Antonio Guterres, UN Secretary General: Tthe threat to international law from power

0:00This BBC podcast is supported by ads outside the UK. If journalism is the first draft of history, what happens if that draft is flawed? In 1999, four Russian apartment buildings were bombed, hundreds killed. But even now, we still don't know for sure who did it. It's a mystery that sparked chilling theories. I'm Helena Merriman, and in a new BBC series, I'm talking to the reporters who first covered this story. What did they miss the first time? The History Bureau Putin and the apartment bombs Listen on bbc.com or wherever you get your podcasts From the Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games To the European Athletics Championships The 2026 sporting calendar is packed full of big events Keep up with all the action with More Than The Score The podcast that goes beyond the score sheet Join expert BBC sports journalists every Monday to Friday For interviews with sports stars, big talking points and the stories behind the headlines.

1:07More Than The Score from the BBC World Service. Listen now. Search for More Than The Score wherever you get your BBC podcasts.

1:19Hello, I'm Anna Foster and this is the interview from the BBC World Service. the best conversations coming out of the BBC. People shaping our world from all over the world. If you're not a little bit afraid, then you're not paying attention. We have never seen a people so united. Do not make that boat crossing. Do not make that journey. Being born in America, feeling American, having people treat me like I'm not. We're more popular than populism. For this interview, I met Antonio Guterres, Secretary General of the United Nations. As the head of the UN since 2017, he's now entering his final year in office, and he's issuing a stark warning about the state of the world.

2:04Global conflicts are increasingly complex and seemingly intractable, and international law is seen by some as secondary to power and influence, in particular by the United States. In the face of this threat to the world order, he says the UN Security Council, designed to maintain international peace and security, is ineffective and in desperate need of reform. There is a problem of efficiency. There is a problem of legitimacy. The Security Council was created after the Second World War. There have been a few adjustments, but still today we have no African permanent member in the Security Council.

2:40You have no Latin American permanent member in the Security Council. You have three European countries as permanent members of the Security Council. First, there is a problem of legitimacy and of the composition. Second, there is the veto power and the fact that the veto power is used in the protection of the interest of the members themselves, which is something that, in my opinion, should not exist. Welcome to the interview from the BBC World Service with Antonio Guterres. It is clear that we are facing very difficult moments. It is clear that multilateralism is under attack. It is clear that many people think that they can solve the problems of the world by themselves.

3:22When the problems are more and more difficult, the challenges are bigger and bigger, from climate to the impacts of artificial intelligence. It is obvious that never like today it was necessary to have strong international cooperation. It was obvious that never like today We needed strong multilateral organisations, modern ones, reformed ones, but strong. And unfortunately, something that it is enough to use power when we need law, that it is enough to use their strengths when you need international cooperation, when it is enough to impose a unilateral view when the world is more and more complex.

4:02As you come to the end of your tenure, it must be difficult for you to see intractable conflicts which are no closer to being resolved, which are devastating for countries around the world. And as you say, instead of coming together to try and solve those, we're moving further and further apart. We are witnessing a situation of total impunity. As the geopolitical divides are high, conflicts that before were localised are now conflicts in which different entities get involved, countries around and sometimes even further afield. With the geopolitical divides, with the sense that anyone can do whatever they want because nothing will happen to them, conflicts are becoming more intractable.

4:48And as I said, the suffering of people is increasing and we see military expenditures growing exponentially, but humanitarian aid diminishing tragically. We are having more and more difficulties to support the people that is dying, the people that is suffering hunger, and the frustration to see people dying, knowing that we could solve their problem and that we do not have the resources to do so. That is terrible. We use the word impunity, and you've talked about brazen violations of international law. Well, there are countries that we've seen do that time after time. But the US is in the mix now, in a way that we've never seen before.

5:30And Donald Trump is violating international law in a way that we've never seen before, isn't he? It's more general than that. It's the concept itself that is unfortunately losing ground. There are those that believe that the power of law should be replaced by the law of power. And indeed, when one sees the present policy of the United States, there is a clear conviction that multilateral solutions are not relevant and that what matters is the exercise of the power and the influence of the United States and sometimes in disrespect by the norms of international law. Donald Trump's been very clear about that.

6:15He spoke at the UN General Assembly. His words were scathing. He talked about the wars that he had ended. He said, it's too bad that I had to do these things instead of the United Nations doing them. The United Nations did not even try to help in any of them. What is the purpose, he said, of the United Nations? Let's be clear. There has been a number of peace initiatives from the United States and we support them. And we are working closely with the United States in Haiti. We are working closely with the United States in humanitarian aid in Gaza. We are doing lots of things in which we are actively cooperating.

6:52But it's important to recognize that the UN is extremely engaged in the solution of all these conflicts, but the UN has no leverage. And indeed, it is true that big powers have a stronger leverage in relation to others. The question is whether this leverage allows for a quick impact or whether the root causes of conflicts are solved. And there is a big difference between the two things. We have many ceasefires, but then the fire breaks again. And unless you address the root causes, and the root causes are related to the questions of development in which the UN is involved. The root causes are related to the questions of human rights in which the UN is involved.

7:38The root causes are related to the cohesion of the societies in which we are involved. And so I believe that the need for this work in depth is essential. And it's not enough just to reach a quick agreement. Sometimes it's very difficult to be stable. So when Donald Trump questions the purpose and the usefulness of the United Nations in this day and age, it is an attack on your institution and on you. But I believe the United Nations is doing, with all these difficulties and all these problems, with the lack of resources, is doing something that we are very proud of. Humanitarian aid around the world.

8:18I was High Commissioner for Refugees. You see UN staff supporting people in the most remote and dangerous positions in the world, losing their lives. We had in Gaza 400 staff members killed, losing their lives, helping people. And this is something whose value is unimaginable. We see the United Nations today a forum where countries accept to come in international cooperation, even if sometimes the United States is absent. We just formed the high-level panel, scientific independent panel on artificial intelligence. We are having a very committed and I believe leading role in fighting for climate action and in making sure that unfortunately we are going to ever overshoot over the 1.5 degrees because measures were not taken on time.

9:13But we are working hard to make it as short and limited as possible and to increase the international engagement, especially in supporting the weak countries that are suffering the impacts of climate change. So we are in the front lines of all the battles of today's world. And I'm very proud of the work the UN is doing. Of course, we need to do better. We need to do more. That's why we are involved in a very deep reform. Let's talk about some of the priorities. And you mentioned one of them there, which is Gaza. and you also gave us an insight into how deeply personal and difficult it must be, as you said, to see your staff losing their lives there, being killed there.

9:53When we look at what the UN has tried to do in Gaza, you've tried to deliver humanitarian aid, which is your purpose, which is something you do around the world, but you've been prevented from doing it. The Security Council has tried time and time again to establish resolutions for humanitarian pauses in the fighting, to try and open up aid. But that hasn't happened because it's been vetoed by the US. When you look at Gaza, does that feel like a failing for the United Nations, something where you should have made a difference but couldn't? Well, of course, you always must aim to do better. But let's be clear.

10:32For a long time, Israel was saying that humanitarian aid was not distributed because the UN was not able to do so. And we were saying that we are not distributed because we are simply not allowed to do so. The obstacles are too many. And then there was a ceasefire. And all of a sudden, there was a massive flow of humanitarian aid. We were ready, provided we had the conditions. Again, conditions were stopped. There was a blockage. We could not deliver humanitarian aid. But recently, with the ceasefire that was established, even President Trump has recently said that humanitarian aid now is a miracle in Gaza, is happening in an extraordinary way.

11:10But you've had to stand by a watch for so long that that not happened. The truth is that at the present moment, we have dramatically improved our capacity to deliver as the obstacles have been reduced. We want to do better and we want to do more, but I'm quite proud of the work that our people in the field, together with the Egyptian Red Crescent, together with the other partners, the NGOs that now Israel wants to kick out, and they are absolutely essential for this work, things have considerably improved in Gaza, even if life in Gaza is still an absolute tragedy. The US has announced the creation of a number of structures.

11:49And I want to say, with the same clarity with which I have criticized many things, I think it's very important that these structures work and that it is possible to finally have a true ceasefire in Gaza and to move into phase two and to move in the end to the commissioning on one hand and to the creation of a Palestinian state on the other. But are there moments when you have felt powerless in that conflict, powerless to act, powerless to deliver aid, powerless to stop what was happening? Of course, whenever Israel would not allow us to move into Gaza, we couldn't move into Gaza. Fortunately, as I said, now things have improved and I hope that they will go on improving because the needs are still huge.

12:31The famine has been addressed. We are distributing one million 300 hot meals per day, but all the problems of water and sanitation are not solved. All the problems of rubble are not solved. Shelter is not solved. People are suffering still enormously. We must do much more And we need to stabilise the peace fire and to make sure that things move in the right direction. And I hope that the structures that were created will make it happen.

13:02You're listening to The Interview from the BBC World Service.

13:10If journalism is the first draft of history, what happens if that draft is flawed? In 1999, four Russian apartment buildings were bombed, hundreds killed. But even now, we still don't know for sure who did it. It's a mystery that sparked chilling theories. I'm Helena Merriman, and in a new BBC series, I'm talking to the reporters who first covered this story. What did they miss the first time? The History Bureau, Putin and the apartment bombs. Listen on BBC.com or wherever you get your podcasts.

13:51The 26 sporting calendar is packed full of big events. Keep up with all the action with More Than The Score, the podcast that goes beyond the score sheet. Join expert BBC sports journalists every Monday to Friday for interviews with sports stars, big talking points and the stories behind the headlines. More Than The Score from the BBC World Service. Listen now, search for More Than The Score wherever you get your BBC podcasts.

14:25Security was tight for Antonio Guterres' visit to the BBC. He was in London to mark 80 years since the UN's very first meeting there. He was also fresh from a conversation with the Prime Minister, Sakhir Starmer, in Downing Street. Now, he doesn't give interviews often, but he was eager to talk. In the final year of his tenure as UN Chief, Mr Guterres has plenty that he wants to say about the changing global order as he prepares to hand over one of the most complex diplomatic jobs in the world to someone new. OK, let's return to my conversation with Antonio Guterres. You've talked about reform in various different sectors, but one of the things that you mentioned in your speech was reform of the Security Council.

15:08And we talked about the way that veto countries are able to stop things happening. We talked about it happening on Gaza, but it's also happened on Ukraine as well, where Russia has repeatedly vetoed humanitarian pauses, ceasefires, ends to the fighting. Do you think it's time now for the Security Council structure to be reformed? Well, it has been a long time that that is absolutely essential. There is a problem of efficiency. There is a problem of legitimacy. The Security Council was created after the Second World War. There has been a few adjustments. But still today, we have no African permanent member in the Security Council.

15:45You have no Latin American permanent member of the Security Council. You have three European permanent members. Russia is a European country, whether you like it or not. But I mean, you have three European countries as permanent members of the Security Council. I mean, the Security Council no longer represents the world that today exists. And you also have protagonists who are able to frustrate the will of a huge number of other member countries. So first, there is a problem of legitimacy and of the composition. Second, there is the veto power. and the fact that the veto power is used in the protection of the interest of the members themselves, which is something that, in my opinion, should not exist.

16:22There was an interesting proposal by the UK and France to limit the veto power to situations of atrocities and others of the kind. And I would very strongly encourage not only the change of composition of the Security Council, that is absolutely essential to regain legitimacy and to give voice to the whole world, but also to limit the veto power in order to avoid the kind of blockages that we are witnessing that are very difficult to accept and very difficult to swallow. You've said that you are deeply concerned about the violent repression that's been happening in Iran. Regime forces killing protesters in large numbers.

17:02In fact, the regime wrote to you asking you to confirm and support narratives that they were not behind that violence. They were asking you to condemn the US. What is your view and what is your assessment? Because, of course, it's very difficult to know how many people have been killed, how terrible those atrocities have been. We have no reliable information about exactly what has happened. But it is obvious that we witnessed a level of repression that is totally unacceptable with violations of human rights that we cannot accept. That doesn't mean that we believe that in such situations other countries should go there and bomb or should start a war because of that, because then the world will enter into absolute chaos and international law will be completely trampled.

17:48But what has happened in Iran is indeed completely unacceptable. The number of people killed that we don't know exactly, but in any case, it was very meaningful. It's not compatible to what it is today's world. And you have member countries carrying out atrocities like that and no power to stop them. But that is the big question of impunity. We have very few instruments, first of all, because the Security Council in itself is ineffective. You have the International Criminal Court under fire and with enormous difficulties to operate. And even the International Court of Justice, we see how difficult it is for their decisions to be accepted.

18:31So there is a sense of impunity and we need to create mechanisms of accountability that are more effective. Because that makes people question the purpose and the value of the United Nations. The question is not the United Nations. The question is the member states. I mean, it's not the United Nations that creates the situations that you mentioned, or it's not the United Nations that deliberately doesn't stop them. No, but people say if the United Nations has no power and the mechanisms are weak. It's the action of member states that creates the problems and do not allow the problems to be solved.

19:04Now, the drama is that multilateral institutions we have, namely the United Nations, are today not adapted to the dramatic problems and challenges of the world that we face. And that is why reform is necessary. And you just mentioned some of the reforms that are needed. And we are doing in the area of competence that we have a huge effort to make the UN more effective, more cost effective, more united and more able to respond to the needs of the people we care for. You touched on this, but do you feel that potential US military intervention in Iran could make things worse for people there? I don't think it would change anything.

19:42I don't think it's with military interventions that we change things. But I think that all the pressure should be put in Iran to make sure that these violations of human rights are not repeated. And when we look at Venezuela, for example, and I feel that the themes and the countries and the conflicts that we keep talking about keep bringing us back to that point you made about brazen violations of international law. We saw the US go in there. We saw them seize the president of the country. Again, we come back to that word that you used, impunity, acting with impunity. Let's be clear. You need to see the whole picture in Venezuela.

20:20I mean, we had elections in which our people that were there verified that there were irregularities. You have violations of human rights. You had difficulties for the opposition in electoral campaigns. So you had many things that, of course, we were not in agreement with what was happening in Venezuela. That is one point. Yes, it is. We shouldn't forget that. We shouldn't forget that. But the second point is that this does not legitimate the use of force because the use of force or the threat to use of force, except in self-defense, are a violation of international law. And obviously, as this then is the decision of those that do it, we risk to have that use of force for all kinds of purposes in all kinds of circumstances.

21:07And even without any kind of justification, even if that justification is not enough to justify the use of force, but with justifications that would be completely false in several circumstances. We have the paradoxical situation to a certain extent in which the regime is still in place. And the big discussions are more about oil than about the human rights of the Venezuelan people. They are. When you see member states and world leaders, and you see, as you said there, you have identified a violation of the UN Charter with what happened in Venezuela. And when you see world leaders, and here in the UK as well, and the response to that is muted, do you feel that they are speaking up strongly enough in defence of the UN Charter, in defence of international law?

21:59I think that people are sometimes reluctant to confront the powerful. But the truth is that if we don't confront the powerful, we'll never be able to have a better world. What do you think the next few years hold for the organisation? And again, I feel like we've come back to several key themes as we've been speaking here, international law being one of them, and the fact that the US in particular, one of the founding countries of the United Nations, is really operating in a very different way now. Do you think the United Nations can survive the age of President Trump? I have no doubt about it.

22:40And we are perfectly convinced that we need, of course, to adapt. The world is changing very quickly, so we need to change, but never multilateralism was more needed than ever. And at the same time, there are megatrends that are happening. I mean, if you look at the world of a few decades ago, developed countries would represent the overwhelming majority of the world economy. Every single day now, developed countries represent a little bit less of the global economy than the day before. And every single day, the emerging economies, you have China, you have India, you have Indonesia, you have Brazil, you have Vietnam and so on.

23:21I mean, they represent a bigger share of the international economy. Power relations are changing slowly. I am deeply convinced that the result of this will inevitably be a revival of multilateralism linked to a much more multipolar world with a much bigger equilibrium among the different powers. How do you retain that positivity when you see, for example, the US and Donald Trump saying that he will annex Greenland and countries in Europe? And indeed, he himself saying, well, that would be the end of NATO, another multilateral organisation. When people talk about these organisations that were put together in a spirit of cooperation and peace, and you hear them being described in such a disposable way, how do you retain your positivity that they do have a future?

24:12People talk about lots of things, but that doesn't mean that those things will happen. And many other people are doing things. Rhetoric is important, though. If people feel free to say that. Many other people are doing things in the right direction and many fantastic, positive things are happening in the world. Many examples of generosity, of solidarity are happening in the world. I have a lot of confidence in the future of humankind. I see the young generations much more cosmopolitan, much more based on a strict nationalist approach. Of course, we see populism with the present generations, but the future generations, I see them with a much more sense of humanity.

24:52And I am very optimistic about the future. And I'm fighting as much as I can in order to make sure that the UN is part of that renewal that I believe will become inevitable.

25:07Thank you for listening to The Interview. If you enjoyed this conversation, you can find many more episodes of The Interview wherever you get your BBC podcasts, including ones with the president of Poland, Carol Navrocki, author Sir Salman Rushdie, and Russian punk activist Maria Alyokhina. Until next time, bye for now.

25:39If journalism is the first draft of history, what happens if that draft is flawed? In 1999, four Russian apartment buildings were bombed, hundreds killed. But even now, we still don't know for sure who did it. It's a mystery that sparked chilling theories. I'm Helena Merriman, and in a new BBC series, I'm talking to the reporters who first covered this story. What did they miss the first time? The History Bureau, Putin and the apartment bombs. Listen on BBC.com or wherever you get your podcasts.