AMTV/Davos, Jan 18 – UN Secretary-General António Guterres’ remarks at the World Economic Forum, in Davos, Switzerland, today:
Thank you very much for your welcome and thank you, dear President [Klaus] Schwab, for your kind words. It is very good to be back in Davos, and once again in person.
Your theme perfectly sets out the dilemma of today’s world: We need cooperation, yet we face fragmentation.
I am not here to sugar-coat the scale of that challenge — or the sorry state of our world. We can’t confront problems unless we look them squarely in the eye. And we are looking into the eye of a Category 5 hurricane.
Our world is plagued by a perfect storm on a number of fronts. Start with the short term, a global economic crisis. The outlook, as we all know, is bleak.
Many parts of the world face recession and the entire world faces a slowdown.
We see deepening inequalities and a rapidly unfolding cost-of-living crisis — affecting women and girls the most. Supply chain disruptions and an energy crunch. Soaring prices. Rising interest rates along with inflation. And debt levels pounding vulnerable countries. Add to all of that the lingering effects of the pandemic. COVID-19 is still straining economies — with the world’s failure to prepare for future pandemics, that failure is straining our credulity.
Somehow — after all we have endured — we have not learned the global public health lessons of the pandemic. We are nowhere near ready for the pandemics to come.
Add to all that another major and, indeed, existential challenge. We are flirting with climate disaster.
Every week brings a new climate horror story. Greenhouse gas emissions are at record levels and growing. The commitment to limit global temperature rise to 1.5°C is nearly going up in smoke. Without further action, we are headed to a 2.8°C increase.
The consequences, as we all know, would be devastating. Several parts of our planet would be uninhabitable. And for many, it would mean a death sentence.
But this is not a surprise. The science has been clear for decades. And I am not talking only about United Nations scientists. I am talking even about fossil fuel scientists.
We learned last week that certain fossil fuel producers were fully aware in the 1970s that their core product was baking our planet. And just like the tobacco industry, they rode rough-shod over their own science.
Some in Big Oil peddled the big lie. And like the tobacco industry, those responsible must be held to account.
Today, fossil fuel producers and their enablers are still racing to expand production, knowing full well that this business model is inconsistent with human survival. Now, this insanity belongs in science fiction, yet we know the ecosystem meltdown is cold, hard scientific fact.
Add to this toxic brew yet another combustible factor — conflict, violence, war.
Especially the Russian Federation invasion of Ukraine — not only because of the untold suffering of the Ukrainian people, but because of its profound global implications.
On global food and energy prices. On trade and supply chains. On questions of nuclear safety.
On the very foundations of international law and the Charter of the United Nations.
We are doing our best making progress where we can — particularly in facilitating exports of food and fertilizers from Ukraine and also Russia. But we are a far cry from peace in line with international law and the United Nations Charter.
All these challenges are interlinked. They are piling up like cars in a chain reaction crash.
Now, let’s be clear. It would be difficult to find solutions to these global interlinked problems in the best of times, and in a world that would be united.
But these are far from the best of times — and the world is far from being united. Instead, we face the gravest levels of geopolitical division and mistrust in generations — and it is undermining everything.
First, the East-West divide.
We risk what I have called the great fracture — the decoupling of the world’s two largest economies. A tectonic rift that would create two different sets of trade rules, two dominant currencies, two internets and two conflicting strategies on artificial intelligence. This is the last thing we need.
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) reported that dividing the global economy into two blocs could cut global gross domestic product (GDP) by a whopping $1.4 trillion.
Now, there are many aspects in which United States-China relations will inevitably diverge — particularly on questions of human rights and on some areas of regional security.
But despite that, it is possible — and I would say it is essential — for the two countries to have meaningful engagement on climate, trade and technology to avoid the decoupling of economies or even the possibility of future confrontation.
For the historians that might be listening: We must avoid a twenty-first century sequel of the so-called Thucydides Trap.
At the same time, and secondly, the North-South divide is deepening.
I am not convinced that the wealthier world and their leaders truly grasp the degree of frustration and even anger in the global South.
Frustration and anger about the gross inequity of vaccine distribution in the recent past.
Frustration and anger about pandemic recovery — with support overwhelmingly concentrated in wealthier countries that could print money.
And trillions were printed in the global North, and of course developing countries could not print money because their currencies would go down the drain.
Frustration and anger about a climate crisis that is crippling countries that contributed least to global heating. And the lack of the financial resources to respond to the challenge.
Frustration and anger over a morally bankrupt financial system in which systemic inequalities are amplifying societal inequalities.
A system that is still routinely denying debt relief and concessional funding to vulnerable middle-income countries that are in desperate need. Because the rules are not made to allow it.
A system in which most of the world’s poorest countries saw their debt service payments skyrocket by 35 per cent in the last year alone.
Now, we need to bridge all these divides and we need to restore trust.
How can we do it?
First — by reforming and building fairness into the global financial system.
Developing countries need access to finance to reduce poverty and hunger and advance the Sustainable Development Goals.
I have urged the G20 to agree on a global Sustainable Development Goals Stimulus Plan that will provide support to countries of the global South — including the vulnerable middle-income ones. They need the necessary liquidity, debt relief and restructuring — as well as long-term lending — to invest in sustainable development.
In short, we need a new debt architecture.
And multilateral development banks must change their business model. Beyond their own operations, which are, of course, very important, they must concentrate on multiplying their impact, leveraging massively private finance in a systematic way, providing guarantees, accepting to be first risk-takers in coalitions of financial institutions to support developing countries.
Without creating the conditions for massive inflow of private finance at reasonable cost to the developing world, there is simply no solution. International financial institutions are too small and the capacity to increase ODA is not to be seen in the short term.
Second, bridging divides and restoring trust means meaningful climate action, and climate action now.
The battle to keep the 1.5°C limit alive will be won or lost in this decade. On our watch. And right now, we have to confess that the battle is being lost.
So, we need to act together to close the emissions gap. And that means to phase out progressively coal and supercharge the renewable revolution. To end the addiction to fossil fuels. And to stop our self-defeating war on nature.
On the other hand, the developed world must finally deliver on its $100 billion climate finance commitment to support developing countries. Adaptation finance must be doubled, as it was promised in Sharm El-Sheikh.
And the biggest emitters — namely the G20 countries — must unite around a Climate Solidarity Pact in which they make extra efforts in the 2020s to keep the 1.5°C limit alive.
And it doesn’t work if developed countries attribute responsibility to emerging economies, and emerging economies attribute responsibility to developed countries. They need to come together, to bring together all their capacities — financial and technological — with the developed ones providing financial and technical assistance to help the major emerging economies accelerate their renewable energy transition.
Because, if they don’t, we will not be able to reduce emissions at the level that is necessary to keep the 1.5°C goal — I would say to keep the 2°C goal alive.
But our climate goals need the full engagement of the private sector. The truth is that more and more businesses are making net zero commitments.
But benchmarks and criteria are often dubious or murky. This can mislead consumers, investors and regulators with false narratives. And it feeds a culture of climate misinformation and confusion, and leaves the door open to greenwashing.
That is why we created an expert group on net-zero emissions commitments. Recently the group has issued a how-to guide for credible, accountable net-zero pledges.
Here at Davos, I call on all corporate leaders to act based on these guidelines. To put forward credible and transparent transition plans on how to achieve net zero — and to submit those plans before the end of this year.
Now, the transition to net zero must be grounded in real emissions cuts — and not relying essentially on carbon credits or shadow markets.
And, finally, what is true about private sector engagement on climate applies across a range of challenges.
Government action is critical — even if obviously it’s not enough.
We must find avenues to boost the private sector’s ability to play its full role for good. And it must be recognized that, in many ways, the private sector today is leading, but it is, to a certain extent, undermined by Government action, or the lack of Government action.
Governments need to create the adequate regulatory and stimulus environments to support the private sector instead of maintaining rules, subsidies, and other forms of action that undermine the efforts of the private sector to move forward in climate action.
And business models and practices must be reworked to advance the Sustainable Development Goals.
Without creating the conditions for the massive engagement of the private sector, it will be impossible to move from the billions to trillions that are needed to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals.
To lead the way to expand economic opportunity for women.
To ensure greater engagement and cooperation for vaccine equity.
To achieve global food security.
And for that, we need the cooperation of the private sector to keep Ukrainian and Russian food and fertilizer exports flowing and affordable.
Even in the midst of the war, the insurance sector has helped support the movement of vessels from Ukraine and Russia. We urgently need other private sector actors to engage, such as the banking sector, the traders and the shippers. Across the spectrum of global challenges, we need private sector resourcefulness and cooperation to be able to advance in our common objectives of peace, sustainable development and human rights.
There are no perfect solutions in a perfect storm. But we can work to control the damage and to seize the opportunities available.
Now more than ever, it’s time to forge the pathways to cooperation in our fragmented world. To adopt multilateral institutions, to bring trust to where trust is badly needed, because the world cannot wait.
We are facing the gravest levels of geopolitical division and mistrust in generations.
Guterres also tweeted today: “At Davos, I urged leaders to bridge divides and restore cooperation to advance peace, sustainable development and human rights.”
8月9日华盛顿讯,美国五角大楼正敦促美国国防企业加快武器生产,以补充其日益减少的弹药库存,其中包括在持续的与伊朗的战争中消耗殆尽的弹药。 五角大楼发言人肖恩·帕内尔(Sean Parnell )8月8日在一份声明中表示,美国战争部正积极致力于提升弹药采购速度,以“以应对威胁所需的速度,为我们的作战人员提供所需的武器”。他还证实,美国战争部上周已采取措施大幅加快武器采购进程,但坚称这是更广泛的现代化计划的一部分,此计划早在持续五个月的冲突爆发前就已启动。 据美国《华盛顿邮报》获得的一份备忘录显示,美国战争部副部长史蒂夫·范伯格(Steve Feinberg )8月5日曾致信美国国防企业领袖,要求他们在21天内提交计划,以“大幅加快交付速度,提高交付效率,并增加关键能力的产量”。 范伯格在信中写道:“长达数年的研发周期是不可接受的。我们必须立即大幅加快项目进度,并扩大产能。” 帕内尔今天证实,范伯格副部长要求迅速提升武器产量的备忘录“属实”,并补充说,该备忘录“将为提交国会的2028财年预算提供依据,并且完全符合我们重建国防工业基础的持续努力。” 这份范伯格的备忘录发布之际,近期有报道称伊朗战争消耗了美军本已捉襟见肘的先进导弹拦截系统的库存。根据一项新的分析,如果战争再次爆发,美军可能面临更大的风险。 据华盛顿智库战略与国际研究中心(CSIS)的分析,美军爱国者(Patriot)和萨德(THAAD)拦截系统的库存减少,可能迫使美国及其中东盟友承担更多风险以保护这些防空系统。例如,该分析称美军可能会减少对来袭的伊朗无人机和导弹的拦截导弹发射次数,从而使伊朗导弹增加了突破防线的可能性。 近日,美国总统特朗普对有关弹药短缺的公开报道感到不满。他8月6日在社交媒体平台“真实社交”上发帖称,美国拥有“大量”弹药。他还补充说,“大量弹药正在按需生产并运往美国”。 目前,一项国防开支法案在美国国会陷入僵局,议员们对特朗普总统发动的伊朗战争感到愤怒,并抵制白宫提出的将五角大楼开支大幅从去年9000亿美元增加至1.5万亿美元的要求。 战略与国际研究中心上月估计,美军的爱国者导弹拦截系统的数量从伊朗战争前的2330枚下降到今年4月停火生效时的1030枚。在最近对伊朗的袭击之后,目前估计库存量仅在759至827枚之间,比伊朗战争开始前至少减少了65%。 战略与国际研究中心还表示,美军战前“萨德”拦截系统的数量为452枚,到4月停火开始时,数量已降至232至262枚之间。美军随后补充了部分武器库存,使拦截系统数量达到234至278枚。但目前的库存量仍比冲突前至少减少了38%。
8月9日特拉维夫讯,以色列总理内塔尼亚胡(Benjamin Netanyahu)今天向其右翼政府发表电视讲话,重申拒绝美国总统特朗普最新的加沙计划。与此同时,在特朗普总统的压力下,以色列军方已基本停止了对加沙地带的袭击。 内塔尼亚胡将在10月27日举行的大选中寻求连任,目前民调支持率低迷。他夹在两难境地:一方面是因加沙问题上的让步而愤怒的极右翼部长们,另一方面是他的主要军事支持者特朗普总统,后者希望通过一项新的15点路线图,推动结束加沙冲突。 此前,自负责监督停火的特朗普总统的和平委员会的加沙特使尼古拉·姆拉德诺夫(Nikolay Mladenov)8月3日与内塔尼亚胡会面以来,以色列已减少了对加沙的袭击。 姆拉德诺夫今天表示,关于新路线图的讨论仍在进行中。姆拉德诺夫在接受以色列N12新闻采访时表示,一旦从哈马斯手中缴获武器并使其无法使用,以色列将被要求“分区域”撤军。 一位熟悉以色列立场的消息人士称,以色列方面已同意,以军只会对加沙地带的“直接威胁”采取行动,不再像之前那样几乎每天都进行定点清除行动。 以色列和哈马斯在特朗普总统计划的时机问题上存在分歧。特朗普总统上个月宣布,他结束以色列加沙战争的计划取得了突破性进展,以色列和哈马斯都同意该计划,以军将在哈马斯解除武装的同时撤出加沙,国际稳定部队(ISF)将与一支新的巴勒斯坦警察部队合作,共同维护加沙地带的安全。但该计划的时间表很快引发了争议。 内塔尼亚胡在与以色列内阁部长们开会时表示:“以色列不接受这份15点文件。在哈马斯解除武装之前不会进行任何撤军……这意味着重型武器、轻型武器,所有武器。” 内塔尼亚胡8月4日在社交媒体上发表了类似言论,以色列官员表示已向特朗普政府表达了保留意见。 内塔尼亚胡还声称:“以色列正在就该计划与美国进行谈判。他们(美国)有一些想法,其中一些我们可以接受,一些我们不能接受,我们知道如何坚决反对这些想法。” 不过,哈马斯高级官员巴塞姆·纳伊姆(Basem Naim)今天告诉路透社,该组织仍然致力于10天前在开罗达成的路线图。 据报道,纳伊姆表示:“我们希望调解人和美国担保人敦促内塔尼亚胡及其政府遵守路线图,不要出于内部政治和选举原因阻碍这一进程。” 以色列极右翼财政部长贝扎莱尔·斯莫特里奇(Bezalel…
8月8日华盛顿讯,美国前总统乔·拜登(Joe Biden)的前列腺癌已经扩散到身体其他部位,给他带来了痛苦,但他仍然坚持就公共事务发表意见。他的儿子亨特·拜登(Hunter Biden)在一次采访中透露了这一消息。 亨特在8月7日晚些时候接受哥伦比亚广播公司(CBS)新闻合作伙伴英国广播公司(BBC)新闻的专访时,亨特在谈到父亲的病情时情绪激动,他声称看到父亲的病情令人非常难过。 亨特表示,他父亲拜登的“癌细胞已经扩散,转移到了他的骨骼和其他部位,这非常痛苦,而且在很多方面都严重影响了他的生活。” 现年83岁的民主党人拜登是美国历史上年龄最大的总统,在他4年的任期内,他的年龄一直是人们关注的焦点。他和他的白宫顾问也因涉嫌向美国大众隐瞒其病情而受到社会各界的猛烈抨击,尤其是在他与最终的继任者共和党总统候选人特朗普进行了一场对其灾难性的竞选辩论后,他被迫放弃了竞选连任总统之后。 拜登于去年5月公开了他的癌症诊断结果,当时距离他离开白宫还不到4个月。拜登的办公室当时称,他的癌症被诊断为格里森评分9分,属于5级,即最严重的级别。 去年9月,拜登还曾接受了皮肤癌手术,该手术通过切除薄层皮肤,直至治疗区域只剩下健康的癌组织。他的办公室还表示,去年10月,他还曾接受过一轮前列腺癌放射治疗。 今年5月,拜登夫人吉尔·拜登(Jill Biden)在接受哥伦比亚广播公司新闻采访时表示,她得知拜登的诊断结果时,全家人都感到震惊。 吉尔表示:“说实话,我还记得得知诊断结果的那一刻,真是太令人震惊了。” 她还称,癌症并非在他担任总统期间发现的。 吉尔当时称:“你知道,医生们说,根据美国泌尿外科协会(AUA)的说法,70岁以上的男性不再需要做PSA血液检查,因为这是一种生长缓慢的癌症……我确实觉得我们在白宫得到了非常好的照顾,但不知何故,这一点被忽略了。” 亨特称,他父亲的诊断对全家人来说都是沉重的打击,“ 看着这一切真的很难过,关于我父亲现在的健康状况,我唯一想说的就是,我希望他能多抱怨几句,因为他的情况不太好。”…
8月8日华盛顿讯,美国副总统约翰·迪安·万斯(JD Vance)今天在接受美国媒体福克斯新闻(Fox News)一期节目采访时表示,“伊朗方面已告知我们,他们没有计划对霍尔木兹海峡收费”,并称在美国总统唐纳德·特朗普(Donald Trump)的直接参与下,美伊双方仍在就重新开放这条重要水道进行谈判。 万斯称,过去几天美国与伊朗的谈判取得了进展,但他同时警告说,伊朗尚未满足特朗普政府的所有要求。 万斯表示:“问题在于,他们是否有能力,或者说他们的体制是否有能力提供我们满意、让我们觉得从这次谈判中得到所需的东西。这还有待观察,但我认为过去几天我们取得了一些进展。” 万斯指出,美国政府正在与伊朗进行对话,以期最大限度地提高通过霍尔木兹海峡的石油和天然气运输量,以及仍然专注于确定伊朗是否愿意做出可能改善美伊关系的长期改变。 伊朗方面表示,其与阿曼就霍尔木兹海峡交通安排的谈判已接近达成协议,但德黑兰方面坚持认为,全面重新开放该水道仍需满足其他条件。 据伊朗官方通讯社伊通社(IRNA)报道,伊朗今天提出六项要求,要求美国“纠正其行为”,霍尔木兹海峡才能重新开放。 伊朗最高国家安全委员会(SNSC)秘书穆罕默德·巴格尔·祖尔卡德尔(Mohammad Baqer Zulqader)表示,“除非美国纠正其行为,否则霍尔木兹海峡不会开放。” 祖尔卡德尔强调,美国必须停止威胁伊朗,停止侮辱他所说的伊朗神圣不可侵犯的事物,停止对伊朗及其在黎巴嫩、巴勒斯坦领土、也门和伊拉克的盟友采取军事行动,并解除海上封锁。他的其他要求包括:美国海空军撤出伊朗,赔偿两场战争造成的损失,解除对伊朗的制裁,以及无条件释放被冻结的伊朗资产。 这些要求是在关于重新开放霍尔木兹海峡的谈判仍在进行之际提出的。万斯副总统今天早些时候称,伊朗官员已告知美国,他们没有计划对这条重要水道征收通行费。 据伊朗伊斯兰共和国通讯社报道,祖尔卡德尔还表示,最高国家安全委员会将在军事和外交谈判中坚持其立场。…
8月8日德黑兰讯,伊朗最高国家安全委员会(SNSC)秘书穆罕默德·巴格尔·佐勒加德尔(Mohammad Bagher Zolghadr)今天强硬表示,重新开放霍尔木兹海峡需要美国解除海上封锁和制裁,从该地区撤军,并支付战争赔款和解冻伊朗被冻结的资产。 根据美伊两国6月份签署的临时协议,最终协议将包含美国解除制裁伊朗的时间表、赔偿计划以及解冻资产的谈判。美伊双方约定的60天最终协议谈判期将于一周多后结束。 此前不久,阿联酋国家石油公司(ADNOC)表示,其一艘船只当天早些时候在霍尔木兹海峡航行时遭到导弹袭击。该公司在一份声明中称,该事件“未造成人员伤亡,局势已得到控制”。 阿联酋在社交媒体X上发表声明,强烈谴责“在霍尔木兹海峡航行时,国家石油公司旗下油轮遭到导弹袭击”的行为。 此外,伊朗方面表示,已接近与阿曼就管控霍尔木兹海峡达成协议。伊朗外长阿巴斯·阿拉格奇(Abbas Araghchi)今天早些时候表示,伊阿双方即将就航行问题达成协议,“特别是确定过境航线”。 阿曼在一份声明中确认称,伊阿两国正在“积极且建设性的氛围”中继续进行磋商,并谴责了霍尔木兹海峡上发生的袭击船只事件。 美国副总统万斯(JD Vance)今天在接受媒体采访时表示,伊朗及其海湾邻国,特别是阿曼,一直在讨论如何确保霍尔木兹海峡交通安全。他表示,相关计划包括制定交通管制方案、清除该海峡水雷以及伊朗承诺不向商船开火。 万斯今天指出:“我们不轻信,我们核实。” 万斯还补充说,美国将根据伊朗的行动而非言辞来评判其行为。 伊朗在2月28日美伊战争爆发后,强势地提升了封锁霍尔木兹海峡的能力。霍尔木兹海峡原来是一条开放且免收费的国际水道,但美国发动的伊朗战争引发了全球能源供应困局,推高了汽油价格,加剧了通货膨胀,并引发了人们对石油储备的担忧。 由于投资者等待特朗普政府本周早些时候暗示将达成一项协议,以开放霍尔木兹海峡的航行自由,油价在8月7日上涨。…
8月8日华盛顿讯,美国参议院今天凌晨投票确认托德·布兰奇(Todd Blanche)出任美国司法部长,这位特朗普总统的前辩护律师正式成为美国最高执法官员。投票结束后不久后,布兰奇在社交媒体上发文表示“我深感荣幸,特朗普总统对我的信任和信心让我领导司法部”。 美国参议院以50比49的微弱优势确认了对布兰奇的认命。有2名共和党参议员,缅因州的苏珊·柯林斯(Susan Collins)和阿拉斯加州的丽莎·穆尔科斯基(Lisa Murkowski)与所有民主党人一起投了反对票。 此前,路易斯安那州共和党参议员比尔·卡西迪(Bill Cassidy)于8月7日宣布支持布兰奇的提名,这为布兰奇的提名扫清了障碍。由于柯林斯和穆尔科斯基的反对,以及肯塔基州共和党参议员米奇·麦康奈尔(Mitch McConnell)的缺席投票,所以卡西迪的投票起到了决定性的关键作用。 布兰奇加入特朗普总统第二届政府时担任副司法部长,并在帕姆·邦迪(Pam Bondi)于4月被免职后被任命为代理司法部长。特朗普总统于6月宣布,他已选择布兰奇正式领导美国司法部。 但布兰奇的任命过程充满挫折,民主党人和一些共和党人对美国司法部设立的18亿美元“反武器化”基金提出异议。该基金旨在向声称受到联邦政府不公正对待的人提供赔偿。这项计划是美国司法部5月与特朗普总统达成的和解协议的一部分,旨在解决特朗普总统就其纳税申报表被前政府承包商泄露一事对美国国税局提起的100亿美元民事诉讼。 美国参议员们还反对和解协议中的第二项条款,该条款赋予特朗普总统、他的家人和他的企业广泛的豁免权,使其免于税务审计和调查。 在今年6月美国参议院司法委员会的确认听证会上,布兰奇曾告诉参议员们,“反武器化”基金已经“夭折”,并重申,由于该基金设立之初就遭到议员们的强烈反对,美国司法部“不会继续推进”该项目。但布兰奇却仍然面临着该委员会中两位关键共和党成员,来自德克萨斯州的参议员约翰·科宁(John Cornyn)参议员和来自北卡罗来纳州的参议员汤姆·蒂利斯(Thom Tillis)的质疑。…