Davos 2023: Special Address by António Guterres, Secretary-General of the United Nations

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.”

AMTV

Share
Published by
AMTV

Recent Posts

特朗普称美国在伊朗问题上维持“现状”,但美军已“整装待发”

11月10日华盛顿讯,特朗普总统昨天表示,美国在伊朗相关冲突中维持“现状”,但同时警告称,美军已“整装待发,随时准备行动”。特朗普总统也表示,希望美国与伊朗能够达成协议。 特朗普总统11月9日在一次临时新闻发布会上说道:“听着,关于伊朗,我希望我们能与他们达成协议,但目前什么进展也没有。如果必须采取行动,我们会非常认真地对待。我们的实力极其雄厚。” 特朗普对记者说:“从军事角度来看,伊朗实际上已经完了。我们之所以维持现状,主要是应其周边国家的要求。” 特朗普还警告称,如果局势发生变化,美国已“做好了充分准备,配备了史上最精良的装备。不过,我们认为应该没有理由动用这些装备。” 在特朗普总统此番言论之前,他11月8日曾对媒体表示,目前他看不出有任何理由让冲突升级。不过,尽管这场冲突带来了经济影响,他仍为其发动之初的决定进行辩护,称从历史角度来看,那是一个正确的决定。 美国国务卿卢比奥(Marco Rubio)11月8日晚间给各方预期“降温”时称,美伊双方谈判并未“处于取得突破的边缘”,因为伊朗提出的要求是“不可接受的”。 11月9日晚间,伊朗最高国家安全委员会秘书穆赫辛·雷扎伊(Mohsen Rezaei)声称,美国已因其针对伊朗的战争而“遭受重创”;他并宣称,现在是特朗普政府“投降”并接受德黑兰方面提出的结束冲突条件的时候了。 雷扎伊在社交平台X上称,美国必须接受伊朗一再重申的7项条件,这些条件是伊朗达成任何和平协议的核心要求。他写道:“针对伊朗的战争已经让美国政府遭受重创。然而,华盛顿方面却像个走投无路的赌徒一样胡乱挣扎。认输吧!别再编造关于所谓‘谈判’的假新闻了。别再否认西亚地区的新秩序了。是时候‘投降’,接受伊朗一再提出的那7项条件了。” 特朗​​普总统11月9日在华盛顿表示,他认为与伊朗之间的战争“从军事角度来看,实际上已经结束了”;这表明,至少目前他并不打算恢复空袭。 美国国务卿马尔科·鲁比奥(Marco Rubio)本周对伊朗长期以来一直提出的多项要求斥其为“不可接受”,其中包括:美国停止对伊朗港口和船只的封锁;结束包括以色列与黎巴嫩真主党之间冲突的各条战线战斗;解除针对伊朗石油和天然气销售的制裁;解冻伊朗存放在海外的国家资金;以及支付战争赔款等其他措施。 此外,伊朗外交部在今天发表的一份声明中表示,对于法国政府指控伊朗涉嫌在法境内进行破坏活动一事,伊朗“坚决予以驳斥,这些指控毫无根据”。 伊朗在驳斥法国政府针对其的一项指控时称,法国的这些指控“毫无根据”。此前有说法称,上个月法国各地数百家杂货店的商业制冷设备遭到网络攻击,而伊朗正是幕后黑手。…

2 hours ago

美国10月份通胀率高于预期,美联储加息可能性增加

11月10日,美国劳工部(DOL)今天发布的数据显示,用于追踪价格随时间变化的消费者价格指数(CPI)环比上涨了0.4%。这份10月份的通胀数据,是美国中期选举后反映经济状况的首批指标之一。 美国劳工部并未公布2026年10月的同比通胀率,原因在于2025年发生的政府停摆导致2025年10月的消费者价格数据缺失,因而无法进行同比比较。10月份,美国消费者价格的月度涨幅超出了经济学家的预期,这对于正饱受高昂生活成本困扰的美国民众而言,几乎没有带来任何缓解。 美国10月份的月度通胀涨幅较9月份有所放缓,9月份整体通胀水平环比上涨了0.6%。该数据仍高于预期;此前,FactSet调查的经济学家曾预测10月份价格环比涨幅应为0.3%。 美国近几个月的通胀在很大程度上是由能源价格上涨所推动的,但10月份的数据显示,其他各类商品和产品的成本也在上升。美国劳工部指出,10月份居住成本上涨了0.3%,占当月整体通胀涨幅的30%以上。 数据显示,美国食品价格涨幅也有所加快;继9月份保持平稳后,10月份食品价格环比上涨了0.5%。 受伊朗战争影响,美国能源成本曾出现激增,但在本期通胀数据中,能源价格对整体通胀涨幅的贡献较此前报告有所下降。10月份能源价格上涨了0.7%,而9月份的涨幅为5.2%。 随着美国加油站开始供应价格更低的冬季配方汽油,以及夏季出行高峰过后人们的出行需求减少,汽油价格已连续数周呈下降趋势。 美国中期选举也凸显了美国民众对于高物价的不满情绪。美国人寄望于中期选举或许能为美国与伊朗之间达成协议、从而结束战争创造契机。10月份决定加油站燃油价格的主要因素全球油价也出现了回落。 据美国汽车协会(AAA)数据,全美汽油平均价格自近四个月以来今天首次跌破每加仑4美元。 10月份剔除波动较大的能源和食品价格的核心通胀率上升了0.3%,与9月份持平,但略高于经济学家的预期。 华尔街分析师预计,上个月较为坚挺的通胀数据将促使美联储在12月的会议上加息。目前的关键问题在于,美联储究竟会将基准利率上调0.25个百分点,还是0.5个百分点。 在最新通胀数据公布后,芝加哥商品交易所集团(CME Group)的“美联储观察工具”(FedWatch tool)显示,美联储在12月加息0.25个百分点的概率为85%,而加息0.50个百分点的概率为15%。 在伦敦今天举行的一次会议上,美联储理事克里斯托弗·沃勒(Christopher…

4 hours ago

马斯克称特斯拉将向Cyber​​truck部分客户退还预订金

11月9日,美国电动汽车制造商特斯拉(Tesla)首席执行官埃隆·马斯克(Elon Musk)今天表示,随着特斯拉准备逐步停止生产Cyber​​truck电动皮卡,该公司将向部分客户退还该车型的预订金。 马斯克在今天发布的一条社交媒体动态中宣布了该决定,并指出Cyber​​truck的订单量“远超”特斯拉的生产速度。 马斯克写道:“我们会在约8个月后关闭生产线之前,尽可能多地生产一些车辆,但不得不向许多人退还预订金。” 马斯克上周宣布,特斯拉将于2027年中期停止在德克萨斯州工厂生产Cyber​​truck,以便“为扩大Cyber​​cab(即该公司的自动驾驶出租车产品线)的产量腾出空间”。 有分析师认为,特斯拉的该停产决定,将使马斯克腾出更多精力,以专注于机器人技术和自动驾驶出租车业务。 马斯克在今天发布的动态中,反驳了有关“特斯拉因Cyber​​truck无法盈利而停止生产”的说法。他表示,实际上“Cyber​​truck 的复杂性所带来的机会成本,远不及增加 Cyber​​cab 产量所能创造的价值。” 特斯拉于 2019 年推出了电动皮卡 Cyber​​truck,起售价为 6.9万美元。…

22 hours ago

美国法警局一名官员因涉嫌参与一起种族主义事件被停职

11月9日,哥伦比亚广播公司新闻网(CBS News)今天报道称,据消息人士透露,美国法警局(U.S. Marshals Service)的一名高层官员已被停职,等待内部调查。此前,他被指控卷入了一起针对一名黑人同事的种族歧视事件。 该名被停职的美国法警局官员是调查行动处(IOD)的助理局长彼得·马尔凯托斯(Peter Marketos)。据称,他卷入了一起事件:有人将一个西瓜放在了一位黑人副助理局长的办公桌上。知情人士称,该员工在同一部门直接隶属于马尔凯托斯。 据一位知晓此次人事变动的消息人士称,上周,美国联邦法警局通过一封简短的电子邮件通知员工,唐恩·斯奈德(Don Snider)将于今天起接管调查行动处。 调查行动处负责监管联邦法警局的一些核心执法职能,包括针对逃犯的调查,以及追踪并逮捕在逃罪犯的相关工作。 接替马尔凯托斯职位的斯奈德在美国法警局任职已久。他此前曾担任首席督察,并领导过“首都地区逃犯搜捕特别工作组”(CARFTF);该工作组负责协调联邦、州及地方各级执法机构,在华盛顿都会区共同抓捕暴力逃犯。 目前尚不清楚这起事件的起因,一些法警局内部人员将其称为“西瓜门”(watermelon-gate)。也不清楚这个西瓜究竟是马尔凯托斯本人放置的,还是由他下属的其他人放置的。 美国法警局的一位发言人表示:“美国法警局非常重视任何针对其人员不当行为的指控。这些被指控的行为并不符合美国法警局的核心价值观,即:正义、诚信与服务。虽然我们理解公众对透明度和问责制的关注,但联邦隐私法禁止讨论人事相关事宜。” 该指控引发了关于隶属于美国司法部的该联邦执法机构领导层内部问责机制及职场氛围的新质疑。在美国,将西瓜与黑人联系起来,长期以来一直被用作针对黑人的贬损性种族刻板印象。 消息人士补充称,此事在美国法警局内部引发了担忧;一些联邦法警认为,这种行为有损该机构的形象,且反映出令人不安的种族主义倾向,绝不应被容忍。其中一位消息人士透露,该机构网站上关于马尔凯托斯的个人简介已被删除,预计他将被解职。 马尔凯托斯是联邦法警局的一名资深成员,在该机构任职二十多年间,曾担任过多个重要领导职务。他于2002年以联邦法警的身份开启职业生涯,此后曾负责监管性犯罪者调查、逃犯抓捕以及战术行动等工作。…

22 hours ago

特朗普称此前的驱逐非法移民政策可能“过于强硬”

11月8日,在共和党于美国中期选举中遭遇惨败3天后,特朗普总统今天在接受《60分钟》(60 Minutes)节目采访时表示,其政府在执法方面采取的强硬驱逐非法移民措施,对于那些已在美国居住十年或更长时间的人来说,可能显得“过于严厉”了。 在今年美国中期选举中,共和党在2年前曾呈现出向共和党靠拢趋势的南德克萨斯州及其他拉丁裔聚居区的支持率大幅下滑;有些美国选民认为,这种转变至少在一定程度上与特朗普政府采取的严厉移民打击措施有关。 特朗普总统表示,他的移民执法政策在选举中对他而言“既有助益,也有损害”,在“封锁边境”方面表现出色,应得“A+”的评价;在“驱逐那些坏人”方面,也获得了“非常高的分数”。 特朗普总统表示:“但我也因此受损,因为我们驱逐了一些拥有正当工作的人,他们唯一的‘违规’或‘违法’行为,就是当初非法进入了美国,如今,美国国内有很大一部分人认为这些人应该被驱逐出境;但也有很大一部分人认为,如果他们是安分守己的好人,比如在园林绿化公司或酒店工作,或者从事其他正当职业,甚至在某些情况下还在纳税,那么就应该允许他们留下来,对吧?” 特朗普总统还表示:“我认为这确实太严厉了。很多人会觉得这很好,但也有很多人认为这太严厉了。” 从明年开始,民主党将掌控美国众议院和参议院。目前尚不清楚特朗普政府是否计划调整其移民执法策略。 此前,特朗普总统任命斯蒂芬·米勒(Stephen Miller)替换了白宫办公厅主任苏西·怀尔斯(Susie Wiles)。米勒是一位强硬派人物,被广泛视为特朗普政府移民政策的设计者之一。 特朗普总统在2024年大选中的获胜,在一定程度上得益于选民对前总统拜登移民政策的不满,其中包括美墨边境非法越境人数激增的问题。 自特朗普总统重返白宫以来,非法越境人数已大幅下降。与此同时,特朗普政府加强了在美国境内的逮捕和驱逐非法移民行动,被美国移民与海关执法局(ICE)拘留的人数创下了历史新高。去年,米勒推动制定的驱逐非法移民政策每日逮捕目标设定为3000人。 在驱逐非法移民行动中的被捕者,有相当一部分人除了违反移民法规外,并无其他犯罪记录。特朗普政府长期以来一直表示,其优先事项是“先抓最危险的罪犯”,同时也警告称,任何非法身处美国境内的人都可能面临被捕和驱逐。 特朗普政府采取的许多移民策略引发了广泛审视,其中包括在明尼阿波利斯及其他城市开展的全面执法行动、针对车辆的拦截检查、拘留措施,以及将部分非法移民遣返回其母国以外的其他国家等做法。 一些共和党人对此提出了异议;来自南佛罗里达州的众议员玛丽亚·萨拉萨尔(Maria…

2 days ago

美国卫生部长前顾问指控白宫办公室主任怀尔斯等官员腐败

11月8日,曾任白宫高级顾问、现为美国卫生与公众服务部(HHS)部长小肯尼迪(Robert F. Kennedy Jr.)核心助手卡利·米恩斯(Calley Means)在媒体上公开指控称,特朗普政府的多名官员,其中包括近期辞职的白宫办公厅主任苏西·怀尔斯(Susie Wiles)及其它官员在白宫的中期选举策略中,将行业利益置于选民健康之上。 米恩斯在今天播出的《面对全国》(Face the Nation)节目中表示:“在特朗普的眼皮底下,有一群前游说者在为电子烟行业、超加工食品行业、制药行业以及农药行业服务,并按这些行业的意图行事。他们给出的借口是,我们需要这些行业的资金来应对中期选举,因此实际上不得不违背选民的意愿。” 米恩斯曾参与创立“让美国再次健康”(MAHA)运动,并在担任小肯尼迪部长的核心助手之前,促成了特朗普总统与小肯尼迪在2024年美国总统大选中的结盟。他在加入美国卫生与公众服务部期间,曾协助推动修订美国膳食指南,并致力于将汽水和糖果从“补充营养援助计划”(SNAP),即食品券计划的适用范围内剔除;他已于上个月辞职。 米恩斯在节目中表示,怀尔斯以及由其他白宫顾问组成的“一个非常紧密的圈子”,一直在“从我们曾致力于对抗的那些行业中收受钱财”。 此前,米恩斯在11月5日录制的播客节目《乔·罗根体验》(The Joe Rogan Experience)中公开指控怀尔斯存在腐败行为,并呼吁特朗普总统“清理门户”。…

2 days ago