Every year in September, world leaders address the United Nations General Assembly to cast their views on world problems, suggesting possible paths to sort them out.
Well, that was the case until not long ago.
The UN General Assembly has been the forum for the participation of world leaders who have expressed their views on the state of the world since its foundation back in 1945. In 1960, the then Cuban leader Fidel Castro delivered the longest speech in the General Assembly history -it lasted 4 hours and 26 minutes- criticizing US imperialism. In 1974, the leader of the then Palestine Liberation Organization, Yassar Arafat, gave his historic "olive branch and the freedom fighter's gun" speech, marking the first time a non-governmental entity addressed a full plenary of the General Assembly. 20 years ago, at the 2006 General Assembly, Hugo Chávez, president of Venezuela referred to then US President George W. Bush as "the devil," claiming the podium still smelled of sulfur. In 2009, the leader of Libya Muamar Gaddafi launched into a rambling 96-minute debut speech where he tore up a copy of the UN Charter and criticized the Security Council as a "Terror Council."
This time, the speeches were less spectacular and extremely predictable. On the one side Donald Trump delivered a speech criticizing the role of the UN in a turbulent world claiming that under his presidency the US has “solved” eight international conflicts. Then he rejected the idea of a world government and suggested he could be a successful mediator between Russia and Ukraine. He highlighted his achievements in the areas of the economy, immigration, border security, and the fight against violent crime and said Mexico is the epicenter of organized crime in the world. He insisted on the virtual destruction of Iran’s military strength and the normalization of navigation through the Hormuz Streight. As it is well known, Donald Trump created the Board of Peace composed by his most important political allies, although this forum has been absent from most conflicts in the world.
Then the prime minister of Israel Benjamin Netanyahu defended at the world’s parliament Israel's military actions and lashed out at international critics following a mass walkout by delegates who left the hall. He stated that attacking Iran alongside the United States was "one of the easiest decisions" of his term, arguing that had they not done so, "we would all be dead." He then accused New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani of attempting to silence him and of creating an environment where Jews supposedly no longer feel safe. He also criticized Turkey and its president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, labeling them as spreaders of antisemitic lies. An important controversy surfaced when it was revealed by French authorities that his plane landed in France on his way to New York, even though Netanyahu faces a warrant from the International Criminal Court for crimes against humanity committed in Gaza.
Another leader in a similar political spectrum who attended the 81 General Assembly was Argentina’s Javier Milei, who branded the UN a "useless organization" that sustains a "caste of fatally arrogant parasites disguised as well-intentioned bureaucrats." Milei seemed to forget that his country intends Rafael Grossi, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), to become UN Secretary General. It does not seem appropriate to support a candidacy to lead a “useless organization with arrogant parasites.” Milei sharply criticized the UN for "looking the other way" regarding Argentina’s sovereignty claim over the Malvinas (Falkland) Islands, South Georgia, South Sandwich Islands, and surrounding maritime areas. He warned that Argentina would "take matters into our own hands" and no longer wait for the UN or the international community to act against unauthorized natural resource exploitation (such as British-backed oil drilling projects) in the area. Needless to say, this is a very dangerous speech because it rules out diplomacy and international law from a contentious issue between Buenos Aires and London that needs political negotiations to explore better outcomes. He reinforced Argentina's foreign policy stance, emphasizing a clear alignment with Western values, the United States, and Israel.
Contrary to Milei’s, Netanyahu’s and Trump’s insults against the UN, other participants delivered speeches where they criticized the performance of the UN but recognized it can be reformed and approached these issues with more constructive views. One of the most-liked speeches was Lula Da Silva’s president of Brazil, who inaugurated the world leaders’ speeches at the UN General Assembly. He is facing presidential elections next month and the interference of the US in the process through the support of Flávio Bolsonaro, the eldest son of former President Jair Bolsonaro. Flávio Bolsonaro may continue his father’s conservative policies which is why the main resident at the White House favors him over Lula. This is why at the General Assembly, Lula Da Silva said Brazil is nobody’s backyard. Then he expressed deep indignation at widespread attacks on multilateralism and stressed that effective diplomacy is the only solution for global challenges. He stated that Brazil will not outsource the defense of its borders or the fight against organized crime to foreign powers, remarking, "We do not need aircraft carriers watching our waters.” But he was critical of the UN too: he complained the international body is failing to prevent war and that the organization's credibility has “never been so low.” He condemned the war in Gaza, accused Israel's government of genocide, supported a two-state solution, and called for diplomacy to end the war in Ukraine.
The absence of India and the PR China at this General Assembly was noticeable, although traditionally Narendra Modi and Xi Jin ping have addressed the UN in the past, supporting multilateralism and diplomatic solutions. In fact, Beijing has launched in the past three global initiatives to address world’s problems: the Global Development Initiative in 2021; the Global Security Initiative in 2022; and the Global Civilization Initiative in 2023, where the Asian giant outlines possible solutions with “Chinese characteristics” -in the later initiative, Beijing advocates respect for the diversity of civilization and modernization models worldwide and it rejects the imposition of a single political model or cultural value (such as Western liberal democracy) on a global scale.
Other world leaders such as France’s Emmanuel Macron criticized global leaders and he noted he specifically rebuked claims of diplomatic triumphs regarding Gaza that failed to reopen humanitarian access. He also warned that ongoing violations in the West Bank and disregard for neighboring sovereignty threaten Israel's long-term security. He warned against a global return to the "law of the jungle" and imperialism, urging nations to reject double standards and defend multilateral cooperation. Macron reiterated support for Ukraine, proposing a double moratorium to protect energy infrastructure and grain routes, and called on Israel to end its escalation in Lebanon.
In the context of a much-spoken trade controversy with the United Staes, Mark Carney, prime minister of Canada advocated for multilateral cooperation in the face of a fragmented world order, warning that "the post-war world is coming to an end." He noted that the disruption of the international order by powers such as the United States and the PR China requires nations to safeguard their interests through practical cooperation—which he described as a "practical necessity" rather than an act of idealism. He announced a 100 million US dollars commitment in international assistance for Palestine, focused on humanitarian aid and peacebuilding. He criticized plans for the Israeli settlement in the West Bank and reaffirmed Canada's trade restrictions on products from illegal Israeli settlements, as part of efforts to preserve the two-state solution.
Thus, in general terms, most speeches focused dealt with Israel’s policies in Gaza, some addressed the war in Ukraine, and some denounced the interventionist policies of Trump. The 81 UN general Assembly was thus polarizing and did not established firm commitments on multilateralism, the environmental crisis, and the support the global body needs to fulfill its mission. Another characteristic of this week’s speeches is the way they are used for domestic purposes duein light of, fr instance, the midterm elections in the US of next November; the presidential elections in Brazil; the forthcoming presidential and legislative elections in Argentina in 2027 -where Milei intends to run for re-election; the elections in Israel next October 27 -where Netanyahu is running for another term as the leader of his nationalist-religious coalition, etcetera.
In the case of Mexico, the country has been absent from the General Assembly -with a president attending- since 2018. The last time a Mexican president traveled to New York to address the General Assembly in person was September 25, 2018, by President Enrique Peña Nieto during the 73rd Session. One may say that during the López Obrador administration Mexico made its voice heard on September 22, 2020, when he delivered a virtual, pre-recorded speech during the 75th Session. It is true the COVID-19 pandemic prevented in presence activities in New York. But this is not the case now. The current president Claudia Sheinbaum has decided not to address the world parliament despite Trump’s insults against Mexico. Instead of replying to Trump in New York, the Mexican president replied at home at her “mañaneras” saying that although Mexico could criticize the high level of drug consumption and arms production in the United States, she preferred not to do so in order to maintain a good bilateral relationship. Although her ironic message was delivered, it does not replace the necessary presence of Mexico at international for a.
The 81 UN General Assembly is taking place at a time of a major financial crisis at the international body, accompanied by lacking political will from its members to address world issues independently from what the US does or does not do under Trump. The context is challenging because in the coming weeks the successor of Antonio Guterres as secretary general will be elected and the winner will face an unprecedented challenge for the UN in political, financial and social terms. The UN needs to be a body of consensus, diplomacy, the rule of law and solidarity. Sadly, these values remain victims of political and ideological polarization.
Editor’s Note: The above guest column was penned by María Cristina Rosas, a professor and researcher in the faculty of political and social sciences at the National Autonomous University of Mexico in Mexico City. The column appears in The Rio Grande Guardian International News Service with the permission of the author. Rosas can be reached via email at: mcrosas@prodigy.net.mx
