Renewing Modern Environmental Multilateralism: Adapting to Respond to Today's Challenges and Tomorrow's Opportunities

Good afternoon to all of you, Excellencies, distinguished guests, colleagues, friends. Welcome. Before we begin, I would like to extend my sincere thanks to the governments of Panama and Vanuatu for their leadership in convening this very timely dialogue, and to my co-moderator and fellow elder Mary Robinson for joining us today. We meet at a very defining moment for environmental multilateralism. At a time of growing geopolitical complexity and increasingly interconnected global challenges, the question before us is not whether international cooperation remains essential, but whether environmental multilateralism can continue to evolve and deliver the results that people and the planet urgently need. Mary and I are part of a group called the Planetary Guardians. Among the guardians is Johan Struik, and Carlos Nobre. And yesterday, we launched the report of the state of the planet, the health of the planet. Where is it now? And the news is not very good because out of the nine planetary boundaries that were identified, seven of them have been surpassed. This is the report. I encourage you to see it because it's very interesting, has a lot of very interesting and important information. And so planetary boundaries are not waiting for geopolitics to improve. I would also like to say a word about how Colombia led the effort to create the SDGs. The SDGs reminds us in this process that multilateralism remains strongest when it is willing to evolve. At the Rio+20 Summit in 2012, countries recognized that old frameworks were no longer sufficient and created something new, the SDGs. And today, we need the same spirit of innovation. When Colombia championed the SDGs, it was an act of optimism. When we started, we said, this is going to be impossible. But it was possible, about what countries could achieve together. And I'll tell you an anecdote that is interesting. When I became president, the first thing that I did was to fly to a mountain very high, above 3,000 meters, to the oldest indigenous communities, our older brothers in the whole of the Americas, the oldest community, called the Kogis in the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta. I went there to recognize them as our older brothers and to ask their permission to go to Congress and be sworn in as President. They appreciated that. They discussed among themselves and gave me a baton of authority, said, you have our permission and we give you a mandate. Make peace with the FARC. We were in the middle of the war, 50 years of war, but also make peace with nature. And when you finish, bring us back the baton. Eight years later, I went back. to give them back the baton. And I very proudly told them, here are the two documents that prove that your mandate was fulfilled. There was the 320 pages of the peace agreement with the FARC, and I brought them the SDGs as proof that peace with nature was also achieved. They told me to come a week later. And I did, I was still president. And they said, Mr. President, the peace agreement with the FARC is perfect, but the SDGs lacks the most important factor. And I said to them, what does it lack? It was negotiated by every single country. It was voted in the General Assembly with no, not even one abstention. We negotiated the 17 objectives. in a very thorough way, what is lacking? And they said something which today I think is very important. They said, it lacks the spiritual factor. Until the humans understand that nature has rights, has life, and if they don't treat nature as a first-rate citizen, there will never be peace with nature. And I think that the results of the Planetary Guardians and what we're seeing around the world gives them some good arguments. And I hope that out of this session, this spirit that they say is lacking, we could revive it and continue trying to achieve peace with nature. Through our discussion today, We will explore how environmental multilateralism can adapt and remain effective in today's geopolitical reality and how political leadership can help drive that evolution. In particular, we will start by highlighting three concrete examples. The resumed negotiations towards a global plastic treaty, the follow up to International Court of Justice advisory opinion on the obligations of state in respect of climate change and the UNGA resolution that endorses it, and the process launched in Santa Marta, in my country, through the first conference on transitioning away from fossil fuels. Together, these examples illustrates different but complementary pathways for strengthening multilateral cooperation and delivering meaningful international outcomes. I invite all speakers to focus on practical political leadership. Speak, please, concisely. We don't have much time. And help us identify how international cooperation can remain effective, responsive, and fit for the purpose in the years ahead. We will now hear from our host, and I invite Juan Carlos Navarro, Minister of the Environment of Panama, to provide some opening remarks. Ministro, thank you for convening us, and you have the floor.

Muchas gracias, Senor Presidente, Excellencies, distinguished colleagues, friends. Panama is proud to convene this dialogue together with Vanuatu. We are here because environmental multilateralism remains indispensable. Let me underline this. Indispensable, irreplaceable. But today, the credibility of the multilateral system depends on something very concrete. its ability to deliver collective action, and I would add, collective results at the scale that science requires. We do not have the luxury of unlimited time, ladies and gentlemen. The environmental crisis we are facing are not abating, but rather are accelerating, while many of our international processes still move far too slowly. Failure after failure of the Cops remind us of where we are going and that is nowhere fast. We need to strengthen multilateralism and update the rules of the game if we want to make sure that we have effective results from the different Cops that we will again be attending in Armenia and so forth in the coming months. Thus, renewing multilateralism must therefore also mean increasing its capacity to act with urgency and effectiveness, which we don't have right now. Global environmental challenges cannot be solved through isolated national efforts. For small countries with big hearts and big dreams like Panama, national efforts are not enough. We need multilateralism to guarantee that the rights of our nations are protected and respected. And this applies to Panama and applies to small nation island states and applies to every country in the world. We have no alternative. Climate change, plastic pollution, biodiversity loss, cross borders affect shared systems, demand common international responses. I think it is incredible that we even have to say this here, where we sit today in the middle of the United Nations, which is proof that multilateralism is the only path forward. As a matter of fact, the negotiations of the global plastics treaties illustrate this very clearly, Mr. President. Panama has consistently supported an ambitious, legally binding agreement that addresses the full life cycle of plastics. And we believe that science and the market must play a vital role to support the level of ambition that we have, which is none other than the survival of our own species. At INC 5.1, Panama presented, on behalf of a cross-regional group of 89 countries, a proposal calling for a global target to reduce the production of primary plastic polymers to sustainable levels, accompanied by national measures, reporting, periodic scientific and economic review. That experience tells us something important about modern multilateralism. When universal negotiations become difficult, coalitions of countries can help build convergence, develop concrete proposals, and keep ambition moving forward. But these coalitions cannot replace the multilateral system. They should strengthen it. And this is our call today. We can demonstrate what is possible, create political momentum, help countries prepare for implementation, and ultimately reinforce stronger collective outcomes. And indeed, we must. Vanuatu has demonstrated another complementary pathway. Its leadership helped bring the question of states' climate obligations before the International Court of Justice, showing how international law can provide greater clarity and strengthen the foundation for collective action. The Santa Marta process, which you referred to, Mr. President, offers another example. It shows how countries willing to move can advance practical cooperation, maintain momentum, and help accelerate implementation while reinforcing the broader climate architecture. These approaches perform different functions. International law can clarify obligations. Coalitions can build ambition and convergence. Plurilateral cooperation can accelerate implementation. And multilateral agreements must provide the common rules and collective direction that hold these efforts together. But all of them ultimately face the same test. Implementation, concrete immediate results. This is the ultimate test. For plastics, we need an ambitious and effective global agreement, clear international rules, adequate means of implementation, and the finance, technology, and capacity that allow all countries to deliver. For climate, greater legal clarity must strengthen collective action and implementation. And plurilateral initiatives can demonstrate practical pathways that can be sealed and feed progress back into the multilateral system. For Panama, strengthening and renewing Multilateralism, therefore, does not mean lowering ambition, rather the contrary. It means making the system more capable of turning science into collective decisions, collective decisions into implementation, and implementation into measurable results, concrete results for people and nature, and doing so at the speed this crisis now demands. President Santos, You recall your ceremony in the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta. I remember it well. The Sierra Nevada is the highest mountain that goes from the depth of the oceans to a very high snowy peak right on the coast of Colombia, a place of historical and cultural irreplaceable significance to every Bolivariano. At the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta, you renewed and were reclaimed the rights of nature. I have good news for you, Mr. President. Tomorrow, the President of Panama, President Molino, will present at the General Assembly Panama's call for adopting a resolution on the universal rights of nature. We believe this is necessary as part of a process of using multilateralism to recognize the obvious. We need to strengthen the fight for protecting nature and we have run out of time. That is a multilateralism that we need and so be it.

Thank you. Thank you very much, Minister Navarro. And what a good news that you brought us, the proposal that your president is going to make tomorrow's General Assembly, and I hope it will have a lot of support. It should.

And I think I would now like to invite our second host today. His Excellency Ralph Regan Vanu, who has the longest title, I think, in the whole climate world, Minister of Climate Change, Adaptation, Meteorology and Geohazards, Environment, Energy and Disaster Management of the Republic of Vanuatu. Minister, you have the floor.

Thank you, Mary. Excellencies and colleagues, Vanuatu is honored to convene this dialogue with Panama, and I thank Minister Navarro for his partnership, as well as CL and W. WJF for your support, and thank you to all of us for joining us tonight. We often say that multilateralism must deliver for people and planet. We must not let repetition empty these words of meaning. In Vanuatu, communities, livelihoods, culture, and customary land connect our ancestors with the generations yet to come. Climate change threatens that continuity, and our losses cannot be measured in economic terms alone. That is the test we bring to this discussion. Can environmental multilateralism evolve to protect our peoples and secure their futures? We believe it can, but only through structural change. The initiatives at the center of tonight's dialogue show what is possible. We've heard from Minister Navarro on the Plastics Treaty, and we will hear more on the Santa Marta Conference hosted by Colombia, the Netherlands, and now Tuvalu and Ireland. Vanuatu is actively supporting both initiatives, but tonight I would like to focus on the International Court of Justice advisory opinion. The initiative began with Pacific students, communities, civil society, legal experts and governments, who collectively brought climate justice before the World Court. The Court's unanimous advisory opinion was delivered last year. The General Assembly's subsequent endorsement followed in May this year, and both demonstrated what broad coalitions, good faith cooperation and principled diplomacy can achieve. What I would like to emphasise about the ICJ initiative today is firstly the nature of the forums that were strategically chosen in order to overcome the limitations in most environmental multilateral processes. The ICJ was of course critical to authoritatively clarifying states' existing legal obligations. However, the General Assembly's vote was also crucial. The resolution that followed the court's opinion that moved us closer towards meaningful change, towards accountability, revealed the measures that those who opposed to the possibility that those who opposed to the possibility of meaningful structural change would engage in to derail good faith negotiations. A small number of states, particularly Saudi Arabia and their like-minded group, the usual blockers we see in all environmental multilateral forums, go to great lengths to delay, dilute and derail. In forums where one objection can block agreement, the tactics which turn multilateralism into a game are allowed to succeed far too often. Negotiations cannot rewrite the law clarified by the court, but they can determine state practice and the formation of customary international law. When the large majority compromise ambition and recognition of legal obligations for the few in the name of consensus, are we contributing to the degradation of our own rights? It is time for us to start analysing the cost of consensus if we hope to renew environmental multilateralism for the future. This is not a new issue. Many years ago, PNG and Mexico proposed amending the UNFCCC climate convention to allow voting as a last resort. Vanuatu would welcome renewed consideration of this proposal and are interested to hear from any of you who would likewise support this. And the opponents of the GA, being a forum where you can vote, must also not be overlooked. Which brings me to my final point. The resolution requests the Secretary General to report on ways to advance compliance with all obligations in relation to the court's findings. We spent months negotiating this paragraph. It started as a proposal to establish an international register of climate damage and a mechanism for the reparation of climate harms and ended with the SG report process. But we have not abandoned the damages register and reparations mechanism. Cooperation needs institutions that can respond when political will fails, backed by access to justice and consequences for breaches. Good faith commitments alone have not been effective in changing states' conduct that is needed to avoid catastrophic harm. The SG report is to be delivered in UN82, but it also requires consultation with member states. Now is the time to shape that report. The current session, UN81, is the time for consultation and for broad coalitions to coordinate on contributing to this process. We invite you to shape it with us, and we look forward to the candidates for Secretary General to commit dedicated capacity to deliver the report and retain a climate action team. Colleagues, if I had to name one act of leadership, it would be this.

Let us refuse to let the.

Lowest common denominator become the measure of our ambition, and build institutions that turn law into protection our people can rely on. And let us build that together. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you very much. Now I would like to give the floor to Minister Daire O'Brien of Ireland to provide some remarks. Minister, you have the floor.

Thank you, Mr. President, and Eire Uaithe, Mary Robinson, and indeed our colleagues, the Minister from Panama and Vanuatu. It was a real pleasure to be here with you today and particularly honored to be here with my former president, Mary Robinson, as an Irish person here and as an Irish minister in government. And I'm really honored to be here to speak this evening on what really is a timely discussion on the importance of multilateralism. And I will keep my comments brief, you can be assured of that. But, you know, I think when we reflect on this, we're really talking about the very survival of multilateralism right now. And I agree with what Ralph has said there, we can't allow the lowest common denominator drive us and reduce our ambition. But the current context we face could hardly be more challenging. The UNEP limiting overshoot report sets out a very stark picture the global community faces in our collective efforts to combat climate change. And While progress has been made in certain areas on curbing emissions since the Paris Agreement, it has not been enough to limit warming, and we all know that. And that's been to the forefront of our minds during the course of this week. But this has come after another record-breaking summer right the way across the world, and particularly in Europe, as you see, the continent that's heating the most. And whilst we're still in the midst of a global energy crisis and the geopolitical headwinds that we all face, so show no sign of abating. In this climate, our multilateral system is facing sustained strain. I agree with my colleague and friend from Panama in that regard. For Ireland, we are a small island nation in the North Atlantic. We are inherently aware of the critical importance of multilateralism and its capacity to provide a voice for all nations, regardless of size, on the international stage. We see the protection of this multilateral cooperation as not only a common good, but a vital imperative for all nations, because shared problems require shared solutions. And the global climate crisis and the ongoing energy crisis are two interwoven and mutually reinforcing crises. And central to our collective response to both must be the energy transition. The transition away from fossil fuels and towards clean energy is now inevitable, and we must collectively plan for it, but indeed accelerate it. But despite this inevitability, within the UNFCCC process, discussions around the transition have been, in many instances, effectively stymied. So, the process commenced by Colombia and the Netherlands in Santa Marta earlier this year really has the potential in our view to reinvigorate those discussions. And I commend both Colombia and the Netherlands for the initiative there. In Santa Marta, we saw a community of first mover countries, academics, civil society, and thought leaders come together and begin a shared conversation about what it means to transition away from fossil fuels, how we can plan for it collectively, and how we can work together to make it an actual reality. We are honoured to be bringing forward this work to the second conference in 2027 with our close partners in Tuvalu. It is crucial, in our view, that the discussions around the transition away from fossil fuels are open and inclusive and that no voices are excluded from those discussions. and we seek to ensure a broader participation in Tuvalu next year, including indeed from many producer countries whose engagement we believe will be crucial for the success of any transition. Very importantly though, it's a non-negotiated space. So does not impose new obligations on any party, but instead is a forum for sharing experiences, best practices, and ultimately moving from discussion to implementation. So we really see the conference as an opportunity to send a very clear message that there are countries who are willing and able to discuss and plan for a phase out now, and that we are looking for others to join us in this. It's clear the energy that was generated from Santa Marta can and must reinvigorate the UNFCCC process. That process and the Paris Agreement obviously remain central to the global response to the climate crisis. Ireland's support for this process has not wavered, and we will ensure that the process that began in Santa Marta continues to be complementary to the UNFCCC process, and that is of paramount importance. So, colleagues, it is a real honour to be here with you this evening. You can be assured both with this moving forward with Tuvalu to the second conference on transition away from fossil, but also as we hold the presidency of the European Union over the course of these six months, entering into the two remaining COPs of this year, that we will be ensuring that transition away from fossil and acceleration of renewable clean energy is central to our fight against climate change. Thank you.

Thank you, Minister O'Brien, and thank you for your kind words. I now give the floor to Vladimir Hauraque Portocarrillo, Minister of Environment of Peru.

Muchas gracias. Excelentísimos líderes, colegas ministros, señoras y señores, es un honor para el Perú participar en este diálogo político de alto nivel. El año pasado en Lima, los países de América Latina y el Caribe Adoptamos en el marco del 24avo Foro de Ministros del Medio Ambiente, una declaración que expresó una preocupación compartida. Nuestra región enfrenta simultáneamente los impactos del cambio climático, la pérdida de biodiversidad y la contaminación en un contexto donde persisten la pobreza y la desigualdad. Esta realidad nos plantea una tarea urgente.

Would you wait for some translation, please?

Okay. Thank you very much, Minister, and it's an honor to translate for you. Distinguished leaders, fellow ministers, ladies and gentlemen, it is an honor for Peru to take part in this high-level political dialogue. Last year in Lima, the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean adopted at the 24th Forum of Ministers of Environment, a declaration that expressed a shared concern. Our region simultaneously faces the impacts of climate change, biodiversity loss, and pollution in a context where poverty and inequality persist. This reality presents us with an urgent task. Necesitamos una cooperación internacional capaz de responder a las necesidades de nuestros países y, sobre todo, de generar resultados concretos para el desarrollo social y económico de nuestras poblaciones. This reality sets us an urgent task. We need international cooperation capable of responding to the needs of our countries and, above all, to delivering concrete results for the social and economic development of our peoples. For Peru, this means recognizing that these crises do not affect everyone equally. Their impacts are especially severe on the most vulnerable groups. For this reason, We need effective, inclusive and human rights-based responses that incorporate the contribution of indigenous peoples, local communities, women and youth. For Peru, this means recognizing that these crises do not affect everyone equally. Their impacts fall especially hard on the most vulnerable groups. That is why we need effective, inclusive, human rights-based responses that incorporate the contributions of indigenous peoples, local communities, women, and youth. We also need to take advantage of different forms of cooperation that will allow us to advance more rapidly. Multilateral approaches and complementary initiatives can bring together countries that share challenges, accelerate solutions, and allow them to reach a greater scale. We must also make use of different forms of cooperation that allows us to move forward more quickly. Plurilateral approaches and complementary initiatives can bring together countries that share common challenges, accelerate solutions, and help those solutions reach greater scale. In our region, we already have concrete experiences. The Regional Coalition on Circular Economy, for example, supports governments in developing sustainable policies and solutions in key sectors. Our region has already concrete experience to draw on. The Regional Coalition on Circular Economy, for example, supports governments in delivering sustainable policies and solutions in key sectors. But no international cooperation architecture will be enough unless our commitments are backed by means of implementation. We need concrete decisions We need concrete decisions on finance, technology, and capacity building. We need adequate, predictable, and timely resources that can turn our commitments into effective action. At the same time, we must mobilize sustainable investment and expand private sector participating, driving innovation and making innovation and sustainable development for our countries. La magnitud del desafío exige una respuesta a la misma escala. Las partes acordaron en la COP 30 avanzar hacia la movilización de 1 billón 300 mil millones de dólares anuales para el 2035. The scale of the challenge demands a response at the same scale. Parties agreed at COP30 to advance towards 1.3 billion goal of funding. To reach To reach this scale, it's fundamental to transform commitments into action and into implementation and to accelerate climate action. Thank you very much.

Muchas gracias, seor Ministro. I now give the floor to Costas Cadis, EU Commissioner. You have the floor.

Chair, Excellencies, dear colleagues, we meet at a moment of real strain for multilateralism. Geopolitical tensions are high and global institutions are being tested. And this is precisely why multilateralism matters more than ever. and the European Union remains fully committed to it. The triple planetary crisis is accelerating on land and on oceans, and no country can tackle it alone. We need cooperation that is practical, science-based, and able to deliver for people and the planet. Environmental multilateralism must therefore respond to current realities in three ways. By staying inclusive, by becoming more effective, and by remaining firmly anchored in science. The establishment of the Intergovernmental Science Policy Panel on Chemicals, Waste and Pollution just two years ago reflects the continued capacity for environmental multilateralism to renew itself in response to emerging needs. The ongoing negotiations towards a global treaty on plastic pollution are a test of whether environmental multilateralism can still deliver timely and meaningful responses to complex global challenges in an increasingly fragmented geopolitical context. At the same time, they illustrate why multilateral processes remain indispensable for addressing a transboundary problem of this scale. And we had a successful example of such cooperation just recently, the BBNJ Agreement, which entered into force at the beginning of this year. By establishing a global framework for the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction, BBNJ turns cooperation into concrete action. Moreover, tomorrow, the President of the European Commission and the Prime Minister of Canada will launch an international alliance to support the global ocean observation system. The alliance precisely aims to bring further support to the multilateral system, which brings together four international organizations, Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission of UNESCO, the World Meteorological Organization, the United Nations Environment Programme, and the International Science Council. And indeed, multilateral cooperation is truly needed to observe and protect our ocean. However, multilateralism must also adapt institutionally, and this is precisely the meaning of the UN80 initiative. We support the United Nations that is even more efficient, responsive, and fit for purpose, one that reduces fragmentation, strengthens coherence, and focuses on impact to be able to meet today's challenges and tomorrow's opportunities. So let us stay ambitious and committed to multilateralism.

Thank you.

Thank you. And I now give the floor to Ana Paula Cantre Luna de Carvalho Pereira, the Minister of Environment of Angola, please.

Good evening. I speak in Portuguese, but we have a translator, thanks. ministros e distintos participantes. É uma honra participar neste importante diálogo sobre o futuro do multilateralismo ambiental, no momento em que a comunidade internacional é chamada a renovar compromissos, fortalecer a cooperação e, sobretudo, transformar as decisões que assumimos coletivamente em resultados concretos para as pessoas e para o planeta.

Excellencies, distinguished colleagues, it's an honor to participate in this important dialogue on the future of environmental multilateralism. At the time when the international community is called upon to renew commitments, strengthening cooperation, and above all, transform the decisions we collectively make into concrete results for people and the planet.

We live in a deeply interdependent world. in which environmental challenges have ceased to be circumstantial issues, national borders, the triple crisis planetary marked by climate changes, loss of biodiversity and pollution climatic demonstrate the loss of biodiversity due to pollution, demonstrate in an unequivocal way that no country, however developed or powerful it may be, will be able to isolate and respond to the dimension and complexity of the challenges we face.

We live in a profoundly interdependent world, where environmental challenges are no longer an issue confined to national borders. The triple planetary crisis, marked by the climate change, biodiversity loss and pollution, demonstrate that no country, however developed or powerful, can in isolation respond to the scale and complexity of the challenge we face.

É por isso indispensável reforçarmos a coordenação internacional e preservarmos um diálogo multilateral que seja aberto, inclusivo e orientado para soluções concretas, capazes de mobilizar todos os países, independentemente do seu nível de desenvolvimento ou do grau de exposição a riscos ambientais.

Is therefore essential that we strengthen international coordination and preserve multilateralism dialogue that is open, inclusive, and oriented towards concrete solutions capable of mobilizing all countries, regardless of their level of development or the degree of exposure to environmental risks.

As catastrophes and extreme phenomena that we have witnessed in different regions of the planet, evidence the urgency of deepening our collective response capacity. As alterações climáticas, a poluição dos oceanos, a perda acelerada da biodiversidade e o crime contra a vida selvagem são desafios que exigem respostas coordenadas, mas também adaptadas às realidades e às circunstâncias de cada país e de cada região.

As catástrofes são um fenômeno extremo que temos testemunhado em diferentes regiões do planeta. I like the urgency of deepening our collective response capacity. Climate change, ocean pollution, the accelerated loss of biodiversity and wildlife crimes are challenges that demand coordinated responses, but also responses adapted to the realities and circumstances of each country and region.

In this context, effective environmental multilateralism.

Must continue to be based on the principles of international cooperation, equity, inclusion, solidarity among nations and respect for national circumstances.

Excellencies, distinguished participants, the future of multilateralism, environmental, will depend in large part on our ability to transform commitments into actions, decisions into results and cooperation in changes in people's lives.

Excellencies, distinguished participants, the future of environmental multilateralism will depend to a large extent on our ability to transform commitments into actions, decisions into results, and cooperation into concrete changes into the life of the people.

Angola reafirma, por isso, o seu compromisso com um multilateralismo ambiental forte, inclusivo, equitativo e orientado para uma implementação. Um multilateralismo capaz de construir pontes entre países, approximate different realities and transform international cooperation into concrete responses to the challenges of the present and hope for future generations.

Angola, therefore, reaffirms its commitment to a strong, inclusive, equitable and implementation-oriented environmental multilateralism. A multilateralism capable of building bridges between countries, bridging different realities and transforming international cooperation into concrete answers to challenges of the present and into hope for the future generations.

To finish, I hope that we can together preserve what we share and manage to build what we want to leave.

To conclude, I hope that together we know how to preserve what we share and build what we want to leave behind.

Thanks for your attention.

I now give the floor to the incoming president of COP17, The Minister of the Environment from Armenia, Mr. Matevosyan.

I don't have the longest title, but I may have the hardest name that you pronounce perfectly. Thank you very much. Excellencies, distinguished colleagues, ladies and gentlemen, let me begin by thanking the government of Panama and Vanuatu for convening this timely and important dialogue. We're discussing not whether multilateralism is still relevant, but how to make it deliver. For Armenia, this is not an abstract question. As we prepare to host the 17th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity, we are working to translate the commitments of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework into implementation, cooperation, and measurable action. To be more precise, I would highlight three principles for renewing environmental multilateralism. First, we need collaboration that is implementation oriented. We already have many of the necessary global frameworks. What we need now is greater political determination to close the gap between commitments and implementation for stronger national action, better monitoring, access to finance, technology, and capacity, and stronger accountability. Second, we need stronger coordination across the environmental agenda. Climate change, biodiversity loss, pollution, land degradation, and ecosystem degradation are not separate crises. They are interconnected, and our responses must be interconnected as well. Third, we should be open to complementary forms of cooperation, but without weakening the multilateral system. For Armenia, this is particularly important as we prepare COP17. We want Yerevan to be a COP where political commitments are connected to implementation, where different regions and perspectives are heard, where science, finance, technology, and capacity building come together, and where cooperation across governments, international organizations, civil society, indigenous peoples, and local communities help turn ambition into action. This is at the heart of Armenia's vision for COP17, under the motto, "Taking action for nature." It's a call to move beyond commitments to implementation, cooperation, and results. Ultimately, renewing environmental multilateralism means renewing confidence in our ability to act together. That confidence will not come from creating more processes. It will come from making existing commitments work better, strengthening cooperation, mobilizing the means of implementation, and demonstrating tangible results for people and for the planet. Armenia stands ready to contribute to this effort through its COP17 presidency. Thank you.

Thank you. And I now give the floor to Jess Gossford, Jr., Minister of Assistance to the President and Environment of the Marshall Islands.

Thank you. Excellencies, colleagues, ladies and gentlemen, please allow me to first thank Panama and Vanuatu for bringing us together tonight. This is a vital subject. As the convener of the High Ambition Coalition, the Marshall Islands have experienced the challenges that have come from bringing diverse groups together adjacent to the process and its power to influence multilateral decisions. As a relative newcomer to the climate space, I can see that there are huge gaps between what those of us with real ambition want to do and what a relatively small number of governments are committed to blocking. And I think that's important to keep that in mind. A vast majority of the world's nations supported the ICJ advisory opinion in the UN General Assembly. Most people around the world want climate action because communities are feeling the impacts all around the world. The momentum behind the Santa Marta movement, with thanks again to the leadership of Colombia, the Netherlands, and now Ireland and Tuvalu, have shown what appetite there is for change. RMI is also a multilateral leader at the International Maritime Organization, where we have consistently championed climate action in line with what the science tells us is required, along with an important coalition, including our Pacific brother, Minister Regan Vanu. We need every country in this room to come together at the IMO this year to secure ambitious global regulation to place the global shipping industry on a 1.5 degree pathway. while ensuring a just and equitable transition. In terms of that role that complementary approaches can play, I see the following. First, the ability to work together to deliver action, where we can demonstrate what works. Second, I hope we can bring this momentum back into the formal process, because the truth is, without action by all countries, but particularly laggards, we won't be able to achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement. And the first point about demonstrating action, I want to take fossil fuel subsidies as an example. We joined COPFUS at COP28, and since then we've been working to inventory our fossil fuel subsidies. It hasn't been easy, but we've got inventory nearly ready to publish. We've got experiences we can share with others about how we've done that, and we're looking for experiences from others that have gotten further in that process of dealing with subsidies. CofRIS is a home for that. We are now chairing CofRIS, and we would love to talk to anyone who is interested about joining us. I think it's also important to ensure that those outside spaces don't ignore the issues that get us held up in the inside ones. My country cares about all pillars of the Paris Agreement. Mitigation, adaptation, loss and damage, finance are all critical to us. We know not all parties have the same priorities as us, but we need to be communicating those priorities, frankly, if we are to really move forward together. I hope we'll see parties in these ambitious outside groups using the spaces to listen to each other, as well as pushing forward agendas that matter to us all. In terms of leadership needed, I think we're looking at it. My friends, we need to be ready to take on the reins, to be bold and not to wait for others to step into the fray. There is work to be done at every level, and no one is going to do it for us. I hope we can continue to work together, support each other's initiatives, and keep pushing to deliver what our countries need. Como Tada, and I thank you.

Thank you. I now give the floor to Bernadette Arakuye, the Minister from Rwanda.

Thank you, Chair. I also want to begin by thanking the government of Panama and Vanuatu for convening this important dialogue. Your Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, Rwanda has always believed that we achieve more when we work together. We were proud to partner with Peru to propose the resolution that launched the negotiations for the global plastics treaty. We did so because no country can solve a global pollution crisis on its own. Gwanda had already taken strong national action to address plastic pollution. We banned plastic bags, restricted single use plastics, and worked hard to keep plastic waste out of our environment. But our experience also showed us that national action, while essential, cannot by itself address a pollution challenge of global scale. Plastic pollution is a shared challenge that requires shared solutions, common commitment, and effective multilateral action. That experience has shown us why multilateralism matters. At the same time, environmental multilateralism is under strain. reaching consensus is becoming more difficult, while the environmental challenges we face are becoming more urgent and severe. That is why it is precisely the wrong moment to retreat from cooperation. It is also the wrong time to fall into the trap of all or nothing thinking. We must continue to work through global frameworks, while also utilizing complementary coalitions and partnerships where countries are ready to move faster. The objective remains the same, bringing countries together and turning ambition into action. We can take confidence from the Montreal Protocol. It remains one of the strongest examples of what environmental multilateralism can achieve. Ten years ago, the Kigali Amendment to phase down dangerous HFCs was adopted. And in those 10 years, we have made significant progress. Our task now is to finish the job. Rwanda encourages remaining parties to ratify the Kigali Amendment and to help us achieve universal ratification. This November, we will welcome the world back to Kigali for MOP 38 and to celebrate 10 years of the amendment. I warmly invite you all to join us. And tomorrow, we will launch the Friends of the Kigali Amendment, a group of countries and parties and partners committed to its advancing implementation. I hope many of you will accept our friend request and join us in this endeavor as well. Excellencies, the challenge facing multilateralism are real, but they make cooperation more important and not less. And for Rwanda, the path forward is to make cooperation better and fairer and to keep moving together whenever and wherever progress is possible. Thank you.

Thank you, Minister. And I now call on Sigrid Asland, the Minister of Climate and Environment of Norway. You have the floor.

Thank you. I thank Panama and Vanuatu for the invitation to this event with such a pressing subject. I wanted to also join the club of small countries with big hearts that Panama launched. Multilateralism matters more today because of the nature of the challenges that we need to address. Multilateralism has also brought us immense and important results on many difficult issues. And then it is an exercise in coordination and collective action. And the principle is that when we act together, we achieve more than if we act alone. Consensus is a principle in environmental multilateralism, and I think no one here will disagree that it is not without its challenges. At its worst, it can result in outcomes that reflect the lowest common denominator and it may fail to deliver the action required to solve the problem. And in the past, we saw countries restrain themselves when consensus was the norm, wanting to go the extra mile to accommodate the concerns of the broad majority, and now it is different. The cost of saying no seems lower than ever to the extent that some countries are willing to block outcomes supported by a broad majority. So there is no question that we need to expand our toolbox, but we need to do so committed, I think, to the bedrock of multilateralism. And I wanted to put this in the context of the current plastics negotiations. Norway is proud to co-chair the High Ambition Coalition to End Plastic Pollution together with Rwanda. With 77 members from all over the world, we represent a significant share of the plastics market globally, and this treaty must set us on a path to indeed end plastic pollution. It is true that common standards, commitments to reduce waste, to handle chemicals, would shift markets and competition even with fewer countries. It is also true that for a treaty to actually be useful, it needs to be comprehensive, it needs to ensure change, it needs to provide results. And a treaty without this also has limited value. And so I know one could argue to go ahead with a coalition of the willing. I am concerned, however, that this would result in a proliferation of national, regional approaches, further increasing fragmentation on a very specific global problem. I therefore, and Norway remains, laser focused on achieving a most effective, comprehensive and accountable treaty in the spirit of multilateralism, remaining open to build on that. And Norway, therefore, remains committed to multilateralism, but also to keep exploring additional and complementary ways to collaborate on top of that. Thank you very much.

Thank you very much. And I now give the floor to Juan Miguel Cuna from the Philippines.

President, we'd like to thank also Panama and Vanuatu for the invitation tonight. Excellencies, distinguished delegates and colleagues. The central question before us is how environmental multilateralism can remain effective in a more difficult geopolitical environment.

Consensus is harder to achieve.

Negotiations are becoming more complex, and countries are expected to implement a growing number of commitments across climate change, biodiversity, pollution and other environmental issues. For many developing countries, These demands are not matched by comparable access to finance, technology, and capacity building. Fragmentation also remains a practical problem. Closely related environmental issues are addressed through separate institutions, reporting systems, and financing mechanisms. Renewal should therefore focus not only on new commitments, but on making the existing system easier to implement. reducing duplication, improving coordination, and directing more resources to delivery at the national level. International law has an important role. The ICJ advisory opinion on climate change provides greater clarity on the obligations of states under international law. But legal clarity has to be matched by the means to implement those obligations. For developing countries, access to finance, technology, and institutional capacity remains central to effective implementation. The plastics negotiations illustrate another difficulty. Agreement remains challenging on measures across the full life cycle of plastics, including product design, chemicals of concern, waste management, and financing. For the Philippines, an effective treaty must be ambitious but implementable, taking to account national circumstances and capabilities and provide adequate finance, technology transfer, and capacity building, particularly for developing countries. We also need better coordination across environmental agreements. Climate change, biodiversity loss, pollution, land degradation, water stress, and pressures on marine ecosystems increasingly overlap. More compatible reporting systems, shared scientific information, coordinated technical assistance and better alignment of financing can reduce the burden on states without weakening existing treaty mandates. The same need for coordination applies to transboundary environmental harm. Shared waters, marine ecosystems, biodiversity corridors and transboundary pollution require practical arrangements for monitoring, information sharing and coordinated management. It also applies to crimes that affect the environment. wildlife trafficking, illegal logging, illegal mining, fisheries-related crime, and illegal waste movements can involve organized criminal networks, corruption, and illicit financial flows. Environmental agencies therefore need to work more closely with customs, law enforcement, prosecutors, and financial intelligence authorities, including through existing mechanisms under the UN Convention against Transnational Organized Crime, where applicable. Renewing environmental multilateralism should ultimately mean a system that is easier to implement, less fragmented, and better to able respond to the way environmental problems actually arise. Thank you, Mr. President.

Thank you. I now give the floor to Krzysztof Balesta, Secretary of State, Ministry of Climate and Environment of Poland.

Thank you very much, Excellencies. Ladies and gentlemen, I took some notes and I don't want to repeat.

Statements of many of you who praise multilateralism. This is discussed without saying it's very much needed and we are in a crisis.

But let me try to give some recipes how we can do that, because today we live in a very, very challenging environment. And I think this makes our work so difficult. First thing is that it's not true that people stop caring about environment. It's certainly not true. It's that this unsecure world is priority number one for many people.

So security got most important for them.

And not only physical security, but economic security, the cost of living is going up, energy security.

We all see what's happening in the Strait of Hormuz.

So people really have different priorities.

But it doesn't mean that they stop caring about environment.

The second thing is that, and I blame myself as well, it's ever harder to explain to the people what we do at COPs. It's really, really difficult to explain what tangible results we bring back to our capitals and we bring.

Back to the people.

So if we lose the public, then there's a reverse spin and politicians get disinterested because the public's not interested, so why should we care? We're not going to be elected based on our multilateral engagement. So what can we change? What can we change? We have to work with what's on the table. Let's use the security angle. In Poland, we are investing in homegrown energy because it improves energy security, but it also reduces pollution. It's the same thing, but the focus is on energy security. Same goes for biodiversity and for climate adaptation. Investment in climate adaptation brings immediate results to the public. They feel that we do something for them. In terms of biodiversity, We are actually using nature as part of our shield on our external border. Some of you know that we share a border with an active ongoing war. So we using, we creating peatlands, we stop logging at the border, we let nature run its course and help us potentially defend ourselves. But it also has climate because it's carbon sequestration, it's biodiversity.

So let's use the new angle, the new.

World, and still care for the same principles that we used to do. Thank you very much.

Thank you. I now give the floor to Barbara Pompili, Ambassador for the Environment from France.

Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Minister, colleagues, friends, thanks Panama, Vanuatu, and all represented states for this discussion on such a complex yet crucial issue. Environmental action faces a cruel paradox. As the crisis intensifies, scientific consensus is questioned and ecological priorities are sidelined by competing crisis. We face a friction in parallel between the slow machinery of multilateral diplomacy and the urgent need for action. I agree with what my colleague just said. And yet, I would argue, this is precisely why multilateralism remains indispensable. It is still the only space capable of setting global norms that every state, however far apart, can be held to. What we are facing is not the end of multilateralism. It is the reminder of its centrality and a moment where it must prove and renew its relevance, and particularly on the environment, which is core of the solution of every challenge, both for human and economic development. So how can multilateralism evolve? That work is already underway with the UN 80 initiative, which reflects a will to make the UN more efficient and better deliver on its mandates. The Pact for the Future points the same way. But as stressed by some, complementary approaches can play a valuable role. Coalition of ambitious, willing states and partnerships bringing together business and civil society do not compete with the multilateral framework. They orbit around it to show what works and often move faster where consensus takes time to build. A prime example of this agile diplomacy lies in the One Planet Summit dynamic launched by the French president, which proved that when the global machinery stalls, an architecture of willing actors can step in, experiment, and ultimately accelerate the pace of the transition. This agile diplomacy also contributed to shape international agreements, such as the Global Biodiversity Framework. I think it can also help us progress on the Global Plastics Treaty, on which a majority of states are willing to start transitioning thanks to harmonized rules. This moment also calls for a leadership that rebuilds trust and favors a logic of genuine partnerships. That was the message delivered by G7 of finance and development ministers under France's presidency. We promoted a new approach to develop financing based on the key tool of country platforms. Country-led global platforms should become the cornerstones of development models. They should be voluntary, aligned with a national whole of government strategy, integrated all environmental component into economic strategy. This is why what we wish to work on with all of you, including for the UN Water Conference, for which France is co-chair of the investment dialogue. Indeed, water is core to all challenges, as there is no dry activity on Earth. But we also need a leadership that is not afraid to own its ambition. Because the environment is not a constraint on sovereignty. It is not a landscape that surrounds us. It is the very reason we exist. We owe it to our people. So, get back to work. Thank you.

Thank you. And I now have pleasure in introducing and calling on Jan Versteeg, of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the Ambassador and Climate Envoy.

Thank you. Thank you very much, Presidents, Ministers, also for getting us here together. As the Climate Envoy of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, I represent a group of four small, not very mountainous countries, one of which is located in the European Union, and three of them are small islands in the Caribbean. And we're all four very fond of multilateralism. And be assured, I won't claim four times three minutes speaking time. We meet at a time when confidence in multilateralism is being tested, as some of the other speakers have put already. Geopolitical tensions are rising. Science is put in doubt. Resources are constrained. And citizens want, as State Secretary Bolesta just pointed out, they want concrete, tangible results. But this is precisely why environmental multilateralism and improving that matters. Environmental challenges do not stop at borders, and no country can address them alone. Environmental cooperation therefore provides a practical test, but also an opportunity to prove that multilateralism can continue to deliver. We need ambition, implementation and delivery. We have seen already that multilateralism can deliver. The Paris Agreement, the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework and the BBNJ Agreement all demonstrate that countries can come together to establish common goals, frameworks, and rules for shared challenges. At the same time, these experiences also show that multilateral negotiations do not have to be the only pathway for building political momentum and advancing solutions. Coalitions of countries that are ready to move forward can develop common positions, test approaches, build ambition, and create momentum that can feed into and inspire broader multilateral processes. This is complementary to, rather than a replacement for, multilateralism. The inclusive multilateral process remains essential for building legitimacy, finding common ground, and agreeing solutions in the end that can be supported and implemented broadly. The example of plastic negotiations was already mentioned. Another example was Santa Marta, where Colombia and the Netherlands brought 57 countries together for this first conference on transitioning away from fossil fuels. The idea was to create a safe space open to all interested states and other stakeholders to discuss solutions and the dilemmas around them departing from this common goal, but also within the boundaries of what we had agreed already at the multilateral level at COP 28 in Dubai years before that. This was not about forming a front against other groups of countries. It is about trying to find solutions acceptable for all in an open and transparent manner. We think such initiatives can build political momentum and support progress in the broader multilateral agenda. And we are confident that Ireland and Tuvalu will bring this process further and be the next pair of co-hosts in what hopefully will be a long series. So the choice, Mr. Chairman, is not between multilateralism and coalitions. We need both. Inclusive multilateral negotiations as the foundation, complemented by coalitions and other initiatives that can build ambition, develop solutions, and accelerate action. Ultimately, the political test is whether these approaches strengthen our ability to deliver. Ambition must lead to implementation, implementation to results, and results to renewed confidence in our international cooperation that is essential. That is how we can strengthen environmental multilateralism and demonstrate its continued relevance for people and the planet. I thank you.

Thank you. We will now hear a series of perspectives from beyond government. And I invite each speaker to share their view, their views on what is needed to strengthen international cooperation and ensure that multilateral processes deliver meaningful outcomes for people and the environment. I invite each speaker to keep their remarks to two minutes. I excuse myself because I have to leave, but I leave you in better hands, which is in the hands of my, my, of Mary Robinson. And I say goodbye by giving the floor to a very dear friend, friend of both chairs of Mary and myself, Hindu Ibrahim. She's the chair of the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, and she's also the chair of the group that we both are part of the Planetary Guardians. Indu, you have the floor.

Thank you very much, President, and thank you, Panama, Tuvalu, for the invitation. And Mary and President Santos are really the right person who can help us through this. Let me start by saying that multilateralism must evolve. Most of the state governments are failing. I have been so disappointed by government that using the principles of consensus to block decision, to block what is matter for people, to reject it completely. But I never get failed by the people, by the communities. And this is the best example of the multilateralism. Of course, the world needs multilateralism more than ever. Climate, biodiversity loss, land degradation, pollutions, they do not know border. They are beyond national jurisdictions. As President Santos and Mary said, this is the report we launched yesterday. It's the planetary health check. It's showing us the nine boundary, seven out of them are in danger. Are we ready to sacrifice our life? So multilateralism must remain legitimate. And for that, it must bring not only government, but the peoples who are impacted that can change the decision. And it must give the legal right to nature. If we do not respect the rivers, the mountain, the glaciers, we do not respect ourselves. We will be abusing them. Indigenous peoples are the guardian of all that. And we cannot be only participant. I have my brothers and sisters here in the room. We are right holders. We are knowledge holders. And our knowledge and right must be protected. We must ask questions in multilateralism. Whose knowledge are bringing in the tables? Whose voice are shaping the solutions? So Indigenous people's knowledge can help us to shape the multilateralism. to drive the consensus is not only one country can block. It is if you do not agree, you allow the majority to move. We need the multilateralism that can move the decision to the implementation. And one of the biggest challenge is lacking the international commitment to be turned into the real action. Let me give you a simple example in chat with my organization. We bring communities, elders, women, scientists, local authorities together to map territories, to identify resources, and it's helped us to check solutions to the action, to build resilience to the communities. But of course, pre-lateralism approach can help if there is strength rather than replace multilateralism. So different countries and actors must all speak to a momentum. But those approach must remain transparent, connected, wild in all the system. Let me conclude by saying, for me, remaining environmental multilateralism mean how we can redefine trust. Trust between countries, trust between science and indigenous people's knowledge, trust between government and communities, and trust that international decision will actually improve people's lives. Let us build a multilateralism that is not only more flexible and fast, but more inclusive, more accountable, and more connected to the realities of the peoples on the ground in the territories, who can give holistic visions of all the species. Because if we did a right way multilateralism, of course, we will have the report that cannot take us seven out of the nine, but who can get us back to the safe area we need for our generation, but also for the upcoming generation. We are ready to build it together. But I want to stay, to listen, to do not speak and leave, to stay in the room. Thank you.

Thank you, Hindu, for your passion and commitment, as always. I invite Xanana, Kalvilo, indigenous youth and women leader to offer their perspective.

Thank you. Hi, my name is Xanenin. I come from the cactus forest ecosystem in Puebla. To us, the protection of nature, water, and all forms of life is inherently the protection of our own life, of the stories of our ancestors, of the spiritual forces that keep this world moving. Our peoples have been defenders more than I have been alive, from the very first threats to our waters 500 years ago and until each and every one of us can access water without being sued or killed by a corporation for theft. So just as our relatives from the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta, we also believe that our territory is our origin, the source of life we all depend on. And we believe that all references to our ancestral and spiritual territories need to go beyond the inspiration to do the right thing and towards a real commitment to the people, to the plants, animals, hills or streams that call those territories home. After all that has changed already, after all that has been lost so far, I could talk from the fear that I feel every time that I call for rainfall when planting in the fields. Or I could talk about the pain that I have for not knowing the extension of the green and blue that we have lost. Things that I never got to live and that I only know from the memories of my parents. I could talk hours from that. Trend says that actually it helps sense the urgency to mobilize better than hopeful speech. But this time, I want to trust that you're here for a reason, because you already know how hard things are out there. And you know, and you are committed to mobilize all that is in your hands to make a difference. Young people no longer trust our governments or these institutions, but we wish we could. I have learned to believe more in the people that make those institutions, because from a lot of you in the room today, I have seen that you care. And I wish to believe that you have the heart in the right place. I believe in cooperation because every time in history that people have come together to stand against those posing a threat, change is inevitable. I believe in solidarity because when law does not make justice, people do. I believe in other systems because they are here today. Because where I come from, they are taking root and growing stronger every day. And I believe they can teach here more on how multilateralism can work, not in opposition, but in cooperation to the land. All of us are here today because Indigenous peoples once shared that knowledge and science on how to live on this very land. And I believe we can share that again if there is openness to learn. I need to express our concern and disappointment as indigenous peoples, as we have been experiencing a systematic exclusion in international negotiations that decide over our territories, such as the intercessional meetings happening to develop an international legally binding instrument to tackle plastic pollution. Our governments Subject to the people that are obliged to represent, need to uphold the obligations to which they, as member states, adhere at these international spaces, not only in these rooms, but mainly when they go back home, when the people in your countries show up in the streets and in the councils and get together to demand something that's just. In order to create what we dream can be possible to achieve as a true organization of the peoples of the world, we need an effective participation of Indigenous peoples. I believe our multilateralism can become what we want it to become. Imagine what we could do and what we could be capable of if we were to survive an apocalypse. And this is one. How fast could we act to preserve our life if we did not have more time? Because we don't. We stand with the greatest opportunity ahead for the world to demonstrate strong leadership at this critical moment. to stand up for the rights of Indigenous peoples, the planet, the rights of the current and future generations to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment. And we urge you to demonstrate that courage and ambition to secure a successful outcome that meaningfully addresses the global plastic pollution crisis. What happens at the next INC negotiations will haunt us forever, not only in paper, but in our bodies, in our streams, in the ones present here and in futures to come. So as you go over this week and beyond with good intentions in these rooms, I hope that you not forget out there that people are dying, not because the system is not working, but because it is working perfectly. I trust in our abilities to be better as societies, to find ways beyond what it seems to make us different, to dive in the deepest truth that we are here as the same nature.

Thank you. And I invite Rebecca Brown, President and CEO, Center for International Environmental Law, to offer their perspective.

Thank you, Madam Chair, Your Excellencies. I thank Panama and Vanuatu for convening this dialogue. As many have said, multilateralism remains essential to deliver the solutions that the world demands, yet the veto of a few has become its greatest threat, preventing the many from moving forward. A consensus-only decision-making model too often allows short-term interests to override science, equity, and international law. We must replace the power to block with collective incentives to join. The Plastics Treaty is our most immediate test. Success cannot mean agreement at any cost while plastic production remains unchecked and rising. Success will require a legally binding treaty that does not let the hesitation of a few derail progress. Over the last three decades, climate negotiations have shown how a handful of countries use consensus to block decisions on finance and fossil fuels, critical pillars of climate action. That is why the calls for the UNFCCC reform are mounting. and why we need to invest in complementary pathways that enable willing countries to move forward together toward a fossil-free world. The Santa Marta process offers one of these pathways. 57 states shifted the conversation from whether to phase out fossil fuels to how to do so. The next conference, hosted by Tuvalu and Ireland, must focus on the international cooperation countries need to deliver on that transition. including binding legal instruments such as a fossil fuel treaty that can enable countries to jointly overcome the dependence on oil, gas, and coal, the cost of which current wars have laid bare. The coalition of the doers can act together to address public revenue needs, improve energy security, and remove barriers like investor state arbitration. To effectively overcome today's environmental challenges, we must keep human rights and equity at the center of the conversation. real participation of rights holders and civil society, no corporate capture, no false solutions that distract from the urgent progress we need to make. We call on governments to turn this dialogue into coordinated action and deliver an effective plastics treaty, concrete commitments to accelerate the transition away from fossil fuels, and a multilateral system that doesn't constrain cooperation, but enables it. The resolution adopting the ICJ's advisory opinion showed the world can move forward, even in the face of objections from a few. This is the moment to show that we have the courage to build the multilateralism future requires and to make it worthy of the trust that we have placed in it. Thank you.

Thank you. And I now give the representative from Uganda an opportunity. He wishes to deliver a few words on behalf of Uganda's candidate for Secretary General. Just one minute, perhaps.

Thank you very much, Madam President. Excellencies, I make these remarks on behalf of Ambassador Olaro Tunnu, Uganda's candidate for Secretary General. I want to thank Panama and Vanuatu for bringing us together. Environmental stewardship by its nature requires much lot of cooperation. In this minute that I have got, I have only four points to leave you with for your consideration. One, rivers, oceans, and the air we breathe connect our countries. Decisions within one country can affect lives and livelihoods far beyond its borders. We need common objectives and national approaches that reflect different needs, priorities, and capacities. Respect for national choices must go hand in hand with responsibility for shared commitments. Cooperation must produce practical results. We can share scientific knowledge, protect shared waters, and strengthen national institutions with technical support for countries that need it. The United Nations can bring countries together and support implementation. Let us judge our cooperation by what we achieve together, and that is cleaner water, productive land, and secure livelihoods for our peoples. Once again, I thank you for organizing this timely event.

Thank you very much.

Thank you. And I now have three more speakers, and then I'm afraid we've had to close the list because of time. But I invite Jane Munk, Scientist Coalition for an Effective Plastics Treaty, to offer their perspective.

Thank you so much, Madam Chair. Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, thank you for inviting the Scientists' Coalition for an Effective Plastics Treaty to contribute to this important meeting. Let me start with the most important point first. Successful multilateralism needs independent science. This is the basis of objective reality. Governments can make sure that objective reality is the foundation of policy making and importantly, that the assessment of a policy's effectiveness is possible by strengthening the role of independent science in these multilateral environmental processes. This can be achieved by giving independent scientists access to negotiation spaces, having clear rules and procedures that mitigate conflicts of interest, and by upholding transparency as a value. But today, science is being attacked and scientists are being harassed by actors with vested interests. So effective multilateralism should protect the human right to science and also protect the human rights of scientists. At the same time, multilateralism needs to create space for independent science to advise on the best available science and provide input. But oftentimes, multilateral processes lack the mechanisms to integrate independent science, and scientists are oftentimes not given access to negotiation spaces. This substantially limits the effectiveness of multilateral environmental processes. At the Scientists' Coalition for an Effective Plastics Treaty, we self-organized a group of over 450 scientists with expertise on plastic pollution across all life stages. We have been supporting the process to negotiate a global plastics treaty. We are available to all members and observers, and we are committed to supporting the process until we all have a treaty that we can be proud of because it will be effective. And this can only be achieved by grounding it in today's scientific knowledge. We have five key points we'd like to share with you that are prerequisites for an effective plastics treaty. First, independent science is essential for developing an effective treaty, but also for ensuring that the treaty is implemented and that it will lead to ending plastic pollution. Second, a treaty that addresses the full life cycle of plastics with clear obligations will be effective. Third, a treaty that includes provisions on plastics production, managing chemicals of concern, and protecting human health will be effective. Fourth, if the treaty contains legal binding measures, it will be effective. And fifth, a treaty that safeguards against being instrumentalized by vested interests will be effective. We independent scientists stand ready to support you and We also need your support. Science needs friends. Thank you so much.

Thank you very much. And I now call on Ephraim Gomez, Global Policy Impact Director of the World Wildlife Fund International, to offer their perspective.

Thank you, Chair. And above all, thank you to the organizers of this event. We're fully behind you. The best should not be an enemy of the possible in us is an axiom that we often hear, but wrongly, it's applied to the issue, to our ambitions and our commitments, and it should be applied to the company today. Because as we've heard here, the incantation or the arch of consensus bends towards veto today, right? That's very unfortunate, but it's a fact that we have. And if we are serious about a multilateral, environmental multilateralism that actually works, that has impact in the real world, as we just heard from scientists, we cannot be beholden to that logic. It's unfortunate, right? We would've wished for something else, but the point of gravity is not good enough. And it's not even about ambition, it's about being reasonable. I think, for instance, in the plastics negotiation, we hear this, oh, you have high ambitions. It's just reasonable. It's not even super, we're not asking for paradise in these negotiations. So we have three requests in the space of reimagining and refreshing environment for multilateralism. The first is that we discover our agency and feel empowered by this development and the facts that we have on the table. We just put out the report which shows the market shaping effect that we can achieve, for instance, in plastics, if we have a group of first movers, right? And there are many more examples and we will have more and we need to find strength in that. in those developments, including then in plastics and designing a tipping point treaty for plastics. And then our second request is that we actually need to put ourselves into perspective. Consensus is not an iron law. Multilateralism is not singular. We have many different kinds of multilateralisms. And there are ways, our ways and arrangements here can improve, you know, and they must, right, especially if we also envision the kinds of decisions, the arrangements that we need in not only today or yesterday even, but in 5, 10, 15 years, we should be able to recognize it's not good enough. And so third is, of course, that we need to incubate and reform where we can, right? And that's the third request that we have here, is that you leave with a strength and spirit, right, for reform and commitment to action that. Thanks.

Thank you. And the last speaker is Jacob Roghag, co-chair of the Business Coalition for Plastics Treaty, to offer their perspective.

Thank you, Chair, Your Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Jacob Roghag, and I'm from Tomra. Tomra is a provider of sensor-based solutions for collection and sorting, enabling a circular economy. We have more than 50 years' experience in circular value chains and system in operation in more than 100 countries. I'm speaking today as an industry co-chair for the Business Coalition for a Global Plastic Treaty, representing more than 330 businesses from across the plastic value chain that supports an ambitious and effective global plastic treaty. For businesses, the case of international cooperation is straightforward. Companies operate across borders. Supply chains cross multiple markets. Investment decisions are made for years and often decades into the future.

Yet today, efforts to address plastic.

Pollution are increasingly fragmented, with different rules, definitions, reporting requirements, and policy approaches emerging across jurisdictions. This fragmentation creates uncertainty. It increases compliance costs, complicates investment decisions, and makes it more difficult to scale solutions that can deliver impact across markets. That is why harmonization matters. An effective global plastic treaty can provide a common framework that gives governments the flexibility to implement measures nationally, while at the same time creating enough international alignment to enable businesses to act, invest and innovate with confidence. Businesses are ready to play our part. Across sectors, companies are investing in circular business models, product design, collection recycling system, material innovation and improving transparency across value chains. but business investments alone will not solve this challenge. Governments have a critical role in providing the enabling condition, clear policy direction, common rules, and long-term certainty. These are the foundations to allow innovation to scale and market to respond. The value of a global agreement is not simply that it addresses plastic pollution. It is that it creates and coordinates international response to a shared global challenge, one that helps align markets, unlock investment, and accelerate solution at the pace and scale required. For the business community, that is the opportunity before us, and that is why we continue to support an ambitious, effective, and globally coordinated treaty.

Thank you.

Thank you very much. Thank you, and as I said, for time reasons, we're not able to hear any more contributions, so I will just conclude with some brief personal comments. I was actually struck by the seriousness of the contributions, both from the governments who spoke and also from the representatives beyond the governments, it's a good sign. There is a real sense of seriousness of purpose, which I think we can draw from and be encouraged by. I would like to recognize that it is small countries and youth and women that are giving leadership across the three initiatives that we're discussing today. On the Global Plastics Treaty, Panama has been a powerful voice leading the coalition for ambition. And let's recall that it was two women ministers from Colombia and from the Netherlands that co-chaired the first of its kind Santa Marta conference. And on the ICJ advisory opinion, I want to pay testament, as indeed the Minister Van der Aa did, to the leadership of the Pacific Island law students. I was so impressed with what they did, who first convinced their governments to take up the campaign, and this all started in a classroom. And I want to commend the government, obviously, of Vanuatu for their leadership in taking forward, and taking forward so well, the resolution in the General Assembly, being prepared to compromise, but not beyond red lines of principle. That's the important thing. My key reflections from the discussion today are, I do fully agree that we have to put the science front and center. That's what it's about. It's about listening to the science, which is telling us how serious the climate and nature crisis is. We need to move beyond the idea that defending environmental multilateralism means defending the status quo. Simply weathering the storm and preserving the business as usual model is not what we will do, what will restore trust in multilateralism, and it doesn't anyway fit the reality that we are facing. What will restore trust is the ability of the willing to co-operate and deliver results, despite the challenges. I include in those coalitions of the willing governments, but also businesses, cities and civil society. I invite and encourage you all to continue those dialogues to find avenues for co-operation The specifics of this co-operation will look different across the different processes, but we need to continue having these discussions at the highest political level for these processes to deliver. On behalf of the conveners and my co-chair, who reluctantly left, I thank all speakers and participants for their engagement and leadership. Clearly, a factual, non-negotiated summary will capture the key messages and forward-looking recommendations emerging, and even the reference to new initiatives that we are hearing about at this meeting of the UN General Assembly that will emerge from this dialogue. And I thank you, and the meeting is now closed. Good evening.