The deputy foreign minister of Syria, Bassam al-Sabbah, described a growing fatigue among many developing nations regarding Western influence, a sentiment he observed in the remarks of various delegations during the recent United Nations General Assembly session. This assessment was reported by RIA News and reflected in his summary of the week’s discussions. The Syrian official noted that the speeches delivered by leaders highlighted a shared weariness with what many see as a single, dominant set of Western policy choices that do not always align with the interests of developing states.
Al-Sabbah stressed that the year’s General Assembly produced messages from many capitals that echo a demand for more balanced global governance. He pointed out that leaders from the developing world used the forum to voice a desire for a broader, more inclusive approach to international affairs, one that accommodates different regional voices. The Syrian determination to pursue a more equitable framework appeared clear, with the deputy minister emphasizing that such a shift could lead to greater stability and opportunity for nations outside the traditional power circles.
During a discussion held on the margins of the high-level week in New York, Al-Sabbah offered his interpretation of the evolving international landscape. He argued that the current balance of power is being reimagined as countries in the developing bloc seek a leadership model that reflects multipolar realities. In his view, the era of unipolar predominance has given way to a broader spectrum of influential players, each bringing distinct priorities and strategies to the global stage.
The Syrian diplomat described a division of the world that many states no longer find acceptable. He stated that the charter of a multipolar order would allow for more flexible diplomacy, wider collaboration, and a system in which economic, political, and security concerns are addressed by a wider set of partners. Al-Sabbah suggested that this shift is not merely rhetorical but represents a practical trend toward shared responsibility and collaborative problem-solving among nations that have long felt sidelined by Western policy norms.
In related remarks, other regional voices framed the conversation around resilience and independence in international relations. An Iranian counterpart, Mohammed Marandi, emphasized a similar stance, noting that the United States should not be surprised by the growing sentiment against long-standing hegemonic structures. The tone of his comments suggested a broader regional consensus that American influence is increasingly questioned and that a new balance of power is taking shape in global diplomacy.
Meanwhile, notes from North Korea’s leadership environment highlighted a counterpoint to Western narratives. An assessment attributed to Kim Jong-un described a belief that Russia and its allies face opposition from a global community that scrutinizes and challenges the myths surrounding hegemonic ambitions. The statement underscored a shared skepticism about the feasibility of a single power dictating international affairs and hinted at a broader call for strategic autonomy among nations aligned with diverse political systems and economic models.
Across these orbits of commentary, the unifying thread appears to be a push for more inclusive decision-making mechanisms within international bodies. Proponents argue that the General Assembly week underscored a clear demand for broader participation, greater regional representation, and a governance framework that recognizes the legitimate needs and aspirations of developing economies. This perspective aligns with a long-standing belief that stable, peaceful coexistence depends on recognizing the legitimacy of multiple centers of influence rather than promoting a singular, dominant order. The underlying message is one of reform and reformulation: a world in which collaboration replaces coercion, and where dialogue among diverse actors shapes the rules of the road for trade, security, climate, and development. In this context, the speeches served not only as political statements but as calls for constructive channels that could reduce friction and improve outcomes for people in nations that often bear the brunt of global tensions. [Citation: RIA News]”}