Lula Challenges U.S. on Climate, Trade as UN Reform Debate Intensifies
UNITED NATIONS – Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva delivered a pointed address to the United Nations today, implicitly criticizing former U.S. President Donald Trump’s policies and advocating for sweeping reforms to the international body, particularly regarding climate change. Da Silva framed climate change as a matter of “justice,” demanding greater resource access and technology transfer to developing nations, and proposed a new UN council to ensure accountability for climate action goals. His remarks come amid concerns about slowing global economic growth, particularly in North America, exacerbated by trade tensions.
Da Silva’s speech underscored the disproportionate impact of climate change on developing countries already grappling with multiple crises. He argued that assistance shouldn’t be framed as charity, but as a necessary correction for historical inequities. The World Trade Organization (WTO) projects that global economic expansion will be hampered by existing tariffs, with North America – largely the United States – facing a steeper deceleration than other regions. This economic context adds urgency to Da Silva’s call for a more equitable and effective international response to climate change, and a fundamental overhaul of the United Nations’ structure.
“A much greater ambition is needed and also guaranteeing much greater access to resources and technologies, not for charity, but for justice,” Da Silva stated. He further emphasized the critical need for climate change to be “the heart that gives life to the United Nations, because it deserves all their attention.”
Da Silva proposed the creation of a new Council, linked to the UN General Assembly, with the authority to monitor progress on climate objectives.”that is what the United Nations need. It is indeed a fundamental step that will have to be given to the wide reform of the organization,” he asserted. While not directly naming Trump, his emphasis on international cooperation and rejection of protectionist policies were widely interpreted as a rebuke of the “America Frist” approach favored by the former U.S. president.
