President of the General Assembly of the United Nations, Dr. Khalil Al-Rahman, Secretary-General of the United Nations, Mr. António Guterres, distinguished ladies and gentlemen, Today, we meet as the world undergoes a major transformation; not only in the balance of power, but in the meaning of security itself; a transformation reshaping the concept of power and the ethics of its use, and the nature of alliances, and the ability of the international system to remain faithful to the principles and foundations upon which it was established.
At the heart of these transformations, a question arises that transcends the borders of States and continents: how do we build an international order in which the rule of law is an equal right, not a privilege for the powerful? And how do we make cooperation among nations a genuine partnership, not one measured by spheres of influence?
We in our Arab, Islamic, and African world do not look at this question from the position of an observer; rather, we live its consequences every day. We regret the lack of ability and purposefulness that, in every moment, has allowed the ordeal of the Palestinian people to worsen before us in this session as well—where, despite decades of occupation, repression, and attempts to alter identity, a reality is being exposed in which participation remains clinging to its right, and to rights guaranteed by international law and international humanitarian law, namely: the right to life, self-determination, and to live without discrimination.
All humanity yearns passionately for the rights of the Palestinian people to be realized, and for international charters, resolutions, and texts to be transformed from promises into reality, and for the opportunities for the establishment of its State in accordance with international law not to be squandered; because the continuation of undermining those opportunities does not only exceed peace in occupied Palestine, but also drives the region toward an expanded circle of conflict and the spread of extremism, while the search for alternatives continues in the shadow of major expansionist projects.
And its repercussions have extended to Lebanon and Syria, and civilians and civilian facilities have not been spared, nor have Islamic and Christian holy sites, and most recently its repercussions have reached the Arab Gulf. As we affirm our full solidarity with Palestine and with what the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has been subjected to, we reject every targeting that threatens the security and safety of its territory, its citizens, and its holy sites, for the security of the Kingdom and the Gulf is not merely a national matter, but a cornerstone of Arab and Islamic security, by virtue of the weight they represent and their effect on the stability of our region.
The continuation of armed conflict in our region—from what our brotherly and neighboring Sudan is witnessing—makes its people pay an exorbitant price for a devastating war in which interests collide; and its effects go beyond Sudan’s borders, exposing the security of the region and its stability, and the integrity and unity of the State to danger; through instability and interventions.
Perhaps what the “Sahel region” in Africa is witnessing is the result of the intersection of terrorism, organized crime, poverty, climate change, displacement, migration, and the widening circle of armed conflict in it, turning it into an existential threat to its States. It is no longer acceptable for the world to view it merely as a source of resources, or an arena for international competition, or a margin to the world; it is not a margin, but a center of the coming world.
Africa, whose course we have followed since the establishment of the African Union, is one of the centers of the world to come.
And Libya is not on the borders of Africa only; it is from Africa, from its history, from its security, and from its future.
Decades ago, the city of Sirte launched the Libyan path and contributed to the establishment of the African Union. Libya was never merely a bridge between Africa and the Mediterranean, but a partner in shaping the African project itself.
Therefore, we look to the security of the Sahel region as part of Libya’s security, and to the security and stability of the States of the region, and all the States of our African neighborhood, as an investment in security and stability, and in development in Africa and in the African and European neighborhood alike; not as assistance offered by one party to another, but as a shared responsibility.
We also look to the Mediterranean basin not as an isolating barrier between Africa and Europe, nor merely as a management issue of migration and crises; relations among its countries should move from that to making it a shared space for development, trade, energy transition, investment, and shared security.
Libya stands geographically and politically at the meeting point of these worlds; Arab in its language, identity, and belonging, African in its geography, destiny, partnerships, and interests, Mediterranean in an authentic aspect of its culture, and Islamic in its civilizational values that incline toward peace, security, and building bridges with its neighborhood.
This multiplicity of circles does not represent a contradiction, but rather a source of strength, responsibility, and opportunity.
And from this position—geopolitically speaking in particular—the past years have taught us a harsh lesson: a vacuum does not remain empty.
When the State weakens, competing interests fill it, armed groups become active in it, networks of crime and smuggling spread, illicit money infiltrates it, and institutions themselves turn into arenas for conflict over influence.
The State then loses part of its security only; rather, its national decision begins, at that point, to lose its independence.
And here we reach the essence of what sovereignty means to us.
Sovereignty is not—upon careful examination—lines drawn on maps, nor slogans repeated while judicial and oversight institutions are absent, nor banners raised while roles are exercised in isolation and responsibility.
Sovereignty is that the national decision be free, and that our cooperation and integration with United Nations institutions be based on transparency, seriousness, and neutrality; far from selectivity and double standards.
Sovereignty is: safeguarding the rights and dignity of the Libyan people, whatever the violations; ensuring that no one is above the law, and that no perpetrator escapes accountability.
Sovereignty is: that the institutions of the State be stronger than persons and groups, that weapons be subject to the law, and that the wealth of the country remain the property of the people, not spoils divided among parties, networks of interests, or suspicious partnerships that exercise tutelage over the State.
Sovereignty is: that we prevent influence from being bought with corrupt money, and that we prevent the penetration of influence from interests that weaken the State. If that circle becomes entrenched, corrupt money acquires an immunity that protects it and threatens the survival of its institutions.
In this context, we call on the Security Council to assume its responsibilities and to follow up what threatens the survival of its institutions; by seriously considering what is brought before it in United Nations reports, including the reports of the Panel of Experts on violations and cases of non-compliance, and by taking whatever is necessary, within the framework of the prescribed mandates, to ensure the effectiveness of their recommendations, or selective, the implementation of the Council’s decisions, and measures and sanctions related thereto, selectivity.
Double standards the standards.
Repeated the reports are facts that the documented violations must not be transformed mere documentation, because the prestige of international law and its credibility must not end at the limits of documentation, nor must accountability end there; rather, accountability means moving monitoring the violation the decision and its perpetrators, through their ability to impose their institutions.
On all, without exception.
And to implementation, for the State’s external relations to be, likewise, an extension of its national interests, and sovereignty, not an extension of the conflicts of others within it.
Mr. President, has indeed paid a heavy price when the regional balances were transformed balances inside its territory.
Here, then, our vision for Libya’s external relations is clear: we do not want to replace one influence with another influence, nor one axis with another axis, nor dependency with dependency.
We want strong relations with our Arab and especially the States of our neighborhood, and we want a balanced strategic with its African continent, for Libya’s natural role its regional space, our Mediterranean and our regional space, on the basis of shared interests, mutual respect, non-interference, and respect for national sovereignty.
An ally within it; the true ally of Libya is not one who seeks to be stronger than a party within it.
Rather, the true ally the one who wants a strong Libyan State.
And the true partner is not the one whose interests are linked to the continuation of division, the one whose interest with us grows whenever Libya becomes more united, more stable, and more prosperous.
We want States investment, reconstruction, energy, and development; not over influence its institutions.
after years of division and political polarization, which exhausted the State and society, no longer needs more crisis management, to end it.
Our goal is clear: a unified State with sovereignty; institutions that derive their legitimacy of its people; and the path to that is: returning to the people, through constitutional and legal mechanisms; referendums, and free and fair elections.
For the people are the source of legitimacy, and they alone are capable of granting institutions their unity and stability.
Not temporary deals, nor fragile settlements that collapse whenever the balance of forces changes or loyalties shift.
And while we welcome the efforts and intentions of every State that sincerely seeks to end the state of division in Libya, and appreciate the role entrusted the United Nations Support Mission supporting the political and institutional process, the previous experiences require that we be clear facilitating the political process and its responsibility: that no political path capable of continuing should violate four governing principles: First: respect for legitimacy, and the constitutional and legal references in force, and non-deviation the prescribed frameworks and procedures.
The international mediation must not turn a means of exceeding them, or creating political arrangements outside them; this is a red line.
Second: the principle of national ownership the foundation; of Libyans the basis, and not the manufacture of solutions from outside; not guardianship, guaranteeing, imposition, or exclusion; and including all parties
— different as they may be — any party.
For any solution to be truly sustainable.
Third: ensuring equal opportunities among all parties, and rejecting the use of force, influence, or faits accomplis to impose preconceived political outcomes.
Fourth: commitment to transparency understandings, agreements, and determining the stages of implementation, their time frames, and the entities responsible for them; and putting in place clear mechanisms for oversight and accountability, so as to ensure outputs that are implementable, sound from the legal standpoint, and capable of producing legitimate and stable institutions.
Experience has taught us that fragile settlements may begin to disintegrate as soon as the balances of power change, or new forces emerge, and that any arrangements that ignore the legal references subject themselves to challenge and conflict, and reproduce the crisis instead of ending it.
For legality and sustained legitimacy are not made by a fait accompli, nor protected by it.
Rather, they are made by the will of the people, and protected by law.
From this platform, we declare our commitment to these principles as a national responsibility, and to translating them tangible action: launching work a national committee for de-escalation and confidence-building, based preventing disputes, containing escalation, supporting reconciliation, and preparing a safe environment for the political, national, local, and electoral process, and preventing its recurrence.
We also call upon all Libyan parties to engage this framework, and call upon the United Nations and Libya’s partners to support it and facilitate it, full respect for sovereignty, and for national ownership.
a Libya that regains its sovereignty, and the unity of its institutions, will not be merely an asset for security and development its Arab world, but will be a force for stability Africa, a responsible partner the Mediterranean, and a bridge for cooperation between the North and the South.
From this platform, Libya announces its candidacy for membership of the Security Council for the period: under the African seat, under the slogan: “Justice for the restoration of peace”, and looks forward the confidence of the Member States and their support for 2029 as a bridge among the nations,” a diplomatic entitlement that embodies a national will to restore peace — Libya as a bridge among nations — and does not represent this candidacy merely as an ambition for this entitlement, an expression of Libya’s assumption of its responsibility its international and of its natural role the preservation of international peace and security, proceeding from a firm conviction that peace is not built merely on the absence of conflict, but on the establishment of justice, and addressing the causes of injustice and turmoil.
is not advancing for this seat in search merely of a position, in pursuit of contributing to consensus, and of being a bridge among nations, and a voice for a more equitable international order.
Our partners are not to abandon their interests; rather, our message our friends and partners is this: to be an effective partner in making peace.
That the interest lies in the stability of Libya, not in the fragility of its institutions, but in building them with us a firmer foundation; and in with it, not in competition for influence within it.
Nationalism is not defence of sovereignty in confronting negative external interventions alone; rather, we — Libyans — also bear the primary responsibility for protecting the State from corruption within, preserving public funds, upholding the rule of law, and placing the homeland above power and interest.
Libya today has an opportunity — because it will not leave the circle of transitional phases until it becomes a State worthy of its history, its location, its standing among the nations, and of restoring the role that befits it.
does not want to be a field on which the interests of others are balanced over its land, nor does it want others for influence in it; rather, it is a State that makes its own balance by its own will, and on with it.
And in conclusion: The path we choose is that of a State in full sovereignty over its decision, unified in its institutions, and just among its sons.
A partner for peace and stability in its region and the world; that is the right of our people before it is our responsibility.
It is our trust toward the coming generations.
Peace be upon you, and God's mercy and blessings.