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.
During the pandemic, bodies under the auspices of this House put themselves before scientific evidence and the sovereignty of nations and promoted forced lockdown policies throughout the world that ruined jobs, that ruined the education of entire generations of children, and cost the lives of millions of people who died alone without basic medical care. Where some allege a public health policy error, we see a global experiment in social control disguised as science. And when a state wearing public health blinkers deprives its population of the right to work, to receive an education, and to bid farewell to their dead, this results in millions of unavoidable deaths, there is a word for it: genocide. That happens in many countries, including Argentina, which boasted of being the World Health Organization's star pupil. And that is why we decided to leave the World Health Organization. Added to that is something more subtle but equally damaging: the psychological terror instilled by the state. For years, citizens around the world were told that they should be afraid. Afraid of their neighbors, of the air they breathe, of leaving their homes. That fear wasn't a mere side effect. It was the chosen instrument of their government. The problem is that emergencies eventually pass. Fear passes.
And I thought it's a good idea to share with you my thoughts. Gunpowder changed the battlefield. Nuclear fission changed the meaning of human survival. Artificial intelligence is changing something even more intimate: who can enter the minds of a citizen, imitate a trusted voice, manufacture a reality calibrated to one person's fears, and do so millions and millions of times at once. Albania is not a developer of frontier models, but we are a nation that has already lived the future others are still debating, and I think a simple message is what we owe to all of you. The greatest immediate danger is not that artificial intelligence will stop obeying humanity. The greatest danger is that it will obey the wrong human beings perfectly. The challenge comes in three layers. What artificial intelligence does instead of us, what it does to us. And who gains the power to reach us? First, what it does instead of us. The public debate imagines machines that awaken, acquire ambitions and turn against their creators. But the systems confronting us today do not wake up with hatred in their hearts. They multiply ours. They have no ambition of their own. They serve the ambition of others. They carry no flag. But they can be deployed by a state. They tell no lie for their own benefit. But they can tell a billion lies on others behalf. The machine has no conscience. But it can borrow the reach of a government, the precision of a weapon and the intimacy of a friend. At the same time, the economic incentives surrounding artificial intelligence increasingly reward the replacement of human effort, rather than the enlargement of human capacity. Write the code so that I do not have to understand it. Draft the report so that I do not have to think through it. Make the judgment so that I do not have to assume responsibility for it. When success is measured only by how much work the machine removes from the human being, we may create more efficient institutions, but will have less capable people. A civilization that outsources effort may eventually outsource knowledge. A civilization that outsources knowledge may eventually outsource judgment, and the civilization that outsources judgment may discover that it also outsources responsibility. This is not inevitable. It is a choice. We can build artificial intelligence that teaches rather than merely answers, guides rather than commands, and strengthens the human being instead of making the human being dependent upon it. The question cannot be only how quickly did the machine complete the task? We must also ask, what did the human being learn? Who understood the decision? Who can challenge the decision and who answers for the decision when it is wrong? Albania became the first country to bring an artificial intelligence instrument into the architecture of government through Diella, our worldwide known artificial intelligence minister. We did not do this to transfer sovereignty from people to a machine. We did it to make public services more accessible, procedures more transparent, and the state more accountable. No machine possesses democratic legitimacy. No algorithm inherits constitutional responsibility. Behind every consequential public decision, there must remain a legal mandate, a human institution, and a name that can be called to give answers. The second layer is what artificial intelligence can do to us. Artificial intelligence inside an accountable state can reduce the distance between citizens and public services. Artificial intelligence outside accountability can eliminate the distance between a lie and the human mind. Albania experienced this directly. I am sure you must have followed or just known the so-called Flamingo Revolution, a fabricated narrative of an Israeli invasion of the Albanian coast, an invasion that never occurred, was manufactured, was personalized and delivered through voices, pages and channels citizens already trusted. One citizen received a story of national betrayal. Another received a story of religious provocation. Another received a conspiracy of foreign occupation. Different fabrications entered different emotional worlds, all serving the same strategic lie. The consequences were real. Citizens had their own reasons to protest. Don't take me wrong. But suddenly they started to protest also against a phantom enemy. Antisemitic tropes entered our public discourse for the first time ever. Don't forget, Albania is the only country in Europe that ended World War Two with more Jews than it started it. Fear became anger. Anger became mobilization and fabrication became political reality. And this is not and was not a laboratory experiment. I'm not talking to you about a science fiction movie. It was a Tuesday in Tirana, our capital city. The algorithm did not invent the objective. A human actor did.
12 people find themselves in a forest on an island. The guide who led them there is sitting among them, is dead, but they don't know it yet. They are waiting for him to return. They hear the wind, the sea, the voices around them. They know they are not alone, yet they can barely tell where the others are. At one point, one of the characters says, years and years we have been together and we have never seen each other. That line comes back to me when I look at our world. We too are together. We meet constantly. We exchange statements, messages and positions. At times we spend hours around the same tables and yet being in the same room doesn't mean that we understand one another. Do we still take the time to hear what others are telling us, to understand what they fear, what they need, and what the world looks like from where they stand? That, to me, is where diplomacy begins. Not when we agree, but when we no longer do. Diplomacy is not erasing disagreements, nor about abandoning our principles to secure consensus at any cost. It is about continuing to speak continuing to listen and finding ways to manage our differences without allowing them to lead to a breakdown in relations or to confrontation. In the play, one of the characters says something very simple let us try to draw a little closer. Maeterlinck wrote those words more than a century ago, yet they feel entirely relevant today. Drawing closer doesn't mean thinking alike. It means refusing to let distance turn into indifference, then mistrust, until eventually we stop speaking altogether. That risk is real today. It is one of the paradoxes of our time. We have never been more connected, yet we do not necessarily understand one another any better. Our economies, societies and technologies have become deeply interdependent, even as the temptation to turn inward returns with force. In other words, we depend on one another more than ever at the very moment when we are sometimes tempted to believe that we can do without one another. The more interdependent we become, the more we need common rules not to erase our differences, not to impose a single vision of the world, but to ensure that we can manage our disagreements without allowing the law of the strongest to become the only law that matters. In the play The Blind, the characters have lost the person who was meant to show them the way. We are not in the same position. No one will come and decide for us which direction to take, but that doesn't mean we can move forward without bearings. Faced with wars, humanitarian crisis, climate disruption, pandemics and technological upheaval, the question is ultimately quite simple do we still have a common compass? For Belgium, the answer is yes. That compass is the charter of the United Nations. It is international law, but the rule has value only if it continues to apply when respecting it becomes difficult. It is precisely when the law runs counter to a state's immediate interest that we discover whether it really matters. When a signature loses its value the moment it becomes binding, when a treaty holds only for as long as it suits the party that signed it, it is not merely a legal text that is weakened. It is trust in a promise made, and with it the security of all those who believed they could rely on that promise. That is why Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine concerns far more than two states.
Advance nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament without delay. And demand accountability without fear or favour. We must also reform the Security Council so that it reflects today’s world with the legitimacy and effectiveness that today’s challenges demand. The Security Council was designed in the aftermath of World War II. But the world has fundamentally changed since then. A change that is far from reflected in the Security Council. The most stunning example is Africa. When the UN was founded, most of Africa was still under colonial rule. Today, Africa still has no permanent representation on the Council. A 21st century Security Council without permanent African seats is unjust and indefensible.
And if there is one word that sums up much of our vocation as a country, that word would be peace. We do not view peace simply as an absence of war. We understand it as something that has to be constantly built. The possibility for people to live, to work, to educate their children, pursue their aspirations, and to look to the future without fear. Uruguay. With its virtues, but also, like every country with its darker times, has been a country that has sought to resolve its differences through institutions, through dialogue and through the quest for agreement. In this assembly, we reaffirm our enduring willingness to contribute to peacekeeping missions with a deep sense of responsibility and solidarity. Uruguayan men and women can bear witness to the value of this instrument in easing suffering and guaranteeing respect for the human lives of the most defenseless populations. You can continue to count on Uruguay here. We are not a country given to grand gestures We are a country of deeply held beliefs. And one of these beliefs is that peace building is never finished. We can't take it for granted. Every generation has the responsibility to build it anew They can't be peaceful some and another peace for others. No suffering matters more because it happens closer to home, and no lives are worth less because they were born in another country. When people suffer, humanity as a whole bears a responsibility. When a people is displaced, when a family loses its home, when young people can see no way out and their mental health is under threat. When a child grows up under the sound of gunfire, when millions of people live in poverty or without any opportunities, we can't stand indifferent to that, nor can we stand indifferent to the pain caused by a state of endless war. The fear and pain generated by organized crime, or the constant threat of terrorism, the repression born out of tyranny, or the suffering triggered by a rigid economic blockade such as that endured by the Cuban people. We don't believe that taking one side or another in a war, confrontation or dispute necessarily contributes to resolving it. Indeed, very often it only serves to further the divisions. We have a different commitment, that is, to seek paths towards understanding, to open spaces for dialogue, and to help to ensure that conflicts find a peaceful resolution. This doesn't mean indifference. It doesn't mean downplaying suffering. It doesn't mean overlooking responsibilities. It means understanding that peace demands something more difficult than merely taking sides. It means that we need to work so that that confrontation can be brought to an end as soon as possible. And to do that, we also have to recover something that at times seems to have been lost in international debate. Humility.
It is now ten years since Brexit. My country has lived through the disruption it brought, and it has given us a unique perspective that I want to share with you today. Britain is back. We are restoring our stability, building a more dynamic economy a nation that wants to trade with the world and work together to solve the shared problems we face. But we have also learned that we need to adapt to meet the challenge of these times. We need to rebalance power in our country and bring it closer to people. We need to work harder to fight the forces of division and instability which threaten us not just through hard power, but through softer, slower means that sow fear and despair. We need to do more to help people with the everyday cost of living, and seize the opportunities that give them hope for the future. And we need to embrace the incredible potential of technology to improve people's lives.
Facts have taught us that war is abhorrent, that peace is the only objective to pursue, and that we must stop watching from the sidelines, stop talking, and start acting. Paraguay comes before the community of nations with one non-negotiable conviction: the dignity of the human person must be at the heart of every decision. For this reason, we defend freedom, democracy, the sovereignty of states, respect for human rights, and the peaceful settlement of disputes. For this reason, we uphold human life from conception, and we recognize the family as the fundamental unit of our society. Because when human dignity is forgotten, humanity itself disappears. Human dignity, from conception until the end of life, is the foundation of our presence on this earth. There is an increasingly visible gap between the commitments we make and the results we achieve. And as that gap widens, trust erodes. People no longer believe us. And that trust will not be restored through mere statements or beautiful slogans. It will be restored by confronting problems without fear, proposing solutions, and delivering results. The first issue that I wish to address here is one that is in my own neighborhood in Latin America.
Excellencies, Heads of State and Government, distinguished delegations, ladies and gentlemen. There was a time in which, in my country, fear prevailed over the law. This was the experience of families that weren't going out at night, business owners who had to pay to be able to work, young people who were given weapons before they were given a diploma. We decided that this should not be the destiny of Ecuador, and we have acted with determination.
The true test of international cooperation is whether a child in a conflict-affected community can live without fear. A young person can find decent employment, a family can afford food, and a developing nation can access the finance required to build its future. Trust among nations has eroded on multiple fronts. Multilateral commitments have too often gone unmet, financing pledges have not yet been fulfilled, and developing countries face trillions of dollars in annual investment gaps to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. Furthermore, billions of people reside in countries where governments are forced to spend more on debt servicing than on healthcare or education. Restoring trust cannot be achieved through declarations alone. It requires that promises already made be honored, and that our institutions demonstrate the capacity and will have to respond to changing global realities. Since the Eswilwini Consensus was adopted in 2005, sadly, Africa still has no permanent seat on the UN Security Council.
These are all different fronts of a single, profound transformation. The world order that emerged after World War II is coming apart. It was an imperfect order. It did not prevent wars and justice or suffering. But today, the world balance has been disrupted, and history, which someone has declared has reached its final chapter, is once again moving at a galloping pace. But every race needs a finish line. Our task cannot be to stand and watch passively the fragmentation of our world, but it must be to build a new framework of rules, responsibility, and cooperation capable of governing change. Change that can happen only through political will, through dialogue among nations, through the awareness of peoples, and through the ability of multinational, multilateral institutions to rediscover a mission equal to the challenges of our time. The United Nations cannot simply record the divisions of today. It must have the ambition to imagine the future and recognize its limitations, overcome its paralysis, and reform its instruments without abandoning its deepest raison d'être: to be the place where conflict gives way to dialogue, confrontation to diplomacy, and fear to the search for shared solutions. The United Nations remains the most universal place for pursuing this aspiration, not because it's perfect, but because no other institution can bring together, around the same table, such different interests, cultures, religions, and visions of the world. It is precisely when the world is divided that the value of dialogue grows rather than diminishes.
While we discuss how to modernize institutions created in 1945, we're seeing the emergence of the most powerful technology that humankind has ever known, and no one's governing it. Artificial intelligence is not only a technical matter that we can delegate to experts, it is an ethical challenge, and it's a geopolitical issue. We reject the false dilemma between innovation and responsibility. We don't believe that going quicker is always better, and neither are we going to turn our back on opportunities as a result of fear. For our country, AI can amount to and mean growth of between 10% and 20%. As such, we are choosing the path that we call one of responsible pace. That means making progress as quickly as our ability to administer progress allows. We have regulations that make things possible that do not hamper progress. We have investment in talent and in energy, and we have rigorous assessments of everything that's happening. We want to lead from a position of knowledge and not fear. And I say this in this room for one reason. The United Nations must be able to bring humankind together to discuss a technology that will decide the fate of this century. Nothing can simply be resolved by an algorithm. Mr. president, allow me to go back to the beginning. The president that I talked about, that spoke here 74 years ago, spoke on behalf of his people and discarded ideological differences.
Excellencies, we are gathering in this hall of nations, countries, large and small, some insanely rich, too many shockingly poor, but all enjoying equal voting rights. Yet we know equality is an illusion. Some possess non-threatening antiquated guns, while few others have perfected their nuclear arsenals, now 100 times more destructive than the ones dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. As primitive as they were then, these experimental bombs incinerated two cities, almost all living beings in them. Those unfortunate ones who survived the blast died long, painful deaths. Russia, U.S., China, France, the U.K. —all members of the NPT— were joined by four countries not members of the NPT: Israel, India, Pakistan, North Korea. Yes, North Korea had a nuclear arsenal estimated to be around 100. And North Korean leaders seem to have learned lessons from Libya, Ukraine, and the ongoing Iran-Israel-Yes war. Dismantle your nuclear capabilities and you lose. The only deterrence you have against a nuclear power deciding to bomb you into submission. On June 30, 2019, President Trump traveled to DMZ in the Korean Peninsula. The mysterious Swiss educator leader of North Korea, half the age of the American president, walked halfway, and the two leaders engaged in an embrace that promised peace. This is what leaders do to advance peace: they show courage, audacity. President Trump, you did the right thing. Friends are friends. We cherish and embrace our friends, never ignoring them or excluding them from the table. But we talk to adversaries so that we don't become enemies. We talk to enemies to prevent wars, and perhaps we become partners in peace. Those countries amassing nuclear weapons keep us all living near imminent catastrophe. One day, any day, by accident, miscalculation, computer error, madness, or foolish strategic design, we could become the last human generation. All the while, the brandishing of these weapons reinforces adversity and fear, which create a high barrier to achieving rational cooperation necessary to fulfill our responsibility to future generations. Trillions of dollars are invested in perfecting forms of death. Instead, we invest in a fraction of these trillions in clean water: food, schools, clinics. No thought was given to the tens of millions of fellow human beings pushed back to extreme deprivation by COVID-19, Ukraine-Russia war, and as if innocent bystanders on the periphery had not suffered enough, we are presented with another catastrophe: the Iran war and disruption of vital waterways for trade. We know the madness of Iranian leaders seeking regional supremacy, pouring fuel into the fire of religious extremism in neighboring countries to destabilize wealthy, stable monarchies. Iranian leaders launch unwarranted attacks against neighbors, destroying civilian industries, infrastructure. Iran's rationale for these attacks is that those countries host American bases. So is Iran going to launch waves of drones and missiles against U.S. bases in Europe? Can we change course? Can we stop slipwalking into wider wars? My invitation to President Trump: be audacious, be unpredictable, be visionary. Invite all nuclear powers and all major conventional military powers and industries, without exception, to a summit somewhere, maybe a town in Portugal, to talk on no first strike. Enhance regular communication between leaders of the nuclear powers. Commitment on reduction of nuclear weapons toward total deactivation and destruction of nuclear arsenals over a decade. Be yourself, be President Trump, be audacious, be unpredictable. Do the unthinkable, and you will gain worldwide gratitude and respect. The humanitarian situation in Cuba is heartbreaking. We understand that the U.S. has provided $100 million in emergency humanitarian assistance to Cuba through CARITAS. In keeping with the U.S. humanitarian tradition, and toward creating an environment conducive to normal, long-term Cuba-U.S. relations, trade relations between Cuba and the U.S. and the rest of the world could be improved. Regarding the situation in Israeli-occupied territories: Gaza and West Bank.
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
Artificial intelligence will transform professions, industries, and the ways in which decisions are made. Energy will be governed by a new configuration and a new logic of operation. Climate change will affect economies, agriculture, cities and the movement of people. Demographic change will reshape labour markets and social protection systems. Security will no longer depend on armies and borders, but also on power grids, data centers, cables, satellites, algorithms and trust in the information we receive every day. And yet today, as we prepare for the future, millions of people are living through war or under the threat of war. More than 100 million people have been displaced by force, more than 270 million children and young people are not in the school. This is the paradox of our time. Humanity has never possessed such immense scientific and technological capabilities, and yet it has never been more evident that technological capability does not automatically produce political wisdom. That is why the real question before this assembly is not simply how we will manage the crisis of 2026. The real question is this: what kind of international order will we leave to the generation that is entering school today? For a small size country like mine, this is not an academic question. It is a question of survival. 33 years ago, since we become a part of the United Nations, the world looked very different. The Cold War had ended. There was hope that a new era was beginning, an era in which cooperation would gradually replace confrontation. Our region, however, was living through a very different reality. Yugoslavia was disintegrating in bloodshed. Wars were being fought just beyond our borders. The fear that the violence might spread was real. And yet my country chose peace. It chose stability. It was in those circumstances on our territory that the United Nations did something it had never done before. It established the first preventive peacekeeping mission in the history of the organization. That experience left a profound lesson in our national memory, a lesson to which I will return towards the end of my speech. Peace does not begin when war ends. Peace begins when politics is wise enough to prevent war from beginning. Perhaps that is why small countries sometimes see international politics differently. Great powers have room for strategic shifts that small sized states simply do not have. For a great power, a mistaken geopolitical calculation may mean a change of strategy. For a small sized country, the same mistake can mean a lost decade. That is why we cannot afford to be indifferent to the rules, nor can we afford to believe that the rules will defend themselves. The world taking shape before us is a world of sharper competition. Power is being redistributed.
Dear friends. Since this morning, we've heard a number of speeches from this rostrum about the state of the world, and I fear I will not be very original in my description. Every speaker has described the return of imperialism, of arrogance, the return of unrestrained force which knows no rules, a world in which we see power concentrated in the hands of the few, a world in which some believe that they can undermine the international order so as to push their borders outwards. Those that believe that people's sovereignty can be toppled over that they could use that sovereignty. People who believe that they can decide the fate of the planet, whether that be as regards the climate or AI. The question we must answer is very simple. The question is, do we want to live under this state of affairs with a return to the law of the jungle? Or do we want to live in a civilised international society? Our duty today, more than ever, is to hold firm here at the United Nations in order to make decisions to further our common interests so that people can choose their fate freely, their development model choose their future. To refuse their sovereignty being taken hostage by unjust forces, by fear. Therefore, the very raison d'etre of this organisation is to bring together free people on an equal footing. It is our charter that prevents the power wielded by some from making decisions for others. This is what compels us to work together to demonstrate our commitment and our capacity to act, and usefully so. You know just how committed France is to the United Nations and its ability to shoulder the responsibilities conferred upon it by the charter. I wish to reassert our commitment to take action hand in hand with each and every one of you, so as to revive multilateralism and to demonstrate that we are stronger, more effective, more capable of tackling common challenges if we do this together. Today's challenges, future challenges, ones we do not know about yet, challenges we haven't yet tackled. I talked about the climate. It also applies to war and peace, new technologies and development. Across all of these areas, wherever might is right is being imposed, we must defend justice and our common interests, and it is in the interests of each and every one of us as well, because our charter affords us the protection, the right to live together. Given the sorry state of the world, given what we're seeing today, and that is a growing number of wars we haven't solved, multiplying myriad crises and contemporary challenges which are weighing on new generations in new ways, I believe we are duty bound not to yield. And at the end of the day, the message I wish to convey to you today, as I've been doing over the last nine years, is a message of determination. Optimism through action. What I'm trying to tell you is that we will not yield to fatalism, to defeatism, which is very much in vogue according to this rhetoric. There's not much point coming here to deliver speeches. They say might is right. We can impose a different kind of peace. That is what they say.
The principles of the charter, therefore, therefore matter to all of us. Human suffering cannot wait for diplomacy to succeed. People in conflict need food, medicine and protection. Now, Hungary will continue to provide humanitarian aid to people in danger, especially the most vulnerable in the Middle East. We call for full respect for international humanitarian law and for aid to reach those who need it safely and without interruption. Israelis and Palestinians Palestinians must be able to live in security and dignity. A lasting peace must give their families reasons to believe that their children can grow up without the fear that has marked so many lives for people forced from their homes by war and or persecution. Protection May 1st mean finding safety in another country. Hungary's own history gives us reason to understand that need. At the same time, every state has the right to protect its borders. Hungary will do do so in accordance with international law. We will fight illegal migration and the criminal networks that profit from it by respecting human dignity and the protection given to refugees.
They also stand as judgments on the greater state policies that, through a joint criminal enterprise, sought to divide and destroy Bosnia and Herzegovina as an independent, sovereign, indivisible and internationally recognized state. Ladies and gentlemen, we live in a world of injustice, insecurity and intolerance. The strengthening of authoritarian populism, the aggression against Ukraine, the suffering in Gaza, the war in the Gulf region, the catastrophic situation in Sudan and other flashpoints have brought humanity into a profound crisis marked by great uncertainty and fear. We must not remain silent in the face of injustice. The world did not respond adequately to the aggression against Ukraine and genocide against Palestinians in Gaza, just as it did not during the aggression against Bosnia and Herzegovina. The aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine is a flagrant example of a violation of the UN charter and international law, while Gaza is humanity's greatest defeat in the 21st century. The greatest global crises are directly interconnected and have the same root: the erosion of international law. Disrespect for international law cannot lead the world towards prosperity and a better future.
And the same is true for every country represented in this hall. When one state believes it can redraw the borders of another by force, every border, on every continent, becomes negotiable. These principles now are being tested in Ukraine. Russia's war against Ukraine strikes at the very heart of the United Nations Charter. Borders changed by force. Territory sized by force. Children taken by force. Ukrainian civilians targeted by Russia. Schools, hospitals, homes, markets, energy infrastructure. Russia's attacks reach far beyond the battlefield. They are directed against the people of Ukraine and their foundations of daily lives. Drones are used to hunt civilians. Human lives are treated like targets in a safari. These are not policy disagreements. These are grave violations of international law. And where crimes are committed, there must be accountability. Let us not look away. Russia is a permanent member of the Security Council. With that comes a special responsibility for international peace and security. Instead, Russia is violating the very principles it is entrusted to uphold. Russia started this brutal war. Russia can end it. It can stop its attacks. It can withdraw its forces. It can leave Ukraine's sovereign territory. Latvia continues to call for an immediate and full ceasefire. Ukraine deserves just peace. Members of the United Nations, not every attack on the international order looks like war. Drones carrying explosives at airports. Drones crashing into homes. Airspace violated. Critical infrastructure damaged. Power stations suddenly in flames. Cyber attacks. We sometimes call them hybrid threats. But it sounds as innocent as hybrid cars. In reality, those threats to international peace and security are as dangerous as conventional wars. Guarding the eastern border of NATO and the European Union, Latvia faces these threats every day. Illegal migrants are deliberately exploited and pushed toward our border with Belarus. Cyber attacks target our critical networks. Acts of sabotage seek to create fear and instability in our societies. Russia's shadow fleet exploits legal gray zones and puts our security and environment at risk. Even in this very building, at the Security Council table, we have heard Russia spread blatant lies and make threats against Latvia and other free and democratic countries. Distinguished delegates, that brings us back to a fundamental question: what is the United Nations' role if its members are threatened and if its principles are violated?
In December 1953, Austria was still occupied while the superpowers were testing hydrogen bombs. And yet from this podium, Eisenhower named two things that did not yet exist negotiations to restore Austria's independence, and an international agency that would bring nuclear technology under international oversight to serve, as Eisenhower said, the need, rather than the fears of mankind. In 1955, Austria was free again. Two years later, the IAEA began its work and Vienna became its home.
It called for the peace dividend to secure freedoms from fear and want. The new majority government in Nepal, elected through the fairest and most peaceful elections in our history, this March has had to weather many international adversities since. When a poor farmer in Nepal went to sow her seeds in monsoon, fertilizers didn't reach her on time. When we wanted to pave a new highway, there was no bitumen.
Such a partnership requires a United Nations that evolves with the aspirations of the present and future generations. Institutions that adapt preserve their relevance, those that resist change, imperialism Nigeria remains optimistic because history shows that countries acting with common purpose and determination can overcome obstacles once considered insurmountable. Our generation has the privilege of shaping the future and the responsibility to answer for it Those who follow us will judge our courage in reforming outdated institutions, building cooperation across divisions, protecting the planet, and directing technology responsibly. Mr. president, excellencies, distinguished delegates Nigeria pledges cooperation over confrontation, dialogue over division, hope over fear and partnership over isolation. These choices must shape institutions that respond to the legitimate aspirations of all nations. Restoring trust requires us to honor our obligations to one another and to manage the challenges before us with justice, wisdom and compassion. The world looks to this assembly for leadership, and our debates must lead to action worthy of that expectation. Nigeria believes that the humanity we share is stronger than the divisions we have met, and that cooperation remains wiser than conflict. A reform, inclusive and effective United Nations is indispensable to the peaceful, just and sustainable world that future generations deserve. Whatever our differences, I repeat, whatever our differences, we must remember that humanity is our oldest citizenship and peace is the inheritance we owe every child.
We need institutions capable of dealing with issues that transcend national borders. We need multilateralism. But multilateralism will only retain its credibility if it is also able to evolve. Switzerland therefore supports efforts to reform the UN system as part of the UN80 initiative. This reform must make the UN more coherent, more effective and more results oriented, while respecting the powers and responsibilities of member states. The UN must focus its efforts where its action brings real added value: when problems transcend borders, when national or regional capacities are insufficient, or when a universal institution is needed to provide a common framework. The key question is therefore a simple one how can we ensure that the resources, expertise and energy invested in the multilateral system yield better results for those it is meant to serve? Because our institutions do not exist for their own sake, they exist for the people, for those who live in fear of conflict, for those who have lost their home following a disaster, for those seeking work or building a future for themselves, for the children whose lives depend on access to education and the new opportunities we are creating today. It is on this scale that the value of multilateralism is ultimately measured. Ladies and gentlemen, Your Excellencies, we cannot make the diverging interests of our countries disappear. We cannot erase disagreements, rivalries, or borders, nor can we remove all of the mountains that stand between us. But we can determine how we wish to tackle them. We can preserve open dialogue rather than erect more barriers. We can keep the channels of communication open rather than resign ourselves to silence. We can ensure that technological progress creates more opportunities rather than new divisions. And we can reform our institutions rather than accept their gradual demise. Switzerland will continue to play its part, using the means at its disposal by upholding international law, promoting dialogue, providing its good offices, supporting effective multilateral institutions, and by remaining a country where the world can continue to come together and engage. We do not claim to have all the answers, but our experience in the Alps has taught us one simple thing. While a mountain might separate us, it can just as easily be crossed. Crossing it brings people together. Coming together encourages dialogue, and dialogue fosters trust. Perhaps this is where our shared responsibility begins: to keep open the pathways that allow us, in spite of our differences, to continue moving forward, hand in hand.
Your excellencies, some things demand our immediate attention, others demand sustained attention. Injustice demands both. Jordan understands this all too well. We know what it means to live in a region where one crisis arrives before the last one has receded, and we know that we cannot choose between responding to the emergency before us and building the future beyond it. So we're doing both. We are strengthening connections from the Gulf to the Mediterranean as a hub for trade, industry and technology while responding to humanitarian crises. We are confronting terrorism in the region and beyond, while developing our own defenses and remaining a frontline against threats like narcotics. We are protecting Christianity in its communities and heritage, in its native and historic land, while promoting the true image of Islam against the voices of hate. And through it all, we will not abandon our commitment to a just peace. We will continue to support Palestinian resilience, we will continue supporting UNRWA, and we will continue to uphold the Hashemite Custodianship and historic and legal status quo at Muslim and Christian holy sites in Jerusalem. Most importantly, Jordan is striving to build a different model principled, open and steady at a time when certainty is rare and politics can shift by the day. A country the world can count on, true to our principles, true to our word, ready to talk to everyone and ready to work with anyone seeking peace. However, our bias towards diplomacy will never supersede our commitment to human values and should not be taken for granted or mistaken for weakness. My friends, whether in Gaza, Sudan, Ukraine, or anywhere people live with war, displacement and fear. Whether crisis began weeks ago or has endured for decades, our principles cannot change with the world's attention. Military force cannot deliver meaningful solutions. It cannot feed the hungry, return the displaced, or build peace, nor can it repair our planet, manage mass migration, or guide technological progress.
These organizations will do that with the full force of the law. But doing that is not enough. If at the same time, we do not tackle the challenge that is developing a better educational system. There need to be effective opportunities for learning for our children and young people. It's only through providing those that young people and adults can enter the labour markets. Instead of being recruited by criminal groups. Consequently, our second challenge will be that of making education a tool for social transformation and a tool for the prevention of violence and crime. The quality of education and the depth of learning enjoyed by our children and young people is a predictor of higher a higher quality of life, because such education makes it possible to develop higher income, better health habits, and that serves the cause of social mobility. On the other hand, we've noted that shortcomings and weak points in our education system combine with other factors to predict crime and indeed, fuel crime. With that in mind, my government has launched a wholesale reform of the Peruvian education system. This reform will strengthen educational infrastructure. It will increase the provision of digital learning and the provision of educational material. We will also bolster. The resources given to teachers to teach. At the heart of our reform will be the creation of a head teacher training school. The goal is to equip head teachers with the tools and skills they need to lead their schools independently, so that schools can become inspiring models that promote the participation of parents in this mission. That is, that of making every child as a citizen that stands in solidarity with others, respects them, and a citizen proud of their country. I must recognize that an ideological cultural agenda that is not in line with our reality and the imposition of it, has sowed confusion and disorder of such magnitude that today, teachers in our schools are not able to keep order in the classroom. They cannot discipline their classes because they cower under the threat of being reported. We need to re-establish the principle of respect for authority. We will make our classrooms safe spaces in which children go to learn and teachers go to teach without fear. This is our agenda. It is not that of anyone else being imposed. The role of a state is to withdraw unfair barriers, barriers that stymie people's development.
What has transpired in Gaza is genocide in every sense of the word and the stain of shame on the conscience of humanity as a whole. Future generations will be astonished by the enormous gap between the scale of the catastrophe and the level of the international response to stop it. Yet the catastrophe persists. And Israeli leaders have now begun to openly proclaim that the most appropriate solution is to displace the population, which they call migration. When the extent of global public revulsion at the practices of the Israeli occupation becomes evident, instead of looking in the mirror, they resort to hurling accusations indiscriminately in all directions, at times invoking accusations of anti-Semitism and at others resorting to conspiracy theories and accusing other powers and states of being responsible for creating their negative image. It's as though there were no means of communication, as though Israeli soldiers had not boasted, through both sound and visuals of their crimes, and as though images of the crimes against humanity committed in Gaza had not been circulated by an entire generation of young people across the world, East and west. From the very first day, the state of Qatar has done its utmost as a mediator to stem the bloodshed, to alleviate the suffering of civilians, and to release the prisoners and detainees until a cease fire was achieved. Today, we continue our efforts to consolidate it and to move towards lasting peace. As Palestinian factions agreed to arrangements for the collection of weapons as stipulated in the agreement, Israel, for its part must fully honour its commitments in their entirety: a definitive cessation of operations, withdrawal from the strip, lifting of the blockade and the unconditional delivery of humanitarian assistance. We fear that those who regard displacement as the solution will obstruct anything that could ease the lives of the population, because this would strengthen their resilience on their land. The international community bears a direct responsibility to press for implementation and to ensure that the agreement's implementation does not remain contingent upon the calculations of a party accustomed to reneging on its commitments whenever circumstances allow it to act with impunity on the ground. The continued persecution, apartheid and settler terrorism in the occupied West Bank, the desecration of Islamic and Christian holy sites, foremost among them the blessed Al-Aqsa mosque. Denying the Palestinian people their rights, most notably their inalienable rights to establish their independent state with East Jerusalem as its capital. All this remains an open wound. Israeli aggression, marked by arrogance and hubris, has expanded to encompass neighbouring countries affected the security of the region as a whole. Israel continues its blatant attacks against Syria and is occupying more Syrian territories and adding them to the Golan Heights, which it has occupied since 1967, without even bothering to provide any justification other than its own assessment of the nature of the political system that emerged there in Syria after the removal of the previous regime, as though it maintains tutelage over the countries of the region. It publicly declares that it is not bound by its understandings with Lebanon. It insists on continuing its occupation of Lebanese territories and seeks to assume a policing role there. Its destruction of entire villages in southern Lebanon in broad daylight is reminiscent of its history in Palestine. Dealing with Israel, putting an end to the harm it causes and restraining its unlawful conduct constitute the true test of the international community's seriousness in upholding values and the rule of law. The law must apply equally to all. When it binds the vulnerable but spares the powerful, it loses its meaning.
My dear colleagues, this evening I want to talk about the need for nations to work together on the new challenges that we face climate change, emerging technology and the breakdown of international rules. Eight decades ago, the citizens and leaders of our nations made a solemn promise to future generations. Having known the untold sorrow of two devastating global conflicts in their lifetimes, they vowed to work together to prevent another. The pioneers who built this institution from the ruins of war, proud Australians among them, were also coming to terms with two terrible truths the horrors of the Holocaust and the unprecedented horror of nuclear weapons. A depth of evil and a scale of destruction beyond imagining even a decade earlier. Yet rather than recoil from that reality, our leaders stood together to face it, learn from it, and most importantly, guard against its return. And instead of surrendering to fear or dealing in retribution, or abandoning their fate to a world governed by force alone, they came together to renew and affirm their faith in humanity, in the essential and equal dignity and worth of every individual, in the sovereignty of every nation and in the capacity and indeed the responsibility of all of us to give the Universal declaration of human rights, life and weight and real meaning by engaging in the dialogue that builds trust and deepens understanding and backing those words with actions. In this moment, we need to lean in and strengthen and modernise the fundamental parts of the UN system that help to build peace and promote economic development and sustainability, sovereignty, prosperity and peace are never guaranteed. They must be created, nurtured and protected by each generation, supporting the jobs, homes, schools and healthcare that represent the fullest expression of the UN's commitment to the economic and social advancement of all peoples. We know that the surest way to minimise the potential for conflict is to create the prosperity, opportunity and economic justice on which lasting peace depends. That means cooperating on the urgent challenges that confront each of our sovereign nations, and creating solutions that work for our citizens. This was the founding purpose of the United Nations. And for the leaders who have gathered here this week, this remains the test of our time. A test we can and we must pass. Whether it is climate change or artificial intelligence. There is always the temptation to say that our generation is being confronted by issues that our predecessors could not possibly have imagined while dealing with the world they would not recognise. But for all the transformation the past eight decades have brought, the fundamental, fundamental stakes haven't changed. And just as its values, our values, our ideals, our commitment to dialogue and cooperation proved equal to that task, then we can rise to meet these new challenges now. We can reaffirm our national sovereignty and our shared humanity. We can seize and share and shape the opportunities this moment holds in the interests of our citizens. But we can only do it together. From the very first days of this forum, Australia has always known that we understand that the UN mission cannot be entrusted solely to the great powers or the biggest countries, or even the loudest voices alone, nor can it be subcontracted to the world's richest companies, or dictated by the pace of technology. Then now and always, shaping a secure, peaceful and prosperous world is a task for all of us. And that world must be driven by the values and aspirations of all of us. We all have a part to play. And that is why Australia is seeking a non-permanent seat on the UN Security Council for 2029 2030. The world faces tough times and Australia wants to respond to partner and to make a difference. Should our Security Council bid prove successful. Our purpose and approach will be consistent with how we have always conducted ourselves at the UN. We will listen with respect. We will partner as equals. And we will protect what matters most. Mr. president, a safer world is one governed by rules, not by power and force alone. It is a world in which all countries have the freedom to decide their own future. And all countries have their decisions. Listen to. As a member of the UN Security Council, Australia will safeguard the rules that protect us all by upholding international law, including the UN charter and the sovereignty of all states. We will amplify the voices of small states and middle powers to ensure a wider range of perspectives shape the council's decisions. We will work to prevent crisis, resolve resolve conflicts and protect civilians through diplomacy, peace building and practical action. Our objective will be to support a more effective, representative and responsive UN that is equipped to address the fast growing challenges of today. Listening, partnering. Protecting colleagues. The world is changing rapidly. New issues are becoming international issues demanding our full attention. Climate change, where the science foretold of the increase in frequency and intensity of extreme weather events that we are now experiencing emerging technology, including artificial intelligence, which is evolving at a furious pace, and the breakdown of trust, civility and social cohesion, which is promoting conflict within and between countries. Clearly, the multilateral system we have all known and benefited from is under immense strain. To promote the peace, to create a world of human dignity, to do justice to the UN's mission, we must embrace change and we must embrace reform. Australia supports the rules and institutions that underpin open trade and connectivity. That order, based on agreed rules and institutions, faces massive disruption. This doesn't mean abandoning multilateralism, it means working to reform it.
We want to build a Bangladesh where young people can pursue their dreams without fear or hindrance, where women can lead their lives with confidence, where every child grows up with the opportunity to realise their full potential, and above all, where people are assured of a safe and peaceful life. That is why we say Bangladesh first. Bangladesh for all. I conclude my address by reaffirming Bangladesh's unwavering commitment to the values and principles of the United Nations in order to build a peaceful world.
Mr. president, Brazil does not underestimate the challenge represented by organized crime. We are ready to face the criminal organization that terrorize our local communities. Workers are robbed. Mothers lose their children. Police officers do not make it back home. People are tired of violence. But we will not. We will not outsource the responsibility of defending its borders and guaranteeing our population the right to live without fear. We do not need aircraft carriers guarding our waters. We need cooperation to block the flow of weapons and money that feeds crime, organized crime. That's the spirit of the proposal that I personally handed to the US president. We want to fight money laundering carried out by Brazilian criminals abroad. For a long time, Brazilian states acted each in their own way. Crime made the most of the lack of coordination. But this is changing in Manaus, a city of the Amazon state. We created the Amazon International Police Cooperation Center, bringing together public safety authorities from nine Amazon region countries. In 2025, we carried out the biggest operation against organized crime in Brazil's history. We broke records of drug seizures as well as unlawful assets and resources. We are facing all levels of crime, including the crime tycoons, the anti faction bill that we just have passed. Establish heavier sentences for organized crime than those carried by terrorism, organized crime and corruption. Walk hand in hand. The fight against corruption shall remain relentless. No matter who it hurts. No one is above the law. Ladies and gentlemen, the pillars of multilateralism are being eroded. The World Trade Organization is being kept on life support. When governments capsulate vis a vis those who use tariffs as weapons of coercion and blackmail, consequences are harmful. In the age of misinformation, obscurantists resist the evidence of science.
And I call that overarching purpose the patria milagro, the miracle nation. The first step is a basic one restoring security. For far too long, Colombians have had to live alongside situations that no society should accept as normal. A rural farmer having to ask permission from a terrorist group to work on his land, a shopkeeper having to hand over part of the fruits of his labor to extortionists, a mother increasingly gripped by fear every time their child goes out to play in the park. That is not, and it cannot become the norm. Consequently, from the very beginning of my government I gave the security forces one clear instruction to regain territorial control, to fully restore the state's authority and to confront the structures using terrorism. My government is determined to do away with euphemisms. Organizations that murder, that kidnap, that use explosives, that recruit children, and that deliberately resort to terror to subjugate a society are terrorist groups. That is what we call them, and we are facing up to them with the full, legitimate force of the state, within the Constitution and within the law But there is another reality that is very often overlooked. The illicit drugs produced in Colombia don't end up in Colombia. Drugs trafficking is a transnational criminal enterprise. Its routes cross borders. Its money moves through international financial systems, and its networks operate across numerous countries. I will do everything necessary to combat that scourge, but a transnational threat requires the international community to play its part as well. Security, while essential, is not enough. A territory that provides no opportunities remains vulnerable.
It must become an instrument for the future. We need a Security Council that reflects the geopolitical realities of the 21st century, not the power structures of 1945. A council that embraces the immoral, the emerging multipolarity of our world, including permanent representation from Africa and Latin America and the Caribbean Mr. president, if the United Nations is to remain humanity's best hope, then this is not the hour to retreat from multilateralism. This is the hour to reclaim and to renew it For it is. In times such as these, when wars rage across borders, when the shadow of existential threats falls across the future of human civilisation, when the old certainties are dissolving before our eyes that multilateralism must rise, multilateralism rests upon the proposition that our destinies are bound together, that the security of one, the security of one cannot be at the insecurity of another, and that in an interdependent world, cooperation is a necessity. And where there can be no enduring prosperity, when inequality deepens and no just international order, when rules are applied selectively. It is to that truth that this 81st session of the General Assembly must recommit itself. But recommitment cannot mean merely repeating the language of yesterday. The world has changed and multilateralism must change with it. We need a new and invigorated multilateralism, one equal to the turbulence of our age. Sufficiently courageous to confront its trials, sufficiently imaginative to navigate its transformations, and sufficiently principled to defend the rule of international law. To make the United Nations fit for purpose. We must make it more transparent, accountable, and responsive. We must strengthen the General Assembly and give great and give greater weight to its deliberative and representative authority. We must bring greater coherence to a system too often divided by institutional rivalries, bureaucratic silos, and competing mandates. We must ensure that the resources of the UN match the responsibilities we have entrusted to it. But institutions do not reform themselves. They require leadership capable of seeing beyond the present and imagining the institution the future demands. The United Nations needs leadership that can bring its different organs, agencies and programs into greater unity of purpose, leadership that can build bridges where division has become habitual. Leadership that can defend the principles of the charter without fear or favour. The United Nations needs its next general Secretary to work with all Member States to restore confidence in the organisation, mobilise its energies and turn the language of multilateralism from aspiration into action. The reform of the United Nations, the restoration of trust and the need to manage transformation, is therefore inseparable from the question of leadership, and the choice of its next secretary general will be, in no small measure, a choice about the kind of United Nations we wish to leave to the generations that follow. It is in this spirit that Guyana has put forward the candidature of Her Excellency Carolyn Rodrigues Burkitt. For the office of Secretary General of the United Nations. She has served her country, represented the developing world and work within the multilateral system with a deep understanding of both its promise and its imperfections. We believe that our experience, her convictions, her record of service, speak directly to the kind of leadership this moment demands. Her candidature, therefore, requires special significance. Amid the profound challenges confronting the United Nations and international order. We need leadership capable of restoring trust without compromising principles, of listening, without surrendering conviction of building bridges across the widening chasms between north and south, between large states and small, between the developed and developing world. We need a secretary general who will defend the charter not only when it is politically convenient, but precisely when its principles are under pressure. On a personal note, Mr. President, Carolyn Rodrigues Burkitt. Come from every experience. Her very upbringing crossed every struggle, every aspect of our accomplishment defined and broke barriers. An indigenous woman coming from a small indigenous village defying the odds. The odds against indigenous persons, the odds against women, the odds against poverty. Defining every challenge and rising to the top amidst those challenges Her character is built on struggle, sacrifice, commitment her accomplishments are crafted in her humanity. This is an individual of extreme qualities not because she is a Guyanese, not because she come from Guyana, but because I know personally and many of you know this too, the permanent representatives sitting here in New York, you know, her character knew who? You know her integrity. You know her will. You know her commitment. You know her love for humanity. You know her love for this world. And I know that this world will be a better place. With Caroline Rodrigues as the secretary general of the United Nations. In the humblest of ways, I call on the P5, the Security Council and every member and every member here to look beyond the small country that nominated her. Look beyond the small country that nominated her. Caricom as a body has endorsed her. And let us rise to the challenge of giving this indigenous woman the chance of helping us craft together the United Nations we want to see succeed. The responsibility for recommending the next Secretary general rests in the first instance with the Security Council, and we therefore respectfully place before its members the candidature of Caroline Rodrigues Burkitt, endorsed by the Caribbean community. We invite all to consider her candidacy on its merits and to judge whether her vision, experience, expertise and record can help restore confidence in the United Nations at this critical moment Mr. president, the United Nations was conceived in hope, and that hope remains alive in the pursuit of peace, security and human progress over the perpetuation of division and war. This is why we must not abandon multilateralism because it is imperfect. We must renew it because humanity still needs it. Let us therefore build a United Nations that does not merely reflect the world as it is, but help create the world as it ought to be. A world where law restrains power, cooperation overcomes division, and every human being can look to the future with hope. Ghana believes that the choice remains ours as to whether the divisions of our age will define the future, or whether nations can summon the will to build a more peaceful, secure and prosperous international order. The United Nations must be at the heart of that endeavour, not as an institution. Looking back at the world it was created to serve, but as one helping humanity shape the world that is yet to come. May God bless all of you. May God bless our humanity. May God guide us to peace and keep our world safe, our children safe, and give us all the worth, all to build nations that are prosperous.
Let us build together a world which dialogue is stronger than weapons, mutual respect is stronger than fear, and cooperation among nations delivers tangible results for all humanity. Thank you very much for your attention.
We also recognize the work carried out by your predecessor, Her Excellency Annalena Baerbock, in the service of this organization, whose contribution we greatly value. Mr. President, the topic chosen for this session—"Restoring Trust, Managing Transformation: A United Nation That Benefits All"— invites us to return to the opening words of the United Nations Charter: simple words, yet perhaps amongst the most powerful ever inscribed in an international treaty. We, the people, together, have the most comprehensive expression of our collective responsibility toward humanity. Eighty-one years ago, in the face of devastation caused by war, humanity chose cooperation over confrontation; the law of force and hope over fear. That promise has shaped generations; it has protected millions of lives in the whole world, and it gave voice to those that, during many times, remained on the margin of international decisions. Today, however, the promise that we face is one of the toughest tests, as we live in a world marked by protected worlds, growing geopolitical rivalities, persistent humanitarian crises, severe weather events, and other highly complex challenges in the world. At the same time, Your Excellency, the digital revolution, the demographic changes, and the organization of the value chains are transforming our economies every day and society at an unprecedented pace. Never has the world been so interconnected and, at the same time, so fragmented like today. And it is precisely in this context that the theme of this session takes on important significance:" Restoring Trust" requires consistency between the principles we proclaim as leaders and the decisions we make. It requires the fair application of international law and concrete results that translate into improvement in the lives of the people in the whole world. In short," restoring trust" means renewing the promise made eighty-one years ago. I repeat: we, the people. Mr. President, Mozambique knows from its own experience the value of multilateralism and the value of the United Nations, this organization. This organization has stood by our people at decisive moments of its history, on the path to our national independence as a people, in the pursuit and building of peace in Mozambique, and in the national reconstruction, in the responding to natural disasters, and in the promotion of sustainable development. Today, in the process of the national dialogue, thank you so much, UN. The trust of Mozambique is a result of a living memory of the Mozambican people. It is in this period that Mozambique would like to commend the leadership of the Secretary-General, António Guterres, whose tenure coincided with a period marked by enormous global challenges, and in which the limits of multilateralism were put to the test. He leaves behind a robust organization that is prepared to better respond to the challenges of our time. His legacy is, in our point of view, unquestionably positive and marked by transformative achievements of this organization. Thus, the best tribute we can pay to his legacy is to continue the work of strengthening this organization, because no generation is going to inherit the United Nations as a finished legacy.
(BRIEF PAUSE) Turning to human rights, we should acknowledge that these are central to the other two pillars: they can promote peace and security and advance sustainable development. And we recognize one of the most urgent assaults on human dignity today: hate speech that incites violence. It is a growing threat to regional and global peace, and it is on the rise. Hateful narratives are spreading like wildfire across borders and into homes at unprecedented speed and scale. They target women and girls, minorities, migrants, refugees and persons with disabilities, often for political gain. New and emerging technologies are used to amplify lies, manipulate public debate, spread hatred and give incitement to violence faster and farther than ever before. We must choose dialogue and tolerance and foster a culture in which human rights are respected not only in law, but in our daily interactions. And we must stop the cherry picking of those rights that fit our respective cultures or the politics of the day. Whether it is islamophobia, antisemitism, homophobia, or misogyny, it’s all the same... hatred, repackaged and relabelled. Let us use the tools of our age not to deepen fear, but to widen understanding and advance human dignity, for everyone, everywhere. (BRIEF PAUSE) My second point: making the United Nations fit for the future, which requires a more foundational approach to reform.
And we've done this always holding true to our principles, not even in the most difficult times, like the times being experienced by the Spanish city of Ceuta, where inequality, desperation, and disinformation has fed one of the most significant irregular migration crises in recent years. I know that in times like this, the temptation is to take shortcuts, to give in to fear, to turn migrants into the enemy, and to break the law. However, my country, Spain, will not do this. And a Spanish city like Ceuta won't do it either, because their citizens are showing that we can tackle a crisis without compromising on decency, upholding the law, and respecting human rights.
Mr. president of the General Assembly. Mr. Secretary general ladies and gentlemen, 12 years could be in politics. A mere temporal span, the length of a protracted crisis. But for a Yemeni child, 12 years are his entire childhood. An entire generation was born amid war, grew up amid hunger, fear and weapons. Learning the names of minds before learning the alphabet of life. Today, we do not ask the world to mourn every Yemeni child whose future has been stolen. Rather, we ask how many more children must be deprived of their future before the world stands resolutely with the Yemeni people in their struggle to restore their state and their stability? The people of Yemen. Yemen. This great nation, with its rich history, civilization, and human heritage, has been enduring for 12 years. The consequences of the coup carried out by the terrorist Houthi militia against the state and its institutions.
At the heart of human rights is a simple truth. Every human being has inherent dignity and is entitled to fundamental freedoms. From a Christian perspective, these freedoms are not gifts bestowed upon humanity by governments or institutions or powerful nations. They are God given rights inherent in every human life. And because this right belongs equally to every person we have a responsibility to respect and protect the rights of others, including those who may not look like us or speak like us, or worship like us, or believe what we believe. The strength of a nation, a government or an economy or a technology, or a religion should never be used to suppress the fundamental human rights of another human being. The might of military power must not suppress the weak. The might of economic power must not suppress the poor. The might of technology must not be used to diminish human dignity or freedom, and the might of a religious majority must never be used to suppress those who belong to religious minority. Human rights have the greatest meaning when they protect those with less power: minorities, the vulnerable communities, and individuals whose beliefs may differ from those of the majority. We must therefore learn to live together with mutual respect. We do not have to agree on everything. We do not have to share the same religion, same culture, same political system or worldview. But we must respect humanity and the fundamental freedoms of one another. Mr. president, this principle is especially important when we speak about religion. Papua New Guinea, for instance, is a Christian nation believing that Jesus Christ is our Lord, Savior and soon coming King. Christian principles profoundly have influenced our country, our communities, and our institutions. But let me make one point clear: our Christianity must and will never be an excuse to deny another human being the freedom of conscience. And we have embedded this the fathers of my Constitution, the fathers of my country's constitution. In 1975 in fact, are right from the foundation of our Constitution. Section 45 of our Constitution guarantees every person freedom of conscience, thought, and religion. And that practice or he that person can practice his or her beliefs and religion according to his own conscience or his own conscience. Our Constitution also protects people against being compelled to participate in religious observance, and against attempts to force religion or irreligion upon another person. Mr. president, faith that is forced is no longer faith. I believe freedom is a choice, a God given right, implanted in the conscience of every human beings. Our moral conscience comes from God. God does not compel worship. He calls worship through love, allowing every person to exercise the freedom of choice he has given them. True faith, therefore, cannot be imposed by force, fear, law, or persecution. A person must be free to believe. A person must be free to worship. A person must be free to change his or her belief. A person must be also free not to profess religion if he or her chooses. So. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights recognizes this principle in article 18 the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion. Mr. president, history teaches us what happens when government or institutions or majority use religion to suppress those who believe differently. Human beings have been persecuted, expelled, imprisoned, or killed because of their faith. Humanity must learn from this history. A Christian majority nation must protect people of other religions. A Muslim majority nation must protect people of other religions. A Hindu majority nation must protect people of other religions. A Buddhist majority nation must protect people of other religions. And every society must respect the rights of those who choose not to profess a religion. The size of a majority does not diminish the rights of a minority. The United States, for instance, this country where we stand on, where the Assembly meets, expressed the principle more than two centuries ago through its First Amendment, which prohibits laws respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. Government should neither impose faith upon its people nor prevent people from practicing their faith. Papua New Guinea supports this principle. We are proudly Christian, but the strength of our Christianity should not be demonstrated by suppressing other persons' beliefs. It should be demonstrated by having confidence in every human to allow their own exercise of free choice or free conscience. Humanity can be diverse in culture, religion, and thought.
I thank our partners, including Australia and the UN police, for their support. Solomon Islands looks forward to increasing its peacekeeping contribution in the coming year. Mr. president, leaving no one behind demands that we complete the unfinished work of decolonization. Solomon Islands reaffirms its long standing support for the right to self-determination of the Kanak people of New Caledonia and the Maohi Nui people of French Polynesia. The UN decolonization process must offer more than hope. It must provide practical pathways to the full emancipation of peoples in non-self-governing territories, and to their freedom to determine their own political future and development aspirations. In the same spirit, I turn to West Papua, whose people are our Melanesian brothers and sisters. Solomon Islands respects the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Republic of Indonesia, and we value our friendship with its government and people. Yet it is precisely because of that friendship that we speak with candor. Reports of human rights violations in West Papua have persisted for far too long. They must be independently verified, not left in dispute. We therefore renew the call of Pacific Islands Forum leaders for the Government of Indonesia to facilitate, without further delay, the long awaited visit of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights to West Papua. Such a visit is an act of confidence between friends and an affirmation that there is nothing to hide and there is nothing to fear from the light. Mr. president, in closing, the challenges of our time demand renewed solidarity, stronger multilateralism, and genuine commitment to the principles of the UN charter.
Islamophobia, which is spreading like a plague in the West, is at the forefront of these issues. In particular, Muslim women and girls have been subjected to greater discrimination in recent years. We regard the headscarf introduced in schools by certain countries as an attack on women's most fundamental rights. Rising xenophobia, cultural racism and anti-Semitism are also toxic trends that must be combated with determination. Global gender neutralization policies have also turned into a siege, targeting innocent children and targeting the institution of family. We can break the siege only by protecting the family consisting of women and men. Turkey will continue to take initiatives in protecting families and children, in spite of attacks from certain lobby groups. Another threat that undermines social peace is the spread of disinformation on social media. Standing up for the truth has become more important today than ever before. We are also facing the same risk with artificial intelligence AI, which is becoming increasingly difficult to control. It is long overdue now to establish a common international legal framework for AI. It is crucial to accelerate the work, which is already being carried out to draft and bring into force the UN International Convention on Artificial Intelligence. Distinguished delegates. The realities I have spoken of here today with an open heart will for sure upset some people, will for sure disrupt their comfort and unmask their lies. I also know well that they will resort to all kinds of perception management operations in an attempt to silence our voice. A late poet said the following quote. They think that if we remain silent, the issue will disappear. But even if we remain silent, history will not. Even if history remains silent the truth will not. They believe that if they get rid of us, the problem will be solved. Yet even if they get rid of us, they will not be able to escape the pangs of their own conscience. Even if they escape the pangs of their conscience. They will not be able to escape the pangs of history, even if they escape the pangs of history. They will not be able to escape the punishment of God. Unquote. As Tayyip Erdogan, as the president of a great nation guided by its conscience, its history, and its compassion. God willing, for as long as God grants me life, I shall continue from this podium here to defend the rights of the oppressed, the rights of the aggrieved and the voiceless. And I will continue to be their voice, to speak on their behalf and to fight for them. If necessary, we will endure hardship. If necessary, we will pay the price, but we will not remain silent in the face of injustice and will never consent to oppression. Now, when we look at the course of the world today, we can see that there are two paths before us. Either we will deepen uncertainty through fear, through conflict and isolation, or we will build the future together through justice, solidarity, and common will. Of course, it is easy to punch darkness.
We must equally reform the Secretariat to better support peacekeeping and the resolution of conflicts. We've been told that there are more conflicts today than at any time since the United Nations was established, and regrettably, these conflicts are in almost every corner of the planet. The Oslo Peace Institute reported that in 2025 last year. 245 000 individuals faced battle related deaths. That is almost Barbados's population. I'm told that this makes it the third most violent year in the post-Cold war era. My friends, the scale of human tragedy is mounting, and whether it is in Gaza or the West Bank or Lebanon, or Yemen or Sudan or Ukraine or elsewhere. Last Here we fared. That there was a risk of conflicts in the Middle East widening even further, and the conflicts continue. These fears, regrettably, have come to pass and with a global impact. Nevertheless. Indeed, conflicts are more protracted and more fragmented. And when coupled with hunger and unsustainable debt and a warming planet, it becomes a veritable hell for the citizens of those countries Increases in energy and transport costs and in interest rates have spurred inflation. It means that no one, even on the other side of the world, can escape the hardships in meeting their daily needs. The truth is, until there is a two state solution that respects the rights and territories of both the Israelis and Palestinians, we will continue to live on the edge in this world. And you may well ask, how have we gotten here? We need to address with laser like focus each and every one of these conflicts. Legitimacy demands that of us. And let us let the UN deliberately and systematically deploy nimble mediation teams led by political leaders, current and retired. On behalf of the Secretary General and enjoying the Secretary General's confidence and authority and the respect of Member States. This, my friends, will help lift the heavy weight necessary to end these multiple conflicts and to bring peace and dignity to those affected populations. We know that many hands make light work and we can't ignore it. These conflicts need to be supported by a quicker and technology enhanced observer force, capable of rapid deployment to monitor and support ceasefires and peace agreements to be given the resources. These peacekeeping forces must be given realistic mandates, predictable financing and true partnership. Let us work my friends together with the parties to these conflicts, to build dialogue and to bring opportunities for investment and jobs to the affected populations so that they too, can live properly. And as for the wider international legal order, we know that countries of every size and capacity depend on a system in which rules are made collectively and applied consistently and fairly But if we don't act early enough, we have trouble. And that is why we say that the UN must receive the resources and the resolve to act before the guns speak, and not after the guns start to fly. My friends, without an equitable rules based order, smaller states like mine will simply cease to exist in this world.
And it is not fake. It's actually amazing But we have to be careful. In fact, it is exactly the opposite of what it purports. From this point forward, all of United States documents and hopefully the world will be changed to use the much more accurate term super as opposed to artificial. So it's super intelligence. In other words, welcome to the new world of superintelligence dash SISI. Let's see if that goes. It sounds much better. It is much better, and it's much more accurate. Let's see if I have any power. Maybe I do and maybe I don't. We're going to find out pretty soon. Superintelligence. Every major new technology brings challenges, and superintelligence is no exception. Yet the very same people who said we'll all be dead in 12 years because of global warming, a name since reborn to climate change because the planet was cooling, not warming, and nobody was dead. These are the same people that are now saying that AI is going to kill us all, that robots are going to attack us, and that everything is going to be a total disaster. Same group of people. This is the group that came up with the Russia, Russia, Russia hoax, the Ukraine, Ukraine, Ukraine hoax, climate change, open borders, whoever wins AI, you have to remember this. And now I say, whoever wins s I, whoever wins, superintelligence wins. That's the group that wins. And we're leading now over China by a lot and everyone else. And we're going to keep it that way. We're going to keep it very, very straight and very strong. I'm not going to stifle growth of something that will be bigger than the industrial revolution, many say bigger than the Industrial Revolution or the internet itself. And we will be very careful. And that's why we have a Department of Justice that we've already used it having to do with this very subject and used it very powerfully. Everything worked out very well and very quickly. And other law enforcement bodies that will reign things in if we have to do that. But we will only encourage superintelligence. We're going to encourage it, not rein it in We're going to watch it closely through the Department of Justice. The United States leads the world in superintelligence and will continue to do so safely and responsibly. Americans have never been a nation that retreats from a frontier or shrinks from a challenge, no matter how great or how daunting that challenge may be. Freedom was not a gift that Americans won easily after 250 years, and it is not one that we will ever, ever, ever surrender. It was right here in New York City that George Washington ordered the Declaration of Independence read to his troops in 1776 as they listen to those immortal words for the first time, the patriots could see across the waters of New York Harbor to a British invasion fleet more than 100 ships strong, which had just arrived to crush the cause of liberty. Thousands of soldiers getting off those ships. Nobody stood a chance. But we won. And we won decisively. Those first Americans knew that it is not enough merely to believe in great principles. We must also have the will and the courage and the strength to defend them As we gather in this same city two and a half centuries later, to discuss the great events of our time. That is the challenge for every nation in this room. If we go forward, strong and united against the enemies of all humanity, if we reject the voices who would have us give in to fear and doubt, if we refuse to shrink from our duties to our people, then together, through bold action, we will make this world far safer and a far better place. We will leave our nations far stronger. We will grow our economies far bigger. And we will not just speak of peace, prosperity, and justice. Here at the United Nations. We will stand for them all over the world. Together, we will build a future for our people that is brighter, more hopeful, and more magnificent than ever before.
