(resumed) Maintenance of peace and security of Ukraine - Security Council, 10227th meeting Security Council Date: 23 September 2026 Language: English Transcript: https://transcripts.un.org/en/sc/10227/2 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. --- France · President [0:00]: floor to His Excellency, Mr. Michael Kratsios, Assistant to the President and Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, United States. United States of America · Assistant to the President and Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy · Michael Kratsios [0:11]: My sincerest thanks to the Republic of France as President of the Council. Distinguished colleagues, I am grateful for another opportunity to discuss the most consequential technological development of our time, superintelligence, formerly known as AI. Our primary responsibility is to ensure that continued advances in superintelligence benefit our citizens and safeguard their liberty and way of life. The frontier of intelligence is advancing rapidly. That is not a reason to pause its further development or to constrain it with new global governance structures. As the leader in frontier superintelligence, the US has taken actions to ensure we are able to keep the frontier moving safely and responsibly. We have engaged frontier labs on testing and evaluation of new model capabilities, established cybersecurity clearinghouses for coordination on vulnerability mitigation, and clarified the existing law enforcement tools available to address harmful uses of superintelligence. Internationally, the United States is committed to diplomacy and dialogue on emerging technologies. But international dialogue in this forum and in others cannot be allowed to drift towards global governance. As President Trump said before the General Assembly yesterday, the United States totally rejects any attempt to construct a globalist scheme of control of superintelligence. Only weeks ago, G20 innovation ministers reached consensus on the Carolina principles, agreeing that countries should preserve national sovereignty in the governance of emerging technologies, not abdicate responsibility to international bodies. The American people's representatives will legislate and regulate on the American people's behalf. You should do the same for your people. Only through an open, cooperative ecosystem built on sovereign infrastructure and domestic capacity can the world realize this technology's potential. U.S. international efforts seek to build that capacity by sharing our technology and providing the tools for adoption. We want you, our allies and partners, to share in the benefits from this technological revolution. That is the purpose of our exports program. The US is the only technology superpower willing and able to truly empower partner nations in your pursuit of a sovereign superintelligence capability. American companies will work with you to build gold standard secure infrastructure and help you implement the applications and development, the tools and capacity you need to serve your people. In this era, technology sovereignty is realized in technology adoption. If you take the risks and benefits of superintelligence seriously, the most important thing you can do is to develop your country's ability to understand and use it. Deploy it widely, build expertise inside your government, prepare your institutions and regulators, understand what these systems can and cannot do. You cannot govern technology you do not understand. This body and others like it should focus on sharing best practices to build domestic capacity, not establishing a global regulatory scheme. It is through a policy of permissionless innovation, a tireless pursuit of the frontier, and an optimism about the future of technology that the United States built the greatest innovation ecosystem ever known to man. For 250 years, the American character has sought a virtuous balance between innovation and safety, independence and security. Superintelligence is the latest in that long series of challenges and opportunities. In the service of humankind, it can become the greatest engine of growth and prosperity in history. A prosperous future will not be secured by a global regulator. It will be secured by sovereign nations that adopt superintelligence. responsible companies that build it, and free people who refuse to be ruled by fear. Thank you. France · President [4:45]: I thank His Excellency, Mr. Kratsios, for his statement. I now give the floor to His Excellency, Mr. Sheikh Abdullah bin Ali Al Khalifa, Acting Under-Secretary for Political Affairs in the Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Bahrain. Bahrain · Acting Under-Secretary for Political Affairs · Sheikh Abdullah bin Ali Al Khalifa [5:02]: Mr. President, allow me At the outset, to express sincere thanks and appreciation to the friendly French Republic for convening this important session. I also extend my thanks to Mr. Bengio, co-chair of the UN Independent Scientific Panel on Artificial Intelligence. Mr. Altman, CEO of OpenAI; Mr. Amodei, CEO of Anthropic; and Mr. DeLange, CEO of Hugging Face, for their valuable briefings. Mr. President, Discussing the implications of artificial intelligence is no longer a matter of intellectual interest. It has become an urgent necessity dictated by this Council's responsibilities for maintaining international peace and security. Guided by this principle, the Kingdom of Bahrain emphasized in the statement delivered by His Royal Highness Prince Salman bin Hamad Al Khalifa, Crown Prince and Prime Minister, during the 79th session of the Assembly the importance of concluding an international treaty to govern the development of artificial intelligence and ensure that it serves as a force for innovation rather than destruction. Consistent with this approach, Bahrain recently had the honor of co-hosting an interactive dialogue with France and Latvia on harnessing this technology for conflict resolution. Mr. President, We stress that the rapid evolution of artificial intelligence expands the scope of security threats, particularly when these technologies are exploited by terrorists and criminal groups. As the autonomy of these systems grows, we emphasize the need to maintain human oversight and accountability at the core of decisions with serious security implications and ensure their full compliance with international law and international humanitarian law. Unlike automated algorithms, only humans exercise reason, responsibility, and conscience, and possess the ability to discern complex contexts. At the same time, we must not overlook the immense opportunities to harness artificial intelligence to enhance early warning systems, monitor indicators of tension, support mediation efforts, and improve effective peacekeeping operations. We also stress the need for bridging the digital divide and facilitating technology transfer to ensure that all nations can benefit from these capabilities. In conclusion, we stress the need for Security Council to hold more regular and systematic discussions on artificial intelligence. These discussions should complement broader UN efforts to address frameworks for the development and testing of these models in line with international law. We stand ready to contribute to advancing these discussions to build a responsible, and balanced international approach, one that places humans at the heart of decision-making and ensures that the innovations we create today continue to serve the peace we all strive to uphold in this Council. Thank you, Mr. President. France · President [8:36]: I thank His Excellency Al Khalifa for his statement, and I now give the floor to the representative of Latvia. Latvia · Permanent Representative [8:44]: Thank you, Mr. President. First of all, I would like to thank the French presidency for convening this meeting on an important and extremely urgent subject for international security. Professor Yoshua Bengio, Sam Altman, Dario Amodei, and Clement de Longue for the enlightening assessment and also the proposals for safe development of the AI. President, The rapid pace of AI development is already having profound impact across all domains, including international peace and security. Alongside the extraordinary opportunities that AI offers, we also see growing risks manifesting both in peace time and in conflict settings. This is a moment for collective action. as we hear today and as highlighted in the call for control of frontier AI models initiated by Norway and Finland, issued on Monday 22nd world leaders, including the President of Latvia. We believe that the Security Council has a responsibility to ensure that the implications of AI for international peace and security are fully considered. without duplicating work undertaken in other fora, of course. But today's discussion demonstrates the Council's ability to convene Member State, science and industry leaders to address this pressing matter. President, two distinct sources of AI-related risks for peace and security are becoming evident. Both demand our attention. First are the risks stemming from the misuse of AI by state and non-state actors. It includes application of AI in malign cyber activities, information manipulation, and even attempts to acquire destructive capabilities, such as biological weapons. Second, a more novel and complex challenge, as outlined by the briefers and the recent reports, stems from the technology itself. such as misalignment and risk of loss of control. Such behavior risks are source of new forms of vulnerability, including to critical infrastructure. Alarmingly, recent incidents indicate that not only can AI systems act contrary to human intentions and interests, but they are becoming better at manipulating and deceiving humans as they do so. These challenges are not an isolated matter. as they add to the already complex international peace and security landscape. Actions by misaligned AI may fuel further tensions and miscalculation due to the difficulty to track, verify, and attribute them. The increasing use of AI and autonomous systems in the military domain poses additional dilemmas, particularly where reliability, control, and escalation risks intersect. President, Responsible action starts at the industry level, but also with governance, clear guardrails, and capable institutions. A multi-stakeholder approach is essential to manage risks and build trust in AI. Through transparency and accountability, through establishment of adequate safety protocols for the development and use of AI systems, through independent evaluation, through connecting the government's mandate academic expertise, civil society, and industry innovation. And all these require international cooperation. Coordination, norm setting, exchange of best practices, and capacity building is key to bridge the divide and foster interoperability. The convening of the UN Global Dialogue on AI governance and the establishment of the independent scientific panel on AI are important steps. Our further efforts should keep up with the pace of development of frontier AI technologies. As highlighted in the call for control of frontier AI models, we need an open-minded approach by the UN member states to build on current international mechanisms and explore developing new ones. The overall objective should be to ensure that technology serves people, safeguards fundamental rights and freedoms, and delivers benefits that do not come at the expense of uncontrollable risks. If there is one thing that we should be able to agree on, AI must remain under human direction, oversight, and control. President, considering its role in maintaining international peace and security, this Council must remain actively engaged in assessing the implications of AI for global peace and security. With this technology becoming increasingly relevant to the Council's work in the area of conflict prevention and resolution, proactive approach is necessary. And building on the recent Council's informal interactive dialogue on AI that was organized by Latvia and France, and supported by Bahrain and Greece, we are committed to taking further concrete steps, for instance, establishment of Council's informal expert group that would enable more in-depth Council analysis of the impact of AI-related technologies on international peace and security and the implementation of the Council's mandate. Latvia will continue to work with interested partners on the Council in the coming months. Thank you. President [14:29]: I thank the Permanent Representative of Latvia for her statement. I now give the floor to the Permanent Representative of Colombia. Colombia · Permanent Representative [14:40]: Thank you, Mr. President. Colombia considers that here we are not discussing the benefits of artificial intelligence but um really it is the risks that come to the fore the uncontrollable in of unavoidable risks and quite clearly following the briefings that we have heard the risk for Humanity. Mr. President we cannot ignore bluntly the report that we have heard is the first time this security Council and is on the record for history has heard a case where machines commit crimes. This is not just a random mistake. Other person, it will be other company, even state secrets, please try to convey the idea for those that produce intelligence or artificial intelligence that the large part of the planet does not. and as such, the critical infrastructure, including cybersecurity systems, will be exposed. If you read the cases that were explained to us today, we will know that it will be a crime even against a state if this will take place at a state level, and it can happen. The second element for us and perhaps the major concern is that we haven't framed the issue correctly and we must make a refrain of the issue. I do not think and Colombia does not think that the issue here is to limit human innovation but machine innovation and I explain my words here. Different reports has telling us that we face two risks. One is misalignment and the other is the loss of control. When it comes to misalignment is that the machines are separating or are finding ways to cheat, break the instructions that were given by humans, that is the AI agents. are able to do this repeatedly, systematically. And so far, even in the cybersecurity case that we analyzed, they were able to reach internet and find ways to cheat the system. Other times, they are able to find out passwords, send thousands of messages, even against the company that was testing these machines in the sandbox. But the other one, and the one that should be very, very concerning for this council, is the loss of control. So we would like to go with you with a logical narrative. We are telling us today that AI has an immense capability to storage information that is far, far away from human capability. We are knowing now that given the models that we are adapting, but also the design of the algorithm and the paths that we open in that design, these capabilities also allow to involve a different type of reasoning, each day more complex, interdisciplinary. In other words, Soon, there won't be any human capable of following the operation, the development of what we are creating. In the first days of the models, we notice how the machine were able to pass a bar exam in three months, a medical license exam in three months. So there are no humans that we know that can do that. But at this state-of-the-art of the technology, we are facing a different type of situation, which is a path from human mistakes to machines' random mistakes. And we have to be aware of the risks that we are facing and assuming if that is the path we choose to take. You see, the critical issue here is to know, as a Security Council, what are we regulating? why we need to regulate it, and why we should do it. Most importantly, Colombia understands the position of the United States and shares partially its practical approach, which is an international body over sign. The sovereign production of AI is impractical. For two basic reasons. There are, of course, constitutional and national security reasons in every country. So the legal battle will be overwhelming. But secondly, if one country stops, the other says, I do not, especially those that are leading the race. For the rest of humanity, the concerns, and for those that are behind but will soon catch up, the concern is, what we do next. And that's where our country can perhaps offer a different approach. And again, no between an ineluctable choice between safety and development, but perhaps a way to make sure that all humans on earth are included, not just by sharing or as we use the term, adapting our countries because it seems to us in the global South that when we call about adapting is to buy a product that we will not produce. And once we buy the product, we can adapt our structures and infrastructures. Again, partially true. But many of these countries will face an undeniable gap that will extend even a century between another country and the other. if we do not participate of the production of AI. That's one issue, and that's a very, very important issue for the Global South. We do not believe that just by adapting our infrastructure, by making it safer, we will also get rid of the lateral and collateral problems. That's when we come to the point today. we could lose millions of jobs. That is a possibility that is being entertained even in developed countries. We have seen how AI start writing the code. And that for us is perhaps the only place that we should start the regulation. Because no one discusses, no one would say that AI is not beneficial for research health, development, technology, communications, cure diseases, et cetera. Well, the benefits are why known and we are not trying to stop it. But it seems that we are reaching a new step on AI. And the US is right, this is super intelligence for one particular reason only. We are about to take the step that a greater and potentially more complex technology, quantum technology, will boost artificial intelligence in the design, in the model, in the modeling, and the development. So the risks that we are facing today, I want to call the attention of the Council, are pre-quantum risks. So that is before we reach that state, but we are very, very close to reach that state. But the concerning side for us and Perhaps this is what we will offer as a different approach, rather than thinking of an international oversight. The Security Council is concerned because this technology has the potential to disrupt and create not just more inequality across the planet, including violence, but also development gaps that will lead us to other types of conflicts. including global migration, et cetera. So we propose to you, we submit to you an important consideration in which perhaps we can start just for that domain because this is it. This is the moment. Autonomous design and autonomous development. This is what is really, really at stake here. Should we allow that machines, AI agents, take the next step that are showing by the experiments, that are showing by the cases they present to us and that had been published actually not just today. There are many article journals, these are everywhere, that tell us how the machine finds another way, a different way, different than humans. When we lose control, one of the major risk of risk management here, which is once we do no longer understand what the machine is doing. Because if we go to super intelligence and we do not possess as humans such a capacity, we are assuming that we are controlling something that we cannot understand. And one of the main elements for this technology, and I listened to the all interventions today, we want to make sure that this remain human. Well, you see, that's the problem. The human brain needs to understand the information that has in front of it to make a decision. But it seems to us that we are soon going to leave that stage and we are going to leave that stage because the way the technology is being developed. And this is not just a matter of ethical limits. We understand that that will be contradictory for many, and it will be also a problem in terms of legislation and regulations. Some might even see that as a red tape, et cetera. No, this is another step because if the machine is the one that starts leading the design, in other words, the methods, the paths, the outcomes. If this is not just and soon will not be a problem of the input and the unreachable goal. In other words, it seems now that the machine is trying to just get the goal done, get things done. And to do that is finding paths that humans usually do not take one and did not instruct to take, yet it find a way. And it cheats, and it conceals the outcome. And that is a concern, of course. One is that it's misalignment. The second one now, however, is that soon, and Mr. Sam Altman really, really pointed out to this risk, is that the autonomous development of artificial intelligence, what really means is this, that machines write the code. that machines find the paths, that machines establish solutions. And again, this is pre-quantum era. So it will be naive, at least to say, to think that we will be able to even regulate something that soon we will not understand. And this is why, perhaps, this is the moment in history that all nations has to come together, at least with one common goal, Let's keep it human. So we should agree that we want development. We might even agree that we don't want oversight. We should understand the concerns in terms of sovereignty, especially of the nations that have a greater scientific development. It is not their fault to be fully innovative capacities, et cetera. But at least for the rest of humanity, it should be important that we decide How far we go, this is again, is not just an ethical control. We are not talking even about yet about human rights. Some countries think that we should in terms of private, et cetera. No, no, no. This is the next step. Are we going to allow machines to build machines, to design their own AI? And if we are there already, and that's perhaps the most important element, is for the countries to decide at least that because in practice, Mr. President, for many other. Countries, particularly Latin American countries, in practice, this means a risk for the national production of many countries, countries that aren't producing artificial intelligence, and those that have been invited to buy artificial intelligence and invest in it. And probably doing that would be the most logical path for them to modernize the infrastructure of each nation and make it as safe and secure as possible. Ultimately, the question remains the same. If we have regulations even down to the production of a tire or a toothbrush, if we regulate the production of cars, if we do that with nuclear weapons, the question remains the same. In scientific progress, including among the most important things, the Einstein's, the movement from from towards Einstein's special theory of relativity. We not only verified that time moves differently in different spaces, but we also came to understand the scientific that scientific precision is based on perception. And we changed the formula from constant velocity that did not include gravity to another one that did include gravity. And we reached a scientific understanding, perhaps the most important one of the 20th century, without which we would not have GPS, for example. But there was one characteristic common to all of those cases, including the production of nuclear weapons, and that is that human beings were always in control. Human beings understood the risks. They knew what they were doing and they knew what they were producing. And that's why they regulated it. The concern for countries such as Colombia isn't scientific progress Colombia invites investment in artificial intelligence and wants data centers in its country we are a strategic partner of various countries uh including the United States in particular and naturally we are interested in being part of this not just on the consumption side but also the production side of artificial intelligence and certainly through the provision of rare earths as well. But there is something that goes beyond bilateral, commercial or national interests, and that is the interests of humanity. Beyond our own time, beyond our own generation, and the time that is allotted to each and every one of us. We are here now, and we need to ask ourselves this differentiated question. Right now, We are setting this precedent which, in the view of a country such as Colombia, seems to be delicate. We regulated nuclear weapons, we regulate the manufacturing of tires, we even regulate the provision of homes. Anything that could jeopardize the lives of the people that use those things is regulated. So why then would we not regulate something which soon we are not even going to understand? That makes no sense. Superintelligence is not just the ability to achieve that through scientific transformation, but also the ability to have that, to know when we are no longer on the same level. Thank you very much, President. France · President [32:42]: I thank the Permanent Representative of Colombia for the statement. I will now give the floor to Her Excellency Ms. Therese Wagner, Minister of Foreign Affairs, International Cooperation, and Francophonie of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Democratic Republic of the Congo · Minister for Foreign Affairs, International Cooperation, and Francophonie · Therese Wagner [32:56]: Thank you very much, Mr. President, Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen. The Democratic Republic of the Congo thanks France, as well as His Excellency, Mr. Jean-Noel Barrot, Minister for Europe and Foreign Affairs, for having convened and chaired this important meeting. I also thank the briefers for their contribution to our collective reflection. Our debate takes place at a pivotal moment. Artificial intelligence is no longer merely a matter of scientific progress or economic competitiveness. Because of the speed of its developments, the scope of its applications, and its growing integration into critical infrastructure and decision-making systems, it now raises questions that directly affect international peace and security. And this reality imposes a responsibility upon us, the responsibility to anticipate risks without hindering innovation, to preserve the benefits of technological progress while preventing it from becoming an additional factor of instability, vulnerability, and conflict. The United Nations have begun laying the foundations for this reflection, the work undertaken by the General Assembly on SAFE. secure and trustworthy artificial intelligence, the establishment of the independent international scientific panel on AI, and the global dialogue on AI governance, as well as the Security Council's work on the implications of scientific and technological advances for international peace and security. All of these constitute important milestones. It is now our responsibility to go further from anticipation to prevention and from prevention to international cooperation. that is commensurate with the transformations underway. Presidents, the risks we face are numerous. Increasingly capable and autonomous systems can create new vulnerabilities for critical infrastructure and decision-making processes. Their use in military and security contexts raises fundamental questions of accountability, predictability, and human control. We must also remain vigilant regarding the unforeseen behavior of certain systems, the possibility of circumventing security safeguards, and the growing difficulties states may encounter in understanding, assessing, and regulating technologies whose capabilities are evolving at an unprecedented pace. These issues take on a particularly tangible dimension in conflict situations. In the Democratic Republic of the Congo, as in other theaters of crisis, surveillance technologies and drones already play a growing role in the operational environment. These technologies can contribute to reconnaissance, observation, and ceasefire monitoring. They can also be diverted for military reconnaissance, coordination, disinformation, or propaganda purposes. This ambivalence reminds us of an essential truth. No technology is in itself an instrument of peace or conflict. It is the framework within which it is designed, deployed, and governed that largely determines its impact. That is why responsibility must remain at the heart of our reflection. States have a responsibility to establish appropriate legal frameworks, ensure effective oversight, and prevent risks that could affect international peace and security. Technology companies must also fully assume their share of responsibility, particularly through risk assessments prior to deployment, incident reporting, traceability, transparency, and maintaining appropriate human oversight. The scientific community and civil society must likewise be able to contribute their independent expertise and participate in the critical assessment of risks. But national responses, as necessary as they may be, will not suffice. Technological interdependence calls for shared responsibility. It requires closer international cooperation based in particular on the exchange of information concerning serious incidents and identified vulnerabilities, cooperation in evaluation and safety testing, as well as the establishment of communication channels among governments, scientists, and technology stakeholders. President, for the Democratic Republic of the Congo, this cooperation must also meet a fundamental requirement, that of inclusion. Developing countries cannot be reduced to the role of mere users of technologies designed elsewhere, nor should be the mere recipients of standards and norms that they did not adequately participate in shaping. They must possess the scientific, technical, and institutional capacities that enable them to assess the technologies to which their populations and economies are exposed, to participate in their governance, and above all, to contribute to innovation themselves. This requirement of inclusion leads us to consider artificial intelligence across its entire value chain. Therefore, despite its seemingly immaterial nature, the AI revolution rests upon profoundly material realities, infrastructure, energy, industrial capabilities, and strategic natural resources. This dimension is of particular importance to the Democratic Republic of the Congo. During its presidency of the Security Council last July, my country invited the Council to reflect on how responsible, transparent, and equitable governance of natural resources can contribute to conflict prevention, supply chain security, and the emergence of shared prosperity. The AI revolution gives this reflection additional relevance. We must ensure that technological transformations of the 21st century do not reproduce the economic imbalances of previous decades. Countries supplying essential resources to the global economy while processing technology and most of the added value remain concentrated elsewhere. The security of supply chains cannot be separated from the prosperity of the populations at their source. That is why AI governance must also be approached from a logic of shared responsibility. responsibility in the design of systems, responsibility in their use, and responsibility within the value chains that make their development possible, and also responsibility in the distribution of the benefits of technological progress. For the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the objective is clear, the resources that help make the digital revolution possible must also contribute to the development, economic transformation, industrialization, and strengthening of the technological capabilities of those countries that produce them. This is not merely a matter of development. It is also a matter of peace. When value chains are opaque and benefits are distributed unequally, and when producing communities remain excluded from the prosperity generated by their own resources, economic vulnerabilities can fuel tensions, and conflict economies. Conversely, when resources are governed responsibly, when local processing creates jobs and opportunities, and when populations genuinely share in the benefits of growth, supply chains can not only become more secure and resilient, but also chains of shared prosperity. Mr. President, it is precisely here that the Security Council can bring added value. It is not the Council's role to replace the appropriate bodies responsible for developing the full range of technical rules relating to AI, but it is fully within the Council's remit to anticipate the risks that may affect international peace and security, to consider how new technologies transform conflict dynamics, to protect civilians, to encourage confidence-building measures, and to ensure that technological transformations do not create new vulnerabilities that could fuel instability. Our objective must therefore not be to choose between innovation and security any more than it should be to choose between natural resources and development. Our responsibility is to govern progress so that it serves humanity. As July under the presidency of the DRC, our council reflected on how to transform natural resources, which are too often associated with conflict economies, into instruments of peace, cooperation, and shared prosperity. Today, the AI revolution in another form puts us in front of a similar question. How can we ensure that technological progress reduces divisions rather than deepening them? How can we ensure that it strengthens states' capacities rather than creating new dependencies? And finally, how can we ensure that value chains, the value chains supporting this revolution, contribute to the peace and prosperity of the societies that make them possible? For the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the answer must rest on three principles, shared responsibility, inclusion, and shared prosperity. As the capabilities of artificial intelligence advance, our collective capacity to govern them must advance alongside them Because whether the subject is natural resources or artificial intelligence, the fundamental question remains the same. It is not only about what our resources and technologies enable us to do, but also about what we collectively decide to do with them. And that is where our common responsibility begins. Thank you. France · President [42:43]: I thank Her Excellency Ms. Kikwombo-Wagner for the statement, and I now give the floor to the Permanent Representative of China. China · Permanent Representative [42:54]: Foreign Language Thank you, President. I thank France for convening this meeting and thank the briefers for their presentations. Artificial intelligence, or AI, is an important driver of the new round of technological revolution and industrial transformation, and as such, brings to humanity immense convenience and opportunities for their life and productive activities, while also creating new issues and challenges for international peace and security. It is incumbent upon the international community to work more closely together, attach equal importance to development and security, and steer AI development for the positive, for good, and for humanity, thereby contributing to world peace, stability, development, and prosperity. I wish to underscore the following points. The first point is about respecting digital sovereignty and advocating openness for mutual benefit. As AI technology is deeply embedded in global production and supply chains, and innovation, networks. All countries have the right to independently choose AI technologies, products and services following the dictates of their actual needs and market principles. Banding together into a petty us versus them clique in the tech sector and forcing other countries to take sides is tantamount to politicizing and instrumentalizing tech issues in the service of certain major powers' attempt to maintain their technological edge through monopoly in their quest for digital hegemony. This not only hampers global tech progress to the detriment of the development rights and interests of all countries, especially smaller nations, but also increases the risk of fragmentation of technical standards and incompatibility between systems, and thus putting global security in serious jeopardy. We call on all countries to enhance exchanges and cooperation, promote open source and open ecosystems, and work together for global scientific and technological advancement. My second point is about strengthening risk awareness and ensuring that AI is secure and controllable. All countries should uphold the people centered philosophy, making sure AI research, development and application are in line with the purposes and principles of the UN Charter and applicable international law, as well as the common values of humanity and social ethics. In response to the inherent and secondary risks posed by AI, it is necessary to continuously improve regulatory frameworks, emergency response, and cross-border cooperation mechanisms, and resolutely combat the malicious abuse of AI by terrorist organizations, extremist forces, and transnational criminal groups. Relevant businesses, especially tech giants, should fulfill their social responsibilities, counter disinformation and hate speech, and subject themselves to regulation by law and oversight by the public. Regarding AI R&D and application in the military domain, all countries should take a prudent and responsible approach, avoid strategic miscalculations and an arms race, oppose the use of related weapons for indiscriminate attacks or deliberate with strikes against civilians and civilian facilities, and make sure that the ultimate decision-making power stays with humans. The third point is about upholding AI for good and strengthening technological empowerment. AI has unlocked many possibilities for addressing global challenges, such as those related to climate change, food security, public health, energy transition, and natural disasters. The international community should seize this historic opportunity, support the empowerment of all industries through AI technologies and provide guidance for technological advances to better translate into improvements in public wellbeing. We welcome the United Nations efforts to make the best use of existing resources and apply AI technology to enhance the quality and efficiency of its work, thereby providing more agile and responsive service to member states. UN field missions, with the consent of the host governments and in line with their respective mandates, may use AI technology properly to strengthen their situational awareness, information analysis, risk early warning, and rapid response capabilities. My fourth point is about promoting fairness and inclusivity and improving global governance. AI is a shared asset for all humanity and should not become rich countries and rich people's game. We must prevent the digital and AI divide from exacerbating the development divide. Increase support for the global south. Help people of all countries peacefully partake of the dividends of technological progress and make them more resilient against security risks. We must practice true multilateralism, support the UN as the main forum of global AI governance, and give developing countries more representation and a bigger voice. On the basis of respecting the diversity of civilizations and the uniqueness of each country's culture, we should enhance alignment and coordination on AI development strategies, governance rules, and technical standards, and form a consensus-based global governance framework at an early date so as to build institutional guardrails that preserve international peace and security. President, China is an important practitioner in AI innovation and development and an active contributor to global governance. Since President Xi Jinping launched the Global AI Governance Initiative, China has helped the UN General Assembly adopt by consensus. the resolution on enhancing international cooperation on capacity building of artificial intelligence and tabled the AI capacity building action plan for good and for all and the AI plus international cooperation initiative. In July this year, President Xi Jinping announced at the World AI Conference that in the next five years, China will provide 5,000 opportunities in AI training and seminar programs for developing countries Build international AI application cooperation centers for ASEAN, the League of Arab States, the African Union, CELAC, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, and BRICS, and advance the application of the AI-powered meteorological warning system named MAZU in 30 countries. proposed and championed by China, a new response to the call of our time. The World Artificial Intelligence Cooperation Organization, or WAIICO for short, was founded in the city of Shanghai. It is the world's first ever intergovernmental international organization dedicated to AI. We welcome more countries to join this open platform and look forward to working with all nations to help build a just and equitable system for global AI governance. Together, we can and shall create a brighter future for humanity. Thank you, President. France · President [50:19]: I thank the permanent representative of China for the statement. I now give the floor to the representative of the Russian Federation. Russian Federation [50:31]: Mr. President, we thank the briefers for their contributions to the discussion. Today, artificial intelligence has become quite a trendy topic, and there is virtually no one in the world who is indifferent to it. It is now being discussed in a variety of political and expert fora. And the Security Council is no exception. However, this principal organ of the United Nations has clear limitations. First of all, it is hard to see how the generic topic of artificial intelligence is related to the Council's mandate as clearly defined in the UN Charter for the maintenance of international peace and security. Secondly, and equally importantly, the countries of Africa, Asia, Latin America are underrepresented in the Security Council. The voice of the global South is unlikely to be heard in full. Accordingly, there is a high risk that the dominant group of Western states in the Council, which is interested in preserving and consolidating its technological leadership in this area, will seek to impose its narrow self-serving approach on the entire international community to the detriment of the prerogative of inclusive specialized mechanisms engaged in practical work in this field. And regrettably, this is already happening. One striking example is the holding of closed-door summits on the so-called responsible military use of AI. to which most developing countries are not invited. Finally, issues relating to both the civilian and military applications of AI technologies are complex and multidimensional. And that is precisely why these issues should be discussed in relevant specialized fora. For instance, discussions of AI-enabled cyber attacks would be more appropriate within the global mechanism established as the successor to the UN Open-Ended Working Group on Security of and in the Use of ICTs. And for the consideration of the military aspects of AI, there is the Group of Governmental Experts on Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems, which operates under the framework of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons. I would like to draw colleagues' attention to the fact that the GGE in Geneva adopted a substantive consensus report just three weeks ago. This outcome serves as a practical confirmation of the effectiveness and relevance of that forum. Most importantly, The report contains a working definition of lethal autonomous weapons systems, common understandings regarding the applicability of the norms of international law to such systems, including international humanitarian law, as well as parameters for ensuring human control in order to mitigate risks associated with the military use of AI. We do not believe it would be advisable to undermine the constructive work that has already been accomplished in Geneva. For our part, we are ready to continue participating actively in the group's work with a view to further aligning common approaches in this area. Mr. President, we have carefully studied the concept note for today's meeting circulated by the French presidency. We believe it is counterproductive to consider the use of AI technologies solely through the lens of risk. After all, every coin has two sides. The advantages of AI include reliability, security, and above all, speed, including in decision making. AI allows to carry out an effective analysis of large data sets. It can help to identify threats. enhance situational awareness, and improve precision in the conduct of operations, as well as reduce risks to the civilian population and strengthen the protection of civilian objects. At the same time, of course, it must be borne in mind that this technology also entails risks. Minimizing them is first and foremost, a matter of ensuring human control over the functioning of AI-enabled technologies. Specific forms of such controls are determined by states in practice at the national level. Some possible means of ensuring human control include, for example, enhancing system reliability and resiliency, limiting the types of targets, restricting the duration of operation, geographical scope and scale of use, and timely intervention and deactivation of the system. In addition, steps must also undertake measures to detect and minimize errors in algorithms and data sets, as well as adopt appropriate measures to prevent and suppress violations of international law in the context of the development and use of relevant technologies. Such measures could include effective life cycle management of weapons systems and military equipment, establishing readiness criteria, and ensuring maximum protection from unauthorized access. We also see added value in exchanging views and developing specific recommendations and guidelines. However, it is important that this be done exclusively in relevant specialized bodies. Russia does not object to a multilateral dialogue on the applications of AI in principle, and this includes the military applications of AI, as well as considering the implications of the use of such tools for international peace and security. We are convinced, however, that such a dialogue must be based on consensus and inclusiveness and be intergovernmental in nature. These fundamental principles are intended to guarantee that the interests of every member state are taken into account and to ensure that the decisions adopted are effective. Moreover, in exchanging views on this subject, a particular focus must be placed on ensuring non-discriminatory and equitable access for all states, particularly the countries of the global south, to AI technologies. Thank you for your attention. France · President [57:59]: I thank the representative of the Russian Federation for his statement. I now give the floor to the permanent representative of Liberia. Liberia · Permanent Representative [58:06]: Thank you, Mr. President. Liberia joins in thanking the presidency of France for convening this critical debate And we thank the briefers for sharing their qualified perspectives. We also join in welcoming the high-level dignitaries participating. Excellencies, history teaches us that humanity's greatest transformations are never defined by technological breakthroughs alone. Every fundamental leap in capability has demanded an equal leap in governance, ethical frameworks, and multilateral rules to ensure that power remains tethered to the common good. Artificial intelligence presents the defining test of that timeless principle. Its promise to uplift societies is immense. So too is the existential peril should its trajectory outstrip human control, institutional accountability, and ethical oversight. 81 years ago, The architects of the United Nations Charter confronted a world fractured by unrestrained power. They recognized that sustainable peace cannot be secured merely by reacting to crises after the smoke has cleared. It demands foresight, sustained multilateral cooperation, and institutions capable of anticipating and neutralizing threats before they ignite global conflict. While the delegates at San Francisco in 1945 could not have envisioned neural networks, or frontier computing models, any capability that reshapes the nature of warfare, sovereignty, and geopolitical stability falls squarely within this Council's primary mandate to maintain international peace and security. Mr. President, artificial intelligence is already reshaping critical infrastructure, global commerce, and social cohesion. Governed responsibly, these technologies can empower the United Nations, enhancing conflict, early warning mechanisms, optimizing humanitarian logistics, and strengthening peacekeeping operations. Yet, we observe with grave concern the proliferation of AI-enabled offensive capabilities, autonomous weapon systems, and frontier models exhibiting unpredictable emergent behaviors. Rapid advances toward artificial general intelligence and highly autonomous systems underscore that frontier risks are no longer abstract theoretical possibilities. They are truly eminent policy realities. The international community cannot afford to wait for a systemic failure or catastrophic miscalculation before establishing collective safeguards. We must not allow the cost of today's hesitation to become tomorrow's catastrophe. Mr. President, Liberia believes the international community must steer clear of two equally hazardous extremes. The first is suffocating overregulation that stifles progress, particularly for developing nations that urgently need access to AI tools to bolster education, revolutionize healthcare delivery, modernize agriculture, and accelerate the sustainable development goals. The second is dangerous complacency. The naive assumption that transformative technologies can safely self-regulate. History offers no precedent for such a faith. Without verifiable safeguards, transparency, and clear liability, unregulated capabilities will generate vulnerabilities that respect no national border. Our path is not a binary choice between innovation and regulation. The imperative before us is to ensure that technological innovation and multilateral governance advance hand in hand. We must regulate with wisdom and innovate with responsibility. For Liberia, four operational pillars are paramount. One, safety by design. Responsibility must begin at the architecture phase. Rigorous risk mitigation, cybersecurity resilience, and fail-safe controls must be embedded across the entire lifecycle from pre-training to public deployment rather than improvised post-crisis. 2. upholding international law and human agency. Decisions involving the use of lethal force, the deprivation of human life, and the escalation of conflict must never be abdicated to autonomous algorithms. Meaningful human control and accountability remain the non-negotiable bedrock of international humanitarian law and human dignity. Collaborative confidence building. Three, multilateral cooperation must foster trust without impeding scientific inquiry. Harmonize safety benchmarks, coordinated threat disclosures, and transparent red teaming protocols between states, industry leaders, and independent scientists are essential to mitigate strategic mistrust. And four, independent verifiable oversight. Norms without verification are insufficient. We require credible auditing frameworks, robust red teaming standards, and independent technical evaluation to ensure that corporate and state commitments translate into measurable safety for mankind. Furthermore, Mr. President, global governance cannot become an exclusive enclave reserved for the few nations that control advanced compute and capital. Africa and the Global South cannot be treated merely as data extractors or downstream end users. We must be equal co-architects in determining the standards, ethics, and architectures of this technological era. In this regard, Liberia welcomes the landmark initiatives advanced through the Global Digital Compact, notably the Global Dialogue on AI Governance and the Independent International Scientific Panel on AI. However, Complementary efforts in the General Assembly do not absolve this Council of its specific duty. When advanced computing intersects with cyber operations against civilian infrastructure, autonomous weaponized systems, and geostrategic competition, it intersects directly with international security. Council engagement is not duplication. It is conflict prevention. Liberia, therefore, lends its strong support to the establishment of a dedicated Security Council informal working group on artificial intelligence and emerging technologies. tasked with monitoring the cross-cutting security implications of these capabilities across both thematic and country-specific agendas. To conclude, Mr. President, let us act with the foresight and urgency demanded of this moment, ensuring that the most powerful technological transition since the Industrial Revolution serves as an enduring engine for shared prosperity and a pillar of international peace and security, rather than an opportunity for further division, fraction of our world, and insecurity. I thank you for your kind attention. France · President [1:09:37]: I thank the Permanent Representative of Liberia for his statement. There are no more names inscribed on the list of speakers. I would like to thank the speakers at this Security Council meeting. The meeting is adjourned. Speaker 18 [1:12:39]: Hi, hi, hi, hi, hi, hi, hi, hi, hi. So France · President [1:14:12]: The 10,227th meeting of the Security Council is resumed. I now give the floor to His Excellency, Mr. Antonio Tajani, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs. Affairs and International Cooperation of Italy. Italy · Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation · Antonio Tajani [1:14:30]: Five years after the beginning of the Russian aggression against Ukraine, the position of the Italian government led by Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni is clear. We stand with Ukraine and its brave people that are resisting an unjust war. Our goal is a just and lasting peace. We strongly condemn the Russian attacks against civilian and energy infrastructures in Ukraine. The increasingly hybrid threats by Russia are putting European security in danger. We express our solidarity to Germany for the incidents at the Leipzig airport. Europe will remain united. It's key to avoid an escalation, and we want to be very clear: Italy is not at war with the Russian Federation. Mr President, Moscow will always find Italy ready to support dialogue and the pursuit of diplomatic solutions. But Russia, as a permanent member of this Council, has a responsibility that cannot be ignored. The time has come for Russia to engage seriously and constructively in negotiations. We thank the American administration for its efforts to facilitate dialogue. We firmly support those efforts. Europe has strategic security interests at stake and it must play a central role in this process. Our position is clear. Nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine and nothing about European security without Europe. We join the many calls for peace dialogue launched by His Holiness Pope Leo XIV. Diplomacy is the only path to follow. Mr. President, winter is approaching. For that reason, we reiterate our call for a immediate ceasefire. It is a question of an urgent humanitarian need. Too many lives have been lost. Too many children are unable to go to school. Too many families have suffered. Faced with the approaching winter, we are preparing a new support package for Ukraine's energy sector. Italia will send new generators and we will continue to support families that have lost their homes. Italy will remain on the front lines of the reconstruction of Ukraine and in contributing to these undertakings. I'm particularly concerned about the impact of this war on Ukraine's export of grain and cereals. The consequences go far beyond Europe. They also affect the most vulnerable economies. They increase the price of grain, fertilizers, and in the end, the price of bread for millions of families. Freedom of safety of navigation are fundamental principles and must be respected. This is why we launched the Roma Coalition to improve access to grain and fertilizers, reduce tensions, and find alternative routes and support trade. Mr. President, Italy's commitment is clear to continue supporting Ukraine, to work for a ceasefire, and to bring the parties back to the negotiating table. Because peace cannot be built by giving up our principles. Peace must be built by defending our principles through dialogue. Thank you. Lithuania · Baltic States · Minister for Foreign Affairs · Mr. Kocius [1:17:39]: I thank His Excellency Mr. Tajani for the statement. I now give the floor to His Excellency Mr. Kocius, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Lithuania. Mr. President, I speak on behalf of the Baltic States. I thank the French Presidency for convening this meeting. We applaud bravery of the Ukrainian people in their heroic efforts to resist the invaders. I will make three points. First, Russia's war against Ukraine continues to escalate, with consequences reaching far beyond the battlefield. Despite repeated calls by international community for peace, Russia has shown no willingness to -- willingness to abandon its futile war of imperialist domination. We are witnessing intensified attacks against Ukrainian cities and civilian infrastructure, with civilians continuing to pay the highest price. According to the United Nations Human Rights Monitoring Mission, in the first eight months of the 2026, more civilians were killed and injured in Ukraine than during the whole of 2025. The OHCHR also brings the light to appalling facts about systematic conflict-related sexual violence perpetrated by Russia against Ukrainian prisoners of war, civilian detainees, and civilians. At the same time, the consequences of Russia's actions are increasingly felt beyond Ukraine. We are witnessing a campaign of Russia's reckless and malign activities, from drone incursions to sabotage, arson, and disinformation, aimed at breaking our resolve in Europe. Drones and other military activities have repeatedly crossed or threatened the airspace of European countries, including Lithuania, just last week. Second. The consequences of this war are global, and the principles at stake are universal. Russia's targeted attacks against Ukrainian ports, maritime infrastructure, and agricultural export capacity have implications far beyond Europe. They disrupt transport and logistics chains, affect food and energy markets, and contribute to economic uncertainty. At stake is also the credibility of international law. Sovereignty, territorial integrity, and the prohibition of use of force are the foundation of international peace and security. Baltic states do not and will not recognize either the holding of the so-called election by Russia in the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine, nor their results. Russia's continued aggression in disregard of its responsibilities as a permanent member of this Council undermines trust in this institution. Calling for unconditional ceasefire and subsequent launch of direct peace negotiations must be a priority. Third, we must turn our calls for peace into meaningful action. The Baltic States welcome President Zelensky's stated readiness to engage in negotiations at the highest level, and we call on Russia to finally come to senses and to reciprocate. We also support the efforts of the United States to bring the end to this war and stand ready to contribute towards Ukraine's security, stability, and reconstruction, including through the Coalition of the Willing. Our people remember Russian occupation too well. We cannot be mute observers. Mr. President, a comprehensive, just, and lasting peace can only be achieved in full accordance with international law, including the UN Charter. A credible peace process must also address the return of all prisoners of war, the release of unlawfully detained persons, and the safe return of civilians, particularly children. Not least, there can be no durable peace without justice. Full accountability for the crime of aggression and for all war crimes and crimes against humanity must be upheld. We call upon all states to join the special tribunal or otherwise contribute to ensuring that accountability does not remain merely a matter of words. We reaffirm the Baltic states' unwavering commitment to a just and lasting peace, and to Ukraine's independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity within its internationally recognized borders. I thank you. Germany · Federal Minister for Foreign Affairs · Mr. Vadepuhl [1:21:47]: I thank His Excellency Mr. Keshiushis-Putris for the statement. I now give the floor to His Excellency Mr. Johann Walter, Federal Minister for Foreign Affairs of Germany. Thank you, Mr. President. Once again, we gather here as ministers to discuss the unprovoked, unjustified, illegal, and utterly brutal war of aggression that Russia is waging against Ukraine, as well as Russia's campaign for hybrid warfare. Since the last High-Level Week, two things have changed, but not to the better. First, Russia has intensified its brutal war of aggression. A few weeks ago, I was in Ukraine. I traveled to Kharkiv, where air raid sirens sound every hour. And yet, the people, the brave women and men of Ukraine, continue to live their lives as best they can. I was in Kyiv, where residents are now essentially living on the front line as missiles and drone rain down them day and night, attacking ever more civilian targets. In the fifth year of the war, Russia's goal remains to break Ukraine's resistance. But the will of the Ukrainian people to defend their freedom is unbreakable. And so is our support in their defense. The second thing that has changed is this: Russia's hybrid attacks against those who support Ukraine support international law have reached a new level. On the 4th of August, Russia attempted to blow up two cargo planes at Leipzig Airport using a drone rigged with explosives. This is not an isolated example of Russia's reckless and dangerous escalation in Europe. And we must not forget that the consequences of this war are being felt around the world. Ukraine had a very good grain harvest this year. But because of the Russian attacks on Ukrainian ports, it can't be delivered to the world. Russia is thereby exacerbating hunger and starvation worldwide. Let us finally escape this spiral of destruction and violence. I am convinced that this is possible. First, we need a full and immediate ceasefire starting in the Black Sea to secure the vital flow of grain and food. Second, we need comprehensive exchange of prisoners of war to bring home those who have suffered long enough. And third, we need a return to negotiations in good faith-based on the principles of international law, paving the way for a comprehensive, just, and lasting peace. Ukraine has been ready for such negotiations for a long time, but Russia continues to refuse, failing to live up to its responsibility as a permanent member of the Security Council. Ukraine is ready. We Europeans are ready. And Germany stands ready to contribute to a peaceful outcome we urgently need. I thank you. France · President [1:25:10]: I thank His Excellency Mr. Vadepuhl for the statements. I see no more speakers inscribed on the list at the time, at this time. The meeting is adjourned.