General Assembly: 82nd plenary meeting, 80th session

Good morning. Please take your seats. The 82nd Plenary Meeting of the General Assembly is called to order. This morning I circulated a letter to all Member States regarding speaking times in debates held in the General Assembly, in follow-up to the discussion in the informal meeting of the General Committee on Monday 18th. Member States agreed to the principle that speaking time limits will also apply in formal meetings of the General Assembly while maintaining the flexibility to decide otherwise for specific cases where circumstances require, in full accordance with the Rules of Procedure. The time limits would be 5 minutes for delegations speaking in their national capacity and 7 minutes for statements delivered on behalf of a group of states. Consistent with the principle of proportionality, the same approach would be taken on explanations of vote. As announced, the decision to limit speaking times will be implemented for the first time at the debate on Agenda Item 32 on June 4th. However, with a very busy program of action today on draft resolution before us, I strongly encourage you to comply with speaking time limits for explanations of vote already today. In keeping with established practice, I invite the attention to the Assembly document A/AD/474 Addendum 4, in which the Secretary-General informs the President of the General Assembly that since the issuance of this communication contained in document A/AD/474 4,474, addendum 3, Ecuador has made the payment— payments necessary to reduce the errors below the amount specified in Article 19 of the Charter. May I take it that the Assembly takes note of the information contained in this document? It is so decided. The Assembly will resume to its consideration of Agenda Item 13, entitled Integrated and Coordinated Implementation of and follow-up to the outcomes of the major United Nations conferences and summits in the economic, social, and related fields. To take action on a proposal announced in the journal, I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Uruguay on behalf of the Group of 77 and China to introduce Draft Resolution A/80/L61.

Distinguished President, Excellencies, distinguished delegates, I have the honor to introduce on behalf of the G77 and China Draft Resolution A/AT/L.61, entitled Fourth Industrial Development Decade for Africa 2026-2035. This resolution comes at a critical moment for the international community. At a time marked by persistent inequalities, economic fragmentation, climate-related challenges, and widening technological divides, industrialization of Africa remains both an African priority and a global necessity. The Group firmly believes that inclusive and sustainable industrial development is indispensable for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals, particularly Goal 9, and for advancing structural transformation, productive capacities, decent job creation, poverty eradication, and resilience across the African continent. The draft resolution before us builds upon previous United Nations commitments and reflects the collective determination of member states to support Africa's industrial transformation agenda, including through infrastructural development, technology transfer, value addition, regional integration, and enhanced international cooperation. It also recognizes the leadership of African countries and institutions, including the African Union Agenda 2063 and the African Continental Free Trade Area, in promoting an integrated, prosperous, and industrialized Africa. Before concluding, The G77 and China, I would like to sincerely thank all delegations and partners for the constructive spirit demonstrated throughout this process. Negotiations are never simply about words on paper. They are about finding common ground, building trust, and advancing shared aspirations. In particular, we thank Angola and Gabon for coordinating this resolution on behalf of the Group, and Morocco for facilitating the process. We deeply appreciate their dedication, patience, and tireless efforts in guiding consultations to help us achieve today's balanced text. The draft resolution before us is therefore a reflection of collective engagement, dialogue, and compromise guided by a common belief that Africa's industrial transformation is essential not only for the continent but for the achievement of our shared Global Development Objectives. The G77 and China therefore hopes that this draft resolution will be adopted by consensus. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Uruguay. We shall now proceed to consider draft resolution A/80/L61. For your information, the draft resolution has closed for e-sponsorship. I give the floor to the representative of the Secretariat.

Thank you, Madam President. I should like to announce that since the submission of the draft resolution, and in addition to the delegations listed on the L document, the following countries have also become co-sponsors of A/80/L61: Austria, Cyprus, and Estonia.

Estonia.

If any other delegations wish to co-sponsor AU61, please signify by pressing the microphone button now. Members of the Group of G77 and China are already co-sponsors of the draft resolution and do not have to press the microphone button at this stage. I see Kyrgyzstan. Greece, Slovakia, Bangladesh, Thailand, Uzbekistan. Thank you, Madam President.

I thank the representative of the Secretariat. Before giving the floor for explanations of vote before the vote, may I remind delegations that they are strongly urged to limit explanation of vote to 5 minutes, which should in any case not exceed 10 minutes, and be made from their seat and in recognition of what we decided in the General Committee, would strongly encourage you to stick to the 5 minutes. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of the United States.

Thank you, Madam President. The United States believes that sovereign nations bear primary responsibility for their own economic and industrial development. Countries must pursue policies that mobilize their own human, financial, and natural resources to attract private trade and investment. This resolution, however, doubles down on the archaic government and multilateral-centric development model that repeatedly fails African nations. Cyclical aid fosters dependency, inefficiency, and corruption, and the United States cannot support a resolution that perpetuates this. The United States will continue to champion development through expanded trade and private investment. It is the private sector, not assistance, that drives economic growth. American aid will be targeted and time-limited. We will favor nations that have demonstrated both the ability and willingness to help themselves. We will target our resources to areas where they can have a multiplier effect and catalyze durable private sector investment. Second, this resolution advances language that categorically undermines national sovereignty and U.S. interests. The text repeatedly reaffirms the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, Sustainable Development Goals, and related initiatives. As the United States has made abundantly clear, the 2030 Agenda and SDGs impinge on state sovereignty as a soft form of global governance, and we will not reaffirm them. The resolution further asks UNIDO, an organization the United States withdrew from in 1996, due to its ineffectiveness, as the implementing agency with respect to the, quote, "fourth industrial development decade." The United States cannot support expanding the role and resources of an organization that does not advance U.S. priorities or deliver meaningful results. The United States firmly believes that Africa's prosperity will come from trade, investment, and private sector partnerships., not multilateral aid programs that have overpromised and underdelivered. The African people deserve better. For these reasons, the United States votes no on this resolution.

Thank you. I thank the distinguished representative of the United States. As we do not see any other request for the floor, we have heard the last speaker in explanation of vote before the vote. The Assembly will now take a decision on draft resolution A/80/L61 entitled Fourth Industrial Development Decade for Africa 2026 to 2035. A recorded vote has been requested on this topic. We shall now begin the voting process. Those in favor of draft resolution A/80/L61, please signify. Those against, abstentions.

The Assembly is now voting on draft resolution A/80/L61 entitled Fourth Industrial Development Decade for Africa 2026-2035. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are accurately reflected on the screen? The voting has been completed. Please lock the machine.

The result of the vote is as follows: in favor, 176; against, 2; abstentions, 0. Draft Resolution A/80/L61 is adopted. Before giving the floor for explanation of vote after the vote, may I remind delegation again that they are strongly urged to limit explanation of votes to 5 minutes. Stick to the 5 minutes with regard to the new rules, but for the moment, which should in any case not exceed 10 minutes and be made from their seats. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of the Russian Federation.

Thank you, Madam President. The Russian Federation supports the adoption of the resolution and Russia welcomes the proclamation of the Fourth Decade of Industrial Development of Africa, 2026-2035. The industrial development of Africa is closely linked to the development of mutually beneficial strategic partnerships. The Russian Federation has been a reliable and time-tested partner. Our cooperation is based upon longstanding and unshakeable friendship with the majority of African states. We continue to support our friends in implementing large-scale industrialization projects. We actively support implementation of NEPAD programs and other initiatives that aim to finance sustainable development in Africa. Russian-African trade volumes have grown considerably. In 2025, this indicator reached almost $30 $1.5 billion. We are convinced that this figure will continue to grow. There's significant potential to expand trade with African states. We've seen increased interest from African partners not only in increasing imports of Russian industrial products, but also to localize them through joint production and through bolstering processing capacity in Africa. And this is what this resolution is about today. We are increasingly seeing a growing demand for cooperation, the foundations of which were laid during the Soviet era. At the center of this cooperation are approaches that are diametrically opposed to the practices of the former colonial powers, which did not bolster local processing capacity, but rather simply siphoned out natural resources from Africa. Industrial development in Africa includes growing contributions from Russian regions. Trade and economic ties with African countries are maintained by 81 constituent entities of the Russian Federation to various degrees. The goal of simplifying interregional and intermunicipal relations are presented in the Russia-Africa Plan of Action 2023-2026. Our domestic goods, services, and technologies are in demand on African markets. We're seeing the outcomes of the participation of our business missions and African congressional and other expos. We are carrying out joint work on developing projects for industrial infrastructure. One good example of this is the creation by— of a Russian industrial zone on the east coast of the Suez Canal, which has become a hub for our business participation in the region's economic development. We focus and underscore increasing cooperation to increase industrial capacity and production capacity. Our foreign policy agenda includes the third summit of Russia-Africa, which is scheduled to be held in Moscow at the end of October. There's active preparations underway for this event, and we are looking forward to a results-oriented summit. Thank you for your attention.

I thank the distinguished representative of the Russian Federation. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Türkiye.

Madam Chair, thank you very much. Türkiye would like to deliver a statement regarding the terms indigenous peoples and local communities as referenced in the resolution Fourth Industrial Development Decade for Africa. Türkiye declares that there does not exist any group of people in its territory which could be considered as indigenous peoples and believes that the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples refers to the exercise of self-determination in line with the UN Charter obligations regarding non-interference in sovereignty, integrity, and political unity of states. The relevant paragraphs in the resolution should be interpreted as applicable only to the extent that it is, it is consistent with and implementable under national legislation. We kindly request that this explanation be reflected in the official records.

I thank you. I thank the distinguished representative of Türkiye. We've heard the last speaker in explanation of vote after the vote. The Assembly will continue its consideration of agenda item 13, entitled Integrated and Coordinated Implementation of and Follow-up to the Outcomes of the Major United Nations Conferences and Summits in the Economic, Social, and Related Fields. And resume its consideration of Agenda Item 117 entitled "Follow-up to the Outcome of the Millennium Summit" to take action on a proposal announced in the journal. We shall now proceed to consider draft resolution A/80/L64. Before giving the floor for explanations of vote, before the vote, may I remind delegations that they are strongly urged to limit explanation of vote to 5 minutes, which should in any case not exceed 10 minutes and be made from their seats. As the first speaker, I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Brazil on behalf of a group of like-minded countries, followed by the United States and Nicaragua.

Madam President, I have the honor to deliver this statement on behalf of Colombia, Costa Rica, Mexico, Uruguay, as well as my own country, Brazil. We once again thank Kenya and Luxembourg for their dedication in facilitating the progress declaration of the Second International Migration Review Forum. We deeply regret that such an important document has been put to a vote. This reflects major setbacks in international cooperation on migration as heightened political debate, disinformation, and dehumanizing rhetoric continue to instrumentalize migrants as scapegoats for broader societal problems. And this is also a grim reminder of our times, in which confidence in multilateralism continues to erode. Madam President, we are clear of the benefits that migration brings to the sustainable development of countries of origin, transit, and destination alike. Migrant workers bring new skills and diversity to the labour market, while remittances remain a crucial source of external financing for low- and middle-income countries. At the same time, countries with aging populations rely heavily on migrants to broaden tax bases and maintain social security solvency. Investing in the socio-economic integration of migrants remains therefore crucial to promoting economic growth and reducing inequality. To unlock these benefits, international cooperation must be at the center of our collective efforts, as recognized by the Global Compact on Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration. That is why, throughout the negotiations, our countries insisted on advancing the commitments made in 2018, as well as those reflected in the Progress Declaration of 2022. We were guided by the recognition that all migrants are entitled to the same universal human rights and fundamental freedoms as anyone else, to be respected, protected, and fulfilled at all times. We oppose language that seeks to differentiate access to basic services based on migratory status. We advocate for stronger efforts to end child detention which is never in the best interest of the child. We emphasize the importance of expanding and enhancing regular pathways, including as a means of reducing irregular migration and combating migrant smuggling and trafficking in persons. We strive to point out to the risk of human rights violations amid the growing practice of externalization, whereby responsibilities for migration management are shifted to other States. While we recognize the sovereign right of countries to implement domestic policies according to their national legislation and specific realities, it is through the exercise of that same sovereignty that States have committed to international human rights law, international cooperation, and multilateralism, which should not be disregarded to to serve political agendas. Madam President, even though the Progress Declaration falls short of the ambition we would have preferred, we fully support it and will vote in its favor. We view it as a possible compromise among widely different positions on migration governance and international cooperation. Contrary to some claims, it does not facilitate so-called mass migration, nor does it prevent international cooperation on return procedures, provided they are safe, dignified, and in full respect of human rights. It also does not create new legally binding obligations for States, which remain free to pursue their objectives on a voluntary basis. At a time when anti-immigration rhetoric continues to fuel intolerance and to undermine the many contributions of of contributions of migrants, the number of migrant deaths and disappearances along dangerous migration routes has reached nearly 8,000 in 2025 alone, according to recent data from the International Organization for Migration. This is yet another reminder of why we must rely on international cooperation and evidence-based, clear information on both the benefits and challenges of migration to counter misleading narratives and harmful stereotypes. As we witness increasing setbacks and attacks against multilateralism, our country sees this opportunity to reaffirm our commitment to all 23 objectives of the Global Compact. We will also build upon the current Progress Declaration to lead by example and to further advance both international cooperation and domestic policies aimed at better welcoming, integrating, and protecting migrants worldwide. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Brazil. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of the United States.

Thank you, Madam President. Last week, the United States refused to participate in the UN's review of the Global Compact on Migration. The United States joins this meeting today with a clear and direct message: The era of mass migration is over, and we will no longer be complicit in allowing it to continue. The United States must have full control over its borders, its immigration system, and who enters the country. Under the leadership of President Trump, the United States is returning to a foreign policy grounded in realism, reciprocity, and above all, the absolute primacy of national sovereignty. The United States stands ready to work with any nation that shares our goal to restore the UN to its founding purposes and ensure it delivers real results for the nations and peoples it serves. We stand ready to cooperate on shared concerns, solutions, and reforms. We are placing the following red lines and points of clarification on the record. We do not recognize the Global Compact for Migration. The Global Compact on Migration claims to support safe migration. For the citizens of Western nations, mass migration was never safe. It introduced new security threats, imposed financial strains, and undermined the cohesion of our societies. The United States will not legitimize instruments or processes that enable mass migration into America or Western nations. Under President Trump, the United States will facilitate— facilitate re-migration, not replacement migration. Sovereignty is non-negotiable. The United States resoundingly rejects any vision of global governance that attempts to dictate how a sovereign nation manages its own borders. Decisions on who enters our country, in what numbers, and under what conditions are the sole prerogative of the United States government, not a network of unelected global bureaucrats. This declaration repeatedly calls for providing basic services to all migrants regardless of their status. Let me be clear: the United States maintains a sharp legal distinction between those who follow our laws and those who violate them. We will not support policies that incentivize mass and illegal migration through through provision of taxpayer-funded healthcare or education. We note with concern the document's saturation with divisive DEI terminology and gender ideology. The United States is currently rooting out these discriminatory practices from our own government institutions. We expect UN documents to use clear biological language, recognizing that women are female and men are male, and to avoid ambiguous terms that serve as a front for destructive propaganda. The original purpose of the United Nations was to maintain international peace and security. Instead, we see a drift into utopian schemes like the 2030 Agenda, which is a form of soft global governments— governance that impinges on national sovereignty. We will not accept such attempts. The United States stands ready to work with any nation that shares our goal of solving real problems through interest-driven diplomacy. But we will stand firm against any effort to subvert the will of the American people or the integrity of our borders. Thank you, Madam President.

I thank the distinguished representative of the United States. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Nicaragua, followed by Indonesia, Ghana, and Nigeria.

Madam President, I have the honor to deliver this statement on behalf of Cuba, the Republic of Belarus, Eritrea, the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Russian Federation, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, and my own country, Nicaragua. We thank the co-facilitators, Kenya and Luxembourg, for their efforts in guiding the negotiations of the Progress Declaration of the Second International Migration Review reform. However, we deeply regret that the final text omitted an evident and widely documented reality: the devastating impact of unilateral coercive measures on peoples and their direct relationship with the increase of number of migrants in various regions of the world. Unilateral coercive measures severely affect national economies, restrict trade and access to international financing. Hinder the acquisition of medicines, food, technology, and essential supplies, weaken health and social protection systems, reduce employment opportunities, and progressively deteriorate the living conditions of millions of people, undermining the efforts to implement the Sustainable Development Goals and the 2030 Agenda. Their effects fall disproportionately on the most vulnerable sectors deepening poverty, exclusion, and social inequalities. To this day, no one has been able to refute through objective evidence or verifiable facts the serious human impact that unilateral coercive measures inflict upon civilian populations. Reality demonstrates that when the normal functioning of economies is restricted and the capacity of states to provide employment essential services, and social protection is weakened, poverty, uncertainty, and social fragility intensify. In such circumstances, millions of people from countries of origin, transit, and destination are affected by these illegal and illegitimate measures, which have structural impediments to growth and devastating socioeconomic consequences on developing countries. These consequences, the consequences of these measures are visible in different regions of the world, particularly in Latin America and the Caribbean, Africa, and Asia, where broad sectors of the population have suffered a sustained deterioration in their living conditions. Economic contraction, difficulties in accessing food, medicines, fuel, technology, and financing, as well as the reduction of employment and development opportunities, have generated scenarios of increasing social vulnerability. These realities ultimately fuel increasingly complex migration dynamics, both within affected countries and towards other regions, by turning migration into an alternative for survival for millions of people. Madam President, it is profoundly contradictory that While the international community debates the structural causes of migration and promotes comprehensive approaches to address them, the text of the Declaration does not refer to the destabilizing effects that unilateral coercive measures have on economies and development, thereby undermining the right of peoples to development, peace, economic stability, and social well-being. Omitting this reality seriously limits the possibility of building migration policies that are truly objective, balanced, and people-centered. We reaffirm our unwavering call to put an end to these illegal unilateral coercive measures. We consider it indispensable that future processes and declarations on migration governance fully recognize this reality and address the root causes of migration in an objective, inclusive manner in accordance with the principles of the Charter of the United Nations and international law. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Nicaragua. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Indonesia.

Thank you, Madam President. Indonesia welcomes the extensive engagement and efforts made in relation to the annex of document number A/80/L.64, or the Progress Declaration of the IMRF. The discussions have reminded us that migration is experienced differently by each member state. These different realities shape our national perspectives, priorities, and approaches to migration governance. At the same time, they also underline the importance of maintaining dialogue, cooperation, and mutual understanding. Indonesia supports the Progress Declaration in its in its entirety. We believe it provides an important basis to continue advancing safe, orderly, and regular migration, while keeping the rights, dignity, and well-being of migrants at the center of our efforts. Indonesia also reaffirms the importance of the full implementation of the Global Compact in its entirety, in line with its comprehensive and balanced vision of migration governance. Moving forward, Indonesia calls for stronger shared commitments among countries of origin, transit, and destination. While our realities and responsibilities may differ, migration can only be governed effectively through cooperation and practical partnership. Indonesia therefore hopes that member states can preserve the spirit of cooperation that has guided this process. We call on all member states to support the adoption of this draft resolution. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Indonesia. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Ghana, followed by Nigeria.

Thank you, Madam President. The adoption of the Marrakesh Compact in 2018 reaffirmed our shared responsibility to coexist and cooperate despite our differences in national positions. Migration remains a cross-cutting issue with profound implications for development. Ghana firmly believes that migration contributes positively to the socioeconomic development of both countries of origin and destination. We will continue to advocate for regular pathways for migration, the protection of the human rights of all migrants regardless of status, respect for the laws of transit and destination states, safe and dignified returns, and alternatives to child detention. Migration is fundamentally a human issue and requires a human response from all states and partners. Madam President, Ghana underscores the importance of the Global Compact for Migration and remains committed to championing its implementation at the national level. Ghana believes that the current test reflects our collective efforts toward consensus and should be implemented in accordance with national and international laws. Progress under the Compact must be measured by actions that advance its objectives and strengthen multilateral cooperation. In this spirit, Ghana will vote in favor of the Progress Declaration and encourages member states to do the same in the interest of good faith, dialogue, and partnership. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Ghana. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Nigeria.

Thank you, Madam President. Nigeria takes the floor before the vote to briefly share its position on the resolution before us. My delegation welcomes the efforts that have gone into producing this document and acknowledges the progress it reflects in advancing the global dialogue on migration governance. We recognize that meaningful gains have been made in addressing key aspects of international migration, and we commend the work of all member states and stakeholders who engaged constructively in this process. However, Nigeria must express its regret that the final text does not adequately address certain critical dimensions of migration governance, most notably the externalization of migration management, the growing practice of outsourcing border control and migration responsibilities to third countries raises serious questions of accountability, human rights, and equitable sharing of responsibilities among states. These concerns are not peripheral. They go to the heart of a fair and humane global migration system, and their omission from this document is a missed opportunity. Notwithstanding these shortcomings, Nigeria firmly believes that the multilateral process itself is worth preserving and strengthening. An imperfect document adopted through dialogue is a foundation upon which we can continue to build. For these reasons, Nigeria will vote in favor of this resolution, and we urge all member states to do the same. We call upon all delegations to support this resolution as a step, however incremental, towards a more just, orderly, and humane approach to international migration. Madam President, we remain committed to continuing engagement in this forum to ensure that the voices and concerns of countries of origin, including those of the African continent, are fully reflected in future outcomes. I thank you, Madam President.

I thank the distinguished representative of Nigeria. We have heard the last speaker in explanation of vote before the vote. The Assembly will now take a decision on draft resolution A/80/LC. L64, entitled Progress Declaration of the International Migration Review Forum. A recorded vote has been requested. We shall now begin the voting process. Those in favor of draft resolution A/80/L64, please signify. Those against, abstentions.

The Assembly is now voting on draft resolution A/80/L64. 80/L64, entitled Progress Declaration of the International Migration Review Forum. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are accurately reflected on the screen? The voting has been completed. Please Lock the machine.

The result of the vote is as follows: in favor, 147; against, 6; abstentions, 23. Draft resolution A/80/L64 is adopted. Before giving the floor for explanation of vote, After the vote, may I remind delegations that they are strongly, strongly urged to limit explanation of votes to 5 minutes, which should in any case not exceed 10 minutes, and be made from their seats. As a first speaker, I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Italy, also on behalf of Poland, Czech Republic, and Slovakia, followed by Norway, Chile, Spain,

Italy, Czech Republic, Poland and Slovakia are not parties to the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration and do not intend to become one.

We therefore decided to vote against the progress declaration which does not meet our expectations and focuses mainly on the implementation of the compact. We thank the co-facilitators Kenya and Luxembourg for their constructive approach but we feel that This is a missed opportunity to adopt a more pragmatic and effective tone that addresses the issue of migration in its full complexity, moving beyond polarised and ideologised perspectives. Moreover, the text before us fails to take stock of how the approach to migration has evolved since 2019, when the Compact was signed. We advocated language reflecting the recent evolution of the global approach to migration, in particular the growing awareness of the fundamental differences between regular and irregular migration and the innovative solutions that have emerged since 2019 to counter illegal migration. The Progress Declaration does not meet these standards and we cannot support it. Our policy on migration is characterized by a comprehensive approach in line with international law and respect of human rights that combines reinforced cooperation with countries of origin and transit for migrants to address the root causes of migration and enable individuals to exercise the right not to migrate; a firm fight against human trafficking, migrant smuggling, and irregular migration, which are the main causes of fatalities at sea; and 3) safe, legal, and orderly migration pathways, in accordance with national legislations and needs. Recalling that the Global Compact is not legally binding, but only a voluntary cooperative framework to which we, like other countries, are not parties, we wish again to underline that: 1) nations have a sovereign duty to protect their borders and a sovereign right decide who enters their territory legally. It must be states, and not criminal networks, that manage migration flows. The fight against human trafficking and migrant smuggling is essential to prevent irregular migration. In this sense, the text fails to properly address this priority and reflect international initiatives aimed at combating these crimes, such as the Global Alliance Against Smuggling of Migrants. Additionally, we deeply regret that the Declaration contains no reference to the instrumentalization of migration, despite concrete and documented instances of this phenomenon in recent years. We believe that acknowledging the risks related to the instrumentalization of migration for political and other purposes is essential for an honest assessment of current challenges and for designing adequate responses that are both human rights compliant and security sensitive. Second, by failing to make the crucial distinction between regular, irregular, and illegal migration. This text risks undermining the role of regular pathways, which remain a sovereign prerogative in line with national legislations, while inadvertently creating pull factors that ultimately benefit criminal organizations. Third, nations have the right to develop their own migration policies in line with their obligations under international law and to explore innovative solutions in this context. We regret that the text views such initiatives refugee programs, which have recently become more frequent, with undue skepticism, rather than acknowledging them as legitimate and positive policy options. Finally, we would have welcomed stronger and more operational language on the return and readmission of regular migrants. We note with concern that the declaration does not include an explicit reference to non-voluntary returns. We request that this statement be put on record. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Italy, also on behalf of Poland, Czech Republic, and Slovakia, I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Norway.

Thank you, President. I have the honor to deliver this statement on behalf of Cyprus, Estonia, Iceland, Malta, Kingdom of the Netherlands, United Kingdom, Sweden, and my own country, Norway. We would like to thank the co-facilitators Kenya and Luxembourg for their transparent and inclusive approach throughout these negotiations.

And we appreciate the very constructive engagement of all delegations.

Migration is a global reality that presents both opportunities and certainly challenges. These require effective multilateral cooperation, and we view the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration and the Progress Declaration as important frameworks for such cooperation. We therefore voted in favor, and we support the adoption of the Progress Declaration, which we consider a balanced outcome. We welcome in particular that the declaration is non-legally binding and does not, not alter the commitments made under the Global Compact.

It does not create new legal obligations, nor does it seek to interpret existing international law.

It reaffirms the obligation of all states to respect, to protect, and fulfill the human rights of all migrants regardless of status, and highlights the importance of child-sensitive and gender-responsive migration policies. It further reiterates the obligation of states to receive and readmit their own nationals in full respect of the human right to return to one's country, and it underscores the importance of sustainable reintegration. This includes cases of safe and dignified non-voluntary returns following an individual assessment and indeed due process.

Thank you, President.

I thank the distinguished representative of Norway. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Chile, followed by Spain and the Russian Federation.

Señora Presidenta.

Madam President, Chile wishes to take the floor in order to explain the decision made to not participate in the adoption of this declaration. Chile opted to not become party to the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly, and Regular Migration adopted in 2018, and this was expressed by our abstention in this vote. And this is under the premise that migratory policy is the sovereign prerogative of states. We must bear in mind that the migratory dynamics in Chile have experienced substantive changes over recent years, exposing us to real challenges in terms of border governance, the management of irregular flows, and our institutional capacity. Chile is dealing with these challenges based on our own legal order and international commitments in force. The decision to not become party to the Compact adopted in 2018 on Chile's part has remained unchanged through three successive administrations. Thus far, Chile has faced complex and dynamic migratory situations duly balancing the protection of fundamental rights with our real capacities to host migrants and due observance of our legal framework in this regard. While Chile in 2021 decided to participate as an observer country in activities linked to the Compact, we did this while making it clear that this condition did not imply subscribing to the commitments of the Compact on Migration nor being subject to its review mechanisms, including the present, uh, review forum. Bearing in mind the raft of situations mentioned, as well as the fact that Chile respects the decisions and agreements that other countries may adopt sovereignly in this regard, our country believes that participating or intervening in any way in an adoption would involve undue interference in decisions that are the exclusive remit of the states parties and not of the states that have declined to become members of the compact. Migratory legislation and policy in Chile does reaffirm our country's commitment to safe, orderly, and regular migration, harmonizing the protection of the fundamental human— the fundamental rights enshrined in the political constitution of the republic and in international human rights treaties that have been ratified and that are in force, with the principle of states sovereignty over the administration, entry, exit, right to remain, and residency of foreign nationals on our national territory. Thank you very much, Madam President.

Thank the distinguished representative of Chile. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Spain.

Muchas gracias, señora presidenta.

Thank you very much, Madam President, excellencies, distinguished delegates. Please allow me to begin by expressing Spain's thanks to the facilitators, Kenya and Luxembourg, as well as to their teams for the open, transparent, and inclusive stewardship of the process that led to the adoption by consensus of the International Migration Review Forum Progress Declaration, and that today was submitted for adoption by this General Assembly, with Spain voting in favor. The document that we're meeting discussing today is based— stands out due to its concise nature, its empirical basis, and its clear focus on action at a time in which moving to effectively implement the Global Compact for Migration is more necessary than ever. Spain fully identifies with this approach. The progress declaration is furthermore an opportunity to collectively assess progress made and pending challenges. While migratory realities differ between regions and countries, this text demonstrates that we share more goals in common than we have differences, and that the exchange of good practices and international cooperation remain essential in order to make progress. Spain supports migratory governance based on dialogue, shared responsibility, and respect for international law. We therefore appreciate particularly the fact that this declaration reaffirms the role of the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration as the main multilateral framework for migration cooperation. We wish to particularly underscore the following parts of the text. First of all, the reaffirmation of the fact that all migrants are holders of human rights regardless of their status and that states have an obligation to guarantee their dignity. Safety and security, and access to rights without discrimination. The push towards safe, regular, and orderly migration routes, and that are adapted to the labor and social needs, reducing the risk and vulnerabilities associated with irregular migration. Next, the recognition of the contribution of migration to sustainable development through labour, innovation, remittances, and the role of diasporas, as well as the need to promote decent employment and inclusive systems. Also, the strengthening of the gender approach, um, and, uh, childhood, the protection of vulnerable persons with measures to combat violence, trafficking, and exploitation, and the call to combat xenophobia, racism, and disinformation. Promoting an evidence-based narrative focused on strengthening social cohesion. Spain will remain committed to the implementation of the Global Compact and to working together with states, international organizations, and civil society to move towards safe, orderly, and regular migration. Thank you very much.

I thank the distinguished representative of Spain. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of the Russian Federation. Russian Federation.

Distinguished Madam President, on this adopted draft document, we reaffirm our position as expressed during the Second International Migration Review Forum. Throughout the negotiating process, the Russian delegation repeatedly indicated the need to revise paragraphs 19 and 45 With regard to the recommendations of Secretary General on strengthening cooperation to search for missing migrants and to provide humanitarian assistance to migrants in distress with the goal of preventing their death during transit, unfortunately, our proposals were not taken into account even after we broke the silence procedure. These recommendations, which now are part of the document did not undergo intergovernmental discussion and were not examined in the relevant humanitarian formats at the UN. Some of them deserve support. Other provisions require additional examination, and others we believe are unacceptable. Allow me to draw attention to a few points in particular. The safe spaces and service points promoted in the recommendations have been repeatedly discussed, but no consensus has been reached on them. The arbitrary definition of safe spaces could play into the hands of destructive actors, be used as a tool for exerting pressure, and undermine the principle of neutrality and impartiality of humanitarian work. We do not support the use of such concepts. We also note that the issue of cross-border humanitarian coordination, the subject of paragraph 45, based on the principle of consent of countries receiving international assistance, but the SG's recommendations nor the text of the declaration mention this. This approach is also unacceptable. Further clarification and correction are needed for recommendation on the delineation of humanitarian activities and migration work, as well as the role of civil society in supporting the families of migrants. In addition, we take a cautious approach toward the insufficiently fleshed-out initiatives on establishing independent review bodies. We believe that such bodies already exist in the form of national courts, and creating new bodies is not advisable. Russia, in any case, welcomes activities to assist people in distress, including migrants. But it's important at the same time that such support take place based on universally recognized humanitarian principles in accordance with G. Resolution 46/1 1982. The lack of any reference to this resolution in the SG's recommendations, we believe, is a serious omission. Madam President, the Russian Federation reaffirms its position on the inapplicability in the national context of terms and concepts such as multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination and survivors. We view any mention in the document of the term gender and its derivatives as referring to men and women. In this regard, it distingues itself from paragraphs 19, 38, and 45. Thank you for your attention. And we'd like to have our statement be included in meeting records.

I thank the distinguished representative of the Russian Federation I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Uruguay.

Muchas gracias, señor presidente.

Thank you very much, President. Uruguay wishes to begin by reiterating its recognition and thanks to Luxembourg and Kenya in their role as co-facilitators of the negotiation process of the Progress Declaration, applauding the efforts that they made together with the Secretariat of the Migration Network that enabled the adoption by consensus of the Progress Declaration during the Second International Migration Review Forum. While Uruguay would have preferred a more ambitious declaration, we are happy to extend our national support, and we do profoundly regret the fact that it had to be adopted by a vote at the General Assembly. The rupture of consensus disregards the genuine commitment achieved during the forum and ultimately the political political will of the vast majority of the states of the international community committed to the implementation of the Global Compact. Making progress in orderly and humane management of migration requires more international cooperation and not less, and the Progress Declaration provides a roadmap to advance in this direction. Madam President, my delegation participated actively and constructively in the negotiation, guided by a fundamental principle: the universality of human rights and the safeguarding of commitments and the spirit of the Global Compact that we agreed on in 2018. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights does not allow for any exceptions. All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. Migration has always been part of the human story and contributes positively to the development and cultural wealth of our societies. Well, this must be— should be obvious. We wish to reiterate here today once again that all persons in mobility, regardless of their migratory status, deserve to enjoy their human rights on an equal footing. In this regard, Uruguay regrets the significant difficulties met during the negotiation that prevented us having a text with more firm commitments and even shedding light on good practices on many states that could inspire third countries, for example, in terms of regularization. In line with our negotiation position, we wish to underscore that we would have liked to have more ambitious language condemning the concerning trends that we are seeing on a daily basis, including growing disinformation, dehumanization, discrimination, and racism against migrants. We also regret that we weren't able to achieve consensus in order to commit the international community to put an end to the detention of migrant children in line with obligations, in terms of human rights and recommendations of the Committee on the Rights of the Child that have been clear on the fact that migratory detention is never compatible with their best interests. Nevertheless, we do appreciate that we were able to safeguard the mandate that requests, um, recommendations on alternatives to detention in the next reform, uh, report to the Secretary-General on the implementation of the Compact. What's more, we are grateful that the declaration includes explicitly the principles of non-discrimination and non-refoulement. Since this is one of the proposals that my delegation made in the final phase of the negotiation, we believe that it was fundamental to have more balance in the text. Uruguay is committed to using the declaration as a roadmap, and we will continue to work for— towards regularization, the social and labor inclusion of all migrants. That reach our territory, and ultimately improving quality of life, guaranteeing the enjoyment of human rights, and facilitating their contribution to national development. In order to achieve this goal, we hope to continue to benefiting from support from international cooperation and sharing our good practices and lessons learned with interested stakeholders. Thank you very much.

I thank the distinguished representative of Uruguay. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of New Zealand.

New Zealand supports and commends international cooperation aimed at combating illegal and irregular migration and people trafficking, which has a range of profoundly negative impacts for both exploited potential migrants and target societies. We also note that legal migration must be robustly and transparently only regulated by sovereign national governments.

There are parts of this declaration which New Zealand is comfortable with and others with which we hold serious concerns.

For that reason, we have abstained on the declaration.

Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of New Zealand. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Bismillahirrahmanirrahim. The delegation of the Islamic Republic of Iran participated constructively in the negotiations of the International Migration Review Forum Progress Declaration. Iran has for decades hosted millions of migrants with full respect for their human dignity despite significant domestic pressures arising from unlawful unilateral coercive measures, including sanctions, and despite limited and uneven international support. Iran reiterates that both the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration and IMRF Progress Declarations of 2022 and 2026 are voluntary, voluntary and non-legally binding frameworks containing non-obligatory guidelines and recommendations that neither create nor imply new legal obligations or commitments for member states. Accordingly, Iran's current and previously stated interpretive positions regarding these instruments remain fully valid and applicable. My delegation underscores that implementation of these frameworks must remain fully consistent with the national sovereignty, domestic legal systems, diverse national realities, capacities, policy priorities, and prevailing economic and social conditions of member states. While committed to constructive engagement, the Islamic Republic of Iran maintains that several provisions of this declaration infringe open states' sovereign prerogative— prerogatives and disregard domestic legal systems and cultural particularities. As these concerns were not adequately addressed, and recalling that while my delegation did not break consensus on the declaration itself, it was nevertheless compelled to abstain on the resolution as a whole, Iran expresses its reservation regarding terminology and concepts lacking universal acceptance, including references to multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination, expansive interpretations of non-discrimination, sexual and gender-based violence, and repeated gender-responsive language, which are viewed as non-consensual and inconsistent with the legal and cultural context of many member states. My delegation further stresses that references to all migrants, regardless of migration status, risk conflating regular and irregular migration and undermining the sovereign authority of states to regulate entry, residence, and access to services in accordance with the rule of law. While reaffirming the inherent dignity of all individuals, Iran maintains that rights and entitlements remain subject to domestic legislation and that terms such as integration should not imply permanence or obligations beyond national frameworks. Similar reservations are expressed regarding language related to irregular migration. Migrants in vulnerable situations, victim-centered approaches and identification mechanisms, which must remain strictly within national jurisdiction and should not imply automatic entitlement, regularization pathways, or role for non-state actors or external monitoring bodies. Iran also expresses its reservations regarding the references to climate change that fail to adequately reflect internationally agreed principles including common but differentiated responsibilities, and stresses the need to explicitly address the adverse impact of unilateral coercive measures on service provisions and human rights while calling for their clear prohibition in future texts. In light of these concerns, the Islamic Republic of Iran dissociates itself from the relevant elements contained in paragraphs 3, 4, 5, 6, 13, 14, 17, 25, 26, 26, 27, 31, 37, 38, 40, 42, 43, 46, 50, 51, 54, and 57 of the IMRF 2026 Progress Declaration, which remains fundamentally inconsistent with its principled position. My delegation requests that this statement be reflected in the official record and relevant reports of the meeting.

Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Ecuador.

President, my delegation voted in favor of Resolution A/80/L64 that contains the Progress Declaration adopted during the Second International Migration Review Forum. As A preeminent country of the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly, and Regular Migration, Ecuador believes that adequate governance and management throughout all steps of the migratory cycle contributes to sustainable development. The progress declaration, in addition to welcoming this approach, reflects new challenges linked to human trafficking, the illicit trafficking of migrants, and the relationship of these phenomena to transnational organized crime. Ecuador, as a country of origin, transit, destination, and refuge for migrants, reaffirms its commitment to safe, orderly, and regular human mobility and firmly rejects irregular migration as It can be linked to organized crime networks, including transnational ones. Given this, Ecuador reaffirms the need to strengthen international cooperation, the exchange of information, and effective implementation of the United Nations Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime and its protocols. Finally, I must recognize and express my thanks for the able leadership of the negotiation process on the part of the co-facilitators, the permanent representatives of Kenya and Luxembourg, whose leadership allowed the Forum on International Migration to adopt a progress declaration that reflects the commitment of states to the 23 non-binding goals of the Marrakesh Compact. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Ecuador. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Croatia.

Thank you, Mr. President.

Croatia supports the adoption of the Progress Declaration.

We thank the facilitators Kenya and Luxembourg for their dedicated efforts and diligent leadership throughout this process. We appreciate that the Declaration recognizes the Global Compact as a non-legally binding framework that fosters international cooperation, acknowledging that no state can address migration alone. We welcome the fact that the text upholds the sovereignty of states and their obligations under international law without creating new legal obligations or establishing of human right to migrate.

It is the sovereign right of each state to determine its national immigration policy.

Therefore, decisions regarding legal pathways for migrants lie strictly within the realm of national sovereignty. Firmly committed to safe, orderly, and regular migration, Croatia will continue to act in line with its national legislation in this regard, differentiating between refugees and migrants, as well as between regular and irregular migration. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Croatia. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Singapore.

Thank you, Mr. President. Singapore has consistently reaffirmed the right of migrants to cross borders safely through legal pathways without being exploited by traffickers and smugglers. And we will continue to participate constructively in these efforts. We believe that every country has the sovereign right to determine the conditions under which migrants may enter, reside and take up employment in its territory, in accordance with its national laws and international obligations. We also believe that all States have the sovereign right to decide on whether and how to implement the operating principles and policy options listed under the objectives of the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration. Singapore welcomes several positive developments in this Progress Declaration. In particular, we note with appreciation the explicit recognition in the Declaration that the Global Compact presents a non-legally binding cooperative framework, and its acknowledgement that within their sovereign jurisdiction, States may determine States may distinguish between regular and irregular migration status, including as they determine their legislative and policy measures for the implementation of the Global Compact. This language reflects Singapore's longstanding position and is an important contribution to ensuring that the Progress Declaration is read in its proper context. At the same time, we are not in a position to reaffirm the Global Compact in its entirety. We accordingly reserve our position on paragraphs 2, 4, and 43 of the Progress Declaration. Therefore, Singapore abstained on this resolution. While we have engaged constructively throughout this process and welcomed several positive developments in the Progress Declaration, the text of the Declaration as a whole does not reflect the balance necessary to satisfy our concerns. Singapore's abstention should nonetheless not be interpreted as a departure from our commitment to advancing safe, orderly and regular migration in a manner consistent with our national laws, priorities and circumstances, nor as a departure from our support for the objectives of international cooperation in this area. We remain committed to engaging constructively in future multilateral efforts on migration. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Singapore. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Belgium.

Thank you, Chair. Belgium fully recognizes the importance of governing migration in order to harness its potential while effectively addressing its challenges. Our central objective remains to ensure that safe, orderly, and regular migration can be beneficial equal to all, in line with the SDGs. Belgium remains committed to migration policies that are effective, humane, and well-managed, grounded in international cooperation, respect for human rights, and the rule of law. Belgium recalls that the international community should also continue to invest in poverty reduction, resilience, and inclusive growth in view of addressing the root causes of migration. Belgium considers is the IMRF an essential moment to take stock of the progress achieved since the adoption of the Global Compact and to reaffirm our shared responsibility in addressing migration as a global challenge. We would like to express our appreciation for the inclusive and transparent process that characterized the negotiations on the Progress Declaration. We thank the co-facilitators Luxembourg and Kenya for their sustained engagement, their openness to dialogue and their efforts to bridge diverging positions in an increasingly complex multilateral environment. We welcome the emphasis placed in the declaration on cooperation between countries of origin, transit, and destination, reflecting a clearer whole-of-route perspective and shared responsibilities in migration management. Belgium also appreciates the attention given to a human rights-based approach as as well as the overall attention given to vulnerable migrants. Belgium also values the addition of a reference to cooperation with regard to identification in the context of returns. We welcome the explicit reaffirmation of the non-legally binding nature of the Global Compact for Migration, which is essential to ensuring broad ownership and continued engagement with the, with the framework. At the same time, Belgium is of the view that, taken as a whole, the current progress declaration does not provide a sufficiently balanced and 360-degree approach to migration management and fails to ensure equal attention to preventing irregular migration, including by addressing root causes, countering migrant smuggling and trafficking, promoting effective return and sustainable reintegration, and providing regular pathways in line with national competences. In this regard, Belgium stresses that realistic and well-targeted regular migration pathways developed in line with national competences and labour market needs are an essential component of an effective migration management system and contribute to reducing irregular migration. The Declaration also does not sufficiently distinguish between regular and irregular migration status, nor does it adequately recognize a non-voluntary component within the broader framework of safe and dignified return and reintegration, carried out in full respect of human rights and international obligations. Belgium firmly believes that a comprehensive migration policy must balance rights and responsibilities of states and migrants and be embedded in a whole-of-government approach. Our nationally National experience demonstrates that such a balanced approach is both necessary and achievable, as reflected in Belgium's voluntary national contribution to the IMRF. For these reasons, Belgium has abstained on the Progress Declaration. We nevertheless remain fully committed to the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration and to constructive and comprehensive partnerships at bilateral, regional and multilateral levels. And we will continue working towards migration policies that are humane, effective, and firmly grounded in shared responsibility and solidarity. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Belgium. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Latvia.

Thank you, Mr. President.

Latvia acknowledges that multilateral cooperation is indispensable for addressing global challenges in the area of migration. One such challenge is the instrumentalization of migrants for political and other purposes. This has been acknowledged by several countries that took part in the negotiations of the Progress Declaration, as well as by United Nations Human Rights Council in Resolution 57/14. Regrettably, These concerns that migratory movements, including intentional, externally driven, and strategic unlawful border crossings, which are deliberately facilitated, encouraged, or exploited by a hostile state with the aim of exerting pressure on another country and its territorial integrity, posing threats to the national security and public order were not reflected in the declaration. Furthermore, my delegation would like to recall that in 2018, following the decision of the Parliament of Latvia, Latvia did not join the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly, and Regular Migration and abstained in voting on the General Assembly Resolution 73/195.

5.

Latvia does not apply the provisions of the Global Compact. Latvia therefore abstained in today's vote and in general does not consider itself bound by the provisions of the Progress Declaration of the International Migration Review Forum adopted today.

I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Latvia. I now give the floor I now turn the floor to the distinguished representative of Mexico.

Muchas gracias, señora presidenta.

Thank you very much, President. Mexico aligns itself with the words expressed by Brazil on behalf of a group of countries, and we would like to now express our national position on the resolution that this General Assembly just adopted. While we do recognize the work of the co-facilitators, Luxembourg and Kenya, we also hugely regret the fact that this resolution that will have an impact on the lives of millions of people had to be subject to a vote following the request of a delegation that did not participate in the negotiation process. We also regret the votes against on the part of delegations who attempted to reach agreements, um, to reach a balanced test. Well, we understand that not all delegations felt comfortable with what was expressed in the explanations of vote. We recognized the progress made following, uh, since the first forum that took place in 2022. In a global context where human rights are under attack, it is of the utmost importance to adopt a single multilateral approach that recognizes the contributions of migrants to their host societies and that protects and guarantees their human rights and fundamental freedoms regardless of their migratory status. We particularly regret that such relevant elements were politicized, such as putting an end to the detention of children, the expansion of legal means for regularization, as well as the provision of essential services regardless of the migratory status of the persons affected, and the recognition of the potential of violation of human rights such as the right to life, and, um, also priority elements for my country. There's a lot of danger around these practices, and some delegations refuse to recognize this. President, for this and other reasons, for Mexico, this progress declaration is below its initial ambitions. However, we do recognize its value and the robust result of the vote that took place a few moments ago. This urges us to ramp up our efforts to continue to fulfill the commitments that we made when we joined the Global Compact for Migration. And to strengthen international cooperation for the protection of all persons in all of their diversity who, for different reasons, saw themselves forced to leave their countries to seek a better quality of life in other places. Thank you very much.

I, I thank the distinguished representative of Mexico. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Portugal.

Thank you, Mr. President. At a time of growing uncertainty, this Progress Declaration sends an important message: multilateral cooperation remains indispensable to address global challenges. We would like to sincerely thank the co-facilitators for their work. Germany, Luxembourg, and Kenya. For Portugal, migration is not merely a policy issue. It is a human reality deeply connected to dignity, opportunity, and shared prosperity. We therefore reaffirm our strong commitment to the Global Compact as a balanced, humane, and cooperative framework for migration governance. As the Secretary-General rightly reminded us, Migration is not a crisis. The crisis is our collective failure to manage it together. Migrants are not numbers. They are human beings, holders of rights and aspirations. Their human dignity must be protected at every stage of the migration journey, regardless of status. Human rights must remain at the center of all migrants' migration policies. Portugal firmly believes that safe, orderly, and regular migration benefits everyone. Migrants make essential contributions to economies, to labor markets, and to cultural richness of the societies. They are workers, entrepreneurs, students, researchers, caregivers, and community builders. At the same time, we must ensure that migration is effectively managed, preserving social cohesion and enabling integration with dignity. As highlighted during the General Debate, balance and cooperation are essential. Portugal also wishes to underline the extraordinary value of diasporas. For a country like ours, with people of Portuguese descent across 178 countries, the diaspora represents a bridge between societies. Diasporas contribute decisively both to countries of origin and destination through knowledge transfer, remittances, and stronger people-to-people ties. They are living examples of how migration can strengthen societies across borders. The implementation of Global Compact requires partnership, trust, and solidarity. It requires rejecting narratives based on fear. Misinformation and dehumanization. And it requires renewed confidence in multilateralism and in the concern, also in the capacity of the United Nations to foster collective solutions. My country, Portugal, remains fully committed to the implementation of the GCM and to working with all partners to advance a migration governance system that is humane, effective inclusive, rights-based, and rooted in international cooperation. I thank you, Mr. President.

I thank the distinguished representative of Portugal. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.

Gracias, señor presidente.

Thank you, President. Venezuela wishes to thank the delegations of Ruanda and Luxembourg for their leadership during the negotiations on the International Migration Review Forum Progress Declaration on the Global Compact, which is of the utmost importance in today's world, in particular given its approach from a human rights perspective and development perspective. While we recognize progress made over recent years, there is still a lot to be done for migrants. Venezuela has been for decades and remains so today a warm and safe home for millions of citizens from all regions of the world. Migration is social and economic development, its diversity and its cultural wealth. That's why it should not be addressed from a perspective of border control, nor from a punitive or security— vision, but rather from a point of view of inclusion and cooperation. Seriously discussing migration without recognizing the causes that force millions of people to abandon their countries does not lead to real results. Human mobility is intrinsically linked to structural inequalities, poverty, conflicts, economic crises, climate change, and an economic model that normalizes exclusion and limits the development possibilities of our peoples. That's why it's important to understand and collectively address its root causes, whilst at the same time strengthening political mechanisms and multilateral cooperation in order to regularize and to respect the dignity of all migrants. We regret the fact that the declaration does not reflect in any way whatsoever the negative impact of unilateral coercive measures as a structural vehicle for migratory movements, uh, that, um, causes, uh, huge political, economic, and social challenges for countries of origin, transit, destination, and return. These illegal measures continue to have a devastating impact on the economies and living conditions of many nations, directly affecting the well-being of populations and stimulating and inducing irregular migratory flows and forced migratory flows. Their immediate lifting is a moral imperative of the whole of the United Nations. We also observe with concern the increased normalization of xenophobic, racist, and stigmatizing discourse against migrants. It's profoundly contradictory that while millions of migrants contribute significantly to economic growth, to the sustaining of labor markets and the development of host societies, they continue to be used as instruments of political polarization and are subject to criminalization and discrimination. What's more, it's necessary to underscore the political contradictions shown by some states, particularly certain countries who are hosts of migrants who are defending strongly the principle of sovereignty when, um, it comes to the migratory control of their borders, but that are relating the same principle with addressing issues, um, to do with the non-interference in internal affairs, sovereign equality of states, and the right of development of people. Sovereignty cannot be invoked selectively nor applied under criteria of political convenience. In this regard, um, as well as, um, the sovereign right of states to manage their migratory policies, it's also necessary to talk about equal responsibility for international cooperation, inclusive dialogue, mutual respect, and dignity of migrants. Instrumentalizing migration for political purposes or ideological purposes does not only entrench the structural causes of human mobility but also contradicts the spirit of solidarity and cooperation enshrined in the UN Charter. Venezuela reaffirms, therefore, its commitment to the strengthening of international cooperation, to dialogue on migration in the context of the Global Compact, as well as to guaranteeing the process of voluntary, safe, and decent return with full respect for human rights. Thank you very much, President.

I thank the distinguished representative of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative Representative of Cuba.

Muchas gracias, señor presidente.

Thank you very much, President. Since it was adopted in 2018, Cuba has continuously reiterated its commitment to the goals of the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly, and Regular Migration. For this reason, Cuba recognizes how important this review forum is, and we participated actively in the two editions of it, and we were honored to support the adoption by consensus of the Progress Declaration in the Forum on the 8th of May last, and today we voted in favor of this text. The results contained in the declaration are conclusive. There is still a lot to be done in order to achieve the full fulfillment of the 23 goals fully. While there have been modest progress in the implementation of the Compact over the last 4 years, we are seeing an alarming increase in discriminatory practices and racist and xenophobic rhetoric in many countries of the world, including in some highly developed countries where migrants make an essential contribution to the economy. It's very regrettable, although not surprising, that the United States didn't get involved in the negotiation for the Progress Declaration at any time, nor did they attend the forum, and that they then requested a vote on this such important document. What should we expect from a country that is promoting an official racist policy that's also discriminatory and xenophobic, including from the highest levels of the government apparatus? Voting in favor of the, um, Progress Declaration, Cuba reiterates its commitment to continue to promote safe, orderly, and regular migration. We regret that the declaration does not mention the impact of unilateral coercive measures to the phenomenon of migration, despite having been an issue that gathered a lot of support during the negotiations. In this regard, we align ourselves with the statement made by Nicaragua on the— on behalf of a group of countries. Cuba's case is eloquent in this regard. The economic, trade, and financial embargo of the United States against Cuba that's been strengthened to unprecedented levels, including restrictions on import of fuel has caused huge suffering for the Cuban economy and the population. Irregular and disorderly migration being exploited for politicized purposes, including against Cuban migrants reaching the United States shores, not only affects Cubans in the United States, but it also has consequences for several transit countries in the region. We also regret the privileged treatment of Cuba from the United States, um, the Law of Cuban Adjustment and the law of the country focused on unseating the revolution and causing suffering for the Cuban economy, which is used as a— against our country, stimulating insecure migration and benefiting the mafias that are involved in the trafficking of persons. We are committed to continue to cooperate with countries in our region to fight against this phenomenon and to prevent putting in danger human life and fighting against related crimes such as human trafficking and the illicit trafficking of migrants, whilst at the same time protecting the human rights of migrants. Thank you very much.

I thank the distinguished representative of Cuba. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Romania.

Mr. President, Romania expresses its own sincere appreciation to the facilitators of the IMRF Progress Declaration for their engagement and extensive dialogue throughout the negotiation process. Our decision to abstain within the vote today is fully consistent with and results from our voting conduct at the moment of adoption of the Global Compact on Migration. Although we implement de facto measures consistent with a number of objectives agreed within the framework of the GCM, Romania's formal position in relation to the compact has not changed. Romania welcomes the attention given within the process leading up to the vote today to the human rights, safety, and well-being of migrants. We equally emphasize that the rights, dignity, and safety of migrants are key components of our national priorities and legal frameworks. Romania will continue to attach a great importance to the multidimensional aspects of migration and play a constructive role in all multilateral working formats in accordance with our national frameworks and European commitments.

Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Romania. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Hungary.

Thank you, Mr. President. Excellencies, distinguished delegates. Hungary has abstained at the adoption of this draft Resolution A/80/L.64 containing the Progress Declaration of the 2026 International Migration Review Forum. We wish to take this opportunity to make this short statement in explanation of our vote, putting on record the following reservations. We recall that Hungary did not join the Global Compact for Migration at its creation and does not participate in its implementation ever since. Consistent with its position, Hungary disengaged from the negotiation process of the outcome document in its statement delivered during the first informal consultation on the text. Furthermore, we wish to emphasize that today's decision on the draft resolution is in no way to be understood as the acceptance of any new commitment, legally binding or otherwise, that may emanate from this Progress Declaration. In this vein, Hungary does not regard this document as an appropriate reference point for any further negotiations on the subject. We would like to ask for the inclusion of this statement in the meeting records. I thank you for your attention.

I thank the distinguished representative of Hungary. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Ukraine.

Thank you, Mr. President. Ukraine voted in favor of the draft resolution adopting the Progress Declaration of the Second International Migration Review Forum. We express our sincere appreciation to His Excellency Kitela Lokale, Permanent Representative of the Republic of Kenya to the United Nations, Nations and His Excellency Olivier Maes, Permanent Representative of Luxembourg to the United Nations, for their able facilitation of the intergovernmental negotiations on this document. At the same time, Ukraine would like to recall its statement delivered on May 8th, 2026, at the adoption of the progress declaration of the Second International Migration Review Forum. We are of the view that the text of the declaration does not fully address the security-related causes of migration, in particular the large-scale forced displacement of people resulting from armed aggression, international armed conflicts, and occupation of territories. For Ukraine, these factors are of fundamental importance as the Russian Federation's full-scale Russia's illegal armed aggression against Ukraine has caused a massive forced displacement of more than 5.8 million Ukrainian citizens abroad, increased their social vulnerability, and complicated the exercise of their rights and access to services. Russia's war of aggression underscored the need to maintain sustainable ties between such citizens and Ukraine, as well as to create conditions for their voluntary return to their previous places of residence or for their integration into places of residence within Ukraine. In this context, we believe that migration governance frameworks should better reflect and address the specific consequences of armed conflicts and forced displacement caused by violations of of international law and the Charter of the United Nations. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Ukraine. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Austria.

Thank you, Mr. President.

Austria very much appreciates the efforts and work that have gone into the elaboration of the progress declaration under the distinguished leadership of the Permanent Representatives of Kenya and Luxembourg. As a sign of our strong commitment to multilateralism, we decided to abstain in today's vote leading to the adoption of the Progress Declaration by the General Assembly. At the same time, we recall that as a non-signatory of the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration, Austria is not a party of it. And Austria's principled position in this regard has not changed.

I thank you, Mr. President.

I thank the distinguished representative of Austria. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Lithuania.

Thank you, Mr. President. I would like to start by thanking the co-facilitators from Kenya and Luxembourg for their dedication and hard work. We underline that the Global Compact for Migration is political and aspirational in nature. It does not create or change rights or obligations under national or domestic law. The Progress Declaration follows the same approach, reflecting non-binding political commitments implemented in line with national law and existing international obligations. By abstaining in the vote on the declaration adopted today, Lithuania wishes to express its national position on certain aspects of the text. First, Lithuania recalls that member states have the authority to regulate migration within their jurisdiction. This includes the right to distinguish between regular and irregular migration status. Second, Lithuania stresses the importance of avoiding mechanisms that create unreasonable expectations that irregular migration flows might be regularized. Third, Lithuania supports a comprehensive approach based on cooperation between countries of origin, transit, and destination, and shared responsibility along migration routes. Fourth, Lithuania underlines that the instrumentalization of migrants by state and non-state actors is a serious challenge. Such practices increase vulnerability, fuel criminal activity, and undermine international cooperation. It must be clearly rejected. Despite different national approaches, Lithuania remains committed to working with partners to advance the 23 Objectives of the Global Compact in a way that is realistic, responsible, responsible and lawful.

I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Lithuania. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Bulgaria.

Thank you, Chair. Bulgaria abstains on the vote for the resolution. We thank also Kenya and Luxembourg for co-facilitating the process. We value the Global Compact for for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration in light of its being the first intergovernmental agreed non-legally binding framework for cooperation at the global level to better manage migration. We are satisfied with the Global Compact of Migration as a result of a transparent and inclusive negotiation process which affirms the sovereign right of states to determine their national migration policies and legislation and to decide whom to admit to their territories. In line with its national position, which has remained unchanged to date, Bulgaria did not take part in the '22 negotiation process on the IMF Progress Declaration and did not take part in the recent negotiations.

IDA.

Since the adoption of the Global Compact of Migration, without being a party to it, as a new member state responsible for the protection of one of the busiest and most sensitive external borders, Bulgaria implemented in practice most of the Global Compact of Migration elements and objectives. We remain fully committed to continue with the implementation of the comprehensive and balanced approach to migration, especially in its regional dimension, which we view as fully reflecting the need for close and result-oriented partnership and cooperation. In light of the above, Bulgaria was not in the position to support this progress declaration. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Bulgaria. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Türkiye.

Thank you, Mr. President. Türkiye voted in favor of this resolution and welcomes the overall balanced and constructive approach of the progress declaration. At the same time, we believe that the text could have reflected more strongly concerns regarding externalization and policy shifting, as well as fair burden sharing as effective approach to tackle migration issues. Türkiye remains committed to advancing a human rights-based and cooperative approach to migration governance in line with the objectives of the Global Compact for Migration. By reiterating this understanding, we look forward to the continuation of a constructive and solution-oriented approach with the guidance of the Secretary General.

Thank you.

We have heard the last speaker in explanation of vote after the vote. The Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration consideration of Agenda Items 13 and 117. The Assembly will begin its consideration of Agenda Item 14, Culture of Peace, to take action on the proposal announced in the Journal. Before proceeding further, I should like to inform members that Assembly will hold a debate on this item at a later date. A later date to be announced. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Pakistan to introduce Draft Resolution A/80/L/43.

Thank you, Mr. President. On behalf of the Philippines and Pakistan, as well as all the co-sponsors, I am pleased to introduce the draft resolution contained in Document A/AT/L43, entitled "Promotion of Interreligious Intercultural Dialogue, Understanding, and Cooperation for Peace under the plenary agenda item 14, Culture of Peace. President, dialogue between religions, cultures, and civilizations is a shared aspiration of the international community, indispensable for fostering a spirit of understanding, peaceful coexistence, and interfaith harmony. To realize humanity's longstanding quest for enduring peace and prosperity, it is essential to promote a culture of peace, one that embraces diversity and inclusivity, safeguards fundamental rights and freedoms, and shuns the social structures and stereotypes which seek to create divisions among individuals, societies, communities, and nation-states. Despite advances made over the years, much more needs to be done to fully realize these cherished ideals. Regrettably, xenophobia, racism, and intolerance still persist which behooves us to continue our efforts through the UN platform and beyond to foster peace and harmonious coexistence worldwide. President, the preamble of the UN Charter exhorts member states, and I quote, to practice tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbours. And the Constitution of UNESCO further builds upon this idea by declaring, and I quote, "Since wars begin in the minds of men, it is in the minds of men that the defences of peace must be constructed." These defences of peace can be best built by sustained dialogue and constructive engagement. Pakistan and the Philippines, supported by a large number of co-sponsors, have made an endeavor towards this end by introducing this biennial resolution. We have proposed a technical rollover this year to retain the key messages of intercultural and interfaith solidarity and harmony that was reaffirmed by the consensual adoption of this resolution during the 78th session. Briefly, the draft resolution before us reaffirms the right to freedom of expression and reflects commitment of all states to promote universal respect for and observance and protection of all human rights and fundamental freedoms. Upholds that violence cannot and should never be a justifiable or acceptable response to acts of intolerance based on religion or belief, and that such violence should not be attributed to any religion, nationality, civilization, or ethnic group. Pakistan and the Philippines have reached out extensively to divide the membership on this initiative, and we thank Member States for their understanding, flexibility, and strong support, particularly the increasing number of co-sponsors of the draft resolution from a cross-section of UN membership. It is our sincere hope that the resolution will be adopted again with consensus today, for it will It will be an important signal from this House. It would augur well for the international community's continued endeavours for promoting the shared values and objectives of peace and harmony amongst all humankind. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Pakistan. We shall now proceed to consider the draft resolution A/80/L43. For your information, the draft resolution has closed for e-sponsorship. I give the floor to the representative of the Secretariat.

Mr. President, I should like to announce that since the submission of the draft resolution, and in addition to the delegations listed on on the L document. The following countries have also become co-sponsors of A/AD/L43: Algeria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belarus, Brunei Darussalam, Burundi, Cambodia, Chad, China, Egypt, Gabon, Ghana, Guinea, Iraq, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Laos People's Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Malaysia, Morocco, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Oman, Qatar, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Tajikistan, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Tunisia, Türkiye, Uganda, United Republic of Tanzania, Uzbekistan, Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, Vietnam, Yemen, and the State of Palestine. If any other countries wish to co-sponsor A/80/L43, please signify by pressing the microphone button. Now I see Comoros, Kyrgyzstan, Mali, Papua New Guinea, Congo, Myanmar, Angola, Burkina Faso, Marshall Islands, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Cameroon, Gambia, Libya, Mauritania, Liberia, Malawi. Thank you, Mr. President.

I thank the distinguished representative of the Secretariat. The Assembly will now take a decision on Draft Resolution A/80/L43, entitled Promotion of Interreligious and Intercultural Dialogue, Understanding and Cooperation for Peace. May I take it that the Assembly decides to adopt the draft resolution A stroke 80 stroke L43. It is so decided. Before giving the floor to— for explanation of vote after The vote, may I remind delegations that they are strongly urged to limit explanation of vote to 5 minutes, which should in any case not exceed 10 minutes, and be made from their seats. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of the Russian Federation.

Distinguished President, we thank the delegations of Pakistan and the Philippines for preparing the draft resolution entitled Promoting Interreligious and Intercultural Dialogue, Mutual Understanding, and Cooperation for Peace. The Russian Federation is a multiethnic and multireligious state, has consistently supported the strengthening of intercultural and interreligious dialogue. We believe that the promotion of a culture of peace, tolerance, and mutual respect is vitally important for overcoming many modern challenges. At the same time, in the modern world, we still see cases of the use of religious institutes for political purposes, including to promote xenophobic and hateful claims. In this context, we're especially concerned by the situation in Ukraine, where recently the situation of Orthodoxy has not improved, but on the contrary has further worsened. Recall that in September 2024, the Law on the Protection of the Constitutional Order with regard to the Activities of Religious Organizations came into force, establishing a mechanism for prohibiting any religious organization which, according to the Kyiv authorities, was affiliated with centers of influence in Russia. And thus, a legal framework was established for the prosecution and dissolution of parishes and eparchies of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, or UOC, simply because They were in canonical communion with the Russian Orthodox Church despite the declaration by the UOC of full and independent autonomy on May 27th, 2022. A striking example of the application of this law today is the lawsuit by the Ukrainian State Services on Ethno— Service on Ethnopolitics and Freedom of Belief prohibiting the activities of the Kyiv Metropolis of the UOC. However, for Ukrainian local authorities, these pseudo-legal mechanisms were insufficient. On February 26th, the Kyiv Regional Council did not wait for the completion of legal proceedings to recommend that district military administrations and self-government bodies support the transition of the metropolis's communities to the the schismatic Orthodox Church of Ukraine and also to prohibit the use of communal property by the UOC. In this same hall, 2 years ago, we sounded the alarm with regard to the forceful seizure of the Kyiv-Pechersk Lavra, a center of canonical Orthodoxy and an ancient monastery, and we protested the eviction of UOC monks and the change of the terms of lease of their churches. Distinguished colleagues, this year on February 7th, after the locks were cut on the Church of the Exaltation of the Cross and the Warm Church of the Lavra, UOC clergy were deprived of access to the last churches where services were still being held. All of this happened with the acquiescence of the international community and the UN, despite the fact that We regularly draw attention to these issues. At the same time, UOC clergy are suffering criminal prosecution on charges of collaborationism, treason, and anti-Ukrainian activities. We'd like to point out that on May 8th, the Ukrainian State Service on Ethnopolitics and Freedom of Belief approved the so-called list religious organizations that are critically important for the functioning of the economy and the livelihoods of the population during this special period. This refers in particular to more than 10,000 religious organizations that are exempt from the military draft. However, for the oldest and largest church in Ukraine, no such exemption was made. Does that mean that we should soon expect to see the active drafting of UOC clergy into the Ukrainian army? Such discrimination runs counter not only to Kiev's obligations under Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which enshrines the right of every person to freedom of thought, belief, and religion, and which prohibits coercion, coercion in the matter of religion, but also Article 35 of Ukraine's own constitution, which guarantees the separation of church and state. The state has to maintain neutrality and may not encourage changes in a community's religious affiliation or interfere in its internal decisions. We call on all states, international organizations, and religious faiths to Ukraine, and to urge the Ukrainian authorities to cease their persecution of the UOC, its clergy, and its faithful. Thank you for your attention.

I thank the distinguished representative of the Russian Federation. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of India.

Mr. Chair, my delegation takes the floor to provide an explanation of position on the Resolution on Promotion of Interreligious and Intercultural Dialogue, Understanding, and Cooperation for Peace. India is a land of diversity and pluralism. All major world religions coexist peacefully in India. As a nation that has given birth to four major world religions, India is more than any other country acutely aware of the need for interreligious and intercultural dialogue and understanding. The philosophy of Sarvadharma Sambhava, implying equal respect for all religions, has been the civilizational way of life for India. Thus, although in agreement with the message of the resolution, we would like to disassociate from Operative Paragraph 12 due to its misleading portrayal of the ground realities. The OP 12 of the resolution recalls the initiative to open the Kartarpur Sahib Corridor, allowing access to pilgrims of all faiths, especially the Sikh community, in spirit of interfaith harmony between the governments of India and Pakistan. This is portrayed as a landmark initiative. Reality on the ground, however, stands in stark contrast. The Kartarpur Sahib Corridor continues to be managed by an entity of the government of Pakistan. The head of the body responsible for the management of the affairs of the main Sikh shrine here is a non-Sikh. This is in direct contravention of the rights of religious minorities to manage their own religious affairs. The safety and security of the pilgrims using the corridor for pilgrimage is also under severe threat. Allow me to cite an example. The travel of pilgrims through the corridor is under extreme surveillance and monitoring of the Pakistani authorities. Yet in November 2025, an Indian Sikh female pilgrim undertaking pilgrimage through the corridor disappeared., and her whereabouts could not be traced. Later, reports of a religious conversion in Pakistan came up. The Indian pilgrim is yet to be returned to India till date. Pakistan's actions on May 7th, 2025, targeting places of worship and houses of the Sikh community, shelling and damaging of Gurudwara, the holy shrine of Sikhs, in Punch district of Jammu and Kashmir,, as well as their attempt to target the holy city of Amritsar, one of the most revered sites of the Sikh community in India, exposes the facade of interfaith harmony presented in the operative para 12 of the resolution. And finally, Pakistan's own abysmal track record of the treatment of minority communities is well known. Pakistan's misuse of the UN forum and initiatives like the Holy Street Kartarpur Sahib Corridor for propaganda and for cultivating a facade of being minority-friendly while actually persecuting them is extremely deplorable. For these reasons, India will be dissociating from the operative para 12 of this resolution. Allow me, Madam Chair, to once again— allow me, Mr. Chair, to once again reiterate India's commitment to the cause of intercultural dialogue, mutual respect, and peaceful coexistence, which is embodied in our larger philosophy of Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam— the world is one family. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of India. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of the United States.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Under President Trump's leadership, the United States is returning the United Nations to its core purposes. Maintaining international peace and security, and fostering cooperation among sovereign nations, as well as delivering measurable results, not empty statements that do not result in constructive action. While the United States remains a steadfast advocate for the right of every individual to practice their faith without fear of harassment, the resolution fails to meet the high standards required to truly protect those freedoms. We echo the resolution's condemnation of attacks on houses of worship. The U.S. administration is fully committed to ensuring that churches, synagogues, mosques, and temples remain safe havens for believers. We support the noble goal of fostering dialogue and mutual understanding. We believe the best antidote to objectionable speech is not censorship, but more speech. Specifically open and honest dialogue between all individuals, including people of different faiths. While the United States firmly condemns all forms of racial or religious persecution, we do not compromise on freedom of expression. Our Constitution protects speech and the pursuit of truth. This fundamental right was not only designed to protect the status quo, but to safeguard the dialogue necessary to maintain a healthy public square. The United States opposes those who vilify or promote violence against others for peacefully practicing their faith and culture. And we will use our voice, and we will act in defense of freedom of expression and freedom of religion or belief, and work to promote interreligious and intercultural dialogue and understanding. Additionally, The United States would also like to make points of clarification on language contained in the resolution. We underscore that UN General Assembly resolutions are non-binding documents that do not create rights or obligations under international law. The United States has made clear that the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Sustainable Development Goals impinge upon state sovereignty as a soft form of global governance, and we will no longer reaffirm them as a matter of course. The United States supports the elimination of discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, age, disability, national origin, and genetic information. The United States expects the UN to ensure that its documents and programming avoid using diversity, equity, and inclusion concepts and terminology which promote discrimination at the expense of recognizing hard work, excellence, and individual achievement, and upholding the equal dignity and respect of every person. As part of our commitment to ending wasteful and ineffective global spending, the Trump administration withdrew from 66 international organizations, including UNCAO and UNESCO. These entities have proven to be chronically mismanaged, captured by narrow interests, and in many cases a threat to our nation's prosperity. We refuse to subsidize institutions that have drifted from their original purpose to become obstacles to American freedom. In this new era, the United States will not sit idly by while the United Nations undermines attempts to redefine the fundamental liberties of the American people. We will not legitimize any document that subordinates the First Amendment's freedoms to a subjective, politically motivated concept of hate speech. We view the term hate speech as a subjective, false Orwellian label designed to empower governments to police thought and silence dissent. We should not call on states to treat offensive offensive language as a legal violation. The right to freedom— to free expression is unalienable. It cannot be abridged by government decree and should not be subject to the content moderation whims of international bodies. Furthermore, we reject the implication that there is a causal or systemic link between the COVID-19 pandemic and an alleged rise in so-called hate speech. This language is a transparent attempt to exploit a global health crisis to justify an emergent international censorship regime. We reject, we reject the notion that international organizations should litigate issues on speech or call on states to suppress speech that challenges the preferred narrative of globalist institutions. In closing, I return to my first point. This body spends countless hours negotiating symbolic, repetitive text with little to show in tangible results for the common citizen. The United States is finished with performative exercises and bloated ideological multilateralism that fails to advance the core mission of the United Nations.

Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of the United United States. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Argentina.

Muchas gracias.

Thank you very much, Chair. Argentina, first of all, wishes to thank and congratulate Indonesia, Philippines, and Turkmenistan for the draft resolution another delegation contained in L43. First of all, President, my country wishes to dissociate itself from all references to the 2030 Agenda, the Sustainable Development Goals. My delegation recalls that the 2030 Agenda and the Sustainable Development Goals constitute non-binding commitments that each state has the sovereign right to interpret and replicate pursuant to their own national political priorities. Furthermore, Argentina wishes to disassociate itself from references to hate speech, which could give rise to restrictions that are incompatible with freedom of expression, that only allows for specific limits enshrined in the law and in line with international human rights law. Thank you very much.

We have heard the last speaker in the explanation of vote after the vote. Distinguished colleagues, the exercise of the right to reply has been requested. May I remind members that statements in exercise of the right of reply are limited to 10 minutes for the first intervention, and to 5 minutes for the second intervention, and should be made by the delegations from their seats. May I now call upon the representative of Pakistan.

Thank you, Mr. President. I have been compelled to take floor to respond to the unwarranted and baseless remarks made by the Indian delegate. Pakistan completely rejects the unfounded and groundless allegations made by the representative of India. It is unfortunate that India has tried to spoil the significance of a unanimous signal that the international community sent today by the consensual adoption of this important resolution. By politicizing this message of harmony, tolerance, and peaceful coexistence between religions and cultures, India has peddled falsehood and lies again. India's perfidious claims today are clearly motivated by its embarrassing and humiliating military defeat last May. Since its inception, the Kartarpur Corridor has facilitated the pilgrimage of Sikh pilgrims to the holy site of Gurdwara Darbar Sahib Kartarpur. Thousands of Sikh pilgrims from all over the globe, including a vast majority from India, visit this shrine in full safety and dignity, which speaks for itself as a testament to Pakistan's hospitality. Pakistan announced the renewal of the agreement between India and Pakistan in 2024 for an additional period of 5 years. It reflects Pakistan's recognition of the importance of safeguarding the rights of religious minorities and has earned widespread appreciation from the Sikh community all over the world. International community, including the UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, has described it as a corridor of hope. The fact remains that India has the distinction of being the world's most intolerant state, which has turned against its own minorities. What stands India apart is that violence against minorities is not perpetrated by fringe elements but under the direct patronage of the Indian government. While Muslims constitute the largest minority group suffering from the hate crimes and face multiple forms of discrimination and persecution, including cow vigilantism, desecration of worship places, and even ghettoization, other religious minorities are not spared either. Pakistan calls upon the Indian government to stop its patronage of the persecution of minorities and punish those who commit such abominable acts. India's progress on this subject should be judged by its visible action, not the hollow rhetoric and lies its representatives peddle in international forums, while its leaders avoid international and media scrutiny of their human rights record. I thank you, Mr. President.

I now call on the representative of Ukraine.

Distinguished co-chair, Ukrainian delegation would like to reply on the just-made Russian Federation statement. So it is clear attempt to misuse the General Assembly through disinformation and deliberate distortion of reality. There is no basis in moral life for Russia claims a call religious, uh, persecution in Ukraine. So there is Russia who is attacking Ukraine and destructing churches and monasteries in Ukraine. Ukraine is a democratic and pluralistic state with the freedom of religion. This narrative is a transparent attempt to divert attention from the core issue before this General Assembly: the Russian aggression, ongoing war of aggression against Ukraine, its grave violation of international law, its continuing attacks against civilians, and the war crimes that they committed on every bases in Ukraine. I thank you.

Distinguished colleagues, the Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of Agenda Item 14. I invite the attention of the Assembly to address Resolution A/80/L52 and Draft Decision A/80/L62 circulated under the agenda item entitled Sustainable Development. Members will recall that at the second plenary meeting on 12th September 2025, the Assembly Assembly decided to allocate Agenda Item 18 to the Second Committee. To enable the Assembly to take action expeditiously on this document, may I now take it that the Assembly wishes to consider Agenda Item 18 directly in plenary— plenary meeting and proceed immediately to its consideration? I hear no objection. It is so decided. The Assembly will now resume its consideration of Agenda Item 18 to take action on the proposals. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Uzbekistan to introduce the draft resolution A/AT/L52.

Dear Mr. Vice President, distinguished delegates, I have the honor to speak on behalf of the 5 Central Asian states. Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and my own country, Uzbekistan, to introduce a draft resolution on strengthening regional cooperation and economic integration to ensure sustainable development in Central Asia region. At the outset, I wish to express sincere appreciation to all member states for their constructive engagement and valuable contributions during the informal consultation on this document. Your involvement has given this initiative a truly broad international character. 8 years ago, in 2018, General Assembly adopted one of the initial resolutions on Central Asia. At that time, our region was only beginning to build a new atmosphere of trust and cooperation gradually overcoming contradictions that had accumulated over decades. The support of the international community at that moment was of particular significance to us. Since then, Central Asia has come a long way. The states of the region have been able to resolve all issues that had long been a source of tension. Transport links have been restored. Cooperation in water and energy sector has been expanded. Trade and economic ties have been sustainably strengthened. Today, we are implementing joint projects in industry, energy, transport, and logistics. They are gradually shaping a more interconnected and resilient economic space. Space. A main role in this process belongs to the mechanism of consultative meetings of the heads of state of Central Asia. This format has become not only a platform for dialogue but a significant instrument for developing decisions and advancing joint initiatives. Central Asian regionalism demonstrates that even in conditions of global instability cooperation can be mutually beneficial and effective when it's grounded in trust, pragmatism and political will. Colleagues, it's precisely on the basis of these realities that President of Uzbekistan, His Excellency Mr. Shavkat Mirziyoev, put forward the initiative to adopt this resolution during the 80th session of the UN General Assembly. The political trust built over the recent years opened the path to deeper economic integration. And this forms substance of the present resolution. Expansion of trade, development of transport corridors, industrial cooperation, support for small and medium-sized enterprises—these are practical directions that are shaping the new economic reality of the region today. Today, Central Asia is a region where states are growing ever more confident in looking beyond their differences toward shared interests. And it's precisely the— that is becoming the principal source of resilience and development. We count on the continued active engagement of the UN and its structures in its implementation of our regional economic agenda. Their support remains an important factor in transforming regional initiatives into tangible and lasting results. Dear Mr. Vice President, in conclusion, I would like to underscore that the Central Asian countries remain firmly committed to promoting the economic integration and hope for unanimous support of the member states of this draft resolution, as well as encourage to become its co-sponsors. I thank you for your attention.

I thank the distinguished representative of Uzbekistan. Distinguished colleagues, we shall now proceed to consider draft resolution A/80/L52 and draft decision A/80/L62. For your information, the draft resolution has closed for its e-sponsorship. I give the floor to the representative of the Secretariat.

Mr. President, I should like to announce that since the submission of the draft resolution, and in addition to the delegations listed on the L document, the following countries have also become co-sponsors of A/AD/L52: Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burundi, Cambodia, Chile, China, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechia, Denmark, Ecuador, Estonia, Eswatini, Finland, Georgia, Germany, India, Indonesia, Israel, Italy, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Latvia, Malta, Mongolia, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Russian Federation, Saint Lucia, Slovakia, Timor-Leste, Tonga, Takiya, Uganda, Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, and Vietnam. If there are any other countries wish to co-sponsor L52, please signify by pressing the the microphone button now. I see Malawi, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, South Sudan, Congo, Lesotho, Gambia, Gabon, Greece, Maldive, Algeria, Sweden, Mali, Liberia, Serbia, Ireland. That concludes the additional co-sponsorship. Thank you, Mr. President.

I thank the representative of the Secretariat. Delegations wishing to make statement in the explanation of vote before the vote on any proposal are under this item are invited to do so in one intervention. After action on all the items, there will be an opportunity for the explanation of vote after the vote, or any or all of them. Distinguished colleagues, the Assembly will now take a decision on Draft Resolution A/80/L52 entitled Strengthening Regional Cooperation and Economic Integration to Ensure Sustainable Development in the Central Asian Region. May I take it that the Assembly decides to adopt the draft resolution A/80/L52? It is so decided. Distinguished colleagues, The Assembly will now take a decision on Draft Decision A/80/L62 entitled Dates and Venue of the 2026 United Nations Water Conference to Accelerate the Implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 6: Ensure Availability and Sustainable Management of Water and Sanitation for All. May I take it that the Assembly decides to adopt the draft decision A/80/L/62? It is so decided. The Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of Agenda Item 18. Distinguished colleagues, the Assembly will resume its consideration of Sub-item A of Agenda Item 31, entitled Prevention of Armed Conflict, to take action on proposal announced in the journal. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Kyrgyzstan to announce— to introduce the draft resolution A/80/L63.

Thank you, dear Vice President. Excellencies, distinguished delegates, ladies and gentlemen. It is my great honor to introduce the draft resolution entitled Peaceful Settlement of Border Disputes submitted by Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan. At the outset, allow me to express our sincere appreciation to our brothers Tajikistan and Uzbekistan for their support cooperation and trust in bringing this important initiative together. The draft resolution is short in form but important in meaning. It is simple in language but strong in message. Its message is clear: border disputes must be resolved by peaceful means through dialogue, negotiation and other mutually agreed peaceful methods in accordance with the UN Charter, and international law. Excellencies, for Central Asia, this issue has special meaning. Our region understands that border questions can be complex and sensitive. They touch history, communities, security, development, natural resources, connectivity, and the daily lives of people living along borders. But Central Asia also understands something very important: even the most sensitive issues can be addressed peacefully when there is a political will, mutual respect, and dialogue. The resolution is not only about Central Asia. It carries a message that is relevant for many regions of the world. Many member states face similar challenges. Many countries have border-related questions, historical sensitivities, or unresolved issues with neighbors. This resolution doesn't prescribe one model for all. It does not impose solutions. It does not target any country or situation. Instead, it offers a simple and universal principle: when states face border disputes, the path forward should be peaceful, lawful, and based on dialogue. In this sense, the experience of Central Asia can serve as a constructive example for the wider international community. Our region has shown that peaceful settlement is possible. Our region has shown that difficult issues can be resolved not through confrontation but through negotiation. Our region has shown that good neighborly relations are not only a regional priority but also a contribution to international peace and security. Excellencies, the peaceful settlement of border disputes is directly connected to the prevention of armed conflict. When border issues are not addressed, they can create mistrust, insecurity, and instability. But when they are addressed through dialogue and cooperation, they can strengthen peace, open new opportunities for development, and improve the lives of communities on both sides of the border. This is why preventive diplomacy is so important. The United Nations should not wait until disputes escalate. It should call states to use peaceful means early, before tensions grow, before communities suffer, and before international peace and security are endangered. Ladies and gentlemen, Kyrgyzstan, together with Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, made every effort to have consultations in an open, transparent, and constructive manner. We carefully listened to the views, proposals, and concerns expressed by member states. We are sincerely grateful to all delegations that participated actively in consultations, shared comments, and engaged with us in a spirit of cooperation and flexibility. And made it to adopt this resolution by consensus. We also wish to thank all member states that have already expressed support for this initiative. Your support is deeply appreciated and demonstrates a shared commitment to dialogue, stability, and good neighborly relations. Excellencies, Central Asia is increasingly becoming a region of dialogue, connectivity, and constructive cooperation. The countries of our region are making a growing contribution to international peace and security through regional cooperation, preventive diplomacy, peaceful settlement of disputes, support for multilateralism, and commitment to the purpose and principles of the United Nations. This draft resolution is one of the— one of the examples of this contribution. It shows that Central Asia is ready not only to address its own regional issues peacefully, but also to share a positive message with the wider United Nations membership. Distinguished delegates, we hope that this draft resolution will become a useful and constructive reference for many states facing similar challenges. In conclusion, we thank all member states for their support, active engagement, and constructive spirit during the consultations process. We respectfully invite all delegations to co-sponsor the draft resolution, thus sharing common commitment to peace, dialogue, and peace. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Kyrgyzstan. Distinguished delegates, we shall now proceed to consider draft resolution A/80/L63. For your information, the draft resolution has closed for e-sponsorship. I now give the floor to the representative of the Secretariat. Mr.

President, I should like to announce that since the submission of the draft resolution, and in addition to the delegations listed on the L document, the following countries have also become co-sponsors of L.63: Armenia, Austria, Bangladesh, Belarus, Cambodia, Egypt, Germany, Papua New Guinea, Sierra Leone, Turkey, Turkmenistan, and Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. If any other countries wish to co-sponsor AO63, please signify by pressing the microphone button now. United Republic of Tanzania, Comoros, Lesotho, South Sudan, Guinea, Mali, Angola, Kazakhstan, Namibia, Burkina Faso, Sudan, Portugal, Honduras, Gabon, Tuvalu, Congo, Malawi, Liberia, Cameroon, Gambia. That concludes the— and Tonga. Tonga. Thank you, Mr. President.

I thank the representative of the Secretariat. Distinguished colleagues, the Assembly will now take a decision on draft resolution A/80/L63 entitled Peaceful Settlement of Border Disputes. May I take it that the Assembly decides to adopt the draft resolution A/80/L63 L63. It is so decided. Before giving the floor for explanation of vote after the vote, may I remind delegations that they are strongly urged to limit explanation explanations of vote to 5 minutes, which should in no case exceed 10 minutes and be made from their seats. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Mexico.

Muchas gracias, señor presidente.

Thank you very much, President. We wish to make the following explanation of position on document A/AT/L63, entitled Peaceful Settlement of Border Disputes. Mexico welcomes the progress that the country that promoted it have made in their respective territorial disputes. We underscore the intervention in issues that are not essentially under the domestic jurisdiction of states as a principle that, while it is established within the UN Charter, is not applicable to territorial disputes since these invariably involve the rights and obligations of two or more states, questions that are governed by international public law. What's more, we are observing an increase in the number of resolutions of a regional scope, and in this regard, we recall paragraph 33 of Resolution 79/327 on the revitalization of the work of the General Assembly. That urges states to abstain from presenting resolutions of this type with a view to simplifying the work of the Assembly and to increase its repercussions, underscoring the needs to establish a more streamlined program of work that's more focused and that has more impact in line with the UNAT reform objectives. Thank you very much.

I thank the distinguished representative of Mexico. We have heard the only speaker in explanation of vote after the vote. Distinguished colleagues, the Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of sub-item A of Agenda Item 31. The Assembly will begin its consideration of Sub-item B of Agenda Item 62, entitled Neutrality for Peace and Security, to take action on a proposal announced in the journal. Before proceeding further, I should like to inform members that the Assembly will hold a debate on this this item at a later date to be announced. I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Turkmenistan to introduce Draft Resolution A/80/L55.

Distinguished Vice President, Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, at the outset, allow me to express sincere appreciation to all delegations for their constructive engagement and valuable support throughout the negotiation process on draft resolution A/18/L55 entitled The role and importance of a policy of neutrality in maintaining and strengthening international peace, security, and sustainable development. Today's consideration of this draft resolution takes place at a time when the international community continues to face growing geopolitical tensions, conflicts, humanitarian crisis, and increasing challenges to multilateral cooperation. In this context, the promotion of dialogue, preventive diplomacy, and peaceful means of dispute settlement becomes not simply relevant but necessary. The draft resolution before us builds upon the well-developed framework of the United Nations General Assembly resolutions on neutrality, consistently facilitated by my country, since 1995, when the first resolution on permanent neutrality of Turkmenistan was adopted. It reaffirms that the policy of neutrality pursued in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and international law can contribute to strengthening international peace and security, promoting friendly relations among states, and advancing sustainable development. Distinguished delegates, a legitimate question may be asked: Do we really need neutral states and zones of peace in today's increasingly fragmented world? Our answer is clear: Yes, we do. We need neutral platforms capable of maintaining dialogue when channels of communication are shrinking or even completely cut off. We need spaces of peace and trust that help prevent geopolitical divisions from escalating into confrontation. We need impartial mechanisms that can facilitate mediation, confidence-building, and peaceful settlement of disputes in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations. In this regard, the experience of neutral states demonstrates that neutrality can contribute contribute not only to national stability but also to the formation of wider regional zones of peace beyond the borders. As a demonstration of this concept, at the initiative of Turkmenistan, the General Assembly recognized Central Asia as a zone of peace, trust and cooperation, reflecting the collective aspiration of the countries of the region to strengthen dialogue, preventive diplomacy and good neighbourly relations. As the ancient philosopher Confucius wisely stated, virtue is not left to stand alone. Who practices it will have the neighbors. Today, this wisdom remains profoundly relevant for international relations. Neutrality, peace, and trust cannot exist in isolation. They create spaces for cooperation, dialogue, and mutual understanding beyond borders. In this regard, my country consistently advances the policy of firm and permanent neutrality through the continuous drive of the peace-oriented initiatives of the President of Turkmenistan, His Excellency Gerdar Berdimuhamedov, and the national leader of the Turkmen people, Chairman of the People's Council of Turkmenistan, His Excellency Berdimuhamedov. This traditional succession has enabled the Turkmen nation to steadily promote preventive diplomacy, mediation, and trust-based international cooperation under the auspices of the United Nations. Your Excellencies, the draft resolution L.55 reflects the following key practical dimensions of neutrality, including the promotion of early warning diplomacy, the use of neutral: neutral platforms for peace talks, neutral humanitarian engagement, strengthening of tolerant multilateral dialogue. In this regard, we particularly value the role of the Group of Friends of Neutrality for Peace, Security and Sustainable Development, established in 2020, which has become an important platform for exchanging views on the practical implementation of neutrality principles. As a chair of the group, Turkmenistan remains committed to further promoting multilateral dialogue and cooperation aimed at strengthening peace and security. Distinguished delegates, allow me to now briefly highlight several forward-looking operative paragraphs of the draft resolution before us. First, operative paragraph 6 welcomes the proposal in cooperation with the United of Peace and United Nations Regional Center for Preventive Diplomacy for Central Asia to explore the establishment of an academic center on peace, neutrality, and preventive diplomacy studies aimed at strengthening research, education, and practical expertise in the field of preventive diplomacy and peacebuilding. Second, operative paragraph 7, encourage the effective use of the territories of neutral countries for hosting peace talks and conflict resolution processes, and notes the proposal to establish a peace mediation chamber, subject to further evaluation by Member States and the United Nations system. Third, operative paragraph 8 reiterates the request to the Secretary-General to develop guidance for upholding and implementing the The principles of neutrality for peace and security, with a focus on consolidating lessons learned and practical approach to the effective application of neutrality in international relations. Finally, operative paragraph 9 invites member states and relevant organizations to further elaborate the neutrality-based concept of global security under the auspices of the United Nations, as a basis for consensus-building, strengthening multilateral cooperation, and promoting trust-based international relations grounded in the Charter of the United Nations. Dear colleagues, the adoption of this document sends a collective message that dialogue, trust, and cooperation must prevail over confrontation and division. I express sincere gratitude to all delegations for their support and contribution to achieving consensus, in particular more than 37 member states from different regions of the world that have already co-sponsored the resolution, reflecting the broad support for the principles of neutrality and peaceful settlement of disputes. We respect— we respectfully call upon other delegations delegations to support this peaceful— peace-reinforcing initiative and to consider joining the growing list of co-sponsors. In conclusion, Turkmenistan hopes that the adoption of this draft resolution will contribute to further strengthening the culture of peace, preventive diplomacy, and constructive international cooperation under the central coordinating role of the United Nations. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Turkmenistan. Distinguished colleagues, we shall now proceed to consider draft resolution A/80/L55. For your information, the draft resolution has closed for e-sponsorship. I now give the floor to the representative of the Secretariat.

Mr. President, I should like to announce that since the submission of the draft resolution,— and in addition to the delegations listed on the L document, the foreign countries have also become co-sponsors of L.55: Armenia, Bangladesh, Belarus, Burundi, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Egypt, Eswatini, Fiji, Gabon, Ghana, Islamic Republic of Iran, Kazakhstan, Mali, Mongolia, Morocco, Nepal, Nicaragua, Oman, Pakistan, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Sudan, Tajikistan, Timor-Leste, Tonga, Türkiye, United Republic of Tanzania, Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, and Vietnam. If any other countries wish to co-sponsor L55, please signify by pressing the microphone button now. I see Guinea, Comoros, Iraq, Angola, Burkina Faso, Congo, Maldives, Nepal, Niger, South Sudan, Jordan. Thank you, Mr. President.

Thank the representative of the Secretariat. Distinguished colleagues, the Assembly will now take a decision on draft Resolution A/80/L55, entitled The Role and Importance of a Policy of Neutrality in Maintaining and Strengthening International Peace, Security, and Sustainable Development. May I take it that the Assembly decides to adopt the draft Resolution A/80/L55? L55. It is so decided. The Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of Item B of the agenda item 62. Distinguished colleagues, I invite the attention of the Assembly to Draft Resolution— Draft Decision A/80/L51, circulated under sub-item B of Agenda Item 71, entitled Human Rights Questions, Including Alternative Approaches for Improving the Effective Employment of Human Rights effective enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms. Members will recall that its second— that at its second plenary meeting on 12 September 2025, the Assembly decided to allocate sub-item B of Agenda Item 71 to the Third Committee to enable the Assembly to take action expeditiously on the document, may I take it that the Assembly wishes to consider sub-item B of agenda item 71 directly in plenary meeting and proceed immediately to its consideration? I hear no objection. It is so decided. The Assembly will now resume its consideration of sub-item B of agenda item 71 to take decision on the proposal. Distinguished colleagues, the Assembly will now take a decision on draft decision A/80/L51 entitled The Safety of Journalists and Use of Impunity. May I take it that the Assembly decides to adopt the draft decision A/80/L/51? It is so decided. Distinguished colleagues, The Assembly has thus concluded the stage of its consideration of sub-item B of agenda item 71. Before adjourning the meeting, the members are informed that the other items announced in journal will be considered this afternoon at 3 PM in this hall. The meeting is adjourned.