Second Committee, 20th plenary meeting - General Assembly, 80th session General Assembly Date: 25 November 2025 Language: English Transcript: https://transcripts.un.org/en/ga/c2/80/20 Transcripts available through this tool are created by using automatic speech recognition and are not official records nor official documents of the United Nations. Official records and official documents are available on the Official Document System of the United Nations. --- 2nd Committee · Chair [0:03]: Good morning. Can we take our seats to start? The 20th meeting of the Second Committee is called to order. In relation to all the draft proposals before the committee this morning, I would like to remind delegates that statements in explanation of votes should be limited to 3 minutes. Delegations are also reminded that in accordance with Rule 128 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Assembly, the sponsor of a proposal is not permitted to speak in explanation of vote on the proposal. Before we begin our consideration of individual draft proposals before the committee this morning, I will give an opportunity to any delegation that wishes to make a statement relating to draft proposals submitted under different agenda items. I give the floor to the United Republic of Tanzania. If they are not in the room, Argentina, you have the floor. I give the floor to Argentina. Argentina [2:05]: Gracias, señor Presidente. Thank you. The delegation of Argentina is delivering this statement to reserve its national position and to indicate that Argentina disassociates itself from all paragraphs in the resolutions that are not aligned with our country's foreign policy. A note addressed to the chair of the committee will be sent detailing the resolutions and the paragraphs that we are unable to support. Mr. Chair, the Argentine delegation reiterates the points made in its statement of October 7th during the general debate of the 80th session of the Second Committee. We must remember that the central mission of the UN is to preserve international peace and security, and that everything else should be considered complementary to that end. Many of the resolutions to be adopted do not complement this end and are far away from the real needs of development. Generating duplication of effort and an overemphasis on certain political agendas that lack consensus. This also goes against the spirit of the UN-80 initiative. The Committee's work should focus on the necessary actions to promote economic growth and free markets, both essential for creating stable conditions that foster peaceful and friendly relations among nations. Argentina considers it imperative that future discussions in this committee focus around international cooperation that ensures the protection of life, liberty, and private property. Chair, Argentina reaffirms its commitment to protecting the individual rights of all human beings without distinction, in accordance with the obligations expressly agreed upon in the international treaties to which it is a party, and recalls that the 2030 Agenda, to which it is committed in good faith, comprises legally non-binding aspirations that each state, in the exercise of its sovereignty, has the right to interpret and pursue freely. Furthermore, Argentina recalls that it withdrew from the Pact for the Future and its annexes. Regarding the concept of gender, Argentina understands that it is a context that admits different interpretations depending on the framework in which it is used. We prefer to use the concepts of man and woman. Likewise, expressions such as gender perspective and gender mainstreaming refer to their own theoretical frameworks and must be evaluated based on the relevance to each negotiated document and not in general. I would like for this statement to be recorded in the minutes of the session. 2nd Committee · Chair [4:48]: Thank you. I now give the floor to the representative of Paraguay. Paraguay [4:59]: Thank you very much, sir. Paraguay is making this statement in general on the drafts upon which we will be acting in this session regarding the references to the SDGs and the 2030 Agenda, paragraph 74 of Resolution 70/1. Is emphasized whereby the 2030 Agenda and the SDGs were established. This emphasizes the voluntary nature of the follow-up and review processes of the 2030 Agenda. This must be in line with national priorities and normative frameworks. Therefore, the national government is implementing the development plans in full awareness of the sovereignty of the State of Paraguay, respecting its constitutional principles. Likewise, my delegation would like to recall that in Paraguay, as established in our national constitution and in the current legal framework, there is no allowance for discrimination of any sort. And this legal basis is one for a real basis of equality. Therefore, for Paraguay, any definition of gender just refers to the differentiation between men and women. Thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [6:16]: I thank the representative of Paraguay. I now invite the committee to turn to Agenda Item 16A, International Trade and Development, in order to take action on draft resolution A/C2/80/L13 Rev. 1 of the same title as submitted by Iraq on behalf of the Group of 77 and China. And the amendments to the draft resolution contained in document A/C2/80/L62, as submitted by Denmark on behalf of the sponsors listed in the document. I wish to thank the co-facilitator, Mr. Julieta Tebakayan of Albania and Mrs. Camila Ortiz Miranda of Chile, for leading the informal consultation on the draft resolution and delegations for their constructive engagement in the negotiation. I would like to inform the committee that draft resolution L13-REV1 has no program budget implications. In accordance with Rule 130 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Assembly, the committee will first take a decision on the proposed amendment. I now invite the representative of Denmark to present the amendment to the draft resolution on behalf of its sponsors. I recall that the time limit for the introduction is 2 minutes. Denmark? Denmark [7:55]: The EU support to this resolution is based on the strongly held conviction that trade is an engine for inclusive growth and poverty eradication and that it contributes to the promotion of sustainable development, Transformation and industrialization, particularly in developing countries. We acknowledge the concerns of developing countries regarding carbon border adjustment mechanisms. The EU has designed and will launch next year a non-discriminatory and WTO-compliant carbon border adjustment mechanism as part of its steadfast commitment to combating the existential threat of climate change. More broadly, environmental measures adopted by the EU are explicitly crafted to be legitimate, non-discriminatory, and fully compatible with WTO rules. We continue to engage bilaterally and multilaterally with our partners on this issue to dispel and address concerns where necessary, and we remain firmly committed to a collaborative approach to implementation in full partnership with third countries and in particular developing countries. However, this resolution includes unbalanced language that we cannot accept. 3 of these paragraphs, PP21, OP38, and 39, target the EU's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism openly and in an unfair manner. Last year, the 4 paragraphs that are subject to this amendment were subject to an amendment and vote. We have engaged constructively and expressed openness to engage on this issue, unfortunately to no avail. Thus, we have yet again proposed an amendment to delete these paragraphs. Thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [9:33]: I thank the representative of Denmark. I give the floor to the Secretary on the co-sponsorship of this proposed amendment. 2nd Committee · Secretary [9:42]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like to announce that since the submission of the amendment and in addition to those listed on the L document, Montenegro, I have the pleasure to announce that the Republic of Cyprus, North Macedonia, and Republic of Moldova have become co-sponsors of L62. If any other countries wish to co-sponsor the amendment contained in L62, please signify by pressing the microphone button. No further co-sponsors. 2nd Committee · Chair [10:11]: I thank the Secretary. A recorded vote has been requested on the proposed amendment. Does any delegation wish to make a general statement or an explanation of vote before the vote in connection with the proposed amendment contained in document L62? I see no request for the floor. The committee will now commence the process of voting on the proposed amendment contained in document L62. In accordance with Rule 128, no representative May interrupt the voting except on a point of order in connection with the actual process of voting. Delegations are requested to indicate their votes. Those in favor of the amendment, please signify. Those against, and abstentions. 2nd Committee · Secretary [11:01]: The Committee is now voting on the amendment to draft resolution L.13 Rev. 1 entitled International Trade and Development contained in document L.16. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are correctly reflected on the screen? The voting has been completed. Please lock the voting machine. Thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [11:42]: The results of the vote is as follows: in favor of the amendment, 54; against, 103; abstentions, 2. The amendment contained in L.62 is rejected. Does any delegation wish to make an explanation of vote? Or a general statement after the vote on the amendment? I see no request for the floor. Since the amendment contained in document L62 has been rejected, we shall proceed to take a decision on draft resolution L13 Rev. 1 as a whole. Does any delegation not a member of the Group of G77 and China wish to join as sponsor of draft resolution L13 Rev. 1? Please signify by pressing the microphone button. I see none. A recorded vote. A recorded vote has been requested on draft resolution L.13 Rev. 1 entitled International Trade and Development. Before proceeding to vote, I'll give the floor to any sponsor delegation wishing to make a general statement in connection with the draft proposal or any non-sponsor delegation wishing to make a statement in explanation of vote. Does any delegation wish to make a general statement or an explanation of vote before the vote in connection with the draft resolution? I see no request for the floor. 2nd Committee · Secretary [13:33]: Oh, sorry. 2nd Committee · Chair [13:35]: United States. Okay. I now give the floor to the representative of the United States. United States of America [13:43]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. The United States has made clear its intention to disengage from a majority of resolutions in the Second Committee this year. We'd like to take this opportunity to reiterate our view that many of these resolutions recycle the same contentious issues year after year. Second Committee resolutions should be short, actionable, and forward-looking. Instead, many resolutions continue to include problematic language that does not— that does nothing to advance the United Nations' core mandate of maintaining international peace and security. The UN can no longer afford to waste its resources where there is little or no impact. The number of reports, conferences, and negotiations has blossomed beyond the point of ineffectiveness and waste to a level of dysfunction that makes it impossible to carry out vital work. Mr. Chair, colleagues, we look forward to working with you in the future to make the Second Committee more efficient, relevant, and effective. We refer you to the long-form explanation of position posted on our missions website for more information. Thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [14:49]: I thank the representative of the United States. The committee will now commence the process of voting on draft resolution L.13. Rev. 1 as a whole. In accordance with Rule 128, no representative may interrupt the voting except on a point of order. In connection with the actual process of voting, delegations are requested to indicate their votes. Those in favor of draft resolution L13 Rev 1, please signify. Those against, an abstention. 2nd Committee · Secretary [15:23]: The committee is now voting on draft resolution L13 Rev 1 entitled International Trade and Development. Will all delegations confirm that their votes Are correctly reflected on the screen. The voting has been completed. Please lock the voting machine. 2nd Committee · Chair [15:54]: The results of the vote is as follows: in favor, 124; 47. Draft Resolution A/C2/80 is adopted. Does any delegation wish to make an explanation of vote or a general statement after the vote on the draft resolution? I give the floor to the representative of the Russian Federation. Russian Federation [16:33]: Mr. Chairman, colleagues, the Russian Federation voted in favor of the resolution International Trade and Development and against the Danish amendment. The resolution in its final version fully reflects many key problems in international trade. Specifically, the increasing number of illegitimate unilateral protectionist measures, including measures that are taken under the pretext of protecting the environment and countering climate change. These measures, in their essence, are a tool for arbitrary and unjustified discrimination against the majority of countries, primarily against the countries of the Global South. Unilateral coercive measures, both economic, financial, and trade-related, are adopted exclusively for political reasons against disfavored states. Unilateral restrictions not only create systemic risks, but they undermine the principles of multilateralism, predictability, and free competition in international trade. Yet the real burden is sometimes borne by the most vulnerable countries that these measures were not targeting. The resolution aptly notes that our collective task should be strengthening a rules-based, non-discriminatory, open, fair, inclusive, equal, and transparent international trade system— multilateral trade system— with the WTO as its basis. Furthermore, we welcome the complementary assessment of regional economic integration as a tool for fostering gradual, comprehensive, and sustainable economic growth. Using the example of the Eurasian Economic Union, we can confidently state that forming single markets and deep integration can be a powerful catalyzer— a catalyst for economic progress and boosting the prosperity of citizens. However, the Russian Federation, just like last year, disassociates itself from paragraph OP9. We believe that issues regarding domestic support for agriculture, the use of subsidies, and especially setting the criteria for their acceptability should remain within the scope of the responsibility of states and the relevant international organizations. This paragraph is one that Russia will be prepared to support with concrete language that reflects agreements on this matter in the WTO once those agreements are reached. I would ask our position to be reflected in the record of this meeting. Thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [19:09]: I thank the representative of Russian Federation. I now give the floor to the representative of Denmark. Denmark · EU [19:26]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have the honor to deliver the statement on behalf of the European Union and its member states. I would like to warmly thank the facilitators, Ms. Camila Ortiz from Chile and Ms. Julieta Tavakalian from Armenia for a very efficient and professionally led process. We also thank the Secretariat and all delegations involved in the negotiation process for their sincere and constructive engagement. The EU has engaged, as always, proactively with the aim of a consensus resolution that prioritizes the challenges of developing countries. Mr. Chair, multilateral rules and disciplines are the best guarantee against protectionism, Promoting a universal, rule-based, open, transparent, predictable, inclusive, non-discriminatory, and equitable multilateral trading system under the World Trade Organization is the best way to achieve meaningful trade liberalization and global sustainable development. As we approach the 14th Ministerial Conference in Cameroon on March 26th, we particularly welcome language in support of the multilateral trading system with the WTO at its core. We regret that language on strengthening the level playing field never questioned in the room was watered down when returned to the G77 and China. On the other hand, we welcome new language welcoming plurilateral agreements that complement and reinforce the multilateral system. We also welcome highlighting the potential of services trade and work undertaken by the LDC Group in Geneva better operationalize the special and differential treatment. Finally, we regret that there was no agreement to include encouragement for WTO members to comply with their obligation to notify changes in their trade policies. Such enhanced transparency can be, as noted in the Secretary-General's report, a vital tool to support predictability of the system, in particular for business in developing countries. As noted previously, certain references in the text appear to question EU environmental measures more broadly, while these measures have been carefully designed to be legitimate, non-discriminatory, and fully compatible with WTO rules. Next year, we look forward to more balanced discussions on the nexus between trade and the environment and the many mechanisms through which they can promote each other. Indeed, Mr. Chair, we would like to reiterate that while the EU and its member states have voted and dissociate from 4 paragraphs, PP21, OP35, 38, and 39. We retain the strong conviction that international trade can and does contribute in a multitude of ways to sustainable development. The EU and its member states abstain today but look forward to constructive discussions to return to this resolution to consensus next year. Thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [22:18]: I thank the representative of Denmark on behalf of the European Union. I now give the floor to the representative of India. India [22:28]: Mr. Chair, India commends the co-facilitators, Ms. Camila Ortiz of Chile and Ms. Julieta Tavakalian of Armenia, for their efforts in bringing to us a text that highlights the importance of trade for advancing sustainable development, particularly in developing countries, and also brings to light the challenges they face in a highly uncertain global socioeconomic outlook. India reaffirms the importance of the rules-based, non-discriminatory, open, fair, inclusive, equitable, and transparent multilateral trading system with the WTO at its core to support sustainable development and will continue to uphold and strengthen the multilateral framework embodied in the WTO and call for the restoration of its dispute settlement system. That is why India has voted in favor of this resolution. However, India notes with deep concern that the critical distinction between trade-distorting domestic support for agriculture and public stockholding programs for food security, which is a lifeline for millions in developing countries, remains unresolved. What is needed is a permanent solution to this issue and more policy space for developing countries in this regard. Operative paragraphs 7 and 9 in the present resolution do not take us in this direction, and we therefore dissociate from these. Mr. Chair, on operative paragraph 12, India considers that plurilateral initiatives are not consistent with the WTO's multilateral consensus-based character. Plurilateral negotiations, especially those occurring outside the WTO's formal mandate, risk fragmenting the rules-based system and creating exclusive clubs that marginalize many developing countries. Joint statement initiatives have no legal mandate under the existing WTO architecture because first, they were not approved by all member states in consensus; second, they bypass established negotiating bodies; and third, they seek to impose rules on all members without universal participation. This parallel rulemaking undermines the integrity of the WTO system. We support voluntary discussions on new issues but oppose binding rules that bypass multilateral consensus and weaken development principles enshrined in the Marrakesh Agreement. India therefore dissociates from operative paragraph 12 of this resolution. I thank you, Mr. Chair, and request that this statement be reflected in the records of the meeting. 2nd Committee · Chair [24:53]: I thank the representative of India. I now give the floor to the representative of Belarus, to be followed by Paraguay, United Kingdom, Australia, and Rwanda. Belarus, you have the floor. Belarus [25:10]: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The delegation of Belarus expresses its gratitude to the member states of the G77 and China for presenting this draft resolution. We also thank the coordinators of the negotiations for their work. We support the adoption of the resolution. We are convinced that international trade is one of the key drivers of global efforts to achieve the 2030 Agenda. We note that international trade fosters the development of economic growth and the eradication of poverty. It also galvanizes the spread of innovation and enhances productivity while strengthening global supply chains, especially through their integration into developing countries. We wish to reiterate our dedication to our position that it is unacceptable to use in international relations trade restrictions and unilateral coercive measures as a means of political and economic pressure. Unilateral coercive measures create serious impediments to the delivery of the 2030 Agenda. They cause harm to the economic and social well-being of countries, including countries that were not targeted by these measures. In closing, Belarus cannot support OP9 of the resolution about the elimination of export agricultural subsidies, and we disassociate ourselves from that paragraph. We would be grateful if our statement could be reflected in the record of this meeting. I thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [26:56]: I thank the representative of Belarus. I now give the floor to the representative of Paraguay. Paraguay [27:07]: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Paraguay voted in favor of this resolution in line with our belief that international trade is an essential driver for development. However, my delegation wishes to emphasize that certain elements in the text need to be updated in order appropriately to reflect the progress achieved, providing the substantive value which is claimed. Likewise, we also believe that certain other elements should not be included in this resolution. Here, we would recall that export agricultural subsidies were eliminated in 2015 in the 10th the WTO conference in Nairobi, and this is one of the most significant outcomes achieved to date when it comes to agricultural negotiations. Moreover, we would like to clarify that the working program undertaken in the WTO to examine how it is better to be more effective and operational— the Marrakesh Decision on the reforms for LDCs and those who are net importers of food— This included in— concluded in 2023, and the report was adopted in 2024. There is no agreement in that forum for any continuation thereto. Moreover, we would emphasize that the repercussions coming from the use of commercial instruments to deal with environmental objectives negatively is not reflected in the resolution. Moreover, the consequences of this obligation are not unpredictable in that developing countries have been suffering from these for years. We would also say that these affect all developing countries, not just LDCs. Therefore, for these and other reasons which we shall not detail for reasons of time at present, my delegation would like to say that the Republic of Paraguay decides regarding paragraphs 9, 31, 35, and 37 as not being in alignment with the objectives supported by Paraguay in other multilateral fora, in particular the WTO. Thank you very much. 2nd Committee · Chair [29:26]: I thank the representative of Paraguay. I now give the floor to the representative of United Kingdom. United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland [29:34]: Chair, the United Kingdom abstained on this resolution. We recognize the progress achieved in the constructive engagement throughout negotiations However, cannot extend full support as consensus was not reached on key issues for the UK. During negotiations, the UK and others expressed serious concerns on several paragraphs. These provisions were consistently flagged as unacceptable throughout the process, yet they remain in the final document tabled by the G77. Consequently, we decided to break silence on paragraphs PP21, OP35, 38, and 39, With the UK additionally breaking silence on OP7. Despite strong reservations, we accepted OP28 on the TRIPS Agreement as a significant concession, but regret that this flexibility was not reciprocated. Accordingly, the UK would like to dissociate from paragraphs PP21, OP7, 28, 35, 38, and 39, and calls for their exclusion from next year's zero draft. We would like to address these issues for the record. Thank you. On OP7, the language jeopardises the essential role of stocks and agricultural futures and options markets in global food security. These markets enable price risk management, provide transparent price signals, and incentivise trade and storage— functions that become critical when supplies are tight and prices are volatile. Restricting speculation or storage would harm liquidity and weaken the mechanisms that stabilise grain markets. To prevent conflation with the original TRIPS IP rights waiver proposal. Finally, while members did not reach consensus on extending the MC12 decision, we do not characterize this as a matter of regret but simply note the outcome. On unilateral coercive measures, we recognize the need to monitor and mitigate unintended impacts on trade and development. The UK's autonomous sanctions are lawful, transparent, subject to challenge, and consistent with the UN Charter. They target individuals and entities responsible for grave acts such as conflict, human rights abuses, and corruption that undermine trade and development. Finally, we remain committed to supporting the most vulnerable countries facing the worst impacts of the climate and nature crises. The COP28 Global Stocktake reaffirmed that climate measures, including unilateral ones, must not constitute a means of arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination or a disguised restriction on international trade. Concerns about trade impacts of climate measures are already being discussed in other forums including the WTO. This resolution is not the appropriate place for unsubstantiated claims on these issues. Looking ahead, we hope to work constructively with all delegations to bridge— 2nd Committee · Chair [32:35]: I thank the representative of the United Kingdom. I now give the floor to the representative of Australia. Australia · CANZ [32:44]: Thank you, Chair, and good morning, colleagues. I'm delivering this explanation of vote today on behalf of Canada, New Zealand, and my own country, Australia. At the outset, I'd like to emphasize that CANZ countries were pleased to join consensus and then vote a resounding yes in favor of the Severe Commitment earlier this year. Severe provides commitments and agreed language relating to many of the resolutions considered by the Second Committee this year, including this resolution on international trade and development. We would like to thank the co-facilitators from Chile and Armenia for their excellent leadership during negotiations. Unfortunately, CANZ deeply regrets having to abstain on this resolution again this year. We were not able to endorse a resolution which we believe resulted from a process that was neither fair nor legitimate. On this resolution, CANZ engaged in good faith negotiations throughout the process, process, exercised maximum flexibility, and genuinely sought to achieve consensus. We were therefore extremely disappointed to see that unilateral changes were made to the text after the negotiations concluded, without a chance for delegations to sit together and discuss those proposed changes. We recognize that member states will have legitimate policy differences and that those policy differences will at times be tractable. We accept that member states will vote according to their policy positions and that consensus may not be possible. What we don't accept is a process whereby the proponent is able to take the text back from the facilitators and make unilateral changes after silence without consultation with others. It is even more concerning when the edits intentionally cross known red lines of other delegations. It is for these process reasons that we have regrettably abstained on this text. Chair, unfortunately, this was not an isolated incident this year. Unilateral changes were also made to the next 3 resolutions we will consider under Item 16: International Financial System, Illicit Financial Flows, and International Tax Cooperation, as well as the Debt Sustainability Resolution being considered here tomorrow. CANZ countries will also be abstaining on these additional 4 resolutions for the same process concerns. Chair, this practice of unilaterally amending text after negotiations have concluded distinguishes 2C from other committees and UN forums and is contributing to a breakdown of trust in this committee. We look forward to constructively engaging on this matter in the revitalization agenda. to rebuild fair and legitimate negotiations. I thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [35:27]: I thank the representative of Australia. I see no other requests for the floor. The committee has thus concluded its consideration of Agenda Item 16A. I now invite the committee to turn to Agenda Item 16B International Financial System and Development in order to take action on draft resolution A/C2/80/L11/Rev1 of the same title as submitted by Iraq on behalf of the Group of 77 and China. I wish to thank the facilitator, Mr. Lewis, Louis Mogol Sapu of Thailand for leading the informal consultation on the draft resolution and delegations for their constructive engagement in the negotiation. I would like to inform the committee that draft resolution 11/rev1 has no program budget implications. Does any delegation not a member of the Group of 77 I, China, wish to join as sponsor of draft resolution L.11/Rev.1. Please signify by pressing the microphone button. I see none. A recorded vote has been requested on draft resolution L.11/Rev.1. Rev. 1, entitled International Financial System and Development. Before proceeding to vote, I'll give the floor to any sponsor delegation wishing to make a general statement in connection with the draft proposal or any non-sponsor delegation wishing to make a statement in explanation of vote. Does any delegation wish to make a general statement or an explanation of vote before the vote? in connection with draft resolution L.11/Rev.1. I give the floor to the European Union. EU · EU [37:43]: Thank you, Mr. Chair, and good morning, colleagues. I deliver this statement on behalf of the European Union and its member states. We would like to start by warmly thanking Mr. Louis Mongkul Ksapkul of Thailand for facilitating this resolution a fair and balanced manner, and all delegations for their constructive engagement throughout the process. In terms of substance, we believe the final text is well-balanced and therefore the EU supports the resolution. At the same time, the EU and its member states must also express disappointment that the resolution has not been fully updated in light of the agreement reached in Sevilla, and that concerns and bridging proposals were not considered, notably on PP20-ALT and PP20-ALT-BIS, as well as OP10 and OP10-BIS, where language from the Sevilla Commitment has been added on to text from last year's resolution rather than updating it. The EU and its member states must also state our strong concern regarding the rewriting of agreed language from the Sevilla Commitment, as most notably in OP7-PRI, which does not now reflect neither the wording nor the spirit of the agreed provision from Sevilla. Therefore, while supporting the resolution text as a whole, we would like to voice our expectation that we will be working on further improving the text in next year's iteration. Finally, we regret that a vote has been called on this resolution. We believe this undermines our collective efforts and the constructive spirit of consensus building that has been long a tradition in this committee and that has also guided this year's negotiations on this resolution. The EU remains firmly committed to a reform of the international financial system as outlined in the Sevilla Commitment. I thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [39:26]: I thank the representative of European Union. I see no other requests for the floor. The Committee will now commence the process of voting on draft resolution L.11/rev.1. In accordance with Rule 128, no representative may interrupt the voting except on a point of order in connection with the actual process of voting. Delegations are requested to indicate their vote. Those in favor of draft resolution L11/REP1, please signify. Those against and abstentions. 2nd Committee · Secretary [40:05]: The committee is now voting on draft resolution We now move to the adoption of Resolution L.11 Rev. 1 entitled International Financial System and Development. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are correctly reflected on the screen? The voting has been completed. Please lock the voting machine. Resolution L.11 Rev. 1 has been adopted. 2nd Committee · Chair [40:36]: The results of the vote is as follows: in favor, 167; against, 3; abstention, 8. Draft Resolution A/C2/80/L11/Rev1 is adopted. Does any delegation wish to make an explanation of vote? For a general statement after the vote on the draft resolution, I give the floor to the United Kingdom. United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland [41:12]: Thank you, Chair. The UN's Finance for Development Conference, FFD4, in Sevilla marked a new era for development finance, setting out a shared ambition to reform the global financial system. Now is the time for implementation, not renegotiation. Throughout Second Committee negotiations, we have sought to uphold this principle. We were surprised and disappointed that verbatim consensus language from FFD4 was challenged and in some cases even removed by the text proponents after silence. We saw this negative trend across the committee. Efforts to unpick language agreed only months ago undermine our commitment to strong multilateralism, cooperation, and solidarity reaffirmed been severe. For this reason, the UK abstained on the text. As we look ahead to the FFD Forum, our priority should be to build on collective momentum and work together to turn commitments into action. We did see 3 positive elements within the IFS text that point towards implementation and deliver tangible impact. First, the African Development Fund replenishment. This is a vital opportunity to demonstrate commitment to Africa's development, its institutions, and innovative approaches to finance. Second, mutual reliance frameworks. These are key aspects of multilateral development bank reform, ensuring institutions operate more effectively as a system. And finally, scaling up local currency lending, an important tool for sustainable economic development. We look forward to working with everyone to help implement the Severe Commitment going forward. Thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [42:46]: I thank the representative of the United Kingdom. I now give the floor to the representative of the United States. United States of America [42:54]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. The United States thanks facilitator Louis Moncon of Thailand for his efforts to seek compromise and consensus. However, however, we cannot support the International Financial System for Development Resolution this year. The United States is troubled that many provisions in this resolution would raise the cost of capital worldwide by interfering in markets, undermining investor confidence, and debasing the integrity of credit ratings. Proposals to expand UN authority into areas best managed by sovereign states and specialized financial institutions, to direct the operations of the IMF and multilateral development banks, and to create new duplicative mechanisms are not only inefficient but risk harming the very countries they purport to help. For example, we are deeply concerned by provisions in this resolution that call for expanded UN involvement in sovereign debt restructuring. The United States believes that debt resolution is best managed through established mechanisms such as the Paris Club and the G20 Common Framework, which are grounded in transparency, cooperation, and fair burden sharing among creditors. UN-led processes risk politicizing debt negotiations, undermining market confidence, and delaying much-needed relief for countries in distress. Such approaches would ultimately raise the cost of capital and reduce access to financing for the very countries the resolution aims to support. The United States supports an international financial system rooted in national sovereignty, fiscal responsibility, and market-based solutions. We believe countries should focus on increasing domestic productivity and resources, ensuring access to abundant and affordable energy, and fostering private sector-led growth. These are the foundations for real economic progress, not bureaucratic overreach or top-down mandates. The United States is not an economic miracle because of any action the UN has taken, but rather the will of a free people to allow markets to grow and innovation to flourish. The United States has also made clear that we do not reaffirm the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development or the Sustainable Development Goals as a matter of course. We do not support aligning international financial institutions, official development assistance, or private capital mobilization with the SDGs. We believe that the proliferation of references to these frameworks in this resolution is misguided and does not advance the real economic interests of member states. We are concerned that the lack of consensus on these important issues undermines the Second Committee's credibility and its ability to advance practical economic solutions. The committee's work is weakened when it recycles contentious or counterproductive proposals that do not reflect the realities of today's global economy. We hope that future resolutions will reflect these priorities and offer a more constructive approach. For these reasons, the United States voted no. Thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [45:46]: I thank the representative of the United States. I see no other requests for Speaker 40 [45:51]: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 2nd Committee · Chair [45:52]: No further speakers have requested the floor. The committee has thus concluded its consideration of sub-item B of Agenda Item 16. I now invite the committee to turn to Agenda Item 16, Promotion of International Cooperation to Combat Illicit Financial Flow and Strengthen Good Practices on Asset Returns to Foster Sustainable Development, in order to take action and drive resolution A/C2/80/L23 Rev. 1 of the same title as submitted by Iraq on behalf of the Group of 77 and China. I wish to thank the co-facilitators, Mr. Rodolfo Reta Haddad of Mexico and Mr. Frank van der Strand of the Kingdom of Netherlands, for leading the informal consultation on draft resolution and delegations for their constructive engagement in the negotiations. I would like to inform the committee that draft resolution L23-1 has no program budget implication. Does any delegation not a member of the Group of G77— Group of 77 and China wish to join as sponsor of draft resolution L23/Rev1. Please signify by pressing your microphone button. I see none. A recorded vote has been requested on draft resolution L23/Rev1 entitled Promotion of International Cooperation to Combat Illicit Financial Flows and good practices on asset returns to foster sustainable development. Before proceeding to vote, I will give the floor to any sponsor delegation wishing to make a general statement in connection with the draft proposal or any non-sponsor delegation wishing to make a statement in explanation of vote. Does any delegation wish to make a general statement or an explanation of vote before the vote in connection with draft resolution L23/rev. 1. I see no requests for the floor. The committee will now commence the process of voting on draft resolution L23/rev. 1. In accordance with Rule 128, no representative may interrupt the voting except on a point of order In connection with the actual process of voting, delegations are requested to indicate their votes. Those in favor of draft resolution L23 Rev. 1, please signify. Those against, an abstention. 2nd Committee · Secretary [48:42]: The committee is now voting on draft resolution L23 Rev. 1 entitled Promotion of International Cooperation to Combat Illicit Financial Flows and Strengthen Good Practices on Assets Will all delegations confirm that their votes are correctly reflected on the screen? The voting has been completed. Please lock the voting machine. Thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [49:20]: The result of the vote is as follows: in favor, 172; against, 1; abstentions, 6. Draft Resolution A/C2/80/L23/Rev. 1 is adopted. Does any delegation wish to make an explanation of vote? Or general statement after the vote on the draft resolution. I give the floor to the representative of the Russian Federation. Russian Federation [50:00]: Mr. Chairman, the Russian delegation at the outset would like to thank the sponsors and the coordinators of this resolution on the development of international cooperation to combat illicit financial flows and strengthen good practices on assets. Return to foster sustainable development. However, our delegation disassociates itself from paragraph 23 of the resolution. We believe that the Compromiso de Sevilla is not a legally binding document, so we consider unacceptable the mention in paragraph 29 of the Sevilla Commitment, which provides a broad interpretation of the UN Convention Against Corruption, UNCAC, which undermines the principles enshrined in it and the international agreements that have been— international commitments that have been agreed upon. We ask this to be reflected in the record of this meeting. 2nd Committee · Chair [50:58]: Thank you. I thank the representative of Russian Federation. I now give the floor to the representative of Denmark. Denmark · EU [51:06]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I deliver this explanation of vote on behalf of the European Union and its member states. We would like to start by thanking Mr. Rodolfo Reta Haddad from Mexico and Mr. Frans van der Straten from Kingdom of the Netherlands for facilitating this resolution in a fair and balanced manner, and all delegations for their constructive engagement throughout the process. We believe the final text is generally well-balanced, and therefore the EU has voted in favour. At the same time, we advocated and would have preferred to see stronger language included, for example, on Financial Action Task Force recommendations and civil society engagement, and we regret that EU-advocated references to the safety of journalists were not retained in the final text. We would also have preferred references to stolen assets be replaced by more accurate language on assets derived from corruption. While supporting the resolution text as a whole, we have objected, along with several other delegations, to the introduction of what is now OP24 relating to a special session of the Conference of the State Parties to the UN Convention Against Corruption. It is very unfortunate that the proposals of the co-facilitators who suggested the deletion of this paragraph were not followed. This resolution cannot preempt a decision of the forthcoming conference. We are thus compelled to dissociate from this paragraph. Similarly, the EU and its member states also state our strong concern that some provisions of the resolution text do not reach standards agreed in the Sevilla Commitment, for example, as regards beneficial ownership registries. We must thus also dissociate from the language retained in OP42. Chair, we regret that a vote has been called on this resolution for the first time since 2021. We believe this undermines our collective efforts and constructive spirit of consensus-building that has long been a tradition in this committee, and that has also guided this year's negotiations on the resolution. The EU remains firmly committed to preventing and combating illicit financial flows in all their forms, recognizing their corrosive impact on governance and sustainable development. I thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [53:29]: I thank the representative of Denmark on behalf of European Union and member states. I now give the floor to the representative of the United States. United States of America [53:39]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. We'd like to take this opportunity to reiterate our view that many Second Committee resolutions this year recycle the same contentious issues Second Committee resolutions should be short, actionable, and forward-looking. Instead, many resolutions continue to include problematic language that does nothing to advance the United Nations' core mandate of maintaining international peace and security. The UN can no longer afford to waste its resources where there is little or no impact. Mr. Chair, colleagues, we look forward to working with you in the future to make the Second Committee more efficient, relevant, and effective. Thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [54:15]: I thank the representative of the United States. I now give the floor to the representative of Switzerland. Switzerland [54:25]: Mr. Chairman, Switzerland supports this resolution and would like to thank the co-facilitators for their work. We regret that it has not been possible to arrive at a consensus-based text in the room during the course of consultations. This has meant that it has gone back to its authors for new amendments and here we would like to voice our reservations regarding the modalities of this process. Because of this process and our reservations regarding the content of OP24, Switzerland dissociates itself from OP24. We wish to emphasize the importance of the UNFCCC and to recall the fact that decisions continue to be taken and meetings organized in the framework of the UNFCCC bodies and the Conference of States Parties and their working groups. Before creating new such groups, it appears to us to be vital fully to make use of those already in existence. This also means avoiding possible overlaps. The use of confiscated assets and their return to their countries of origin should not just be done in a transparent fashion in accordance with international standards, but it must also benefit local populations. Promoting the use of returned assets to the local population is not any waiver to the UNFCCC or the Seville Commitment, but a natural and necessary development of the principles here supported by a growing use of good international practices. The final success of the recovery of assets cannot be assessed solely by the return of funds, but also by their tangible contribution to the people who have been deprived thereof. Switzerland continues to be committed constructively on this subject. Thank you very much. 2nd Committee · Chair [56:06]: I now give the floor to the representative of United Kingdom. United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland [56:14]: Thank you, Chair. The United Kingdom thanks delegations for their constructive engagement on the illicit finance text in the Second Committee. Tackling illicit financial flows remains a priority for the UK, which is why our Deputy Prime Minister has confirmed our intention to host a summit next year to strengthen international cooperation on this issue. We welcome the inclusion of language on beneficial ownership and transparency, a key priority, and will continue to urge states to advance the strong commitments agreed as part of FFD4 outcome in this area. However, we remain concerned regarding OP22bis. The focus for States Parties should remain on the full implementation of existing comprehensive asset recovery obligations under UNCAC, not creating duplicative structures which distract from implementation. For this reason, we disassociated from this suggestion in the text. We do not require a special session, and work to implement our commitments should be continued through existing UNCAC structures. Thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [57:16]: I thank the representative of United Kingdom. I now give the floor to the representative of Republic of Korea. Republic of Korea [57:26]: Thank you, Chair. At the outset, my delegation would like to express our sincere appreciation to the co-facilitators for their tireless effort throughout this process. We also extend our deep gratitude to all fellow delegations for their engagement and to the Secretariat for its dedicated support during the negotiations. Despite the efforts of OROVOS, the Republic of Korea has decided to abstain on the resolution and International Financial System Development as well. This was a very difficult decision for the ROK, taken only after thorough review and careful consideration. My delegation wishes to express expressed its concerns regarding procedural aspects of the negotiation— negotiations, in particular that unilateral changes were made to the text after negotiation concluded. These factors were an important part of context in which the ROK ultimately decided to abstain. The ROK considers that this experience serves as a reminder of the need for future negotiations to be conducted in a more inclusive and transparent manner. We recognize that given the different circumstances and priorities of member states, achieving consensus is a highly challenging process. At the same time, such differences underscore the importance of ensuring adequate consultation and coordination throughout the negotiation process. The United Nations has on many occasions reached meaningful agreement even under challenging circumstances. These experiences demonstrate that sustainable outcomes are more likely when continued efforts are made to achieve consensus. In this context, the RKA wishes to reiterate that our abstention should be understood as a constructive message reflecting our hope that future discussions will advance on the base of more balanced and constructive consultations. Thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [59:35]: I thank the representative of Republic of Korea. I see no other requests for the floor. The committee has thus concluded its consideration of sub-item F of Agenda Item 16. I now invite the committee to turn to Agenda Item 16H, Promotion of Inclusive and Effective International Tax Cooperation at the United Nations in order to take action on draft resolution A/C2/80/L20/rev. 1 of the same title as submitted by Nigeria on behalf of the African states. I wish to thank Thank you. I would like to thank the facilitator, Mr. Ivo Urubio of Angola, for leading the informal consultation on the draft resolution. I also thank delegations for their constructive engagement in the negotiation. I would like to inform the committee that draft resolution L20/REV1 has no program budget implications. I give the floor to the representative of Angola to introduce the draft resolution on behalf of the sponsors. Angola · Africa Group [1:00:55]: Mr. Chair, colleagues, I have the honor to introduce on behalf of the African Group the draft resolution entitled Promotion of Inclusive and Effective International Tax Cooperation at the United Nations. The text builds upon Resolution 79/235, which established the member state-led Intergovernmental Negotiation Committee mandated to elaborate the United Nations Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation and its early protocols. Since its establishment, the INC has held its organizational session and the 3 substantive sessions in New York and Nairobi, complemented by active intersectional work. Progress has not been easy, but it has been genuine. As our proverbs remind us, a single farmer cannot pick up a stone, and if you want to go far, go together. This process is precisely about going far together towards a fair and more inclusive international tax system. This year's resolution is intentional procedural, recognizing the substantive negotiations are unfolding within the INC. It welcomes the tangible progress achieved to date and expressed concerns regarding UN liquidity challenge and which already constrained the Secretariat to support. Mr. Chair, this might be a modest resolution in form, but its purpose is significant. It signals our collective determination to advance an inclusive, effective, and fair global tax cooperation. On behalf of the African Group, I urge all delegations to support this resolution and uphold the spirit of partnership, multilateralism that defines the INC process. I thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [1:02:41]: I thank the representative of Angola. I give the floor to the Secretary on the co-sponsorship of the draft resolution. 2nd Committee · Secretary [1:02:49]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like to announce that since the submission of the draft resolution and in addition to those listed on the L document, The Dominican Republic has also become a co-sponsor of L20 Rev. 1. If any other countries wish to co-sponsor L20 Rev. 1, please signify by pressing the microphone button. Bahamas? Panama? Congo? It's an African country. It was submitted on behalf of I see no further co-sponsors. Thank you, Mr. 2nd Committee · Chair [1:03:27]: Chair. I thank the Secretary. A recorded vote has been requested on draft resolution L20/rev1 entitled Promotion of Inclusive and Effective International Tax Cooperation at the United Nations. Before proceeding to vote, I'll give the floor to any sponsored delegation wishing to make a general statement in connection with the draft proposal, or any non-sponsored delegation wishing to make a statement in explanation of vote. Does any delegation wish to make a general statement or an explanation of vote before the vote in connection with draft resolution L20 Rev. 1? I see no request for the floor. The committee will now commence the process of voting on draft resolution L20/Rev1. In accordance with Rule 128, no representative may interrupt the voting except on a point of order in, in connection with the actual process of voting. Delegations are requested to indicate their vote Those in favor of draft resolution L.20 Rev. 1, please signify. Those against and abstentions. 2nd Committee · Secretary [1:04:47]: The committee is now voting on draft resolution L.20 Rev. 1 entitled Promotion of Inclusive and Effective International Tax Cooperation at the United Nations. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are correctly reflected on the screen? The voting has been completed. Please lock the voting machine. 2nd Committee · Chair [1:05:20]: The results of the vote is as follows: in favor, 121; against, 3; abstention, 56. Draft Resolution A/C2/80 Does any delegation wish to make an explanation of vote or a general statement after the vote on the draft resolution? I give the floor to the representative of Denmark. Denmark · EU [1:05:55]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I deliver this explanation of vote on behalf of the European Union and its member states. The EU and its member states share the goal of inclusive and effective international tax cooperation. We have maintained constructive good faith engagement in this process since the outset. We thank the African Group and agreed with its approach, that is a short text focused on the ongoing work in the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee on a Framework Convention for the International Tax Cooperation at the UN. We also thank the proponents of the resolution for their flexibility on OP1 to solve issues with the zero draft language. We regret, however, that the other reservations raised from the outset of consultations and that we feel could have been resolved were not given due consideration. We have thus abstained in the vote called on this resolution. The EU and its member states are compelled to dissociate from 2 paragraphs, OPs 2 and 3. We acknowledge with appreciation the positive spirit that has accompanied the work in the sessions of the INC, particularly the latest session in Nairobi, as well as the informal intersessional discussions thus far. However, this resolution should not be an assessment of the ongoing negotiations nor a prejudgment of their possible outcomes. In OP2, we preferred the facilitator's wording of welcoming discussions held and regret that the final text reverts to welcoming the progress made, despite many delegations expressing preference for the more neutral formulation proposed by the facilitator. In OP2, the EU has also repeatedly objected to the reference to the roadmap and working methods In the last sentence. While this informal document guides the work of the INC, it was not put to the membership for adoption. It has no place in this resolution. We have not heard any substantiated arguments for retention of this reference. In OP3, we also appreciate the facilitator's compromise proposal clarifying the reference to the liquidity situation and support from the Secretariat for the INC without prejudice to 5th Committee deliberations. The final paragraph as it retained lacks these necessary clarifications. The EU and its member states must express disappointment that other concerns and bridging proposals were not considered, notably relating to OP5, which does not fully reflect agreed wording from the Sevilla commitment. Nevertheless, the EU and its member states reiterate our continued constructive posture and our strong belief in the utility of international cooperation on tax and related instruments. While we regret that consensus could not be reached on this resolution, the EU and its member states continue to engage constructively in the INC and participated actively in its 3rd session. 2nd Committee · Chair [1:08:55]: I thank the representative of Denmark on behalf of the European Union and member states. I now give the floor to the representative of the United Kingdom, to be followed by Singapore and United States. United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland [1:09:15]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. The UK is committed to working with all stakeholders to ensure inclusive and effective international tax cooperation, and collaboration between different international organizations in addressing global policy challenges. We have championed efforts to combat base erosion and profit shifting, to increase tax transparency, including through the automatic exchange of information, and to support domestic resource mobilization, including via HM Revenue and Customs peer-to-peer capacity-building partnerships with developing countries. The UK has been actively engaging in negotiations at the UN over a future Framework Convention, including most recently at the productive dialogue in Nairobi. We believe that a UN Tax Framework Convention has the potential to further advance international tax cooperation, but to be successful, it needs to be clear in its aims, avoid duplicating existing initiatives, and seek to secure the broad support and participation of members. We remain concerned that those principles have not been reflected during the process so far and believe the organizational session in February was a particular missed opportunity in that regard. As set out in the final PP, carrying out a process which is designed to secure the broadest possible consensus is paramount. Otherwise, it will not be effective in the end. Given there is more time for us to find areas of convergence and consensus in this process, the United Kingdom abstained on this resolution. We will continue to work actively with all of you to exchange views and be constructive, collaborative, and open-minded in considering how to accommodate different perspectives. We hope that together we can deliver a positive contribution to international tax cooperation. Thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [1:11:15]: I thank the representative of the United Kingdom. I now give the floor to the representative of Singapore. Singapore [1:11:24]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Singapore thanks the African Group for its leadership in presenting this resolution and Mr. Ivo Rubio of Angola for his steady facilitation throughout these negotiations. Although this resolution was envisaged to be procedural in view of the ongoing negotiations of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee on Tax. The extensive engagement by many delegations underscores the importance that all of us attach to strengthening international tax cooperation at the United Nations. International tax cooperation is of particular significance to many countries, including Singapore. A stable and predictable international tax environment is essential for fostering sustainable and inclusive growth and domestic resource mobilization. In an interconnected global economy, strong multilateral cooperation anchored in collective ownership is indispensable. The tabling of this resolution was intended to capture the full breadth of member states' perspectives. In this spirit, Singapore engaged constructively throughout the process to recognize the importance of international tax cooperation at the UN and offered bridging solutions where possible. However, we note that elements of the final text did not take into account the following concerns which delegations had highlighted. First, it is highly uncommon for an ongoing intergovernmental process to welcome progress before Member States have reached any agreed stage in their deliberations. And second, to our understanding, there is no concrete document or outcome in the INCEON text yet at this juncture that we could reasonably cite as progress for the membership to acknowledge. These concerns make it premature to signal any value judgment on the ongoing negotiations, particularly at this early stage when delegations are still deliberating on the key elements of the UN Framework Convention and its Protocols. It is vital that we enable an objective space for our delegations in the INC on Tax to engage fully and constructively, and to provide them the requisite support towards the conclusion of the Framework Convention. For these reasons, Singapore voted abstain on this resolution. Looking ahead, We remain committed to engaging constructively with all member states in the negotiations of the UN Framework Convention and its protocols. Our shared objective should be a framework convention and protocols that enjoy the broadest ownership, bring about a stable and predictable international tax system, and ultimately serve the interests of the entire UN membership. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 2nd Committee · Chair [1:13:46]: I thank the representative of Singapore. I now give the floor to the representative United States of America [1:13:54]: Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to our 2C colleagues for their thoughtful interventions today. The United States has made clear its intention to disengage from a majority of resolutions in the Second Committee this year, given our view that many of the resolutions recycle the same contentious issues as previous years. Many resolutions continue to include problematic language that does nothing to advance the United Nations' core mandate of maintaining international peace and security. The number of reports, conferences, and negotiations has blossomed beyond the point of ineffectiveness and waste to a level of dysfunction that makes it impossible to carry out vital work. Mr. Chair, colleagues, we look forward to working with you in the future to make the Second Committee more efficient, relevant, We look forward to working on the revitalization process. We refer you to the long-form explanation of position posted on our missions website for more information. Thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [1:14:57]: I thank the representative of the United States. I see no other requests for the floor. The committee has thus concluded its consideration of sub-item H of the agenda item 16. I now invite the committee to resume its consideration of agenda item 17, follow-up to and implementation of the outcome of the International Conference on Financing for Development, in order to take action on draft resolution A/C2/80/L57 of the same title as submitted by the vice chair, Veronica Gaboschi, of Poland on the basis of informal consultation on draft resolution L9 presented by Iraq on behalf of, on behalf of the Group of 77 and China. I wish to thank the co-facilitators, Mr. Rodolfo Oreta Haddad of Morocco and Ms. Katie Boyd-Lee of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, for leading the informal consultation on the draft resolution, as well as delegations for their constructive engagement in the negotiation. I would like to inform the committee that draft resolution L57 has no program budget implications. A recorded vote has been requested on draft resolution L57 entitled Follow-up to and Implementation of Outcome of International Conference Before proceeding to vote, does any delegation wish to make any explanation of vote before the vote in connection with draft resolution L.57? I give the floor to the European Union representative. EU · EU [1:16:48]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have the honour to deliver the statement on behalf of the European Union and its member states. The candidate countries North Macedonia, Montenegro, Albania, Ukraine, the Republic of Moldova, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Georgia aligned themselves with this statement. I would like to start by warmly thanking the facilitators, Ms. Katie Bradley from the United Kingdom and Mr. Rodolfo Reta from Mexico, for their professional and patient facilitation of this resolution, as well as the Secretariat and all delegations involved in the negotiation process for their constructive engagement. This resolution is, without a doubt, one of the most relevant resolutions in the macroeconomic financing for development cluster this year. Following the long and at times difficult journey from Addis to Seville, in the context of crises and conflicts and the challenge of reaching the SDGs being seriously off track, ensuring a smooth transition from implementing the Addis Ababa Action Agenda to implementing also the Seville Commitment was a high priority. We fully supported the approach chosen by G77 and China, namely to streamline the resolution and focus it on the essential. The resolution, as we will adopt it today, delivers exactly what it needs to. It recognizes the multilateral common ground, the context, objectives, and priorities on financing for development that we reconfirmed in the Sevilla Commitment in July 2025. It echoes the continued mandate for the Interagency Task Force to provide the factual and analytical basis for our work at the UN, and it anchors and solidifies the concrete next steps to launch the new biennial cycle of follow-up. The EU and its member states have high hopes that the continued support of the IATF and their annual report, as well as the new biennial cycle and other innovations, will allow for deeper discussions and more meaningful and inclusive outcomes. Mr. Chair, a commitment without action equates to nothing more than empty promises, which is why the EU and its member states strongly advocated for encouraging and recognizing the pledges and contributions already put in place by members and stakeholders under the Sevilla Platform for Action. We call on those having put forward initiatives to regularly update the forum on their progress. Finally, Mr. Chair, the EU has engaged, as always, proactively with the aim of a consensus resolution that prioritizes the needs and challenges of developing countries. We deeply regret that this resolution has been called to a vote. We believe this undermines our collective effort and the constructive spirit of striving for consensus, which has been a tradition in this committee and has also guided the negotiations on this resolution this year. The EU and its member states fully support this important resolution. Thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [1:19:26]: I thank the representative of the European Union and member states. I see no other requests for the floor. The committee will now commence the process of voting on draft resolution L.5.7. In accordance with Rule 128, no representative may interrupt the voting except on a point of order in connection with the actual process of voting. Delegations are requested to indicate their vote. Those in favor of draft resolution L.5.7, Please signify those against and abstentions. 2nd Committee · Secretary [1:19:58]: The committee is now voting on draft resolution L.57 entitled Follow-up to and Implementation of the Outcomes of the International Conferences on Financing for Development. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are correctly reflected on the screen? The voting has been completed. Please lock the voting machine. 2nd Committee · Chair [1:20:31]: The results of the vote is as follows. In favor, 178. Against, 1. Abstentions, 1. Draft Resolution A/C2/80/L57. The draft resolution is adopted. Does any delegation wish to make an explanation of vote after the vote on the draft resolution? I give the floor to the representative of Republic of Korea. Republic of Korea [1:21:05]: The Republic of Korea welcomes adoption of this resolution. We thank the co-facilitators for their efforts and all delegations fully engaged constructively throughout the negotiations. My delegation wishes to make following 3 points. First, the need for a robust follow-up to FFD4 cannot be overstated. The Sevilla commitments provide a comprehensive roadmap for how we can mobilize and align financing to rescue the SDGs. This resolution is therefore essential, as it sets the overall direction for translating Seville into an ongoing process through which we take stock, identify gaps, and mobilize our collective response. Second, effective follow-up will depend on strong and inclusive partnerships. The challenges before us cut across domestic and international public finance, private investment, and institutional capacity, and no single actor can address them alone. We need strong cooperation between providers and recipients, between the public and private sectors, and with civil society and other stakeholders grounded in mutual trust, transparency, and shared responsibility. The FFD4 follow-up should become a space where such partnerships are nurtured and where good practices are shared and scaled up. Lastly, we appreciate the efforts by all member states to strengthen the FFD4 following up— follow-up process. At the same time, we regret that the core elements to follow up to on the outcomes of the FFD4 are not fully captured in these resolutions. In particular, concrete plans to implement the development effectiveness agenda, including principles of development effectiveness, country ownership, focus on results, inclusive partnerships and transparency, and mutual accountability, should have been properly presented in such resolutions. Thus, we hope to see further discussions to reflect these indispensable elements in the future. Looking ahead, drawing on our own experience of moving from an aid recipient to provider of development cooperation, we will engage fully in financing for development discussions and support the efforts to strengthen financing framework needed to implement the Cebu Commitment. 2nd Committee · Chair [1:23:20]: Thank you. I thank the representative of Republic of Korea. I now give the floor to the representative of Canada. Canada · CANZ [1:23:32]: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I have the honor to deliver this statement on behalf of Australia, New Zealand, and my own country, Canada. First, CANZ wishes to acknowledge the efforts of all delegations throughout the negotiations of this resolution and the constructive spirit that has guided our work. We recognize the complexity of the issues before us and the importance of ensuring that our processes remain transparent and inclusive. This resolution offers a streamlined, practical, measured, and coherent approach to financing for development, which we are pleased to support. We welcome the reaffirmation of the Compromiso de Sevilla and its emphasis on multilateralism, international cooperation, and global solidarity. We believe the compromiso can serve as a catalyst for a more effective multilateral system, one that mobilizes development finance from all sources, maximizes the impact of scarce concessional resources, and targets support to those most in need. At the same time, however, we note with concern that the text does not sufficiently integrate gender equality-related commitments fundamental to the Compromiso de Sevilla. In particular, the lack of stronger commitments to gender-responsive approaches, such as gender-responsive budgeting and taxation, and expanding access to financial services for women, undercuts the Financing for Development agenda. Gender equality is not only a fundamental human right, but also a key driver of economic and social progress. Sustainable development cannot be achieved without it. As outlined in our general debate statement, we view previously agreed language as the floor, not the ceiling, from which gender references should be negotiated. We regret that this resolution presents a weakening of this language and therefore missed opportunity to advance concrete actions towards gender equality and the empowerment of all women and girls. While not perfect, this resolution moves us forward on key priorities and reinforces our shared commitment to multilateralism and sustainable development. For these reasons, CANZ was pleased to vote in favor of this resolution. I thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [1:25:46]: I thank the representative of Canada. I now give the floor to the representative of the United States. United States of America [1:25:54]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. The United States has made clear its intentions to disengage from a majority resolution and the Second Committee this year. We would like to take this opportunity to reiterate our view that many of these resolutions recycle the same contentious issues year after year. Second Committee resolutions should be short, actionable, and forward-looking. Instead, many resolutions continue to include problematic language that does nothing to advance the United Nations' core mandate of maintaining international peace and security. The UN can no longer afford to waste its resources where there is little or no impact. The number of reports, conferences, and negotiations has blossomed beyond the point of ineffectiveness and waste to a level of dysfunction that makes it impossible to carry out vital work. Mr. Chair, colleagues, we look forward to working with you in the future to make the Second Committee more efficient, relevant, and effective. We refer you to our long-form explanation of position posted on our mission's website for more information. 2nd Committee · Chair [1:26:50]: Thank you. I thank the representative of the United States. I see no other requests for the floor. In light of the adoption of Draft Resolution L.5.7, I understand that the Draft Resolution L.9 is withdrawn by its sponsors. The committee has thus concluded its consideration of Agenda Item 17. I now invite the committee to resume its consideration of Agenda Item 18, Sustainable Development, in order to take action on the 2 draft resolutions submitted under the item. I first invite the committee to turn to Draft Resolution A/C2/80/L7 Rev. 1 entitled Agricultural Technology for Sustainable Development as submitted by Israel on behalf of this sponsors listed in the document. I wish to thank the facilitators, Mr. Nizam Arni and Mr. Peter Silverberg of Israel, for leading the informal consultation and delegations for their constructive engagement in the negotiation. I would like to inform the committee that draft resolution L7/Rev1 has no program budget implication. I now invite— I now give the floor to the representative of Israel to introduce the draft resolution. I recall that the time limit for introduction is 2 minutes. Israel, you have the floor. Israel [1:28:30]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Israel is honored to have led the resolution on agriculture technology for sustainable development. All countries recognize the importance of producing more food, using less input, including land, water, and energy, and getting that food to processors, markets, and to our tables more efficiently. In the face of growing global population on the one hand and less fresh water, a decline in arable land, and climate change on the other, technologies can support our farmers and shape our economies. This year, the draft recognizes the increased importance of digitalization, including AI, to increase the efficiency of food production, processing, and consumption. Many delegations from all regional groups actively joined the negotiations and are now among the many co-sponsors. We will continue to champion agricultural technologies because we know firsthand its transformative power. We thank all the delegations for their valuable contributions to the text, and we encourage others to join in co-sponsoring this draft resolution. And I believe now is your moment to do so. Thank you, Chair. 2nd Committee · Chair [1:29:44]: I thank the representative of Israel. I give the floor to the Secretary to announce the additional sponsors. 2nd Committee · Secretary [1:29:51]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like to announce that since the submission of the draft resolution, and in addition to those delegations listed on the L document. The following countries have also become co-sponsors of L7 Rev. 1: Albania, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Bulgaria, Burundi, Cambodia, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, El Salvador, Estonia, Eswatini, Fiji, Finland, Gabon, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Hungary, Italy, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Federated States of Micronesia, Monaco, Myanmar, Kingdom of the Netherlands, New Zealand, North Macedonia, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, San Marino, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, South Sudan, Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand, Togo, Tonga, Tuvalu, United Kingdom, and Uzbekistan. If any other countries wish to Those wishing to co-sponsor L7 Rev 1, please signify by pressing the microphone button. Iceland, Norway, Gambia, Uruguay, Japan, Liberia, Denmark, Paraguay, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Belgium, Cameroon, Malta, Nauru, Ukraine, Marshall Islands, Poland, Liberia, Botswana, Côte d'Ivoire, and Serbia. That concludes the list. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 2nd Committee · Chair [1:31:55]: I thank the Secretary— 2nd Committee · Secretary [1:32:01]: Panama is an additional co-sponsor. 2nd Committee · Chair [1:32:06]: I thank the Secretary. A recorded vote has been requested on draft resolution L.7/Rev.1 entitled Agricultural Technology for Sustainable Development. Before proceeding to vote, I'll give the floor to any sponsored delegation wishing to make a general statement in connection with the draft proposal or any non-sponsored delegation wishing to make a statement in explanation of vote. Does any delegation wish to make a general statement or an explanation of vote before the board in connection with the draft resolution? Morocco. I give the floor to Morocco. Morocco · Arab Group [1:32:52]: Chair, it's my honor to deliver this statement on behalf of the Arab Group. to explain our position on a resolution entitled Agricultural Technology for Sustainable Development. This resolution was put forward by Israel, and we in the Arab Group ask for a recorded vote for the following reasons. Firstly, the Arab Group believes that there is no justification for this resolution entitled Agricultural Technology for Sustainable Development. There is no reason to put forward this resolution separately because it addresses one component out of several components included in the omnibus resolution put forward by the groups of G77 and China. As such, this resolution is a waste of UN resources, mainly in light of the ongoing liquidity crisis. Chair, ladies and gentlemen, colleagues, the Arab Group recalls that the Israeli occupying power, which is above international law and international legitimacy resolution, has put forward this draft resolution that promotes agricultural technology and food security and sustainable development. But at the same time, the occupying power does not spare any effort to violate this resolution on the ground by undermining agricultural land in Palestine. And by undermining agriculture in Palestine, it also disregards the UN system and it violates all Security Council and General Assembly resolutions and other UN resolutions. This has been confirmed by several UN-relevant reports. The Israeli occupation forces, including land occupation, the uprooting of orchards, the restricted access to land and water, and other restrictions, have damaged livelihoods of the Palestinians and have undermined food security in Gaza. The decades-long siege and the repeated attacks, including the latest war of genocide over the past last few years have undermined agricultural infrastructure, had led to soil pollution and to the undermining of irrigation infrastructure. Food security has reached catastrophic, unprecedented levels. Famine is now rampant. Agricultural production is now inexistent. In the West Bank, including in East Jerusalem, the expansionist illegal settlements and the military checkpoints points restrict Palestinian access to their agricultural land. Thousands of households are denied of their livelihood. In addition, agricultural farming communities come under repeated attacks by extremist settlers with protection from the occupation forces. This includes violent attacks on farmers, including women, children, and elderly. This also includes the destruction of crops, the uprooting of trees. According 2nd Committee · Chair [1:35:50]: Thank you, Representative of Morocco. I see no other requests for the floor. The committee will now commence the process of voting on draft resolution L7/Rev.1. In accordance with Rule 128, no representative may interrupt the voting except on a point of order in connection with the actual process of voting. Delegations are requested to indicate their votes Those in favor of Resolution L.7 Rev. 1, please signify. Those against, an abstention. 2nd Committee · Secretary [1:36:25]: The committee is now voting on Draft Resolution L.7 Rev. 1 entitled Agricultural Technology for Sustainable Development. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are correctly reflected on the screen? The voting has been completed. Please lock the voting machine. 2nd Committee · Chair [1:36:57]: The results of the vote is as follows: in favor, 129; against, 29; Abstention 15. Draft Resolution A/C2/80L7 Rev. 1 is adopted. Does any delegation wish to make an explanation of vote or a general statement after the vote on the draft resolution? I give the floor to Colombia. Gracias, señor presidente. Colombia [1:37:40]: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Colombia recognizes the strategic value of technology and agricultural innovation to drive forward sustainable agricultural systems that are resilient and equitable, in line with the projects of the government for a change and our integral rural reform program to ensure sustainable food. We welcome and support international cooperation and we believe it is important to bring together divides in technologies to help families and agricultural development. However, we want to emphasize that this resolution is to eradicate hunger, promote efficient systems And we are looking here at a systematic campaign of despoliation, violence, and destruction of civilian infrastructure in the occupied Palestinian territories. According to the FAO, 80% or more of the land cultivated by Palestinians has been destroyed. The population are facing epidemics without means of subsistence. And this violation of is a violation of international humanitarian law. Colombia emphasizes the great irony that while the resolution expresses concern for world hunger, the proponents are deliberately using hunger as a weapon of war. Equally, it is incongruent to talk of sustainable agricultural development when we see that the olive harvest time, which is a pillar of rural development, has been interrupted in an unprecedented way, depriving thousands of Palestinian families of their livelihood with systematic intimidation, with people prevented from having access to their land and the use of Israeli forces. Therefore, Colombia abstains in this resolution. We support the text, but we cannot ignore the inconsistency of the destruction of the Palestinian territories while claiming to promote sustainable agriculture. Colombia wishes to see the protection of civilians and consistent multilateralism based on the principles of the UN Charter. This cannot be selective when it comes to the existential realities of states. and their needs. Thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [1:40:19]: Colombia. I now give the floor to the representative of Russian Federation. Russian Federation [1:40:30]: Mr. Chairman, Russia abstained from the vote. We also distanced ourselves from paragraphs PP13 and OP3 of the draft resolution on agricultural technology for sustainable development, which failed to garner consensus. We are sorry to be forced to note that during the negotiations on the coordination of the Israeli document, the coordinators ignored our principled stance about the sole paragraph on the energy transition— that's PP13— and they refused to revert to Earlier agreed-upon language for this paragraph as a compromise. Russia favors a balanced approach to energy. We believe that renewables and traditional energies need to be developed in parallel, supplementing one another. To the extent that fossil fuels in the energy— in the global energy balance will at least by 2040 be no less than 2/3 of the energy balance, we believe that the rollout of renewables— in the rollout of the renewables, due attention needs to be given to the development and spread of clean fossil fuel technologies. We disagree with the forced energy transition with an emphasis on renewable sources of energies, and we disagree with the attempts to ban hydrocarbons. Putting the question in this way ignores national priorities the structure of the economy and the social specifics in other countries. As regards PP16, expressing serious concern about the findings of the Intergovernmental Science Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, the Israeli delegation took a dissension— a decision after an attempt to find consensus on this paragraph. Returning to the language agreed upon 2 years ago. No less controversial is the new paragraph OP3, which our delegation objected to. It sets out a call to member states to ensure inclusive access to agricultural technologies, especially for smallholder farmers, women, youth, and marginalized communities, in accordance with the recommendations of the Committee on World food security, which the Russian Federation considers unacceptable. Such instructions delivered by the committee, which contain even in the title contentious concepts such as marginalized communities, are exclusively advisory in nature and should not be imposed on member countries. Thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [1:43:12]: Thank you, Representative of Russian Federation. I now give the floor to the Representative of Argentina. Argentina [1:43:19]: The delegation of the Republic of Argentina has voted in favor of the draft resolution entitled Agricultural Technologies for Sustainable Development presented within the framework of the Second Committee. Our position is based on the belief that technological innovation and scientific cooperation and capacity building will significantly improve agricultural production, existing methods, and strengthen the livelihoods of rural peoples, particularly in developing countries. Argentina values the exchange of knowledge and access to technology internationally, which means that each state can implement agricultural technologies in accordance with its needs. However, despite this We wish to emphasize our position regarding the Agenda 2030 resolution and sustainable development, looking at national technological developments. Therefore, we agree with strengthening agricultural technology and the sovereign right of government policies to contribute. to economic sustainable development and the benefit of the people. 2nd Committee · Chair [1:44:40]: Thank you. I thank the representative of Argentina. I now give the floor to the representative of the United States. United States of America [1:44:49]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. The United States has made clear its intention to disengage from majority resolutions in the Second Committee this year. We would like to take this opportunity to reiterate our view that many of these resolutions recycle the same contentious issues year after year. Second Committee resolutions should be short, actionable, and forward-looking. Instead, many resolutions continue to include problematic language that does nothing to advance the United Nations' core mandate of maintaining international peace and security. The UN can no longer afford to waste its resources where there's little or no impact. The number of reports, conferences, and negotiations has blossomed beyond the point of ineffectiveness and waste to a level of dysfunction that makes it impossible to carry out vital work. Mr. Chair, colleagues, we look forward to working with you in the future to make the Second Committee more efficient, relevant, and effective. We refer you to the long-form explanation of position posted on the Commission's website for more information. 2nd Committee · Chair [1:45:44]: Thank you. I thank the representative of the United States. I now give the floor to the representative of Brazil. Brazil [1:45:56]: Thank you, Chair. Notwithstanding this resolution's technical merits and importance of the issue of technology and sustainable agriculture, Brazil has abstained in this voting procedure. We took the stance due to our firm belief that the commitment to the promotion of sustainable agricultural development should be universal and apply to all areas of the world, including the State of Palestine. Increased cooperation in agricultural development will be essential for the recovery of the vast amounts of Gaza's cultivable land which have been destroyed in the context of the Israeli occupation and military operations, especially during the last 2 years. According to FAO data from August 2025, 98.5% of the arable land in the Gaza Strip is inaccessible or damaged. Damaged, leaving only 1.5% available for cultivation. In parallel, analysis for the West Bank indicates systematic denial of access for Palestinian farmers to their land, water, and food, as well as the demolition of agricultural facilities and restrictions imposed on harvests. The same applies to the other areas illegally occupied by Israel, including parts of Lebanon and the occupied Syrian Golan. Agricultural sustainability must serve the realization of the integral and absolute human right to food and the guarantee of food security in its dimensions of access, availability, utilization, and stability for all people, and in this particular context, especially for the Palestinian people. Thank you, Chair. 2nd Committee · Chair [1:47:37]: I thank the representative of Brazil. I now give the floor to the representative of State of Palestine. State of Palestine [1:47:45]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. The State of Palestine joins the states that opposed Resolution L.7/Rev.1. Israel, the proponent of this resolution, has relentlessly and for decades defied international law and systematically violated countless UN resolutions. It continues to breach its Charter obligations and violently entrench its occupation in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem, never ceasing its annexation plans and dispossession of our people. During the past 2 years, the world has witnessed Israel's deliberate destruction of the agricultural sector in Palestine, particularly in Gaza. Numerous reports have documented the decimation of agricultural lands and orchards greenhouses, and water wells, leading to the collapse of Gaza's agri-food systems, acute food insecurity, and famine. Across the rest of occupied Palestine, Israel has likewise continued its obstruction and destruction of the agricultural sector. This has been carried out with lethal attacks, colonization measures, and settlement expansions alongside the dehumanization and ethnic cleansing of our people including escalating settler terror emboldened by extremists in the Israeli government and aided by the occupying forces aimed at intimidating and displacing our people and advancing annexation in all directions. These realities on the ground expose a stark contradiction to the principles of sustainability, resilience, and food security that Israel claims to promote through this resolution. One cannot witness the most atrocious crimes perpetrated against an entire people, then just look the other way, normalizing the perpetrator's behavior and failing to hold it accountable. When a member state deliberately breaches international law and blatantly refuses to abide by its Charter obligations, as in the case of Israel, it should not be permitted to exploit the benefits and privileges of membership to whitewash its atrocities against our people, including its destruction of agriculture and livelihoods, while pretending to be a paragon of virtue when it comes to agricultural development or any other matter. We extend our profound appreciation to the states that oppose this resolution, reiterate our call to other delegations to reconsider their position as a matter of principle, stressing again that Israel cannot remain above the law, that its impunity must not be rewarded, and that it must be held accountable for its crimes. I thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [1:50:39]: I thank the representative of the State of Palestine. I see no other requests for the floor. I now invite the committee to take action on draft resolution A/C2/80, /AL28/Rev1 entitled Sustainable Development— Sustainable and Resilient Tourism and Sustainable Development in Central America and the Dominican Republic, as submitted by Panama on behalf of the sponsors listed in the document. I wish to thank the facilitator of the draft resolution, Ms. Madeline Thompson of Panama, for leading the informal consultation on the draft resolution and delegations for their constructive engagement in the negotiations. I would like to inform the committee that draft resolution L28/1 has no program budget implications. I now give the floor to the permanent representative of Panama to introduce the draft resolution. I recall that the time limit for introduction Panama · Permanent Representative [1:51:49]: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. The delegation of Panama has the honor of submitting as facilitator this draft resolution A/C2/80/L28/Rev. 1 entitled Sustainable and Resilient Tourism and Sustainable Development in Central America and the Dominican Republic, presented by Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Panama under item 18 of the Work Program on Sustainable Development. Since 2011, this resolution has been submitted biannually and adopted traditionally by consensus on every occasion. The text before the committee today retains its focus on the realities and priorities of the Central American countries and the Dominican Republic to strengthen sustainable and resilient tourism as an essential driver of sustainable development. It is the result of a productive, transparent, and respectful process of consultation. Unfortunately, as often happens— occasionally happens after consultation, there has been deviation from the main purpose of the draft. However, Panama welcomes the majority of delegations' constructive position to arrive at a balanced text faithful to its original purpose. Therefore, Panama urges all delegations to support this draft resolution acknowledging how important it is to consolidate a more sustainable, innovative tourism sector generating new opportunities for our peoples. Thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [1:53:35]: I thank the Permanent Representative of Panama. I give the floor to the Secretary to announce the additional sponsors of the draft resolution. 2nd Committee · Secretary [1:53:46]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like to announce that since the submission of the revised draft resolution and in addition to those delegations listed on the L document, the following countries have also become co-sponsors of L28 Rev. 1: Chile, Colombia, Georgia, India, Kyrgyzstan, Mexico, Morocco, and Tajikistan. If any other countries wish to co-sponsor L28 Rev. 1, please signify by pressing the microphone button. Uruguay, Ecuador. That concludes the list. Thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [1:54:21]: Thank you. 2nd Committee · Secretary [1:54:22]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. 2nd Committee · Chair [1:54:25]: I thank the Secretary. A recorded vote has been requested on draft resolution L28-REP1 entitled Sustainable and Resilient Tourism and Sustainable Development in Central America and the Dominican Republic. Before proceeding to vote, I will give the floor to any sponsored delegation wishing to make a general statement in connection with the draft proposal as— or any non-sponsored delegation wishing to make a statement in explanation of votes. Does any delegation wish to make a general statement or explanation of vote before the vote in connection with draft resolution? I give the floor to Dominican Republic. Dominican Republic [1:55:11]: Gracias, señor presidente. Thank you very much, sir. The Dominican Republic would like to thank Panama for submitting this text. We wish to state once again our firm commitment to sustainable resilient tourism and we value the tourist sector as one of the main drivers of sustainable development in our country and in our region. The document adopted will enable our region to promote initiatives for cooperation and tourist policies in a multilateral area by means of the consensus-based adoption over the last 15 years. We appreciate the international platform looking at the exchange regionally of good practices as a general asset. My country regrets the fact that not all the parties have accepted an agreed language in good faith, looking at the basis of a fair negotiation. We urge redoubling of efforts to avoid the politicization of resolutions of this committee. Panama, we will vote in favor of this. This is a resolution that deals with urgent matters for our country and we see support of membership as a positive example of multilateralism and solidarity and cooperation here. Thank you very much. 2nd Committee · Chair [1:56:29]: I thank the representative of Dominican Republic. I see no other requests for the floor. The committee will now commence the process of voting on draft resolution L28/01. In accordance with Rule 128, no representative may interrupt the voting except on a point of order in connection with the actual process of voting. Delegations are kindly requested to indicate their votes. Those in favor of the draft resolution Please signify those against and abstentions. 2nd Committee · Secretary [1:57:05]: The committee is now voting on draft resolution L28/Rev.1 entitled Sustainable and Resilient Tourism and Sustainable Development in Central America and the Dominican Republic. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are correctly reflected on the screen? The voting has been completed. Please lock the voting machine. 2nd Committee · Chair [1:57:44]: The result is as follows: in favor, 149; 17. Against, 4. Abstentions, 14. Draft Resolution A/C2/8028 Rev. 1 is adopted. Does any delegation wish to make an explanation of vote or general statement after the vote on the draft resolution? I give the floor to the representative of China. Followed by Panama, Russia, Russian Federation, Brazil, United States, Algeria, and Nicaragua. China [1:58:29]: Mr. Chair, China has always supported countries in Central America and the Caribbean in implementing the 2030 Agenda. We work together with regional countries to promote the global both development cooperation and mutually beneficial cooperation in various fields including tourism, which has yielded fruitful results that effectively advance regional development and prosperity. It must be pointed out that the organizations referred to in the draft resolution, including Central American Integration System, blatantly violate GA Resolution 2758 and seriously contradict the fundamental principles of international law in the UN Charter, including respect for national sovereignty and territorial integrity and non-interference in internal affairs. On such a major issue of right and wrong, there's no room for ambiguity. Recently, China has actively participated in consultations on this draft resolution, thoroughly explained its position, and proposed constructive amendments. However, As the draft fails to address our legitimate and reasonable concerns, China has no choice but to vote against it. We believe that China's just position will continue to receive broad understanding and support from member states. Thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [1:59:48]: I thank the representative of China. I now give the floor to the permanent representative of Panama. Panama · Permanent Representative [1:59:58]: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Distinguished delegations. The delegation of Panama welcomes the adoption of resolution entitled Sustainable and Resilient Tourism and Sustainable Development in Central America and the Dominican Republic. Since 2011, this resolution has been approved by consensus and it reflects the endeavors of the region to continue developing by means of a more resilient and sustainable tourist sector. However, Panama regrets the fact that because of strictly political considerations, the historical consensus that has always supported this regional resolution is lacking, sending an equivocal signal regarding the treatment of resolutions which directly meet the priorities and needs that are very specific when it comes to developing countries and the welfare of their countries. We are deeply grateful to those who have supported this draft and we reiterate our commitment to the principles guiding the work of this committee, particularly seeking agreements which strengthen sustainable development and improve the quality of life of our peoples. Thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [2:01:19]: I thank the Permanent Representative of I now give the floor to the representative of Russian Federation. Russian Federation [2:01:32]: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Russian delegation abstained from the vote. Our principled position about the question of Taiwan is clear, consistent, and unchanging. That position is reflected in all the foundational intergovernmental documents, including in the document that sets out the Russia-Chinese strategic partnership, the Agreement on Good Neighborly Relations, Friendship and Cooperation. Russia is a staunch supporter of the principle One China. There was a joint statement of the leaders of Russia and China following a visit to Moscow of the Chairman of the PRC, on the 8th of May, 2025. That statement underscored that the Russian side recognized that there was only one China in the world. Taiwan is its integral part, and the government of the People's Republic of China is the only legitimate government that represents the needs of all of China, the interests of all of China. Moscow opposes the independence of Taiwan in any form. And we firmly support the actions of our Chinese friends to protect their own sovereignty and territorial integrity, and also to unify the country. We believe that the settlement of the situation in the Taiwan Straits is purely a domestic issue of China. We also note that Beijing has consistently stated that the peaceful reunification is the priority. Of course, we hope that the problem will be resolved without detriment to the peace and stability of the region. 2nd Committee · Chair [2:03:13]: I thank the representative of Russian Federation. I now give the floor to the representative of Brazil. Brazil [2:03:22]: Thank you, Chair. The delegation of Brazil has voted in favor of the resolution on sustainable tourism and sustainable development in Central America and the Dominican Republic. We recognize the vital importance of sustainable tourism as a driver for the region's economic and social development aligned with the sustainable development goals. As an observer to the Central American Integration System, SICA, Brazil reiterates its strong support for this crucial mechanism. The reference to SICA in the text appropriately reflects its central role in the regional agenda. At the same time, Brazil reiterates its unwavering commitment to the One China policy. We recognize the government of the People's Republic of China as the sole legitimate government of all China and Taiwan as an inalienable part of the Chinese territory. Our position and interpretations regarding these texts are always guided by this fundamental principle. Our favorable vote today is thus an expression of our dual commitment to sustainable development and regional integration in Central America, as well as the principles enshrined in the UN Charter, including respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of states. Thank you, Chair. 2nd Committee · Chair [2:04:34]: I thank the representative of Brazil. I now give the floor to the representative of the United States. United States of America [2:04:43]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. The United States has made clear its intention to disengage from a majority of resolutions in the Second Committee this year. We would like to take this opportunity to reiterate our view that many of these resolutions recycle the same contentious issues year after year. Second Committee resolutions should be short, actionable, and forward-looking. Instead, many resolutions continue to include problematic language that does nothing to advance the United Nations' core mandate of maintaining international peace and security. The UN can no longer afford to waste its resources where there is little or no impact. The number of reports, conferences, and negotiations has blossomed beyond the point of ineffectiveness and waste to a level of dysfunction that makes it impossible to carry out vital work. Mr. Chair, colleagues, we look forward to working with you in the future to make the Second Committee more efficient, relevant, and effective. We refer you to the long-form explanation of position posted on the Commission's website for more information. Thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [2:05:37]: I thank the representative of the United States. I now give the floor to the representative of Algeria. Algeria [2:05:50]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm making this statement on explanation of vote. My delegation acknowledged the importance of the tourism sector in achieving SDGs worldwide, including in Central America and the Dominican Republic, where tourism continues to be a major economic driver across this region. Tourism plays an important role in promoting sustainable development, regional growth, social inclusion, and poverty eradication. While contributing to the improvement of the quality of life of the population, as in 2024 tourism accounted for 10% of the global economy. Also, we underscore that this resolution has enjoyed consensus since its first presentation in 2011, and for these reasons my delegation voted in favor of the resolution, although we wish to continue its adoption by consensus, we underscore that we fully understand the concerns expressed by one delegation during the negotiations, which regrettably were not accommodated. We trust that when this resolution is presented again in 2 years, the concerns of all member states will be taken into account, allowing the resolution to be adopted again by consensus, considering its importance to the region. I thank you, Mr. 2nd Committee · Chair [2:07:05]: Chair. I thank the representative of Algeria. I now give the floor to the representative of Nicaragua. Nicaragua [2:07:15]: Muchas gracias, señor presidente. Thank you very much, sir. Nicaragua would like to explain our position regarding the resolution on sustainable tourism, sustainable resilient tourism in Central America and Dominican Republic. We have a fair and commitment to sustainable authentic. Resilient tourism, again on the principles of mutual respect, sovereignty of peoples, and the principles of the UN Charter. Sustainable resilient tourism is a vital pillar for economic and social development in our region. This can strengthen local economies, drive forward regional integration, and promote the protection of our motherland and our crops. During negotiations, Nicaragua was constructive and respectful, displaying flexibility in order to arrive at genuine consensus reflecting the realities and concerns of all states involved. Nicaragua would like to thank the flexibility shown by the People's Republic of China and also their proposals— for their proposals presented during the process, which made it possible to arrive at an adoption by consensus and avoid the need to have a vote on this resolution. We believe that the concerns of China are legitimate, consistent ones based on fundamental principles of international law, including sovereignty and territorial integrity, non-interference, and full respect of relevant resolutions of the Assembly— this Assembly, inter alia, 2758. The interpretation of this is firmly rooted in international law. Supported by Nicaragua. China's requests are reasonable and can easily be accepted. However, as there is a lack of consensus amongst delegations, there was a vote. And for Nicaragua, it is essential to heed and take into account the positions of states when they refer to matters of principle and previously adopted resolutions. We iterate that certain references contained in the end document generate contradictory interpretations or precedents which are not consistent with UN practice or the legal framework in force. Additionally, the document submitted does not reflect a consensus-based position of member states when it comes to the Central American integration system, and significant differences remain. They were not —resolved despite the endeavors to achieve this. In these circumstances, and acting with transparency and responsibility, given that it wasn't possible to achieve the consensus that Nkurunziza wished to see to avoid a vote on this resolution, we have voted against. We reassert our commitment to dialogue cooperation, regional cooperation, and the full observance of the principles upon which this organization is based. Thank you very much. 2nd Committee · Chair [2:10:16]: I see no other requests for the floor. I now invite the committee to turn to Agenda Item 18D, Protection of Global Climate for Present and Future Generations of Humankind, in order to take action on draft resolution A/C2/80 L37 Rev. 1 of the same title as submitted by Iraq on behalf of Group of 77 and China. I wish to thank the facilitator, Mr. Javid Momin of the Islamic Republic of Iran, for leading the informal consultations on the draft resolution, as well as delegations for their constructive engagement in the negotiations. I would like to inform the committee that draft resolution L37/Rev1 has no program budget implications. Does any delegation not a member of the Group of 77 and China wish to join as sponsor of draft resolution L37/Rev1? Please signify by pressing your I see none. A recorded vote has been requested on draft resolution L.37/rev.1 entitled Protection of Global Climate for Present and Future Generations for Humankind. Before proceeding to vote, I'll give the floor to any sponsor delegation wishing to make a general statement in connection with the draft proposal or any non-sponsor delegation wishing to make a statement in explanation of vote. Does any delegation wish to make a general statement or an explanation of vote before we vote in connection with draft resolution L.37/01? I see no request for the floor. The committee will now commence the process of voting on draft resolution L37/rev1. In accordance with Rule 128, no representative may interrupt the voting except on a point of order in connection with the actual process of voting. Delegations are requested To indicate their votes, those in favor of draft resolution. Oh, sorry. Just wait for the voting screen. Oh, oh, okay. It's not coming on. Oh, okay. It's all here. Yes. Oh, okay. Yes. Those in favor of draft resolution L37 Rev 1, please signify. Those against, and abstention. 2nd Committee · Secretary [2:13:31]: The committee is now voting on draft resolution L37 Rev 1 entitled The resolution is adopted. Resolution 1, Protection of Global Climate for Present and Future Generations of Humankind. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are correctly reflected on the screen? The voting has been completed. Please lock the voting machine. 2nd Committee · Chair [2:14:13]: The result is as follows: in favor, 178; against, 1; abstentions, 0. Draft Resolution A/C2/80/L37 Draft Resolution 1/Rev. 1 is adopted. Does any delegation wish to make an explanation of vote or general statement after the vote on draft resolution? I give the floor to the representative of India, followed by Denmark, United Kingdom, France, and Australia. India, you have the floor. India [2:14:54]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. India commends the facilitator, Mr. Javad Momeni of Iran, for his efforts on this text. We have adopted this resolution just as our leaders concluded a productive COP30 last week. It has been 10 years since the Paris Agreement, and the 2025 NDC Synthesis Report shows that the global emissions curve is beginning to bend downwards. This means our efforts are showing results, and we must sustain our efforts in this regard. However, there are significant gaps that need to be closed if we want to succeed. Mr. Chair, the most critical gap is in climate finance. The 2025 UNEP Adaptation Gap Report clearly vindicates India's stand at COP29 that the new collective quantified goal of US$300 billion per year by 2035 is insufficient by every measure. Since it covers both mitigation and adaptation and is unadjusted for inflation. Real needs of developing countries is at least $440 to $520 billion per year, according to the 2035 value. Debt instruments dominate adaptation finance, constituting nearly 58% of flows, raising concerns about affordability for LDCs and SIDS, which are most vulnerable and least equipped to address the adverse impacts of climate change. These countries also depend heavily on concessional financing from abroad for their adaptation needs. We cannot ignore the fact that without adequate, timely, and predictable financing in the form of grants and concessional resources, developing countries will not be able to continue to take the action needed. India therefore welcomes the focus of this resolution on the need for scaling up climate finance, without which developing countries will not be able to undertake ambitious actions to respond to the adverse impacts of climate change. Mr. Chair, India reiterates its commitment to multilateralism and towards preserving and safeguarding the architecture of the Paris Agreement built on the foundations of the UNFCCC. As a firm believer in climate action, we stand ready to collaborate with all nations to implement solutions and transition to sustainable— sustainability in ways that are in line with the principles of equity and CBDR. I thank you, Mr. Chair, and request that this statement be reflected in the records of the meeting. 2nd Committee · Chair [2:17:14]: I thank the representative of India. I now give the floor to the representative of Denmark. Denmark · EU [2:17:21]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have the honour to deliver this statement on behalf of the European Union and its member states. The candidate countries North Macedonia, Montenegro, Albania, Ukraine, the Republic of Moldova, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Georgia align themselves First of all, let me thank the facilitator, Mr. Javad Momeni, and all delegations for their efforts and continued engagement. The text before us strives to maintain an overall balance. We particularly welcome the reinstatement of language on adaptation and mitigation, the reaffirmation of the Paris Agreement and its long-term temperature goal of 1.5 degrees Celsius, and the strengthened links between climate action, biodiversity, and the outcomes of the various UN conferences, including UNOC 3. However, our delegation must express serious concern. From the outset, our priority has been clear: to ensure that the energy paragraph reflects the outcomes of the first Global Stocktake adopted at COP28. This was an essential element for us. Despite persistent and constructive engagement, we regret that paragraph OP5 does not reflect the outcomes of CMA5, as well as the momentum that emerged at COP30 in favor of the full implementation of the GST. While we acknowledge the reinstatement of OP31bis from last year's resolution, including a general reference to the GST, this does not fully address our core concern. In light of this, and in order to remain consistent with the position we took last year regarding the energy paragraph, our delegation broke silence on this specific paragraph. Unlike last year, we are not tabling an amendment, but we would clearly like to register our dissatisfaction with the lack of progress of this critical issue while recognizing the broader balance achieved in this text. Consequently, we ask to dissociate ourselves from paragraph OP5. Furthermore, we appreciate the efforts made on the language on climate finance, especially paragraph OP22, 23, and OP28. We have to express concern regarding OP21, as it does not reflect that in 2022, for the first time, developed countries have not only met but also exceeded their target of mobilizing $100 billion a year to help developing countries cut emissions and cope with climate change. When it comes to climate finance, the EU views the NCQG as a central tool for scaling up climate finance in a credible, fair, and sustainable way. While the EU stands ready to do its part, we support a broad approach that also includes a broader group of contributors. The climate financing needs to be ambitious but realistic. Thank you. aligning with the Paris Agreement needs, especially for vulnerable countries. Finally, allow me to reiterate my group's position, especially this year as we celebrate the 10th anniversary— one sec— the Paris Agreement stands on an equal footing with the UNFCCC. We regret that our proposal to update the reference to the Paris Agreement in the United Nations Treaty Series like other international treaties has not found consensus. Mr. Chair, finally, we regret that a vote has been called on this normally consensual resolution. The EU and its member states support this important resolution. I thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [2:20:15]: I thank the representative of Denmark. I now give the floor to the representative of the United Kingdom. United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland [2:20:25]: Thank you, Chair. The United Kingdom extends its thanks to colleagues for their work on this important text. In particular, we welcome the references to forests and the ocean, Nationally Determined Contributions, and limiting temperature increase to 1.5 degrees Celsius. The UK voted in favor because we are committed to climate action and to a just, inclusive transition that supports the most vulnerable. That, that demands urgent action, including accelerating the shift from fossil fuels, scaling up finance, and delivering on NDCs in line with the best available science. As we saw at COP30 in Belém, multilateralism is essential to achieving these ambitions, providing credible pathways to course-correct and accelerate action. However, we express our deep concerns with certain paragraphs in the text and the process by which they were included. First, OP22 and OP23 do not fully capture the scope of the decision on the new collective quantifiable goal, which emphasizes collaboration among all actors and refers to finance from a wide variety of sources. We therefore disassociate from this characterization and underscore that Decision 1-CMA.6 remains the correct precedent. Secondly, we regret the lack of references to the Global Stocktake namely in OP5. This was a missed opportunity to reinforce our commitments, including to triple renewable capacity and transition away from fossil fuels. Lastly, OP21 suggests the $100 billion goal remains unmet. The latest OECD report, Climate Finance Provided and Mobilized by Developed Countries in 2013 to 2022, confirms that the goal was met and exceeded in 2022. The UK will continue to work with all partners to deliver on our climate commitments and support the most vulnerable and marginalized countries already facing the reality of hurricanes in the Caribbean, typhoons in East Asia, and extreme heat and wildfires across the globe. I thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [2:22:45]: I thank the representative of the United Kingdom. I now give the floor to the representative of France. Followed by Australia, Switzerland, United States, and Kazakhstan. France, you are— France [2:23:01]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. France endorses the statement of the European Union. The COP30 in Belém showed us that the commitments undertaken 10 years ago in the context of the COP need to be translated into tangible actions in order to bridge the ambition gap. The text submitted today strove to maintain this balance, and we welcome the sound references, references to adaptation and mitigation. But there are still 3 major points. First, the lack of a clear reference to a transition beyond fossil fuels. From the very beginning of the negotiations, our priority was to underscore strongly the conclusions of the first Global Stocktake adopted at COP28. This reference is vital to translate the spirit of the Global Stocktake. A just, orderly, and swift transition is needed. But paragraph OP5 failed to reflect the conclusions of the CMI— CMA5, nor the momentum created by launching a roadmap on the the phase-out of fossil fuels at the COP30. So we disassociate ourselves from OP5. Second, climate financing. For France, the new collective quantitative goal is the cornerstone of a credible, permanent, and equitable financing. We need to mobilize financing from all sources. In 2022, developed countries passed the threshold of $100 billion mobilized per year. Not indicating this fact undermines the credibility of the text. Third, the third point is the status of the Paris Agreement in the climate machinery. At its 10th anniversary, we reaffirmed that the Paris Agreement needs to be fully placed on equal footing with the UNFCCC. We regret that no consensus has been found on our proposal. Mr. Chair, one cannot escape from the law through a simple footnote. I thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [2:25:12]: I thank the representative of France. I now give the floor to the representative of Australia. Australia · CANZ [2:25:22]: Thank you, Chair. I'm honored to deliver this statement on behalf of Canada, New Zealand, and my own country, Australia. Cairns countries voted yes today because we strongly believe that multilateral action remains our best hope of tackling climate change. We make 3 simple points via this statement. The first concerns how we refer to the Paris Agreement, now in its 10th year, and ongoing attempts by some to mischaracterise the independent legal nature of the agreement. This remains an unhelpful distraction from the primary issues at hand and undermines the intention of the Paris Agreement to collectively limit the worst impacts of climate change. Adopting a consistent and cross-cutting approach which respects the Paris Agreement's independent status could render our work much more effective in future sessions and allow us to focus on the concrete actions which matter. The second concerns the utility of negotiating a climate climate text in 2C in parallel to the actual COP negotiations. This session, doing so proved problematic and did not lead to a meaningful outcome for this body. We hope that as part of revitalization considerations, the proponents will consider a refreshed way of reflecting climate action in this forum. And third, we were disappointed this resolution fails to keep pace with important developments in climate policy. In this respect, does not portray the new collective quantified goal and climate finance targets accurately. As I close, Cairns would like to congratulate Brazil on the successful conclusion of COP30 last week. We would like to reaffirm our commitment to ambitious climate action alongside our steadfast commitment to multilateralism more broadly. In my national capacity capacity, I would also like to note that as President of Negotiations for COP31, Australia looks forward to working with COP President-designate Türkiye to build on the legacy of Belém, as well as bringing the world to our region for pre-COP and delivering tangible outcomes for the Pacific. Australia remains steadfast in our commitment to our Pacific partnerships and to highlighting Pacific voices at COP31. I thank you, Chair. 2nd Committee · Chair [2:27:41]: I thank the representative of Australia. I now give the floor to the representative of Switzerland. Switzerland [2:27:55]: Monsieur le Président. Mr. Chair, distinguished colleagues. Switzerland regrets resolution was called for a vote. We voted in favor of this resolution due to our unwavering support to international efforts seeking to promote multilateral cooperation. The challenges of climate change can be addressed only through measures put in place by states jointly. We also regret that the update of the resolution in accordance with reaffirmed the desire reaffirmed during COP28 was not sufficiently taken into account. Switzerland advocated for measures to set out a roadmap to phase out oil, coal, and gas internationally at COP30. So we deplore this situation. I thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [2:28:58]: I thank the representative of Switzerland. I now give the floor to the representative of the United States. United States of America [2:29:08]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. The United States has made clear its intentions to disengage from majority resolutions in the Second Committee this year. We would like to take this opportunity to reiterate our view that many of these resolutions recycle the same contentious issues year after year. Second Committee resolutions should be short, actionable, and forward-looking. Instead, many resolutions continue to include problematic language that does nothing to advance the United Nations' core mandate of maintaining international peace and security. The UN can no longer afford to waste its resources where there is little or no impact. The number of reports, conferences, and negotiations has blossomed beyond the point of ineffectiveness and waste to a level of dysfunction that makes it impossible to carry out vital work. Mr. Chair, colleagues, We look forward to working with you in the future to make the Second Committee more efficient, relevant, and effective. We refer you to the long-form explanation of position posted on the Commission's website for more information. Thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [2:30:03]: I thank the representative of the United States. I see no other requests for the floor. The Committee has thus concluded its consideration of sub-item D of Agenda Item 18. I now invite the committee to turn to Agenda Item 18F, Convention on Biological Diversity, in order to take action on draft resolution A/C2/80/L6 Rev. 1 entitled Implementation— Speaker 142 [2:30:36]: 36, right? 2nd Committee · Chair [2:30:38]: 36, okay. L36 Rev. 1 entitled Implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity and its contribution to sustainable development, as submitted by Iraq on behalf of Group of 77 and China. I wish to thank the facilitator, Ms. Alina Majid of Pakistan, for leading the informal consultation on the draft resolution, and delegations for their constructive engagement in the negotiations. I would like to inform the committee that the I would like to inform the delegation that draft resolution L36/Rev. 1 has no budget— program budget implications. Does any delegation not a member of the Group of 77 and China wish to join as sponsor of draft resolution L36/Rev. 1? Please signify by pressing your microphone button. I give the floor to the Secretary. 2nd Committee · Secretary [2:31:46]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Greece, Spain, Ireland, Denmark, North Macedonia, Czechia, Malta, Cyprus, Bulgaria. That concludes the list. Croatia, France. That concludes the list. Thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [2:32:15]: I thank the Secretary. A recorded vote has been requested in draft resolution L36/rev1 entitled Implementation of Convention on Biological Diversity and its contribution to sustainable development. Before proceeding to vote, I wish— I will give the floor to any sponsored delegation wishing to make a general statement in connection with the draft proposal, or any non-sponsored delegation wishing to make a statement in explanation of vote. Does any delegation wish to make a general statement or explanation of vote before the vote in connection with draft resolution. I give the floor to Malta. I now give the floor to European Union. EU · EU [2:33:16]: Mr. Chair, I have the honor to deliver this statement on behalf of the European Union and its member States. The candidate countries North Macedonia, Montenegro, Albania, Ukraine, the Republic of Moldova, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Georgia, as well as Monaco, aligned themselves with this statement. At the outset, we would like to express our appreciation to the facilitator for guiding the discussions. We also commend all delegations for their constructive engagement throughout the process and thank the Secretariat for its support. Mr. Chair, the EU and its member states believe that it is essential that the resolution reflects the full breadth of outcomes from all CBD COP16 sessions. We therefore welcome the inclusion in this year's resolution of additional references to COP16 decisions. Looking ahead at COP17, we are also particularly pleased to see references to the Global Review of Collective Progress in implementing the KMGBF, as well as the call for parties to submit their 7th national reports and to revise or update their NBSAPs. We also value the inclusion of references to the first meeting of subsidiary body on Article 8, the upcoming entry into force of the BB&J agreement, and the emphasis on enhancing synergies. At the same time, we regret that the resolution could not reflect the COP16 decision on ecologically or biologically significant marine areas and its relevance the implementation of the BB&J Agreement. We also regret that the text does not elaborate further on key IPBES assessment reports, including the Nexus Assessment and the Transformative Change Assessment. We nevertheless believe that overall important progress has been made this year, and we look forward to continuing our constructive engagement next year within the Second Committee and at COP17 in Yerevan, Armenia. These upcoming discussions will provide an important opportunity to build on the progress achieved and to further strengthen our collective efforts towards the full and effective implementation of the Convention and the KMGBF. Mr. Chair, we regret that a vote has been called on this normally consensual resolution. We believe this undermines our collective effort and the constructive spirit of striving for consensus, which has been a tradition in this committee and has also guided the negotiations of this resolution this year. The EU and its member states fully support this important resolution. And the complete version of this statement is available on our website. Thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [2:35:42]: I thank the representative of the European Union. I see no other requests for the floor. The committee will now commence the process of voting on draft resolution L36/rev1 in accordance with Rule 1288. No representative may interrupt the voting except on a point of order in connection with the actual process of voting. Delegations are requested to indicate their votes. Those in favor of draft resolution L.36/Rev. 1, please signify. Those against and abstentions? 2nd Committee · Secretary [2:36:28]: The committee is now voting on draft resolution L36 Rev. 1 entitled Implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity and Its Contribution to Sustainable Development. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are correctly reflected on the screen? The voting has been completed. Please lock the voting machine. 2nd Committee · Chair [2:37:02]: The result is as follows. In favor, 177. Against, 1. Abstentions, 1. Draft Resolution A/C2/80/L36/Rev1 The resolution is adopted. Does any delegation wish to make an explanation of vote or general statement after the vote on draft resolution? I give the floor to the Russian Federation. Russian Federation [2:37:42]: Mr. Chairman, abstained from the vote. Russia abstained from the vote. And we would also like to distance ourselves from the two— from 2 paragraphs of the draft resolution on the implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity and its contribution to sustainable development dedicated to UNGA Resolution 76/300, the right of people to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment, and Resolution 3.2.1, the agreement under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity in Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction. Our delegation does not recognize the so-called right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment because it is not encapsulated in a single international agreement. This language is a mechanical compilation of various rights recognized in various regional and national acts. But this language cannot lay claim to any universality. Resolution 76/300 is the only source that recognizes the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment. We wish to underscore the non-consensual nature of this document. 8 states, including the Russian Federation, abstained from the vote. Turning now to the BB&J agreement, our country believes this instrument is unacceptable. It undermines provisions of crucial existing international agreements. These include the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and the Agreement on Straddling Fish Stocks of 1995. Its standards encroach on the mandate and competencies of specialized sectoral and regional international organizations, including organizations for fisheries. Furthermore, we cannot support the reference to Resolution 77/321 on the BBNJ agreement, which is another resolution that Russian Federation voted against. Thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [2:40:04]: I thank the representative of Russian Federation. I now give the floor to the representative of the United States. United States of America [2:40:14]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. The United States has made clear its intention to disengage from a majority of resolutions in the Second Committee this year. We would like to take this opportunity to reiterate our view that many of these resolutions recycle the same contentious issues year after year. Second Committee resolutions should be short, actionable, and forward-looking. Instead, many resolutions continue to include problematic language that does nothing to advance the United Nations' core mandate of maintaining international peace and security. The UN can no longer afford to waste its resources where there is little or no impact. The number of reports, conferences, and negotiations has blossomed beyond the point of ineffectiveness and waste to a level of dysfunction that makes it impossible to carry out vital work. Mr. Chair, colleagues, we look forward to working with you in the future to make the Second Committee more efficient, relevant, and effective. We refer you to the long-form explanation of position posted on our mission's website for more information. Thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [2:41:21]: I thank the representative of the United States. I now give the floor to the representative of New Zealand. New Zealand [2:41:29]: Thank, thank you, Chair. I'm delivering this explanation of vote in my national capacity. New Zealand was pleased to vote in favor of this resolution. However, on the references to the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples contained in the resolution, New Zealand would like to note for the record that while we recognize that UNDRIP is an important framework, we reaffirm the non-binding status of the Declaration, which is not a treaty. New Zealand's existing legal and constitutional framework, including the Treaty of Waitangi, defines the bounds of New Zealand's engagement with UNDRIP and will continue to evolve in accordance with New Zealand's domestic circumstances. I thank you, Chair. 2nd Committee · Chair [2:42:10]: I thank the representative of New Zealand. I see no other requests for the floor. The committee has thus concluded its consideration of sub-item F of Agenda Item 18. I now invite the committee to turn to Agenda Item 18H, Ensuring Access to Affordable, Reliable, Sustainable, and Modern Energy for All, in order to take action on draft Resolution A/C/18H. C2/80/L35/Rev. 1 of the same title as submitted by Iraq on behalf of Group of 77 and China. I wish to thank the facilitator, Mr. Hussein Ahsan Mohamed Hussein of Maldives, for leading the informal consultation on draft resolution and delegations for their constructive engagement in the negotiations. I would like to inform the committee that draft resolution L.35 Rev. 1 has no program budget implication. Does any delegation not a member of Group of 77 and China wish to join as sponsor of draft resolution L.35 Rev. 1? Please signify by pressing the button. I give the floor to— I see none. A recorded vote has been requested on draft resolution L.35/Rev. 1 entitled Ensuring Access to Affordable, Reliable, Sustainable, and Modern Energy for All. Before proceeding to vote, I, I will give the floor to any sponsored delegation wishing to make a general statement in connection with the draft proposal or any non-sponsored delegation wishing to make a statement in explanation of vote. Does any delegation wish to make a general statement or explanation of vote before the vote in connection with draft resolution L.35/rev.1? I see no requests for the floor. The committee will now commence the process of voting on draft resolution L.35/rev.1. In accordance with Rule 128, no representative may interrupt the voting except on a point of order in connection with the actual process of voting. Delegations are requested to indicate their votes. Those in favor of draft resolution L.3.5, Rep. 1, please signify. Those against, an abstention. 2nd Committee · Secretary [2:44:48]: The committee is now voting on draft resolution L.35 Rev. 1 entitled Ensuring Access to Affordable, Reliable, Sustainable, and Modern Energy for All. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are correctly reflected on the screen? The voting has been completed. Please lock the voting machine. 2nd Committee · Chair [2:45:20]: The result is as follows: in favor, 177; against, 2; abstentions, 2. Resolution A/C2/80/L35/Rev1 The draft resolution is adopted. Does any delegation wish to make an explanation of vote or general statement after the vote on the draft resolution? I give the floor to Denmark, followed by United States and United Kingdom. Denmark · EU [2:45:58]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have the honor to speak on behalf of the European Union and its member states. The candidate countries Greece, North Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, Albania, Ukraine, the Republic of Moldova, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Georgia, as well as Monaco, aligned themselves with this statement. First, let me thank the G77 and China for presenting this draft resolution, delegations for their valuable contributions, and the facilitator, Mr. Ajaan Mohamed Hussain from the Maldives. The EU member states voted a resounding yes to this resolution and regrets that this consensus-based resolution was put to vote. The European Union and its member states stand firmly behind the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, which guides our actions both internally and externally. We would have preferred a more ambitious outcome, and we wish to express concern regarding the following areas. Firstly, we are deeply disappointed that again there is not enough support to include internationally agreed upon climate language in this resolution. It is the position of the EU and its member states that this resolution should not— should be modernized and streamlined in line with the latest text on climate mitigation. We urge the full implementation of the UAE consensus, including paragraph 28 of the Global Stocktake. Secondly, in reiterating our long-standing position, we firstly disassociate from preambular paragraph 27 on the use of all available technological solutions, express our concern on the language on internationally— International Atomic Energy Agency in preambular paragraph 31, and lastly, we are deeply disappointed no consensus was reached on referencing the Paris Agreement in the right manner in operative paragraph 35. The Paris Agreement remains a legal agreement on its own right and should not be be ranked alongside others. In closing, the EU and its member states repeat its longstanding commitment in achieving universal access to energy for all. Mr. Chair, finally, we regret that a vote has been called on this normally consensual resolution. We believe this undermines our collective effort and the constructive spirit of striving for consensus, which has been a tradition in this committee and has also guided the negotiations on this resolution this year. The EU and its member states support this important resolution. I thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [2:48:23]: I thank the representative of Denmark on behalf of EU and member states. I now give the floor to the representative of the United States. United States of America [2:48:34]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. We start by expressing our gratitude to the facilitator, our colleague from Maldives, To the UN Secretary-General's staff and to fellow delegates for their professionalism throughout the negotiations. The United States opposes this Second Committee resolution. Roughly 700 million people remain without electricity access globally. Roughly 2 billion people have unreliable access. Despite the talk of the UN's Sustainable Development Goals and calls for action on climate change, the percentage of energy poor has remained stubbornly high. Abundant access to affordable, reliable, and secure energy is a core condition of economic development. Each year, millions of lives are lost because they lack access to energy sources that some label as unsustainable. To save lives and unlock economic prosperity, we must embrace all affordable, reliable, and secure energy options, including nuclear, natural gas, and coal. By restricting energy sources instead of expanding them, this resolution undermines global energy access, resulting in continued unmet needs and preventable deaths. By prioritizing climate politics over practical solutions, it risks higher costs, reduced energy reliability, and stalled progress on energy access and development, deepening energy and economic poverty. What's more, this resolution continues to include problematic language that does nothing to advance the United Nations' core mandate of maintaining international peace and security. We highlight the consensus texts adopted by G7 and APEC energy ministers as significant examples of international cooperation on pressing energy issues. The United States remains committed to unlocking energy independence and stands ready to partner with any country willing to depart from this outdated understanding of self-limited potential. Thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [2:50:45]: I thank the representative of the United States. I now give the floor to the representative of the United United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland [2:50:53]: Thank you, Chair. We'd like to thank the facilitator and the Secretariat for guiding negotiations on this resolution. The UK voted in favor of this resolution because we remain committed to just and inclusive clean energy transitions that support economic development. We continue to work to close the energy access gap and deliver on COP28 Global Stocktake commitments to keep 1.5 degrees Celsius within reach. That includes tripling global renewable capacity by 2030, doubling energy efficiency rates, and accelerating the shift away from fossil fuels, while mobilizing investment where energy access is most limited. We note serious concerns with the negotiating process, including an excessive volume of text inputs, which led to reverting to last year's text at a late stage. We also underscore our reservations about PP27's reference to all available technological solutions. We disassociate from the reference to cleaner fossil fuels in OP34, as this creates the perception that unabated fossil fuel usage is compatible with long-term climate goals. And lastly, we are disappointed that OP23 still refers to the Paris Agreement as under the UNFCCC. This does not reflect its legal position as a separate treaty. The UK reiterates that we must all adopt a forward-leaning approach that accelerates renewable deployment and mobilizes investment, building on progress from COP28, COP29, and the outcomes of COP30. Thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [2:52:53]: I thank the representative of the United Kingdom. I see no other requests for the floor. The committee has thus concluded its consideration of sub-item H Speaker 164 [2:53:04]: Thank you, Madam Chair. I would like to inform delegates that the right of reply has been requested under item 18 in accordance with Rule 115 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Assembly. I should like to remind delegations that the number of interventions in exercise of the right of reply for any delegation at a given meeting should be limited to 2 per item. The first intervention should be limited to 5 minutes and the second to 3 minutes. 2nd Committee · Chair [2:53:35]: I give the floor to the representative of Israel. Israel [2:53:46]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I didn't plan to take the floor again. Still, I must exercise the right of reply to some of the hostile remarks we heard today, including from the representatives of the Arab Group, Brazil, Colombia, and the Palestinian delegation. All great examples on how to politicize an agenda. It is unfortunate that instead of engaging constructively on a resolution dedicated to agricultural development, we heard a repetition of distorted political narratives that obviously do nothing to advance development nor peace. Facts matter. For years, Billions of dollars intended for development, arriving from many of your countries' taxpayers, have been diverted by Hamas to build their terror infrastructures, not to build a better future for the Palestinian people. Just imagine if these funds have been invested in real agricultural development or any sort of development, how different our region could look like today. Of course, these are always absent in your statements. Those who refuse to condemn Hamas enable the ongoing suffering of civilians from both sides. Making your bold statements here will not change the simple reality on the ground. You may, you may also not want to acknowledge it, but the Israeli industry has already transformed and will continue to contribute to global agricultural development. The Arab Group Thank you. The group also said there is no need for this resolution as another resolution already addressed agriculture. On this, I will just say that during our negotiations, there was a strong proposal to work together, at least to combine reports, and there was strong objections to this from G77 members in the room. We, of course, welcome joining efforts where possible. I want to thank the vast majority of member states again for supporting this resolution. I thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [2:55:44]: I thank the delegation of Israel. I now invite the committee to resume its consideration. I now give the floor to the delegation of Russian Federation. Russian Federation [2:56:18]: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and apologies for not asking for the floor in time and timely fashion to explain our position on the vote regarding the document ensuring access to affordable, reliable, and sustainable energy sources for everyone. We want to state that during the work on the negotiation, fully eradicating certain glaring flaws in, in as regards renewable energies has not been successful. We trust that this will happen in our further joint activity. We also want to say that the excessive and unjustified emphasis on renewables in the UN in the energy field has become a characteristic trait of the Secretariat's work. We've seen this dismaying trend in the implementation of the initiative Decade of Sustainable Energy for Everyone. In that regard, our delegation would like to disassociate itself myself from operative paragraph 40 as a sign of our disagreement with the content of that para. We urge member states to develop cooperation in the energy field in accordance with the principle of technological neutrality, with no discrimination against any particular energy sources, and with consideration of national priorities. Thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [2:57:47]: I thank the representative of the Russian Federation. I now invite the committee to resume its consideration of Agenda Item 22A, Implementation of the 3rd United Nations Decade for the Eradication of Poverty, 2018 to 2027, in order to take action on Draft Resolution A/C2/80/L53 of the same title, as submitted by the Vice Chair Andres Napuri Peter of Peru on the basis of informal consultation on draft resolution L.3.1 presented by Iraq on behalf of Group of 77 and China. I wish to thank the co-facilitators, Ms. Camelia Ortiz of Chile and Mr. Hendrick Garcia of Philippines. Thank you, Mr. President. for leading the informal consultation on the draft resolution, as well as delegations for their constructive engagement in negotiations. I would like to inform the committee that draft resolution L.53 has no budget implications. A recorded vote has been requested on draft resolution L.53 entitled Implementation of the TAD 3rd United Nations Decade for Eradication of Poverty, 2018 to 2027. Before proceeding to vote, does any delegation wish to make an explanation of vote before the vote in connection with draft resolution L.5.3? I give the floor to the European Union. EU · EU [2:59:30]: Thank you. Chair, I have the honor to speak on behalf of the European Union and its member states. The candidate countries Turkey, North Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, Albania, Ukraine, the Republic of Moldova, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Georgia, as well as San Marino, aligned themselves with this statement. First, let me thank G77 and China for presenting this draft resolution, delegations for their valuable contributions, the co-facilitators Mr. Henry Garcia from the Philippines and Ms. Camila Ortiz from Chile, as well as the Secretariat. The European Union and its Member States stand firmly behind the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, which guides our actions both internally and externally. We regret that a vote has been called on this normally consensual resolution. This undermines our collective effort and the constructive spirit of striving for consensus, which has been a tradition in this Committee and has also guided the negotiations of this resolution this year. Fostering the sustainable economic, social, and environmental development of developing countries with the primary aim of eradicating poverty is a founding principle of our international cooperation enshrined in the Treaty on European Union. The EU and its member states are the largest global ODA provider. The European Union, comprising only about 4% of the world's population and only about 17% of the global GDP, provides over 42% of official development aid through the United Nations system to help promote sustainable development and better lives around the world for today's and future generations. We are particularly pleased to welcome the convening of the World Social Summit at which the Doha Declaration was adopted. We also welcome the resolution that clearly stresses the need to reduce inequalities by investing in affordable, universal health coverage, universal social protection, food and nutrition security, universally accessible quality education and training, decent jobs creation, especially for young people, women, and persons with disabilities. We also welcome the importance of gender equality and the empowerment of women and girls in the fight against poverty, including through gender-responsive policies and actions. We would like to recall that the transfer of technology that we commit to must be voluntary and on mutually agreed terms. We would have liked to see clear and unambiguous language in this regard. The world nowadays requires more solidarity and cooperation. The EU and its member states are committed to do their share. Thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [3:02:07]: I thank the representative of the European Union. I see no other requests for the floor. The committee will now commence the process of voting on draft resolution In accordance with Rule 128, no representative may interrupt the voting except on the point of order in connection with the actual process of voting. Delegations are requested to indicate their votes. Those in favor of draft resolution L53, please signify. Those against, and abstention. 2nd Committee · Secretary [3:02:43]: The The committee is now voting on draft resolution L.53 entitled Implementation of the Third United Nations Decade for the Eradication of Poverty, 2018 to 2027. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are correctly reflected on the screen? The voting has been completed. Please lock the voting machine. 2nd Committee · Chair [3:03:17]: The results of the vote is as follows: in favor, 176; against, 2; abstentions, 0. Draft Resolution A/C2/80/L53 is adopted. Does any delegation wish to make an explanation of vote after the vote on draft resolution? I give the floor to the United States. United States of America [3:03:48]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. The United States has made clear its intention to disengage from a majority of resolutions in the Second Committee this year. We'd like to take this opportunity to reiterate our view that many of these resolutions recycle the same contentious issues year after year. Second Committee resolutions should be short, actionable, and forward-looking. Instead, many resolutions continue to include problematic language that does nothing to advance the United Nations' core mandate of maintaining international peace and security. The UN can no longer afford to waste its resources where there's little or no impact. The number of reports, conferences, and negotiations has blossomed beyond the point of ineffectiveness and waste to a level of dysfunction that makes it impossible to carry out vital work. Mr. Chair, colleagues, we look forward to working with you in the future to make the Second Committee more efficient, relevant, and effective. We refer you to the long-form explanation of position posted on our mission's website for more information. Thank you. 2nd Committee · Chair [3:04:46]: I thank the representative of the United States. We still have requests for the floor. Speaker 176 [3:04:52]: Thank you very much. 2nd Committee · Chair [3:04:52]: Thank you very much. We have heard the statements from the delegations for statement after the adoption from Nicaragua, Hungary, and Holy See. We will hear the remaining statements at 3 PM this afternoon and then continue with the planned program of work for this— for the afternoon. The next plenary meeting of the committee will take place this afternoon at 3 PM in the conference— in this conference room. To continue taking action on the draft proposal. The meeting is adjourned. Thank you.