Share Twitter Facebook Email Copy URL

As history continues to be marked by terrorist attacks across borders, indiscriminate bombings of defenseless populations, and genocidal practices that condemn millions to a futureless existence; while environmental devastation renders vast areas of the planet uninhabitable, this year’s UN General Assembly is shaped by an ambitious yet ambiguous initiative driven by Secretary-General António Guterres: the Summit of the Future. The concept of a Summit of the Future, which Guterres envisioned as early as 2023, originated from his 2021 report Our Common Agenda, requested in the wake of the pandemic to chart a post-crisis strategy for the world.

In the 60 pages painstakingly negotiated across five drafts, the “Pact for the Future” approved in New York addresses key areas such as sustainable development, peace and security, technology and digital cooperation, youth and future generations, and global governance reform, including changes to international financial institutions and the Security Council. While the Pact delivers a strong declaration of intent, its implementation is likely to face tough negotiations. Among its components is the “Global Digital Compact,” aimed at addressing “the moral and regulatory vacuum in which artificial intelligence advances,” according to the Secretary-General. It also includes a Declaration on Future Generations, ensuring that they are no longer excluded from national and international decision-making processes.

Prominent voices from delegates and civil society argue that the summit was a distraction from the international community’s glaring failures regarding the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Others view it as a last-ditch effort to revive those goals. Ultimately, Guterres’ initiative seeks to re-establish the UN’s relevance, despite the organization’s frequent challenges from its own member states. His strategy involves greater openness to the private sector, including corporate and philanthropic entities, and the inclusion of previously uninvolved segments of society, such as athletes and influencers. However, this ambition led to a less-than-smooth negotiation process. The approval methods were unusually controversial, including consultations with unlikely “civil society” representatives, as seen in Nairobi last May. So be it.

Now that the summit has concluded, it is difficult to assess Guterres’ bold vision for the future when the present remains mired in the failures of past commitments and the ongoing impotence of international law in curbing the actions of those who flout it, emboldened by historical impunity. The UN Assembly recently passed an unprecedented resolution, with a large majority (147 votes), translating the International Court of Justice’s opinion against Israel into political commitments. But what happens now? What concrete impact will this have on the people of Gaza and the West Bank, particularly after a year of ongoing genocide? These are inescapable questions.

In his opening speech at the summit, Guterres was clear in his diagnosis of the “planetary poly-crisis” and emphasized the urgent need to rebuild trust in multilateralism. He argued that we cannot wait for perfect conditions to reform outdated institutional structures that no longer meet the world’s needs. He is right. However, the core of the Pact, beyond its rhetoric, remains unconvincing. The document once again promotes economic growth as a goal, glorifies intellectual property despite contrary evidence, and
revives the focus on private finance and market-based solutions, often without sufficient regulation.

It offers, for the umpteenth time, crumpled neoliberal formulas, the only adjustment being a proposal to move beyond GDP as a sole measure of economic performance. Yet, it does nothing to alter the unsustainable dynamics of power within an economy that perpetuates inequality and insecurity. Between the lines, one can read a rehash of privatization strategies in the name of “development”—strategies that, as we know all too well, hinder access to basic rights such as health, education, food, and housing. These are the silent violations of human dignity that rarely make headlines but define the lives of an increasing number of people, even within a few steps of the UN’s Glass Palace.

“The UN was not created to take humanity to heaven, but to save it from hell,” wrote Dag Hammarskjöld, the second UN Secretary-General. If we do not confront the hell of the present with immediate and actionable solutions, all rhetoric will be in vain. The younger generations have grasped this reality.

Nicoletta Dentico is a journalist and a senior policy analyst in global health and development. After directing Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) in Italy, she played an active role in the MSF campaign on Access to Essential Medicines. She worked as consultant of the World Health Organization and she currently leads the global health programme for the Society for International Development (SID).