NEW YORK, United States – Argentine President Javier Milei criticised the United Nations from its own General Assembly podium on Wednesday, calling the institution a “useless organization” and accusing international officials of abandoning the principles behind the UN’s creation.
Milei delivered the remarks during the 81st session of the General Assembly, his third address to the annual gathering as Argentina’s president. He framed his speech around three themes. He questioned areas where the UN failed to fulfil its original mission, criticised policies he believes exceeded its mandate, and challenged emerging international efforts to regulate artificial intelligence. The Argentine presidency published the full address after his appearance in New York.
Milei said the UN’s founding commitments to international law, national sovereignty, human dignity and peaceful conflict resolution deserved respect. He then argued the institution had moved away from those commitments.
Milei described the UN as a “useless organization whose only purpose is to sustain a caste of fatally arrogant parasites masquerading as well-intentioned bureaucrats.”
His attack formed part of a wider argument about institutional authority. Milei said resolutions lose value when governments face no consequences for ignoring them. He used Argentina’s sovereignty dispute with Britain over the Falkland Islands, known in Argentina as the Malvinas, as his main example.
“There’s no shortage of words or resolutions. What is lacking is consequences,” Milei said. He argued an institution loses authority when its declarations fail to influence events on the ground.
Argentina and Britain fought a war over the islands in 1982. Britain retained control after the conflict. Argentina continues to claim sovereignty, while the islands remain a largely self-governing British Overseas Territory. Milei renewed Argentina’s call for negotiations with London and linked the dispute to UN credibility.
Milei also attacked the UN system over human rights and Israel. He accused bodies associated with the organization of tolerating authoritarian governments while member states repeatedly passed measures critical of Israel. He said Argentina had made a clear geopolitical choice to align closely with the United States and Israel.
His government has strengthened ties with Israel and has condemned Iranian attacks against the country. Milei also referred to the 1992 bombing of the Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires and the 1994 attack on the AMIA Jewish community centre. Argentina has long sought accountability over both attacks.
The president then moved to migration, environmental policy, gender policy and economic regulation. He accused international institutions of building a large bureaucracy with growing influence over domestic choices. Milei specifically attacked what he described as uncontrolled immigration and environmental extremism.
Those remarks reflect his libertarian political programme at home. Since taking office in December 2023, Milei has pursued deregulation, public spending cuts and a smaller role for the state. His foreign policy has also placed stronger emphasis on relations with Washington and Israel.
Milei then turned to the COVID-19 pandemic. He accused institutions linked to the UN system of promoting lockdowns which damaged employment, education and access to medical care. He described the restrictions as a “global experiment in social control disguised as science.”
He went further and used the term “genocide” to describe consequences he attributes to forced lockdown policies. The accusation represents Milei’s political assessment, rather than an established legal finding. International law defines genocide through specific acts combined with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group.
Argentina announced its withdrawal from the World Health Organization in February 2025. Milei’s government said pandemic policy and concerns over national sovereignty drove the decision. The presidential office accused the WHO of backing lengthy lockdowns and argued international health institutions had exceeded their proper authority.
The speech also targeted international efforts surrounding artificial intelligence. Milei argued governments should avoid preventive regulation and said Argentina wants to attract investment through a freer regulatory model. He linked technological development to productivity and argued excessive state control risks slowing innovation.
The wider UN leadership has acknowledged serious institutional weaknesses while defending multilateral cooperation. General Assembly President Khalilur Rahman used Africa’s place in the Security Council to illustrate the reform challenge.
“Africa needs to be at the table, not on the menu,” Rahman told delegates two days before Milei’s speech. He argued Africa’s continued underrepresentation on the Security Council damages the organization’s credibility and called for deeper institutional reform.
Rahman’s position offers a different response to the same problem Milei raised. Rahman argues for reform within the UN system, while Milei argues the organization has repeatedly exceeded its proper role and failed in core areas.
Outgoing General Assembly President Annalena Baerbock made a similar reform argument earlier this month. “Without deep reform, this Organization will not last,” Baerbock told the Assembly. She urged member states to reduce overlapping structures and mandates. Her remarks recognised bureaucratic problems without accepting Milei’s broader rejection of the institution’s role.
For African governments, parts of the debate carry direct relevance. Many African states have long pressed for permanent representation on the Security Council. African leaders have also criticised unequal influence inside global financial and political institutions. Milei approaches institutional reform from a libertarian and sovereignty-focused position, while many African governments seek greater representation and decision-making weight inside multilateral structures.
You therefore see two separate arguments meeting at one point. One asks whether the UN exercises too much authority in domestic policy. The other asks whether the UN gives enough authority to countries and regions excluded from its strongest decision-making bodies.
Milei closed by saying Argentina would continue participating in multilateral forums while rejecting political subordination. He presented national sovereignty, free enterprise and technological freedom as central principles for his government.
The UN debate will continue long after Milei leaves New York. Secretary-General António Guterres has also called for institutional reform as wars, inequality, climate pressures and rapid AI development strain existing global arrangements. His September 22 address called for stronger international cooperation while pressing governments to reform institutions which no longer reflect present geopolitical realities.
Milei’s speech placed a sharper question before delegates. For him, the issue concerns consequences, authority and limits. For UN leaders seeking reform, the issue concerns whether member states will rebuild trust through results. The clash does not settle the argument. The dispute now sits directly before governments whose votes, funding and political choices determine how much authority the United Nations retains.
