At the UN General Assembly on September 23, 2025, Donald Trump delivered a long address focused on immigration and climate policies. Gaza and Ukraine conflicts were mentioned briefly, while he urged Western nations to adopt MAGA-style measures and strategies.

Trump described global climate initiatives as “the greatest con job ever perpetrated on the world,” eliciting audible reactions from delegates. He warned European leaders that failing to act decisively on migration and energy issues could threaten cultural heritage and social stability.

Migration and international critique

The president accused the UN of facilitating migration programs he claimed allowed illegal entry into the United States. He framed this as the top political challenge of our time, while humanitarian groups rejected his statements as misleading and inaccurate.

Trump argued that mass migration undermines national sovereignty and social safety nets. He pressed countries to act immediately to prevent what he described as uncontrolled migration, implying severe consequences for ignoring his recommendations and policies.

He criticized the UN for promoting uncontrolled migration and climate policies he considers harmful, claiming U.S. funds were misused to ease migrant access. This sparked debates on accountability and raised concerns about international policy priorities and funding use.

Conflict resolution is largely sidelined

Trump emphasized ending seven wars, citing disputes in Congo, Kosovo, and over Nile water. Experts highlighted that progress in these regions is limited. Ongoing conflicts in Gaza and Ukraine remain unresolved, contrasting sharply with his public statements.

Observers stressed that personal diplomacy and unilateral action cannot solve entrenched conflicts. Former U.S. envoys emphasized that coalition-building, long-term strategy, and multilateral engagement remain essential for meaningful resolution in global hotspots.

Financial withdrawals and humanitarian impact

The administration accelerated U.S. withdrawals from UN-backed initiatives, leaving the WHO, the Paris Climate Agreement, and the Human Rights Council. Foreign aid, including HIV/AIDS prevention programs, was drastically reduced, disrupting health efforts globally.

Congress considered withholding over $1.4 billion in UN dues and peacekeeping contributions following the president’s guidance. In response, the UN implemented UN80 reforms, cutting the core budget by 15 percent and eliminating over 2,600 posts worldwide.

Experts warned that funding reductions limit the UN’s ability to deliver humanitarian aid. Agencies dependent on U.S. support face disruptions in health, food, and development programs, potentially affecting global stability if unilateral policies persist over time.

Global reactions and implications

International reactions varied. Some diplomats called the speech a domestic political message staged globally, while others warned it could alter expectations of U.S. engagement in multilateral institutions and reshape long-standing diplomatic norms and practices.

While Trump praised achievements in conflict resolution, critics noted minimal attention to Gaza and Ukraine. His focus on migration and climate overshadowed global security issues, highlighting a mismatch between rhetoric and practical outcomes in ongoing international crises.

The address emphasized tensions between domestic priorities and international expectations. Observers warned that unilateral approaches could complicate cooperation, treaty compliance, and the resolution of longstanding conflicts, particularly in unstable regions.

Looking forward

Trump’s UN speech may influence global discussions on migration and climate, yet his proposals face resistance from nations committed to existing UN frameworks. The gap between U.S. unilateralism and multilateral consensus will likely shape diplomacy for years.

Analysts suggested that while the speech signals domestic policy priorities, actual global outcomes will depend on coalition-building and adherence to international treaties. Leaders worldwide are assessing whether such rhetoric can translate into actionable multilateral change.

You also might be interested