(8th meeting) Plenary Session, Global Mechanism on ICTs in the Context of International Security (20-24 July)

Good afternoon to all. I call to order the 8th meeting of the 2026 substantive plenary session of the Global Mechanism on Developments in the Field of ICTs in the Context of International Security and Advancing Responsible State Behavior in the Use of ICTs. We will now continue with the final item of our agenda, which is developing and implementing capacity-building measures. As I have told you during the meeting this morning, we have a very lengthy list of speakers, which demonstrates the importance and the relevance of most of this topic to you— of this topic to most of you. However, this will require us to manage our time very carefully. Therefore, I reiterate that while there is no set time limit for statements, you could consider delivering a shorter version of your statement and submitting the full version through e-statements to the Secretariat and to the Chair's team. For your information, there are 49 requests for the floor. If you have not yet pressed the button to request to speak, please do so right now. If you're going to speak on behalf of a group of states, please also indicate this. to the Secretariat so that we can make the relevant adjustments to the list of speakers. And also, for your information and for your reference, there will be a clock on the screen. I think you already know this, but I will recall it just the same. We will now begin with the first speaker, which is Côte d'Ivoire.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

followed by South Africa.

Madam Chair, Côte d'Ivoire aligns itself with the statement made by Nigeria on behalf of the African Group and would like to make the following observations in its national capacity. Madam Chair, my delegation welcomes the fact that a specific discussion is dedicated to capacity building, which for many states remains the essential precondition for implementing the framework for the responsible behavior of states in the use of ICTs. The digital transformation undoubtedly opens up immense prospects for development for our societies. However, it also increases their exposure to cyberattacks, disruptions of essential services, digital fraud, and the criminal exploitation of new technologies. In the face of these threats, which know no borders, my delegation is of the view that security collective cannot rest on national capacities, which are deeply unequal. digital environment requires resilience for states that have, uh, even limited resources. Côte d'Ivoire believes that capacity building must be voluntary, inclusive, sustainable, transparent, and based on the needs expressed by the beneficiary states themselves. It must take into account local realities and produce measurable results. At the national level, my country has strengthened its institutional architecture, in particular through the National Agency for Information Systems Security and the CRT Côte d'Ivoire. My country is also working to develop sectoral incident response mechanisms. We are working on training staff and ensuring better coordination between those responsible for digital security and public administration officials. Madam Chair, national efforts in order to fully bear fruit must be supported by more accessible and better coordinated international cooperation. That is why my delegation would suggest the following 3 recommendations. First of all, under the auspices of the UN to develop a tool that will allow states to identify their needs and then connect them with partners, programs, and finance— available financing. Secondly, attach a particular prerogative to CRT: the protection of critical infrastructure, simulation exercises, and the training of diplomats technicians, judges, and other law enforcement services. Third, strengthen the role of the African Union Regional Economic Commissions and the African Training Centers so that assistance is adapted to national and sub-regional contexts. Madam Chair, Côte d'Ivoire calls for more ambitious, inclusive international cooperation that includes women and youth and promotes transfer of knowledge and the development of lasting local expertise, because strengthening the capacities of each and every one of us means strengthening the digital security of all of us. Thank you.

Thank you very much, says the chair. I now give the floor to the delegation of South Africa, followed by Malawi.

Chair, South Africa aligns with the statement delivered by Nigeria on behalf of the African Group and would like to make the following remarks in our national capacity. South Africa maintains the view that capacity building is a cross-cutting issue on the pillars of the global mechanism, given that member states remain at varying levels of implementation of the framework for responsible use of ICTs due to various factors, including differing contexts and capabilities. Capacity building is therefore an important enabler in addressing cybersecurity threats and building resilience to such threats. The implementation of norms for responsible state behavior, the application of international law to the use of ICTs, and the implementation of CBMs. South Africa continues to support capacity-building efforts that are needs-based and practical, guided by capacity-building principles encapsulated in paragraph 56 of the 2021 OEWG Final Report. Programs such as the Women in International Security and Cyberspace Fellowship, remain essential in building the necessary cybersecurity capacity. Also critical is sustainable and practical funding to support capacity-building activities, particularly for the Global South. In this context, we look forward to further discussions on the development and operationalization of the UN Voluntary Fund for Capacity Building, as well as the establishment of the dedicated Global ICT Security Cooperation and Capacity Building Portal to strengthen international cooperation and assistance on ICT security. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you very much. I now give the floor to Malawi, followed by Italy and Brazil.

Madam Chair, understanding the value of every second, I will do my best to share our national statement CBMs in a reasonable time. My delegation once again thanks you for giving us the floor. If the cumulative and evolving framework represents our shared vision for responsible state behavior in cyberspace, then capacity building is what makes that vision achievable. The Republic of Malawi believes that capacity building should not be viewed as assistance provided by some states to others. Rather, it is is a shared investment in international peace and security. Cyber threats do not recognize borders, and weaknesses in one part of our interconnected digital ecosystem— and a weakness in one part of our interconnected digital ecosystem can have consequences far beyond national frontiers. For developing countries, however, the challenge is often not lack of commitment, but a lack of resources and expertise, and opportunities to translate political commitments into operational capabilities. Addressing this gap requires sustained partnerships, predictable support, and above all, respect for national ownership. Capacity building must therefore remain demand-driven, tailored to national priorities, and responsive to the different levels of development and capacities of member states. Equally important, it should promote self-sufficiency by enabling states to develop enduring institutions, skilled professionals, and resilient national ecosystems, rather than creating long-term dependency. Madam Chair, as we begin operationalizing the global mechanism, the dedicated thematic groups present an important opportunity to move beyond dialogue towards practical implementation. They should become platforms where member states openly exchange experiences, identify common challenges, showcase successful practices, and develop practical recommendations that support implementation across all 5 pillars of the framework. The Republic of Malawi further welcomes establishment of the voluntary fund under the global mechanism. For many developing countries, meaningful participation in this process depends only on political will. depends not only on political will, but also on all the availability of practical support. The Voluntary Fund therefore represents an important investment in ensuring equitable participation and strengthening the implementation of our shared commitments. Capacity building must also be inclusive. In this regard, my delegation would like to specially recognize UNIDIR, and all sponsoring states' efforts in supporting the WIG Fellowship. We also would like to congratulate UNIDIR's launch of the Compendium of Good Practices on Gender Mainstreaming in Cybersecurity. The compendium provides practical guidance that can assist member states in integrating gender perspectives into national cybersecurity policies, institutions, and capacity-building initiatives. We commend UNIDIR for advancing this important work, and we affirm that inclusive cybersecurity is stronger cybersecurity. When women participate fully as policymakers, technical experts, incident responders, diplomats, and leaders, our institutions become more resilient and our responses more effective. At the national level, the Republic of Malawi continues to prioritize investment in people as the foundation of cyber resilience. Through national awareness, professional development, and cybersecurity education, we are strengthening institutional capacity and developing the next generation of cybersecurity professionals. This includes delivering child online protection training for trainers, training for teachers across all education divisions, conducting university cyber drills to build practical skills, advancing women in cyber initiatives to promote greater participation in the field, and providing specialized technical training through the Malawi National CERT, as well as our established sector CERTs. These efforts reflect our conviction that sustainable cybersecurity begins with sustainable human capacity. Madam Chair, to conclude, the measure of successful capacity building is not the measure— is not the number of workshops conducted or certificates awarded. It is whether countries leave better prepared to prevent cyber incidents, respond effectively when they occur, and contribute meaningfully to international cooperation. As we move from establishing the global mechanism to implementing its mandate, let us ensure that capacity building remains practical, inclusive, and results-oriented, so that every member state has not only one seat at the table, but also the capability to contribute meaningfully to our shared objective of an open, secure, stable, accessible, and peaceful ICT environment. I thank you.

Many thanks. I now give the floor to Italy, followed by Brazil and Rwanda.

Good afternoon, and thank you, Madam Chair, for giving me the floor. Italy fully aligns itself with the statement delivered by the European Union and wishes to add what follows in its national capacity, also incorporating some contributions by the 4 Italian stakeholders objected by the Russian Federation. Cyber capacity building is essential for strengthening national resilience against increasingly sophisticated cyber threats in today's interconnected world. In the current geopolitical landscape, strong cyber capabilities help safeguard critical infrastructure, protect national security, and reduce dependence on external actors. As emerging technologies such as AI, cloud, quantum, and the Internet of Things expand the digital ecosystem, cyber capacity building ensures these innovations are adopted securely. Ultimately, it promotes international cooperation to trust and stability in cyberspace, while supporting sustainable digital development. Existing national and regional experience demonstrates that combining assessment, innovation, training and practical implementation produces measurable improvements in cyber resilience. Madam Chair, cyber capacity building is a qualifying element of Italy's national cybersecurity strategy and of our national cyber diplomacy. Firmly convinced by the effectiveness of the multi-stakeholder approach, which has been highlighted also by other delegations such as Tonga, we have developed a robust national ecosystem of public and private entities that are engaged whenever requests for assistance and cooperation are presented. A key role in this scheme is played by the Italian National Competence Centres for cybersecurity and digital transformation. The principles of sustainability, inclusivity, and alignment with SDGs underpin Italy's CCB approach. Efforts must respect human rights and fundamental freedoms, also incorporating a gender perspective. This goes hand in hand with the implementation of the UN Pact for the Future and the Global Digital Compact. A particularly meaningful strategy is the Mattei Plan for Africa, promoted by the Italian Government to bring about a paradigm shift in relations with African nations and peoples, generating shared opportunities, benefits and development. The Plan promotes a model of cooperation between equals, built on trust and mutual respect. The strategy aims to support the sustainable development of the African continent in all its dimensions, including the digital one, through ongoing dialogue and the joint selection of the projects and investments considered most effective to respond to the concrete priorities of its peoples. Some examples of CCB projects supported by Italy range from developing national cybersecurity strategies to training personnel, from delivering ICT products to crafting awareness-raising campaigns. We do that bilaterally with several partners, as well as through multilateral organizations such as the World Bank, UNIDIR, and ITU. Within the other multilateral initiatives in this field, I would like to particularly mention the Tallinn Mechanism, which is a platform of countries that since 2023 has been providing civilian cyber support to Ukraine, as the latter endures the ongoing unjustified and unprovoked Russian war of aggression that is horrendously targeting civilian critical infrastructure both at central and local level, which is a blatant violation of the UN Framework of Responsible State Behaviour in the Use of ICTs. Madam Chair, dear colleagues, capacity building should remain the central pillar of of the global mechanism. Initiatives should be demand-driven, sustainable, coordinated, and based on local ownership, while avoiding duplication of existing efforts. Beyond technical training, capacity building should encompass institutional development, cybersecurity governance, policy support, workforce development, awareness programs, and the strengthening of national cyber ecosystems. as also recalled, for instance, by Nigeria. All of the above bearing in mind the advancements of EDTs and their impact on cybersecurity. Against this backdrop, DTG1 will be essential to deepen the interconnection between CCB and the other pillars, whereas DTG2 will have the extraordinary opportunity to define possible templates of CCB projects, or best practices, making sure that nobody is left behind, as several delegations of Africa and Oceania have emphasized during the past few days. Madam Chair, Italy stands ready to contribute to these efforts by sharing practical experiences and supporting collaborative initiatives that strengthen global cyber resilience through measurable, operational, and trusted collaboration so as to concretely nurture the conditions for a broad implementation of the UN framework of responsible state behavior, which is the very mandate of this global mechanism. Thank you.

Thank you. I now give the floor to Brazil, followed by Rwanda.

Madam Chair, Brazil aligns itself with the statement made by Chile on behalf of a number of Latin American countries. And would like to add a few comments in its national capacity. Building capacities in the field of ICT security is the foundation for all countries to benefit in a sustainable way from digital transformation, a key enabler of socioeconomic development, while adequately addressing security vulnerabilities. The digital divide adds a central layer to this challenge. Rendering international cooperation an urgent imperative in order to expand the capacity of states to foster resilience, mitigate risks, and respond to ICT incidents. My delegation believes that the United Nations must play a larger role in capacity building on ICT security. Centralizing information on the many existing initiatives would facilitate access by those who need them most, by concentrating all possibilities in one place. More importantly, having the United Nations take part in those efforts ensures closer alignment with the priority issues identified by the membership and better compliance with the capacity-building principles adopted in the OEWG. Brazil looks forward to the December session of DTG II. Its work should not start from scratch. It should build upon the experience accumulated in the previous process, including activities such as the 2024 Global Roundtable on ICT Security Capacity Building and the mapping exercise carried out by the Secretariat to survey the global landscape of capacity building programs and initiatives. Having a clear, updated picture of what exists helps optimize synergies, avoid duplications, and promote a systematic matchmaking effort. Given the rapidly evolving pace of digital technologies, developing and retaining enough qualified personnel is an ongoing challenge, and even more so from a gender, race, and disability-sensitive lens. Ensuring that women and persons belonging to marginalized populations are duly qualified and effectively including in the ICT security workforce is essential to a more secure cyberspace and should be treated by the DTG too as a substantive component of capacity building rather than an afterthought. Madam Chair, by way of conclusion, my delegation highlights that the interconnected and transnational nature of cyberspace means that security is even more of a collective endeavor than in other arenas. No country can tackle threats in the digital domain in isolation, and vulnerability left unaddressed in one state is a vulnerability available to be exploited against all. The strategic importance of ICT security capacity building lies in the need to enhance systemic resilience and ensure confidentiality, integrity, and availability of digital ecosystems resources. International capacity building efforts need to be held high in every country's priority list for ICT security and will continue to play a crucial role in our common goal of an open, secure, stable, peaceful, accessible, and interoperable ICT environment. I thank you.

Thank you. I now give the floor to Rwanda.

Thank you very much, Chair, for giving me the floor. First, Chair, we want to thank you and your team for excellent leadership and guiding us in this session. Chair, we align ourselves with the statement delivered by— on behalf of the African Group. Madam Chair and colleagues, over the past days, we have engaged in rich and thoughtful discussions on evolving cyber threats, landscape, responsible state behaviors, international law, and confidence-building measures. While perspectives have naturally differed, one message emerged with remarkable clarity: no state can address today's cyber challenge alone. Our collective security depends on one strong cooperation, greater trust, and shared commitment to responsible action. The establishment of this global mechanism gives us the opportunity to translate that shared understanding into practical actions and results. Madam Chair and colleagues, as we turn to capacity building, we are discussing the foundation upon which every other pillar depends. Without the necessary institutions, legal frameworks, technical expertise, and skilled professionals, commitments cannot be implemented, norms cannot be operationalized, and resilience cannot be strengthened. Rwanda's own experience has demonstrated that building cybersecurity capacity requires sustained investment, sound public policy, and strong national institutions. But it has also shown that national efforts alone are not enough. Cyber threats knows no borders, and like we, the diplomats, they never wait for visas. That is why international cooperation remains indispensable. The Open-Ended Working Group laid a solid foundation through initiatives such as the Global Points of Contact Directory. Confidence-building measures and the inaugural Global Roundtable on ICT Security Capacity Building was in the direct direction. We should preserve these achievements and build upon them as new technologies, including artificial intelligence and quantum computing, continue to reshape the cyber landscape. Madam Chair, many developing countries, the challenge is no longer or not a lack of commitment. It is a lack of resources, technical expertise, and opportunities to build national capacities. Closing these gaps, as most have said, should be our collective objective. Our shared digital ecosystem will only be as resilient as the capacity of every state to prevent them. As this global mechanism begins and continues its work, let us ensure that capacity building remains practical and accessible to all states. If we succeed in this, this mechanism will be remembered for the capacities it strengthened and the trust it helped build among the states. I thank you very much.

I thank the Deputy Permanent Representative of Rwanda for that statement. I now give the floor to the Permanent Representative of Ecuador. Ambassador, you have the floor.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Let me begin. By saying that Ecuador welcomes your appointment and we wish to express our full support for your work. My delegation aligns itself with the statement delivered by Chile on behalf of a group of Latin American states, and we wish to highlight a few additional remarks. I'm referring now to the topic of capacity building. This is indispensable for all states to be able to participate in more on more equal footing in cyberspace and, of course, the framework for responsible state behavior in ICT. Since March 2026, we've had a framework law on cybersecurity in Ecuador. Its implementation requires the consolidation of institutional capacity, technical and operational and financial capacity as well. I understand that Ecuador is the 3rd country in the region to have this legal framework. Also, Ecuador is developing its national cybersecurity policy for 2026 through 2029. This is aimed at building a resilient ecosystem and shared responsibility. One of these 7 pillars is linked to international cooperation and cybernetic diplomacy, and it recognizes the need to complement national capacity with knowledge, resources, and technical assistance. This vision aligns with the overall principles of responsible state behavior. Colleagues, capacity building must be sustainable. It must be oriented— results-oriented, and it must be equipped with adequate financing and enjoy participation from a broad range of sectors, including all stakeholders and concerned individuals. We are focused also on a culture of cybersecurity and building this culture in small and medium-sized companies, and we believe that international cooperation can help us overcome these challenges. These initiatives should foresee the challenges of emerging technologies such as AI, quantum computing, and the Internet of Things. All of these are areas that Ecuador has incorporated into its new national policy. And so my delegation gives particular importance to the dedicated thematic group on capacity building, and it should bring us closer to the realities in different countries and promote measures to help countries diagnose and assist in their challenges. It could also promote indicators for assessing results, monitoring, follow-up mechanisms, and better coordination between the needs of states and the offers of cooperation that are available. The other— the technical thematic group should address also the risks associated with this and developing national capacity. and it should avoid addressing issues that fall to other fora. Let me reiterate the willingness of my delegation to contribute to the development of this global mechanism. And of course, I couldn't fail to mention how happy I am to see you leading our work, and you will always have our full support.

Thank you.

Thank you very much. Ambassador, for that support. Thank you for also, also for those words. I now give the floor to the next delegations, which are Kiribati, Cambodia, and Mauritius. Kiribati, you have the floor.

Madam Chair, Kiribati aligns itself with the statement delivered by the Kingdom of Tonga on behalf of the Pacific Island Forum members, and we endorse in particular the forum's view that capacity building is the enabler underpinning everything else we do here. A framework that only some states can implement is not yet a framework for all. We speak from experience. Our National Cybersecurity Strategy was developed through broad multi-stakeholder consultation, with technical support from the International Telecommunication Union, ITU, Our national cybersecurity maturity assessment undertaken with the Oceania Cybersecurity Centre gave us an evidence base that has shaped our priorities ever since. And through the Kiribati Digital Government Project, supported by the World Bank, we are building the institutions and infrastructure on which secure digital services depend. Madam Chair, I want to be plain about what that took. Each of those was years of work for a very small number of people. Not one arrived complete. What our partners gave us was not the capability delivered ready-made. It was the chance to build our own and the patience to let us do it. That is the first lesson and the most important. Capacity building works when it is country-owned. Our partners supported priorities that Kiribati identified, not priorities identified for us. The second is that it must be sustained. A single training builds a memory. It does not build an institution. And the third is that it must be inclusive. Government alone did not build Kiribati cybersecurity. Our churches, our communities, our private sector, our schools, and our regional partners each carry part of it. In a society as small as ours, inclusion is not a procedural courtesy. It is the only way capacity is built at all, and the only way it stays. Madam Chair, we warmly welcome the dedicated thematic group on capacity building. December is this mechanism's first opportunity to show that it can convert discussion into delivery, and GDBS asks that it focus on concrete, measurable output, mapping needs against what already exists, developing tools states can actually use, and identifying sustainable financing. We support the fullest use of experts' briefings, which are of particular value to delegations that cannot Bring their own expert. And Madam Chair, permit me one practical word because it is a capacity question too. Kiribati is 19 hours ahead of this room. A 10 o'clock meeting in New York is a 5 o'clock the following morning in our capital. When we ask that meeting times be rotated, as the Forum have asked, we are not asking for comfort. We are asking that the offices who hold our entire national cybersecurity function, and who must be at their desks the same day, are not required to choose between attending this mechanism and defending their country. Hybrid participation matters enormously to us, but hybrid at 5 in the morning, session after session, is not participation. It is endurance. An inclusive mechanism must be inclusive in, in the practical design of its work. And this is the simplest, least inclusion this mechanism could offer. Madam Chair, in closing, permit me to say something on behalf of my delegation. Kiribati's delegation to this session is 3 people. 2 are here through the Women in Cyber Fellowship. One is here under the United Nations sponsorship program. Not one of us will be in this room without those programs and without the trainings that came with them. I say that plainly because it is true and because those who sustain this program should hear it, say it aloud. They did not buy Kiribati a seat, they made it possible for Kiribati to use one. What we brought to this room, our experience, our position, our voice, is our own. What those programs gave us was the chance to bring it. To the state and partners, who made this possible. We thank you. The training is not incidental to the travel. It is what turns attendance into participation. Madam Chair, this is what capacity building looks like when it works. It looks like a delegation that would not otherwise— that would otherwise not be here. We are not asking to be carried. We are asking to be equipped. So the next time this room meets, Kiribati can arrive not only with needs to describe but with the experience to offer. That is the measure by which we will judge this mechanism and it is a contribution we intend to make. I thank you, Madam Chair.

I thank you so much for your remarks. I cannot promise to change the time that we meet in the global mechanism.

However, you have my commitment that next time I'm going to meet with you virtually, it's going to be at your convenient time, not New York time.

Thank you.

Now, I'll now give the floor to the delegation of Cambodia, to be followed by Mauritius.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Cambodia is taking concrete steps to strengthen its national cyber resilience. We are advancing our—

oh, sorry.

I think— Cambodia appreciates your leadership in the effort of your team in preparing for and convening for this first substantive plenary of the Global Mechanism. We welcome this opportunity to contribute to the discussion on capacity building and to promote the practical implementation of our agreed framework. Digital transformation is among Cambodia's key priorities. We are building a digital government, economy, and society while recognizing that digital progress and cyber resilience must advance together. Sustainable development cannot rest on insecure digital foundations. Yet significant capacity gaps persist. Developing countries face increasingly sophisticated malicious ICT activity, much of which is cross-border, while operating with constrained technical, institutional, and financial resources. In an interconnected environment, Weakness in one part of the digital ecosystem can create risks across borders. Closing these gaps is therefore an investment in our collective security. Cambodia considers capacity building essential to the effective implementation of the Framework of Responsible State Behavior in the use of ICTs. We emphasize 3 priorities. First, capacity building must be demand-driven, tailored to national circumstances, and grounded in national ownership. For Cambodia, priority areas include protecting critical information infrastructure, strengthening national and sectoral incident response capabilities, and securing digital government services. Programs should be designed jointly with recipient states and aligned with their national strategies, institutional context, and implementation timelines. Second, capacity building must be sustainable and results-focused. One-off training alone is insufficient. True resilience is built when we train local trainers, establish robust institutional memory, and strengthen our national pool of cybersecurity professionals. Cambodia welcomes international partnerships that support joint research, knowledge exchange, facilitated access to relevant technologies, and security and university-level collaboration to build the next generation of our cyber workforce. Third, capacity building should be evidence-based, politically neutral, transparent and accountable, and should be provided without conditions. It should be inclusive, non-discriminatory, Undertaken through voluntary partnership and implemented with full respect for state sovereignty, human rights, and fundamental freedoms. Madam Chair, Cambodia is taking concrete steps to strengthen its national cyber resilience. We are advancing our national cybersecurity legal and policy framework, strengthening CAMCERT and incident response capabilities, and enhancing the security of our digital government services. We appreciate that recent Cambodia UNIDIR Cyber Capacity Building and Policy Training jointly organized by Cambodia's Ministry of Post and Telecommunications and the UNIDIR with support from the Government of Canada And we also value capacity-building support from the Government of Australia and other partners, as well as regional cooperation through the ASEAN-Singapore Cybersecurity Center of Excellence and the ASEAN-Japan Cybersecurity Capacity Building Center. The global mechanism should add practical value to these national and regional efforts. Cambodia encourages close coordination between the 2 dedicated thematic groups so that implementation challenges identified in substantive discussions can confirm tailored capacity building partnership. We also support voluntary needs assessment matchmaking between identified needs and available assistance, resource mobilization, knowledge sharing, and measurable follow-up. Cambodia underscores the state-led and intergovernmental character of the global mechanism and the principle of consensus in its decision-making. In accordance with the agreed modalities, Its capacity-building work should draw on relevant technical expertise and build on regional experience, including ASEAN's effort to implement the voluntary non-binding norms. It should also avoid duplication, make effective use of the United Nations system and relevant partners. The success of these efforts should be measured by concrete results: stronger institutions, better prepared personnel, and more resilient essential services. In closing, Cambodia reiterates its commitment to working constructively with all member states to promote an open, secure, stable, accessible, and peaceful ICT environment in which no state is left behind. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Grazie. Thank you. I now give the floor to Mauritius, to be followed by Nauru, Singapore, and the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Madam Chair, good afternoon, and thanks for giving me the floor. Essential. Capacity building must be inclusive, demand-driven, and sustainable. It should reflect national priorities and contexts while promoting ownership and long-term resilience. In this regard, Madam Chair, we emphasize the importance of strengthening legal, policy, technical, and institutional capabilities, including the development of national cybersecurity strategies, protection of critical information infrastructure, and enhancement of incident response mechanism. We further highlight the need for enhanced cooperation and coordination among the states, regional organizations, the private sector, academia, and civil society. Public-private partnerships play a vital role in sharing expertise, resources, and best practices. At the same time, capacity building efforts should avoid duplication and ensure better alignment with existing initiatives. Transparency, trust, and confidence building are fundamental. We support the exchange of information on national experiences, lessons learned, and good practices. In addition, the existing voluntary repositories and platforms for capacity building can facilitate matchmaking between needs and available resources. This could further discuss in the established dedicated thematic group on capacity building, Madam Chair. It is also essential to integrate capacity building with in-depth discussions on the applicability of international law, norms of responsible state behavior, and confidence-building measures. This holistic approach will ensure that capacity building contributes meaningfully to a secure, stable, and peaceful cyberspace. We would like to highlight that the mainstreaming of the principles of transparency, trust, and human rights into capacity building programs, including through gender-responsive approaches and the integration of gender perspective into the national ICT policies, should be enhanced during the course of this particular process. Madam Chair, we strongly believe that development of mentorship programs to supplement training particularly for CERTs and CSIRTs, and strengthening of cooperation between incident response teams through joint training and mutual assistance arrangements is important and should be expanded. We further express support for existing initiatives such as the Global Cybersecurity Cooperation Portal designed by India and the UN Cyber Resilience Academy under UNIDR, and also initiatives from the OAS, OSCE, and ASEAN regions. We firmly believe that these tools and capacity-building efforts can provide practical support and long-term resources for states, especially those with limited capacities. Finally, Madam Chair, allow me to reiterate that Mauritius hosts one of the ITU Global Academy training centers where dedicated training programs focusing on cybersecurity norms and CBMs implementation have been conducted on an annual basis since 2021. Past training sessions were attended by over 20 countries across the globe, and we encourage interested delegations present here to register on ITU Academy portal for future trainings in that regard.

Madam Chair, finally, we reaffirm that capacity building should be guided by the principles of inclusivity, accessibility, and equality, ensuring that no state is left behind.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you very much. I now give the floor to Nauru.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Nauru offers the following national remarks in alignment with the statement delivered by Tonga on behalf of the Pacific Island Forum members on capacity building. When Nauru first addressed this mechanism in March, we said that our focus was implementation. And that success should be measured by whether support is accessible and equitable for those who need it most. 4 months on, we return to report what implementation has meant at home and to hold this mechanism to the same test. Since March, NATO has advanced our most ambitious cyber-neutral reform program in our national history. The NAWERO Cybersecurity Bill is in the final stage of consideration by our government, with a Digital Transformation Bill and Data Protection Bill to follow. Our National Cybersecurity Strategy and National Child Online Protection Strategy are being developed in parallel with the assistance of ITU, and our national CERT arrangements are taking shape. The draft legislation was open for public comment Because in Nauru, the community that legislation serves is never far from the government that drafts it. These reforms are aligned with the framework of responsible state behavior and with our region's instruments so that what we build nationally serves what we have agreed to internationally. Madam Chair, Nauru, a country with a population of 12,000 people, offers this account for a reason. It demonstrates that political will is not a scarce resource. Capacity is. A committed small state can draft the laws, set the strategies, and design the institutions. What it cannot do alone is staff them, sustain them, and grow the expertise they require when the officials concerned already carry several portfolios each. Capacity building for a state like Nauru must therefore be cumulative, each engagement building on the last, developing our own people rather than substituting for them, and lasting beyond any single project cycle. Support delivered in fragments leaves fragments behind. We therefore look to the DTG on capacity building in December to move on from principle to program. Nowhere else asks as specific, a clear picture of where needs and existing support do and do not meet, a capacity building portal designed for the official with 10 minutes to spare, not the ministry that is equipped with a dedicated research team and serious attention to sustainable financing. We also encourage the cross-cutting group to treat capacity as a thread running through every pillar. Because of many states, it is the difference between endorsing the framework and living it. I thank you.

Muchísimas gracias. Thank you very much. I now give the floor to Singapore.

Thank you, Madam Chair. As highlighted by many delegations today, cyber capacity building is an essential component of international efforts to promote an open, secure, stable, interoperable, and resilient ICT environment. States have consistently highlighted the importance of building technical, legal, policy, operational, and diplomatic capacities to enable effective implementation of the UN Framework for Responsible State Behavior in cyberspace. Capacity building should be needs-based, nationally owned, practical, and coordinated. Precisely because of the complex challenges in cyberspace as articulated by States, it is important that we continue to support action-oriented capacity-building in ICT security, which can equip States to deal with and respond effectively to these emerging threats. Madam Chair, Singapore remains committed to cyber capacity-building. We need cyber capacity-building to close the gaps in cyber capabilities and for countries to contribute meaningfully to international cyber discussions. In this regard, cross-regional exchanges and sharing can also be an extremely useful form of capacity building, and participants often equip each other as much as the trainers who provide capacity building. In this regard, Singapore capacity building programmes are now privileged to work with members from the Pacific Island Forum member states as well as ASEAN. Under the Singapore Cyber Leaders Programme, the ASEAN-Singapore Cybersecurity Centre of Excellence conducted our first workshop for the Pacific Islands Forum member states and ASEAN member states in December last year. The next workshop will be conducted in November this year, and we look forward to the participation from ASEAN as well as Pacific Island colleagues. Next month, Singapore will run the 7th iteration of the United Nations Singapore Cyber Fellowship, or the UNSCF. The UNSCF seeks to empower senior officials with interdisciplinary expertise to effectively oversee national cyber and digital security policy, strategy, and operations requirements. Selection letters have gone out, and we look forward to welcoming fellows to the 7th iteration of the UNSCF. As discussions under this UN global mechanism advance, there is an opportunity to consider how international coordination mechanisms can better support cyber capability— capacity-building efforts. We could work together to develop a co-creation model that places national priorities at the center, leverages regional coordination as the primary platform for needs identification and consolidation, and uses international mechanisms to facilitate visibility, coordination, and partnerships. Effective coordination of international capacity building is not a one-time exercise, but a continuous and evolving commitment. Addressing the full range of ICT capacity building needs requires approaches that are both inclusive and universal. We look forward to more focused discussions on how to accelerate capacity building in DTG II and stand ready to contribute to these discussions. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you. I now give the floor to the Islamic Republic of Iran. They will be followed by Canada, Guatemala, New Zealand, Iran, you have the floor.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Throughout the discussions in both the First and Second OEWG, member states have consistently underscored the vital importance of capacity building for the security of and in the use of ICTs. This common understanding is reflected in the final report of both OEWG and in the annual progress reports of the Second OEWG. However, despite this strong political commitment, no concrete operational capacity-building measures have yet been adopted at the UN. The Global Mechanism should now translate this political commitment into practical action by developing and implementing concrete UN-led capacity-building initiatives. Given the central role of the United Nations in promoting the security of and in the use of ICTs, existing capacity-building initiatives outside the United Nations should complement and support the work of the UN, not the other way around. In this regard, my delegation believes that the role of the United Nations should extend beyond merely coordinating and matchmaking capacity initiatives undertaken by other actors. Madam Chair, we are not beginning our discussions under the capacity building pillar from scratch. During both the first and second open-ended working groups, member states put forward several concrete and action-oriented proposals on capacity building. These proposals are already reflected in the final and annual reports of the We therefore propose that they be consolidated into a single compilation prepared under your authority to serve as the basis for focused, practical, and action discussions within the Second DTG. Among these proposals, the establishment of a voluntary United Nations Fund should be accorded priority. As reflected in paragraph 58 of the OEWG Final Report, Member States agreed to continue discussions within the Global Mechanism on the development and operationalization of a voluntary UN fund to support the capacity building of States in the security of and in the use of ICTs. Advancing this initiative should therefore be one of the first priorities of the DTG, too. During the OEWG process, Member States recognized the UN-Singapore Cyber Fellowship Program as a valuable initiative for enhancing understanding across the policy, operational, technical, legal, and diplomatic dimensions of ICT security. This recognition is reflected in paragraph 53 of the OEWG Final Report. Building on this agreed outcome, as highlighted by the African Group and several other delegations, We propose that the establishment of a UN Cyber Fellowship Program be considered as another priority item for discussion within the 2nd DTG. Capacity building is not limited to positive measures aimed at addressing the needs and priorities of developing countries. It also requires the removal of, of obstacles that impede a state's ability to access ICT resources and develop their national capacities. Restrictive measures in the ICT environment can significantly hinder the development, security, and resilience of ICT ecosystems. Such measures undermine existing capacities and impede efforts to strengthen them. Accordingly, the global mechanism should also consider practical measures to address and prevent such restrictive practices including unilateral coercive measures that adversely affect the ICT capacities of states. This should constitute another priority area for discussion within the 2nd DTGs. I thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you very much. I now give the floor to the delegation of Canada.

Merci. Thank you, Madam Chair. Canada has national experience in capacity building. For example, Canada is proud to support UNIDIR's work in Southeast Asia. This is a multi-year project that involves 8 countries: Thailand, Vietnam, Indonesia, Malaysia, Laos, Cambodia, Pakistan, and the Philippines. These workshops and training sessions have brought together a range of government entities academia, civil society, and the private sector across the region. Canada will be able to elaborate on good practices in the area of co-creation for these activities at DTG2 in December. Canada is also pleased to have supported the Compendium of Good Practices on Gender Equality and Cybersecurity recently published by the Stimson Center and UNIDIR. This compendium shows how gender-responsive approaches can strengthen cyber resilience, improve governance, and contribute to more sustainable capacity-building outcomes. One of the examples identified in that compendium is, of course, the Wake Fellowship, to which Canada proudly contributes. The energy of the women in this room is inspiring to all, and we thank them. Dear colleagues, one of the foundations of effective capacity building is collaboration. In this regard, Canada believes it is useful to strengthen relationships between donors, implementers, and beneficiaries. Each plays a distinct role in ensuring that capacity building efforts are tailored, effective, and sustainable. Madam Chair, Allow me one last parallel with soccer. Following that analogy, the beneficiaries of capacity building are the players on the field. They are the ones who are living the match and who know where the gaps are. Non-governmental stakeholders are the coaches. They must listen to the players and adjust the game plan. Donor countries, for their part, are the supporters or fans.

Thank you.

Who fund the coaches and follow the score closely. Co-creation means making sure that these 3 players are talking about the same match before deciding how to play it. Madam Chair, we are enthusiastic about the idea of elaborating on good practices and co-creating on capacity building at the thematic group in December. We will thus together raise the level of each of our teams together. This concludes our statement.

Thank you.

Thank you very much, says the Chair. And I now give the floor to the delegation of Guatemala.

Thank you, Madam Chair. As this is the first time my delegation takes the floor, allow me to congratulate— convey my delegation's congratulations on your leadership and to recognize the dedication with which you and your team have guided the work of this mechanism. Guatemala appreciates the efforts made to promote an inclusive and transparent process. Guatemala also aligns itself with the statement made by the delegation of Chile on behalf of a group of countries and wishes to make some additional remarks in its national capacity. Madam Chair, my delegation believes that capacity building constitutes one of the fundamental pillars of the framework for responsible state, state behavior in the use of ICTs. It also represents an indispensable condition for all states to be able to participate safely, effectively, and meaningfully in the digital environment. For Guatemala, capacity building should not be understood solely as technical assistance. It is a comprehensive process that strengthens institutions, develops human resources, promotes public policies, improves national resilience and helps narrow the digital divides that still persist in some states. In this context, capacity building is the element that makes it possible to translate the commitments and consensus reached into concrete institutional, technical, and human capacities at the national level. It also helps strengthen the resilience of states, facilitate the effective implementation of the Framework for Responsible Behavior, and ensure that all countries, regardless of their level of development, can participate on more equitable terms in collective efforts to promote security and stability in the digital environment. Madam Chair, we also believe it is important to continue promoting initiatives related to the protection of critical infrastructure, the strengthening of national C-CERTs and CERTs, cyber diplomacy, the application of the norms of responsible behavior, incident response, and the challenges associated with emerging technologies. Including artificial intelligence. Madam Chair, in the digital and cybersecurity ecosystem, human resources are always the most important. In Guatemala, where only a small percentage of, uh, people have higher education in the computer science and even fewer experts, this is a major big problem, it is necessary to work together with NGOs and private initiatives, including academia, to strengthen fellowship programs, which are very useful to countries like Guatemala when our own resources are insufficient. That's why we are very enthusiastic about such mechanisms. Finally, Guatemala reaffirms its commitment to work together to promote an approach to capacity building that is inclusive, action-oriented, and based on the needs of States, as we are convinced that no state can be fully secure until all of us have the capacities necessary to meet the challenges of the digital environment. Thank you very much.

Thank you very much, Guatemala. I now give the floor to New Zealand.

Thank you, Chair.

New Zealand aligns with the statement delivered by the Kingdom of Tonga on behalf of the Pacific Islands Forum And we reiterate the key message that capacity building is the enabler that underpins all aspects of the global mechanism's work. We also recommend to you a Pacific Islands Forum working paper submitted to the OEWG last year that outlined regional capacity building priorities. New Zealand's capacity building efforts are focused in our Pacific region, including building CERT capabilities, developing national cybersecurity strategies, cybersecurity public awareness campaigns. We're also pleased to be supporting the Women in International Security and Cyberspace Fellowship, which last week saw 37 fellows from 30 countries build connections and explore key issues shaping cybersecurity. These fellows have also enriched discussions this week across every agenda item. Looking forward, this new global mechanism is including DTG2, should deliver an approach on capacity building that is coherent, contextualized, calibrated, and constructive. It should be coherent by responding to identified needs and avoiding duplication. It should be contextualized by ensuring capacity building is tailored to cultural contexts, economic conditions, conditions, and geographic circumstances. It should be calibrated to the UNAID operating context, and most importantly, it should be constructive by actually leading to practical support and improved outcomes. Ultimately, success will be measured by whether the global mechanism makes a difference. And to borrow a sentiment from some of our Pacific colleagues, if the mechanism makes a difference in the context of Pacific Island member states, then you can guarantee that it will make a difference for all member states.

Thank you.

Muchísimas gracias.

Thank you very much. I now give the floor to the delegation of Cuba, followed by Mexico and then India.

Gracias, Presidenta. Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, as a delegation from a developing country, we firmly defend the creation and strengthening of capacity, capacity building. In this regard, We support the disarmament affairs division for supporting the development of developing countries in the work of the global mechanism, especially at this first plenary session. Their program has not only fostered the participation of developing countries in the formal meetings of the mechanism, but it has also held additional activities on capacity building on relevant topics. Also, it is worth expanding the traditional forms of capacity building limited to good practices and exchange of information. We have seen that this is not sufficient to transform the digital divide into digital opportunities. The vast gaping digital divide and the enormous economic difficulties faced by developing countries puts us in a position of asymmetry and also in terms of preventing, detecting, and tackling threats in the area of ICTs. Very often they— these come from areas where there is greater technological development and often these are used as a pretext for actions further down the line. Capacity building or strengthening should not be limited to those topics that do not impact the essence of cybersecurity. The United Nations has a key role to play in this regard. Bilateral and regional initiatives, South-South and triangular initiatives, should also complement the global efforts that are within reach of all. As regards the work of the dedicated thematic groups, we note that the selection of topics should be done by consensus. The dedicated thematic groups should contribute to stemming the growing threat of the use of ICTs in the context of international security, and specifically by achieving a global commitment for the use of ICTs for exclusively peaceful ends, for the benefit of cooperation and the development of people, the prohibition on the use of ICTs as a pretext to launch wars, threats, or the use of force, a prohibition on the militarization of cyberspace, and also the elimination of the vast technological gap and the barriers placed on developing countries as regards investing in their own ICT security infrastructure. The TG2 of the global mechanism has greater emphasis on capacity building, and this could contribute to achieving real commitments, especially for developed countries, in order for them to provide to developing countries who request it assistance and cooperation, including financial resources and technology transfer, bearing in mind the specific needs of each country. This idea is supported by the vast majority of developing countries, and so far we have not found a sufficient response. We especially call for an end to all unilateral coercive measures that put in— that limit exchanges or progress and digital learning environments. Just to mention a few examples, we cannot talk about cooperation on capacity building in real terms when there are still destructive and discriminatory practices that persist. In order to detect and respond to the malicious use of ICTs, we must have inclusive, universal, and non-discriminatory access to information and knowledge related to ICTs. And this is why it is necessary for measures or activities aimed at capacity building implemented by this global mechanism be directed to making possible this access and to closing the digital divide. I thank you.

Thank you very much. I now give the floor to the delegation of Mexico. Thank you.

Mexico aligns itself with the statement delivered by Chile on behalf of a group of Latin American states and wishes to add the following remarks national capacity. Madam Chair, Mexico considers that capacity building should be responsive to the needs, priorities, and contexts identified by states themselves. In order for such initiatives to be truly effective, they should incorporate a gender perspective. They should recognize the differing levels of development and promote sustainability, interoperability, and national ownership. Also, we reiterate that Dedicated Thematic Group 2, DTG 2, has its own mandate for accelerating capacity building in the area of ICT security. And therefore, its work should not be understood as being subordinate to or conditioned by the first dedicated thematic group. The 2 groups together with the plenary should complement each other in order to avoid duplication and generate practical coherent outcomes. At the same time, we believe that the focus of our work should evolve beyond the traditional vision of assistance and cooperation. The mechanism should reflect the idea that all states can contribute knowledge, experience, and good practices in accordance with their capacities and their areas of expertise. In this regard, it would be appropriate to move towards an approach that recognized the providers of assistance for capacity building rather than resorting to the traditional categories such as donors and beneficiaries. Doing so would foster more horizontal, inclusive, and needs-based cooperation that is based on the needs expressed by states themselves. Finally, Mexico considers it essential to ensure predictable and sustainable financing to enable all states to participate fully in capacity-building activities. In this context, we believe it is timely to advance in the as-yet pending discussion as regards the establishment of the United Nations Voluntary Fund and the fellowship program provided for in the modalities in order to expand the access of developing countries to resources, training, and cooperation opportunities offered by the mechanism. I thank you.

I thank you. I now give the floor to India, to be followed by Albania, Botswana, Guyana, and Vanuatu. I now give the floor to the Ambassador and Permanent Representative of India. You have the floor, sir.

Thank you, Madam Chair. It's a matter of great satisfaction for me to address this plenary on an agenda item that India has from the very outset of the open-ended working group process considered central to building a truly inclusive and secure cyberspace. Madam Chair, for the Global South, digital technology has been transformative, a genuine enabler of economic prosperity and accelerated progress on the Sustainable Development Goals. India's own experience with open, inclusive digital public infrastructure, exemplified by the India Stack model, has shown that technology's benefits can only be fully realized when accompanied by robust security, and the capability to defend against emerging threats. This is precisely why India has consistently emphasized that capacity building cannot be treated as a residual or secondary pillar. It must be targeted, it must be needs-driven, contest-specific, politically neutral, and transparent. Madam Chair, India's own bilateral practice reflects this conviction that capacity building for the Global South must be substantive and sustained, not just symbolic. Through the Indian Technical and Economic Cooperation Program, one of the oldest institutionalized arrangements of its kind, in the last 5 years alone we have offered close to 50,000 fully funded training opportunities to professionals from Global South countries spanning nearly 400 courses at over 100 premier Indian institutions, with a substantial and growing share dedicated specifically to ICT, cybersecurity, e-governance, and emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence, and big data analytics. We share this experience to underline that scaled demand-driven capacity building for the Global South is both achievable and effective when pursued with sustained political will. India therefore warmly welcomes the establishment of a dedicated thematic group focused specifically on cyber capacity building. It's a structural recognition of the priority this issue deserves within the global mechanism. In this regard, we welcome and look forward to the constructive role that the co-facilitators have envisaged to play in this DTG. We also take this opportunity to stress that the DTG should function through synchronized topic-based agendas, expert briefings, and clear reporting modalities to the plenary so as to sharpen the practical output of this mechanism. Madam Chair, it is with particular happiness that my delegation recalls that the proposal for a dedicated global ICT security cooperation and capacity building portal was originally an Indian initiative first tabled in 2022. We are deeply gratified that this idea has found resonance across the membership, particularly among Global South countries, and was ultimately endorsed by the General Assembly through Resolution 80/16 as part of the final OEWG report to be developed through a step-by-step modular approach. We are pleased to announce today that having seen this idea through years of deliberation to consensus, and eventual adoption. India will be providing the entire funding towards the operationalization of this portal as a portal of the United Nations, so that concrete, tangible action can finally follow years of discussion. India's support will help enable the technical establishment of the portal and its maintenance, ensuring that the platform envisaged comprising a repository of resources, a capacity-building calendar, a needs-based catalogue of opportunities, and an interactive discussion board can move from design to reality. CERT India will undertake the technical consultancy work required for the portal's testing and infrastructure development. We wish to place on record that India sees genuine and lasting value in this portal if properly used and populated by member states with actionable needs-based information. We believe this platform can play a meaningful role in bridging the capacity gap that continues to separate developed and developing states in the domain of ICT security. Provided it is treated by all of us as a living tool rather than a static repository. Madam Chair, India remains committed to ensuring that this global mechanism translates years of patient multilateral negotiation into concrete outcomes that matter on the ground, particularly for those states that need capacity support the most. We look forward to working with the Chair, the co-facilitators of the DTGs, and all member states to take this important work forward. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Ambassador, muchísimas gracias.

Many thanks for your statement, Ambassador, and thank you also for this important announcement that you've just shared with us. Thank you for India's leadership and your commitment to making commitments a reality. I now give the floor to the delegation of Albania.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Albania aligns itself with the statement delivered by the European Union and wishes to add the following remarks in its national capacity. Albania regards capacity building— regards capacity building as a cornerstone of the framework for responsible state behavior in cyberspace and an indispensable enabler for international peace, security, and sustainable development. We reaffirm that capacity building is one of the most practical and impactful ways to support states in addressing existing and emerging ICT threats and implementing agreed commitments on ICT security. Albania supports capacity building that is demand-driven, needs-based, sustainable, transparent, and nationally owned. We stress that such efforts should be inclusive, accessible, and responsible to the specific needs and priorities of each state, particularly in cases of the small countries. Effective capacity building strengthens not only technical capacities, but also institutions, policies, partnerships, and a cybersecurity culture embraced by people as professionals and also as individuals. In concrete terms, Albania has expanded its capacity building efforts across the 3 pillars of people, processes, and technology. Our experience with severe cyberattacks shows that cyber resilience depends not only on technology, but also on strong institutions, skilled professionals, informed decision-makers and citizens, and trusted partnerships at national, regional, and international levels. Following our investment in technology and security of the system, Albania has strengthened cybersecurity resilience through new laws, and procedures that define the organization and responsibility of cybersecurity institution response team and the emergency and crisis response team, as well as the protection of critical and important information infrastructure and cybersecurity risk assessment. During last year, the National Cybersecurity Authority delivered a broad program of activities, national and international, to raise awareness, strengthen education, and build practice cybersecurity capacity across society. Over 50 activities targeted professionals, the public and private sector, critical and important infrastructure, businesses, and SMEs through cyber hygiene training, conferences, regional events, and practice-oriented webinars. In addition, 11 dedicated activities and awareness sessions were organized for persons with disabilities, the Roma community, visually impaired individuals, elderly people, and other groups with more limited access to technology and digital education. Particular emphasis was placed on children and youth education, professional cybersecurity training, and support for women and girls in cybersecurity. Weekly activities at schools across the country have reached several thousand students, helping them to learn about safety and well-being online. Last year alone, these activities organized direct— engaged directly over 7,700 participants, compared to 6,500 we had in the previous year. And from those, majority were employees of public and private institutions and citizens, while 1,000 events received— over 1,000 people received expert-level cybersecurity training. An increasing number of international events, which have brought up to 30 countries in one event only, make us believe that this work is very important, help us all together to meet the challenges of today's world in cyberspace. Albania continues to work closely with international partners and is grateful for their support, with particular emphasis on cooperation in the Western Balkans. Through international events and platforms, we have brought together technical teams, legal experts, diplomats, and with strong emphasis bringing together young people in order to exchange experiences, strengthen cooperation, and promote practical cybersecurity learning for today and for the future. These investments have enabled dialogue and reinforced our shared commitment to building cyber resilience through cooperation, training, and trusted partnerships. Looking ahead, Albania strongly supports the work of the Global Mechanism as the principal inclusive intergovernmental platform for advancing dialogue and cooperation on ICT security. We welcome the dedicated focus on capacity building with the Mechanism and believe it offers valuable opportunities to strengthen practical cooperation, facilitate exchange of experiences, and identify concrete avenues for assistance and partnership. We also support efforts aimed at improving coordination among existing initiatives, promoting transparency regarding available assistance, and facilitating better matching between identified needs and available resources. Such efforts can emphasize effectiveness, avoid duplication, and contribute to more sustainable capacity-building outcomes. As we move forward, capacity-building should continue to serve as a bridge between policy and implementation, helping all states strengthen resilience, build trust, and contribute to our shared objective of an open, secure, stable, accessible, and peaceful ICT environment. Last but not least, I would also like to express my appreciation for the opportunity to participate at this session as part of the Women in Cyber Fellowship, made possible for us through the support of the Government of the Netherlands. I am proud to be part of this capacity-building program, a strong community of women whose expertise and engagement contributes meaningfully to the United Nations discussions on cybersecurity. I thank you, Madam Chair.

Muchísimas gracias. Doy la.

Thank you very much. I now give the floor to the delegation of Botswana, followed by Guyana.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Botswana aligns itself with the statement delivered on behalf of the African Group by the Federal Republic of Nigeria and wishes to make this statement in its national capacity. Chair. Cyber capacity building is not a secondary consideration in the discussions of this forum. It is the fundamental pillar upon which the framework for responsible state behavior rests. As my delegation has continuously stressed during the OEWE sessions, there is an undeniable correlation between a country's capacity gaps and its digital vulnerabilities. In this regard, Botswana welcomes the operation— of the dedicated thematic group on capacity building within this global mechanism. We believe the discourse by this group must prioritize concrete needs-based support over a one-size-fits-all mandate, while ensuring that national ownership remains at the heart of all initiatives. Chair, closing the digital divide and translating agreed norms and CBMs into practice requires actionable capacity building. We encourage the DTG to, to focus on strengthening member states' institutional readiness, specifically in developing sound legislative and regulatory frameworks and sound national policies. Equally essential is building technical cyber defense capabilities, strengthening critical infrastructure resilience, and investing in human capital through targeted cybersecurity education. Botswana reinforces the widely shared sentiment among developing nations that capacity building must be sustainable and adaptable in accordance with criteria that aligns with their recipient states' unique internal realities and demands, which should be voluntary identified by the states themselves. Botswana firmly maintains that the global mechanism must work hand in hand with regional and sub-regional bodies to roll out capacity-building initiatives. These organizations understand the unique political and physical challenges of their member states very well. Formally leveraging these regional hubs under the global mechanism will maximize resources efficiently. Botswana acknowledges and thanks the UNIDEE for its sustained contribution to national capacity-building initiatives. Including through its International Law Program, which helps states develop national positions. Furthermore, their new regional liaison program reinforces a shared commitment to the principles of capacity building. Botswana reemphasizes that all capacity building efforts must systematically adopt a gender-sensitive perspective. True cyber resilience cannot be achieved while a gender digital divide persists. We must continue to build the capacity of women cyber professionals while deploying gender-inclusive cybersecurity awareness strategies. This is why Botswana is particularly grateful to UNDII and its dedicated state partners for bridging the gender gap in global digital governance through the Women in International Security and Cyberspace Fellowship, of which Botswana is a proud beneficiary. This program ensures that women's voices are actively shaping international security dialogues, and contributing to the future of global cybersecurity. I thank you, Chair.

Muchísimas gracias. Thank you very much. I now give the floor to Guyana, to be followed by Vanuatu, the Russian Federation, and then the Republic of Korea.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Guyana aligns with the statement delivered by the Bahamas on behalf of CARICOM and adds the following remarks. In our national capacity. For developing countries like Guyana, ICT capacity building is essential to bridging the digital divide and should be continuous and cross-cutting. In this regard, we underscore the importance of identifying ICT capacity gaps, taking account of country-specific challenges and needs. Strengthening the capacities of developing countries should be viewed as part of the greater global ICT security security, and as part of efforts to accelerate implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. ICT capacity building is critical for addressing ICT vulnerabilities, mitigating ICT threats, ensuring incident responses, and strengthening digital resilience. Training at technical, legal, policy, and other relevant levels, information sharing, exchange of best practices and experiences and technology transfers can help to effectively advance these efforts at the national, regional, and international levels. There is also a need for multilateral collaboration, including public-private partnerships, regional and sub-regional cooperation, and cooperation between states and relevant stakeholders. Building on OEWG and ICTs, Guyana supports the operationalization of the Global ICT Security Cooperation and Capacity Building Portal and the establishment of the UN Voluntary Fund for ICT security capacity building. We believe that these would be beneficial in supporting the capacity building needs and initiatives of States. We also welcome the dedicated thematic group aimed at accelerating ICT security capacity building. Cognizant of both ICT threats and benefits, Guyana's digital transformation has been guided by its ICT Master Plan 2030 and the National Cybersecurity Policy Framework. We have invested in developing our ICT infrastructure to improve public services, enhance cybersecurity awareness, and promote digital literacy. Guyana also recently joined the Latin American and Caribbean Cyber Competency Center, LAC4, as we continue to strengthen our cybersecurity capacity and digital resilience. Finally, Guyana emphasizes that ICT capacity building is critical to the global mechanism on ICTs and for promoting an open, secure, stable, accessible, and peaceful ICT environment. I thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you very much. I now give the floor to Vanuatu.

Madam Chair, Vanuatu aligns itself with the statement delivered by Tonga on behalf of the Pacific Islands Forum members and adds the following in its national capacity. Vanuatu can testify that capacity building works. 2 decades of sustained national investment supported by genuine partnerships have given Vanuatu the strongest cybersecurity standing in our region by international assessment. We say this without complacency. Our gaps remain real and our resources thin, but with purpose, the return on well-designed capacity building is measurable, and skeptics of this pillar should study the Pacific before doubting it, because we have seen what works. Vanuatu is equally clear about what does not, and our region has put that learning on the record. The Joint Pacific Islands Forum paper on capacity building submitted to the OEWG remains Vanuatu's reference point for this pillar. Its principles bear repeating in this new setting. Capacity building in our region must be Pacific-led, with activities co-designed by those they serve. Contextualized, because one size fits nobody; coordinated, so that partners complement rather than crowd each other; sustainable, outlasting the funding cycles that create it; and inclusive of our societies in full. The paper also identified needs this room will hear from a few other regions: climate-resilient digital infrastructure, and the capacity to assess emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence, cloud services, and satellite connectivity before adopting them. These are not generic asks. They describe what it takes to digitalize safely on the frontline of a changing climate, and Vanuatu asks that this mechanism treat the paper as a standing Pacific input to its capacity-building agenda. Madam Chair, the Dedicated Thematic Group on Capacity Building gives that agenda its first institutional home, and Vanuatu wants December to be remembered as the moment this mechanism started delivering. We hope the DTGs deliver 3 outputs: an honest global mapping of needs against provision, exposing the mismatches that everyone suspects and nobody has documented. A capacity-building portal shaped around how officials in recipient states actually work, and credible progress on financing that does not evaporate with the next budget cycle. We further encourage the Gross Cutting thematic group to embed capacity considerations in its treatment of every pillar. Vanuatu's earlier remarks on norms implementation and legal capability both, in the end, resolve into capacity questions. Vanuatu came to the OEWG to ensure that the smallest states would shape this agenda rather than receive it. The Pacific Paper is proof of that intent. This mechanism's task is to prove— is to prove the international community heard it. I thank you.

Muchísimas gracias. Thank you very much. I now give the floor to the Russian Federation.

Madam Chair, the development of practical, action-oriented recommendations and initiatives for capacity building in the field of ICT security is one of the priorities of the global mechanism's work. We believe that such measures must meet the specific needs of the Global South When it comes to bridging the digital divide, they must be depoliticized and open and carried out on the basis of respect for state sovereignty. At the same time, we believe that any attempts to restrict countries' access to advanced ICTs or to increase their technological dependence on dominant states in this sphere are unacceptable. This includes the monopolization of the ICT global market by the latter and/or with their facilitation. Madam Chair, in our view, the time has come to move from discussions about the importance of capacity building to concrete practical steps. I have the honor on behalf of the Russian Federation to present an initiative to conduct drills on responding to computer attacks under the auspices of the United Nations. We are convinced that the key factor in ensuring information security is not the ICTs themselves, but the human being who operates the relevant software and hardware. And while the latter can be purchased, the task of equipping operators with skills, expertise, and real-world expertise is far more complex. It is precisely this challenge that the proposed drills are designed to address. I refer to real-time virtual competitions among national teams on a training base provided by the operator, during which they will simulate responding to various types of malicious activities in accordance with a pre-prepared scenario. The technical and diplomatic points of contact of the UN Global Intergovernmental Points of Contact Directory also participate in the exercises. I stress that in accordance with the principles of the UN Charter, exclusively defensive actions are practiced. The results are assessed either in person or in a hybrid format using a rating system based on the team's performance and completion of tasks stipulated in the scenario. A working document with more detailed information is available on the website of the Global Mechanism. The Russian Federation already has experience in conducting such exercises. Drills with broad international participation were held on the margins of the signing of the UN Convention Against Cybercrime in Hanoi in 2025, as well as on the margins of the Digitalization of Industrial Russia conference in Nizhny Novgorod and the ICT Crime 2026 conference in Saint Petersburg. The drills we propose are focused on the broadest possible range of countries, primarily developing countries, and they aim to practice interaction within the framework of the UNPOC directory. Thus, the initiative is aimed to— aimed at assisting the mechanism in 2 areas at once: capacity building and confidence building. We plan to work with the UN Secretariat and specialized departments to, to work with them on the implementation of this initiative with Russia's financial, organizational, and methodological support, and member states will be duly informed afterwards. Madam Chair, given the needs of the Global South, we place a particular emphasis on one of the key aspects of assistance in strengthening ICT security. Training personnel. In Russian universities, there are several thousand students currently studying in relevant specialized fields, including free of charge from Asia, Africa, the Middle East, and Latin America. They are offered higher education and additional professional education programs, as well as advanced training courses. The specializations include Information and computer security, methods for detecting and countering network computer attacks, methods and techniques for protecting information from unauthorized access, open source intelligence gathering, countering ICT crime, techniques for investigating ICT-related crimes, and international cooperation in this area, as well as computer forensics. Given our experience and capacity, we express our readiness to establish mutually beneficial cooperation with interested competent agencies of other countries across the full range of issues relating to the training of foreign experts at Russian universities in the field of information security. Together with the private sector, we also organize annual international events dedicated to assisting developing countries in the field of ICT security. This year's main event will be the Global Digital Forum, which will be held in Moscow on October 8th through October 10th. Another major annual forum will take place in September in Kazan. That's Kazan Digital Week. And with the assistance of the National Association for International Information Security, we are organizing the 20th International Forum Partnership of State, Business, and Civil Society in Ensuring International Information Security. Security in Moscow on September 22nd, 24th. We invite all partners to participate.

Thank you.

Muchísimas gracias.

Thank you very much. I now give the floor to the delegation of the Republic of Korea, to be followed by Germany, France, Switzerland, and Serbia.

Thank you, Chair.

The Republic of Korea reaffirms the fundamental fundamentals of capacity building as the foundation underpinning our 5 pillars of the framework for responsible state behavior in the use of ICTs. As cyber threats become increasingly sophisticated, the absence of adequate policy, technical, legal, and operational capacity will limit not only individual states' ability to respond effectively, but also the international community's broader efforts to enhance security and build confidence. In this regard, the Republic of Korea looks forward to substantive and action-oriented discussion under the TCG2. We also believe that capacity building should not be driven solely by the priorities of providers or follow a one-size-fits-all approach, whether it should be demand-driven and tailored to the specific needs and priorities of recipient states. We remain committed to maintaining close dialogue with our partners to ensure that international capacity-building efforts are effective, sustainable, and responsive to those needs.

At the same time, we should avoid unnecessary duplication of existing capacity-building efforts and instead seek to enhance coordination, complementarity, and efficient use of available resources.

We look forward to the Global Mechanisms serving as an effective platform for promoting international cooperation on capacity building and for strengthening coordination among member states and relevant stakeholders.

I thank you.

Thank you very much. I now give the floor to Germany.

Thank you, Madam Chair, for giving me the floor. Germany fully aligns itself with the statement of the European Union and wishes add the following remarks in its national capacity. Madam Chair, you have mentioned on different occasions that we should start focusing on action-oriented capacity building as part of the global mechanism. We support this approach. There is consensus that capacity building is key— is a key element to implement the consensus framework. Germany believes that this unity is something we should build on and that it is time to take concrete steps. Like for most delegations in the room, capacity building has become an important resource to promote a peaceful, open, stable, accessible, and secure cyberspace at home and abroad. Germany believes that capacity building can only be effective when it is aligned with the specific needs and priorities of each nation. In particular, capacity building initiatives are most successful when implemented through a co-creation approach, as mentioned by Singapore and Canada, whereby donor and recipient states collaborate closely to jointly design, develop, and implement programs based on the UN principles for cyber capacity building. One example of such a co-creation approach is the Western Balkans Cyber Diplomacy Network, which Germany jointly established with its partners in the Western Balkan region in May 2025. The network is guided by designated focal points from the Ministries of Foreign Affairs of participating countries, which jointly identify regional cyber capacity-building priorities and decide on the initiatives needed to address them. This example illustrates, and as mentioned by Nigeria, Cambodia, and Malawi, cyber capacity-building programs should be demand-driven, targeted, and nationally owned. Such an approach fosters holistic community building among states, stakeholders, and the private sector alike, reflecting the borderless nature of cyber threats and the need for collaborative responses. When looking ahead, Germany believes that DTT2 and the annual Global Roundtable offer valuable platforms for a wide range of in-depth discussions on best practices and capacity building among policymakers, practitioners, and stakeholders from all sectors, especially including experts from the private sector, academia, and industry, will contribute to real-life and practical discussions. Both opportunities, though, should complement each other. In practical terms for Germany, this would mean hands-on and interactive discussions in DTT2 that facilitate the exchange of experiences and practical expertise. The Roundtable could complement DTD2 by providing a platform bringing together donors and recipient states. Furthermore, Germany would like to reiterate the importance of developing global portals in close coordination with existing initiatives and in alignment with existing regional portals to avoid duplication, enhance efficiency, and ensure complementarity. Also, we would like to highlight the important work of regional organizations, when it comes to cyber capacity building. As an example from our region, the OSCE Secretariat is a trusted partner across the region and provides valuable work when it comes to the implementation of CBMs. To conclude, by embracing a holistic, comprehensive, and demand-driven approach to cyber capacity building, both in the plenary and DTT meetings, this mechanism can ensure that every country is empowered to participate in an open, safe, secure, and resilient digital future, and that no country is left behind. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Muchísimas gracias. Thank you very much. I now give the floor to the delegation of France, to be followed by Switzerland.

Thank you, Madam Chair. My delegation aligns with the statement delivered by the EU and wishes to add the following remarks on its national capacity. In recent days, we have heard a majority of states emphasize the urgency for the global mechanism to work towards the implementation of the Framework for Responsible State Behavior in Cyberspace. Many have also highlighted that supporting the development of their national capacities is a prerequisite to doing so. This connection between the international framework and national capabilities should guide our future work, especially in the area of capacity building. And this leads me to the following 3 observations. This connection, first of all, echoes the link that France has pointed out between the 2 thematic groups. The United Nations must contribute to effective capacity building, but this can only be achieved by having a thorough understanding of the threats and challenges that these capabilities must address. The discussions within the Dedicated Thematic Group 1 should therefore provide a basis for guiding the work of the Dedicated Thematic Group number 2, ensuring a fruitful dialectic between these 2. Secondly, any discussion on capacity building, particularly within DTG 2, must be underpinned by existing capacity building initiatives, the ones that exist perhaps elsewhere. Regional organizations as well as other UN entities have a key role to play in sharing their experience and best practices. Various experts, both governmental and non-governmental, as well as stakeholders should have a place in the second group. They are often the ones who develop or participate in capacity building programs. And without them, these programs would be nothing more than empty shells. And this is why, Madam Chair, as a final point, please allow me to reiterate France's call for the topics of the thematic groups to be selected as soon as possible. This will make it possible for countries to nominate experts. It will allow the co-facilitators to work alongside you to guide the upcoming discussions and enable the countries and parties to prepare substantial contributions to make before these groups. Madam Chair, France stands ready to be fully engaged in these discussions, and we reiterate our full support for your chairpersonship. I thank you.

Thank you very much. I now give the floor to Switzerland. They will be followed by Serbia and Tonga.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Switzerland views cyber capacity building as a process that is nationally owned, expert-led, and collaborative, and which depends on strong coordination between the intergovernmental process and the wider community of practitioners. Throughout this week, we have seen what capacity building delivers— substantive and constructive contributions from delegations that have enriched our discussions. As our Canadian colleague has just highlighted, programs such as the Women in Cyber Fellowship demonstrate this added value concretely, supporting diplomats in bringing their expertise and perspectives directly into this room. We therefore welcome the newly established DGT2 on cyber capacity building and congratulate the chair, you, Madam, on appointing the co-facilitators. DGT2 and the Roundtables are vital steps towards achieving this coordination, and Switzerland is committed to supporting them. Effective coordination, strong partnerships, and reduced fragmentation are needed for cyber capacity building, as well as a better match between needs and available expertise, and stronger links between regional and global efforts. It is crucial that the intergovernmental process has a robust connection to the broader cyber capacity-building community, which provides invaluable expertise, practical experience, and implementation capabilities. In this regard, Switzerland would once again like to express its regret at the wide-range veto against stakeholder participation in the global mechanism. Stakeholders are not observers of capacity-building. They are among its principal implementers and knowledge holders. Excluding them does not protect the intergovernmental character of this process. It deprives it of the very expertise DGT2 was created to mobilize. At the same time, we recognize that their contribution to advancing cyber capacity building will inevitably—

sorry—

be limited by available resources and how frequently DGT2 and the Roundtables can meet. This is precisely why Switzerland believes it is essential for the cyber capacity-building community to remain constructively and consistently organized and engaged between the sessions of the Digi-II and the roundtables. In this context, Switzerland acknowledges the previous contributions of the Global Forum on Cyber Expertise, the GFCE. In recent years, the GFCE has served as a key platform bringing together governments, international organizations, the private sector, civil society, and technical experts to facilitate knowledge exchange and support coordination across the cyber capacity-building ecosystem, including by facilitating the very fellowship whose impact we witnessed this week. Now that the GFCE Foundation has had to cease its operations, these functions no longer have a dedicated home, yet they remain essential to ensuring that cyber capacity-building efforts remain coherent, inclusive, and responsive to evolving needs. Switzerland has therefore been working with community members to identify ways to build on the valuable contributions of the GFCE while addressing the lessons learned from its shortcomings. During the Geneva Cyber Week in May 2026, the Geneva Center for Security Sector Governance, DCAF, announced its partnership with Switzerland to host a community hub explicitly designed to carry these functions forward. Adopting a for the community, by the community approach, the hub will facilitate continued coordination, multi-stakeholder engagement, and the development of sustainable governance models for cyber capacity building. Crucially, the hub should complement the efforts of the Global Mechanism. It will support connectivity across the community and draw on the rich ecosystem of international Geneva, including institutions and organizations such as UNIDIR, ITU, and Diplo Foundation. It will also strengthen the link between strategic discussions and practical implementations— implementation, which is essential for the success of the global mechanism. Geneva offers a unique ecosystem of relevant expertise and stakeholders and can serve as a bridge between the intergovernmental process and the wider cyber capacity-building community. We look forward to discussing this proposal further with delegations and you, Madam Chair, and to supporting DGT2's work in the years ahead. We are committed to ensuring that this and future efforts reinforce rather than duplicate the objectives of the Global Mechanism. We thank all the delegations that have expressed their support for this project and provided valuable input, and we look forward to further engagement. I thank you.

Thank you very much. I now give the floor to Serbia, to be followed by Tonga and then Argentina.

Thank you, Madam Chair. The Republic of Serbia has aligned itself with the statement delivered by the European Union delegation and makes the following brief comments on national capacity. For Serbia, capacity building is a central element in ensuring that the benefits of this mechanism reach all UN member states. We believe that strengthening technical expertise, institutional capacities, and legal frameworks is essential to enabling states to better prevent, detect, and respond to malicious ICT activities. Capacity building is not only an investment in national resilience, but also an important contribution to a more secure, stable, and peaceful ICT environment for all. Serbia supports capacity building that is needs-based, demand-driven, sustainable, and coordinated. The United Nations, given its universal character, is uniquely placed to facilitate coordination, connect needs with available resources, and avoid duplication of efforts. In this regard, Serbia welcomes the role of the dedicated thematic groups in enhancing coordination, facilitating the exchange of experiences, and promoting a more effective approach to capacity building. Serbia approaches this pillar from a distinctive position. We have benefited from international cooperation and capacity-building programmes and projects with a wide range of partners, while investing substantially in our own national capabilities and contributing actively to the regional cooperation in Southeast Europe, including through the exchange of expertise, joint exercises, and the cooperation between national CERTs. This experience confirms that well-targeted, locally owned capacity building delivers tangible results. Finally, CEBI underlines the importance of the full, equal, and meaningful participation of women in all processes related to ICT security. Thank you.

Muchas gracias.

Thank you very much. Tonga, you have the floor.

Madam Chair, Tonga aligns itself with the statement delivered by my colleague on behalf of the Pacific Islands Forum members and offers the following national remarks. Our own experiences with serious incidents have taught us what capacity building must be. It must be needs-based and country-driven. Our priorities are set in Nuku'alofa, shaped by our own frameworks and our most effective partnerships. Bilateral, regional, and multilateral have been those that supported our direction rather than substituting their own. It must be sustained. Institutions like CERT Tonga were not built by single workshops, and the response to last year's attack on our health system succeeded because the relationships and capability— capabilities behind it had been invested in over years and not weeks. It must be inclusive. In a kingdom of some 170 islands, resilience is carried by government, but also by our communities. Stakeholder inclusion is not a formality of process for Tonga. It is how capability reaches the people who need it. For the same reason, we support meaningful stakeholder participation in the work of this mechanism. Madam Chair, Tonga warmly welcomes the establishment of the dedicated thematic group on capacity building, and we see the December meetings as the first true test of whether this mechanism can convert deliberation into delivery. We encourage the DTG to work towards concrete results. The cross-cutting thematic group should apply the same capacity lens across all pillars, because a state that cannot implement the framework is not protected by it. And we underline that hybrid participation in the DTGs is not a convenience, but a condition of equity. We will never be able to travel from the Pacific with a large delegation. On the other hand, we are grateful to UNIDIR and the support of the donor partners for their continuous support and for allowing our small nation to take part in the Women in International Security and Cyberspace Fellowship last week, which has greatly assisted us and has also allowed our small delegation to participate in this substantive plenary session. Madam Chair, Tonga came through disaster with the help of its partners and the strength of its people. We ask this mechanism to take to make that kind of resilience possible for every state. I thank you.

Muchísimas gracias.

Thank you very much. I now give the floor to the delegation of Argentina.

Thank you, Madam Chair. My delegation aligns with. the joint statement delivered by Chile on behalf of a group of countries from our region. We wish to add the following remarks on our national capacity. First of all, we believe that within the dedicated thematic group 2 on capacity building, the work could be oriented towards identifying national needs and regional needs in capacity building as well. As putting together best practices to foster complementarity between existing systems, fostering networks of cooperation, and identifying opportunities for technical assistance aimed at implementing the agreed framework. Second, we believe that capacity building should continue to be understood in a broad sense, which is to say the training activities should not be based only on capacity building or strengthening human resources, but rather this training should be accompanied and should complement necessary capacity for securing ICT infrastructure and improving cyber resilience software. The capacity building should be focused on ensuring each country's ability to develop and implement its own protection strategies in accordance with its own priorities and national policy. We believe it's essential for capacity building to address the needs identified by the beneficiary country itself, bearing in mind their specific geographical circumstances, thus avoiding any kind of standardized models or one-size-fits-all all that ignores the differences between national contexts. Fourth, my delegation believes that Thematic Group 2 should maintain a technical and results-oriented focus. And this is as regards the practical functioning of the second group. We believe that this DTG 2 should play a central role in developing recommendations and draft concrete, practical, action-oriented decisions aimed at being elevated formally to consideration by the plenary. In our view, it would be desirable as far as possible for the proposals emanating from the second group to— should address the broad level of consensus between the countries participating in its work. This would allow the plenary to focus its efforts on the adoption of decisions, avoiding bringing into the plenary technical issues that could previously have been resolved in the thematic groups. This is particularly important if we bear in mind the extremely limited time that the plenary has in order to simultaneously address national interventions on the 5 pillars— substantive, discussion and the discussion and negotiation of the texts and the outcomes of the different thematic groups. This is why Argentina believes that DTG II should focus on submitting to plenary sufficiently technical and mature texts that have broad support between the delegations participating. In this way, it could contribute to more efficient decision-making that is results-oriented. I thank you. Muchísimas gracias.

Thank you very much.

I now give the floor to Uruguay, to be followed by the Marshall Islands and then the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ukraine, and Japan.

Muchas gracias, señor.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Uruguay is aligned with the statement delivered by by Chile on behalf of a group of Latin American states. Furthermore, I deliver this statement in our national capacity. Uruguay wishes to underscore the importance of the substantive work of this mechanism reflecting the priorities of all regions, especially in the area of capacity building. For our region, this is a fundamental pillar for moving towards an open, secure, stable, accessible, and peaceful ICT environment, and this is why we have sought to submit a working paper, as stated in the original statement. Without a solid basis, it's going to be difficult for us to implement the mechanism or to participate on an equal footing in these fora. So capacity building is necessary to strengthen resilience and collective security. We consider this session should lay the foundations for Dedicated Thematic Group 2 to be agile and be able to be results-oriented and have technical assistance. We believe this should be a practical mechanism that should link the practical needs of states with tangible solutions and effective cooperation. Capacity-building activities It must address the priorities identified by states themselves. It should include amongst other things strengthening cybersecurity capacity, incident response capacity, protection of critical infrastructure— critical information infrastructure, and the implementation of confidence-building measures. Lastly, Uruguay wishes to highlight the value of regional and international initiatives the furtherance of capacity building, especially those by UNIDIR, the Organization of American States. And we wish to highlight especially the Women in Cyber program. Uruguay has been beneficiary of this on a number of occasions. It has significantly contributed to strengthening technical capacity and to promoting greater participation of women in the area of cybersecurity. These initiatives have shown themselves to be effective tools for strengthening national capacity, and this is why we encourage you to continue strengthening them, to broaden their reach, and to ensure greater cooperation across different programs in order to maximize their impact, to make the most of synergies, and to avoid duplication.

I thank you.

Muchas gracias.

Thank you very much. I now give the floor to the Marshall Islands.

Thank you, Madam Chair. The Republic of the Marshall Islands has not previously spoken at this process or at the Open-Ended Working Group. We are honored to take the floor now on this important issue. We wish to begin by expressing our sincere gratitude to the Pacific colleagues who have carried the priorities of our region into this room with such conviction. and Malo Apito in particular to the Kingdom of Tonga, who have delivered the Pacific Islands Forum statements on our behalf. We align ourselves fully with the Pacific position. Madam Chair, the Marshallese people live across atolls scattered over a vast expanse of ocean, separated by hundreds of miles of open sea. In this context, digital connectivity is the difference between a family divided by the ocean and one able to speak across it, between an outer island left on its own and an outer island reached by a doctor, a teacher, or a warning before the storm. Digital connection for a nation such as ours can be transformational in itself. Yet what arrives from beyond the horizon can carry harm as well as hope. The very connection that can lift a remote nation can also expose it, and the smallest and most distant among us have the least to fall back on when it does. Promise and peril arrive together. This is why the Marshall Islands places capacity building at the heart of our first intervention in this process. For nations like ours, capacity building is how the promise of digital connection is made safe. We ask that this mechanism Reach even the most distant shores, so that no nation is left beyond its horizon. We are grateful to stand with our Pacific family, and we are ready to take our place in advancing this work. Komoltada, thank you.

Muchísimas gracias.

Thank you very much. And it is indeed excellent that you're participating in the global mechanism.

Welcome.

I now give the floor to the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Madam Chair, the Democratic Republic of the Congo aligns itself with the statement made by Nigeria on behalf of the African Group, and we would like to make the following remarks in our national capacity. My delegation believes that capacity building is the foundation for the effective implementation of the entire United Nations framework. Framework on the Responsible Behavior of States in Cyberspace. Without human, institutional, technical, and legal capacities at the necessary level, states, and particularly developing countries, cannot fully participate in the collective efforts that seek to promote a safe, stable, secure, accessible cyber environment. For my delegation, capacity building needs to be guided by needs expressed by states and be part of a long-term inclusive and results-oriented approach. Assistance programs need to be developed in collaboration with beneficiary countries in order to ensure their national ownership and their effectiveness. Madam Chair, the DRC underscores the need to strengthen national capacities in a number of priority areas. These include Developing national cybersecurity strategies, training— or rather developing adapted legal and normative frameworks, strengthening national response teams, fighting cybercrime, and training for public officials.

Thank you.

law enforcement agents, and others. It is with this in mind that we adopted our National Digital Plan. This policy document includes 69 priority projects with around 4 pillars, including infrastructure, use, governance. This has led us to establish an agency for the development of, uh, digital technologies. We have ratified a digital code. We also have a national cybersecurity strategy and other projects that are today operational. My delegation also attaches particular importance to the development of skills, investing in training, research, higher education, talent development. This is all essential to ensuring developing countries to have long-term national expertise and to fully participate in international discussions on ICT issues. In this regard, the DRC supports initiatives that seek to establish a United Nations fellowship program for cybersecurity, which is meant to facilitate knowledge transfer, develop technical expertise, and ensure the participation of developing countries in the work of the global mechanisms. We also support the swift operationalization of the Global Cooperation and Capacity Building Portal for ICT Security, which will align countries' needs with offers of assistance. It will improve coordination of various initiatives, and it will promote a more equitable distribution of the available resources. We would like to thank and commend the Government of Singapore with its fellowship program for member states, as well as the remarkable work carried out by UNIDIR in order to support states' capacities through its fellowship program for women in the AI sphere and the various tools that it provides. The DRC believes that capacity building must also promote regional and South-South cooperation. Regional organizations such as the AU and regional economic commissions play an essential role in sharing good practices, developing joint training programs, and sharing technical resources. These initiatives are a useful complement to efforts at the international level. To conclude, the DRC remains fully engaged alongside all member states to ensure that capacity building remains a priority within the global mechanism so that all countries without exception can participate effectively, equitably, and in a lasting manner in the governance of international cybersecurity. We look forward to seeing how, despite the liquidity crisis the United Nations is going through this pillar will be made operational in a practical sense.

Thank you.

Thank you very much. I now give the floor to the delegation of Ukraine, to be followed by Japan, Australia, the Bahamas, and Ghana.

Thank you, Chair. Ukraine aligns itself with the statement delivered earlier by the European Union and would like to add points in our national capacity. First, as many other states, particularly in reference to the statements delivered earlier in the morning, for example, by Australia, Malaysia, OSCE in regional perspective, and others, Ukraine recognises the strong connection that exists between confidence-building measures and capacity building. To our understanding, joint exercises, both tabletop and capture the flag contribute greatly to both, as well as the Women in Cyber Fellowship, the UN Singapore Cyber Fellowship, the work of UNIDIR, the activities conducted within the OSCE, the support in human capacity building we receive from Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Estonia, and others. On the national level, Ukraine has started the Women in Cybersecurity Program, and our side is ready to cooperate with other states in this regard. It is worth noting that the most recent CTF competition held in Ireland had a Ukraine— 100% female team from Ukraine that took part, as well as it was noting the mutually beneficial cooperation with Poland in the field of promoting cybersport. We also attach a great importance to bilateral cyber dialogues. We see them as a valuable tool for both capacity and confidence building. Such dialogues help to both exchange experiences and shape the expectations from each other. On our path to joining the European Union, we continue to deepen cooperation with the European Union in cyber defence, protection of critical infrastructure, crisis response, cyber diplomacy, countering hybrid threats, and alignment with the European cybersecurity standards. In turn, Ukraine contributes unique frontline experience acquired while defending ourselves against the persistent cyber aggression by a certain P5 member. We practice the similar approach to our partners outside of the EU. Second, global mechanism as a capacity-building tool in itself. We see DTGs as a tool for the capacity building for government representatives. Allowing them to benefit from the best and the most relevant expertise that can contribute to the inclusivity of the decision-making process. For the record, Ukraine did not exercise the right of veto this time, although we have our reservations. Particularly, we consider as irrelevant to the purpose of the DTGs the presence among the stakeholders of the government-sponsored entities, the primary purpose of which is to explain their government's position. We believe that governments should explain their position themselves in the course of plenary sessions. In this respect, and due to a significant number of the vetoed stakeholders, we invite the chairperson and the secretariat to consider reserving time for the thematic workshops in the course of December session so the willing majority could benefit from the broadest available expertise as well as to determine the possibilities to engage the additional expertise on the national level. Third, the infrastructural capacity building. In this respect, it is important to highlight the work of the Tallinn Mechanism, which has become the leading platform for coordinating civilian cyber assistance to Ukraine. Through coordinated international support, it has played a crucial role in maintaining essential public services and strengthening the resilience of Ukraine's digital infrastructure. under the cyber aggression. The Tallinn Mechanism demonstrates how practical international cooperation can produce tangible results and offers a valuable model for future international efforts to enhance cyber resilience. Having said that, Ukraine reiterates the intent to further engage in the constructive manner in the capacity-building activities within the Global Mechanism and beyond.

Thank you. Muchas gracias.

Doy ahora la palabra a—

Thank you very much. Japan has the floor.

Well, thank you, Madam Chair. Japan attaches great importance to capacity building. Japan believes that capacity building is a fundamental tool for fostering common understandings of international law and norms, as well as confidence-building measures among member states. It is also an essential tool for strengthening cyber resilience in the international community as a whole. Madam Chair, in this context, let me touch upon a couple of Japan's efforts in the Indo-Pacific region. Japan is providing multi-layered and comprehensive assistance through practical exercises conducted by the Japan-ASEAN Cybersecurity Capacity Building Center, AJCCBC. And issue-specific seminars to enhance capabilities in international law and policy, among other initiatives. In addition, Japan, in collaboration with the U.S. and the EU, hosts the Industrial Control Systems Cybersecurity Week for the region every year, offering hands-on training, workshops, and seminars led by experts from Japan, the US, and the EU, as well as networking among participants. Madam Chair, discussing capacity building in the global mechanism, we believe it is important to take into account the needs of each member state, draw on the expertise of the private sector, and through information sharing and coordination among relevant countries eliminate a deprecation and waste in assistance. From this perspective, with regard to DETG2, we believe it is important to move forward in a way that realizes efficient, effective capacity building by securing the participation and proposals of a wide range of stakeholders, including the private sector. Madam Chair, aiming to maintain and develop a free, fair, and secure cyberspace, Japan will engage actively and constructively in discussing— discussions in the global mechanism, including DATGs, going forward. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you very much. I now give the floor to Australia.

Thank you, Chair. Australia aligns with the statement delivered by Tonga on behalf of the Pacific Islands Forums. If there is one lesson from the OEWG and the GGEs, it is this: that a framework is only as strong as our ability to implement it. Norms, law, and confidence-building measures don't implement themselves. People implement them. Institutions implement them. capability implements them. And that is why cyber capacity building remains indispensable to international peace and security. And it's why the creation of DTT2 is one of the most important innovations in our new mechanism, a dedicated forum focused not only on discussing capacity building, but accelerating it, coordinating it, and making it more effective. The challenge before us is not a lack of goodwill, expertise, or programs. The challenge is how to bring together a mature but fragmented ecosystem of states, regional organizations, international organizations, development partners, industry, academia, and civil society, and turn it into something greater than the sum of its parts. That should be our ambition for DTG2. Australia sees 3 priorities. First, we need to listen better. Capacity building starts with examining our assumptions and understanding the needs identified by states and by communities themselves. The OEWG repeatedly recognized that there is no one-size-fits-all or one-size-fits-none approach to cyber capacity building, and that efforts must be tailored to national circumstances and national priorities. DTG2 should become a platform where states can openly discuss discuss challenges to implementation of our framework, share lessons learned, and help us collectively understand where the most urgent gaps remain. Second, we need to connect better. Many of the solutions already exist around the world. Governments, development agencies, regional organizations, the private sector, academia, and civil society are delivering high-quality cyber capacity building programs every day. Too often, however, those seeking support don't know where to find it, and those offering support do not always know where it is most needed. Good ideas remain disconnected from funding, from expertise, or from the implementation partners. DTG2 has a unique opportunity to help bridge those gaps. Through the Capacity Building Roundtable, through stakeholder engagement, and through DTG2 itself, we can become a platform for coordination and for sustainable partnerships. Not duplicating existing efforts and not competing with them, but connecting them. Third, we need to build regionally. The most successful capacity building is often regional, built on shared experiences, shared challenges, and shared trust. The Pacific knows this. ASEAN knows this. The African Union knows this. Australia believes that DTG2 should actively amplify regional initiatives. Not because regional work is an alternative to global cooperation, but because it's one of the strongest foundations for it. Chair, perhaps the most important lesson from our previous processes is that cyber capacity building is a strategic investment in collective security. When one state becomes more resilient, we all become more resilient. And that's why Australia has invested consistently in gender-responsive, rights-respecting, and evidence-based based cyber capacity building across our region, and it's why we'll continue to do so. As this mechanism begins its work, Australia stands ready to work with all states, all regions, and all stakeholders to ensure that we deliver practical outcomes, measurable progress, and lasting partnerships. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you. I now give the floor to the Bahamas.

Madam Chair, The Bahamas aligns itself with the statement delivered on behalf of Caribbean Community CARICOM and offers the following remarks in its national capacity. As reflected in that statement, sustained demand-driven capacity building remains essential to closing our region's gap in cyber resilience, including cyber legislation, workforce development, and the protection of critical infrastructure. For the Bahamas, capacity building is a central pillar of our national cybersecurity strategy and the foundation on which effective implementation of the UN Framework for Responsible State Behavior depends. We speak from recent experience. CIRT BS, our national computer incident response team, was formally launched in December 2023 with a small team and a broader national mandate. Our establishment has reinforced an important lesson: capacity building is more effective when it's tailored to the reality of the recipient. For new and emerging CERTs like the Bahamas, this means targeted role-specific trainings aligned with the maturity of the national team and delivered in ways that strengthens capacity without disrupting day-to-day operations. Structured maturity model provides a practical roadmap enabling teams to progress from foundational incident response to more advanced operational services. We also emphasize the importance of building capacity beyond the technical communities. Policy and senior decision makers must understand cyber risks so that they can advance legislation, strengthen governance, prioritize the protection of critical infrastructure, and provide the strategic leadership needed to build national resilience. Leadership-level capacity building is what transforms technical capacity into national action. Madam Chair, capacity building should also create opportunities for exposure and collaboration. Placing developing technical teams alongside more mature, experienced counterparts through staff exchange, study visits, mentorship programs, and joint exercises accelerates learning in ways that formal training alone cannot. Moreover, Small Island Development States need capacity building that includes emerging technologies such as AI to ensure that we grow with the evolving state of technology. We encourage the global mechanism to promote these practical peer-to-peer partnerships. The Bahamas has benefited greatly from the support of a wide variety of regional and international partners whose investment has been instrumental in strengthening our national cybersecurity capacity. We are deeply grateful for their partnership, generosity, and continued commitment to our development. Personally, I have also experienced over the last 2 weeks the value of international capacity building through the WIC program. I extend my sincere thanks to its donors, organizers, facilitators, mentors, and my fellow WIC fellows. It is this testament that sustained investment in people creates lasting national and international impact. Finally, Madam Chair, the Bahamas is committed to the practical implementation of capacity-building initiatives. And to working closely with regional and international partners to maximize their impact. We believe that sustainable cybersecurity begins with people. Building a resilient digital framework requires long-term investment in education, awareness, leadership, workforce development. Through initiatives such as our annual cybersecurity conference and our Cyber Shark Capture the Flag competition that's hosted next month, our national cyber hygiene school roadshow, and targeted training for policymakers, women, and youth, we are laying foundational— the foundation for sustainable cybersecurity workforce and for strengthening resilience across our nation and our region. The Bahamas stands ready to share its CERT establishment journey With member states beginning with— sorry, let's start that again. The Bahamas stands ready to share its CERT establishment journey with member states who are beginning their own and to support a capacity-building agenda that is practical, sustainable, demand-driven, and responsive to the needs of small island development states. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you very much. Thank you very much. I now give the floor to Ghana. They will be followed by Bosnia-Herzegovina, China, Ireland, Malaysia, and Cameroon.

Madam Chair, Ghana aligns itself with the statement of the African Group and delivers the statement in its national capacity. Ghana recognizes capacity building as a cornerstone of the cumulative and evolving framework for responsible state behavior in the use of ICTs. It enables states to prevent, detect, respond to, and recover from cyber threats while participating meaningfully in international cooperation. In this regard, we welcome the establishment of the Global ICT Security Cooperation and Capacity Building Portal, the UN Voluntary Fund, and the Fellowship Program, and encourage their early operationalization alongside continued support for national CERTs, cyber exercises, and the Global Point of Contact Directory. For capacity building to be effective, it must be needs-driven, nationally owned, and tailored to each country's context, priorities, and level of cyber maturity. There is no one-size-fits-all approach. National priorities should guide the design and delivery of capacity-building programs to ensure long-term impacts and sustainable resilience. Capacity building should also extend beyond technical training. It should strengthen institutions, leadership, and human capital across government, law enforcement, diplomacy, academia, and the private sector, while fostering collaboration across technical, legal, policy, and operational communities. Ghana further underscores the importance of mainstreaming gender across all capacity-building initiatives, increasing opportunities for women through training, mentorship, fellowship, and leadership programs is essential to building a more inclusive and resilient cybersecurity ecosystem. In this regard, Ghana commends initiatives such as the UNIDIR Women in Cyber Fellowship, of which I am a fellow, and the HEC CyberTrax, which have expanded opportunities for women from developing countries to contribute meaningfully to national, regional, and global cybersecurity discussions. Ghana remains grateful to the organizers and partners and sponsors for the continued support and engagement on these capacity-building programs. Programs. We also welcome the continued emphasis on South-South, triangular, and regional cooperation, which complements North-South partnerships by providing peer learning, knowledge exchange, and the sharing of practical experience. Regional organizations remain important partners in strengthening institutional capacity expertise and supporting implementation. Finally, Ghana recognizes the valuable contributions of the private sector, academia, civil society, and the technical community. Multi-stakeholder partnerships will be essential to ensuring that no country is left behind. Ghana remains committed to working with member States and all stakeholders to advance an inclusive, sustainable, and action-oriented capacity building under the global mechanism.

Thank you.

Muchísimas gracias. Thank you very much. I now give the floor to Bosnia-Herzegovina.

Thank you, Madam Chair. While we align with the statement of the European Union, I would like to add some observations in my national capacity. For Bosnia and Herzegovina, cyber capacity building is vital and must remain a central pillar under the global mechanism, complementing bilateral, regional, and multi-stakeholder efforts. The relevance of capacity building has only increased due to the rapidly evolving threat landscape. The growing sophistication of malicious ICT serve as a constant reminder that cyberspace is deeply interconnected and that all states share exposure to these risks. In light of these realities, capacity building is no longer a matter of choice but a collective responsibility. Some of the constraints countries face in building cybersecurity capabilities are well known, such as lack of technical expertise, gaps in institutional frameworks, and limited access to advanced technologies. Yet these challenges manifest differently across national contexts, shaped by each state's unique legal, institutional, and socioeconomic environment. It is precisely for this reason that our discussion must address 2 necessary considerations. First, efforts must ensure inclusivity so that all member states, regardless of their level of resources, can benefit from coherent and coordinated support. Second, capacity building must be guided by effective partnership, matching the right needs with the right expertise. In this regard, Bosnia-Herzegovina deeply appreciates the ongoing support from its international partners, particularly the European Union, member states, which directly contributes to capacity-building projects and progress in my country. Madam Chair, for state resilience to be truly effective, capacity-building must be sustainable rather than ad hoc. We need long-term strategies that embed skills and institutional memory, ensuring capabilities are not only built but maintained as threats evolve. Furthermore, this process must be fully inclusive, engaging governments, the private sector, academia, and civil society. In this effort for Bosnia and Herzegovina, integrating a gender perspective is essential. My presence here today reflects our strong commitment to women's leadership and equal representation in cyber diplomacy. Finally, looking ahead, We will continue to strongly support work of this pillar as capacity building remains critical to turning agreed norms into practice and strengthening our shared resilience.

Thank you.

Thank you very much. I now give the floor to China.

Thank you, Madam Chair. China supports that within the UN framework to strengthen capacity building and related international cooperation. We support the formation of DTG2 and hope that the first biannual meeting will make substantial gains with regard to capacity building. China believes that the international cooperation in capacity building should be action-oriented, should be able to create fair, equal, and non-discriminatory environment, and carry out the international cooperation in this field should respect the sovereign right and digital right of each country. And the countries in the Global South must not be coerced to choose sides in this cooperation. Relevant cooperation should be unconditional— should not come with conditions, especially there should not be a condition for international cooperation in capacity building by excluding certain products from certain countries. Countries have the right to choose independently their digital and technical products based on their own conditions. Without the right to choose, there will not be digital sovereignty. Last week, China held the 2026 International AI Conference and announced the formation of the International Cooperation Organization, YECO, which is composed of the 29 founding members—

member states.

The establishment of this organization is China's action to respond the call from the Global South to unite the international community to promote the development and promotion of international AI development. China's President Xi Jinping announced that in order to support the international AI development and the capacity building in international AI in the next 5 years, China will provide 5,000 AI fellowships to the developing countries, and to create new momentum for the digital cooperation in the digital world. These actions not only will be helpful to help the Global South to fill their digital gap, But it will be also beneficial to increase the capabilities of the countries to be empowered in terms of AI security. So the AI empowered the safer cyberspace. Thank you, Chair.

Muchas gracias.

Doy a—

Thank you. I now give the floor to Ireland. They will be followed by Malaysia.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Ireland aligns with the intervention made on behalf of the European Union and makes the following comments in our national capacity. Closing the digital divide to ensure all states can harness the benefits of ICT while mitigating global cyber risks through capacity-building measures is a priority for Ireland. Ireland shares states' views that cyber capacity-building is vital for promoting a secure and stable cyberspace, including in the implementation of norms for responsible state behavior. The work under the Global Mechanism, and in particular the DTGs and the plenary, should enable continued discussions on the overall framework and of cyber capacity building and the identification of concrete gaps and needs for cyber capacity building efforts. We must work towards effective delivery of capacity building and the sharing of national best practices to help states implement the UN Framework of Responsible State Behavior in their national and regional frameworks. Capacity building must be based on the needs identified by individual states, as many here have already said. And be country-driven. The limited resources available must be used in the most effective way possible, avoiding duplication. Again, as mentioned by many here, participation by many participants in the OEWG and now in the Global Mechanism has been assisted through various programs, mostly organized through the UN with support from member states. These efforts must continue to ensure the broadest possible involvement of participants so that all contribute to our deliberations here and have their views reflected in how this process develops. Ireland supports the further development of a digital tool for state implementation of the UN framework, building on the Voluntary Norms Implementation Checklist, and the role of the Global Roundtable on Capacity Building in ensuring enhanced coordination and cooperation, including matchmaking between regional priorities and and donor offerings. Discussions at DTG1 and DTG2 must be aligned so that the discussions at the first are reflected in the work undertaken in the second. Discussions should also focus on the role of the multi-stakeholder community in the design and delivery of cyber capacity building, ensuring effective coordination with the work being done by regional organizations, ensuring the effective inclusion on women and youth in cyber capacity building efforts, and generally work to mainstream the agreed ICT security capacity building guidelines as adopted in the 2021 OEWG. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Muchas gracias.

Thank you very much. I now give the floor to Malaysia, to be followed by Cameroon, and I hope we will still have time remaining for the next speakers, which would be Israel and Thailand.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Malaysia views capacity building as a crucial enabler of the UN Framework for Responsible State Behavior in the use of ICTs. Without adequate capacity, commitments relating to norms, confidence-building measures, and international law cannot be effectively implemented. Given the different levels of cyber maturity among states, capacity building remains essential to ensure that no state is left behind. It should therefore be practical, demand-driven, and tailored to national circumstances. Malaysia has benefited from regional and international partnerships, including through ASEAN and partners such as UNIDIR, in strengthening our cyber capabilities. Drawing from these experiences, Malaysia would like to highlight 3 considerations to guide future capacity-building efforts under the global mechanism. First, capacity-building should respond to concrete needs identified by states. It should move beyond awareness-raising and support the development of capabilities that are relevant to national circumstances and priorities. For example, Some states may require support in developing cyber legislation and policies, while others may need assistance in strengthening critical infrastructure protection. A one-size-fits-all approach may not deliver sustainable outcomes. Malaysia's experience with the Malaysia UNIDO Cyber Capability Building Program has demonstrated that the best results come from programs designed in close consultation with the beneficiary state. Second, we encourage greater focus on the protection of critical information infrastructure, which forms the backbone, backbone of our economies and societies. Given the cross-border nature of cyber threats, the global mechanism has an important role in supporting States to develop the necessary capabilities to address these shared challenges. Third, we see real values in ensuring closer alignment between the DTGs. If States continue to highlight difficulties in implementing the norm on critical infrastructure protection, capacity-building activities should respond directly to to the, to the need. Such alignment will ensure that our work remains evidence-based and responsive to actual challenges. Madam Chair, capacity building is the bridge between the agreed commitments and effective implementation. By building this bridge according to the principles we have agreed upon, we can strengthen the ability of all states to benefit from and contribute to the global mechanism.

Thank you.

Muchísimas gracias. Thank you very much. I now give the floor to the delegation of Cameroon.

One element among many of the global mechanism, it is the foundation upon which its success will ultimately be built. A framework without capacity remains an aspiration. Norms without the ability to implement them remain commitments, and cooperation without shared capabilities cannot deliver lasting results. This is why Cameroon believes that the success of the global mechanism would depend on its capacity to transform political commitments into practical outcomes, particularly for states that require support. To fully participate in shaping a secure, stable, and peaceful ICT environment. Let me therefore begin by reiterating my delegation statement earlier this week. The global mechanism must ultimately be assessed by its ability to deliver meaningful and measurable results. Nowhere is this more important than in the area of capacity building. Capacity building is the foundation upon which all other pillars of the framework depend. Without adequate technical, institutional, and human capacities, states cannot effectively implement norms, apply international law, or participate fully in confidence-building measures. For developing countries, capacity building is therefore not an optional component of the global mechanism. It is the prerequisite for meaningful participation and sustainable implementation. In this regard, Cameron welcomes the establishment of the Dedicated Thematic Group on capacity building. We believe that this group should serve as a central platform for technical cooperation, peer learning, and implementation, building on the valuable work already undertaken under the OEWG process. As mentioned by other member states, the DTG should complement plenary discussions with more interactive and implementation-oriented formats, including expert-led technical workshops, country case studies, and peer-to-peer exchanges. These formats will enable member states to share experiences, identify common challenges, and develop solutions adapted to their respective national circumstances. The DTG should focus on deliverables that provide practical support to member states. We would encourage the development of concise implementation guidance, a mechanism to facilitate greater alignment between national capacity building needs and available expertise, technical assistance and support, as well as recommendations to strengthen coordination and resource for capacity building initiatives. Madam Chair, the success of DGT2 will depend on a genuine spirit of partnership solidarity, and shared responsibility. Developed countries can contribute through technical assistance, expertise, and resources. International and regional organizations can strengthen coordination and support implementation. The private sector and academia can provide innovation, specialized knowledge, and practical experience. At the same time, developing countries must continue to articulate their priorities clearly strengthen national ownership and make full use of the opportunities for cooperation offered by the global mechanism. Only through such a balanced, inclusive, and cooperative approach would the DTG tool be able to deliver lasting benefits for all member states. In conclusion, Madam Chair, Cameroon remains firmly committed to advancing the capacity-building pillar of the Framework for Responsible State Behavior in Cyberspace. Space. We believe that a focused, inclusive, and implementation-oriented digital tool can make a tangible contribution to strengthening national capacities, narrowing the digital divide, and enhancing international cooperation. This vision is also rooted in a long-standing African understanding that the strength of a community is measured by its ability to uplift and empower all its members. In this spirit, capacity building is not only about sharing knowledge and expertise. It is about building collective resilience and shared prosperity. Cameroon stands ready to work with all delegations to ensure that DCG2 becomes results-oriented platform capable of transforming our shared commitments into concrete progress and lasting benefits for all member states. I thank you, Madam Chair.

Muchas gracias.

Thank you very much. I now give the floor to Israel.

Thank you, Chair, and I apologize upfront for being the one delaying everyone from their evening activities, but I'll try to be very concise. Thanks, Madam Chair, for giving us the floor. The global growth, scale, and sophistication of cyber threats continue to challenge defensive capabilities worldwide. Cyber capacity building is not merely a supportive measure. It is a strategic imperative. It must be treated as a political neutral and practical endeavor placed at the very core of the global mechanism's mandate. Israel continues to actively champion global resilience through concrete, action-oriented initiatives. Our efforts focus on 3 key pillars. Cyber resilience, fostering international cooperation to protect critical infrastructure and mitigate cross-border systematic risks. Counter-ransomware cooperation, partnering with international allies to combat ransomware through our joint technical exercise, rapid information sharing, and actionable CERT-to-CERT collaboration. And lastly, human capital and education. Investing heavily in grassroots cyber literacy, workforce development, and academic programs designed to build sustainable, long-term talent pipelines and vibrant cyber ecosystems. Madam Chair, one example we can provide to prove how capacity building is exercised in the international arena can be the Crystal Ball Platform and the CRI mentorship. These initiatives under the umbrella of the International Counter-Ransomware Initiative, the CRI. Israel, together with its partners, developed and launched the Crystal Ball, which is a secure cloud-based platform to share threat indicators, analyze complex cyberattacks, and coordinate responses in real time. Israel also provides partners with training and mentorship programs to help build national counter-ransomware ransomware capabilities. Additionally, Madam Chair, effective capacity building must be inherently needs-driven, flexible, and inclusive. Cyber resilience cannot be imposed through a one-size-fits-all approach. It requires actively listening to the specific developmental and operational priorities of recipient states. To succeed, we must also adopt a whole-of-society perspective. Leveraging the technical expertise of all relevant stakeholders, and in particular, the tech community and academia. To maximize impact, the global mechanism must also serve as an effective coordinator. Rather than reinventing the wheel or duplicating already successful capacity-building frameworks, our efforts should focus on mapping national needs, sharing best practices, and matching requirements with available resources. By promoting transparency and voluntary information sharing on capacity-building programs, we can eliminate duplication, optimize resource allocation, and ensure assistance— that assistance reaches where it's needed most. Israel stands ready to share from its vast experience based on its very robust cybersecurity ecosystem and assist the Global Mechanism in becoming a truly inclusive platform a cornerstone for advancing resilience, cybersecurity, and responsible state behavior in the digital sphere. In a similar vein, Israel strongly supports prioritizing capacity building within the dedicated thematic groups. Capacity building offers us a unique space to generate tangible value, foster mutual confidence, and build operational trust, all while sidestepping political divides. Ultimately, it is through political capacity, practical capacity building that our shared diplomatic consensus translates into real-world protection on the ground. For these reasons, Madam Chair, capacity building remains not only a favorable focal point, but in our view can serve as an essential point of departure for the DTG's agenda. I thank you.

Muchísimas gracias.

Thank you very much.

Right.

We have used all the time available this afternoon. I know that it has been rather a long afternoon, but I do believe it has been a productive one. There are still 14 requests under this agenda item, and so we will hear the remaining speakers tomorrow. We are going to begin with the first 3— Thailand, Saudi Arabia, and the Philippines. Tomorrow morning. And let me remind you that tomorrow is our last meeting. We just have our meeting tomorrow morning, and so we will have to complete our work then. Once we have exhausted the list of speakers under this agenda item, we— the chair will deliver some remarks in order to set out the pass forward. So, without further ado, I will see you tomorrow morning at 10:00 a.m. in this room. Thank you very much. Have a nice evening—

afternoon.