Since its establishment by international agreement in 1945 as a forum for the leaders of member states, the United Nations General Assembly has witnessed numerous memorable events and incidents that have remained etched in public memory. It is the venue where heads of state, or their representatives, deliver speeches outlining their visions and objections.
In this regard, one recalls the action taken by Nikita Khrushchev during the fifteenth session of the General Assembly in September 1960, when he startled participants by removing one of his shoes and banging it on the podium. The Soviet “shoe protest” came in response to remarks by the Philippine delegate criticizing Soviet policy. This occurred even though that UN session was intended to help mend relations between the Western and Eastern blocs, or more specifically between the camp of freedom and capitalism and the camp of one-party rule.
Cuban leader Fidel Castro, meanwhile, tested the patience of delegates at the same session by speaking from the UN podium for nearly four hours, delivering an extended Marxist critique of the Western bloc, far too lengthy to recount here.
The United Nations was not created so that every head of state could vent personal grievances against rivals. Rather, its purpose was to provide a platform for initiatives that foster consensus and promote peace. Yet Castro delivered a speech that sounded more suited to a mass political rally than to a gathering representing the world's nations.
Everyone also remembers what Colonel Muammar Gaddafi did when he made his first appearance at the UN podium. He delivered remarks that diminished any sense of caution that others might have felt toward him and, like Castro in exceeding the allotted speaking time of fifteen minutes, spoke for an hour and a half.
His speech contained rhetoric that did little to enhance Libya’s standing within the international community. Some of his arguments might even have received consideration had he not committed the inappropriate act of tearing up a copy of the United Nations Charter before the audience, a scene broadcast around the world and accompanied by widespread criticism of his behavior.
In contrast, the international community welcomed Yasser Arafat’s appearance before the General Assembly in 1974. He spoke briefly but meaningfully, expressing hope for a positive outcome when he told the assembly:
“I have come bearing an olive branch in one hand and a freedom fighter’s gun in the other. Do not let the olive branch fall from my hand.”
Arafat’s appeal, however, did not achieve the hoped-for results.
Today, Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan speaks from the UN podium with words that shed an objective light on the challenges confronting nations around the globe. He argues that many crises “do not stem from a lack of resources and opportunities as much as from a lack of commitment to the principles agreed upon by the international community.”
He adds that efforts to restore security and stability in the region and build sustainable relations among its states cannot be based on domination or exploitation of crises, but rather on mutual respect, shared interests, good neighborliness, respect for state sovereignty, and full adherence to international law and humanitarian law.
It is also worth noting that annual sessions of the General Assembly have often seen delegations walk out during the speeches of leaders with whom they have deep disagreements. Such was the case at the current session when the US delegation left the hall during the speech of Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian.
Yet the most striking walkout occurred when Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu took the podium. Seventy-seven heads of delegation reportedly left the chamber. In his speech, Netanyahu appeared to take pride in the war of destruction, starvation, and devastation that he has waged, and continues to wage, in Gaza, the West Bank, and Lebanon.
These are merely reflections on a UN session held amid the thunder of exchanged missiles and the persistence of seemingly unending obstinacy. The recollection of incidents stretching back half a century serves to underscore a simple point: the General Assembly is a forum for those who seek to address the world's problems through meaningful discourse.
