(Opening remarks only) Partnership for Multilateralism Summit

Excellencies, distinguished heads of state and government, foreign ministers, ladies and gentlemen, dear friends, I'm very glad to convene all of you here today. And I'm particularly pleased to co-host the first meeting of Partners for Multilateralism, together with Australia, Barbados, Brazil, Canada, India, and Kenya. a wide and diverse representation of the international community from all continents. We each come from different regions, from different cultures and history, but we are all facing the same challenges. We are at a critical moment for the world. Conflict is spreading. International law, including the United Nations Charter, are being repeatedly violated. including by permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, and the multilateral system is under stress. At the same time, climate change, pandemics, artificial intelligence, and economic insecurity are challenges confronting the world to an extent that no country, neither big or small, can address alone. And this is why We must turn confrontation into cooperation. And this is why we need to create a global network connecting us based on multilateral cooperation, mutual respect, and international law. This is the spirit in which we propose to launch our initiative today, Partners for Multilateralism. This aims to be an open platform for partners from all parts of the world who are ready to defend common principles and work towards concrete solutions. It will act as a network for dialogue, coalition building, and practical cooperation, helping us to coordinate in the face of common challenges. Our core objective is to support the work of the United Nations and other multilateral formats. And we will help to turn shared commitments into concrete action. In this respect, I see three main priorities. First, we must defend the rules and institutions that protect us all. the United Nations Charter, the peaceful settlement of disputes, and international law. Second, we must make progress in dealing with global challenges like climate finance, sustainable development, pandemic preparedness, economic resilience, and artificial intelligence. Third, we must reform our institutions so they that are fit for tomorrow's world, not yesterday's. The Pact for the Future, the UN80 initiative, and other reforms offer an important opportunity to make the United Nations more coherent, effective, and efficient. Dear colleagues, all in all, our task today is to strengthen what connect us, to build trust and deepen dialogue, to weave the network that can bring us closer together. And I look forward to hearing from all of you. Thank you very much. And I have the great honor to give the floor to the President of the Republic of Kenya, Mr. William Ruto.

Thank you very much. Antonio Costa, Your Excellencies, heads of state and government colleagues. Allow me to thank President Costa for convening us around a question that can no longer be postponed. How do we restore trust in international cooperation when the institutions created to sustain it are themselves under growing strain? I want to put my argument in one sentence before I defend it. The crisis of multilateralism is not a crisis of cooperation. It is a crisis of rules and institutions that have not kept pace with the world they are expected to govern. The theme of this year's General Assembly calls upon us to restore trust, manage transformation, and build a United Nations that delivers for all. That is not simply a theme for debate. It is a test of whether multilateralism can respond to the world as it is and prepare us for the world that is coming. We meet at a time when conflict is spreading, geopolitical competition is intensifying, and international law is too often applied selectively. Climate change, debt, pandemics, cyber insecurity, and artificial intelligence cross borders faster than institutions can respond to them. No nation can manage these challenges alone. So the answer is not less multilateralism. It is better multilateralism, one that is more representative in institutions, fairer in its rules, and more effective in its results. The United Nations Charter remains our essential foundation. Sovereign equality, territorial integrity, the peaceful settlement of disputes, and the prohibition of the threat or use of force must apply to every nation, in every region, in every circumstance. International law cannot be a shield for some and a restraint for others. But defending the Charter does not mean defending every institutional arrangement created 80 years ago. Principles can be permanent, while institutions should evolve. The world has changed. The distribution of population, economic weight, and geopolitical influence has changed. Yet the architecture through which international power is exercised has not changed sufficiently with it. This is why Kenya continues to advocate reform of the United Nations Security Council in accordance with the Ezulwini Consensus and the Sirta Declaration. Africa cannot remain the only continent without permanent representation in the institution entrusted with international peace and security. Put it differently, a continent of 54 countries and more than 1.4 billion people cannot remain at the margins of decisions central to global peace and security. This is not simply about fairness. It is about legitimacy. Institutions that do not reflect the people whose cooperation they require will eventually struggle to command their trust. The same problem appears in the international financial architecture. Africa's challenge is increasingly not simply the amount of capital available to it. It is the rules that determine where capital is allowed to go, how African risk is priced, what investments are considered prudent, and whose evidence is used to make those judgments. Our continent has substantial pools of domestic savings, yet too little of that capital finances the power systems, transport networks, and industries that our continent needs. Africa today holds more than $4 trillion across its domestic capital pools. more than $2 trillion in non-bank domestic capital, including over $1 trillion in pensions and life insurance assets. So the question to our international partners should no longer be only how much money can you bring to Africa? It should be, how can we use the international financial architecture to unlock the money Africa already has. That changes the purpose of international partnership. We need multilateral and development financial institutions not simply as lenders, but as catalysts. Their guarantees, credit enhancement, and risk-sharing instruments should make productive African assets investable for African pension funds, insurers, and other long-term investors. Africa is therefore not asking others to carry risk that we are unwilling to carry ourselves. No, we are putting our own savings and institutions on the table. We are asking our partners to help build the instruments that allow that capital to be deployed. That means pricing African risk against actual default and recovery experience. It means making guarantees affordable. It means expanding local currency credit enhancement and creating investable pipelines. And it means examining prudential rules that unnecessarily prevent long-term African savings from financing long-term African assets. These objectives should be clear. International capital should increasingly catalyze African capital, not substitute it. However, a grievance is not a program of reform. These are decisions that can be taken by institutions that already exist and by people who already possess the authority to take them. The same principle must apply to multilateralism more broadly. Credible multilateralism cannot simply ask countries to trust institutions. Those institutions must give countries reasons to trust them. That requires representation where decisions are made. It requires consistency in the application of international law. It requires evidence rather than inherited assumptions in the pricing of risk. And it requires developing countries to participate in writing the rules by which their economies and societies are governed. It also requires us to resist a return to a world of rigid blocks. Africa seeks neither dependency nor alignment. We seek partnership. Countries should not have to choose sides in order to cooperate. We cannot rebuild trust by speaking only with those who we agree with. Dialogue matters most when positions diverge. I get often a standard question. Are you facing east or are you facing west? That's a very unfortunate question. But we have developed a standard answer that we are neither facing east nor are we facing west. We are facing forward. That is why this partnership for multilateralism should strengthen, not substitute, the United Nations, nor the African Union, nor other regional institutions. It should remain open, inclusive, and anchored in genuine consultation. And participating states must have the opportunity not merely to endorse commitments, but to shape them. Durable agreements are negotiated, understood, and owned by those who are expected to implement them. Kenya comes to this conversation not only with an argument, but with an offer. Where international rules are said to reflect evidence, let us test them against the evidence. Where institutions are said to be representative, let us measure representation against the world as it is today. Where financial methodologies are said to price risk accurately, let us compare them with actual evidence. And where the evidence shows that the architecture is no longer fit for purpose, let us have the courage to change it. Our task is not to produce another declaration of faith in multilateralism. It is to make multilateralism demonstrably worthy of that faith. Let me repeat that. Our task is not to produce another declaration of faith in multilateralism. It is to make multilateralism demonstrably worthy of that faith. The institutions we inherited helped the world navigate an earlier age. Our responsibility is to renew them for this one, to preserve what is principled, reform what is unequal, and build what is missing. Trust will not be restored by asking countries to believe more strongly in multilateralism. Trust will be restored when multilateralism works more fairly, when its rules are applied consistently, when its institutions reflect the world that they govern today, and when cooperation produces results people can see. That is how we make multilateralism deliver. And that is how we ensure that the future is not written for some and imposed on others, but built together through partnership, fairness, and shared responsibility. I thank you.

Thank you, Mr. President. Now I have the honour to give the floor to the Prime Minister of Australia, Anthony Albanese.

Well, thank you very much, Antonio, and to colleagues. Australia has been, from the very first, a supporter of the United Nations and multilateralism. Our position has always been very clear that global challenges cannot be solved by countries acting alone. And today, that is possibly more so than ever before the case. When we look at the challenges confronting us, a land war in Europe, conflict in the Middle East, global inflation, the rise of new technologies, including artificial intelligence, that present opportunities, but also have very significant risks before us. To solve them, we must commit to the UN Charter, but we must also resolve to make the system work more effectively. Australia has been a consistent voice at the UN for stability and sovereignty since the beginning. And we want to help the Council meet the challenges of the next decade, which is why yesterday I declared we would seek a non-permanent seat at the Security Council for 2029 and 2030. Our approach will be to listen with respect, to partner as equals, and to protect what matters most. because we know that the multilateral system is under immense pressure now. It is our responsibility, therefore, to both protect but also to evolve the system, focusing on those functions that the United Nations can deliver best, but also work within other multilateral forums as well to build cooperation, to build dialogue, to promote amongst the people that we are sent here to represent. The common view to be accepted that nation states acting alone cannot be as successful as nation states acting for their sovereignty but acting in a cooperative way. That is what I believe middle powers in particular, must accept their responsibility to play a stronger role, coming together under different partnerships and arrangements to make a difference, stepping up as being outward looking in the world and in our approaches. I think there are three areas that confront us now that make it obvious that we need to go down the multilateral road. Of course, the first is climate change. In my country, like many others, I'm sure, it's said, oh, well, we're only a small percentage of global emissions, so why should we take action to move to net zero? But if every nation takes that approach, then, of course, no nation will advance, and we will indeed continue down the road of dangerous climate change. The second is in areas of new technologies. Our social media ban that we've implemented in Australia has been replicated in many countries. The emergence of new technology in the digital world, including artificial intelligence, represents a challenge in which no nation state by itself can properly protect the interests of our people unless there is some broader international cooperation and an understanding that we need to have safeguards, as indeed the major companies are themselves calling for safeguards. That should be a wake-up call that we also need to act. And the third is, of course, upholding international law in all of its dimensions. This approach is right for the world, and I look forward to the discussion tonight and to working with the nations here to advance our common interests. I thank you.

Thank you very much for your comments. Let me now give the floor to Mia Mottley, the Prime Minister of Barbados.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I'd like, first and foremost, to thank President Costa and President Ruto, Prime Minister Carney, for bringing us together, Prime Minister Australia. This initiative comes, of course, at a critical historical moment, a moment when the international community really is facing perhaps its most gravest moment. And to that extent, we ask ourselves, to what end are we really meeting here today? The reality is that it is vital that countries like ours have a voice. The post-independence movement in the post-World War two era was intended to give us opportunity and choices. Regrettably, those are being taken from us without our participation, without our input. On the fourth of January, we woke up to the news that there had been an incursion in Venezuela. It became clear to us that small states like ours can only survive in a rules-based order. And that if others really want to take you out or take control, you have nothing to stop it. That is why we have called consistently for global, moral, strategic leadership. Moral, because it matters where we stand. Strategic because we need to be able to contextualize where the world is. The world that we live in is significantly different as we know from the post-World War II era. Yet the institutions reflect the structure, the institutions reflect the interests, and the charter reflects issues that were some universal in time and nature, but others by omission are really not addressing the world in which we live. The need for global public goods must be at the center of the multilateral system. And the notion that the IFAs or the UN exist purely to recreate a world that was destroyed by a great global war cannot be the basis for our existence anymore. We have the climate crisis, there is no reference to it in the charter. We have the reality of AI and the social media ills of which the Prime Minister of Australia just spoke about, there is no reference in the charter. We have the galloping global inequality, and certainly while inequality existed in 1945, regrettably the people in those days were not seen in the way that we are forced to see people under the human rights order that we have today. The truth is that we have to determine whether we are prepared to sit back and allow circumstances to gallop in front of us or whether we are prepared to summon the will to act. I believe that even where others are not prepared to go in the same direction, it does not mean that the rest of us remain mute or incapable of action. And to that extent, I therefore thank those who have convened this session this evening. And to simply say, President Ruto has made the point as all of us have made consistently of the need for Africa to be appropriately represented as a matter of right in the Security Council, for India equally to be appropriately represented. You cannot have countries responsible for as much people as they are and deprive them of an opportunity to speak, for this very building tells us that we should aim towards democratic principles, which means giving people a voice. Secondly, we have to determine what we are prepared to do to reform the institutions and to recognise that there will be new issues in 10 years or 15 years that we have not yet contemplated, and that we therefore have to have an institution that is nimble both of action and of thought if we are to remain relevant to today's world. In addition to that, the issue of reform is absolutely clear. The United Nations has found itself stumbling over itself on too many issues. There has been, yes, too much redundancy and bureaucracy. And to that extent, therefore, we ought with very clear eyes to reform the institution to make sure that we recognize that it is in the third decade of the 21st century and not in the fifth decade of the 20th century. To that extent, it means that some of us will have to carry weight. If we have to carry more weight by also increasing our subventions, then so be it, because there is a price to protecting the rules-based order. Those who would wish to protect it without stepping up to the plate to be able to contribute to it really have no intention for us to see change. I look forward to the for the same case being made for small island states for a permanent seat to be reflected on the Security Council, because the reality is that small states have a different perspective. And if you don't know what our reality is, then you're liable to take actions and make decisions that will harm us in ways that may not have been intended. We look forward to being able to make changes fundamentally in the area of financial reform because it takes cash to care. And the reality is that in the V20 countries, we have not sat and waited for anyone. In October last year, as chair of the V20 countries, Barbados met with the Arab Cooperation League and asked them if they were prepared to help us change the direction of financing across the world. The reality is that we cannot build schools and hospitals and replace water mains with 10 and 15 year money. And the notion that that should only be available to HIPC countries is to risk pauperising those countries who have come out of poverty. To that extent, I'm happy that in Vienna in June, 73 countries, 74 countries met and signed with the Arab Cooperation League and the World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank, the Caribbean Development Bank, the African Development Bank, the Asian Development Bank, the Latin American Development Bank, otherwise known as CAF, 16 institutions coming together to be able to say that we need to put a new deal in place for the financing of schools, for the financing of hospitals and clinics, and for the financing of carrying safe water to people. I could otherwise have said that we wanted to go for the SDGs, but we accept that, in a world where people are fighting for their own fiscal stability and in a world where people are putting more money, regrettably, in defence, it is critical that we claim ground where we can. There is no more basic place to claim ground than sending our children to school, ensuring that our people can be healed when they are hurt or sick and making sure that we have access to what really is vital for life, water. If in 2026, 193 nations or the majority there too cannot protect ground in this area, then we really have to ask ourselves, what have we come to do at this General Assembly? I look forward to us being able to confront the big issues, particularly AI, who is impatient of any kind of continued dialogue as to whether regulation should come or not. And while we ponder on these great issues, then there are bots and all other kinds of things working to undermine our capacity to control livelihood. I end on this point. It is arrogant for us to believe that civilizations do not fail or that humans or species do not become extinct. We do not see dinosaurs anymore on this earth. And we have heard about all kinds of civilizations that are no longer dominant in the world's history. Let us wake up and recognize that the only thing that is necessary for us to succeed is to find the political will to act and to make the sacrifices necessary, monetary or otherwise, to maintain the center such that global common public goods are maintained in the world. Thank you.

Thank you, Prime Minister. And now I give the floor to the Minister of Foreign Affairs of India, Mr. Subrahmanyam Jaishankar.

Thank you. Thank you, Excellency. Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, it's a great pleasure to join you all at this summit. And I thank President Antonio Costa for taking this initiative. India is glad to join as a co-sponsor. We meet at a time when the global order is under stress. For some decades, the world has witnessed a steady rebalancing, which was a long expected structural evolution. However, extreme competition, geopolitical tensions, and actual conflicts have given this an entirely different character. If left unchecked, it would call into question the very spirit of international cooperation. And that is why it is so essential that multilateralism asserts itself strongly at this juncture. At stake here are very real issues, not just words and expressions. The future of peace and international security, of climate action and climate justice, of emerging technologies and development finance, of countering terrorism and strengthening supply chains, and of ensuring disaster resilience and preparing for pandemics, all depend on a will to cooperate. Let us recognize that whatever we have achieved so far is only through collective efforts. The lesson here is to safeguard the good while striving for the better. That objective can be realized through a range of efforts, through a combination of initiatives. Where ongoing conflicts are concerned, specific dimensions could be addressed even while we strive for a broader peace. The 4F crisis of fuel, food, fertilizer, and finance cannot be left to itself. When new capabilities and concerns arise, there is a very powerful case for frameworks and guardrails. Where there is a threat of choke points, dominance, and disruption, De-risking and diversifying must be encouraged. And where there is a compelling cause or a powerful case, the like-minded must have the confidence to come together. Multilateralism will be best served when international law, rules, and norms are scrupulously observed. For multilateralism to forge ahead, Its advocacy and its practice must both be strengthened. Reformed multilateralism is therefore essential. More participative deliberations and more transparent decision-making are both overdue. That would provide the hope and the optimism which is clearly needed by the UN system, and it would reinforce our resolve to work together. I thank you.

Thank you very much. Let's now give the floor to the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Federal Republic of Brazil, Mr. Mauro Vieira. You have the floor.

Thank you very much, Mr. President William Ruto. President of the, Antonio Costa of the European Council, Prime Minister of Australia, Prime Minister Albanese, Prime Minister Motley, and Minister Jay Shankar. Ladies and gentlemen, I wish to extend President Lula's sincere greetings to the organizers of this event and regret and his regrets that his short stay in New York this year for the opening of the General Assembly did not allow him enough time to be with us this evening here as he so wished. The world today is undergoing unprecedented changes. Climate change, new technologies, and shifts in global production chains will shape our future. To address the challenges these changes will bring, we will need more dialogue and more multilateralism, not less. Yet, there are those who seek to divide the world into spheres of influence in an attempt to halt the inevitable emergence of a multipolar order. In doing so, they attack multilateralism, international law, and the UN Charter. Their targets aim at the UN, at WTO, ICC, UNRWA, and World Health Organization. Excellencies, the order we created after 1945 was never perfect. We have always had to confront violations of international law, yet we face something different today. direct challenges to an international order grounded in international law. Attempts to impose this world view have brought nothing but instability, insecurity, and violence. We know what needs to be done. Our principles have not changed. They remain close to the UN Charter. Excellencies, we must reject the erosion of multilateralism. human rights, peace and development are interdependent. This understanding lies at the heart of the United Nations. The UN was built by many hands over many generations. All of us have the duty to defend it and to improve it. None has the right to dismantle it. For this reason, President Lula encouraged world leaders at the 79th session of the General Assembly to respond vigorously to this situation through a comprehensive review of the Charter. We have the instruments to carry it forward. Article 109 of the Charter provides the way. Likewise, the call to action for global governance reform adopted under the Brazilian presidency of the G20 can guide us forward. Security Council reform is also especially urgent, given the spiral of violence ravaging the world. At the same time, while we continue striving to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals, we must also begin preparing for a future beyond 2030. Excellencies, A stronger multilateral system must go hand in hand with the stronger sovereignty. That means strengthening our domestic capacities while strengthening international cooperation. The Mercosur-European Union trade agreement is one such example. The Global Alliance Against Hunger and Poverty is another. There is also great potential for cooperation in areas such as digital sovereignty, critical minerals, and artificial intelligence. Preserving autonomy requires rejecting automatic alignments while remaining permanently open to dialogue. Excellencies, it's not possible to defend international law while sending weapons to those who violate it, nor can we invoke international norms selectively. We must uphold the most basic international norms. South Africa's case before the International Court of Justice under the Genocide Convention underscores the importance of law over force. We must recognize that the lives of Palestinians or Ukrainians are as valuable as our own, and that Cuban and Danish sovereignty is as sacred as that of our own countries. Finally, we must act with purpose and urgency. In this spirit, the partnership for multilateralism must become more than a forum for restating familiar positions. It must serve as a platform for advancing concrete initiatives to strengthen the multilateral system. Excellencies, we do not yet know whether the present crisis will result in a painful rupture or in a promising transformation. Our fate is not sealed. It is our duty to act now to defend the achievements of multilateralism and international law so that the future generations may benefit from them. Brazil is ready to do its part. Thank you.

Unfortunately, the Prime Minister McCartney cannot be with us by unexpected problems to land in New York, but he sent his speech and I invite the Perm Rep of Canada to read the speech of Mark Carney, please.

Excellent, please. President Costa, President Ruto, Prime Minister Albanese, Prime Minister Motley, Minister Vieira, Minister Jayashankar. In 1955, a school teacher from Pugu, outside Dar es Salaam, sat in this room. He had come to ask the Trusteeship Council to set a date for his country's independence, and he was told that it might take 25 years. His name was Julius Nyerere. The institution was not yet ready to move as far or as fast as he wanted, but it gave him a place to stand. a way to build support. Tanganyika was independent in six years, united with Zanzibar as Tanzania in nine. Prime Minister Carney has spoken at length this year about the rupture in the international order. I will not do it again tonight. We are all living with the consequences. Our choice is where to go next. Let's.

Remember the principles of the UN Charter: sovereign equality, the right of peoples to self-determination, the respect for international law, the respect for the universal rights of people, the individual, and the conviction that even in an increasingly fragmented world, countries are stronger when they work together.

These have not failed us. The failure is the habit of insisting that every problem be solved by everyone at once, and then calling the paralysis that follows multilateralism. Effective multilateralism works in layers. Universal institutions uphold common principles, confer legitimacy, and ensure that countries large and small have a voice. Coalitions of the willing assembled around specific problems deliver results. Both drawing on capabilities beyond government, science, business, civil society, and people themselves. For those who doubt what this system delivers, consider the International Telecommunication Union, which lets us communicate every second across the world. Or the International Civil Aviation Organization, which allows millions to fly safely every day.

These are examples of the sustainable organization of multilateralism, but there are also examples of innovation. Originally, the Montreal Protocol was a targeted technical solution, and governments, science, and industry were addressing a specific problem by taking specific measurable commitments. and then it was ratified universally, and the ozone layer is now being restored. It was concluded in Montreal, and still today it is administered by an office in Nairobi.

For the P4M, small groups formed around problems rather than around geography or size, variable geometry. not as an alternative to multilateralism, but as an instrument of it. A place that reaches across divides, that connects universal institutions, practical coalitions, and capabilities beyond government. That listens with humility, learns from experience, and turns shared principles into shared outcomes. In short, build trust and prove what works with those ready to act. then bring it back to the multilateral system to be strengthened, broadened, and scaled. Nyerere came into this room before the institution was ready. He asked it to move. When it did not move far enough, he built the momentum that moved history. That should be our ambition, not to wait for consensus before beginning, but to act with those who are ready, deliver results, and bring others with us. That is our task now. You can count on Canada. Thank you.