Delivered By: HE Mohamed Abushahab, Ambassador and Permanent Representative
Mr. President,
I would like to thank you for convening this timely open debate, and as this is the first time this month that I speak in the Security Council, I would like to congratulate Slovenia for assuming the Presidency.
I also thank former UN Secretary-General Mr. Ban Ki-moon, and Ms. Anjali Dayal, for their valuable briefings.
Mr. President,
Eighty years on from its founding, the United Nations stands at a crossroads. In a world of compounding crises and geopolitical fragmentation, leadership for peace has never been more consequential – both for the future of the UN and for global peace and security.
Against this backdrop, I would like to offer three recommendations on strengthening the UN’s leadership for peace.
First, in 2026, Member States should select a UN Secretary-General who is equipped to provide leadership for peace in a far more complex security landscape than that envisaged in 1945.
The leadership provided by the UN’s nine Secretaries-General has been shaped by the demands of their times. What has mattered consistently is sound judgment – the ability to navigate a highly decentralized system and discern when action, restraint, or adaptation is required.
Today, that judgment must translate into a clear and credible sense of direction; the capacity to steward necessary reform of the UN, the ability to steer it through technological transformation, and the vision to revitalize its role in preventing and resolving conflicts.
Finding a candidate who can meet these evolving demands requires that we draw on the full range of global leadership talent. The United Arab Emirates hopes to see a large pool of candidates, half of whom are women, thereby increasing the chance that perhaps, finally, we will be able to welcome the first Madame Secretary-General.
Second, the UN’s capacity to provide leadership for peace must be measured by its ability to prevent conflicts before they erupt and, if they break out, resolve them swiftly before they escalate.
The UN does not lack tools for preventing conflicts and restoring peace. But too often, the Organization’s high-profile failures are due to a lack of political will to take decisive action, or the veto preventing the Security Council from taking such action.
The Secretary-General has the ability to tackle crises by using their good offices, deploying special envoys, or invoking Article 99. The Security Council and the wider membership should encourage the Secretary-General to use these tools.
When conflicts do break out, the UN still carries unique legitimacy to convene warring parties, as well as regional and international actors, to seek common ground and silence the guns.
And when regional entities or ad hoc coalitions are well-positioned to secure peace, the UN and its Member States should support those efforts.
This leads me to my final point: effective leadership for peace by the Secretary General is strengthened by sustained and constructive engagement from the Security Council.
The Council’s meetings too often serve as a forum for divisive theatrics or rote statements. Those lead to a gradual erosion of confidence in the Council and in multilateralism itself. The Council should therefore consider ways to avoid this.
Strengthening the Council’s role in support of peace also requires reform, including to address the misuse of the veto, which, as mentioned earlier, too often prevents the Council from fulfilling its mandate.
It also requires expanding the Council’s membership to better reflect today’s world, including through adequate representation from across the Global South.
Mr. President,
This is a moment of choice.
Renewal or decay.
Prevention or reaction.
Leadership or drift.
The direction we choose will not only determine the future of the United Nations, but the welfare of generations to come and humanity itself.
Thank you.