ensure better representation for every region of the world. And more than 80 years ago, ladies and gentlemen, Paul-Henri Spaak led the Belgian delegation to the San Francisco conference that gave birth to the United Nations. A few months later, he became the first president of this General Assembly. Belgium was emerging from war and occupation. That is precisely why multilateralism seemed the obvious choice to us. We are not here to preserve an institution for its own sake. We are here to preserve what it must make possible peace and security, human rights and prosperity for all. So, ladies and gentlemen, before we were presidents, ministers, ambassadors, or diplomats, we were all children. And despite all that sets them apart, the people we represent often want remarkably simple things to come home in the evening, to watch the children grow up and send them to school without fear, to work to love the person they love, to make plans for next year.
Whether in the Security Council or in the international financial system, institutions built for another age are being asked to govern a completely different world that we live in today. Restoring trust requires more than defending those institutions. It requires having the courage to reform them. This is not a conversation we are beginning today. For decades, member states have debated how to make the Security Council more representative, legitimate, and effective. In 2008, after years of discussion, this General Assembly moved Security Council reform into intergovernmental negotiations. Those negotiations began the following year. Seventeen years later, we are still negotiating. The central question remains before us: membership, the veto, regional representation, the size and working methods of the Security Council, and its relationship with this General Assembly. The world has not stood still while we have been debating these issues. In the Pact for the Future, member states agreed that redressing the historical injustice against Africa must be a priority in the Security Council reform. We should not accept that reform is impossible because it is difficult. This organization has changed its architecture before. In 1963, this General Assembly adopted amendments to enlarge the Security Council. The council grew from 11 members to 15 because member states recognized that the institution had to respond to a changing membership. What was possible then, ladies and gentlemen, is possible today. Reform must deliver equitable and permanent representation with all the prerogatives and privileges of permanent membership to Africa and other deserving regions. Political reform and financial reform are not separate projects. They ask the same fundamental question: whether the institutions that govern our common future will reflect the sovereign equality they proclaim or preserve inequalities inherited from another age. More than half a century ago, this General Assembly called for a new international economic order founded on sovereign equality, interdependence, and cooperation among states. We need not recreate the debates of another era. But we must ask the question they left unfinished: what does equality among nations require in the world of today? It requires a world in which no continent is permanently excluded from the highest decisions on peace and security. A world in which international law does not change with the identity of the state to which it is applied. A world in which a nation's prospects are not determined by how expensive the world has decided its capital to be. It requires that no child lose a classroom because debt service came first; that no mother finds an empty clinic because essential investment became unaffordable; and that the resources of developing countries became foundations for their prosperity rather than pathways for extraction.
But the real motivation of which lies elsewhere: in a covetousness for the significant resources that God has placed in our land. Niger's uranium, Mali and Burkina Faso's gold, lithium, gas, oil and so many other riches still make the former colonial powers salivate. They want to make us believe that we are incapable of governing, of governing ourselves, incapable of producing, of thinking, and of defending ourselves. They want to make us believe and convince us that we do not have the science, the intelligence, or the sovereignty needed to build something precious by and for ourselves, and that as a consequence, therefore, we should accept the tutelage of Emmanuel Macron's France and his allies. A France which very often acts through its local proxies, networks and complicity. For centuries they have instilled self-deprecation, fear and resignation. They continue to want to introduce permanent conflict in communities which since time immemorial, have been living in harmony in the same space and which have created peaceful mechanisms for settling disputes, such as joking kinship. For example, this perfidious attempt to destabilize the central Sahel conducted by France with the active complicity of Ukraine, is now documented, widely documented. This criminal enterprise has been dismissed, has been unmasked now that the military, political and media elites that justify it in the name of their own country's interests have themselves removed their veils and remove their masks. I say solemnly from this rostrum: the Sahel sees, the Sahel hears, the Sahel remembers, and the Sahel understands things very well. Our Sahel is determined to defend its liberty, its resources and its dignity at any cost. A people that has decided to be free cannot be recolonised through fear, through deceit, nor even through savage violence. Ladies and gentlemen, as I speak to you, on our northeastern border there are proxies led by that France, supported by Ukraine and two other countries. And you know which countries I'm alluding to. Those proxies are armed, managed and led, and they are about to attack our military positions and our oil installations. But inshallah, they will find what they deserve if they do so. The AES, the result of a long and historic struggle of our peoples against colonization and neocolonialism, is now an irreversible process towards our country's sovereignty. Make no mistake, the century that we are living in marks the end of old Hegemonies and the awakening of thus far suppressed forces. The AES is to Africa and its historic and contemporary diasporas as light is to darkness. It is for this human community that is present around the world, a source of hope and of dignity. And I say this before the world so that the world can understand: the AES is the result of a movement that dates from the dawn of time. It is a profound, lasting, irrepressible and irreversible change. Inshallah. A change which, by trimming the sharp claws of imperialism, abolishing the trade in black persons and slavery, overthrowing colonialism and neocolonialism, is bringing the peoples of Africa towards independence, sovereignty and liberty. I affirm that our Refoundation in Niger
We must earn their trust. It is not enough to tell them what is true. We must build institutions they can trust when the truth is uncomfortable for everyone. It is not enough to speak to them about values. We must show that those values have meaning and carry costs, even when defending them requires patience, political capital, or choosing the more difficult path. We are called upon to convince our societies that cooperation is better than isolation, that the rule of law is better than unilateral behaviour, that compromise is better than conflict, and that institutions are better than rule of sheer force.
Everyone is aware of it. Its name is Venezuela. Before coming to New York, I visited Caracas, despite the fact that the diplomatic relations between Paraguay and Venezuela have been suspended. My decision to visit the Caribbean country, therefore, surprised many, and many people have questioned, sometimes harshly, my decision. I therefore like to use this forum to say it loudly and clearly: I didn't go to Venezuela to legitimize a regime. I did not go there to legitimize or validate anything whatsoever. No, ladies and gentlemen, quite the opposite. Paraguay cherishes democracy, and we believe that the Venezuelan people also deserve democracy. The reason I went to Venezuela is because, for 25 years, South American leaders have issued fine, lyrical rhetoric, resounding statements, and countless slogans on Venezuela. For 25 years, we watched, we waited, and we condemned, from the comfort of this distance, without doing anything for the Venezuelan people. We watched. We talked. But we didn't act. We did nothing. In the meantime, our Venezuelan brothers and sisters suffered. That is why I went to Venezuela a few days ago, to take a second step following the first difficult but extremely important step that was represented by the fall of the dictator Maduro. Because Paraguay can play a useful role in the second step: Venezuela's transition towards a pluralistic democracy. Venezuela is now facing a new reality. Defending our values cannot mean standing indifferent to that reality. That is why Paraguay has opened a channel of dialogue with the Venezuelan authorities and is already taking action towards a Venezuela in which power resides with its one true sovereign, the Venezuelan people. Dialogue doesn't mean abandoning our principles or forgetting the past. It means having the courage to look ahead and to act. We cannot wait for the United States or some northern power to resolve our problems. We have to resolve them ourselves. Venezuela, what I want, is what my own country achieved after 35 years of dictatorship in 1989: a real, lasting democratic transition. I don't want a photo opportunity. I don't want a communiqué. I want, we want, a transition. With institutions, with security, with an economy, and with a people that are once again integrated into the international community and, in our region, integrated into Mercosur. Paraguayan leadership doesn't confuse dialogue with indifference. Dialogue, talking, is one way of standing with the Venezuelan people. It's also a way of jointly combating transnational crime, which knows no borders and which harms our entire region. Today I call on all my Latin American brothers and sisters, but also on these United Nations. Let us come together to help Venezuela, this beautiful country, to reintegrate into the world and achieve a democratic government that respects human rights. To borrow the words of the Latin poet Publius: I am human. Nothing human is alien to me. The suffering of the Venezuelan people is also the suffering of the Paraguayan people. It is the suffering of us all. And what applies to Venezuela applies, perhaps even more so, to Nicaragua, Cuba, and Haiti, countries that have lived for far too long in the darkness of authoritarianism, violence, and sorrow. Let us bring light to these sister nations. For where there are free elections, there is hope. But we mustn't stop at words. We must act. Let us do so.
True leadership requires both. Prudence, in this case, means not only knowing what we want; it also is about 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 where 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.
Solomon Islands therefore recognises the need for an inclusive and transparent international governance framework on AI. Mr. president, year after year, Pacific leaders have stood at this podium and urged the world to act on climate change. And yet, global action continues to fall short of what the science demands. For every passing COP, the impacts grow more severe. Our islands are being lost to the sea. Disasters are more frequent and more devastating. Food and water security is under threat and communities are being forced from their ancestral lands. Solomon Islands knows this reality firsthand. This year, Tropical Cyclone Maila, a category five storm, tore through our communities, destroying homes, schools, infrastructure and livelihoods. My government has just approved US$9.38 million for shelter recovery. That is money our essential services urgently need now diverted to deal with the impacts of this climate extreme. Like many Pacific Island countries, we are trapped in a relentless cycle of response, recovery and rebuilding. This is not sustainable, nor is it just. My people did the least to cause this crisis, yet they pay its earliest and heaviest price. That is the moral ledger that lies before this assembly. Last year, the International Court of Justice confirmed in its landmark advisory opinion that states have legal obligations to protect the climate system. Major emitters must make deep emission cuts and transition away from fossil fuels. Climate finance, including support for loss and damage, must be grant based and channelled through our national budget systems. Project based financing of climate action is unsustainable and out of step with the scale of a crisis we did the least to cause. Vulnerable countries should not have to choose between climate action and educating our children, caring for the sick or securing food and water. Yet that is the choice we face with every dollar we spend. We therefore call for the full capitalisation of the Pacific Resilience Facility, and an ambitious and timely third replenishment of the Green Climate Fund. Our region has long led on climate action, and we will continue to lead. The Pre-COP31 meeting, to be hosted in the Pacific by Australia in partnership with Fiji and Tuvalu, will bring the reality of climate change directly into the heart of the global process. I call on all parties and partners to come to that meeting and to COP31 with stronger commitments and concrete action. The communities on the frontline of the climate crisis deserve nothing less. Mr. president, Solomon Islands welcomes the convening of the second high level meeting on sea level rise and the adoption of the first political declaration on sea level rise. Every day our people are defending their coastlines, strengthening their resilience, protecting their food and water security and their cultural heritage, and, where there is no other choice, relocating. But we cannot do this alone. I call on this assembly to match the courage of our Pacific communities with collective international resolve to scale up adaptation and resilience finance, and to support communities facing climate mobility needs.
That's what I want to talk to you about this evening, how the world can come through the turbulence of today to reach towards something better in the decade ahead. Overcoming the forces of division and instability starts with national security. So we will keep investing in our defence, meeting our NATO commitments and strengthening European capabilities. We will be relentless in building up our hard power and deterrence. But we will not play Russia's game of trading escalatory rhetoric. Unlike Russia, we do not seek confrontation. Instead, we will be prepared, but not panicked, clear eyed but cool headed and unflinching in defending our people and our allies. True resilience depends on this military strength. But the last ten years tells us that it is also about something deeper as well. It is about the strength of the social fabric that binds us together. There is no national security without a strong, cohesive society underneath it. That's the starting point for everything we hold dear and everything we want to achieve.
These are the five key areas. I could have been more exhaustive in my comments, but I'll leave it there. This is what France will be defending across these five areas. My message is to stand firm. Do not yield to the situation which is developing. The world is slowly becoming more divided. The rhetoric of defeat that is giving way to empires, abusing their powers, threatening the sovereignty of some nations, abuse of power by some who are monopolizing productive capacity, those who are monopolizing the ability to make calculations, abuses of power by those who wish to concentrate wealth in their own hands. In the face of such abuses of power, we must go back to the very spirit of this organization, which is multilateralism, the defense of common interests, of justice for all, something that through unity, justice and cooperation is the way to take effective action, the way to restore just and lasting peace in all of our nations, a way to once again achieve unity between the North and the South. A way of crafting an agenda for taking proactive measures on technology, on the climate. We will not yield. Today, more than ever, we need the United Nations as we elect a new Secretary General. And I'd like to pay tribute to the efforts of António Guterres over all these years under such testing conditions. He never gave in. We must address old crises, tackle new challenges. Against this backdrop, we must continue taking action. Today, more than ever, we must be courageous in our optimism. We must mobilize to take useful steps not to yield for the benefit of each and every one of us.
