Remarks by the President of the General Assembly
H.E. Ms. Annalena Baerbock
at the Closing of the High-Level Meeting on the Prevention and Control of Non-Communicable Diseases and the Promotion of Mental Health and Well-being
September 25 2025
[As Delivered]
Ms. Assante,
Excellencies,
Ladies and gentlemen,
We have reached the close of this High-Level Meeting on Non-Communicable Diseases and Mental Health.
I thank all Member States and stakeholders for their active engagement, and for reaffirming that tackling NCDs is central to achieving the SDGs.
As I stressed this morning—and it bears repeating—most NCDs are preventable and treatable. Mental health challenges are not a life sentence.
And it’s in every country’s own interests – including economic interests – to tackle these ‘silent killers’.
Despite these facts, many countries face budgetary and capacity constraints, as we have heard today, that keep essential services out of reach for those who need them.
It is our responsibility, this has been underlined also here today, to close this gap.
That means, as discussed in Panel 1, forging stronger partnerships and whole-of-government approaches.
It means raising awareness, so people understand the risks—and know where to turn for help.
And, as discussed in panel 2, it means scaling up financing and capacity-building so prevention, diagnosis, and treatment are within reach for everyone, irrespective of nationality, age or wealth.
Excellencies,
NCDs and mental health conditions touch every country, every community, every family, every economy.
Cancer, heart disease, depression, diabetes – these are not distant challenges, but human – our realities.
While we cannot eliminate every risk, we can reduce many.
We can turn what feels like a fatal diagnosis into a manageable condition, one that allows people not just to survive, but to thrive.
We can turn a $30 trillion dollar drag on our economies into innovation, productivity, and overall economic growth.
As I said this morning and over the day, tackling NCDs is for our own mutual benefit, and even for our own self-interest.
We work together, or we suffer alone.
So, let’s be better together.
Thank you.
Now the danger is more complex.
What if terrorists acquire these weapons?
What if artificial intelligence accelerates decision-making, leaving no room for human restraint?
The risk of miscalculation today may be greater than at any point since 1945.
Excellencies,
Ladies and gentlemen,
Managing these risks, especially in areas of disagreement, is precisely one of the tasks for which the United Nations was created.
And as I said in my opening speech, it’s not because we do not know our compass.
It is not because our compass does not work.
We do have effective frameworks for reducing nuclear dangers, shaped by this organization.
- the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons,
- the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty,
- and the Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone treaties.
These are concrete guardrails.
They build habits of restraint and keep doors open to deeper reductions.
But as I also said in my opening speech treaties alone are not enough. Member States – each Member State – have to live up to them.
Especially those who possess these monstrous weapons.
The most simple thing would be to commit to policies of no first use.
And rather than pouring resources into new arsenals, we should invest in the biggest security threat for all humankind, of this century: the climate crisis.
Just imagine if we were to use all the money invested into nuclear weapons today for fighting exactly this: the climate crisis; the injustice of social divides.
And we should also think about the potential of newer forms from this technology, directed to serve humanity constructively – and safely.
Used wisely and under regulation, nuclear technology can for example diagnose and treat cancer, monitor oceans and the atmosphere.
But also, these civil technologies must also be kept safe.
Because civilian facilities—reactors, laboratories, universities, hospitals—could also be turned into targets of war.
Again, with dramatic consequences.
And therefore, we have to join to protect them, wherever and whenever, to be better and safer together.
Excellencies,
We do not live in heaven.
We live in the world we are living in.
Therefore we must be pragmatic.
Nuclear weapons exist.
Indeed, tens of thousands of nuclear weapons exist.
And whether we like it or not, deterrence and balance still feature in delicate security architectures.
But they are not ends in themselves.
While we cannot be naïve about the world as it is, neither can we give up on the world as it should be.
It’s in our hands.
And as I underlined at the opening of the General Debate, to give up because we have tried and failed would be to let evil prevail.
Our efforts must persevere, not because of any certainty that we will win, but because we know it is the right thing to do.
And we know that the right thing to do is to disarm; to reduce the risk or likelihood of nuclear weapons ever being used.
Durable security rests not in ever-growing arsenals, but in disarmament, in non-proliferation, and—one day—in abolition.
Excellencies,
Two weeks ago, when together with the Secretary General and the Japanese representatives, I rang the Peace Bell for the International Day of Peace, I recalled my visit to Nagasaki.
Back there I met schoolgirls, who told me why they are fighting for a nuclear weapons free world.
Because they didn’t experience the horrors of bombing themselves.
But they inherited them through generations from their grandparents, some of whom were killed by the nuclear bombs, and others had to live with the consequences for life.
Those great-granddaughters of the victims have become fierce advocates for peace.
They know, with unsentimental clarity, that humanity holds the power to erase civilization in a single reckless act.
For their sake—and for the memory of those reduced to shadows in Hiroshima and Nagasaki—let us resolve that their great-granddaughters and their great-grandsons will grow up one day in a world free of nuclear weapons.
I thank you.