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.
And how can we make cooperation a genuine partnership among nations, rather than a carving-up of spheres of influence? We, in the Arab and Islamic world, and on our African continent, do not approach this question as observers, for we live its consequences every day. That reality unfolds before us at every moment in Palestine, whose delegation, we regret, has not been able to participate with us in this session. There, the plight of the Palestinian people continues to worsen after decades of occupation, repression, and alteration of their identity, yet they remain steadfast in their adherence to their right to life and to self-determination. These are rights guaranteed without discrimination by international law and international humanitarian law. All of humanity yearns for international instruments and resolutions to move from texts and promises to a reality, and for the right of the Palestinian people to their state to be realized in accordance with international law. The continued undermining of these prospects for its establishment not only squanders opportunities for peace; it also drives the region toward a widening cycle of conflict, the spread of extremism, and a search for alternatives amid major expansionist projects that extend beyond occupied Palestine to Syria and Lebanon. Neither the Islamic and Christian holy sites, nor civilians, nor civilian infrastructure in Palestine have been spared the ravages of this conflict. Its repercussions have extended to the Arabian Gulf, most recently in the attack against the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. We affirm our full solidarity with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in safeguarding its security, its territorial integrity, its citizens, and its holy sites. We reject any targeting that threatens it or endangers Islamic holy sites. The security of the Kingdom and the Gulf, given their Arab and Islamic weight, is not a national matter, but it is a pillar of the security and stability of our region. The ongoing armed conflict in the Sudan, our brotherly neighbor, has made its people the victims of a devastating war for which they are paying a hefty price. In that war, interests and interventions collide, and its effects extend beyond the borders of Sudan, endangering the security and stability of the region and the unity of its states. The instability in the Sahel region represents an existential threat to the integrity of its states. That threat stems from the nexus of terrorism, organized crime, poverty, climate change, displacement, and migration, and from the widening of the cycle of armed conflict in the region.
Restoring trust, managing transformation is a fitting theme for this year's session. It reflects both the scale of the changes our world is undergoing and the need to navigate them peacefully. After the Second World War, a robust multilateral system based on rules and global cooperation was built, spanning security, human rights, and economic development. For decades, shifts in global power unfolded within this largely predictable framework. Power has always been unevenly distributed. Today, however, we are witnessing profound changes that are reshaping the post-war system. The task of the international order is not to resist these changes, but to manage them peacefully. Our shared ambition should be to draw inspiration from the founders of the United Nations. Our goal should be to prevent war and destruction, and to build a predictable international order capable of adapting to change while providing fairness and stability. This is precisely why we need forums like this: places where dialogue can prevail and diplomacy can work. This is why we need rules. Not because all states are equally powerful, but precisely because they are not. Rules have value only if they bind everyone, especially those powerful enough to break them. When rules are cast aside, raw power fills the vacuum. A world dominated by great power competition is a volatile world, less able to address the most pressing challenges of our time. It is a world where a single spark can ignite a fire. Instead, we should insist that with greater power comes greater responsibility. Responsibility in the use of force. Responsibility to exercise restraint. But also responsibility to use one's influence to prevent force from becoming necessary in the first place.
So we're calling for a process like the one that was initiated in the Pact for the Future, to achieve a common framework to measure progress beyond GDP, and for international financial institutions to incorporate these criteria in the multidimensional vulnerability index. Because what can't be measured and what isn't measured doesn't influence decisions, and what doesn't influence decisions does not receive attention. For a small island country, climate change is not an abstract matter, ladies and gentlemen. Our vulnerability is not a statistical category; it's the reality that we're experiencing, and that's why we welcome that this assembly has committed to adopting a declaration on sea level rise guaranteeing stability in maritime areas.
Where writing and law were born. And one of the founding members of the United Nations. I stand here to renew my country's commitment to the United Nations Charter and principles, and to present Iraq's vision for its future, its region, and the world at this critical juncture. Iraq, perhaps more than others. Has experienced wars and the damage they cause. We have lived through the conditions they create, along with the siege and terrorism imposed on us. Our people have paid a hefty price and lost the lives of their children, their resources and their development opportunities. Despite these difficulties that have made our country over several decades an arena of war and conflict. Today we are confidently presenting our vision for the future. Iraq aspires to exercise its influence and have an impact as an effective economic power in the region. And as a bridge for dialogue and cooperation among the peoples of the region.
Excellencies ladies and gentlemen. This summer, the Republic of Moldova turned 35. For much of that time, the world described us as a country caught between East and West, a place where others decided. I stand here as the new Prime Minister of a country that has decided. Small countries do not choose their geography or their size. But small does not mean powerless. Nations like people, are shaped by the choices they make, whom they trust, whom they elect, whom they call friends, and how they respond when things turn against them. For a long time, others made many of those choices for us. Soviet authorities deported our families to Siberia, forced our Romanian language into another alphabet, and told us it had another name. After independence, Moscow used gas and trade restrictions as leverage over our country. Step by step, we began choosing for ourselves. Romanian is again written in Latin and spoken freely. Governments change peacefully at the ballot box and when our democracy was threatened, Moldovans have defended it through elections and civic action. We also reduced Russia's economic leverage on us. We diversified our gas purchases. In just five years, renewables grew from nothing to around 30% of our energy supply. Our electricity system is increasingly integrated with Romania and the European grid, and our companies sell on some of the most demanding markets in Europe and the world. But the Kremlin kept trying. Moldova faced illicit financing, disinformation, cyber attacks and vote buying. Russia spent the equivalent of nearly 2% of our GDP trying to influence last year's elections. Moldovans answered that their home is not for sale. Each of these choices carried a cost, but each taught us the same lesson. We cannot control everything around us, but what we do still matters. That is the source of our optimism. Our future remains in our hands, and nowhere is that choice clearer today than in our European path.
A United Nations that delivers for all captures, at least in part, the moment in which we find ourselves. I agree that we need to restore trust in the United Nations, but I am less certain about the extent to which we can manage a transformation that has, in many respects, already taken place. The international system, as we knew it, has collapsed; it no longer exists. Today we are witnessing the emergence of a new order, increasingly structured around two principal centers of power, alongside a growing number of strong regional actors with considerable political, economic, military, and technological capabilities, seeking to shape their own environments and influence broader global developments on their own terms.
Mr. President, Excellencies, Ladies and gentlemen, The faultlines in our world are widening. Cracks have become canyons. Over the last decade, wars erupted with devastating consequences and dragged on with despicable cruelty. Civilians were targeted. Human rights trampled. Hunger weaponized. Humanitarians killed. International law cast aside. Geopolitical divides have deepened. Inequalities have intensified. Trust has frayed. The climate crisis went from distant warning to daily reality. And artificial intelligence moved at a speed that has blindsided even those who created it. These are not separate crises. They are chapters of the same story. The story of power. Who has it. Who is denied it. How it is used. And how it is changing. Excellencies, Power is being reshaped in three fundamental ways. First, among States. New centres of economic, political and technological influence have emerged. Second, we are witnessing an extraordinary transfer of power away from governments to a handful of private corporations and individuals. Their reach now extends across politics, economies, information flows, technological development, and the civic space on which societies depend. And, third, humans are increasingly handing over power to machines – with Artificial Intelligence agents going rogue, and lethal autonomous weapons going from science fiction to military reality. Yet our institutions and systems of global governance continue to reflect the power realities and interests of a largely bygone age. That is the defining challenge before us. At the very moment when humanity faces an unprecedented convergence of threats, our mechanisms for collective action are under growing strain. Excellencies, We are clearly moving towards a multipolar world. And that movement is irreversible. But there are different ways that multipolarity can take shape. One possibility is a world of fragmentation and transactionalism. A world of rising tensions and deepening mistrust. Of fractured markets and weakened institutions. Of shrinking cooperation and zero-sum calculations. In many respects, that is the trajectory we are on today. But there is another path. A path towards networked multipolarity. A world built on interdependence – and sustained by a dense web of economic, political, social and technological connections. A world in which multiple centres of influence coexist within a common framework of international law and shared rules. Such a world can help us avoid hegemonic tendencies and what I have called the Great Fracture: The division of the world into two rival blocs with separate economic, technological and security systems. A networked world recognizes that no power can solve today’s challenges alone. Of course, competition will remain a permanent feature of international relations. But competition does not have to mean confrontation. Healthy competition can drive innovation, strengthen resilience, and expand opportunity. But only when it operates within frameworks that preserve stability and enable cooperation where cooperation is indispensable. Building a networked future begins with a recognition, especially by superpowers: That their power isn’t so super. That their power has limits. The events of recent years have made that unmistakably clear. Military power alone cannot secure peace. Economic power alone cannot command stability. And technological power alone cannot guarantee security. A networked multipolar world can create the conditions for more balanced and representative global problem-solving. But it requires a multilateral system centred in the UN that is balanced and representative. Strong, effective institutions that reflect the realities and the progressively changing relative weight of countries and economies in today’s world – not the power arrangements of 80 years ago. Fortunately, we are not starting from scratch. We already have a binding foundation: The Charter of the United Nations. And the principles that give it life. The primacy of international law. Upholding human dignity. And the pursuit of justice in all its dimensions. These are the backbone for the effective, legitimate and responsible exercise of power in the 21st century. Excellencies, It comes down to this: Will we act to ensure that power is governed by law or by force? By cooperation or coercion? By responsibility to young people and future generations or indifference to their fate? Because the defining challenges of our age are not separate from the question of power. They are expressions of it. And they will determine whether we drift deeper into division and instability – or move toward cooperation, justice and collective security. Looking ahead, our future will be shaped by how we address four great tests of power: The power over war and peace. The power that concentrates wealth and drives inequality.
And finally, we hope that the Iranian people can, in the future live in peace, security and as free men and women. Excellencies, the United Nations need an ambitious and leader that is firmly committed to the principles of its charter and respect of international law, as is currently being demonstrated by Antonio Guterres here, I would like to pay tribute to the Secretary General. His clear efforts in favor of respect of the United Nations Charter, the defense of human rights, reforming the global financial architecture, sustainable development and decisive action in the face of climate change have all been a true beacon, lighting our path, guiding our collective commitment. Thank you very much Antonio Guterres, the next secretary general. The next secretary general must continue to fully mobilize all of the tools available to them to be able to prevent conflict and mediate crises and build peace, particularly emphasizing the Middle East, Sudan and Ukraine. This commitment will depend on the robustness of the multilateral system tomorrow. Ladies and gentlemen. A more robust multilateral system also calls for stronger partnerships The EU doesn't purport to impose a model or influence.
Thirty-seven years ago, the Maldives asked this Assembly to face a simple truth: that “Small States can be highly vulnerable to external threats and acts of influence.” In response, this Assembly adopted resolution 44/51, an initiative led by the Maldives, affirming the importance of protecting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of small States. That was true then, and it is true even today. But the threats have evolved. Insecurity now travels through sea lanes, supply chains, financial markets, digital networks and new technologies. Today, sovereignty can be weakened without a single border being crossed. It can be undermined when external powers limit a State’s freedom to choose. This is why the Maldives comes before this Assembly with a clear message: “Every State, large or small, must have the freedom and capacity to shape its own future.” A sovereign future. And that future begins with peace.
At the same time, criticism of government policy must never become a cover for anti-Semitism. If civilian lives are equal, our attention should be guided by the scale, duration and severity of suffering, Not primarily by geography, political alliances, media visibility or political influence. These principles must also guide our approach to Belarus. We condemn the authorities systemic repression arbitrary detention and persecution of political opponents, human rights defenders and independent voices.
At that time, it was a historical achievement for the Angolan people, who waited more than 12 months from the date of proclamation of the national independence for the country to be accepted as a full fledged member of the international community. That event of great significance for the history of my country took place in a global context in which Angola became a victim of confrontation between world powers in the struggle for control of sphere of influence within the spirit of Cold War. Our entire journey towards the attainment of peace in 2002 was closely linked to the spirit of that period, which hampered the fulfillment of the dreams of Angolans and their plans to building a prosperous nation committed to its own development. These facts belong to the past, but have left us with a wealth of experience and lessons that we have drawn upon to build peace, understanding and reconciliation among all Angolans, and to chart the course of our foreign policy. Peace and national reconciliation is now a reality as shown through concrete gestures, including the holding of award ceremonies to honor the main political leaders of national liberation struggle and representatives of all segments of civil society, within the framework of the 50th anniversary of national independence. Still, within this framework, a monument in memory of all victims of the political conflict that occurred in Angola, from the proclamation of national independence until achievement of Peace in April 2002 will be inaugurated in October this year. Mr. president, excellencies, nowadays we are witnessing a downgrading and violation of the rules governing international relations with the logic of force, intimidation and imposition of values stemming from unilateral vision by certain countries in defense of their exclusive interests.
it did not make. The promise of our generation was made 81 years ago with the founding of this United Nations from the ashes of the worst war in human history. Its ideals have proven its worth. No nation is too small to be sovereign, no people too poor to be equal. And the strong should be bound by the same law as the weak. Sad to say, United Nations has drifted from its promise. The Bahamas comes today to insist on it. Mr. president, all week we've been told this is an age of uncertainty. With respect, I do not agree. Uncertainty is the language of those who have already decided and do not wish to say so. Treaties are being torn up, institutions are being starved, rules are giving way to deals, and the benefits of the deals go to whoever holds the most leverage. Once again, we hear the language of spheres of influence, of backyards and hemispheres. For 500 years, the Caribbean was somebody's backyard. We did not win our freedom to once again become somebody's backyard. The message to small nations is very clear be as sovereign as we allow you to be. Mr. President, a sovereignty that must ask permission is not sovereignty. It is a lease. Our ancestors did not break their chains so that their children could become tenants. These are not uncertain times. These times are very certain. The only uncertain thing is how we respond to the opportunities and challenges of this time. People often say that the world lacks political will. I do not agree. The world has never lacked political will. In 2008, when the banks of the richest nations were failing, trillions of dollars were found in a matter of weeks. When a global pandemic reached the capitals of the powerful, the political will returned. The will exists. It is simply pointed elsewhere. Somewhere, a bank is always too big to fail. Similarly, a nation should never be too small to be left behind. What the world lacks is not political will for change. It is political change itself. A change in who writes the rules. A change in whose suffering counts. A change in who decides and who pays. Political will is a feeling. Political change is a decision about who holds the power. And Mr. President, that is what I have come to speak about today. Power. 2500 years ago, the envoys of Athens stood before the small island of Milos and told his people a simple truth about power. The strong will do what they can. The weak will suffer what they must. 81 years ago in San Francisco, humanity wrote a different law: the sovereign equality of nations, not equality of size or wealth, equality of standing. The United Nations was the world's answer to Milos. But in 1945, nearly 1 in 3 people on earth still lived under colonial rule. The people of my islands were among them. The Bahamas was not in that room, but we were on the map. Then came political change for us. Not granted from above, demanded from below. And so on the 18th of September 1973, the Bahamas took its seat in this assembly. Then in 1985, Commonwealth leaders met in my own capital and agreed the Nassau Accord against apartheid. We were told pressure would never work. Less than five years later, Nelson Mandela walked free. 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
This is what we expect from a statesman, Yasser Arafat and Zaki Rabin were statesmen. They challenged the past to envision a future of peace. They were defeated by hatred. Generations of Palestinians will carry the pain and trauma left by the genocide of women and children perpetrated. By Netanyahu. Government in Gaza. Israeli civilians pay the price for radicalism and intolerance of Hamas terrorist acts, persecuting the International Criminal Court and its members encourages these crimes to go unpunished. The U.N. special rapporteur, Francesca Albanese, must not be silenced for telling the truth. Illegal settlements in the West Bank. Are making the two state solution increasingly unviable, essential for Israelis and Palestinians to live in safety, threatening civilizations with extinction will not bring stability to the Middle East. The Strait of Hormuz became has become a battleground, when it should have remained a vital passage for international trade Families around the world are paying for the rising. The price of fuel, fertilizers and food. The war between Russia and Ukraine has dragged on for five years in a humanitarian drama that continues to claim lives. We all know that there will be no winners on the battlefield. Diplomacy is the only option. Initiatives such as the Friends of Peace Group, created by Brazil and China, revealed that there are forces in the international community willing to work towards dialogue in Latin America and the Caribbean region. Geographical proximity to the world's greatest military power is inescapable, especially in the context of renewed hegemonic temptations. Brazil does not fit in anyone's backyard. We need partners with a positive agenda that fosters development. Ideological differences should not hinder higher integration amongst neighbors. The countries in the region have experienced the horrors of authoritarian regimes. We have come a long way to restore popular will. Democracy is once again under threat. We witness once more interference in the electoral processes, dividing the world into zones of influence and neocolonial incursions for strategic resources are anachronistic gestures. The Venezuelan people deserve to define their own destiny. Nicaragua will not solve its problems by preventing the opposition from running in the elections. The crisis in Haiti continues to test the limits of the international community's indifference. In Cuba, the world watches in horror as collective punishment is imposed on 10 million people by an illegal economic and energy embargo.
We need a United Nations that does more than respond to crises after lives have been lost and communities destroyed. We need an organisation that works with determination to prevent conflict, advance sustainable development, confront injustice and protect those who are most vulnerable. We need a system in which every country, regardless of its size wealth or influence, has a voice and a meaningful place at the table. We need multilateralism that is not selective in its concern or uneven in its response, but fair, effective and responsive to the needs of all people. Our development must include young people, women and girls, Indigenous Peoples, persons with disabilities, the elderly and communities that have too often been left behind. If the United Nations is to deliver for all, it must first see, hear and include all. Multilateralism is our best hope for addressing challenges that cross borders, threaten our shared future, and demand collective action. We therefore remain committed to peace, climate action, sustainable development and the dignity of every human being. We remain ready to work with all nations in a spirit of mutual respect and shared responsibility to build a fairer, safer and more resilient world. Mr. president, let this 81st session be remembered as the moment when we collectively renewed our faith in cooperation and matched our words with action. Let this 81st session be remembered as the moment when vulnerability was met with solidarity, promises were honoured and trust was rebuilt through meaningful delivery. Above all, let this 81st session be remembered as the moment when this family of nations found the courage to act together and recommitted ourselves to ensuring that no country, no community, and no person was left behind.
These are not the actions of a country interested in peace. Russia could halt its brutal attacks at any time, yet it refuses to do so. Russia's actions have already had direct global impact in increased food and energy costs. This time last year, a bushel of wheat was just over $5. This year, it's more than $7. The fact that a permanent member of the Security Council is seeking to change borders by force, in clear violation of the UN charter is utterly unacceptable Sovereignty and territorial integrity apply equally to all states. The international community must remain steadfast in our response. In support of the UN charter and of a comprehensive, just and lasting peace. Ireland stands in solidarity with Ukraine and will continue to do so. We will continue to support efforts to hold Russia accountable for its actions. There can be no impunity for war crimes, not in Ukraine, not anywhere. And that is why Ireland is a steadfast supporter of the International Criminal Court. Ireland strongly opposes efforts to undermine the court. All measures against it should be immediately withdrawn. The international legal order, founded on our agreements to make the world a safer and more secure place, is being challenged. International law represents the collective lessons drawn from conflict, suffering and atrocity. The rules and institutions that we have built over generations exist to protect the rights, security and sovereignty of all states and all peoples. When these principles are disregarded, the consequences extend far beyond any single conflict. We all become less secure. Mr. president, 20 years ago, the Commission on War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity in Darfur saw the international community come together to fulfil our collective responsibility to protect. Despite the extraordinary efforts of the Sudanese people, the cycle of violence has continued. The conflict has been inflamed and prolonged by harmful outside interference. All states and external actors must cease arming, financing and enabling the war in Sudan. 15 million Sudanese people are displaced from their homes. Over 19.5 million face crisis levels of hunger. 33 million need urgent humanitarian assistance. Violations of international law including targeting on the basis of ethnicity, deliberate destruction of the means of survival, killing, torture and sexual violence are again being used as weapons of war. We need to act decisively to support the people of Sudan to end this conflict. We must support their aspirations for democracy, justice and development. Sudan has become a forgotten war despite its devastating impacts We must not allow the absence of daily headlines to become a license for inaction. The people of Sudan deserve the same attention, urgency and solidarity that we rightly extend to crises elsewhere. Mr. president, despite its prevalence, we cannot ever allow ourselves to become indifferent to conflict and human suffering it brings. To do so would deny the shared humanity of its victims. The peace plan on Gaza agreed last October was welcome, but it has not fundamentally changed the reality on the ground. Israeli strikes continue, humanitarian aid remains blocked. Civilians continue to suffer. We, the collective international community, have failed Palestine. Ireland, like most gathered here, believe that the only viable solution to the decades of conflict, misery and wasted human lives is a situation where a state of Palestine and a state of Israel live side by side in peace, security, and dignity. There are modest signs of progress. More countries have recognised the state of Palestine, and overwhelming majority of UN member states has endorsed the New York Declaration. More of us have taken steps to push back against the illegal and violent settler occupation of Palestinian land in the West Bank. But time is running out. What we are witnessing on the ground is a deliberate attempt by some to make the prospect of a two state solution impossible This is not some mad conspiracy theory. It is the stated intent of the Prime Minister of Israel who said clearly that, and I quote, we are going to fulfil our promise that there will be no Palestinian state. This place belongs to us on court, as he permitted the E1. Illegal development in East Jerusalem and the situation in Gaza remains an affront to all that is decent. How can we tolerate a situation where civilians are so desperate for shelter that they have to make their homes in war damaged and unsafe buildings where eight children died because one of them collapsed? Where the most basic humanitarian aid, food and shelter is deliberately impeded When the full truth of what has happened, what is still happening in Gaza is finally known. When the evidence is gathered, when the testimonies are heard, when the true horrors are finally and fully revealed. It will shame the world. Nobody will be able to say that we did not know. Let it not be said that we did not act in the West Bank. In the West Bank. The relentless expansion of settlements have reached a scale without precedent, further eroding, eroding the prospects for a just and lasting peace. Violent settlers continue to act with near-total impunity, while Palestinian communities face a sustained campaign of displacement and destruction amounting to ethnic cleansing. Entire villages have been razed, homes and vital infrastructure demolished, and thousands of Palestinian families driven from the places they have called home for generations and exposed to intimidation and violence. The United Nations reports that this year there have been almost 200 attacks against Palestinians every month, a stark reminder of a reality that is deepening conflict, suffering and despair. The International Court of Justice has been clear. Settlements in occupied Palestinian territory are illegal. Ireland has acted alongside others to prohibit the import of settlement goods. It is never too late to uphold international law. Mr. president, the conflict in the Gulf remains deeply concerning and is having a serious impact around the world. We need to get back to meaningful, good faith negotiations by all sides Ireland has consistently stated that Iran must cease its attacks on its neighbours and also end its destabilizing activities across the region, including strikes on ships in the Strait of Hormuz. Vessels must be allowed to transit the strait safely and without tolls in line with international law. If we are to build greater stability, Iran must never have a nuclear weapon. Iran's destabilizing influence across the region must cease. We need dialogue to achieve a negotiated settlement. Mr. president, since 1978, Irish soldiers have served with distinction in Lebanon in the Unifil peacekeeping operation. Ireland will continue to work with Lebanon, European Union and international partners to support Lebanon's future peace and security. We have consistently condemned Hezbollah's attacks on Israel, which must cease immediately. Israel must withdraw its military presence from southern Lebanon and bring an end to its military operations there. Israel's response has been wholly disproportionate. We honor the courage, professionalism and dedication of all peacekeepers who have served under the United Nations We remember with particular respect, those who lost their lives in the cause of peace. We welcome the Secretary-General's report on the Future of Peacekeeping, and Ireland will work with others to ensure that this essential capacity adapts to the 21st century. Ireland also welcomes wider reforms in efforts in the United Nations system. These are necessary if we are to meet the challenges of our rapidly changing world.
Created in the aftermath of the Second World War, the immediate focus was obviously on peace and security but the UN system has evolved significantly over the decades to expand its scope and sphere of influence within the confines of its charter. However, the UN must now look to the future, building on its record of achievements as well as from lessons learned from what it could not achieve. As we look to the next 80 years, we must ask ourselves a searching question is the UN fit for the purpose for the 21st century, not the world of 1945, but the world of today and beyond? We are entering a new era of international relations defined by unprecedented technological developments, often absent from the table where the rules of tomorrow are being adopted, developing countries risk being left further behind. The same exclusion afflicts the international financial architecture, which remains skewed against the Global South. Developing nations must have a seat at the table as equal stakeholders. We all acknowledge that the three pillars of the UN charter are peace and security, development and human rights. The twin institutional pillars provided in the charter were and still are, the Security Council and ECOSOC as the apex bodies for achieving these purposes. However, over the years, optimal use has been made primarily of only one of these organs. We need to enhance and accelerate the revitalization of the General Assembly and that of ECOSOC so that they are not merely forums for debate, but engines of action. This must be done as we bring about the reform of the Security Council, the historical injustice regarding the composition of the Council was acknowledged in action 39 of the pact for the future, but the process for reform is still stalled. Mauritius fully supports the Common African Position, the Ezulwini Consensus and the Sirte Declaration calling for no fewer than two permanent and five non-permanent African seats on the council. Mauritius also supports the call for SIDS to have a seat on a reformed council. On the question of the veto, Mauritius aligns itself with the position of a growing number of states that, in the event the veto is retained, any new permanent member must have the same rights as the original permanent members. Mauritius also supports the Franco-Mexican initiative on the suspension of the veto in cases of mass atrocities. We support the positions of the G4 and the L69 on council reform, and we reiterate our support for India's candidature for a permanent seat commensurate with its constructive role in global affairs. Mr. president, Mauritius welcomes the increasing recourse to the International Court of Justice as a mechanism for the peaceful settlement of disputes and determination of issues of international law. We call upon Member States which have not yet done so, to accept the compulsory jurisdiction of the ICJ. We welcome the landmark unanimous advisory opinion of the ICJ on the obligations of states in respect of climate change. This was a vindication of the tireless advocacy of Vanuatu and the core group of states. Mauritius was proud to stand among them.
The pact for the future reminds us of precisely this responsibility: that the decisions we make today must not undermine the possibilities of those who will live with their consequences tomorrow. But future generations should not only be the subject of our decisions. They should have a voice in making them. And Montenegro has heard the call from the young people to move from participation to real influence in decision-making. Young people are not simply beneficiaries of public policy. They are partners in shaping it. And education— education is our most powerful investment in young people— equipping them with knowledge, with critical thinking, with values they need to shape a better world. And this is very personal to me as well. I know what education can make possible. I was born and educated in Montenegro, and it was education, education, which gave me the opportunity to study and work abroad, to learn from other countries, from other institutions, and to ultimately return home to serve my own country. It shaped my belief that the place where a child is born should never define the limits of what that child can become. Coming from a small country, one can sometimes assume that greater size brings greater vision and greater wisdom. But the United Nations reminds us of a simple truth: vision and wisdom are not measured by the size of a country, but by the ideas we bring and the responsibility with which we act upon.
AI can be a powerful accelerator of human progress; therefore, we must not close the door to innovation. At the same time, we must address AI’s potential harms, including job losses and widening of the digital divide. We cannot also rule out the possibility that AI, particularly artificial general intelligence, or AGI, could affect human survival. That demands prudent and reliable guardrails, based on scientific evidence, to safeguard the global public interest, while allowing innovation to go forward. Governments must remain at the heart of this endeavour. But governments do not have a monopoly on expertise, capital, technology, innovation or influence. Much of that experience and capacity already lies with businesses, innovators, civil society and others. We need to unlock the doors of the United Nations to those developing and using AI. Not someday. Now. We are falling further behind each day. AI differs from earlier proliferation challenges in one critical respect: it is already embedded in nearly every facet of our lives, in our water systems, electricity grids, health records, economies and militaries. We cannot allow an arms race for control of AI to carry us over the precipice. There is clear precedent for United Nations engagement with world-changing developments. We did so on nuclear non-proliferation; through the Montreal Protocol to protect the ozone layer; and with the United Nations Declaration on Human Cloning in 2005. We need experts, innovators, industry leaders, scientists, civil society, and academia all working together on the issues of our times. (PAUSE) Excellencies, Ladies and gentlemen, We have an opportunity in this session to show that we have learned from what works; that we are prepared to confront what does not; and that we can build a United Nations capable not simply of surviving change, but of shaping it. To seize that opportunity, we must be realistic enough to confront hard truths, bold enough to reform, and inclusive enough to bring the right people to the table.
The international community's hesitation to designate the Houthis as a terrorist group provided them with a valuable opportunity to expand their influence and magnify the threat they pose. We have seen that decisive action, when applied, weakens their capabilities. The Coalition to Restore Legitimacy in Yemen, led by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, has played a critical role in reducing the dangers posed by this group through its support for the Yemeni government, thereby contributing to regional and international security and stability. We believe that this firm approach adopted by the United States administration in dealing with the Houthi militias, has disrupted their calculations. The Yemeni government appreciate President Trump's clear understanding of the only language this terrorist group comprehends the language of resolve. It is the language that leaves no room for misinterpretation. We likewise value the support of every friendly state that has stood behind this position. International legitimacy and its resolutions are there. But resolutions alone do not make peace and international resolution without a political will to implement it does not stop wars. Rather, it merely prolongs a marathon of negotiations while only terrorism advances. Peace is not a distant aspiration. It is a firm determination. It is an effective deterrent action against those who threaten the security and stability of states. Ladies and gentlemen, Iranian support is not the only factor contributing to the danger posed by Houthi terrorist militias. They also benefit from the lack of an effective and decisive international position. They benefit from every statement that underestimates the threat represented by this racist terrorist movement in Yemen.
We wish them well, and they as they complete their tenure at the end of this year. Mr. president, fellow, few institutions embody the principle of sovereign equality as visibly as this assembly with the. Within these walls, differences in power, wealth and influence may shape the realities our nations confront, but they do not confer a greater claim to membership or participation. And perhaps more than anywhere else, this assembly reminds us of a simple truth. Our differences are real but so is our interdependence. This is why this organization was created with the understanding that disputes must be resolved through dialogue. Human dignity must be protected, and that nations must work together. If development, peace and human rights are to be sustained. In other words, that our common future requires common institutions. Eight decades later, we must ask ourselves whether we have remained faithful to that insight. And perhaps more importantly, do we still trust one another enough to act on it? Because today, Mr. President, trust is being tested. Geopolitical divisions are widening. Wars have become more protracted, with devastating humanitarian consequences. Respect for the United Nations Charter and international law is under visible strain, with developing countries facing intensifying debt burden. Climate vulnerabilities, huge gaps between commitments made and implementation, and feeling of marginalization and inadequate representation in the global system. Therefore, the task before us is building stronger, better equipped, representative responsive and effective multilateral system and global financial architecture that delivers for all nations and regions. Mr. president, the governments own experience within the. This organization gives us grounds for optimism. We have seen within this very institution that multilateralism can still deliver. During the 80th session of the General Assembly the government had the honor of chairing the second Committee at a time of profound disagreement over some of the most consequential economic and development issues before us. That experience reminded us that multilateralism does not require unanimity on every issue. It requires the willingness to remain at the table to listen, negotiate, and courage to make compromises. Our experience demonstrates that in this period of deep disagreement, progress remains possible.
It is also about voice. Africa's 54 nations are home to nearly one in every five people on Earth. Yet, our influence on the institutions that govern global finance remains disproportionately small. We cannot carry substantial obligations under a system while remaining marginal in shaping its rules. If Africa has a stake in the burden of debt, Africa must have a share in the decisions on how that debt is acquired. This is not a plea for special treatment. It is a proposition for shared prosperity. A more industrialized Africa expands global demand. A more food-secure Africa strengthens global stability. A better-connected Africa diversifies global supply chains. And an Africa able to finance more of its own development becomes a stronger partner for the world. Excellencies, this brings us back to the central question before this assembly.
Moreover, last July, the Cemetery Complexes of the Xiongnu Nobility, Mongolia's first statehood were inscribed on the UNESCO World Heritage List, reflecting international recognition of their historical and cultural significance. It is my pleasure to underline that Mongolia is serving for the first time as a member of the UNESCO World Heritage Committee for the term 2026 2029. Moreover, this year marks the 820th anniversary of the Great Mongol Empire, founded by Great Chinggis Khaan, Man of the Millennium, King of Kings. The United Nations General Assembly resolution, adopted on the occasion of the 800 years of Mongolian statehood, highly values and emphasizes the contribution of Mongols to the history of humankind by recognizing the richness of nomadic civilization and its important contribution to promoting dialogue and interaction among all forms of civilization, and that nomadic civilization influenced inter alia, societies across Asia and Europe, and in turn, absorbed influences from both East and west in a true interchange of human values, the important role in the development of extensive trade networks and the creation of large administrative, cultural, religious and commercial centres. This demonstrates that this historical contributions embodied progressive ideas that could serve as a foundation for today's collective efforts to safeguard peace and stability. For example, the renowned Mongolist Władysław Kotwicz in his work, Mongols are the promoters of the idea of global peace from the early 14th century, noted that Öljeitü, Il-Khan of the Mongol Empire, in his letter sent to King Philip the Fourth of France in 1305, eloquently underscored the value of harmonious relations among nations and peoples in the thoughtful words, what could be better than true concord? History is the foundation upon which we reflect on the past, shape the present, and build the future, and is the memory of our statehood.
Ladies and gentlemen, threats to human dignity no longer belong exclusively to the physical world. They are increasingly emerging in places where, until recently, neither the law nor accountability extended. In the digital realm, shaped by the development of new technologies. New technologies such as artificial intelligence or superintelligence should always serve humanity as they develop, rather than exploit people or their weaknesses. This raises the question of whether, in a world of advancing artificial intelligence, humans will remain subjects or become merely objects of algorithmic influence. I'm fully aware that groundbreaking technologies bring not only enormous opportunities but also certain risks. As early as in the 1980s, an eminent Polish writer, Stanisław Lem, in his novel Fiasco, warned that the moment we teach machines to think, we will face questions not only about their capabilities but also about their ambitions. For if they begin to imitate humans in their thinking, a natural consequence may be the drive to surpass them. Today, this challenge takes on a special dimension. It is precisely the development of technology that is playing a decisive role in co-shaping the realities of the 21st century. That is why we need a serious conversation about the limits of artificial intelligence development. We need rules that will actually be enforced and that clearly define where innovation ends and a threat to humanity begins. Artificial intelligence must not be used as a tool for destabilization, manipulation, or undermining the international order. Technology must serve humanity and the truth, not chaos and manipulation. Ladies and gentlemen, Poland's priority is order based on truth, enshrined in our constitution and resulting from our historical experience. That is why we view the United Nations not merely as a forum for discussion but as an institution that must be capable of taking action.
Transnational criminal networks are using our ocean as a highway for illicit drugs, undermining our sovereignty and national security, destroying young lives and tearing at the fabric of our communities. Behind every statistic stands a family, a community, a young life robbed of its promise. We will not allow criminal networks to profit from the vulnerability of our people. We are amending our Dangerous Drugs Act to introduce stiffer penalties as a deterrent, and we are strengthening law enforcement to prevent and detect these crimes and to hold perpetrators accountable. In August this year, Solomon Islands acceded to the UN Convention Against Transnational Organised Crime, a clear demonstration of our resolve to confront this threat. These are costly and demanding undertakings, and no Pacific country can win this fight alone. We call for stronger international cooperation, greater information sharing, sustained investment in the capacity of our law enforcement agencies, and the support for prevention and rehabilitation. Our vision of a peaceful and secure Pacific extends beyond transnational crime. As enshrined in the Ocean of Peace declaration, our region must remain free of nuclear weapons and free from destabilizing external influence.
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 a near 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, FREA, 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 FREA. And we remain open to every country that can contribute to building protection against ballistic missiles. Our FREA 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 FREA join these common efforts. And yes, sometimes it may seem that Ukraine is focused, 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 detour 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.
But the fact is, it has been under attack. In recent years we have seen industrial scale assault by hostile actors on the information environment in the UK, and that of many of our allies. Russian agencies have used every means at their disposal to spread lies and disinformation and prey on people's fears. They've used bots and fake websites, falsified newspaper articles, forged the branding of 28 British organisations, including universities and the BBC. They've amplified far right narratives, and we have evidence that they tried to interfere with the 2019 General Election. We also know that they have tried to stoke tensions and unrest in the wake of horrific events. The idea that anyone would try to use such things to their advantage is just repulsive. But it is what they do. The Kremlin spends around £1.3 billion each year on manipulating information. We're talking about an insidious campaign that reaches into people's homes and twists what they feel about their own country and community, creating a narrative of decline, stoking division and sowing despair. On top of that, we have seen cyber attacks on companies and institutions, and we know that AI will multiply the threat. We have tiptoed around this for too long. Over the last decade, we have given too much ground to those who want to run a negative, corrosive narrative about life in Britain, which bears no resemblance to reality. Well no more. We are going to face the new decade in a different way with our eyes wide open. We are going to be much prouder in standing up for our values and the rule of law. And we are going to help our people to strengthen their resilience, because faced with this information warfare, security starts in every home. If you're struggling with the cost of living and your life is not improving, or if you're a young person not in employment, education or training, you are going to be much more vulnerable to this kind of influence. So part of the challenge is to lift our people up and create the opportunities they need. When inequalities grow too wide, our societies are at greater risk. So we will work to make life more affordable for people. That will be at the heart of a new ten year plan for Britain that we will bring forward later in the year. And we will put in place the architecture to stem this poisonous tide. Today, I am asking our security chiefs in the UK to begin work on a new National Centre for Information Defence, to detect, attribute and disrupt these kinds of hostile state information attacks to support and defend our democracy. I know this is a shared challenge so we are going to use our experience in the UK and the fact that we have already been through this shock, starting ten years ago, to help other countries. We have already supported Moldova to protect its elections from Russian interference. As more elections approach across Europe, more nations are grappling with these issues, some for the first time. So we're ready to share our understanding of how these actors work and how we can respond, because this is a vital task for our collective security and resilience. To overcome division and instability, we must also find new ways to bring countries together.
