Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news.
Speaker 2: Every September, global leaders gather at the headquarters of the
Speaker 2: United Nations to discuss and debate the world's toughest issues.
Speaker 1: There's eighty nine heads of state, five vice presidents, one
Speaker 1: crown Prince, and forty three heads of government.
Speaker 2: Magdalena del Vialler covers the UN for Bloomberg, and she
Speaker 2: says the eighty year old institution is at a critical juncture.
Speaker 2: The United States, which is responsible for about twenty percent
Speaker 2: of the UN's annual budget, hasn't paid its dues in months,
Speaker 2: and President Trump says the organization is bloated and isn't
Speaker 2: living up to its potential. That was the backdrop to
Speaker 2: Trump's arrival to the General Assembly on Tuesday.
Speaker 1: I mean, I think things kind of started to go
Speaker 1: wrong from almost the second he walked through.
Speaker 2: The door, Magdalena says. The President and First Lady got
Speaker 2: out of their limo, walked inside, and then stepped onto an.
Speaker 1: Escalator and then all of a sudden it stopped. They
Speaker 1: both were confused, and then they all had to walk up,
Speaker 1: kind of awkwardly, up this escalator.
Speaker 2: In a statement, a UN spokesperson said the escalators built
Speaker 2: in safety mechanism had been activated. The Secret Service says
Speaker 2: it's also investigating. Well after that, there was another problem.
Speaker 2: When Trump reached the podium in the General Assembly Hall,
Speaker 2: the teleprompter wasn't working.
Speaker 3: I can only say that whoever's operating this teleprompter is
Speaker 3: in big trouble.
Speaker 2: Trump went on to deliver a speech that lasted almost
Speaker 2: an hour, detailing a lot of what he views as
Speaker 2: the major accomplishments of his second term. The president also
Speaker 2: trained his sites on the UN itself. What's the purpose
Speaker 2: of the United Nations? He asked.
Speaker 3: For the most part, at least for now, all they
Speaker 3: seemed to do is write a really strongly worded letter
Speaker 3: and then never follow that letter up. It's empty words,
Speaker 3: and empty words don't solve war.
Speaker 2: Trump turned that awkward start to his speech into a
Speaker 2: punchline and a metaphor.
Speaker 1: These are the.
Speaker 4: Two things I got from the United Nations.
Speaker 3: A bad escalator and a bad teleprompter, Thank you very much.
Speaker 2: Trump's criticism of the UN raises the question of what
Speaker 2: the organization will look like in the future without the
Speaker 2: kind of engagement and investment the US has provided for decades.
Speaker 2: Antonio Guterrez, the UN Secretary General, told me the organization
Speaker 2: is facing some hard choices.
Speaker 4: We shrink, we reduce what we're doing.
Speaker 5: The problem is that those peace keepers, that many of
Speaker 5: them are in places where there's no piece to keep
Speaker 5: with terrorist groups, with groups, they are sometimes the last
Speaker 5: resort for the protection of civilians, and those.
Speaker 4: Are the ones that will suffer.
Speaker 5: So the UN can move on, but the people that
Speaker 5: we support will suffer.
Speaker 2: I'm David Gera and this is the big take from
Speaker 2: Bloomberg News today. On the show, the United Nations at
Speaker 2: a tipping point as the United States withholds money and support.
Speaker 2: It raises questions about the role the UN plays on
Speaker 2: the world stage. Since the United Nations was founded in
Speaker 2: nineteen forty five in the aftermath of the Second World War,
Speaker 2: it's depended on funding from the United States, but the
Speaker 2: country's unpaid obligations to the UN are now more than
Speaker 2: three billion dollars. So when I sat down with UN
Speaker 2: Secretary General Antonio Guterrez last week, I asked him can
Speaker 2: the UN survive without US support?
Speaker 5: We are having some massive cuts. The agencies have responded
Speaker 5: in humanitarian aid and the Development Corporation, which means that
Speaker 5: they reduce stuff, they shrunk their operations. So the UN
Speaker 5: moves on, but of course the people impected by the
Speaker 5: cuts suffer, which means less food distributed, less vaccines distributed,
Speaker 5: less HIVH treatment distributed. So obviously the impact is not
Speaker 5: in the end. The impact is in those that benefit
Speaker 5: from the action of our humanitarian development agencies. On the
Speaker 5: other hand, we have the assessed contributions, which means the
Speaker 5: mandatory contributions that already red by member states for the
Speaker 5: Secretariat and for the peacekeeping operations, and there are cuts
Speaker 5: announced and cuts that probably will take place in the future.
Speaker 5: We have been doing enough measures in the implementation.
Speaker 4: Of this year's budget to be able to.
Speaker 5: Move ahead, and we are preparing, if necessary, a series
Speaker 5: of emergency measures to drastically reduce our peacekeeping operations.
Speaker 2: Bloomberg's Magdalena Dovia says many people were hoping President Trump
Speaker 2: would provide more information about the future sure of US
Speaker 2: funding in his speech on Tuesday, but he didn't get
Speaker 2: into specifics.
Speaker 1: And it's not just because the US isn't paying. A
Speaker 1: lot of countries aren't paying or they're paying late, and
Speaker 1: so it's really hard for them to decide kind of
Speaker 1: what they're going to fund, and the Secretary General has
Speaker 1: made some proposals, but with so many different countries, with
Speaker 1: so many different priorities, it's hard for them all to agree.
Speaker 1: So even if the SG says, okay, we should combine
Speaker 1: these two entities and fire this many people, for a
Speaker 1: lot of these decisions, all the countries have to agree,
Speaker 1: and so the bureaucracy could possibly get in the way
Speaker 1: of making some hard cuts so.
Speaker 2: That these countries who haven't paid what they've said they
Speaker 2: would pay or they're supposed to pay. How would you
Speaker 2: describe the current state of the UN how's it operating
Speaker 2: without that financial scream.
Speaker 1: I mean, I don't know if it's related, but it
Speaker 1: could be that the escalator in the telefronter didn't work
Speaker 1: because they can't afford it. I know, no, we are
Speaker 1: very much discussing here, but in the past they have
Speaker 1: had to shut down escalators at certain hours to save money.
Speaker 1: They turned off the air conditioning again, I think during
Speaker 1: the weekend or like. They've had to make some decisions
Speaker 1: like that about just the day to day. I think
Speaker 1: some of the elevators sometimes didn't run things like that,
Speaker 1: but more broadly, I think it means that if these
Speaker 1: countries continue to not pay a lot of programs might
Speaker 1: just disappear. Something that's really at risk is the UN's
Speaker 1: peacekeeping missions. The UN is going to cut about thirteen
Speaker 1: percent of its workforce and about eleven percent of its funding,
Speaker 1: and these missions are kind of the last resort for
Speaker 1: a lot of countries. I mean, every institution that I've
Speaker 1: talked to at the UN has this new motto where
Speaker 1: they say they have to do less with less, So
Speaker 1: I think everyone's trying to do that. More broadly, the
Speaker 1: UN is moving a lot of its projects to places
Speaker 1: where it's less expensive to live, so maybe instead of
Speaker 1: New York and Geneva, they're going to Kenya or to Germany.
Speaker 1: But there's also this push to make things more efficient
Speaker 1: and to actually, instead of doing less with leus to
Speaker 1: maybe try to do more with less. But obviously very
Speaker 1: very difficult.
Speaker 2: We're living in this moment when global power dynamics are
Speaker 2: shifting so rapidly. There are several major conflicts unfolding all
Speaker 2: around the world. I spoke with the UN Secretary General
Speaker 2: on Friday, and Antonio Guterres told me we're now entering
Speaker 2: into a multipolar world.
Speaker 5: This is no longer a bipolar moons, This is no
Speaker 5: longer a unipolar world. This is at the present moment
Speaker 5: the chaotic worlds but moving into a multi polar world.
Speaker 5: And we need to build the multilateral institutions of the future.
Speaker 5: That's why we are informing the UN. And let's not
Speaker 5: forget there was multipolarity in Europe before the First World
Speaker 5: War in the absence of multilateral institutions.
Speaker 4: The result was, well.
Speaker 2: It does seem like this is just the kind of
Speaker 2: moment the UN was created eighty years ago to address.
Speaker 1: A couple months ago, I spoke to someone and kind
Speaker 1: of brought up the same question and his answer was, well,
Speaker 1: we haven't had a Third World War yet, so the
Speaker 1: UN is still working. But yeah, I mean, we have
Speaker 1: the conflict between Israel and God, we had Russia and Ukraine.
Speaker 1: There was actually a Security Council meeting called on by
Speaker 1: Estonia to defend their own airspace, and now NATO is
Speaker 1: saying that they're going to really defend their countries if
Speaker 1: Russia flies over them. So there's also tension with Iran
Speaker 1: right now. They're kind of in a very tight spot
Speaker 1: where they have a week left to maybe come up
Speaker 1: with a deal before the UN brings back sanctions on Iran.
Speaker 1: But as long as we don't start World War three,
Speaker 1: some experts say that the UN is working.
Speaker 2: I want to go back to President Trump's speech, and
Speaker 2: I wonder if you could draw a contrast between the
Speaker 2: speech that he delivered in twenty twenty five and the
Speaker 2: first speech he delivered eight years ago, help us understand
Speaker 2: just how different the world is today than it was
Speaker 2: eight years ago. I mean, President Trump had this ambition
Speaker 2: to kind of reorder the global order. There were those
Speaker 2: who didn't take him seriously before. He has been successful
Speaker 2: in kind of pushing for or making a lot of
Speaker 2: the changes that he said he would back then.
Speaker 1: I think that's exactly right. I think eight years ago
Speaker 1: people didn't take him as seriously. I think world leaders
Speaker 1: of thought he was a bit of a joke. And
Speaker 1: now he's here and he is not a joke. They're
Speaker 1: taking him seriously. They're making sure to get in his
Speaker 1: good grace. Is because they know he can and will
Speaker 1: make their lives difficult if he wants to.
Speaker 2: You hear the President's skepticism of the UN as it
Speaker 2: exists today, and I'm curious how that affects the way
Speaker 2: other Member states look at the US's role in the UN.
Speaker 2: As you talk to people there, other diplomats, what do
Speaker 2: they say just about the level of power influence that
Speaker 2: the US has today.
Speaker 1: Well, I think one of the hardest things for a
Speaker 1: lot of the Members states is the reality that no
Speaker 1: other country can really step up to take the US's place.
Speaker 1: There is a lot of speculation that China might step
Speaker 1: up and have more influence in the UN or a
Speaker 1: different country, but the magnitude of the US's influence and
Speaker 1: just I mean the sheer scope of the money they contributed,
Speaker 1: no one can match that. So sure, some countries might
Speaker 1: try here and there, but I mean, I think it's unmatchable.
Speaker 2: Without the full backing of the US. How much can
Speaker 2: the UN do to promote peace and security around the world,
Speaker 2: That's next. One common criticism of the United Nations is
Speaker 2: that when it comes to resolving conflict, one of its
Speaker 2: main roles, it's ineffective. The UN Security Council has the
Speaker 2: big and important role of maintaining security and peace around
Speaker 2: the world, but it's often deadlocked, frozen, blocked from moving
Speaker 2: forward because the Council's five permanent members. China, France, Russia,
Speaker 2: the United Kingdom and the US have all powerful vetos
Speaker 2: and often the countries can't agree. I ask Secretary General
Speaker 2: Guterrez how the broader institution can continue to operate when
Speaker 2: this central body is unable to do its job effectively.
Speaker 4: T N is much more than this Security Council.
Speaker 5: We are by far the main distributors a mimitarian aid
Speaker 5: in the world. We are in the front line of
Speaker 5: climate action, so we are involved in lots of activities
Speaker 5: of all kinds to the benefit of the people around
Speaker 5: the world.
Speaker 4: We have a problem, yes, in the core area of
Speaker 4: our activity, which is peace and security.
Speaker 5: We depend on a Security Council that today has a
Speaker 5: problem of legitimacy because it doesn't correspond anymore to the
Speaker 5: world of today. When we were talking about multipolarity, where
Speaker 5: is the multipolarity in the Security Council? Clearly not and
Speaker 5: it has a problem with efficiency and that is a
Speaker 5: serious restriction for our activity. But usually say, when we
Speaker 5: do not have a dog, we hunt with a cat.
Speaker 4: But we hunt.
Speaker 2: On Tuesday, the Security Council had separate three hour meetings
Speaker 2: on Gaza and Ukraine.
Speaker 1: There are a lot of conversations about these conflicts, and
Speaker 1: then I do think in the background there's that sense.
Speaker 1: So do we need the UN for this or not?
Speaker 2: The question of Palestinian statehood is of course front and
Speaker 2: center at this gathering, Canada, the UK, and Australia announcing
Speaker 2: they now recognize Palestinian statehood. What is your sense of
Speaker 2: the significance of them doing that and how is that
Speaker 2: reverberating around the UN this week.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's pretty clear, and everyone has said that
Speaker 1: it's mostly symbolic. I mean, in the long run, I
Speaker 1: know that Macrone said he's hoping to have embassies and
Speaker 1: to have more solid things that represent that France recognize
Speaker 1: as Palestine as a state, and I'm sure other countries
Speaker 1: are working on that as well, But for now, you know,
Speaker 1: in the short term it is mostly just ideological, which
Speaker 1: some countries think is good because it's going to put
Speaker 1: pressure on Israel. Someone I spoke to yesterday actually said
Speaker 1: it might be counterproductive because the pressure on Israel might
Speaker 1: actually be a motivation for them to really bring down
Speaker 1: the hammer harder than before because they feel more threatened.
Speaker 1: So I mean, I guess we'll see what happened.
Speaker 2: Another point of tension at this year's General Assembly is immigration.
Speaker 2: In his Tuesday remarks, Trump called on other UN member
Speaker 2: countries to clamp down on border security.
Speaker 3: It's time to end the failed experiment of open borders.
Speaker 4: You have to end it now.
Speaker 3: Let's see. I can tell you I'm really good at
Speaker 3: this stuff. Your countries are going to hell.
Speaker 2: Trump has pressured the UN to change its protocols for
Speaker 2: asylum seekers.
Speaker 1: Basically, the UN has had this long standing rule for
Speaker 1: how asylum should work, and the Trump administration they want,
Speaker 1: I think, to have the countries that people arrive to
Speaker 1: make more of the decisions rather than the people. They
Speaker 1: shouldn't be able to decide which country to go to.
Speaker 1: They should just like, you know, if you make it
Speaker 1: to one place, then that's where you're stuck. You can't
Speaker 1: suddenly decide to go somewhere else. I think Trump also
Speaker 1: wants to propose that the host country can get to
Speaker 1: decide when the asylum seeker can go back, Like they
Speaker 1: can assess how the other country's doing, and if the
Speaker 1: host country decides that it's okay, then the person can
Speaker 1: be sent back. So they definitely want to make a.
Speaker 2: Lot of changes in light of what we've discussed. I
Speaker 2: think the trajectory of the UN doesn't sound like it's
Speaker 2: on a great path. What are your sources say about
Speaker 2: where the organization is headed.
Speaker 1: This is not the first year, and I don't think
Speaker 1: it'll be the last year where people say that the
Speaker 1: United Nations is in the crisis. I mean, I think
Speaker 1: ever since it was founded, people have criticized it. People
Speaker 1: have thought that it's going to fail, and it hasn't.
Speaker 1: And a lot of the sources I've spoken to, I mean,
Speaker 1: when you know, there was the crisis in Iran and
Speaker 1: things like that, we're saying, yeah, the UN can't really
Speaker 1: mitigate every single little fight between two countries. They just
Speaker 1: have to make sure the big picture stays okay. And
Speaker 1: so yeah, I think. I mean, someone was saying, we're
Speaker 1: going to be here next year again, and we're going
Speaker 1: to be one if we're going to be here the
Speaker 1: year after that, but we probably will. Like, I don't
Speaker 1: think the UN is going anywhere, even though people every
Speaker 1: year think it might be its last year.
Speaker 2: This is the Big Take from Bloomberg News. I'm David Gura.
Speaker 2: To get more from The Big Take and unlimited access
Speaker 2: to all of Bloomberg dot com, subscribe today at bloomberg
Speaker 2: dot com. Slash Podcast offer thanks for listening. We'll be
Speaker 2: back tomorrow.