Transcript: Espinosa Garcés at CCG
July 25 , 2025President of the 73rd United Nations General Assembly and former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ecuador visited CCG for a dialogue with CCG Secretary-General Mabel Lu Miao.
▲ Video | Mabel Lu Miao in Dialogue with Espinosa Garcés
Espinosa Garcés, President of the 73rd United Nations General Assembly and former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ecuador, visited the Centre for China and Globalisation (CCG) on July 25, 2025, for a dialogue with CCG Secretary-General Mabel Lu Miao.
It’s my great honour to host our distinguished guest, our old and good friend, María Espinosa Garcés, who is a former President of the United Nations General Assembly.
I would like to introduce Maria. Maria is a distinguished politician and diplomat worldwide. The United Nations General Assembly elected Equatorian Foreign Minister, María Espinosa Garcés on 5 June 2018 as president of its 73rd session; only the fourth woman to hold that position in the history of the world body, and the first since 2006.
The President of the seventy-third session of the General Assembly, María Fernanda Espinosa Garcés, has more than 20 years of multilateral experience in international negotiations, peace, security, defence, disarmament, human rights, indigenous peoples, gender equality, sustainable development, environment, biodiversity, climate change and multilateral cooperation. She has served Ecuador as Minister of Foreign Affairs (twice), Minister of National Defence, and Coordinating Minister of Natural and Cultural Heritage.
María has very strong leadership and extensive experience in diplomatic circles and within the United Nations. We have met María on different occasions worldwide, at the Munich Security Conference, the Paris Peace Forum, the Doha Forum, and the Boao Forum for Asia. You were so active and demonstrated strong leadership. The world has already witnessed your leadership, actively participating in many conferences and delivering strong messages about the collective efforts for global governance.
Later, I would like to invite you to the CCG Global Dialogue series. As Luo Yan, Communications Director of CCG, mentioned, we have many distinguished guests, some of whom may be your colleagues, and you know them very well. However, today we have a very special topic, which is about inclusive leadership in global governance, especially the role of women in global governance. I think this is a very urgent topic in the current situation. So, let’s welcome Mrs. Espinosa to the stage, and we will have the dialogue. Thank you.
Hello, Ms. María Espinosa Garcés, you are warmly welcome to visit the Centre for China and Globalisation and join today’s CCG Global Dialogue series. At the very beginning, I’ve already introduced your extensive experience in global governance. In fact, we have met in different locations worldwide, and the world has already witnessed your leadership through your strong speeches and active efforts for collective global action. Actually, I would like to ask you a few questions and invite you to share your impressions and perspectives on today’s topic: inclusive leadership for a fragmented world, especially regarding women in global governance. Perhaps you could speak on this topic for a few minutes, maybe five minutes. Thank you.
Well, thank you. Thank you very much, Mabel, Dr. Lu Miao, as I should call you. It’s such a pleasure to be at the headquarters of CCG. As you very well mentioned, we have crossed paths, I think, all over the world—whether in Doha, Istanbul, Munich—everywhere. And I think it’s because we share the same purpose. It’s not a coincidence. It is that we need to be in the places where discussions, decisions, and new thinking emerge on the challenges of new governance designs.
And why am I saying “new”? Because I think we stand at a very critical moment. Because we have created and designed organisations to serve a purpose. The United Nations, more concretely, was designed and created after the Second World War, with the purpose of, and I would quote, “Never again.” Never again would countries or communities use force to resolve conflicts. The aim of the United Nations was to build a peaceful world.
And we have a Charter that has three pillars: the pillar of peace and security, the pillar of development, and the pillar of human rights. When the Charter was signed, the UN Charter—which is the UN constitution, let’s put it that way—80 years ago, 51 countries signed the Charter. The international community was 51 countries. And because of the decolonisation processes that happened under the auspices of the UN—by the way, one of the first tasks and challenges of the UN was to support countries in their decolonisation processes—we have now a community of 193 countries.
And only in the numbers you see that the world has become bigger, wider and more complex, in that the new threats to our survival as humans have also shifted. Some remain the same, like the threat of war and conflict, but others have emerged, for example, climate change and the climate crisis. Others have emerged, like the new technologies and the use of artificial intelligence, increasing poverty and inequalities. We have come up precisely 10 years ago with this new framework and global commitment called the Sustainable Development Goals. Basically, the 17 Sustainable Development Goals have one and only purpose, is to combat poverty inequalities and bring a life of peace and well-being for humanity.
And these might seem platitudes, but it so happens that these minimum standards of living are not our reality, not for hundreds of millions of people that continue to live in poverty. So what we’re facing now is the opportunity to reshape these institutions, keeping the core values, like to respect the sovereign equality among states, to solve disputes using diplomacy, not violence or armed responses. The issue of respecting the rights and dignity of people remains at the core. But of course, we are living a different scenario altogether. The challenge we have is how we redesign these organisations so they can remain relevant, they can remain effective, and solve the challenges of the people on the ground.
The first phrase of the Charter, which I love, is “we, the peoples of the United Nations,” meaning that we have an obligation to deliver for we the peoples. And the main responsibility is in the hands of governments, of course. The UN is an intergovernmental organisation, but actors have multiplied. You know, the scientific community, think tanks, private companies, the role of the private sector is increasingly important. So, this is a shared endeavour.
And there is—perhaps we can discuss that later, Mabel—a very dynamic movement around, thinking about how to improve the systems, the mechanisms, and the institutions that we have designed. One of the issues is the issue of representation, the issue of women in positions of moral power. That’s one of the issues, but also the issue of accountability, the issue of, you know, transforming the decisions we take into real action on the ground. The Sustainable Development Goals are a means to do precisely that.
I think, as we were discussing before, that the younger generations and I see a lot of young women, especially young men and women in this room, basically, we have to feel like we are a global family, that we are interconnected and interdependent, that we need to put our energy, our intellect, our effort to build a global community that would be able to coexist in peace.
This is something that I think China has understood a long time ago. Because China is one of the greatest defenders of multilateralism, of global cooperation, of international solidarity. When you look at the three initiatives that China is putting forward, it really shows that China cares about global development, about infrastructure support, about the well-being and the interconnectedness of humanity. It believes in safe and predictable global supply chains.
So, these are the issues that really create trust in global institutions, and I think that the UN really has to go through a major overhaul to deliver to the people it was created for 80 years ago.
I appreciate that. I appreciate what you said. You served as President of the UN General Assembly during a period of intensified geopolitical tensions. Just now, you mentioned you are assessing the current state of the global governance: the UN needs reform, and the current geopolitical architecture needs to listen to more people’s voices, and more representative voices should be heard.
By the way, you mentioned that this year marks the 80th anniversary of the United Nations, and China was the first to sign the UN Charter. I remember I saw that documentary when I was younger. It was quite impressive for me as one of the Chinese community. We are supporters of the UN Charter as well, and you mentioned that too. Currently, China has put forward three global initiatives on development, security, and civilisation. Those are very important to building a community with a shared future for mankind. They also share the core values of the UN. From my perspective, the UN is a peace project. It is also a project for a more prosperous world. So we cannot forget what the UN represents: peace, development, and prosperity after the Second World War. As you said, young people should revisit and review what happened history and the UN’s contributions.
I have some questions. Could you further introduce how you assess the current state of global governance? Are multilateral institutions still fit for purpose? What specific reforms do you believe are most urgent for the United Nations and other multilateral institutions to ensure they remain equitable and effective, especially in a multipolar world?
Well, this is a very interesting question, because what we are witnessing [is], we are not in the post-WWII scenario; we are not anymore in a bipolar world. We are experiencing an emergence with the great strength of many powers. Some call it a polycentric world. Others call it a multipolar world. But what is true is that power has diversified into many hands, and what we are experiencing is high multipolarity but low multilateralism, in a way. What we need to do is redesign the multilateral institutions so they can embrace this diversity and this redistribution of power. The core should remain the importance of international cooperation and of international solidarity.
Why? Because we are more interdependent but also more vulnerable as a human species. For example, if you look at the health sector, we know that our security depends on the behaviour of the neighbours. And even physically, in your building, you know how the neighbours behave on the rules and the standards, of course, but in the way societies respond to that. If we talk about climate change, it’s not that the emissions on CO2, they stop at borders. It doesn’t work like that. No, the environmental crisis, which is a planetary crisis, does not respect national borders. Whether we speak about the extinction crisis, the disappearing of species, whether you speak about air pollution or climate change, the deterioration of our oceans, everything is interconnected. Therefore, our response should be collective action and should be based on cooperation. This is the core of a well-functioning multilateral system.
Your question was, what are the things we need to change? I think we should preserve the core values of the UN, the reason why it was created, to build a world of peace, of well-being and dignity for all. These remain, I would say, the centre. But then, how we reach that situation, it’s different, because the actors in the international community are different. If you look at the technological capabilities, if you look at the wealth in natural resources, if you look at natural capital throughout the world, there is a more complex scenario out there.
So, the things that need to change, I would say, is the way the multilateral system takes decisions, translates the decisions into practice, and this practice improves the lives of people. This means like a no-brainer and even a platitude. But these are things that are not working in the system that we have today. What is the balance between the role of the General Assembly, which is a sort of a parliament of nations? Because it’s every country one vote, regardless of you know how many square kilometres you have; it’s one country, one vote. It’s sort of a parliament of nations. Then you have the Security Council, whose main mandate and responsibility is to keep the world safe and free of conflict. That is also something that the system is not delivering. As we speak, there are more than 100 active armed conflicts around the world. So, something is not working well. Humanity, in a way, is a custodian of peace. This is something that also needs to be boosted.
Currently, the UN is undergoing a very profound liquidity crisis, a financial crisis. One of the things that should be reformed in the system is the way we finance the system, how is that countries contribute to finance the system that is going to deliver for humanity. And currently, what you see is that if one country withdraws, the whole system is paralysed. But then, this multipolar world has to respond in a different way. And the UN needs to be financed in a way that does not rely on one country only, but has more diversified sources of funding.
And we have seen an incredible commitment and generosity from China. China is not only saying in international fora that we believe and we defend multilateralism, but they have made sure that the fundamentals are properly funded, not only in terms of how much resources you invest in the system, but also how much you contribute to the decision-making processes.
I have never worked for the UN, but I have always been connected to the UN. You know, that’s also an advantage. I’ve never been paid by the UN, but I have been ambassador in New York, in Geneva, President of the General Assembly, Foreign Minister, and I can tell you that the constructive spirit of China in multilateral negotiations is something that is highly appreciated, because we are living a time of great polarisation, of great fragmentation, and we need these bridge countries that basically broker wider agreements that are so important.
Let me give you, perhaps, Mabel, two or three examples. It is true that the UN is in trouble, underfunded, with legitimacy challenges, with trust challenges. But in spite of all of that, it continues to deliver. Just in May, for the first time ever, governments came together to approve a new pandemics treaty that is going to really make the cooperation in a pandemic situation easier and framed under certain shared norms and standards—for example, access to medicines, access to vaccines, several protocols that are going to help.
A few months ago, the International Maritime Organisation passed a carbon adjustment tax for shipping, agreed by all countries. A few weeks ago, we were in Seville for the 4th Financing for Development (FFD4) Conference. The Seville Compromise is a very strong outcome negotiated by all members and basically committing to increasingly closing the gap on financing development. And here again, China comes leading by example. You mentioned the three initiatives on peace, development and civilisation. These are not only words. They are practical investment commitments of the country to support the countries that are less privileged. And that’s the core of multilateralism.
I appreciate your words. Actually, China has done and tried our best to give more budget to the United Nations, but the U.S. is still the largest budget contributor. China is the second largest, nearly on par with the P5. I think what you mentioned about UN reform is very, very important.
We need to reform the UN, but we should still appreciate the achievements it has made for humanity. There is no other project like the UN that can be replicated by others—there is no other alternative. So, I think we should continue to uphold the core values of the UN and the spirit of collective effort to promote peace and prosperity for humanity.
Another question: You are the first female Latin American president in UN history. How do you see the significance of your role? How can developing countries, especially those in the Global South, secure a more representative voice in the institutions of global governance?
That’s an excellent question. Also, some good news: it’s not only the percentage of each country contributing to the UN—whether you pay or not, also your dues—but the increase in the contribution of China is extremely meaningful because now, China contributes almost 20% to the overall budget of the UN. In terms of peacekeeping operations, China went, if I’m not mistaken, from 18% to more than 20% of the peacekeeping budget of the UN. So, that makes China a very strong player. Again, not only words, but action, and this is extremely important.
Your question was about the role of women and the representation of women. I am the CEO of an organisation called Global Women Leaders. It’s a network of women, former heads of state and government, and former high-level officials of the UN. I have the privilege to be the CEO. And that’s the reason why I sit in Madrid; my office is there. And we produce a report called Women in Multilateralism, and we track the 54 most important international organisations and look how many women these organisations have.
That’s interesting. Data talks, right?
Yes. So, just look at our website, and you will see we have been tracking this for three years now, and what you see is a chronic underrepresentation of women in positions of power in the international system.
Let me give you one example. We tracked, for example, how many women ambassadors the UN has had in New York since the UN was established. Since 1947 until today, we have had 2800 permanent representatives in New York. And from all of these permanent representatives, only 7% have been women representing their countries. When I was appointed ambassador to New York, we have in the wall of our mission there, the permanent representatives, the ambassadors, they were all men. I said, well, when I leave, there would be one picture. But my hope was [not just] my picture, but then others, other women ambassadors. But I was the one and only, until now. In Geneva, the same, the one and only. And in many cases, they have never had a woman.
If you look at the heads of agencies, if you look at the governing boards of UN agencies, if you look at organisations as important as the World Bank, [it] has never had a woman at the helm. So there is a historic under-representation of women in the system. And it’s not only because we are 50% of the world’s population. It’s not only that, but I think that we bring quality. We bring different perspectives, we bring different ways of problem-solving, and we bring good diplomacy.
It’s part of the inclusiveness of global governance.
Exactly. Absolutely. It’s not just to have the numbers right. No. It’s also because we do good diplomacy. And, you know, Mabel, when you travel the world and you speak for the good causes of multilateralism, of cooperation, of better global governance, you know that you bring a special…
We contribute from our angel.
Exactly. And I think that’s perhaps what the world needs right now when we think about changing leadership. For example, at the UN, when I was elected President of the UN General Assembly, I was the number four female in, at the time, 73 years of history. And the four women, we came from the Global South. The first one was from India, Vijaya Lakshmi Pandit. The second, Madame Brooks, from Liberia, from Africa. The third from Bahrain, from a Gulf country. And the fourth, and only from Latin America, when I was elected. So, it was a great responsibility for me because I knew that I had to do a good job. Why? Because I wanted more women behind me and more young women diplomats also having the opportunity.
Wonderful. Regarding women’s leadership, this year also marks the 30th anniversary of the adoption of the Beijing Declaration. Thirty years ago, a very significant conference happened in Beijing—the World Conference on Women. Last time at the Boao Forum, I mentioned that my mom had a magazine about that forum, and I read that magazine carefully. It gave me a strong impression that in the future, maybe I would have the opportunity to access the so-called global governance.
So, I am honoured to mention that at the 30th anniversary of this significant conference, maybe in October, once again, an international women’s summit will happen here. And I think, what are your views on the past? We can review the past 30 years. Over the past 30 years, what has happened to women’s responsibility and contribution, achievements in global governance? Do you have some hope for the future?
Well, first of all, I’m so happy that you were reading the magazines of your mother. And when I think where I was 30 years ago, you in Beijing, I was living in the equatorial Amazon. I was living in the forest, working with indigenous peoples of the Amazon.
By the way, I should introduce you to our audience. You are not just a senior diplomat and politician, but also an Amazonian expert. You can share more about that. Sorry for the interruption.
Well, no, when I’m asked, where did you study? I studied geography. But where I learned the most, I know I learned from the indigenous communities of the Amazon. And it’s real. My work was with indigenous women, basically. What I was doing, among other things, was preparing the first delegation of indigenous women to travel to Beijing for the conference. And I wrote an article then, called Tracing the Beijing Conference from Below.
And here are small anecdotes. There was funding, let’s say, for six delegates from indigenous women of Ecuador to travel to Beijing. And these were women that have never left their communities, not even travel to the capital city. No. So I was preparing. And believe me, they are so wise and so smart. We prepared an agenda, a platform that they came together with other indigenous women because the Amazon is shared by eight countries, as you know, Brazil, Bolivia, Colombia, and Peru. They came together. A Trans-Amazonian Women’s meeting to prepare the first indigenous Amazonian women agenda for Beijing. That’s why I’m older than you are, Mabel.
So they sent six funded participants. I was, of course, the person coordinating. And I said, no, I will leave my space for one more of the women there. And I’m sure that they’re going to find their way. So, I stayed. I gave my seat to another indigenous representative, and I monitored. And at the time, we didn’t have phones, and cell phones didn’t exist. So I was very stressed because I didn’t know. But basically, they were..
They never left their region, but they crossed the Pacific and came.
Went to Beijing and they were a big success. Because it was the first time that they found other indigenous women that came to Beijing.
I think that Beijing was perhaps the landmark of the women’s rights agenda worldwide. The legacy of Beijing was so important 30 years ago. You know, being here, going to universities, having a career, and having dreams as young women, it’s also very much because of the struggle and the agendas that were built in Beijing. And I’m very happy to hear that there will be some celebration here to remember the legacy of the Beijing Platform for Action.
Of course, the downside is that we signed and committed to many things. The situation of women around the world is not the best. And not only the issue of representation and participation, but violence against women, salary gaps, overburden of care work in the shoulders of women worldwide. In situations of conflict, women and girls are the ones that suffer the most. In human trafficking, women [sic] that are trafficked worldwide, 80% are women. Women that decide to go into politics, there is a lot of violence against women that are in politics worldwide. You have very difficult situations in many countries around the world, of a lack of opportunities, of discrimination.
It depends. If you ask the World Economic Forum, they will tell you we have done the arithmetic, and it would take more than two hundred years to close the inequalities gap. UN Women tells you, I think it’s a hundred and fifty years that we have to wait to close the inequalities gap. And I think we need fast track. We cannot wait 150 years because we want our daughters and granddaughters, and we want you, the younger generations, to have the same opportunities and the well-being, and live in a world free of violence. So, this is a collective endeavour.
Of course, there are places where we are seeing regression in women’s rights, in regulations, in legislation. And you see that instead of improving, we’re going back. So, I think it is time to celebrate the legacy of Beijing, but it is time to continue working also for women’s rights because it’s not a given. And sometimes, younger generations, they forget all the struggle that went into this. So, you are where you are, very talented professionals, very committed young women. It didn’t use to be that way, you know, always. So the struggle continues, and very much great enthusiasm to see that we’re going to do a commemoration of the legacy of Beijing.
Thank you. Actually, I think that organising this event once again in China, in Beijing, is a good reminder for people and for humanity of how hard and how tough it has been for women in history to achieve better gender equality and parity. It’s a great accomplishment.
Today, our topic is women in global governance. I often encourage my colleagues to get involved in the core of all issues, including global governance. There’s some data from China that over the past three decades, or even longer, China has had more than 40 million female scientific and technological workers. This is a huge number, representing over 45% of the total workforce in science and technology. The STEM fields—science, technology, engineering—are very important for our development, and China has made a lot of achievements in this field. Actually, more than 15.6% of all graduates are female students. So, it means that there are more female students than male students in China. But we still need to review their employment and the types of jobs they are doing, and in mid-career, what kind of situation they’re in.
So, you yourself are a model and an idol for all women aspiring to access global governance. I think it’s a huge encouragement to talk about your story today on this occasion. Thank you. Appreciate that.
Later, I would like to ask another question. I know you are an expert on global environmental governance and play an active role in that area. Last month, you wrote an article discussing the importance of preventive diplomacy at the core of climate change governance. Could you share more about your views on global climate governance? We know that right now, we are facing a lot of challenges, especially with transactional diplomacy versus what you said, preventive diplomacy. Transactional diplomacy is prevailing, and people narrow the concept to deal-making in all cases, without a long-term vision for global governance. I would love to hear your opinions on this.
Well, I think that one of the challenges that humanity faces is how we get together to govern the issues that go beyond our national borders. In nature, I think the best example is the Earth system. Because yet again, if you have a wetland or you have oceans or a forest, ecosystems do not respect borders. So, if you want to fight air pollution or if you want to fight extinction and combat deforestation, it’s because we have a responsibility over the functioning of the Earth system. It’s our life-supporting system. When people say we want to save the planet, and believe me, the planet can live very well without us, without humans. But we cannot live without the planet. That’s where our food, our air come from.
The truth is that what we have done, I think at certain moments, a good decision is to create conventions on issues, issue-based conventions. So Biodiversity Convention, Climate Convention, Wetlands Convention, Migratory Species Convention, and to reach more than 2,000 multilateral environmental agreements. And the problem is how you make sure that you comply with all these conventions.
In countries, of course, China is a big country with great capabilities. I come from Ecuador, a country of less than 20 million people. We should hire half of the country just to report back on the conventions. It’s impossible. Basically, we should overcome this issue-based international treaties and look about a more systemic way of looking at the air system and make the life of countries easier to cooperate, to protect, to invest in an ecosystem-based approach.
It counters the current structure of governance. That includes, of course, climate. At one point, there was an initiative when I was president of the General Assembly. There was a mandate to negotiate the Global Pact for the Environment, some kind of a framework, of a big framing mechanism to help countries to work in ecosystem mode and not in issue-based mode. When countries have to report back on their NDCs, the Nationally Determined Contributions on climate, this needs to be integrated into their report to the Convention on Biological Diversity, to the Convention on Desertification, to the Wetlands Convention, to have a more integrated approach.
And we haven’t come up yet with the solutions to that, but I think we need to rethink. When you talk about environment, people think about climate, which is critical because climate change is killing so many people, displacing hundreds of thousands of people. So we need to act. But you cannot act on climate if you do not create the proper adaptation mechanisms that include, for example, keeping forests alive, combating deforestation, combating pollution, air pollution. We know that 70% of the emissions come from cities. So there is a very strong component of regulation of cities regarding air pollution. So we are lacking a systemic approach. We are lacking interconnectedness, we are lacking better ways to collaborate.
You were saying, Mabel, what are the challenges for the current multilateral order and the importance of regional approaches and regional responses? When the UN was created and established, this configuration of regions, of multilateral configurations, issue-based, interest-based, regional approaches. I know China is leading APEC, for example, and ASEAN, even the BRICS that took place recently. So these are regional configurations, issue-based configurations, but all these regional spaces, all these ad hoc groups need to come up with responses. And of course, there is the need to have a global universal structure. That’s the UN. But I think we really need to reassess the effectiveness of the environmental conventions, even the Climate Convention. We are going to meet in Belém for the 30th time.
Cop 30, yeah.
Cop 30, meaning that we have met 30 times, and emissions continue to grow. So, something is not right. And some countries take the issue of climate change more seriously than others. Let me again put the example of China. China has a long-term plan, a very well-organised transition. It’s the first producer and investor in renewable energy. So again, they act as they say. And this is a very good example because not all countries do the same.
I agree with you. It’s very interesting that you mentioned regional governance affiliated with global governance, especially in this fragmented world. I think we need to renew and innovate global governance. For example, just yesterday, the EU and China concluded a summit and reached a very important agreement: the EU would like to work with China on the green transition. Both sides will strengthen their bilateral cooperation on the green transition and support the Brazilian people to get a great and successful COP 30.
I think it’s very important, as it represents two key pillars of global governance—the EU and China—making a consensus on the green transition, and it’s good for global governance. After all, everyone suffers from climate change, and it is a global issue.
But right now, with the intensifying geopolitical tensions, the competition between superpowers sounds like a more exciting term. But, as you mentioned, we need to translate these theories and ideas into actions. The UN and China have made good consensus agreements on the green transition, including initiatives on electric vehicles (EVs), renewable energy, and how to spread them to other regions, like Africa and Latin America, making sure no one is left behind—digitally or in terms of renewable energy. Those are a very important part of global governance.
During your visit to Beijing, you must have seen many cars with the EV symbol. These are electric vehicles, and they are very cheap in China. China would like to contribute to the world. I think it’s a good thing.
I remember exactly at the Munich Security Conference, some people criticised China for overcapacity and dumping its EVs. But one person from the U.S. said, “Come on, if the Chinese are willing to subsidise the world on climate change and help reduce climate issues, why not? It’s good for everyone, for every individual on Earth.” Some may be right, some may be wrong, but I still believe that, as you mentioned, the EU and China are two pillars of a regional mechanism. They can work together, and this is a good thing for the world—a good thing for what you called preventive diplomacy, as you wrote in your article. Yes, very interesting.
Maybe the last question is also about young people. You already mentioned that there are many young women here today. They’re your fans. Actually, you’re an idol for women’s participation in global governance. Many people say that there are more female graduates today—not just in China, but globally—and more and more female graduates have higher education degrees. However, if you examine their mid-career trajectory, you’ll find that they are still at lower executive levels, on average, compared to men. This is often referred to as the “man leadership” phenomenon. In global governance, you already mentioned that we need more female ambassadors to the UN, more senior executives in the global system and international institutions. What words of encouragement would you offer to young women who want to participate in global governance? What message would you like to share with them? Thank you.
Well, thank you for this question. Mabel, if you allow me to just speak a little bit of the previous question and something I forgot to mention. Sometimes when we speak about the need to reform the current institutions and mechanisms, including the UN, we think that reform happens because you write a document and you say, this is what needs to be improved. We need to improve the way the Security Council delivers. We need to do a mandate review of the UN and just mainstream. We need to do more with less and be more cost-effective, and we need to do that.
And the truth is all of that is needed, but real reform has to happen in a variable geometry kind of [way]—I don’t want to be abstract—but at different speeds. There are things that can be done now. There are things that are going to take a little longer. There are a series of mandates contained in the Pact for the Future that came out in the latest Summit of the Future last year. So, there is a lot of movement, a lot of space and opportunities right now. We all agree that the system cannot continue operating the way it’s operating. And we also know that there is no silver bullet, you know, to fix the system like that. This is a call of co-responsibility and of really having a clear roadmap on how to deliver.
And there are urgent issues that we need to work on right now. One of the urgent issues is the financing of the system that I was mentioning, and how to optimise and how to use better the resources we have, how to set the priorities right. And this is the responsibility of governments, of course. Member states have to decide what are the priorities and really change a little bit in the way we expect the UN to solve and address all the problems of the world. The UN should remain, in my opinion, the big factory of international law because international law is basically prepared and done and delivered under the UN. But big policy advice, cooperation, capacity-building, guidance, then to land the actual action on the ground to regional spaces and national responsibilities. Of course, the oversight on peace and security.
And when I use preventive diplomacy, it’s something that the UN has failed big time. We’re always one step too late, too little too late. We arrive when the conflicts already take place. When we arrive, a humanitarian crisis already happens. And we’re not exercising this capacity to prevent, to reduce risk, to prepare people and communities better to be more resilient and to adapt better and more to the climate shocks, for example. And we should really work seriously on preventing—preventing is less costly than to be always responding to permanent crises.
And in this is easy to say, difficult to do. I’m not naive, but I think we are in a make-it-or-break-it moment. That leads me to the younger generations. Because you have a big responsibility there, to learn from the past, to really do better than we did, that our generation did.
That leads me also to women’s leadership. You mentioned, Mabel, that there are more women in universities than men and more women in STEM areas than men. In the world of diplomacy, when I was president of the General Assembly, the cabinet of the president is formed by contributions of countries with diplomats. It’s not the staff you have. They come from different countries. And I had two. I didn’t choose them. It was the Chinese government that had the generosity to give me two superpower diplomats, both were women. One [was an] expert on human rights, and a second one was an expert on climate change. And they were among the super bright, super young diplomats in my team. I learned a lot from them.
The truth is that it is about opportunity and possibility. And I think we should never, never be afraid of asking for our space, asking for the roles we want to play, following our dreams. I would be lying to you if I told you it’s easy. It’s not easy. For women, it’s difficult because we are expected also to be good housewives, good mothers and have different responsibilities. But that shouldn’t be an obstacle because we are experts in multitasking and we know how to perform well in different spaces. And the world has changed in a way where the care work is better shared in the household, and that we can have career plans that are ambitious, that are forward-looking.
And you also have to think about even the generations to come. And you want the women of the generations to come to have more and better opportunities than you had. The truth is that when I was appointed Minister of Defence of my country, this is not naturally a job for a woman.
The Defense Ministry in many years ago. You’re like, it’s a typical man’s job.
Exactly. No, even Foreign Minister. You know, I was the first one, the first Minister of Defence. And of course, being a professional, I wanted to perform the best way I could. But I always thought I need to do a good job because I’m opening the door for younger women and the younger generations, to prove that we are capable, that we deserve to be in spaces where decisions are taken and that we have the merit.
So, never shy away. Be very careful about this impostor syndrome. Sometimes, women, we are self-demanding—thinking, “Oh, no, maybe I’m not well-prepared,” “Oh, no, perhaps we don’t have the qualifications,” or “Perhaps I’m not ready.” We are always ready, and we are always ready to take on the responsibilities that come to us. That would be perhaps a very humble advice. Never shy away of opportunity and really fight for it.
And perhaps, to share an anecdote of my mother. I have three brothers, male brothers, and I had something happening in school when I was, I don’t recall, but perhaps 12 or 13 years old. As you remember the magazines of Beijing, I remember this. And I think I was crying in my room or something, but my mom knocked on the door and I told her I had this problem. I was supposed to be whatever, I don’t remember, but leading the school newspaper or something that was so important when you are living the moment.
And she told me, you know, listen, no one is going to knock on your door and tell you, here’s your opportunity. It’s not a given. You have to fight for it. And being a woman, she was talking to me because I had three brothers and a father. She said, always follow your dreams and push hard for whatever dream you have, if you want to be a chef, a diplomat, an expert on foreign relations, like Mabel, that represents this country and represents women in such an able way. I have seen her and [am] a great admirer of the work she does. See that we can do whatever we want to do if we have the energy and the courage. And we are fearless. I think that has been a little bit of the push of my life and my career. But when we lead, lead with generosity, lead with empathy, I would say even lead with love. That’s what makes the leadership style of women different.
The female characteristics of leadership.
Well, yes. And then you never regret. And believe me, if I saw the two people that work with me at the cabinet from China, believe me that they will remember me not only because they learn from me, but because I learned from them a great deal. My food every day and the energy that I have, I get from my own team in Madrid. They’re all young women. We try hard. My team is rather small, but they’re all women, except for the IT technician of the computers. But we did open calls for the positions. It so happened that I work only with women. It should be a mixed group. But for the time being, it’s all women.
Excellent. You mentioned that we should seize those opportunities by fighting for them, not just waiting for those kinds of opportunities to come to us. I completely agree with you. It’s not easy as a woman. As you mentioned, in China and around the world, women are often expected to have a thousand hands—you should do this, you should do that. You’re expected to handle everything by yourself. If you can’t do it all, it means your abilities are not good. There are so many expectations placed on women. But we should fight for ourselves, especially in society and in global governance, as you mentioned.
We’ve had a great dialogue flow. Now, I’d like to take a few quick questions from our audience. I see we have a media representative here. Could you introduce yourself and let us know which media outlet you’re from? Please.
[Audio not captured]…The second question is about how do you recognise that the United States has withdrawn from UNESCO? What is the event’s impact on global governance? And that’s it. Thank you for your answers.
You know, China takes seriously this year’s 80 anniversary of the United Nations. And this early September, there’s a big parade happening in Beijing at Tiananmen Square. So yeah, it’s a huge event for China and for the world, I think. So the first question I think is related to the UN and China’s role in UN.
I’ll repeat my first question.
No, I got your question very well. Both questions are excellent. The first question is the role of China. It is not only the three initiatives on development, peace, and civilisation. It is more than that. It is the very constructive contribution of China in the intergovernmental negotiation processes.
China has been, and believe me, I’ve been around for decades, as an ambassador and in all my positions, a country that has always had a very positive constructive stand. It is not only the financial contribution that China is providing to support the functioning of the system, it is the attitude to contribute constructively to the discussions and the negotiations and the decisions.
China is a country that always respects its commitments, and that’s very important. I have never seen China withdrawing from any of the multilateral agreements or treaties or organisations and institutions that form the system. And China also has, for a long, long time, contributed to openly, generously cooperating with the countries that are in need. When you see countries that are undergoing major conflicts or major climate shocks, the support of China always comes. So cooperation is a word that we have seen come through—not only words, but actions in terms of investment, in terms of constructive attitude towards the negotiations.
And we were only remembering the legacy of Beijing on women’s rights from 30 years ago, and initiatives such as the Belt and Road Initiative that have brought together so many countries with great development opportunities. And the importance of China in securing supply chains, this is very important. Trade rules are very important not only for the big powers but for the smaller countries like my own. We have a free trade agreement with China. And believe me, I mean, we are far away. Why would China want to trade with Ecuador in South America? But it’s not only about how much do I get from this deal, it’s how much we cooperate. You know, there is a spirit of true cooperation and generosity. This is at the core of multilateralism.
I have followed China. I think I have been to almost 20 COPs in my life, and I have followed the commitment of China throughout. And when China says no, it’s because they cannot deliver. When they say yes, it’s because they can deliver.
I was part of the negotiations of the Paris Agreement, and I so happened to be seated next to Minister Xie at the time, who was the climate envoy of China. I not only learned a great deal from him, but I learned good climate diplomacy. And I know it’s challenging [for] a country that has a responsibility to fight poverty, like China, that has done miracles in fighting poverty.
800 million people out of poverty in China. It’s a huge number.
It’s huge. So, to do this and at the same time transition away from fossil fuels, at the same time invest in renewables, etc. So, the power of China today as being the number one in renewable energy is not by coincidence. It is not something that you do in one week. You do that in a long process of years of investment and vision. So, that was your first question. You know, it’s real, and I hope that there are other powers that follow what China has done.
In all our countries, we have challenges. We are not perfect, of course. But if we keep our word, if we translate our words into action, if we show that cooperation is something that we care about, if we are always raising our voice to defend the UN and multilateralism, I think we would be better off. I also celebrate this partnership between the European Union and China in terms of a just transition to renewables.
Your second question was about the U.S. leaving UNESCO, but they have also left the Paris Agreement and the Human Rights Council. And I think that one of the beauties of the multilateral system is that it provides space for dissent. Countries that do not agree, they have the right to say, “I don’t agree, I don’t feel this is good for my country right now,” and take a decision. They have the right to do that. There are even legal mechanisms to do that, to withdraw. It’s not the ideal, but it can be done, and the system should respect that. Of course, in terms of cutting funding, for example, in the case of an important donor, the UN should be more resilient and well prepared to face, for example, budget cuts. Quite frankly, it wasn’t that well prepared. But this right to disassociate, to say, I’m leaving this because I don’t feel right now that this is contributing to my country, I think it’s a very legitimate decision.
What’s important is that the machinery continues to operate and the countries, which is the larger majority that believe that UNESCO has done an incredible job on science, on education, on technology, on regulating with the principles of ethical use of artificial intelligence just recently [continue supporting it]. UNESCO has a long history in working against anti-Semitism, for example. All of that, I think it’s part of the legacy of these institutions and we should continue to support that. And if at some point one country feels it’s not in their interest, there are ways of saying no, and the system should be prepared to accept and process the right to dissent.
So, diplomacy is not an art to talk to the people that think alike. Because for people that think alike and have the same projects and agree on everything, you don’t need diplomacy as much as a platform to discuss, quote and quote with the ones that think differently, that have different positions. The art of diplomacy is the art to speak about, to speak with countries, groups, and individuals that think differently. That is at the heart of diplomacy.
I really like what you said. Your answer reflects a great deal of wisdom. You interpret the art of diplomacy. Actually, I remember exactly in the WTO Annual Forum last September, and the President of the Peterson Institute made an interesting remark. He said we can work together to move forward with WTO reform and free trade mechanisms, while the U.S. can prepare for a longer period and catch up. That was a very interesting answer. And it may have answered part of what she mentioned.
I really like what you said that the art of diplomacy is to bring together people with different ideas, ensuring unity in diversity. That is the value of diplomacy. As a senior diplomat, you know the importance of this, and you’ve highlighted this spirit once again. I truly appreciate that. I think it’s a fantastic conclusion to our conversation and dialogue, and it’s a highlight of you as a senior diplomat with insight for opinions on diplomacy itself.
Thank you again, Maria. Thank you so much. I’m so glad to have such a distinguished guest today be part of our global CCG Global Dialogue series. Actually, there are a lot of people listening to our coming broadcast around the world in English and Chinese, and they really wanna hear our opinion, especially your opinion on the UN, UN reform, and global governance, particularly inclusive leadership for a fragmented world and women’s leadership in global governance.
Thank you again. I appreciate your time and warmly welcome your visit to Beijing and the CCG headquarters. Thank you. Thank you all.
Well, thank you, too, CCG. Thank you, Mabel, for having me for this conversation and for this incredible audience of young diplomats-to-be young professionals. It’s so encouraging to see that all the ideals of global cooperation would remain a part of the commitment of the younger generations to work and commit to a better world. So, privileged to be at CCG headquarters and looking forward to continuing this conversation.
Thank you, María. I think today your opinions will plant seeds in the hearts of those people who, in the future, will be the forest of our global governance. They are the young think tankers. I think this is a great encouragement for all of them. I appreciate it again. Thank you. Thank you all.
Note: The above text is the output of transcribing from an audio recording. It is posted as a reference for the discussion.
