Sudan, Somalia & other topics - Daily Press Briefing

attempt to discredit United Nations special procedures, not just myself, but many others. Essentially, it's some people who think that Israel and the United States should never be criticized. And of course, we do our job impartially, independently. I'm a lifelong professor of international law and academic. That's always been my job in my professional life, and I would never take instruction from a government or reduce my criticism of governments because, you know, someone sent some money to the UN Human Rights Office in Geneva. Unfortunately, it does point to a structural problem, which is my mandate and many others get no UN regular budget funding and have never done for 20 years since we've been in existence. And so it does mean that that unfortunately, the system has to rely on voluntary contributions from governments. My mandate also gets some contributions from from Spain and Switzerland, as do many other mandates, get get funding from from from different governments. But just to reinforce the key point is that China has no say in the work that we do. And of course, I've criticized China on many occasions. I did so in my report to the General Assembly last year, translated into six languages, including addressing the question of Xinjiang. I co-drafted the special procedures assessment of the Hong Kong National Security Law about two years ago. I've been very active on the Jimmy Lai prosecution and conviction in Hong Kong. So any suggestion that somehow I'm self-censoring or a stooge of China is utterly ridiculous.

Yes, please go ahead. And then please introduce yourself.

Yes, thank you so much for this briefing. Namo Abdullah with Rudaw Media Network. You have counted 239 people killed in 71 U.S. strikes on vessels at sea, and you say there are reasonable grounds to see these as crimes against humanity. Do you believe President Trump and the officials who ordered them bear personal criminal responsibility?

Yeah, thanks. So that's obviously a question of fact and evidence as to who bears responsibility for ordering and carrying out these strikes, you know, under under international law, there's an obligation on a state where these kinds of credible allegations are made to investigate those allegations and to identify who are the perpetrators. So, of course, that includes not only the military commanders and anyone involved in carrying out those strikes. And I note that Various senior retired members of the US military, including people in Congress, have called on US service men and women not to obey illegal orders to kill civilians. And that's part of US military law, in fact, that you shouldn't obey those kinds of manifestly illegal orders. But international law also requires not only military command responsibility, but civilian superior responsibility. So the buck stops with whoever ordered these strikes. Now, of course, under the US system, at least the secretary of war and the United States president are ultimately the actors who make decisions about going to war, use of military force, executive orders to use the military. This isn't authorized by Congress. And so I think logically, they would be part of the chain to identify who bears ultimately ultimate responsibility for carrying out those strikes.

Just one follow-up. If Washington refuses to investigate, are you calling on other governments or the International Criminal Court to step in?

Yes, so crimes against humanity are crimes under customary international law that gives any state universal jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute them. At the same time, of course, international law still, I think, has what we call head of state and senior official personal immunity while in office. So that does generally prevent foreign domestic legal systems from arresting or prosecuting a sitting president, prime minister, senior minister, like, let's say, a secretary of war while they're still in office. That changes once they leave office. And so, you know, any any, you know, even a president after leaving office who travels to another country and is accused of a crime like General Pinochet back in the day, then are potentially liable to arrest. And at that point, there is no, what we call functional immunity under international law for international crimes committed even when you were in office. So immunity bars, prosecution, arrest while you're still serving, but not afterwards. That's why it is so important that the United States takes responsibility for enforcing, because there's no immunity before your own courts under international law. And in fact, international law prohibits immunities for heads of state and government for international crimes. So there's an inconsistency here, of course, because the US president under the US domestic legal system gets immunity for seemingly anything they do in office. That's not consistent with, with international law. International Criminal Law Court, look, the, the, the question there is whether it has jurisdiction. The United States is not a party, so there's no jurisdiction on, on that side. There could potentially be jurisdiction if any of the people who were killed had the nationality of a state that is a party to the International Criminal Court. That's a question of fact. We don't know a lot about who are these 239 people who've been killed. And so that's a question that would need to be explored as part of an investigation. And unfortunately, you know, because these people have have disappeared at sea in many cases, I mean, there have been a few, but not many survivors picked up and transferred back to Latin America. But it does mean it's then very difficult to investigate nationalities. There are lots of grieving families in the region and some cases being brought in the in the U.S. courts, in the Inter-American Court of Human Rights by American human rights organizations, ACLU, CCR, Center for Constitutional Rights, are trying to support those families to get answers for what has happened to the victims of those strikes.

Yeah, we have time for one more question. Go ahead.

Thank you. Murad Hashim from Al Jazeera Arabic. Do you support designating Houthi militia in Yemen as a terrorist group by United Nations and the state members, given its violation for human rights.

Yeah, so the United Nations does not have a global list of terrorist organizations. It only lists groups or individuals that are members or associates of Al-Qaeda or ISIS. So the basis for Security Council listing is then whether you could show, you know, factually, are there links between the Houthis and Al Qaeda or ISIS? I'm not an expert on the Houthis. My understanding is that is not or doesn't seem to be the case. That doesn't mean international action isn't appropriate against actors who violate international law, humanitarian law, human rights law, the prohibition on the use of force for de facto authorities in control of territory. But it doesn't necessarily mean capture is the appropriate paradigm. I mean, the Security Council has power to impose sanctions on anybody for threats to international peace and security, and I would include in that serious violations of human rights. And unfortunately, some members of the Security Council at the moment, probably a majority, I'd say, don't seem to think human rights is part of the job of the Security Council and isn't part of the peace and security mandate of the United Nations. Obviously, I disagree strongly. The United Nations Charter, as it was written in 1945, absolutely emphasized the inextricable links between development, human rights and security. And we know that from so many past wars that everything from poverty to state oppression of human rights are causes of war and conflict. and tension within and between states. And so, of course, unless you address those causes, then you're not going to stop conflict in any kind of durable, lasting way.

Thank you. And then we have one last question, and then we'll have to wrap up.

It's a very brief one. Thank you very much for the briefing. My name is Mona Aoutoul. I'm with Al Quds Al Arabi. Can you please walk us through the methodology you use in your report to distinguish organized crime and terrorism? And how do you determine what specific international legal framework applies to both of them? And thank you so much.

Yeah, thank you. So in the first part of the report, It makes this distinction based on international standards between crime primarily for profit, which is organized crime under the Convention on Transnational Organized Crime, and terrorism done for a political or ideological reason. And that comes really from the General Assembly's Declaration on Terrorism of 1994, which, as you know, there's no internationally accepted definition of terrorism. This has always been a problem because of debates about state terrorism and foreign occupation and so on. But certainly, you know, in that very important political resolution in 1994, a declaration, especially important resolution, that's probably the most authoritative indication we have of what the international community thinks is terrorism, you know, short of a binding legal definition. And of course, that says terrorism is, you know, certain criminal acts for political purposes. So that's the key distinction I draw in the in the in the report. As I said, obviously there can be overlap and links between organised crime and terrorism, but usually it is possible to put a group in one box or the other. And although certainly drug cartels, you know, they kill politicians, they meddle in elections, sometimes they provide basic services like cooking gas or communications in communities and they even try to sort of govern communities in a loose way, but that's not their purpose. Their purpose is to make money, to protect the criminal operations of the group, not to be de facto governments. And in fact, in many of these countries, part of the problem is that these criminal groups are absolutely enmeshed with state authorities through corruption. It works for them to cooperate with bits of government, state officials who they've managed to get on side, and that's a kind of cohabitation which works for them. They leave the politics to the politicians. They buy them off and they keep making money. This is part of the problem. You can't kill your way out of drug cartels. You have to strengthen governments, combat corruption, address poverty, which is an incentive for young kids in many of these countries to get involved in drug cartels and gangs. And this really simplistic war on narco-terrorism paradigm as I said, we know will ultimately be ineffective and will perpetuate violence for many years to come.

Thank you, Special Rapporteur. Thank you all for joining and for coming. There are plenty of press conferences next week by Special Rapporteurs. I will send you a list. Thank you very much. Bye. Thank you, Ben. I'll send it to you. Yeah. You should have on your inboxes the press release that his office sent from Geneva. If not, I'll resend it now.

Can you resend it?

Yeah, yeah, of course. And it has a link to the report. When was the report published? July? July, right?

A couple of weeks ago, I think. Yeah, towards that. It's on the report.

Sorry.

Yeah, Norris, thank you.

It's nice to see you again.

Nice to see you. You're always busy. Thank you. Play all songs of the Kapil Sharma Show. Play all songs of the Kapil Sharma Show. US the icing on the cake. Did you say

Can we start or you want to share with the whole class what you guys are chatting about? All right, good afternoon. In a short while, we will be joined virtually by our friend Jorge Moura da Silva, who I see is already on the screen. You know he's the executive director of UNOPS. He's connecting from Copenhagen to discuss various projects, including his most recent trip to Nepal following the devastation caused by the flood there not long ago. You saw the Secretary-General this morning and said that in Europe and far beyond, many have taken to the streets out of frustration with the rising cost of living. Everywhere, he said, pressures are building over the price of food, fuel, and other basic items. The Secretary-General said that violence and destruction we have seen on the streets is unacceptable, and those responsible for those criminal activities must be held to account. At the same time, he said, we cannot let intolerable violence obscure the very legitimate and very real grievances of many of the peaceful demonstrators. He added that from the Middle East to Ukraine to Sudan, we're seeing civilians and civilian infrastructure deliberately thrust into the line of fire. Nothing seems to be off limits, he said, warning that war exposes the fundamental unfairness of an economic system that forces those with the least to absorb the greatest shocks. Everywhere, he said, fighting must stop. Civilians must be protected. International navigational rights and freedoms must be upheld, and diplomacy must be given the space to succeed. As you heard also from the Secretary General, he mentioned that he would be leaving for Egypt. He's heading out tomorrow at the invitation of Egyptian President Fatah El-Sisi. We expect him to arrive early on Saturday morning in the Egyptian capital. During the visit over the weekend and on Monday, he will hold a number of meetings with Egyptian senior officials, including the president, the foreign minister, and the foreign minister, Badr Ahmed Abdelatty. He's also scheduled to meet with Nabil Fahmi, who, as you know, is the secretary general of the League of Arab States. The visit is part of the secretary general's ongoing consultations with countries amid ongoing diplomatic efforts to de-escalate tensions between the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran, and as well to support a diplomatic resolution to the conflict. Egypt has been actively engaged in these efforts, working with regional and international partners. He's also expected to discuss these efforts with Egyptian officials, alongside broader regional developments, including the situation in Sudan and in Gaza. The Secretary-General also coincides with October 24th, which is...

UN Day.

Very good, Linda. It is UN Day, which marks the anniversary of the entry into force of the Charter of these United Nations. On this occasion, the Secretary-General will deliver an address to students and diplomats at Cairo University. And the Secretary-General is also expected to return to be back in New York Tuesday morning. Also traveling in this afternoon is our Deputy Secretary-General, Amina Mohammed. She will head to College Park, Maryland, to deliver keynote remarks at the launch of the Global Policy Institute at the University of Maryland School of Public Policy. In her remarks, she will highlight the urgency of accelerating progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals and consider how demographic change, urbanization, and artificial intelligence will shape development beyond 2030. She will also underscore the role of research, public policy, intergenerational collaboration in addressing inequalities and building a more sustainable future. Moving to Sudan, which I referred to in our trip announcement, our humanitarian colleagues on the ground tell us that air and drone strikes reportedly caused civilian casualties across several parts of that country. In North Darfur State, an airstrike reportedly killed five civilians, including two people who were working in a community-led initiative known as the Emergency Response Rooms. that took place in Tina locality on Tuesday. Many other people were reportedly injured. Further civilian casualties were also reported following air and drone strikes in western South Kordofan. We condemn, of course, as we always do, the killings of civilians. Civilians and humanitarian personnel, as well as civilian infrastructure, must always be protected and never be targeted, and that would be in accordance with international humanitarian law. Hostilities also being reportedly driving up the price of fuel in parts of Kordofan and Darfur, increases are expected to push commodity prices higher and make essential goods even less affordable for the most vulnerable families. We and our humanitarian partners are preparing to scale up lifesaving assistance in the most impacted areas of Darfur. and Kordofan over the next six months. However, as we've been saying here repeatedly, the severe funding shortages hamper our ability to respond to the growing needs. We call on donors to provide the resources needed to sustain and scale up the response, and on the parties to the conflict to allow us to deliver that aid. Turning to Somalia, where our colleagues at the International Organization for Migration warned that nearly 874,000 human beings could be forced from their homes over the next three months. This is due to rising rivers and heavy rainfall that threaten communities already struggling with drought and repeated displacement. The Danish Refugee Council and the IOM project that flooding will account for 92 percent of the displacement as Somalia enters a rainy season forecast to bring above-normal rainfall amid strengthening El Nino conditions. IOM is working with Somali authorities to strengthen the early warning system and prepare emergency assistance. But right now, they've only secured 14 percent of the $16.6 million needed to prepare for and respond to El Nino related events. Crossing the sea into Yemen, our humanitarian colleagues there tell us that civilians continue to pay a heavy price as the conflict persists. Since the beginning of August, Our colleagues at the Human Rights Office have verified 262 civilian casualties, including 66 people killed and 196 injured. More than half of those people were children. And as you can imagine, the actual count is probably much higher. Despite these challenges, our partners continue to deliver life-saving aid. Nearly 190,000 people have received emergency food assistance. More than 117,000 were able to receive cash. assistance so they can buy emergency supplies, and 96,000 men, women, and children have benefited from water and sanitation support. However, the conflict continues to hamper our humanitarian response. Access to Tizi city continues to be severely disrupted. WFP had to switch from distributing food to providing cash assistance because of lack of access. The World Food Programme aims to reach some 132,000 people across four districts of the city this week alone. That would allow families to purchase emergency supplies where they are available. But as you know, with few supplies coming in, the price is rising fast of most of the most basic commodities. Again, in this conflict, as in others, we call on parties to protect civilians and civilian infrastructure and to respect international humanitarian law and to allow for the safe passage of humanitarian assistance and essential commercial goods into the city of Taiz. Turning to the occupied Palestinian territory, our acting special coordinator, Remy's Alabkarov, traveled with diplomats to Jenin in the West Bank. 13 member states took part in this trip to learn about the challenges linked to the olive harvest and the prolonged displacement of Palestinian communities. In the village of Araba, they heard from farmers growing olives about recurrent settler attacks, which combined with Israeli access restrictions, are undermining food security. Our humanitarian partners briefed the delegation on efforts to protect olive pickers, including by accompanying them to the groves and providing legal aid to challenge Israeli-imposed access restrictions. Dr. Alabkarov said the harvest season should be a time of celebration, with up to 100,000 Palestinian households depending on olives for their livelihoods, but many Palestinians are being prevented from gathering their crops safely. He said that crimes committed against them must stop and the perpetrators must be held to account by the Israeli authorities. At a clinic in the city of Kabatiya, diplomats met with Palestinians who since early 2025 have been prevented from returning Janine camp by the Israeli authorities, where many of their homes have been destroyed. UNRWA briefed the group on support being provided by those families, from food to shelter to other essential services. Dr. Labcarov stressed that more funding is needed so that humanitarian organizations can help the displaced Palestinians and urged Israeli authorities to enable their safe and dignified return. Meanwhile, we and our partners yesterday brought more medical medical supplies and equipment into Gaza, also brought in food and fuel. That was to replenish the stocks and supported -- we also supported efforts to fix water infrastructure in the area of Dar al-Bala. We also provided families in multiple areas with items that could help them prepare for the rainy season. And moving north to South Lebanon, our peacekeeping forces there tell us that Israeli Defense Force military activities in their area of operations between the 19th and the 21st of October. UN peacekeepers observed several airstrikes across the area of operations in both the UNIFIL sectors. Peacekeepers also reported extensive artillery and mortar activity daily, with 80 trajectories of projectiles recorded yesterday alone. Multiple drones observed over positions in populated areas, including low-altitude overflights near Al-Bayada, Al-Mansouri, Tiri, and Tyre in Sector West, and Mays al-Jabal in Sector East. UNIFIL patrols in Sector East faced repeated movement restrictions due to roadblocks and other obstacles, mainly due to IDF activities that caused delays, rerouting, and the cancellation of some missions. Despite these challenges, our humanitarian missions coordinated between the peacekeepers and our Humanitarian Affairs Office are proceeding. Again, we continue to urge all to respect the freedom of movement for peacekeepers and to avoid any acts that could lead to further escalation. And moving to Ukraine, where humanitarian colleagues tell us that repeated attacks continue to claim civilian lives, disrupt essential services, and hinder humanitarian evacuations. In regions of Kyiv and Kharkiv. Those were the most impacted, while attacks on the capital damaged homes, medical facility, ambulances, and some transport infrastructure. Relentless attacks were also impacting humanitarian operations. Yesterday, a drone strike severely damaged a clearly marked humanitarian vehicle in the Donetsk region, forcing the humanitarian group to suspend its operations to try to evacuate people from Kramatorsk, and Sloviansk in the region. Aid workers, thankfully, were unharmed. Our humanitarian partners, including with support from UN agencies, are providing emergency repair material, hot meals, cash assistance, and psychosocial support. Yesterday, an interagency convoy delivered medicines, hygiene kits, and winter supplies to a frontline community in the region of Zaporizhzhia, where access remains severely restricted, as you well know. And lastly, a note from Afghanistan, where our friends at the World Food Programme warned that the situation in the country is deteriorating fast, and hunger and malnutrition are no longer seasonal setbacks. The Integrated Food Security Phase Classification projection released earlier this month confirms more than 19.2 million human beings are acutely food insecure in Afghanistan, of which 5 million will be facing emergency levels of hunger, while 4 million children and 1.3 million mothers are projected to be malnourished. WFP notes that approximately one-third of the country's health facilities including 815 malnutrition treatment clinics, are either closed or suspended further, worsening malnutrition by limiting access to critical health and nutrition services for women and children. WFP remains a critical lifeline for vulnerable communities, providing food, nutrition, support, and resilience that help families weather shocks. However, as you'll recall, WFP was forced to halt food assistance in June to stretch limited resources through the winter, when hunger is expected to be at its As hunger approaches, WFP is pre-positioning its winter response, but current funding allows us to reach just a million out of the 5 million people who need help. WFP needs $545 million for the next six months to tackle a crisis that is quickly spinning out of control. Edie.

Thank you, Steph. A follow-up on the olive harvest. Are we right to assume that there was no settler interference in the -- against the group that you talked about today?

Yeah, I mean, we've not been told of any obstruction to their visit, and I'm sure if there had been something, we would have been told.

And secondly, Iran says that seven oil tankers have been attacked in the Strait of Hormuz. Does the Secretary General have any comment on these attacks?

I mean, obviously, no commercial ships should be attacked. We want to see a return to the free and open navigation in the Strait of Hormuz. Obviously, we continue to urge the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran to return to diplomacy. We know that the Pakistan and Qatar have been very active in the last few days. I mean, I think for the sake of the people in the region and the broader world, we need to see that waterway reopen and we need to see tensions go down. Linda and then Namu.

Thank you, Steph.

Namurad.

Apropos of Afghanistan. What is the current status of the UN workforce in Afghanistan? Are women still very limited in terms of...

Yeah, I mean, we continue to face... De facto, Taliban authorities continue to impose unacceptable restrictions on female UN staff, Afghan staff, from doing their work, and this is an issue that has been raised repeatedly. from the humanitarian side, Mr. Rosemary DeCarlo was there recently, the new SRS G, the new representative also just just arrived. This is it's it's not right on so many on so many levels as a human right and also obviously for for us to be able to conduct our operations properly. Press your microphone.

Sorry. Are international women, women from other countries, allowed to work in Afghanistan?

As far as I know, our international female staff is able to do its work. And as you'll recall, both this -- the current special representative and her predecessor are both women and have been interacting with the Taliban, as has Rosemary DiCarlo herself. Uh, now more than Murad.

Uh, thank you, Stefan. Special rapporteur, Ben Saul, uh, has called the U.S. strikes on vessels suspected of belonging to drug cartels a crime against human- uh, a war crime, sorry. Does the Secretary General share his assessment?

Look, as you know, we let the special rapporteurs do their own assessments. I think we've been very concerned about the strikes that are being conducted against suspected drug boats. We need to see respect for international law. And, you know, the fight against illicit drugs needs to be a fight that is done through cooperation and within the framework of the law. Murad.

Thank you, Stephen. Could you clarify how the UN is still able to get access to Taiz city in Yemen, if the city under complete...

We are not, right? And I think that's what WFP said. They switched from actually trying to deliver goods to doing cash transfers, which are often done electronically through phone-based cash apps. We have partner NGOs so local Yemeni NGOs who we work with that are in the city. And so we're getting information from them. We're trying to support them remotely. But, listen, it is so tragic that in the last few years, we have seen so many cities besieged as they were in medieval times. right, whether in Sudan or in Yemen and in other places around the world, with civilian population just trying to survive as the price of commodities that are actually there keep going up. We need to get that access. We need to get the trucks, our trucks rolling in to Taiz. Madam.

Thank you so much. Mr. Brad Lander, I hope I said his name correctly, I'm sorry if I didn't. He's a Congress candidate. I know he is, yep. I know he got released, but he was also detained with other American activists and volunteers. Do we have any updates on whether they were the other volunteers were released?

I don't I don't know. I mean, what I just saw about him is that he was temporarily detained. Obviously, I mean, this is part of the growing and constant concern about the security operations by the Israeli security forces in the occupied West Bank, as well as the violent settler activity that we've seen. Okay. Abdelhamid, do you have a question online?

Really fast question, short. The first question is, yesterday, Israeli announced that its air force violated the Syrian airspace and Iraqi airspace, and they reached the border of Iran. Do you have any comment on that?

We have no confirmation. We've seen those press reports. As always, we call on countries not to violate other the territorial sovereignty or the airspace of their neighbors. Your next question.

And the second question is that in his statement, the Secretary General put the blame on the situation in the West Bank, and he called it out of control on the solely on the settlers, while the occupation forces are doing the most violation of Palestinian rights, including killing and including arrest, including 22 communities were invaded last night by Israeli occupation forces, not by the settlers. So why it was not mentioned in his statement.

I don't think your interpretation -- I mean, I know, Abd al-Hamid, you and I always have a disagreement about the words that are used and the words that are not used. I think the Secretary-General was highlighting the violent activities that were seen by Israeli settlers. But if you take the time to read our statements, what we say here, the briefing, as well as the reports, I think we've clearly expressed our repeated concern about the security activities and the lethal force often used by Israeli security forces in the occupied territory.

Okay. And finally, Netanyahu stated today that he's been he's in contact with a number of countries to facilitate the eviction and the expulsion of Palestinians from Gaza. Are you aware of this statement?

I've not seen the statement, but, you know, as we've often said, the people of Gaza need to be able to choose their own future, both politically and where they want to live. Okay. We will go to our guests. If we could put George up on the screen. No, that's Abdel Hamid. All right. No, that's still Abdel Hamid. We like Abdel Hamid. There we go. Now we see. There we go. All right. George, you're a man who almost needs no introduction. George Moura da Silva is the head of UNOPS. George, I'll let you make some opening comments and then we'll go to questions.

Perfect. Thank you, Steph. I would like to focus on Nepal. As you know, I just visited Nepal after the climate disaster that impacted Nepal on the 26th of August. It was one of the most destructive and deadliest climate disaster events in Nepal and globally. It's caused, as you know, from a flash flood triggered by a glacier outburst, and the impact was devastating. More than 1,500 people lost their lives. 5,600 are still missing. More than 100 bridges collapsed. 100,000 people have been affected, including more than 30,000 children. 13 hydropower dams have been destroyed, 23 schools, and 2.2 million tons of debris and sediments are now occupying what used to be houses, schools, roads, and rivers. The estimate points to, in terms of recovery needs, to $4.8 billion, which is equivalent to 10% GDP. So in my visit, I had the chance to go, just a few days ago, I returned yesterday, visit the most affected areas in Raswa and Nuwakot. I met the government in Kathmandu. affairs and infrastructure. I had the chance also to engage with the mayors, with the governors, with the UN family, and of course also with the donors, with ambassadors representing different member states.

You're muted. Hold on a second. George, if we could unmute George.

Was quite sobering about what they faced on the 26th August.

George, you're muted again.

They faced a massive water wall with more than 100 meters high, traveling at the speed of 180 kilometers per hour. that devastated in a matter of seconds 60 kilometers along the valley. So we are not dealing with a normal flood. We are dealing with a flash flood that, again, is triggered by a glacier outburst. Of course, I also heard their expressions of resilience and tenacity. They want to go back. to the communities. They are displaced, but they want to go back to the places where they lived. They told me how difficult it is to live in those places now that the 100 bridges collapsed. So the connectivity across the river is impossible. What used to be something walking distance, a few minutes, now takes 12 hours. And finally, expressions of climate injustice. This is one of the most tangible expressions of climate injustice that the Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has been alerting to. Nepal is a vulnerable country that lives in very unique circumstances. They emit 0.08% of global greenhouse gas emissions, and they are disproportionately affected by climate change that they are not responsible for. They are highly exposed to earthquakes. They are still a least developed country, receiving only $1.5 billion ODA every year. And now they are highly, highly exposed to the dependence of fertilizers and energy from the Strait of Hormuz. As you know, I'm also leading the UN Task Force for the Strait of Hormuz. And indeed, Nepal is one of the most exposed countries to the dependence of the fertilizers. And the Prime Minister, you remember at the General Assembly, Prime Minister Shah explained how difficult it has been for Nepal to deal not only with the climate impact, but also with the food and energy crisis. The government is currently concluding the PDNA, so the Post-Disaster Needs Assessment, which will be presented in the next few days. They are also preparing the recovery plan. The UN family, including UNOPS, and also the multilateral development banks, we are supporting the government in those efforts on the assessments and on the recovery plan. The UN Office is obviously ready, in addition to what we have been doing, which is doing damage assessments and immediate response, we will be supporting the country on the recovery. But I would like to say, to conclude, that this is a defining moment for Nepal, but also for the international community. For Nepal, it is a defining moment because building back better means that they need to integrate resilience in everything they do. They will need to invest more on early warning systems. They will need to ensure that all infrastructure is climate resilient. And they will need, obviously, to invest more on planning. But for the international community, this is also a defining moment. It's not fair to ask Nepal, who emits only 0.08% of global greenhouse gas emissions, to pay alone the cost of the recovery for a climate crisis that they have not any responsibility. It's also a moment of truth and the defining moment of the international community when it comes to climate, to ensure that all countries honor their commitment on the $1.3 trillion on climate finance every year by 2035 to developing countries. And also, as the Secretary General mentioned yesterday, when UNEP launched their Emissions Gap Report, it's fundamental that all countries cut their emissions and bring us to a 1.5 degrees target. So I would say to conclude that this crisis, this disaster in Nepal, is a defining moment, not only for climate, but also for development. And I hope that the international community will comply with its responsibilities. I confess that, not I confess, I think that there is good expressions of solidarity, but we'll need much more than what has been provided. And of course, I'll be happy to answer to any question, Stefan.

Thanks, George. Edie.

Thank you very much on behalf of the United Nations Correspondents Association for doing this briefing. My name is Edith Lederer from the Associated Press. Can you tell us how much money Nepal has received since the disaster to at least try and deal with helping those tens of thousands of displaced people ahead of winter, which I'm sure is going to be setting in very quickly. And is there going to be some kind of a pledging conference? I know you talked about 4.8 billion. billion being needed for reconstruction, and what sense do you get that major donors are going to really offer significant funds to help restore Nepal?

Thank you. Go ahead, George.

Thank you. On the On the amounts provided, the flash appeal, the OCHA flash appeal requested 50 million, just immediate support, and only 24.5 million have been raised. So we are talking about the fraction of be needed for the recovery, because the recovery will require almost 5 billion. What has been collected until now, it's just 24.5 billion, which is a million for immediate support. So your second question is very important, which is how can we mobilize the international community through a more comprehensive pledging. And I know that Nepal is planning to organize this soon. I contacted already several donors during my visit in Kathmandu and also engaged with the World Bank and also with the Asian Development Bank. I think that there is good perception from the international community about the need to provide support, but perception is not enough. We need strong commitments and I really hope that we can mobilize the resources soon. Of course, three things are important. We need the government to put in place or to develop a plan because it doesn't work mobilizing resources if there is no plan. And I know that the government will issue in the next few days. the damage assessment and the recovery plan, we need the financing, and then we need the capacity for implementation, which is where United Nations, but also UNOPS, we will be ready to support the country.

Thank you. Any other questions? So, okay, go ahead, Mona, please.

Thank you very much, sir, for the briefing. My name is Mona Outul. I'm with Al Quds Al Arabi. You mentioned UNEP report. You said that countries need to cut emissions while meeting their climate finance commitments. Now, given Nepal's very small contribution, as you said, to global emissions and the scale of its recovery needs, How can we ensure these commitments translate into funding that reaches countries like Nepal when they face disasters like this? And thank you.

Thank you. It's precisely the reason why we must align development and climate. a double responsibility from the international community, particularly the most rich economies, most developed economies. One is doing their own job, reducing emissions. And what the UNEP report shows is that we are overshooting, but that overshooting on 1.5 degrees can be perceived as a matter of complacency. We must course correct quickly. And what is needed is to reduce emissions by 18% by 2030 and 45% by 2035, which means that The member states, signatory to the Paris Agreement and the convention, will need to redo their national determined contributions to put it aligned with 1.5 degrees, first. Second, we need to mobilize the resources that are needed to the most vulnerable countries. And the numbers are clear. There is a commitment from the developed countries, most rich economies, to provide $1.3 trillion per year by 2035 on climate finance. to developing countries. And that's why I mentioned that when it comes to this crisis in Nepal, we need both. We need to support Nepal with the $5 billion that are needed for the recovery, but we also need to ensure that the entire commitment on climate, both on climate finance and on the reduction of emissions, are fully implemented.

Just a quick follow up, please. Since you mentioned that resources need to be mobilized, what concrete obligations legal and high emitting countries have to support climate vulnerable countries like Nepal? Are there any specific legal obligations that they need? I'm sorry.

Thank you.

I can-- Go ahead, Mort. Go ahead.

Go ahead, Jorge.

Thank you. Well, as you may know, I'm a climate veteran. In 1999, I was, as a member of the European Parliament, the rapporteur on ratification of the Kyoto Protocol. And as minister in Portugal, I negotiated the Paris Agreement. So the rules are very clear. The Paris Agreement establishes very clearly what needs to be done to reach 1.5 degrees. That's why we have stock taking exercises to see whether the Nationally Determined Contributions from member states are aligned with that objective. And what the report from UNEP shows is that that's not the case. So the current NDCs puts us in a much better path than before. We are in a path to 2.3 to 2.5 degrees. no longer the four degrees as it was before the Paris Agreement. So that's the good news. But the bad news is we are not in a path to 1.5. And that's why the spirit of the Paris Agreement requires nations to revisit their commitments. And that's what the Secretary General said yesterday when he launched the UNF report. And I quote, "Overshoot is not surrender. we can still keep it as small, as short as possible and bring temperatures back to below 1.5 degrees. Thank you.

George, thank you very much. We wish you all the best. We hope to see you soon here in person. Thank you all.