gaza after the war ends. there are questions about the what the you and can do to bring an end to the war in ukraine and if they u.n.'s government structure formed in the aftermath of world war ii needs to be reworked in the 21st

century. our guest today is president dennis francis, the president of the 78 session of the united nations general assembly where he serves as the international organizations chair and presiding officer. i'm looking forward to hearing his thoughts on these issues and many others. prior to his work in the united nations, president francis was trinidad and tobago's longest serving abbasid or. -- longest-serving ambassador. he has a 40 year career. is a graduate of the university of the west indies where he later taught and he is a graduate of the school of international advanced studies at the johns hopkins university in d.c. after he makes his opening remarks come i have a couple of questions for him. we encourage you to suggest questions which i can add to the list. please write them on the cards you have at your feet and hand them over.

those of you watching and listening on c-span come we were happy to accept your questions. please email them to headliners at press.org. put united nations in the subject line. we look forward to having as many as time permits. now that housekeeping is out-of-the-way, president francis, welcome to the press club, the floor is yours. [applause] president francis: thank you emily and good morning to you and all of our guests both in studio and online. ms. emily wilkin, president of the national press club, colleague, friend, ladies and gentlemen, i'm am profoundly honored by your invitation to

speak of the renowned national press club come an institution with a storied legacy and long-standing commitment to journalistic excellence. i consider this not just as a headline speaker moment for me but the unique opportunity for us together to assess the current state of our world and for me to hear your invaluable perspectives on some of the issues facing us. at a time when our world which abounds with timeless possibilities, there is also mounting challenges with relentless ferocity. we need to be aware of the potential consequences and results of the situations that confront us. on the one hand, science, technology and human innovation

is propelling us into a new era of promise and progress. despite the overshadows of nationalism and the inequity in access, we have witnessed the manufacturing with lightning speed of the covid-19 vaccine, demonstrating that in the face of collective threats and challenges, humanity has an enormous capacity to rally and deliver relief and outcomes even faster. barring the accompanying challenges of cybersecurity and the downside of artificial intelligence, the science fiction of our childhood is therefore transforming into today's reality. on the one hand, we see a lack of unity and solidarity, leaving much of the world behind. a vast majority is mired in

abject poverty, misery, strife, want and many other indignities of a bygone age. the ridge of some nascent conflicts across the globe with 35 to these concentrated in africa alone further compounds any chance for us to deliver the agenda and paris agreement for people on the planet. from haiti to the gaza strip, ukraine to myanmar, the sudan to afghanistan, a pleura for ration of conflicts are ablaze with a trailer death and rampant human rights abuses continuing unabated. a relentless climate of calamity is devastating our planet as evidenced by the triple crises of climate change, biodiversity loss and dilution whose impacts

cut across rising sea levels and flooding. the so-called el niño effect, the drought and frequency of intensifying strife among others. to navigate this complex web of challenges in a rapidly transforming world, we must seize the opportunities and address the pressing issues that lie at the very core of our values. the u.n. charter, the declaration on human rights among other things, the instruments that provide those foundational values and which underpin multilateralism itself form universal rights and we must start common challenges with collective solutions resolving differences transcending borders through

dialogue and through international cooperation. despite the clear benefits of multilateralism, there is without doubt growing skepticism about clarence -- current global institutions include questions on the relevance of the united nations itself. in the face of escalating geopolitical tensions, critics have highlighted the paralysis in the security council, crippled by deadlock and the misuse of the power as a failure by not just the council but by the united nations organization as a whole. to address escalating conflict. some also view the general assembly which i am privileged to lead is ineffective, pointing out as a hindrance, the lack of legal force of its resolutions. indeed, while we reflect on

these legitimate concerns, we must also acknowledge that the institutional mechanism established in 1945 may no longer fully suffice for the challenges of 2024 and beyond. whether foundational principles of the united nations shall remain relevant, i believe that a candid discussion on reform is now much more urgently needed. advocates of the you and lead multilateral system like myself as president of the general assembly would argue that the organization and its deeds is much larger than the security council. across the globe, through its specialized agencies, funds and program including operational activities rendered by the resident coordinated system at the country level, the united nations offers a lifeline and hope for many hundreds of millions of people who depend on

it. in the far-flung corners of the globe, the united nations is not only a staunch defender and promoter of human rights, it is also an honest broker peace as demonstrated by its deployment of its blue helmet peacekeepers in the good opportunities of peace building and preventive diplomacy. as also clearly demonstrated in the ongoing complex cases of ukraine and gaza, the general assembly as the most universally represented entity, we are 193 member states having an equal voice offers a unique platform for dialogue. i firmly believe that the general assembly's resolutions carried the desire and political will on global issues. more than commonly thought. those resolutions being a collective voice of the majority

of u.n. membership. it's adoption of revolutions in 2022 on the so-called veto initiative mandated the convening of a debate in the general assembly when ever a permanent member of the security council cast a veto which enhances accountability and transparency enforces better collaboration between the council and the assembly. i am therefore confident by remaining anchored in the core values and tapping into our demonstrated ability for innovation and adaptation, we can inject new vigor into our most lateral systems and reaffirm its enduring relevance. let me close by recalling that when i was elected to the presidency of the general assembly 10 months ago, i committed to reignite the much needed trust and solidarity among member states to achieve the 2013 agenda.

anchored on my watch was faith, prosperity, progress and stability for all. with five more months remaining in my presidency, i am steadfast in pursuing this vision to restore the diminished faith in our multilateral system. importantly, to renew our commitment to the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. i have launched several initiatives including the recent general assembly first ever sustainability week which i convened last month, focusing on the critical sectors of the economy such as debt, tourism, infrastructure, transport and energy. let be laser focused on our goals as we also approach the summit of the future in september. world leaders are expected to forge a new global consensus to

advance international cooperation and address global challenges. the much-anticipated summit outcome documents are expected to be more transformative and actionable. the so-called pact of the future. fortifying global governance with concrete reforms, global digital combat addressing the disparity and access to digital technology and the accompanying ethical challenges and the declaration of future generations committing us to preserve the integrity of our own environment, protect human rights and achieve peaceful society. as we look forward to the summit of the future, i invite all stakeholders including you, members of the press to join us in reaffirming that the u.n. lead multilateral system is not only relevant but that it is dispensable.

yes, the imperative of durable deeds across the globe is under threat and its absence to achieve the 2030 agenda of the paris agreement among other global commitments. i urge you to reject the cynical view that we lack the power to make the difference as a united global community. instead, let us recognize the boundless potential of humanity to collectively address the myriad of challenges, advance progress and create a world worthy of habitation by present and future generations. i thank you and eagerly wait your questions. [applause] >> thank you so much. we're going to open up for questions and thank you to all

of those who have already submitted questions. i will be getting somewhere from everyone coming in online. i'm making sure we are getting the wide range of expert questions in. i think i want to start by asking you about something you mentioned in your remarks which is their's current criticism of the u.n. structure, the security council, the general assembly. i'm wondering if there are any efforts underway to have reforms were some changes to make those perhaps more effective and more influential and powerful? >> thank you villa question, it's very important. the you and is unique in many ways in the sense that the process of reform has been taking place over several years. the point at which we are now in

which we five this council in particular seems unable to come to consensus on key issues, key global issues. i suppose it creates a greater sense of urgency. as everyone knows, the united nations was established in the immediate postwar in the late 1940's so the structure that was put in place in the late 1940's are clearly outdated and need to be rethought. we witness this every day. a process is taking place and has been ongoing for some time. there are a number of formulas by which to reconfigure the united nations. i believe they are proposers -- proposals on the table but are currently attracting the

attention and discussion among member states in the general assembly. note however that i use the descriptor, discretion, not negotiation. a formal negotiating process is yet to be launched. that issue is an issue that the member states themselves must decide. the timing at which to enter into formal negotiations. in the meantime, a lot of useful work would lead into the formal negotiations. the various formulas for reform are under scrutiny and intense discussion. of course, it's not so easy to reform an institution that has been in existence for 80 years. and in which not all members enjoy the same privileged position.

there is something called the p-5 the permanent five in the security council which are five members who have the privilege and i want to say quickly their responsibility of the veto. i see responsibility derivatively because the security council acts on behalf of the general assembly. what we been noticing is that all too often, geopolitical considerations tend to override everything else. therefore, national interest become almost a dominance -- a dominant factor in how the security council makes decisions. there is a need for reform and it's not just the security council. there is also an ongoing process

about revitalizing the general assembly making it stronger more and more effective. for the system to work well you need a strong, agile security council but you also need a very strong fitful purpose general assembly. we are working on both. however, whenever i give these talks, particularly in respect of the security council, reform is a process. it's not an event. i would be misleading you if i left you with the impression that within two or three weeks, we would awaken one monday morning there would be perfectly performed -- form security council. that will not happen. it will take some time. however you look at it, the

configuration of the council will change very likely to take account of the new political dynamic of the international system. power has been shifting from the traditional western powers. and some other parts of the world so there are several countries were now exercising influence and leverage at the global scale but who are not members of the permanent five. for example, africa's one of the fastest growing regions in the world. they have a very large population. there is no african state represented on the council. the largest democracy in the world is 1.4 william people -- billion people. they are not on the permanent

five. brazil -- these are all countries with ambitions. japan, not a member of the council. this is a process that requires meticulous thought and concentration. it's not something you will have an opportunity to tinker with every other year. whatever we decide now will very probably take us through perhaps may mid century. what we have now is 80 years. >> you say there are discussions going on but it hasn't moved into formal negotiations? >> absolutely. >> do you have a sense of a timeline? >> i hope it will take place within the next year. i hope it will take place very soon but that again is a decision the members will come to. it's a member driven process. as president of the general

assembly, i have no authority to interfere in negotiations themselves or to instigate until such time as the members come to a consensus on what would be in their view, the correct time to engage in that formal process, we wait. but i have to say in the context of what is going on globally, there is increased pressure to accelerate the initiation of former negotiations because the perception raab is among nine members that the sigurd account is not serving as the way it was intended and is falling short of its mandate of maintaining international peace and security.

>> we also had a question from the audience -- most agencies are located in g-7 countries and as the u.s. urges more countries to move outside of the council. >> those were decisions made by the council ship. the location of a u.n. agency is a matter that is voted upon. the fact that most of the g-7 countries would have met, that the government of those countries would have offered them as candidates, they may well have been in the path contending -- other contending candidates and there would have been election. were some process by which new members can be chosen. this is what many people do not fully appreciate.

the u.n. works by consensus. decision-making represents the overwhelming majority of states. in terms of how that decision is implemented. everyone has a single vote and therefore, if a country -- what i should say is so that people do not get the wrong impression. i recently visited the united nations system in nairobi, kenya. if the headquarters of the environmentally leakers -- leaders of programs. there are many programs there. some other agencies are setting up offices there as well. it is not correct to leave you with the impression that they

are only in g-7. there is one in nairobi, kenya. >> good clarification there. i wanted to move into a couple of questions regarding gaza. given the ongoing conflict in gaza, do you think the un's inability to get a cease-fire agreement is a failure? >> no, it is not a failure. it is not a failure. the you and itself is not a party in the conflict. one must keep in mind that this is a very unusual situation we have in gaza. two parties with a conflict raging between two parties, one is a sovereign state, israel, that is a member of the united nations. the other is a group called hamas.

it is not a state and is not bound by the u.n. charter. you and of course, the un's brand is peace and security. that's at the core of what we do. it's not the only thing bennett is at the core of what we do. the fact that the u.n. has not been able to facilitate a cease fire which is the more apt to facilitate because the u.n. cannot and may not in poses will run any government. bear in mind, as many people seem to overlook or forget, the you and is not an autonomous esoteric organization. it is the member states themselves that constitute the u.n.. the fact that it's not impossible to come to sort of's

-- come to some sort of cease fire and i hope up to the last moment that those with the authority of coming to agreement and establishing a cease fire would do so in order to save human lives and suffering and pain and trauma. that is not a failure. is a failure of the parties in the conflict it do that. we in the u.n. keep asserting that the only way to resolve conflict is through dialogue and negotiations. violence only breeds more violence. nobody wins. this concept in a war of the victim vanquished is at what cost? at what cost in terms of human lives and suffering and dislocation? and financial costs. wars cost money.

this we do not see is a failure on the part of the you and. what we had hope is that the parties would be amenable to deeper you win engagement and helping them to find common ground, to create that cease fire. but we are very encouraged in the um that there are third parties both from the region and outside united states being one that are playing a key role in that process of discussion. they are trying to identify the terms and conditions on which a cease fire might take place. i am hoping, really hoping that that process will produce a positive outcome. for me and for us in the u.n.,

it's unthinkable what the consequences are likely to be if that cease fire does not take place. >> we are getting good questions from the audience. if i can't read the handwriting on the question, i can't ask the question. i saying dish i'm saying this is someone whose penmanship is not the best. i also want to ask you about the international court of justice. there is a case claiming genocide against israel in the u.n. court. this is unusual for an international court to become involved in ongoing conflict rather than after the dust has settled. do you think that was appropriate for them to do it now while the conflict is ongoing? >> the you in is the highest court. all countries who are member of the u.n. have the right to seek

the guidance of the court. the court has two ways in which it operates. they can give advisory opinions or in a conflict, it can give legally binding findings. it has -- this is not a case for a legally binding finding. they have given an advisory opinion from the court. that is the advice that was sought by the south africans. i don't think it's a question of south africans having access improperly or illegally. under the terms of the charger, they have the right to speak. any country can see the the court. you notice with the court has done, it has asked the

government of israel to ensure that they take adequate precautionary measures to ensure the safety of the people in gaza. that's to ensure that their humanitarian needs are met. they not specifically addressed the question on which the south africans, in the question they rot just they rose. i think the legal and humanitarian basis for this is clear because the fact of the matter is that with an excess of 35,000 people having lost their lives, most of them civilians, 35 or so percent being children, there is a basis to be concerned

about the humanitarian dynamics of what we see in gaza. >> i know there have been studies showing the chance of a famine >> is very high. >> can you talk a little bit about the u.n. effort to address the humanitarian aspect? what has been the biggest challenge in doing so and you see any sort of turnaround for the humanitarian crisis that the merger? pres. francis: i think it would be fair to say that if you follow the news, there has been a wellspring of concern among people across the world for the situation confronting the people in gaza. there is an organization established by a resolution of the general assembly called the united nations relief agency u

nra the mandate of which, is to provide humanitarian and other support to the palestinians up to the day on which the two state solution comes into effect. you have palestinians in the gaza strip but there is no governing authority, no government. unra performs the role and function of a government. education, food, medical care, utilities, everything is done under the auspices of unra. you would be aware that there have been accusations recently of impropriety committed by a small group of unra staff.

those allegations triggered an immediate response by the secretary-general to launch two investigations. one is internal and one is external. i'm not quite sure but i believe the internal report should be coming out pretty soon. the french foreign minister undertook a unra gaza and that report was published approximately a week and a half ago. it showed conclusively that she found no basis on which to suggest thatunra is an organization had violated its mandate. she did indicate in the report that there were some areas of

weakness, administrative and weaknesses that needed to be tightened up but she found no evidence compelling or otherwise of any impropriety on the part u ofnra. it's important because several countries once the allegation was made, terminated their financial support tounra. it's that financial report that provides the humanitarian necessities needed by the people gaza. the accusation that was made unra's ability in many countries withheld their financial contributions. fortunately, on the basis of the report, many countries have returned to providing contributions and donations to

unra. unra is not yet out of the woods. it still in a delicate position. as a matter of fact, we will host on i believe the third of june, a pledging conference to raise funds for unra because without their support, 1.5 people in palestine would not be in a position to have any sort of support medical, nutritional or otherwise. you have a situation in gaza where, for example, based on reports i've seen young children, babies are being amputated without anesthetics. can you imagine that? without anesthesia. the hospitals just don't have the medication.

you have kids dying of hunger, on the verge of dying with hunger. there is no potable water. these are some of the things that unra proviso is very important that they should have their funding reinstated because they are acting on behalf of the rest of humanity to help those in a difficult situation to let them have some level of human dignity. so they can have a meal, have their medical conditions looked after etc. i am hopeful that now that the foreign minister report has been published, the situation will improve steadily. but i encourage international

communities and donors to keep an eye out and to be very generous in their donations to unra during the present. i >> washington has blocked funding to unra through 2023. they were the largest contributor. can we talk about the potential for the u.s. funding coming back? what does that look like? is the report enough? pres. francis: you're quite right, the u.s. is and has been for several years the largest contributor to unra and that's well appreciated. as to the question of when the likely return of the u.s. government will be, i'm not in a position to indicate. i don't know and i think it's a

question better posed to maybe a senior functionary of the state department or the treasury department. what i will say is that without the contribution of the u.s., unra will be very hard-pressed and will have to find alternative sources of funding to close that gap. this will be a challenge because of the magnitude but it will be absolutely necessary. without closing that funding gap, it's anybody's guess what would be the consequences for the future of gaza. >> which got a big world with a lot of issues. the war in ukraine is also very much on the minds of those in d.c. and around the globe. what is the u.n. doing at this point to bring an end to this war? what is the u.n. role there? pres. francis: this is a war we

believe to be very unnecessary. it's very unnecessary. the general assembly has passed six resolutions on the war in ukraine. there is a reason for this. that war constitutes a fundamental violation of the precepts on which the u.n. is founded. respect for territory and integrity of states, the sovereign equality of states, the needs to resolve the dispute always by peaceful means and to respect international law. in all of those instances, the russian federation has been found to be in breach.

we would like this war to come to an end sooner rather than later. it has entered its third year. and there is talk in the media about what is likely to happen in the short term of the coming months. the u.n. can just continue to press for the war to come to an end. the you and is never the problem. the u.n. is part of the solution . there are instances and have been in the past where war has been prosecuted based on you and

agreement or mandates to go ahead. this is not one of those cases. this matter never came before the security council of the u.n.. we just got up one morning and found that an aggression had unilaterally taken place. therefore, it constitutes a fundamental departure. consider for a moment the precedent it would set. we would be living in a world of anarchy countries could just violate the rules and tear of their charger and walk away. we would literally be living in the 19th or 18th century. there would be absolute disorder. we continue to insist and speak to the parties quietly. at the end of the day, it's the

parties that had see the wisdom of bringing this to a halt. let's face it, the war has affected, that war in particular the notches that one, gods as well has affected virtually every aspect of life. global food insecurity is one they say it's been rising significantly since the war in ukraine. inflation rates have gone up. the ability -- the u.n. had in fact intervened and quietly arranged for the export of ukrainian grain through certain imports. in collaboration with the russian federation. unfortunately, the russians withdrew from it. now you have a situation where it's very difficult to export

ukrainian green and countries in several parts of the world including in africa framed the constitution -- frame the consequences of this. this war has been long and costly not just in terms of light but in terms of the rest of the impact on the global economy. it's time it's brought to an end. we urge the parties to find a way forward that would involve diplomacy, dialogue and a search for durability. >> you mentioned potential reforms to the u.n. security council and russia sits on the council as a member. in the discussions, is there any discussion about removing rozier as a member if it's found that russia violated the law repeatedly since 2014. >> in the history of the u.n.,

there has only been one country that -- that's been expelled from the u.n.. if my memory sues me well, that was seth everett. such an eventuality is very rare in the u.n. but bear in mind that these decisions would have to be decisions that would be made by the membership of the u.n. the membership has ways of imposing costs of consequences on members whose behavior should not be dizzy -- deemed unacceptable. russia is a member of the u.n.. it's behavior in ukraine in

violating and invading ukraine has been regarded as an affront to multilateralism and the system. the fact that private apartment buildings, public facilities, nursery schools have been bombed. it seems to create the impression in people's minds that there is a certain insensitivity to the geneva convention that dictates how such places should be treated in war. they are supposed to be exempt from attack. but they have been attacked in ukraine. russia has for example floated membership in the u.n..

they had a candidate for membership of the human rights council of the you and. that candidate ship failed. it failed. they've had a candidate share for membership in competition with another member states. that seat on the economic and social council to this day remains vacant because neither of the two contending parties can amass a large enough majority to win the seat. there is a sense in which the assembly uses its influence to take decisions in relation to third parties whose behavior they disapprove of that it's

intended to frustrate the objective or interest of that country. >> in some ways russia has already been punished but they still have a seat on the security council. >> >> you are right. i want to move to some other parts of the world and we have a question from the audience. there is a resolution pending ahead of the u.n. general assembly to establish an annual international federation of the 1995 genocide side. the resolution is supported by the general general of rwanda and they were a couple other countries. can you talk about the current status of that resolution how you envision the process proceeding from here and any action you will be taking as president of the assembly? >> such a resolution has in fact been brought forward. it is my understanding that this

is not the only time. there was an attempt to do so two years ago. if my memory serves me correctly , that was eventually withdrawn. however, that matter has come up and there is an agenda under which it will come up. the rules of the general assembly are quite clear. whereas i am the leader of the general assembly in the convene or just and the conveneer, the rules limit the power of the president to do anything other than to administer the rules and perverse objectivity regarding these parties.

the resolution has been powered by germany and rwanda and cosponsored by a large cross-section of member states. a discussion will have to be had with the protagonists relating to the actual resolution. suffice it to say that we have not yet identified a date, is something that will be attended to shortly. also, the manner in which i propose to deal with it would be entirely consistent with the rules of procedure and with precedent. they are very clear in terms of procedurally what should happen in the general assembly. i have now input at all into this substantive content of the

resolution. that does not fall within my purview. that would be the responsibility of the countries. normally the way this process works is that there is an initial drought which is placed on the table and they are consultations. the draft would go through a refined months until everyone is comfortable before it's formally brought to the general assembly. it has now been brought to the general assembly. in fact, i have been traveling officially last week and i am advised that it would have arrived formally last friday. when i get back to new york, you will -- they will have to engage with that approach protagonists to consider the date when the matter will be discussed. are you saying it could be done soon? i don't know2 but i think it's a

matter of consultation. the date has not been set but there are certain provisions and direct relations that will need to be followed. and it is my duty as the president to ensure that we remain faithful to the rules. >> gotta follow the process. let me ask you about the environment. that is a very big passion of yours and a critical focus of the united nations. i understand that the un-sponsored conference held in canada at the end of april, made significant progress on a treaty to end plastic pollution. can you tell is more about this? do you think this will have an impact on global production in plastic? pres. francis: the fact that there is a decision to have a treaty at all is indicative only of the importance of ridicule

world -- of ridding the world eventually a plastics. i share with you a statistics i read recently. it really bothered me. if we do not act now and allow the situation to persist as it is, by 2050, there will be more plastic in the ocean than fish. can you imagine that? plastics have been found in the depths of the ocean floor. 35000 and 40,000 feet beneath the surface. plastic has been found there. the fish in the ocean now, many of them consume plastic. given that we are at the top of the food chain when we eat the fish, we are also consuming some plastic.

plastics have been known to be harmful to human health. the health of the oceans is a huge issue for the united nations and mankind. the u.n. has determined that we got to take corrective action unless we create the conditions to bruce's. that will make -- this is an extremely important treaty. there is concern in many places. they are focused on the moment on single use plastics, things like straws that you use once and throw away, perhaps -- i saw on television this morning on one of the channels and

advertisement about the creation of containers, plastic containers easily reusable that you minimize the use plastics. -- minimize the use of new plastics. externally invite -- important for the environment and human health. we hope, given the importance of sustainability, you notice i'm wearing a pin on one of my lapels. this is a sustainability pin. it's important because the message we are trying to get people to internalize is that our survival on this planet really depends on the expense that the sentence to which we can adjust her lifestyle to live comfortably on the planet while minimizing the data redo the --

of the environment. >> i'm glad the press club we've gone from plastic bottles to aluminum bottles. [applause] i'm just thankful we >> did it before we had this conversation. pres. francis: it seems like a simple step at very important. if you only use plastic, up to one week, the volume he end up with is staggering. that goes into the environment. we need to be more responsible users of the environment because unless that environment is healthy, we can't be healthy. we don't use sustainability sustainably. this is as much about ourselves as our grandchildren, their grandchildren, their grandchildren -- >> the future of the planet.

speaking of which, you guys have the upcoming summit of the future that's coming up this september. can you talk about what you and other world leaders hope to discuss at this gathering? >> it's got unusual name. >> it's very broad. pres. francis: but it will do some important things. we've been talking about the fact that there is a lot of mistrust in the international system at the moment, solidarity seems to have receded. so the you and as the anchor of all of this is seeking ways in which to restore the capacity of the organization, to really identify and implement a lasting solution to major global challenges.

the summit of the future is an instance in which world leaders will convene in new york later this year. it will form a new consensus regarding how we deal with some of these burning crises. it will mean, for example, reaffirming their commitment to the sustainable development goals which are woefully off-track. we do not need to go into why that is. i will simply say one of the big challenges has been the unanticipated covid-19, the consequences of which still linger with us. but they will come together and they will reaffirm the importance of the sustainable development goals, this pin i am wearing, and also they will try to address important issues that

exist now and those that are perhaps on the horizon. so, for example, the outcome document from the summit will be accompanied by two documents, one a global digital compact. why is this important? this is important because you cannot really talk about visualization -- digitalization in a world where there is tremendous inequality without addressing the problem of inequality itself. the compact will seek to do that , so that heads of state and government in the global digital compact will seek to close the gap, narrow the gap between those countries that are very

proficient in the digital world and those less proficient. it will also address things like, this is extremely important, antimicrobial resistance. i am glad for the opportunity to talk about this because we do not believe the world is paying enough attention to it. the medications available now, the antibiotics, are losing their effectiveness. the medical advice suggests the reason for this is overuse, potential abuse. viruses and bacteria, new strains are being created that are resistant to these drugs. already, the estimates are 1.5 million people annually, one in five of which are children, young children between the ages of one and five, lose their

lives because of antimicrobial resistance. and so, the heads of state will give a mandate for follow-up work to be done on this. i have appointed two cofacilitators, representatives of barbados and malta, to work with the member states on developing some sort of outcome document in which the heads will give instruction as to what needs to be done to address this problem. if it is not addressed, it will simply get worse. in other words, the reality is we are running out of options with respect to the treatment of several diseases. so, that is one. the other one, the big one is artificial intelligence, which,

of course, has enormous potential to change the way we live, to deliver extraordinary benefits to civilization, maybe to advance the cures of many diseases, to strengthen competitiveness and productivity, and to do a great number of things. but it also comes with considerable risks. the risk of loss of personal data, for example. risks of attack by third parties. >> concerned about disinformation -- concern about disinformation is high. pres. francis: particularly at a time when the younger generation are not getting their

information from the news, traditional sources, it is all on social media. and the fact there has been an invasion on social media of misinformation and disinformation much of which leads to poor decision-making, panic, and challenges in fundamental ways. the issue then becomes, how do we, as in international community, ensure that we harvest the benefits of ai but to minimize the risks and threats to society, to the cohesiveness of society? those are issues that will be dealt with in the future. >> i am sure many in this room will be attending the summit, watching the summit. i think we are at time. before everyone leaves, i want to give a huge thank you to the folks who made this event possible.

donna and lori as well as team members who organized the event. thank you so much. as well as the program manager. i am sure in your global travels, you must have acquired many very interesting items. i hope this national press club mug will fit nicely with your collection. feel free to use it next time you are chairing the general assembly. pop it on up there. pres. francis: you can look for it. >> i will. thank you for joining us. pres. francis: my pleasure. [applause] >> [indiscernible] for questions submitted. sorry we were not able to get to everyone.

>> [indiscernible] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2024] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]

indianapolis by the indiana debate commission. >> good evening and welcome to the indiana debate