Deputy U.S. Representative to ECOSOC
New York, New York
November 22, 2021
Thank you, Madame Chair. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the facilitator for his constructive work on this resolution.
Madame Chair, as in previous years, the United States has been candid about our concerns regarding this text. The United States is a leader in the alleviation and eradication of poverty in all its forms and dimensions, and it is unfortunate that this text undermines the international community’s good work on poverty eradication by injecting politicized and unbalanced language into the discussion.
The United States respects the Bureau’s working methods and understands that many paragraphs were not open for negotiation. However, OPs 4, 8, 15, and 19, in particular, continue to reflect the domestic policies and political ideology of a single member state and are not appropriate in this resolution.
Specifically, we cannot support the references to “win-win cooperation” and “building a shared future for humankind” in OP19. We object to the use of this unilateral language that excludes important elements of international standards and best practices for sustainable development that were adopted in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, such as the rule of law, transparency, and human rights. Furthermore, while once considered consensus language, many delegations have repeatedly made clear that they do not support it any longer. Its continued inclusion undermines the consensus-based work of the Second Committee.
Furthermore, the outcomes in this resolution are duplicative and wasteful. The Secretary General already produces an annual report that analyzes progress on the eradication of poverty holistically, and the issue of rural poverty should be addressed through that report.
At a time when Member States have agreed to make the UN work more efficiently, this resolution draws valuable resources away from efforts to eradicate extreme poverty, including in rural areas, and creates a duplicative mandate that stresses the already overburdened agenda of the Second Committee.
The United States also stresses that the cluster of issues addressed in OP 8 is unbalanced and not unique to efforts to address rural poverty.
Concerning OP9, the United States reiterates that it is not appropriate for UN Member States to characterize a trading system under the WTO, which has its own membership and mandate. The UN must respect the independent mandates of other processes and institutions, including trade negotiations, and must not attempt to characterize or interfere with decisions and actions in those fora.
With regard to language on the transfer of technology in OP17, as well as language referring elsewhere to the 2030 Agenda, the Addis Ababa Action Agenda, and the New Urban Agenda, we refer you to the U.S. statement delivered on November 18.