mr. chairman, thank you for allowing me to waive on and i yelled the balance of my time. chair latta: the chair, seeing no other members wishing to ask questions, on behalf of all of the members of the subcommittee we want to thank all of our witnesses for appearing today. members may have additional written questions for you all. members are advised they have 10 business days to submit additional questions for the record. i asked that the witnesses submit their responses within 10 business days upon receipt of the questions. i ask unanimous consent to insert into the record documents included on the staff hearing, documents list, without objection. that will be the order. and without objection the subcommittee is adjourned. [gavel]

nchecked development of

artificial intelligence. this is about half an hour. >> ladies and gentlemen, excellencecies, welcome to one of the highlights of our annual meeting. it is an honor and pri ledge to welcome back to das have -- davos the general of the united nations. you said one of the purposes was to bring multilateral. i back from the brink. that it was a pivotal minds to focus minds and attention on our collective response to changing the world. this year, the united nations celebrates its 80th year. a testament to the vitality of the organization and its centrality for multilateral

corporations. united nations is more needed than ever, and thank you for your leadership. it is clear that global cooperation is stagnating. but the most pressing issues that we are faced with still need us to collaborate because they are trans-boundary. we do live in a world that's less predictable and more chaotic. we are grateful in this respect also for your personal efforts to maintain global dialogue and we remain steadfast in our commitment to work together toward a better future. at the beginning of this year, i invite you to share with your -- with us your assessment of the state of the world. welcome. [applause]

mr. guterres: ladies and gentlemen, friends, it's good to be back in davos. your focus this year is on collaborationer in intelligence age and it is a noble vision. but let's face it, when many people look around the world they don't see much collaboration. and perhaps to their minds not enough intelligence. despite progress on in fronts, investment in renewables, ecological leap, health advances, many of our world's problems are getting worse. we are living in an increasingly rudderless world. last week, i delivered annual priorities speech to the general assembly and i said if our world is facing a pandora's box of troubles, we face widening geopolitical divisions, rising inequalities and assault on

human rights. we see a multiplication of conflict, some of which are leading to the reshaping of different parts of the world, not least the middle east. and there is finally a measure of hope when a ceasefire and hostage release teal in gaza takes place and we are working to surge up needed humanitarian aids. i was just in lebanon where the cessation of hostilities is holding and a new government is taking shape after two years of stalemates. from the middle east to ukraine to sudan and beyond, we still face and uphill battle. but we will never give up in calling for peace. but peace grounded on values. the u.n. charter, international law, including international humanitarian law, and the principles of sovereignty,

political independence and territorial integrity of states. meanwhile, developing countries are an -- are in economic dire straits. some are facing double digit inflation rates while interest payment are up 27% of all government revenues. on every front, our system of governance are often ill-equipped to deal with these challenges. many were bill for a different era, a different economy, a different world. we are working to reform institutions for the 21st century from the global financial architecture to the u.n. security council. to basic aspects of our summit of the future. but reforming institutions requires reforming mindsets, because we face big challenges, existential challenges, and i'm not convinced others get it.

yes, we all understand the nature of an existential threat. those of us who lived through the cold war remember living under the constantia doe of nuclear annihilation. of course the nuclear threat is still with us. but when it comes to existential threats nuclear is no longer alone. today we face two new and profound threats that demands farmer global attention and action because they threaten to end life as we know it. first, climate chaos. i recently awe saw and analysis that exposed the green irony. certain of the world's biggest ports for oil super tankers will be overwhelmed by rising sea levels. rising seas.

which are caused by rising temperatures. and rising tells which are overwhelmingly caused by burning fossil fuels. our fossil fuel addiction is a frankenstein monster sparing nothing and no one. we see clear signs that the monster has become master. we just endured the hottest year and hottest decade in history. 2024. likely to be the first calendar year that pushed 1.5 degrees above preindustrial levels. breeching this limit does not mean the long-term goal is keeping the rising global temperature to 1.5 degrees is shot. it means we need to fight even harder to get on track. especially when we are seeing the sea level rise, heat waves,

floods, storms, droughts, and wildfires and that's just a preview of the horror movie to come. a world where every economy feels the pain, infrastructure destroyed, where premiums go up. at the same time a farmer hopeful story is unfolding. cheap, plentiful energy provided by renewables is an extraordinary economic opportunity. one that will benefit people in every country. and will make the end of the fossil fuel age inevitable, no matter how hard vested interests try to stop it. a number of financial institutions and industries are back tracking on climate commitments. and here at davos, i want to say loudly and clearly that this is

short sight and paradoxically it is selfish but also self-defeating. you are on the wrong side of history. you are on the wrong side of science. and you are on the wrong side of consumers who are looking for more sustainability, not less. these warnings certainly also i aye ply is to the fossil fuel industry in advertising, lobbying and companies who are aiding, abetting this. we cannot afford to move backwards. and governments must keep their promise to produce new economy-wide national plans this year well ahead of cops 13 brazil. this must align with limiting the global rise in temperature by 1.5 degrees including by accelerating global energy

transition. we also need a surge in climate in developing countries to adopt global -- to adapt to global heating. to slash emissions and seize the benefits of the renewables revolution. we need to tackle high capital costs that are leaving developing countries behind. i also urge all businesses and financial institutions to create robust, accountable transition plans this year. these too must align with 1.5 degrees and recommendations of the united nations group on net zero. to the corporate leaders who remain committed to climate action, your leadership is needed now more than ever. do not back down. stay on the right side of history. now is the time to shift our collective efforts into

overdrive and make 2025 the biggest year yet for climate action. the second area of existential concern is ungoverned artificial intelligence. yes, ample inch holds untold promise for humanity. revolutionizing learning. helping health care. supporting farmers with smarter tools to boost productivity. clearing land mines, better targeting in times of crisis. these are real results happening right now. but with these problems comes profound risk especially if ample i. is left ungoverned. a.i. can be used as a tool of deception. it candice respect economies and labor marks and undermine trust in stewings and have chillingesques on the battlefield.

a.i. could help those without the resources or tools to benefit from its promise. once again collaboration is critical. the global vehicle compact in september at the united nations offers a road map to harness the immense potential of technology. it also brings the world together around the shared vision for artificial intelligence. one where this technology serbs humanity not the other way around. the concept establishes the first universal agreement on the governance of a.i. that brings every country to the table. it includes the creation of an independence international scientific panel on a.i., pulling expertise to bridge knowledge gaps and help every nation make the most informed a.i. policies. the compact also calls for periodic global dialogue on a.i.

ace for stake holders to come together under the us a piss of the united nations. it also foresees a network of capacity building initiatives for developing countries which have the most at stake as a.i. driven systems grow and expand. and we must collaborate so that all countries and people benefit from a.i.'s promise and potential to support development and social economic progress for all. by investing in digital literacy and the infrastructure that allows every country to harness a.i.'s potential. by helping developing countries use a.i. to grow small businesses, improve public services and connect communities to new markets. and by placing human rights always at the center of a.i.-driven systems. the united nations is committed to leading these efforts.

we are working with governments, industry and civil society to ensure that a.i. becomes a -- an opportunity for inclusion and progress for all people. ladies and gentlemen, now is the time to wake up to these existential challenges and face them head-on. and transform them as sources of progress and wealth for everyone. as a global community, we must live up to these great responsibility and let's do so by working in collaboration as the model of the world economic forum. thank you and i look forward to our discussion tonight. [applause]

>> mr. speaker secretary general, great to have you back. one can look at the world as like a glass half empty or a glass half full. let's start with the latter and then come back to the first. you just came back from lebanon. it is now president elected, there is a ceasefire as you mentioned in gaza. the start of releasing hostages. there is a new government in damascus, we know your special envoy is there to -- today. working on that. currently there hasn't been an escalation leading to a war between israel and iran that would have huge impact. so where do you see the meas in

a year when you come back to davos? mr. guterres: well, i know it will be different but i do know exactly in what direction all the different aspects will be changed. first, gay savage i think it's important to recognize that the ceasefire in gaza is the product of the work of many, and i will praise the united states, qatar, for their efforts for months and months to obtain the release of hostages, that it be immediate and unconditional and also to obtain the ceasefire. but the negotiations were dragging, dragging, dragging. and then all of a sudden it happened. i think there was a large contribution of the robust

diplomacy of the, at the time president-elect of the united states. i feel that when we had the position of israel still reluctant to the ceasefire, just two days before, then all of a sudden there was an acceptance, i think that we have witnessed an example of robust diplomacy that is something that we must recognize. >> do you expect more robust diplomacy? mr. guterres: i see more examples of robust diplomacy. but what is not yet clear is what is the future of the relationship between israel and the palestinians. one possibility is to move into annexation of the west bank. probably a kind of limbo situation in gaza which of

course is against international law, there will never be peace in the mete. the other possibility is to -- with a realized palestinian authority, an open approach by the israeli government to still be able to look into a two-state solution. it's not yet career how things will be done. in lebanon, i believe that the ceasefire is holding. and my hope is that we will witness a lebanon that will be able to finally have an effective government and we know that the lebanese, if the war ends at noon, at 1:00 they start to build. the lebanese people have an enormous potential. i'm optimistic about lebanon. but we are still not yet -- there's still not yet a

guarantee that this ceasefire will hold and will lead to final peace. i think syria is the big question now. we have a new government that is saying all the right things. but at the same time it's a government that still corresponds only whatever -- organizations that have a tradition that is in the exactly of members of the part of a church. so there are many questions. and we see some signals that the openness and tolerance that is -- that translates itself into reality. so we hopefully will have a syria with a government that relate represents all the communities in syria. which means if the problem in

kyiv is resolved, and that allows for full integration of syrian -- syria in the international community, but we still have a strong risk of fragmentation and a strong risk of extremism in at least parts of the syrian territory. syria is still a question mark. but it is in the interest of us all to engage in order to make things move in the direction of an inclusive form of government in syria. and i think some gesture must be made regarding the sanctions to help make it possible. >> incentivize? >> i think it's a quid pro quo. but i believe the first step now must be to create some relief in the sanctions that is causing a

lot of suffering to the syrian people. >> and we're already seeing the00,000 syrians coming back to syria. but we also, as you said, as -- there's a lot at stake. we have seen in the past that walking the talk has not necessarily been happening. and it's really a lot at stake now, inclusiveness, you have the kurds. you have christians. you have shiites. it's complex. mr. guterres: as i said we might have a good solution in which all feel represented and contradicks or overcome. or a fragmentation with resisting parties. let's hope it's the first option that wins. and then you have the most relevant question which is iran

and realizations with the united states. my hope is that the iranians understand that it is important to once and for all make it clear that they will denounce to have nuclear weapons. at the same time that they engage constructively with the other countries of the region to have a new security architecture in the region with full respect of independence, territorial integrity in the region. and to with that, having so-called great bargain that allows them to be fully integrated in the global economy. this is my hope. but it's still possible that things do not go in this direction and that we might have an escalation and an ex-escalation that could be -- lead to dramatic confrontation engulfing the whole region. >> that wouldn't only affect the gulf region or the middle east

that would have huge global impact. but you mentioned robust diplomacy related to gaza. we also heard that president trump has said that he wants peace and stability. that was a readout from the conversation he also had with xi jinping on saturday and we were very close to full fledged war between israel and iran in the fall. so i guess also on the israeli side, they will ned to work very closely with the new administration on their approach to iran. and i -- there's also different camps in the republican party when it comes to how to deal with iran. mr. guterres: my feeling is that

the first step now must come from iran. because if not, we risk and escalation. i hope iran understands that it is useful to have this first step. and that it doesn't make sense at all to bet on the possibility, because it's not even a reality, or the perception that iran is aiming at having nuclear weapons. i think to make it clear once and for all that that will not happen and to engage as i said constructively for a new security in the region, respecting the independence and all the other countries would be a step that would allow the full integration of iran in the global economy and i hope once and for all pacify these -- one

of the most serious risks in global security. >> coming back to gaza, implementation of the first phase is happening now. but there's also a second phase. there's still things that have modalities that have to be negotiated. but when you look at risks also, we see currently a deterioration of the situation in the west bank. so of course it's seen to play a role in the next phase of the implementation of gaza. so it of course will be interesting also to see this new administration's view on two-state solution. the abraham accords. saudi arabia having said that there is no joining of the abraham accord without a path toward a two-state solution. but the immediate challenge is now really on the best wang --

west bank. because we have seen deterioration of the security situation there and -- and then the path for reconstruction of gaza. mr. guterres: i think there's a win-win solution. that win-win solution is that the ceasefire holds. hostages are -- go on being released. and the message takes place. first 130 trucks, second 900 trucks. it was shown when restriction disappeared aid was provided. this is important. it is a successful story. now this success story must resolve itself into a success story in the next phases. and the next phases leading to a situation of permanent ceasefire in gaza and the situation in which a transition can be

established in gaza, allowing for the unification of the occupied palestinian territories. and allowing for a serious negotiation, a political solution, based on the two states. this is the win-win situation. but there is another possibility. and the other possibility is for israel feeling emboldened by military successes to think that this is the moment to through the annexation of the west bank and to keep gaza in a kind of limbo situation with an unclear form of governance. it is clear for me that israel is not fundamentally in gaza. it's fundamentally in the west bank. now that would be a total violation of international law and that would create a

situation in which i think the abraham i think accords would be undermined completely and that would mean that we would never have stable peace in the middle east. >> one of the challenges we are faced with is in a more fragmented, polarized world is also this notion of proxy wars. proxy wars, i'm thinking about what we're seeing now in africa, sudan, somalia, mosul, and the sahal. i guess that this is something that keeps you up at night. it's hard to address. it's hard to attribute. but also for syria, this is probably one of the real impasses. also if you don't have an integration, then you can have a

war going on for decades. mr. guterres: we live in a situation where the geopolitical divides are deep. the superpowers are deeply divided. with russia's invasion of ukraine of course the most serious problem but with china-u.s. relationship being, as you know, very deteriorated. could have worse with the trade issues that appear on the horizon. so this huge geopolitical divide has created a situation in which there is total impunity. as the superpowers are not able to formulate their action in relation to global peace and security. in any part of the world, anyone feels they can do whatever they want. and we are seeing this in due hsu dan. two groups, killing each other. fighting each other.

creating a situation for the people in sudan. and nothing happens to them. total impunity. now this is the situation that i believe we need to correct. because this is what makes these wars by proxy happen. and you see that in each of the situations, four or five countries that intercede. be it in sudan or -- >> somalia, the presence here on the first row. mr. guterres: i mean, it is absolutely essential to independently of the geopolitical divide that exists, to create a situation in which there is real accountability in relation to the dramatic violations of human rights and

international law we are seeing in the world. >> so, coming to a close, it's imperative still, isn't it, that in a world where more and more of the challenges are trans-boundary, be it future pandemics, climates change as you mentioned in your speech, making sure that technology works in the interest of humankind. also with cyber crime. but also in all this original conflicts that are so interconnected. we do have the the security council. there's criticism that it is not the best mood in the security council but it is a place where the big powers still meet. and it's a paradox that in a

situation where all these challenges are only sold in a multilateral complex, the appetite is not always there. so it first makes your job even more complex but do you feel there are a few opportunities and silver linings now not coming years to tissue to even -- to 9/11 a world where each nation follows mainly their national interests, there are areas where there's strong overlap of the interests that you can push things through? mr. guterres: first of all, let's look at the security down tough. he problem with security council is is a problem of effectiveness but also losing power. the security council is the five members, france, u.k. and russia

are european countries. three in five on a continent that is what it is doesn't make any sense anymore. it is absolutely essential to have reform in the security council to make the security council more representative of today's world and make it more effective. this is one of the central questions at the debate. but beyond that, what i believe is that there are things that will tend in my opinion to unite. and i have a lot of hope of the positive impacts of science and the positive impacts of technological development. we can have different positions.

but renewables are the cheapest way to produce energy. so independently of the opinions that people might have, those that are now invested in fossil fuels, in my opinion, are invested in something -- i'm convinced that oil and gas that exist in the world today, independently of new discoveries, will never be spent. and so sooner or later, i believe that the realities created by the scientific and technological evolution, will make it inevitable, even for reasons of selfish analysis, will make it inevitable for people to take the right decisions. and that is one of my hopes. the second hope is that the use of -- this youth of today has a different perspective and different version -- vision of

the world than the youth of our generations. they are more cosmopolitan and they are more sensitive to the questions related to the well being of our planet and well being of the intermarble community -- of the international community. >> so there are sill venn linings. mr. guterres: the question is not to be optimistic or pessimistic. the question is to be determined. we need to be determined in making the values and principles which we live with. if we are materialed to fighter in right thing if we are on the right side of history, i believe in the end we will get what we want. >> thank you so much. thank you so much, mr. secretary general. [applause]