UNGA 80 and Türkiye’s Agenda
This morning, the UN General Assembly begins its “High-level Week 2025” with a meeting to mark the 80th anniversary of the UN. Later in the day, the UN will resume the High-Level International Conference for the “Peaceful Settlement of the Question of Palestine and the Implementation of the Two-State Solution,” co-chaired by France and Saudi Arabia. The conference aims to reaffirm international commitments to the two-state solution and seek support for its implementation. From September 22 to 30, world leaders will address global issues during the General Debate.
This year’s General Assembly is likely to be characterized by disarray in the West and growing solidarity among the Rest, particularly among BRICS. During the General Debate, the BRICS countries will strongly voice their support for a new world order that is not defined by US supremacy.
The statement published by the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs following last Friday’s call between President Xi Jinping and President Trump again stressed the importance of peaceful coexistence, the spirit of equality, mutual respect, mutual benefit, and win-win cooperation between the two countries. These would probably be the crux of Chinese Premier Li Qiang’s broad message to UNGA 80.
With the wars in Ukraine and Gaza ongoing, and questions about Iran’s nuclear program and Syria’s future still unanswered, there are no major expectations from UNGA 80. In the final analysis, the UN is only a gathering of nations, not a supernational body.
For years, there has been broad international recognition of the need for political and financial reform in the UN. However, the permanent members of the Security Council have been dragging their feet on any change in the organization’s top body’s membership and its decision-making rules.
Moreover, US funding cuts to the UN have negatively impacted humanitarian and development programs in vulnerable regions, creating budgetary difficulties for the organization. On one hand, until recent years, the US covered about 22% of the UN’s regular budget and roughly 27% of its peacekeeping budget, making it the largest single contributor. On the other hand, major international organizations with global membership, such as the UN, sometimes expand beyond need and cause overlaps in programs that strain their budgets. Thus, if not on political reform, the UN should be able to undertake some measures on budgetary reform.
As for UNGA 80’s top agenda items, in Gaza, Israel keeps razing the Strip to the ground with a constantly rising death toll.
Last week:
The United Nations Human Rights Council Commission of Inquiry stated that Israel has committed “genocide” against Palestinians in the Gaza war.[i]
The US again vetoed a UN Security Council resolution calling for an immediate, unconditional, and permanent ceasefire in Gaza, as well as the immediate and unconditional release of hostages.
The Israeli military warned that it would operate with “unprecedented force” in Gaza City.
It was reported that former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who met President Trump at the White House on August 27, is now collaborating with Jared Kushner on a proposal to create a postwar transitional body to govern the Gaza Strip. This is now referred to as the “Gaza International Transitional Authority (GITA).” (Mr. Blair served as the special envoy of the Middle East Quartet from 2007 to 2015. In nearly twenty-five years, the Quartet accomplished hardly anything.)
The European Commission presented a proposal to the Council to suspend certain trade-related provisions of the Association Agreement between the EU and Israel, as well as proposals for sanctions on Hamas, extremist ministers, and violent settlers. It appears that the proposals failed to gather support among members.
Finally, yesterday, the UK, Australia, and Canada officially recognized the Palestinian state. Belgium, Portugal, and Malta had announced plans to join Britain and France in recognizing Palestinian statehood, thus joining more than 140 other countries that have already done so.
In his New York Times article on President Trump’s visit to the UK, Mark Landler said, “Mr. Trump said he disagreed with Mr. Starmer about recognizing a Palestinian state, but he did so without rancor.” Mr. Landler was right on the mark because Mr. Trump knows that all of that is nothing but diplomatic theatre.[ii]
The photograph of President Trump and Prime Minister Starmer, both holding their copies of the “Memorandum of Understanding regarding the Technology Prosperity Deal” must have been yet another display of “grandeur” by the former, judging by the size of their signatures.[iii]
Unlike his predecessor, President Trump has not imposed any new sanctions on Russia since his return to the White House. Mr. Biden was more interested in weakening Russia than ending Kyiv’s ordeal. Mr. Trump may wish to advance his quest for the Nobel Peace Prize, but for now at least, he seems to be happy with the EU countries’ purchase of US arms to support Ukraine’s defenses. And in response to calls by European leaders for tough sanctions against Moscow, he has said that he would do that when all NATO nations stop buying oil from Russia.
The European Commission has now proposed to member states the 19th package of sanctions against Russia. As part of the measures, Von der Leyen has said that the Commission will ban imports of Russian liquefied natural gas.
Last Friday, “I am pleased to host President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan of Turkey, at the White House on September 25th. We are working on many Trade and Military Deals with the President, including the large scale purchase of Boeing aircraft, a major F-16 Deal, and a continuation of the F-35 talks, which we expect to conclude positively. President Erdoğan and I have always had a very good relationship. I look forward to seeing him on the 25th!” President Trump wrote on Truth Social. The visit would remind many of the undiplomatic letter he sent to President Erdoğan during his first term.[iv]
A Carnegie Endowment for International Peace paper titled “U.S. Democratic Backsliding in Comparative Perspective” by McKenzie Carrier and Thomas Carothers, published on August 20, 2025, starts with the following:
“ The global democratic recession of the past twenty years has been marked by numerous cases of elected leaders incrementally dismantling democracy through a steady centralization of power and undercutting of checks and balances—what political scientists label as executive aggrandizement. Under the second Donald Trump presidency, the United States is showing clear signs of following such a path, leading many commentators to draw arresting but often relatively glancing comparisons with other prominent recent cases of democratic erosion, like Hungary, India, Poland, and Türkiye.”[v]
This means that on the issue of Türkiye’s democratic decline, Mr. Erdoğan will be on solid ground in Washington. However, Mr. Trump sees himself as a master dealmaker and can go to extremes when things go against his wishes.
In Türkiye, speculation about the meeting’s agenda has, to some extent, focused on Ankara’s purchase of American civilian and military aircraft. Türkiye’s reported acquisition of hundreds of Boeing aircraft is out of the question; Ankara does not have the funds. It is also unlikely that Washington will provide Ankara with F-35s during times of tension with Israel, except in symbolic numbers. The main topics of discussion will be regional issues, Türkiye-Israeli relations, Syria, PYD/YPG, and Iran. Mr. Erdoğan will mostly hear the views of Prime Minister Netanyahu from his host. It’s also possible that the AKP government’s Canal İstanbul Project might be mentioned among other subjects.
Today, President Erdoğan will deliver a speech at the Palestine Conference and address the General Assembly for the 15th time tomorrow, where he said he would speak of the atrocities in Gaza. This means that he will continue with his fierce criticism of Netanyahu’s policies but refrain from targeting Washington’s full support for the Israeli leader. Nonetheless, what he says will be closely watched by the White House.
In brief, a truly “win-win” conclusion of the Washington meeting is impossible.
Yesterday, Mr. Özgür Özel was re-elected as the Republican People’s Party (CHP) Chairperson. As expected, during his address to the Party Convention, he directed much criticism at Mr. Erdoğan. On the issue of Gaza, he targeted him particularly for remaining silent on Mr. Trump’s support for Israel, and he called on him to tell the US President, “Palestine is our national issue. It is our red line.”
Mr. Özel delivered a truly remarkable speech. However, I was disappointed to see him treat the question of Gaza like the AKP leadership. It goes without saying that it was the AKP who started to use the war in Gaza for domestic political reasons, but we must put an end to it sooner rather than later. Why? Because it is wrong and it does not serve our national interests.
Türkiye recognized the Palestinian state in 1988, years before the AKP came to power. Since then, it has supported the two-state solution. It has always been critical of Israeli discrimination against the Palestinians. What Israel is doing in Gaza is only to be condemned. And the AKP government has said more on this than any other country, including the members of the Arab League. However, Palestine is not a national issue for us. Our national issues are the restoration of our democracy, the state of our economy, the security of our borders, our polarization, and drought. We should not allow anything else to distract us from concentrating on those as a nation.
Only days before Mr. Erdoğan’s departure to New York, AKP’s junior partner, MHP’s Chairman Devlet Bahçeli, reacting to Israel’s attacks on Gaza, proposed a Turkey-Russia-China alliance against the “evil coalition” of the US and Israel. It remains to be seen whether this was a message to Mr. Trump to be more accommodating during Mr. Erdoğan’s visit to Washington or the first signal of a major foreign and security policy shift in the making. After all, Mr. Bahçeli was the one who launched the signal flare regarding the negotiation process with the PKK.
For Türkiye’s problems, from A to Z, there is but one solution: the restoration of democratic rule. If that were to be accomplished, the country would be on its feet in a surprisingly short time, both politically and economically. And that would serve the interests of not only Türkiye, but also our friends, our allies – i.e., if we still have any- and our neighbors.
[i] https://www.un.org/unispal/document/commission-of-inquiry-report-genocide-in-gaza-a-hrc-60-crp-3/
[ii] https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/19/world/europe/trump-king-charles-keir-starmer.html?smid=em-share
[iii] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c8rynvlm6zjo
[iv] https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/10/16/us/politics/trump-letter-turkey.html
[v] https://carnegieendowment.org/research/2025/08/us-democratic-backsliding-in-comparative-perspective?lang=en