President of the UN General Assembly,
H.E Dennis Francis,
grants press conference in Kampala, Uganda
20 January 2024
(As Delivered)
Video link: https://tinyurl.com/27xu6zrj
Good afternoon, all.
Thank you for your interest and for joining me here today.
Allow me to start by firstly conveying my heartfelt thanks to the people and government of Uganda for the generous welcome my delegation and I were offered.
And, allow me to also extend my sincere congratulations to the government of Uganda for successfully hosting the 19th Non-Aligned Movement Summit, as well as the Third South Summit, which we will open tomorrow.
I wish them the best of luck in chairing these two important groups – whose rich and diverse membership is so critical to the UN system and multilateralism as a whole, with NAM representing 55 per cent of the global population, and the Group of 77 and China being the largest negotiating bloc of developing countries at the UN.
And I must say – I am very proud that it was on these two occasions that I held my first official visit to Africa.
Yesterday morning, we opened the 19th Summit of the Non-Aligned Movement, held under the theme Deepening cooperation for Shared Global Affluence, which concluded this afternoon.
And tomorrow morning, I will attend the Third South Summit, organised by the Group of 77 and China, under the banner Leaving No One Behind.
In my address to both ceremonies, I use the occasion to reiterate my praise and appreciation for both organisations, whose support has proven immensely useful during very challenging times. .
The current climate – and I mean that politically and literally – is marked by profound instability, and our multilateral systems are on trial.
Gatherings like the ones we have convened this week are an occasion for us to demonstrate that cooperation and collaboration are not only still possible, but are, in fact, indispensable. They constitute the sole credible course of action to authentically and meaningfully address the breadth of challenges we face.
Indeed, it is only as a cohesive, international community that we stand a chance.
In a time of unprecedented crises, far too often, the voices of the Global South and developing countries are relegated to the margins and the peripheries.
This is wrong. Ethically, morally, politically, and pragmatically.
In fact, I am absolutely convinced that both the Non-Aligned Movement and the Group 77 and China, are key drivers of peace, progress, prosperity and sustainability – all of which are priorities of my Presidency.
Ladies and gentlemen,
This evening, on the occasion of his newfound Chairmanship of both Groups, I will have the honour of paying a courtesy visit to H.E., Mr. Yoweri Muveni, President of the Republic of Uganda.
I was also very privileged to meet with the Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs, the UN Country Team and the Resident Coordinator for Uganda, as well as other bilateral engagements.
In all my meetings, I addressed a range of pressing global issues, including climate change, sustainable development, peace and security, and, of course, human rights. I also made sure to communicate the work ongoing in New York, including invitations to upcoming events such as the Summit of the Future and my Presidency’s signature event, Sustainability Week, in April.
Today, I undertook several field visits around the capital city of Kampala. In fact, I am just back from said visits.
In terms of migration, my visits included UN-operated programmes such as UNHCR’s Urban Response Initiative in Nsambya and IOM’s Kampala Transit Centre in Nakasero.
Regarding education, I visited Nakivubo Blue Primary School and their Girls Empowering Girls programme, which they run with UNICEF. I also had the chance to visit Makarere University, where I was introduced to Makerere University’s multi-disciplinary innovation project, conducting research on digital innovation and urbanisation, in partnership with the United Nations Development Program.
Finally, on women and girls’ rights, I was welcomed into the offices of the SAUTI Help Line’s Centre where I saw the incredible work being led to counter gender-based violence, child labour, neglect, and abuse.
It was a truly eye-opening experience and a privilege. I do not take for granted to have had the chance to witness the work being spearheaded in Uganda by the various entities under the United Nations umbrella. I am very proud of that work.
To complement these extensive visits, tomorrow afternoon, I will participate in a Roundtable session with the Heads of UN Agencies present in the country, to be moderated by the Resident Coordinator, which I eagerly anticipate.
As I conclude, this visit is part of a broader effort of mine to underscore the UN’s dedication to and commitment to ensuring a more prosperous and harmonious world that is inclusive of the Global South. I am confident that this trip will have served this purpose.
My door is open to any nation or leader desiring to engage in further cooperation across borders, sectors or UN departments.
Together, we can deliver on peace, we can deliver on prosperity, we can deliver on progress and we can deliver on sustainability– and I am glad to have shared this message to both the government and people of Uganda, as well as all those present for these two Summits.
Thank you for your kind attention, and I now open turn the floor for your questions and observations.
Moderator
Thank you, your excellency, can we have questions?
Speaker 2
Thank you very much. Thank you very much, your excellency, I am from RT, Russia Today.
Now, Your Excellency, one of the major issues that was discussed at this 19th Non-Aligned Summit was the ongoing Israeli aggression in Gaza. How is the United Nations actively addressing and seeking solutions to this conflict and also conflicts with humanitarian implications around the world? And how does the organization plan to enhance its effectiveness, adaptability and responsiveness to contemporary global issues? Thank you.
Moderator
Let’s have second one.
Speaker 3
Mr. President, thank you very much.
I am from NBSU, Uganda, particularly seeking for your response on conflict. Most of the times when the UN responds on conflicts, it talks about Palestine, or even Ukraine. There are so many conflicts happening in Africa, Central African Republic, Mozambique, Somalia, Burkina Faso and in many other countries, including the Sudan situation. What’s your take on the conflicts happening in Africa and what is the UN going to do to make sure that it takes a stand on some of these conflicts?
Moderator
Thank you.
Speaker 3
Thank you so much.
African countries have been pushing for permanent seats on the UN Security Council. However, updated efforts have not been successful. So, I’m inquiring how far with granting this, or should we be hopeful that this will be granted? Thank you.
Moderator
You can answer those three, then we can take three more.
PGA
Okay. Thank you very much for your questions.
I think the first question related to, specifically to, the situation in Gaza and about how does the UN plan to adapt itself to be more impactful in resolving complex global issues.
The first thing I want to say is that the UN is not the problem. The UN is not the problem. The UN seeks sometimes to lead, but always to support the solution. So, let’s get that out of the way. Let’s get that clear. The UN is not an actor in creating problems for the international system. The UN was set up as a problem solver to facilitate dialogue, discussion, compromise, agreement, understanding that leads to resolutions of conflicts. The situation in Gaza is an extremely frustrating one. I think you know that 25,000 innocent civilian lives lost? It’s a very impressive number for the wrong reasons. It’s impressive because it is woefully and unacceptably large that so many innocent people who are not themselves combatants should be the victims of military action taking place in Gaza. And that is why the General Assembly, which I have the honour to lead, and I, are here. I am sitting here, but I am the voice and the face of the General Assembly.
And that General Assembly was swift in agreeing a resolution that called for, number one, the immediate return of all hostages as a consequence of the unacceptable action that was taken by Hamas on October 7, and the cessation of the violence in Gaza in order to save lives. At the time we had made that call, I think the death toll was about 7000 people, the majority of whom were, in fact, women and children, young children, innocent children. And the third thing was to insist that the authorities, the Israeli authorities, permit and facilitate access of humanitarian aid to those in Gaza who needed it.
So, that was maybe – if one could use the descriptor – 6000 lives ago. Today, it’s in excess of 25,000 lives. That number has more than multiplied itself four times. And that is precisely the reason why the General Assembly delivered this very strong message that the violence must come to an end, because we saw the danger and the risk that many more innocent lives would be lost in a situation that threatened to become a spiral – a spiral of death and destruction, which is precisely what has happened as it stands at the moment, with no immediate end in sight to the hostilities in Gaza. It’s anyone’s guess what can and might happen next. Including, of course, the worrisome prospect that this can all spill over into a regional war, a regional engagement, which, of course, would be the worst possible scenario that could happen.
The other part of the question that I was asked was how the UN plans to adapt itself in order to address more effectively global issues. I think we need, first, an answer to that question. But there is also, I think, the necessity of dissecting the origins of some of these conflicts and disputes. Conflicts and disputes create strife and tension in the system. The parties to those conflicts make a choice. They make a decision. There was a decision made to invade Ukraine. There was a decision made by Hamas – albeit not without the provocation of domination of Gaza for an extraordinary long period of time – but there was a decision made by Hamas on October 7 and a consequential decision made by the state of Israel in response. Conflict and crisis and war are decisions. They’re not necessarily inescapable decisions. There could have been other decisions. There could have been decisions for dialogue, for negotiation in several rounds, that did not happen.
The point I’m making is war and peace are decisions that countries make for reasons best known to themselves. It is not the decision that the UN expounds and promotes for the very reasons we’re seeing in Gaza, because it’s painful, it’s dastardly, it’s dehumanizing, it’s destructive. Think for 1 minute of what it would cost. Let’s for a moment, if we could, and in a sense we shouldn’t, but if you, for 1 minute, just set aside the human cost of the war in terms of the lives the 25,000 people – think for 1 minute what it would cost to rebuild Ukraine and what it might mean for the entire global economy and for global development in having to rebuild Ukraine and having to rebuild Gaza. Think for a moment.
The United Nations Charter says, We the peoples, in order to save human future generations from this scourge of war. That is what the UN is about. Because we’ve been down this road before in the First and Second World Wars. There are no real winners. There are no winners. There are only losers. Setbacks. Setbacks that undermine development, derail people’s lives, impose costs and suffering on human beings, create dysfunction in societies, impose new problems, new burdens on families.
Can you imagine? 80% of the households in Gaza have been destroyed and are now uninhabitable. Where are these people to live? And under what protection from the environment, from the elements? So, there’s a logic to the UN position. Let’s avoid this carnage because it’s self destructive. No one wins. We all lose. We all lose a part of our humanity watching other human beings suffer. It was never intended that way.
What is the UN doing in order to empower itself to better address these challenges? The UN is not complacent or arrogant about its role and function and its capacity to meet the demands of the challenges that exist. In fact, the UN is very much a reformist organization. One of the issues, and it’s a big issue, a huge issue, that has been dramatically demonstrated, particularly in relation to the war in Ukraine and to the war in Gaza, is the apparent incapacity of the United Nations Security Council, which has, under the charter, primary responsibility for international peace and security. The incapacity of the Council to act, to take the decisions that are necessary to be taken, that could politically alter the course of events and the Security Council, because of deep divisions globally, geopolitical divisions have not for a very long time been able to reach a decision, a consensus on Gaza.
In the meantime, the death toll has been climbing in the UN itself. Let us not forget that UN personnel amounting to, I think, 155 souls have been lost in Gaza and UN workers assigned to Gaza to provide humanitarian aid and support. Many of them were taking their children to work, their young children, to work with them out of fear that if they should die, their families would die with them. They did not want to be separated from their children because bombs were being dropped on UN facilities, contrary to the provisions and dictates of international law, contrary to the principles of international humanitarian law. Those are supposed to be safe spaces, as indeed are places like hospitals, health centers, schools. But the evidence seems to suggest that the nature of these facilities did not form part of the calculus in the bombing campaign that has taken place in Gaza. So, you have the largest number of UN personnel killed in any military action, anywhere in the world, in the history of the UN. So, Security Council reform is underway. I want to say to you, though, that Security Council reform is a process. It’s not an event.
I’m a very practical guy, and so I’d say to you, don’t expect to get up to awaken Monday morning and find that the Security Council has been reformed. It will not happen in that way. And it shouldn’t. It shouldn’t, because you have now a system that was invented in the post-1945 period when the world was a very different place. It needs to be updated; it needs to be refined. It needs to take into account the current geopolitical realities that exist. Power has shifted from where it was in the 1940s to what exists now. New countries have become influential players in the international system, and I will address the question of Africa later. So, we need a security council that is reformed, that is up to the task, that is agile, and that is not paralyzed to take the decisions that need to be taken in the interest of securing international peace and security. That is an ongoing process. We have a process called the intergovernmental process with two facilitators, one from a developed country, one from a developing country, to engage in that discussion. There are a number of models or proposals on the table about how the Security Council can be reformed, and these models are being analyzed and discussed.
There are, as yet, no formal negotiations to that end. That will come when Member States have determined that the moment is right to commence formal negotiations. But Security Council reform is at the top of the agenda of the UN, and has been made so to a significant degree because of what has happened in Ukraine and in Gaza. Quite apart from that, it’s not just the reform of the Council. There is also a process to reinvigorate the General Assembly of the United Nations. And if you’ve been following the issue, you would know that in the wake of the paralysis of the Security Council, the General Assembly, which the Charter assigned a secondary role in matters of peace and security, has in fact taken up the gauntlet and been able to agree. I think now it’s four resolutions on Gaza, very decisive and clear resolutions on Gaza. So, the UN is not the problem. We seek to address and correct the problems. The problems arise when member states of the United Nations, for whatever reason – I have to say this correctly – exercise their decision to violate their commitments under the Charter of the United
Nations. If there were no violations of the Charter, we would not be where we are now. It is a choice that countries make to repudiate their commitments under the Charter that has landed us in this very difficult situation of war and crisis, and this unacceptably high human cost that we are witnessing in Gaza.
The next question that was asked was about Africa, the conflicts in Africa and NAM’s position in the conflicts. You’re quite right. You’re quite right in the sense that the conflict in Ukraine and the conflict in the Middle East, in a sense, has drowned out other regional conflicts which might be smaller, but that are no less important. And they’re important for a number of reasons. They’re important because they give rise to mass population movements. People are dislodged from their homes, from their homelands. I visited a refugee center today. People fleeing their homelands for a number of reasons and being given safe haven in Uganda in a program of acceptance that is unarguably one of the most progressive and impressive anywhere in the world.
I’d like to take the opportunity to compliment and commend the government and people of Uganda for their very humanistic approach to refugees. There are some places in the world, if you look at the news, some very wealthy places, where refugees are being turned back at the border, sent on to other countries, which is not something anticipated in the international refugee law and policy. But Uganda accepts the refugees, helps and supports them, and prepares them to go on to a country that will accept them. And I was very privileged today to observe and witness all of this and to see the processes and the facilities at which these procedures are carried out. It’s very worrying, in fact, that Africa has again become, in the last five, eight years, an area of conflict, a zone of conflict. We have thought that that era was behind us. We have thought that coups in Africa was behind us. That, however, is not the case. The UN is committed to supporting African governments and working with the regional authorities in Africa, such as the African Union and others, to address these conflicts, because we are aware that these conflicts provide opportunities for opportunistic operatives to pounce on them, complicate them with further implications for peace and stability across the region.
If conflicts are not contained, they have a way of multiplying and spreading. And so, our hope is that those countries in conflict in Africa will find the courage and the strength to come to the table and to discuss and resolve their differences. The UN is fully prepared to support that process, to bring the parties together, to facilitate that dialogue in a nonjudgmental way. In a nonjudgmental way. It is not for us, in the UN, to assign blame or responsibility. What we want is a solution that saves lives, creates stability, so that the business of pursuing development, bringing development to people who deserve it. Children can’t go to school in the midst of a conflict. In some cases, you can’t leave your home to purchase the things you need when guns are blazing over your head. Conflict and crisis undermine the day to day lives of citizens, derails it. And that is why we are committed to doing what we can to support these countries in conflicts, to resolve those conflicts in a sustainable way, in a sustainable way, the only way.
And, let me quote Mahatma Gandhi here. If you ever have the opportunity of visiting the UN, you should go into the UN gardens. There is a statue there of Mahatma Gandhi, the world-famous leader of India, with one of his quotes, “There is no way to peace. Peace is the way.” And that philosophy is as powerful today and will always be as powerful as it was when he uttered those words. Peace is the way. If we put people first, which is what the UN does, if we elevate the safety and security of human beings to the top of the agenda, we will see how worthless war and destruction is. So, we need to put people first, because all that we do, at the end of the day, development is not about how much money there is to spend. That is important. It’s about spending the money in a way that lifts people up, gives them hope for tomorrow, prepares them, empowers them to live more fulfilling lives, to look after their children, to educate their children, to be upstanding citizens, that make a contribution to their communities and societies and to global situation, to global peace and stability.
And the last question that I was asked had to do with the African proposals for two seats in the Security Council. I have my own opinion about that, but I’m barred as President of the General Assembly from uttering what my opinion might be because I represent only the views of the General Assembly. But what I can say is the process is ongoing. Everyone accepts that the Security Council that’s currently constituted is not fit for purpose. It has to be made for purpose. It has to be democratized. It has to reflect current realities of global power and global influence. And it must be agile and responsive to the dictates and demands of building peace and security in the early 21st century, so that some things have to change. When the Security Council was invented 75 years ago, many of the countries that now exist, many of the African states that now exist, did not at that time exist. They would have been under colonial domination. Thankfully, that era has passed. So, we need to create a council that better represents the current reality, but more than that, better represents the aspirations of the people in the Global South. I make no apologies for saying that because the Council has a particular structure, something called the P5, the permanent five.
And of that five, only one might describe as coming from the Global South, and that’s China. And China is a unique case because, of course, China is a large country, very powerful, very influential, but there are no other countries from the Global South. That clearly is not satisfactory in the early 21st century. So, don’t be frustrated because there is no decision as of now regarding what would be the formula by which the Security Council will be constituted. That is a question that will come out in the negotiation. And I’ve heard the African states negotiate. They are very adept at it. They’ve done their homework. Their capacity to reflect their needs and their interests is not in doubt. So let us allow the process time to mature before we begin to get frustrated. The matter is still on the table. And so, Africa still has a chance to have two seats assigned to it in the Council. More questions?
Moderator
We’ve come to the end of this briefing. The president has got other commitments and they are waiting for him. So we apologize for that.
PGA
Can we have one more, just one more quickly, let’s have the lady. Don’t give me a four part question.
Speaker 4
No, sir. Good afternoon. The Kampala Declaration and pronunciation on the [inaudible] expected to be revised later today. How, in your view, should it look like to symbolize that the Non-Aligned Movement is progressive in dealing with the current global challenges.
PGA
Well, the first thing is that the Non-Aligned Movement is a progressive movement and has been. The Non-Aligned Movement has had a long history of repudiating war and conflict and promoting peace and stability, but also cooperation among states, particularly of the Global South. So, I’m sure that those fundamental, those foundational principles, will find their way into the statement. Because situations of crisis complicate the existence of all countries. It adds cost. For example, the situation with the Houthis attacking international shipping. It sounds as if it’s far away, but you will all have to stand the consequences of it in terms of the price of imports, things that you buy from abroad that use those shipping lanes. The insurance cost to the buyers will go up. Those costs get passed on to the consumers, and so your budget will be affected. So, war has a way. It snowballs and changes everything. And that is why it’s not healthy. It’s not something you do as a matter of course. There are some wars that may be unavoidable. That’s why. I don’t know if you know, but there are some things called “legal wars”, when the Security Council gives its assent because all else has failed and the situation is so desperate to go to war.
But that only exists in the most extraordinary of circumstances. War is not a policy of change. It cannot be in the normative sense. So, let’s promote and cultivate peace. Let us encourage dialogue and negotiation, and we must do so in our private lives as well as in our public lives. In your families, it’s less stressful on you not to have to make up than to have to make up. Resolve it. It will save you time and effort and angst the same way for the world.
Thank you very much. I’m sorry we don’t have more time, but send me your questions at Ask the PGA. We have a link on the website of the President of the General Assembly. Ask the PGA and we guarantee you an answer within 48 hours.
Thank you very much. Thank you.
Moderator
We have come to the end of this briefing.
END
WEBCAST : https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1h/k1hg4t8s3q
YouTube:
Twitter (X)
Instagram:
https://www.instagram.com/unpga
LinkedIn:
