Inflammatory speeches at the United Nations
Monday Ministerial Musings
By Rev. Mark William Ennis
2026 Blog #34
September 28, 2026
The United Nations General Assembly is in session once again. Fortunately, I have never visited in New York City during these sessions. People that I know who have lived or worked in New York have complained about the traffic that the General Assembly brings to Manhattan. It is not easy for New York City to manage the many diplomates, and their security staffs, who arrive in the city. I have even heard horror stories about the behavior of some of the representatives to the United Nations who take advantage of their diplomatic immunity.
When I read the history of the founding of the United Nations following World War Two, it seems like a wonderful idea. It was formed to keep international peace. Not to blame the organization or the idea behind it, I wonder why there continues to be war around the globe. Perhaps the mission of keeping peace is simply an impossible job and no organization on earth can fulfill this task. Or perhaps, procedural changes of this body might help the combatants to begin roads to peace.
As of this writing, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), estimates that 130 armed conflicts are now happening on this planet. Most of us in the West have never heard of most of these wars but even we are aware of the ongoing fighting in the Middle East and the long war in Ukraine. It seems like a bitter irony that representatives of nations at war with one another still gather at the United Nations and make speeches even while their nations are killing citizens of other nations and while their citizens are being killed by their adversaries.
I did not hear the speeches of President Trump, Prime Minister Netanyahu, or Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian but I did read the New York Times summaries of the three speeches. Each of these leaders gave their own versions of current events while insulting the leaders and citizens of the nations that they are in conflict with. I wonder how allowing insulting and inflammatory speeches lowers tensions or leads to the potential for peace. Of course, I’m sure that much of the inflammatory speaking is meant simply to inspire the citizens of the countries that the representatives come from. These leaders want to look macho and strong, playing to their own constituencies.
I wonder if the goal of ending conflicts might have been advanced if these three leaders, instead of making inflammatory speeches, should have been put in a room and encouraged to begin discussing what it would take to live together with peace, respect and dignity. How do insulting speeches promote peace among nations? I wonder if it is not counter-productive toward this goal. Instead of giving them large forums, would it be better if they were forced to sit down and talk to one another without the need to be boisterous to impress their own citizens? Why not force them to speak to one another instead of talking about each other?
In our lives, we were taught by parents and teachers that conflicts increase when we talk about each other and diminish when we talk to each other. Should not the leaders of nations be forced to act as well as we, the people, were taught to act?
The United Nations was founded to add to world peace, but I wonder if the format of inviting leaders to insult other leaders contributes to this goal. Maybe it is time for the United Nations to change its procedures and get world leaders speaking privately to one another.
#ReformedChurchInAmerica #BergenCountyNJ
#www.PastorMarkAuthor.com #www.revmarkwilliamennis.com
#GlenRock,NJ #CommunityChurchofGlenRock
#UnitedNations #War