What is the General Debate of the UN General Assembly?

The General Debate of the United Nations General Assembly (GA/UNGA), or simply the “General Debate”, is an annual event that takes place in New York. It is a high-level meeting that involves presidents, prime ministers and secretaries of state from all UN members. These leaders typically gather in September to deliver statements about how they perceive major issues in international politics. They also hold both formal and informal meetings on the sidelines of UN events. As a whole, the event is a prominent part of the UN’s calendar and it helps to shape international perceptions about countries and their foreign policies.

For outside observers, the General Debate is useful because it brings many national positions into one public sequence. The speeches are non-binding public statements that show how governments describe their priorities, grievances and diplomatic identity before a worldwide audience. That makes the week both symbolic and practical. Leaders perform sovereignty on the same stage, and officials can compare messages, arrange meetings and test how other delegations react. The gathering is often covered like a summit, even though its formal product is usually a sequence of statements rather than a negotiated text. A short speech can therefore matter even when it does not change any formal decision.

In 2026, the 81st session of the General Assembly is scheduled to open on September 8, and the General Debate is scheduled to open on September 22. Khalilur Rahman of Bangladesh was elected President of the 81st session on June 2, 2026. His theme for the session is:

Restoring Trust, Managing Transformation: A United Nations that Delivers for All

That theme gives the session a broad frame, but each member still uses its own statement to emphasize national concerns. Some leaders focus on security crises. Others place more weight on development, health, climate or institutional reform. The result is a diplomatic snapshot rather than a single conversation with a single answer. Many governments speak from the same podium, under the same rules, while presenting different versions of what the international agenda should be.

What happens in the General Debate?

Despite what its name suggests, the General Debate is not an actual debate between nations. Each country has the right to send a high-level representative to the UN General Assembly Hall. The Holy See, the State of Palestine and the European Union are invited to send representatives as well. These high-level leaders deliver speeches about themes that matter the most to them. Meanwhile, diplomats and lower-level officials watch as the event unfolds.

The absence of direct debate changes the tone of the event. Delegations speak one after another rather than questioning each other in real time, so the main instrument is the prepared statement. A government can praise partners or criticize rivals. It can also defend its own conduct or ask for international attention. Usually, it does so through a speech addressed to the Assembly as a whole. The format gives every member visibility while avoiding the disorder that could follow if nearly two hundred delegations tried to argue from the floor at once.

Since there are 193 members in the UN, representatives are asked to keep their declarations short — up to 15 minutes. However, this limit is not enforced. On average, speeches have lasted about 35 minutes. In some cases, they may last more than one hour. Currently, the former Cuban president Fidel Castro holds the record of having spoken for the longest time, for 4.5 hours.

The time limit is therefore more of a discipline than an absolute rule. A concise speech lets more delegations be heard on the same day, while a very long speech can become a diplomatic signal in itself. Leaders may use extra time to develop a grievance, answer criticism or make the address feel historic. The cost is that the schedule becomes harder to manage, especially when many heads of state and government are expected to speak during the same high-level week.

Because every delegation knows it will get a turn, the time rule also shapes expectations before leaders arrive in New York. Officials have to decide which points belong in the main speech and which can be left for bilateral meetings, press remarks or later rights of reply. In practice, the short formal slot pushes governments to compress broad foreign-policy positions into a few themes that can be heard by many audiences at once. The discipline therefore affects not only the length of the speech, but also how a country chooses to rank its concerns.

In general, countries have two main ways to show displeasure with a speech:

• Their representatives can stage a walkout, by getting up and leaving the Hall during a speech. Sometimes, walkouts are previously planned by many representatives — this is a sign of extreme dissatisfaction with the behavior of a certain country. For example, in 2011, several states boycotted an address by former Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, because he had launched a scathing critique of Western nations.
• Their representatives can ask for the right to reply. This request is transmitted to the Secretary-General and circulated to all members of the UN. All replies to speeches occur at the end of each day’s session, and they are usually made by lower-level officials. India and Pakistan, for instance, are used to exchanging replies every year.

These responses show that the General Debate still has interactive elements, even without ordinary back-and-forth debate. A walkout is visual and immediate, while a right of reply preserves the formal record of disagreement. Both tools allow a delegation to signal that it rejects a statement without interrupting the main speaking order. They also give smaller or directly affected states a way to respond when a speech names them or frames a dispute in a way they consider unacceptable.

What is the order of the speeches?

The Secretary-General of the UN is the first to speak, but his intervention is not considered a part of the General Debate. He presents his report on the work of the United Nations during the year and, usually, highlights the most important international issues. His remarks are supposed to be neutral, but he has some leeway to criticize countries for their actions or inactions.

This opening helps separate the institution’s voice from the voices of member states. The Secretary-General describes the global agenda and the UN’s work from an institutional position rather than from one national delegation. That distinction matters because the following speeches are political statements by governments. The institutional opening can frame the mood of the week, but each state still decides what to emphasize once the country-by-country sequence begins.

Next, the President of the General Assembly opens up the General Debate with a speech of their own. Their words are similarly ceremonial. In fact, the real power that they have is the ability to shape high-level thematic debates that happen alongside the main speeches and that produce non-binding recommendations.

The first country to address the UN General Assembly is always Brazil, by force of tradition, since 1955. There are many explanations for this:

• Because of its role as an Allied nation during the Second World War, Brazil should have been given a permanent seat at the UN Security Council. As this was not accepted, opening the debates was meant as a consolation prize.
• When the United Nations came into existence, no other country wanted to open the debate, while Brazil always volunteered itself.
• During the Cold War, Brazil was considered a neutral country and the world powers wanted it to speak first, so as to provide an independent assessment of international politics.

Whatever explanation is preferred, the practice has become part of the ceremony. Brazil’s position at the beginning gives the General Debate an immediately recognizable rhythm: institutional speakers first, Brazil next, and the host country after that. The pattern also shows how diplomatic procedure can preserve habits that began for practical, political or symbolic reasons and later became expected by delegates and observers.

The second country to speak is the United States, because it hosts the UN Headquarters and the UN General Assembly itself in New York.

All other speeches are ordered by the UN staff, based on the level of representation, states’ preferences and other criteria such as balance between the world’s geographic regions. One such criterion is avoiding to schedule in the same session speeches from countries that are engaged in international disputes.

The rest of the order is therefore administrative as well as political. Protocol officials must balance rank, timing, regional distribution and diplomatic sensitivities while keeping the programme workable. Heads of state and government normally receive more prominent scheduling than lower-ranking representatives, but preferences and practical constraints also matter. The aim is a speaking order that allows the event to proceed with as little avoidable friction as possible. That practical goal matters because schedule disputes can distract from the speeches themselves. This is why the order can become part of diplomatic interpretation: a prominent slot can draw attention, while an awkward grouping may create needless tension.

How do countries sit in the General Assembly Hall?

In general, countries are seated according to English alphabetical order, irrespective of the rank of the head of the delegation. This procedure is laid down by the Resolution 71/323 of the General Assembly.

Seating is another example of how the Assembly tries to combine equality with order. The alphabetical rule prevents the hall from being arranged by power or diplomatic prestige. Every delegation receives a place through a neutral procedure, even though the representatives in the room differ greatly in rank and influence. Political differences remain, but the formal meeting has a predictable layout that all members can understand in advance.

However, every year, the Secretary-General of the UN draws a lot from a box containing the names of all members. This randomly-selected country occupies the first seat of the hall: at the right end of the front row, as seen from the podium.

Another exception is made for delegations that request wheelchair-accessible seating. In this case, a country’s delegation will be moved to one of those special seats, and all other delegations will be moved by one seat.

What happens on the sidelines of the event?

Every year, hundreds of foreign dignitaries come to New York. They take advantage of physical proximity to conduct bilateral and multilateral meetings on the margins of the General Assembly. The original BRICS countries, for instance, launched their group at the 61st Session of the General Assembly.

These meetings are one reason the week matters beyond the speeches. When many leaders and ministers are already in the same city, diplomacy becomes faster and more concentrated than usual. A government can schedule a bilateral conversation, join a small-group meeting, speak to regional partners and attend a thematic event without organizing separate trips for each contact. Some meetings are public and ceremonial, while others are quieter attempts to manage disputes, prepare future negotiations or keep communication channels open.

That concentration also changes what the public speeches can do. A leader may use the podium to state a principle, then use meetings on the margins to test whether partners are willing to act on it. Conversely, a private conversation may explain why a public speech emphasizes one issue and avoids another. The General Debate therefore works as a public stage and as a scheduling anchor for quieter diplomatic contact. The two functions reinforce each other: visibility gives meetings political weight, while meetings give speeches practical context.

There are also meetings with civil society representatives, such as when U.S. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken met with LGBTQI+ activists.

The exact agenda changes every year. In 2026, the high-level week will coincide with the opening stretch of the 81st session, when delegations are expected to combine public speeches with meetings on security, development, health and institutional reform.

Conclusion

The annual UN debate is a significant event in international relations. It attracts leaders from nearly every corner of the globe. It also offers nations a platform to present their perspectives on both national interests and collective challenges. Its value lies less in binding decisions than in visibility, agenda-setting and the chance for governments to meet in the same place at the same time. For readers, it is best understood as a recurring map of positions rather than a lawmaking session.