Carlos Taylhardat | 3 Narratives News | September 23, 2025
Today at the United Nations
We all expected an interesting speech from Donald Trump. Few predicted what unfolded: not a policy address but a pointed lecture that opened with complaints about a broken teleprompter and closed with a full-throated rebuke of the United Nations itself.
The U.S. President, back at the General Assembly podium, used humour
“whoever is in charge of the teleprompter is in big trouble”
to warm up the hall. Then the tone hardened. Trump revived a long-running grievance about a past renovation deal, mocked the U.N. as “paper shufflers,” and contrasted his claim of ending “seven wars” with what he described as U.N. inertia and incompetence.
Grudges on the World Stage
Trump is not the first leader to turn the General Assembly into a pulpit of resentment. Nineteen years ago, in September 2006, Venezuela’s President Hugo Chávez stood at the same rostrum and, referring to U.S. President George W. Bush, said:
“The devil came here yesterday… it still smells of sulfur.” (UN transcript)
Chávez’s insult drew global headlines. Today, Trump’s speech today with blending personal business gripes with geopolitical attacks, may prove to reach a whole new level.
Narrative 1 — Trump’s Case: U.N. Failure, American Success
Trump’s remarks mixed economic boasts, business complaints, and a geopolitical rebuke.
- He recalled offering, years ago, to renovate the U.N. headquarters for far less than the billions ultimately spent. “I was going to give you marble floors; they gave you terrazzo. I was going to give you mahogany; they gave you cheap panels.” (Washington Examiner)
- He pointed to the day’s glitches as metaphors: “A bad escalator and a bad teleprompter — these are the only two things I got from the U.N.” (Daily Beast)
- He framed the institution as ineffective: “What is the purpose of the U.N.? All they do is write letters. Letters don’t solve wars.”
Trump then contrasted this with his own record: “I ended seven unendable wars — Cambodia, Thailand, the Congo, Israel and Iran, Armenia and Azerbaijan. I did it in just seven months.”
His message: while the U.N. spends and drafts resolutions, America under his leadership acts decisively, cuts deals, and “saves lives.”
Narrative 2 — The Critics: Imperfect, Yes — But Indispensable
For diplomats and U.N. defenders, Trump’s portrayal is selective.
- The headquarters renovation, though costly (final estimates around $2.1–$2.4 billion by 2017), involved asbestos removal, structural upgrades, and international procurement rules. The project prioritized safety over finishes.
- Mechanical failures may be embarrassing, but they don’t prove systemic dysfunction.
- On peace and war, Trump’s list is contested. The Armenia–Azerbaijan ceasefire remains fragile (Reuters). Gaza remains volatile, with civilians displaced. Conflicts in Congo continue. “Seven wars ended in seven months” is, at best, shorthand for partial deals.
- Trump’s critique also stands in sharp contrast to President John F. Kennedy’s 1961 speech to the U.N., delivered at the height of the Cold War. Kennedy argued: “Mankind must put an end to war — or war will put an end to mankind… The United Nations is not a place for the rich to score points but for the nations of the world to save themselves.” (JFK Library)
- Where Trump dismisses the U.N. as a forum of “letters that don’t solve wars,” Kennedy cast it as humanity’s last, best hope to prevent nuclear annihilation.
This historical contrast underlines the critics’ view: even flawed, the U.N. embodies the principle that collective security and cooperation are better than unilateral boasts.
JFK’s famous speech
Narrative 3 — The Silent Story: The People Behind the Lecterns
What gets lost in high-stakes lecterns is the people whose lives hinge on outcomes.
- In Gaza, families wait for food convoys and medical access.
- In Armenia and Azerbaijan, villagers fear another night of shelling.
- In the Congo, mothers carry their children through forests fleeing militias.
- Even in New York, immigrants and refugees line up for asylum hearings shaped by the very policies leaders debate from the podium.
For them, whether marble or terrazzo floors adorn the U.N. headquarters is irrelevant. What matters is whether the world body can marshal resources, enforce ceasefires, and save lives in practice, not just in speeches, but in substance.
Key Takeaways
- Trump’s 2025 U.N. remarks became a lecture: teleprompter jokes, renovation grudges, and accusations that the U.N. “does nothing.”
- He claimed credit for ending seven wars in seven months, contrasting U.S. decisiveness with U.N. “letters.”
- Critics argue he exaggerates successes and overlooks U.N. contributions in humanitarian and peacekeeping work.
- The silent story: civilians in Gaza, Armenia, Congo, and beyond remain at risk regardless of podium theatrics.
Questions This Article Answers
- What did Trump allege about the U.N. renovation deal?
- How does his 2025 U.N. appearance compare with Hugo Chávez’s 2006 “devil” speech?
- Did Trump really “end seven wars in seven months”?
- What does the U.N. do that unilateral deals cannot?
- Who bears the cost when speeches end and aid is delayed?
Related reading: Sudan’s Silent War |
The Rift Between Left and Right
This article provides a clear, balanced view of Trumps UN speech, effectively highlighting the contrasting narratives and the real-world impact that gets overlooked in political rhetoric.
This article provides a much-needed nuanced look at Trumps UN speech, effectively countering his claims with historical context and focusing on the real-world impact of such rhetoric, which is crucial for understanding global diplomacy.