President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine delivered a powerful address at the United Nations General Assembly, urgently appealing for increased military aid to counter Russia’s ongoing aggression. His speech also carried a stark warning about a new and perilous era in military technology, citing the unchecked rise of drones and artificial intelligence. He declared, ‘We are now living through the most destructive arms race in human history.’ This fervent call to arms, coming just a day after former U.S. President Donald Trump signaled a renewed backing for Kyiv, stood in sharp contrast to the U.N.’s foundational spirit of promoting dialogue and diplomacy to resolve conflicts.
Meanwhile, Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian made his debut on the global stage, three months after his country faced a brief but intense war with Israel and U.S. strikes on its nuclear facilities. Pezeshkian portrayed Iran as a victim of military aggression, firmly stating that his country ‘has never sought and will never seek to build a nuclear bomb,’ echoing a sentiment shared earlier by Ayatollah Khamenei. However, his speech offered little concrete strategy for resolving the ongoing nuclear standoff with European powers, instead criticizing their moves to impose snapback sanctions as undermining diplomatic efforts. He also vehemently accused both the U.S. and Israel of a ‘great betrayal of diplomacy’ by attacking Iran while negotiations were underway, even presenting a booklet with photos of civilians allegedly killed by Israeli strikes. This firm rhetorical stance, without a clear path forward, left many observers uncertain about Iran’s immediate diplomatic intentions.
Syria’s new President, Ahmed al-Shara, also made a significant appearance, becoming the first Syrian leader to address the Assembly since 1967. While expressing openness to a security agreement with Israel, al-Shara cautioned against Israeli expansion in the region and aggressive military actions, assuring the international community that ‘Syria will not pose a threat to any country, including Israel.’
Beyond these pressing geopolitical crises, the General Assembly dedicated significant attention to other critical global issues. The Security Council convened to discuss the potential threats of artificial intelligence to world peace and stability, while U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres hosted a crucial climate summit, where 118 nations are expected to outline their 2035 emissions-reduction targets under the Paris climate accord.
Indeed, the climate debate highlighted a notable divergence. Despite former President Trump’s public repudiation of climate action, European Union climate commissioner Wopke Hoekstra affirmed Europe’s unwavering commitment to aggressive emission reduction goals. He noted that other major economies are similarly advancing their climate ambitions, underscoring a growing global resolve that seems unswayed by a shifting U.S. stance. The E.U. is even accelerating its ban on Russian liquefied natural gas, a move that could benefit American gas suppliers.
President Trump’s sudden shift on the Ukraine war, where he moved from pressing for territorial concessions to declaring Ukraine could ‘WIN all of Ukraine back,’ was met with a mix of gratitude and cautious skepticism in Kyiv. Ukrainian commentators noted the statement’s unprecedented favorability but cautioned against premature celebration of a ‘White House strategy overhaul.’ Zelensky himself expressed surprise at Trump’s turnabout, suggesting that President Putin’s alleged dishonesty may have contributed to improved relations. Despite this renewed optimism, the reality on the ground remains challenging, with Russia continuing to make territorial gains in a brutal war of attrition, leading Zelensky to conclude that international rules are failing and only ‘friends and weapons’ can save a country. He echoed this sentiment when discussing the war in Gaza, drawing parallels to Ukraine’s struggle and lamenting the humanitarian crisis unfolding there, which King Felipe VI of Spain also decried as ‘abhorrent acts that offend human conscience and shame the entire international community.’
President Mulino of Panama, in a seemingly direct response to earlier threats from former President Trump, also used the platform to firmly defend Panama’s sovereign control and neutrality of the Panama Canal, asserting its role as a ‘global public good’ that ‘is and shall remain Panamanian.’