UN Secretary-General Addresses World Economic Forum: Climate Crisis and AI Governance Take Center Stage

Secretary-General's Special Address at the World Economic Forum

Your focus this year is on "Collaboration for the Intelligent Age" -- and it is a noble vision. But let's face it. When many people look around the world, they don't see much collaboration. And, perhaps to their minds, not enough intelligence. Despite progress on many fronts -- investments in renewables, technological leaps, health advances -- many of our world's problems are getting worse. We are living in an increasingly rudderless world. Last week, I delivered my annual priorities speech to the General Assembly. I said that our world is facing a Pandora's box of troubles. We face widening geopolitical divisions, rising inequalities, and an assault on human rights. We see a multiplication of conflicts, some of which are leading to a re-shaping of different regions of the world -- not least the Middle East. There is finally a measure of hope with the ceasefire and hostage release deal in Gaza takes place -- and we are working to surge up desperately needed humanitarian aid. I was also just in Lebanon where a cessation of hostilities is holding and a new government is taking shape after two years of stalemate. From the Middle East to Ukraine to Sudan and beyond, we still face an uphill battle. But we will never give up in calling for peace, but peace grounded in values of the UN Charter, international law -- including international humanitarian law -- and the principles of sovereignty, political independence and the territorial integrity of States. Meanwhile, developing countries are in economic dire straits. Some are facing double-digit inflation rates -- while interest payments in Africa are eating up 27 per cent of all government revenues. On every front, our systems of governance are often ill-equipped to deal with these challenges. Many were built for a different era, a different economy, a different world. We're working to reform institutions for the 21st century -- from the global financial architecture to the UN Security Council. Two basic aspects of our Summit of the Future. But reforming institutions requires a reform in mindsets. Because we face big challenges -- existential challenges -- and I am not convinced leaders get it. Yes, we all understand the nature of an existential threat. Those of us who lived through the Cold War remember the decades spent living under the constant shadow of nuclear annihilation. Of course, the nuclear threat is still with us. But when it comes to existential threats, nuclear is no longer alone. Today we face two new and profound threats that demand far more global attention and action because they threaten to upend life as we know it: the climate crisis and the ungoverned expansion of Artificial Intelligence. First, climate chaos. I recently saw an analysis that exposed a grim irony: Thirteen of the world's biggest ports for oil supertankers will be overwhelmed by rising sea levels. Rising seas, which are caused by rising temperatures. And rising temperatures, which are -- overwhelmingly -- caused by burning fossil fuels. Our fossil fuel addiction is a Frankenstein monster, sparing nothing and no one. All around us, we see clear signs that the monster has become master. We just endured the hottest year and the hottest decade in history. 2024 is likely to be the first calendar year that pushed past 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial levels. Breaching this limit does not mean the long-term goal of keeping the rise in global temperature to 1.5 degrees is shot. It means we need to fight even harder to get on track. Especially when what we are seeing today -- sea-level rise, heatwaves, floods, storms, droughts and wildfires -- are just a preview of the horror movie to come. Of higher prices and higher insurance premiums -- or no insurance at all. At the same time, another far more hopeful story is unfolding. Cheap, plentiful energy provided by renewables is an extraordinary economic opportunity. One that will benefit people in every country. And one that will make the end of the fossil fuel age inevitable -- no matter how hard vested interests try to stop it. A number of financial institutions and industries are backtracking on climate commitments. And paradoxically, it is selfish and also self-defeating. You are on the wrong side of history. You are on the wrong side of science. And you are on the wrong side of consumers who are looking for more sustainability, not less. This warning certainly also applies to the fossil fuel industry and advertising, lobbying and PR companies who are aiding, abetting and greenwashing. Global heating is racing forward -- we cannot afford to move backward. Governments must keep their promise to produce new, economy-wide national climate action plans this year, well ahead of COP30 in Brazil. Those plans must align with limiting the rise in global temperature to 1.5 degrees -- including by accelerating the global energy transition. We also need a surge in finance for climate action in developing countries, to adapt to global heating, slash emissions and seize the benefits of the renewables revolution. We need to tackle high-capital costs that are leaving developing countries behind. I also urge all businesses and financial institutions to create robust, accountable transition plans this year. These, too, must align with 1.5 degrees. And with the full recommendations of the United Nations High-Level Expert Group on Net Zero. To the corporate leaders who remain committed to climate action -- your leadership is needed now, more than ever. Now is the time to shift our collective efforts into overdrive, and make 2025 the biggest year yet for climate action. The second area of existential concern is ungoverned Artificial Intelligence. Advancing healthcare and diagnosing illnesses earlier. Supporting farmers with smarter tools to boost productivity. But with this promise comes profound risk, especially if AI is left ungoverned. AI can be used as a tool of deception. It can disrupt economies and labour markets, undermine trust in institutions and have chilling effects on the battlefield. And AI could deepen inequalities by excluding those without the resources or tools to benefit from its promise. Once again, collaboration is critical. The Global Digital Compact, adopted in September at the United Nations, offers a roadmap to harness the immense potential of digital technology and close digital divides. It also brings the world together around a shared vision for Artificial Intelligence -- one where this technology serves humanity, not the other way around. The Compact establishes the first universal agreement on the governance of AI that brings every country to the table. It includes the creation of an independent international scientific panel on AI, pulling expertise to bridge knowledge gaps and help every nation make the most informed AI policy decisions. The Compact also calls for a periodic global dialogue on AI governance as an inclusive space for stakeholders to come together under the auspices of the United Nations. It also foresees a network of capacity-building initiatives for developing countries, which have the most at stake as AI-driven systems grow and expand. And we must collaborate so that all countries and people benefit from AI's promise and potential to support development and social and economic progress for all. By investing in affordable internet, digital literacy, and the infrastructure that allows every country to harness AI's potential. By helping developing countries use AI to grow small businesses, improve public services, and connect communities to new markets. And by placing human rights -- always -- at the centre of AI-driven systems. The United Nations is committed to leading this effort. We are working with governments, industry, and civil society to ensure that AI becomes a tool of opportunity, inclusion and progress for all people. Ladies and gentlemen, Now is the time to wake up to these existential challenges -- and face them head on. As a global community, we must live up to this great responsibility. And let's do so by working as one, in collaboration. Thank you, and I look forward to our discussion today.

Davos 2025: Speech by the United Nations' António Guterres

Your focus this year is on "Collaboration for the Intelligent Age" -- and it is a noble vision. When many people look around the world, they don't see much collaboration. And, perhaps to their minds, not enough intelligence. Despite progress on many fronts - investments in renewables, technological leaps, health advances - many of our world's problems are getting worse. We are living in an increasingly rudderless world. Last week, I delivered my annual priorities speech to the General Assembly. I said that our world is facing a Pandora's box of troubles. We face widening geopolitical divisions, rising inequalities and an assault on human rights. We see a multiplication of conflicts, some of which are leading to a reshaping of different regions of the world - not least the Middle East. There is, finally, a measure of hope when the ceasefire and hostage release deal in Gaza takes place - and we are working to surge up desperately needed humanitarian aid. I was also just in Lebanon where a cessation of hostilities is holding, and a new government is taking shape after two years of stalemate. From the Middle East to Ukraine to Sudan and beyond, we still face an uphill battle. But we will never give up in calling for peace, but peace grounded on values - the UN Charter; international law, including international humanitarian law; and the principles of sovereignty, political independence and the territorial integrity of states. Meanwhile, developing countries are in economic dire straits. Some are facing double-digit inflation rates -- while interest payments in Africa are eating up 27% of all government revenues. On every front, our systems of governance are often ill-equipped to deal with these challenges. Many were built for a different era, a different economy, a different world. We're working to reform institutions for the 21 century - from the global financial architecture to the UN Security Council, two basic aspects of our Summit of the Future. But reforming institutions requires a reform in mindsets. Because we face big challenges - existential challenges - and I am not convinced leaders get it. Yes, we all understand the nature of an existential threat. Those of us who lived through the Cold War remember the decades spent living under the constant shadow of nuclear annihilation. Of course, the nuclear threat is still with us. But when it comes to existential threats, nuclear is no longer alone. Today we face two new and profound threats that demand far more global attention and action because they threaten to upend life as we know it: the climate crisis and the ungoverned expansion of artificial intelligence. First, climate chaos. I recently saw an analysis that exposed a grim irony: Thirteen of the world's biggest ports for oil supertankers will be overwhelmed by rising sea levels. Rising seas, which are caused by rising temperatures. And rising temperatures, which are - overwhelmingly - caused by burning fossil fuels. Our fossil fuel addiction is a Frankenstein monster, sparing nothing and no-one. All around us, we see clear signs that the monster has become master. We just endured the hottest year and the hottest decade in history. 2024 is likely to be the first calendar year that pushed past 1.5ºC above pre-industrial levels. Breaching this limit does not mean the long-term goal of keeping the rise in global temperature to 1.5ºC is shot. It means we need to fight even harder to get on track. Especially when what we are seeing today - sea level rise, heatwaves, floods, storms, droughts and wildfires - are just a preview of the horror movie to come. Of higher prices and higher insurance premiums - or no insurance at all. At the same time, another far more hopeful story is unfolding. Cheap, plentiful energy provided by renewables is an extraordinary economic opportunity. One that will benefit people in every country. And one that will make the end of the fossil fuel age inevitable -- no matter how hard vested interests try to stop it. A number of financial institutions and industries are backtracking on climate commitments. And paradoxically, it is selfish and also self-defeating. And you are on the wrong side of consumers who are looking for more sustainability, not less. This warning certainly also applies to the fossil fuel industry and advertising, lobbying and PR companies who are aiding, abetting and greenwashing. Global heating is racing forward -- we cannot afford to move backward. Governments must keep their promise to produce new, economy-wide national climate action plans this year, well ahead of COP30 in Brazil. Those plans must align with limiting the rise in global temperature to 1.5ºC - including by accelerating the global energy transition. We also need a surge in finance for climate action in developing countries, to adapt to global heating, slash emissions and seize the benefits of the renewables revolution. We need to tackle high-capital costs that are leaving developing countries behind. I also urge all businesses and financial institutions to create robust, accountable transition plans this year. These, too, must align with 1.5ºC, and with the full recommendations of the United Nations High-Level Expert Group on Net Zero. To the corporate leaders who remain committed to climate action -- your leadership is needed now, more than ever. Now is the time to shift our collective efforts into overdrive, and make 2025 the biggest year yet for climate action. The second area of existential concern is ungoverned artificial intelligence. Advancing healthcare and diagnosing illnesses earlier. Supporting farmers with smarter tools to boost productivity. But with this promise comes profound risk, especially if AI is left ungoverned. AI can be used as a tool of deception. It can disrupt economies and labour markets, undermine trust in institutions and have chilling effects on the battlefield. And AI could deepen inequalities by excluding those without the resources or tools to benefit from its promise. Once again, collaboration is critical. The Global Digital Compact, adopted in September at the United Nations, offers a roadmap to harness the immense potential of digital technology and close digital divides. It also brings the world together around a shared vision for artificial intelligence - one where this technology serves humanity, not the other way around. The Compact establishes the first universal agreement on the governance of AI that brings every country to the table. It includes the creation of an independent international scientific panel on AI, pulling expertise to bridge knowledge gaps and help every nation make the most informed AI policy decisions. The Compact also calls for a periodic global dialogue on AI governance, as an inclusive space for stakeholders to come together under the auspices of the United Nations. It also foresees a network of capacity-building initiatives for developing countries, which have the most at stake as AI-driven systems grow and expand. And we must collaborate so that all countries and people benefit from AI's promise and potential to support development and social and economic progress for all. By investing in affordable internet, digital literacy and the infrastructure that allows every country to harness AI's potential. By helping developing countries use AI to grow small businesses, improve public services and connect communities to new markets. And by placing human rights - always - at the centre of AI-driven systems. The United Nations is committed to leading this effort. We are working with governments, industry and civil society to ensure that AI becomes a tool of opportunity, inclusion and progress for all people. Ladies and gentlemen, Now is the time to wake up to these existential challenges - and face them head on and transform them as sources of progress and welfare for everybody. As a global community, we must live up to this great responsibility. And let's do so by working as one, in collaboration. Thank you, and I look forward to our discussion today.

Secretary-General's Special Address at the World Economic Forum [followed by Q&A session with Børge Brende, President and CEO of the World Economic Forum] | United Nations Secretary-General

Your focus this year is on "Collaboration for the Intelligent Age" -- and it is a noble vision. But let's face it. When many people look around the world, they don't see much collaboration. And, perhaps to their minds, not enough intelligence. Despite progress on many fronts -- investments in renewables, technological leaps, health advances -- many of our world's problems are getting worse. We are living in an increasingly rudderless world. Last week, I delivered my annual priorities speech to the General Assembly. I said that our world is facing a Pandora's box of troubles. We face widening geopolitical divisions, rising inequalities, and an assault on human rights. We see a multiplication of conflicts, some of which are leading to a re-shaping of different regions of the world -- not least the Middle East. There is finally a measure of hope with the ceasefire and hostage release deal in Gaza takes place -- and we are working to surge up desperately needed humanitarian aid. I was also just in Lebanon where a cessation of hostilities is holding and a new government is taking shape after two years of stalemate. From the Middle East to Ukraine to Sudan and beyond, we still face an uphill battle. But we will never give up in calling for peace, but peace grounded in values of the UN Charter, international law -- including international humanitarian law -- and the principles of sovereignty, political independence and the territorial integrity of States. Meanwhile, developing countries are in economic dire straits. Some are facing double-digit inflation rates -- while interest payments in Africa are eating up 27 per cent of all government revenues. On every front, our systems of governance are often ill-equipped to deal with these challenges. Many were built for a different era, a different economy, a different world. We're working to reform institutions for the 21st century -- from the global financial architecture to the UN Security Council. Two basic aspects of our Summit of the Future. But reforming institutions requires a reform in mindsets. Because we face big challenges -- existential challenges -- and I am not convinced leaders get it. Yes, we all understand the nature of an existential threat. Those of us who lived through the Cold War remember the decades spent living under the constant shadow of nuclear annihilation. Of course, the nuclear threat is still with us. But when it comes to existential threats, nuclear is no longer alone. Today we face two new and profound threats that demand far more global attention and action because they threaten to upend life as we know it: the climate crisis and the ungoverned expansion of Artificial Intelligence. First, climate chaos. I recently saw an analysis that exposed a grim irony: Thirteen of the world's biggest ports for oil supertankers will be overwhelmed by rising sea levels. Rising seas, which are caused by rising temperatures. And rising temperatures, which are -- overwhelmingly -- caused by burning fossil fuels. Our fossil fuel addiction is a Frankenstein monster, sparing nothing and no one. All around us, we see clear signs that the monster has become master. We just endured the hottest year and the hottest decade in history. 2024 is likely to be the first calendar year that pushed past 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial levels. Breaching this limit does not mean the long-term goal of keeping the rise in global temperature to 1.5 degrees is shot. It means we need to fight even harder to get on track. Especially when what we are seeing today -- sea-level rise, heatwaves, floods, storms, droughts and wildfires -- are just a preview of the horror movie to come. Of higher prices and higher insurance premiums -- or no insurance at all. At the same time, another far more hopeful story is unfolding. Cheap, plentiful energy provided by renewables is an extraordinary economic opportunity. One that will benefit people in every country. And one that will make the end of the fossil fuel age inevitable -- no matter how hard vested interests try to stop it. A number of financial institutions and industries are backtracking on climate commitments. And paradoxically, it is selfish and also self-defeating. You are on the wrong side of history. You are on the wrong side of science. And you are on the wrong side of consumers who are looking for more sustainability, not less. This warning certainly also applies to the fossil fuel industry and advertising, lobbying and PR companies who are aiding, abetting and greenwashing. Global heating is racing forward -- we cannot afford to move backward. Governments must keep their promise to produce new, economy-wide national climate action plans this year, well ahead of COP30 in Brazil. Those plans must align with limiting the rise in global temperature to 1.5 degrees -- including by accelerating the global energy transition. We also need a surge in finance for climate action in developing countries, to adapt to global heating, slash emissions and seize the benefits of the renewables revolution. We need to tackle high-capital costs that are leaving developing countries behind. I also urge all businesses and financial institutions to create robust, accountable transition plans this year. These, too, must align with 1.5 degrees. And with the full recommendations of the United Nations High-Level Expert Group on Net Zero. To the corporate leaders who remain committed to climate action -- your leadership is needed now, more than ever. Now is the time to shift our collective efforts into overdrive, and make 2025 the biggest year yet for climate action. The second area of existential concern is ungoverned Artificial Intelligence. Advancing healthcare and diagnosing illnesses earlier. Supporting farmers with smarter tools to boost productivity. But with this promise comes profound risk, especially if AI is left ungoverned. AI can be used as a tool of deception. It can disrupt economies and labour markets, undermine trust in institutions and have chilling effects on the battlefield. And AI could deepen inequalities by excluding those without the resources or tools to benefit from its promise. Once again, collaboration is critical. The Global Digital Compact, adopted in September at the United Nations, offers a roadmap to harness the immense potential of digital technology and close digital divides. It also brings the world together around a shared vision for Artificial Intelligence -- one where this technology serves humanity, not the other way around. The Compact establishes the first universal agreement on the governance of AI that brings every country to the table. It includes the creation of an independent international scientific panel on AI, pulling expertise to bridge knowledge gaps and help every nation make the most informed AI policy decisions. The Compact also calls for a periodic global dialogue on AI governance as an inclusive space for stakeholders to come together under the auspices of the United Nations. It also foresees a network of capacity-building initiatives for developing countries, which have the most at stake as AI-driven systems grow and expand. And we must collaborate so that all countries and people benefit from AI's promise and potential to support development and social and economic progress for all. By investing in affordable internet, digital literacy, and the infrastructure that allows every country to harness AI's potential. By helping developing countries use AI to grow small businesses, improve public services, and connect communities to new markets. And by placing human rights -- always -- at the centre of AI-driven systems. The United Nations is committed to leading this effort. We are working with governments, industry, and civil society to ensure that AI becomes a tool of opportunity, inclusion and progress for all people. Ladies and gentlemen, Now is the time to wake up to these existential challenges -- and face them head on. As a global community, we must live up to this great responsibility. And let's do so by working as one, in collaboration. Thank you, and I look forward to our discussion today. Borge Brende (BB): Where do you see the Middle East in a year, when you come back to Davos? Secretary-General: Well, I know it will be deeply reshaped, but I do not know exactly in what direction. All the different aspects will be reshaped. First, Gaza. I think it's important, first of all, to recognize that the ceasefire in Gaza is the product of the work of many - and I would praise the United States, Qatar and Türkiye for their efforts, for months and months and months to obtain the release of hostages - that by the way should be immediate and unconditional - and also to obtain the cease fire, but the negotiations were dragging, dragging, dragging. And then, all of a sudden, it happened. I think there was a large contribution of robust diplomacy of, at the time, the President-elect of the United States. I feel that when we had the position of Israel, still reluctant to the ceasefire just two days before it happened, and then all of a sudden, there was an acceptance. I think that we have witnessed an example of robust diplomacy and that is something that we must recognize. BB: You expect more robust diplomacy? SG: I think you will have more examples of robust diplomacy. Let's see now in what direction. But what is not yet clear is what is the future of the relationship between Israelis and Palestinians. One possibility is to move into annexation of the West Bank, probably a kind of limbo situation in Gaza, which of course, is against international law and would mean that there will never be peace in the Middle East. The other possibility is to be still on time with a revitalized Palestinian Authority and an open approach by the Israeli Government to still be able to look into a two-state solution. It's not yet clear how things will develop. In Lebanon, I believe that the ceasefire is holding, and my hope is that we will witness a Lebanon that will be able to finally have an effective government. And we know the Lebanese - if the war ends at noon, at 1 o'clock they start to build. So, the Lebanese people have an enormous potential. So, I am optimistic about that. But we still do not yet have the guarantee that this ceasefire will hold and will lead to a final peace. I think Syria is the big question now. We have a new government that is saying all the right things, but at the same time, it's a government that still corresponds only to what we had in Idlib, and organizations that have a tradition that is not exactly the members of the choir of a church, and so there are many questions. and we see some signals that the openness and tolerance that is said, really will translate itself into reality. So, we hopefully will have a Syria with a government that represents all the communities in Syria, which means that the problem between Türkiye and the Kurds will also be solved, and that allows for full integration of Syria into the international community, but we still have a strong risk of fragmentation and the strong risk of extremism in, at least, parts of the Syrian territory. So, Syria is still a question mark, but it is in the interest of us all to engage in order to make things move in the direction of an inclusive form of governance in Syria, in which all minorities will feel represented. And I think some gesture must be made, namely in relation to the sanctions, in order to help to make it possible. BB: Incentivize? SG: I think it's a quid pro quo, but I believe the first step now must see to create some relief in the sanctions system that is causing a lot of suffering in Syria. BB: And we have already seen 200,000 Syrians coming back to Syria, but we also, as you said, SG, is a lot at stake because we've seen it in the past that, walking the talk has not necessarily been happening and it's really a lot at stake now with inclusiveness - you have the Kurds, you have the Alawites, you have Christians, you have Shiites. So, it's complex. SG: As I said, we might have a good solution in which all feel represented and the contradictions are overcome, or a fragmentation with ruling parts of the territory. Let's hope that it's the first option that wins. And then you have the most relevant question, which is Iran and relations with Iran, Israel and the United States. And here, my hope is that the Iranians understand that it is important to once and for all make it clear that they will renounce to have nuclear weapons, at the same time that they engage constructively with the other countries of the region to have a new security architecture in the region with full respect for independence, territorial integrity, non-interference, in the region, and with that having so-called [ inaudible] that allows them to be fully integrated in the global economy. This is my hope, but it's still possible that things do not go in this direction, and that we might have an escalation and an escalation that could be a dramatic confrontation engulfing the whole region. BB: And that wouldn't only affect the Gulf region or the Middle East, that would have huge global impact. But you mentioned robust diplomacy related to Gaza. We also heard that President Trump has said that he wants peace and stability. That was the readout from the conversation he also had with Xi Jinping on Saturday, and we were very close to a full-fledged war between Israel and Iran in the Fall. So, I guess also on the Israeli side they will need to work very closely with the new administration on their approach to Iran. And there is also different camps in the Republican party when it comes to how to deal with Iran. SG: But my feeling is that the first step now must come from Iran. Because if not we risk having an escalation. And I hope that Iran understands that it is useful to have this first step, and that it doesn't make sense at all to bet on the possibility [inaudible] or a reality or the perception that Iran is aiming at having nuclear weapons. I think to make it clear once and for all that that will not happen. and to engage, as I said, constructively for a new security architecture in the region, respecting the independence of all the other countries would be a step that would allow the full integration of Iran in the global economy and would, I hope, once and for all to pacify this which is one of the most, I would say, serious risks in global peace and security. BB: And coming back to Gaza, the implementation of the first phase is happening now. But there is also a second phase. There are still things that have modalities that have to be negotiated. But when you look at risks also, we see apparently a deterioration of the situation in the West Bank. So, of course the PA is also seen to play a role in the next phase of the implementation of Gaza. So it, of course, will be interesting also to see this new administration's view on the two-state solution. The Abraham accords, Saudi Arabia having said that there is no adjoining of the Abraham accords without a path towards the two-state solution. But the immediate challenge is now really on the West Bank, because we have seen a real deterioration of the security situation there. And then the path for reconstruction of Gaza. SG: I think there is a win-win solution. That win-win solution is that the ceasefire holds, and the hostages go on being released, and the massive distribution of aid takes place. First day 640 trucks, second day 930 trucks. It was proven that when restrictions disappeared aid is provided, as we've always said, and this is important; it is a success story. Now this success story must translate itself into a success story in the next phases. And the next phase is leading to a situation of permanent ceasefire in Gaza and a situation in which a transition can be established in Gaza, allowing for the reunification of the occupied Palestinian territories and allowing for a serious negotiation of a political solution based on the two states. This is the win-win situation. But there is another possibility, and the other possibility is for Israel, feeling emboldened by the military successes that it has had, to think that this is the moment to do the annexation of the West Bank, and to keep Gaza in a kind of a limbo situation, with an unclear form of governance. It is clear for me that Israel is not fundamentally interested in Gaza, it is fundamentally interested in the West Bank. Now, that would be a total violation of international law, and that would create a situation which I think the Abraham accords would be undermined completely and that would mean that we would never have a real, stable peace in the Middle East. BB: So, one of the challenges, Secretary-General, we're faced with is in the more fragmented, polarized world, is also this notion of proxy wars. I'm thinking about what we're seeing now in Africa, in Sudan, Somalia, also in the Sahel. I guess that this is something that keeps you up at night. It's hard to address. It's hard to attribute, but also for Syria, this is probably one of the real impasses. Also there, if we don't have an integration, because then you can have a war going on for decades. SG: Well, we live in a situation where the geopolitical divides are deep. The superpowers are deeply divided, with the Russian invasion of Ukraine of course the most serious problem, but with the China-US relationship being, as you know, very deteriorated and we could have worse with the trade issues that appeared on the horizon. So, these huge geopolitical divides have created a situation in which there is total impunity. As the superpowers are not able to coordinate their action in relation to global peace and security, the truth is that in any part of the world, anyone feels that they can do whatever they want, nothing will happen to them. And we are seeing this in the Sudan, no, I mean, two groups killing each other, fighting each other, creating a horrible situation for the people in Sudan. Nothing happens to them. Total impunity. Now, this is the situation that I believe we need to correct. Because this is what makes these wars by proxy happen, and you see that in each of the situations - we have four or five countries that interfere with the conflict. Be it in Libya, be it in Sudan, be it in the Sahel. BB: Somalia? We have the president here in the front row. SG: I mean it is absolutely essential to, independently of the geopolitical divides that exist, create a situation in which there is real accountability in relation to the dramatic violations of human rights and international humanitarian law, we are seeing. BB: So, coming to a close, it's a paradox though, isn't it that, in a world where more and more of the challenges are transboundary, being future pandemics, climate change, as you mentioned also in your speech, making sure that technology works in the interest of humankind. Also, with cybercrime, but also in all these original conflicts that are so interconnected, we do have the Security Council. Of course, there is criticism that it is not the best mood in the Security Council, but it is a place where the big powers still meet and it's a paradox that in a situation where all these challenges are only sold in a multilateral context, the appetite is not always there. So, it first makes your job even more complex, but do you feel there are a few opportunities and silver linings now in the coming years to, even in the world where each nation follow mainly their national interests, there are areas where there is so strong overlap of interests that you can push things through? SG: Well, first of all, let's look at the Security Council. The problem in the Security Council is a problem of effectiveness, but there is also a problem of legitimacy. In the Security Council, of the five permanent members there are three European members - where, like it or not, France, the UK and Russia are European countries. Now, three in five of the continent, that is what it is, doesn't make any sense anymore. So, it is absolutely essential to have a reform of the Security Council, to make the Security Council more representative of today's world, and to make it more effective. This was one of the central questions of the debate in the Summit of the Future. But beyond that, what I believe is that there are things that will tend, in my opinion, to unite. And I have a lot of hope of the positive impacts of science and the positive impacts of, I would say, the technological development. We can have different positions, but renewables became the cheapest way to produce electricity, and so, independently of the opinions that people might have, those that are now invested in fossil fuels, in my opinion are invested in obsolescence. I'm totally convinced that the oil and gas that exist in the world today, independently of new discoveries, would never be spent. And so, sooner or later, I believe that the realities created by the scientific and technological evolution, will make it inevitable, even for reasons of selfish analysis, would make it inevitable for people to take the right decisions. And that is one of my hopes. The second hope is that the youth of today has a different perspective and a different vision of the world than the youth of our generations. They are more cosmopolitan, and they are more sensitive to the questions that are related to the wellbeing of our planet and wellbeing of the international community. BB: So, there are silver linings? SG: I think that the question is not to be optimistic or pessimistic. The question is to be determined. We need to be determined in making the values and principles in which we believe win. And if we are determined to fight for the right thing, if we are on the right side of history, I believe in the end we will get what we want. BB: Thank you so much. Thank you so much, Mr. Secretary-General. Great discussion.