Agenda item 5: discussions on substantive issues contained inparagraph 1 of General Assembly resolution 75/240 (continued)/ part 6

Summary

The 8th meeting of the 11th Substantive Session of the Open-Ended Working Group (OEWG) on Security of and in the Use of ICTs concluded with the consensus adoption of a draft final report establishing a permanent global mechanism for cybersecurity discussions. Chair Ambassador Gafoor of Singapore emphasized that the Conference Room Paper (CRP) represented a “finely balanced package” requiring surgical rather than extensive changes, and urged delegates to avoid seeking perfection at the expense of achieving consensus. He warned that any attempts to reopen negotiations could upset the delicate balance and derail the transition to a single-track permanent mechanism.

Multiple delegations expressed support for the final report while noting areas of disappointment. India praised the establishment of the Global ICT Security Cooperation and Capacity Building Portal as a milestone for developing countries. The Arab Group, represented by Tunisia, expressed concerns about the removal of dedicated sections on international law and insufficient provisions for capacity building, but joined the consensus. Several Pacific Island nations, including Tonga and Vanuatu, highlighted how the process had been transformative for small island developing states and emphasized the importance of inclusive participation.

The United States expressed dissociation from certain paragraphs related to gender references and Sustainable Development Goals, while Russia and other like-minded countries voiced disappointment about the balance of implementation versus development of new norms. Many delegations specifically thanked the Women in International Security and Cyberspace Fellowship for enabling greater female participation, with Australia noting that women now make approximately 53% of interventions compared to one-third at the process’s beginning.

The Chair concluded by emphasizing that this represents a victory for multilateralism and the United Nations, establishing the foundation for a Global Mechanism that will begin operations with an organizational session by March 2026. He urged delegations to support a simple enabling resolution in the First Committee and to maintain the single-track approach moving forward.

Keypoints

## Major Discussion Points:

– **Adoption of the Final Report and Transition to Permanent Mechanism**: The primary focus was adopting the Conference Room Paper (CRP) containing the draft final report by consensus, establishing a single-track permanent mechanism for ongoing institutional dialogue on responsible state behavior in cyberspace under UN auspices.

– **Balancing Act and Compromise**: The Chair emphasized that the CRP represented a “very finely balanced package” requiring surgical amendments rather than extensive changes, with delegations needing to show flexibility and avoid letting “the search for perfection be the enemy of the good.”

– **Capacity Building and Inclusion**: Strong emphasis on capacity building for developing countries, particularly small island developing states, including the establishment of thematic groups and recognition of programs like the Women in International Security and Cyberspace Fellowship that enhanced participation.

– **International Law Concerns**: Several delegations, particularly from the Arab Group and others, expressed disappointment about the removal of dedicated sections on international law application in cyberspace, especially regarding international humanitarian law, while acknowledging the need for consensus.

– **Stakeholder Participation and Governance**: Discussion of modalities for non-governmental stakeholder participation in the future mechanism, with emphasis on maintaining the intergovernmental nature while allowing consultative participation under specific procedures.

## Overall Purpose:

The discussion aimed to conclude a five-year Open-Ended Working Group process by adopting a final report that would establish a permanent UN mechanism for ongoing dialogue on cybersecurity and responsible state behavior in cyberspace, ensuring a smooth transition from the current working group to a single-track future mechanism.

## Overall Tone:

The tone began formal and cautious, with the Chair setting expectations about the delicate balance required for consensus. As delegations expressed support for the document despite individual reservations, the atmosphere became increasingly positive and celebratory. The discussion concluded on a highly appreciative and emotional note, with extensive gratitude expressed toward the Chair and his team, reflecting relief at achieving consensus and pride in the multilateral accomplishment. The final portions were marked by warmth, humor, and genuine camaraderie among the participants.

Speakers

**Speakers from the provided list:**

– **Chair** – Ambassador Burhan Gafoor of Singapore, Chair of the Open-Ended Working Group on Security of and in the Use of ICTs

– **India** – Delegation representative

– **Vanuatu** – Delegation representative

– **Tunisia** – Speaking on behalf of the Arab group

– **Tonga** – Speaking on behalf of the Pacific Island Forum member states with a presence in the United Nations

– **Venezuela** – Delegation representative, aligning with Nicaragua’s statement on behalf of like-minded countries

– **El Salvador** – Delegation representative

– **Islamic Republic of Iran** – Delegation representative, aligning with the LMG Group statement

– **Mauritius** – Delegation representative

– **Israel** – Delegation representative

– **Cuba** – Delegation representative

– **Republic of Korea** – Delegation representative

– **Egypt** – Delegation representative, aligning with Arab group and African group statements

– **China** – Delegation representative

– **Argentina** – Delegation representative

– **European Union** – Speaking on behalf of EU member states

– **Mozambique** – Delegation representative

– **Brazil** – Delegation representative

– **United Kingdom** – Delegation representative

– **Portugal** – Delegation representative

– **Russian Federation** – Delegation representative

– **United States** – Delegation representative

– **Switzerland** – Delegation representative

– **Canada** – Delegation representative

– **Nicaragua** – Speaking on behalf of like-minded states (Belarus, Venezuela, China, Cuba, Eritrea, Iran, Niger, Russian Federation, Sudan, Zimbabwe, and Nicaragua)

– **Malaysia** – Speaking on behalf of ASEAN

– **Australia** – Delegation representative, aligning with Pacific Islands Forum Statement

– **Malawi** – Delegation representative

– **Ghana** – Delegation representative

– **Colombia** – Delegation representative

– **Fiji** – Speaking on behalf of a cross-regional group and in national capacity

– **France** – Delegation representative, aligning with EU statement

– **Pakistan** – Delegation representative

– **Algeria** – Delegation representative, aligning with Arab group and African group statements

– **New Zealand** – Delegation representative

– **Ireland** – Delegation representative, aligning with EU statement

– **Germany** – Delegation representative, aligning with EU statement

– **Greece** – Delegation representative, aligning with EU statement

– **Albania** – Delegation representative

– **Papua New Guinea** – Delegation representative, aligning with Pacific Island Forum statement

– **Sierra Leone** – Delegation representative

**Additional speakers:**

– **Philippines** – Delegation representative, aligning with ASEAN statement (spoke under Malaysia nameplate but identified as Philippines)

# Comprehensive Report: 8th Meeting of the 11th Substantive Session of the Open-Ended Working Group on Security of and in the Use of ICTs

## Executive Summary

The 8th meeting of the 11th Substantive Session of the Open-Ended Working Group (OEWG) on Security of and in the Use of ICTs concluded with the consensus adoption of a draft final report (document A.AC.292.2025.CRP.1), establishing a permanent global mechanism for cybersecurity discussions under United Nations auspices. Chair Ambassador Burhan Gafoor of Singapore emphasized that the Conference Room Paper (CRP) represented a “finely balanced package” requiring only surgical amendments rather than extensive changes, warning that further amendments could create “the risk of not being able to cross the finish line.”

All delegations ultimately joined consensus despite expressing various reservations about specific provisions. The outcome consolidates work dating back to 1998 and establishes the foundation for ongoing institutional dialogue on responsible state behaviour in cyberspace, with an organizational session to be held no later than March 2026.

## Opening Framework and Chair’s Guidance

Ambassador Gafoor opened the session by establishing clear parameters for the discussion, describing the CRP as walking “a very fine line, almost a tight rope” that required delegates to show flexibility and avoid “making the search for perfection the enemy of the good.” He noted that in multilateral negotiations, there would inevitably be “disappointment, displeasure, dissatisfaction, and even possibly frustration.”

The Chair contextualized the document as “a crystallisation of efforts not just this week, not just this past few months, not just these past few years, but a consolidation of decades of work starting with previous OEWGs and GGE processes.” He emphasized that any further amendments could “upset the apple cart” and derail the transition to a single-track permanent mechanism.

The Chair explained the evolution of regular institutional dialogue discussions from 2022 to 2025, noting that the first annual progress report in 2022 made an “in-principle decision to establish a global POC directory,” which was subsequently launched in May 2024.

## Universal Consensus Despite Reservations

### Delegation Positions

Tunisia, speaking on behalf of the Arab Group, established the pattern by expressing “certain reservations on the final form of the report” whilst choosing to “join the consensus on the CRP paper.” This approach was followed by numerous other delegations.

India praised the establishment of the Global ICT Security Cooperation and Capacity Building Portal as “a milestone for developing countries” whilst acknowledging that “many additional elements could have been incorporated.” China described the CRP as a “finely balanced package” despite noting areas where improvements could have been made.

The European Union welcomed the “balanced approach and consensus achievement” whilst noting they “would have preferred more ambitious language in certain areas.” Brazil expressed that whilst they “would have liked a higher level of ambition in some sections,” they recognized “a fair and balanced document.”

Several Pacific Island nations, including Tonga speaking on behalf of the Pacific Island Forum member states, highlighted the transformative nature of the process for small island developing states. Vanuatu emphasized the importance of inclusive participation, thanking the Chair for showing “respect to small island developing states” regardless of their size or resources.

## Major Areas of Disagreement

### International Law Provisions

The most significant area of contention centered on international law provisions and their application to cyberspace. Tunisia, representing the Arab Group, expressed particular concern about “the fact that the section reserved for international law and cyberspace was removed,” describing this as exacerbating “concerns by certain states regarding the use of ICTs.” The delegation noted “clear violations of IHL in the Middle East with the use of ICTs” and requested that “the Chair of the Mechanism hold a conference on the application of international law.”

Egypt, aligning with both Arab Group and African Group statements, expressed disappointment about “how international law compliance will be approached” under the new mechanism. Algeria voiced concern about “the removal of dedicated space for international law discussion,” whilst Canada “profoundly regretted that the final report fails to capture the substantive convergence on international law that became clear in the room.”

Australia noted disappointment that “the international law chapter does not capture all the progress made and emerging convergence reached over almost five years,” whilst Ireland regretted the “insufficient reflection of international law discussions.”

In contrast, the Russian Federation explicitly rejected “automatic and unconditional application of international law to the digital sphere,” arguing instead for “development of universal convention on international information security.”

### Gender References and Terminology

A notable disagreement emerged regarding gender-related language in the document. The United States expressed disappointment that “the report retains references to gender and the Sustainable Development Goals,” with the delegation formally dissociating from specific paragraphs containing these references.

Argentina provided a restrictive interpretation, stating that they “understand the word gender in the framework of international law as referring to two sexes, male and female, in accordance with the Rome Statute 7.3.” This contrasted with Fiji’s position, which “welcomed the references to gender included in the final report” and highlighted “the valuable role of the Women in International Security and Cyberspace Fellowship.”

### Capacity Building Mechanisms

Developing countries expressed significant disappointment with capacity building provisions. Tunisia noted “the weakness of the section on capacity building,” particularly the inability “to set up a voluntary fund or a fellowship programme.” Algeria maintained that “the content and recommendations regarding capacity building are significantly lower than expectations,” arguing that “without concrete steps to establish a UN-led capacity building vehicle with adequate resources, the discussions will not realise their desired potential.”

The Russian Federation, however, welcomed “the consensus decision of the OEWG to create a thematic group on capacity building under the Global Mechanism” and noted the launch of the Global POC directory in May 2024.

## Stakeholder Participation and Governance

Portugal expressed disappointment that “Member States were not able to agree on more equitable and transparent future modalities for selection of non-governmental interested parties.” This contrasted with Nicaragua’s position, speaking on behalf of like-minded states, which welcomed that “accredited stakeholders will participate on a non-objection basis with solely consultative status, maintaining the strictly intergovernmental nature.”

The Russian Federation viewed “the participation of non-state actors in the activities of the OEWG as of limited utility when it comes to conflict settlement and building up technical capacity.”

## Women’s Participation and Gender Inclusion

Despite disagreements over gender language, there was broad appreciation for the Women in International Security and Cyberspace Fellowship. Tonga expressed “appreciation for Women in International Security and Cyber Fellowship,” whilst Ghana thanked the programme for “enabling meaningful participation.” Mozambique noted how the fellowship had enabled “meaningful participation” from women delegates.

Australia provided empirical evidence of the programme’s impact, noting that “when the OEWG began… about one third of interventions were made by women. And since then, we’ve been tracking a very encouraging trend… it is 55%. It was 55% in February, and it’s 53% at this session.”

Colombia celebrated “the leadership and meaningful participation of women in the working group,” whilst Fiji highlighted how the fellowship had helped build “a global community of cyber practitioners.”

## Multilateralism and UN Framework

Multiple delegations emphasized that the successful consensus outcome represented a victory for multilateralism. China noted that “given the current geopolitical landscape, which is filled with challenges, hot-spot conflicts in regions are ongoing, and in countries we see that some countries are not so keen on the concept of multilateralism… The success of our meeting is of a special, great significance.”

India recognized the “achievement as testament to multilateral dialogue value,” whilst Brazil appreciated the “success demonstrating multilateralism effectiveness.” Pakistan welcomed the “consensus outcome as historic milestone,” and Albania viewed the “consensus as victory for multilateralism.”

## Specific National Positions and Additional Reservations

The United States not only dissociated from gender references but also opposed Sustainable Development Goals references, arguing that “the Sustainable Development Goals advance a programme of soft global governance that is inconsistent with U.S. sovereignty.”

Argentina recalled that “Agenda 2030 is not legally binding and that each state in exercise of their sovereignty has the right to interpret and pursue freely.”

Cuba expressed concern about “the neutrality of technologies notion in paragraph 26,” whilst the Islamic Republic of Iran remained concerned that “the final report does not fully reflect the entire range of the threat landscape,” particularly regarding “private sector responsibilities and platforms with extraterritorial impact.”

Nicaragua, speaking on behalf of like-minded states including Belarus, Venezuela, China, Cuba, Eritrea, Iran, Niger, Russian Federation, Sudan, and Zimbabwe, emphasized “commitment to peaceful use of ICTs and prevention of arms race” whilst supporting “development of universal convention on international information security.”

## Future Mechanism Structure and Transition

Despite substantive disagreements, there was consensus on the structural aspects of the future global mechanism. The Islamic Republic of Iran emphasized “consensus-based decision-making in global mechanism,” whilst Nicaragua supported the “single-track, state-led, consensus-based global mechanism.”

France expressed “readiness to support operationalisation through First Committee resolution,” and Brazil committed to “constructive engagement in future mechanism.”

The Chair appealed for “just one single resolution on ICT security in the First Committee, not multiple resolutions,” seeking to maintain the single-track approach. He suggested that the Global Mechanism could be nicknamed “GMAC” and emphasized that the organizational session must be held “no later than March next year” (2026).

## Procedural Outcomes and Next Steps

The session concluded with the formal adoption of the final report contained in document A.AC.292.2025.CRP.1 by consensus, along with adoption of the procedural report (A-AC-292-2025-L1) authorizing the Chair to finalize it. The establishment of the Global Mechanism as a permanent single-track process was confirmed.

Singapore committed to presenting a simple enabling resolution in the First Committee to endorse the final report. The future mechanism will include dedicated thematic groups on capacity building and cross-cutting working groups, along with the establishment of the Global ICT Security Cooperation and Capacity Building Portal.

Delegations were given the option to submit written statements within three weeks to be compiled by the Secretariat.

## Acknowledgments and Closing

The Chair expressed gratitude to his team members by name: Dr. Gillian Goh, Matthew Wong, Clarice Lim, Dennis Scott, and intern Denise Chan. He also thanked UNODA staff including Catherine Priceman, Virginia Browning, Alexander Lomia, Natalia Uliana, and others for their support throughout the process.

The session concluded with arrangements for a family photo at 1 p.m. with the UN photographer, marking the end of this phase of the OEWG process and the beginning of preparations for the permanent Global Mechanism.

## Assessment

The consensus adoption represents a significant diplomatic outcome that demonstrates the possibility of multilateral cooperation in cybersecurity governance. While substantial disagreements remain on international law application, capacity building mechanisms, and stakeholder participation, the establishment of a permanent mechanism provides a foundation for continued dialogue on responsible state behaviour in cyberspace.

The successful transition from expert group discussions to inclusive multilateral processes, combined with measurable improvements in women’s participation, indicates positive evolution in international security diplomacy. The future Global Mechanism will inherit both the achievements and challenges of the OEWG process as it begins operations in 2026.

Chair: Distinguished Delegates, the 8th meeting of the 11th Substantive Session of the Open-Ended Working Group on Security of and in the Use of ICTs is now called to order. Distinguished Delegates, dear friends, we will continue our discussion under Agenda Item 5 to consider the Draft Final Report, which was issued overnight as Document A.AC.292.2025.CRP.1. Before I open the floor for comments on the document that was issued last night, please allow me to make some general remarks to set the context for our discussions today. First, I want to apologize for the fact that the CRP was made available much later than I had anticipated. My apologies for that. Secondly, the CRP is a very finely balanced package of elements that have been put together to create the balance necessary for us to cross the finish line. In preparing the conference room paper, I have walked a very fine line, almost a tight rope. I have not made extensive changes to the CRP, and indeed I had said yesterday that in looking at Ref. 2, we will not be able to make extensive changes but surgical amendments. and tweaks. That indeed has been my approach to looking at the CRP. But the few changes I have made in my assessment were needed to make us cross the finish line. I know that there were a range of requests for additional changes, amendments, additions as well as deletions yesterday. But I thought about them very carefully and decided to take a very surgical and strategic approach to preparing the CRP. Fundamentally, because the more we add, the more we lose the balance. And therefore, my approach had been very, very surgical and very, very strategic. And I hope that you will be able to appreciate the balance and the adjustments I have made in the context of the need to maintain the overall balance. I have often said before that balance like beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder. So it is my hope that you will be able to see the balance in the text. From your point of view, it is very clear that for each one of you, there will be a degree of disappointment, displeasure, dissatisfaction, and even possibly frustration that your views have not been accommodated. But in creating that overall balance, it is necessary to focus on what will get us across the finish line. So that is the reason why I have… been very, very surgical and strategic in making these amendments. Secondly, I want to say that it is not my intention to open the text in CRP for further changes or further negotiations, because my concern is that if we entertain the idea of additional adjustments, there will be requests for a range of adjustments which is bound to lead to upsetting the apple cart, so to speak. And because it’s a very finely balanced package, any requests for amendments will be met with a counter request for further amendments, whether they are additions, deletions, modifications. I’m certain of that. So I’d like to appeal to each one of you to resist the temptation to make further proposals or to make requests for further adjustments. I’d also like to urge each one of you to avoid making the search for perfection the enemy of the good. In my assessment, the package that is before us is a crystallization of efforts not just this week, not just this past few months, not just these past few years, but a consolidation of decades of work starting with previous OEWGs and GGE processes. But in this process, the report that we have is a crystallization of work that has been done over the years. And therefore, once again, I appeal to each one of you to look at the final report in the context of all previous annual progress reports that have been achieved. The first annual progress report, and some of you have been involved in the process, in this process from the beginning, in the first annual progress report, we made an in-principle decision to establish a global POC directory. That was in 2022. In the second annual progress report, we worked on elements and the framework for a global POC directory. And we also began the discussions on some guiding principles for regular institutional dialogue in 2023. So the discussions on regular institutional dialogue, annex one that we are focusing on today, has its roots from the beginning of this process. So in 2023, we started with guiding principles for regular institutional dialogue. And last year, we adopted annex C on modalities. And this year, annex one builds on the additional modalities needed. So this has been a three-year process as far as regular institutional dialogue is concerned. And these processes or discussions over the last few years has been, in my view, very inclusive because every one of you have had the opportunity to put your views across. And we are at a stage where we have to agree on some final additional elements. And therefore, we are very close to finalizing the architecture that will enable us to make a smooth and seamless transition to a single-track permanent mechanism. So I wanted to say that the final progress report, which now contains a CRP document, is not something that has just happened over the last few days. It is a distillation, crystallization of different points of view built over the last few years and put together in a very, very finely balanced package, which is why I believe that at this very final moment, any effort to put in additional elements has the risk of derailing the process that began many years ago, the process of building a smooth and seamless transition to a single-track future permanent mechanism. And I’m explaining the context so as to urge you to reflect on how far we have traversed as a group, as a community, and how far we have come in terms of building layers of understanding, building a degree of convergence on a set of issues that are reflected in the annual progress report and potentially in this final progress report. And that is why any further amendments or requests is going to create the risk of not being able to cross the finish line. So I’d like each one of you to reflect on that as well. The final thing I would say is that the CRP will open the door into the future for this process. I think we are on the threshold of crossing from one mechanism into the new one. But that step forward is not something that I can take. That step forward to cross the threshold from this mechanism to the next is your decision to make. And as to whether there will be consensus on the CRP is also in your hands now. I’ve done my utmost as chair of this process to listen to each one of you, to create a conducive environment where different viewpoints are expressed, and also to be always transparent and to be faithful to the mandate of this process. But the ultimate decision as to whether there is consensus lies in your hands. And I wanted you to be aware of this moment as we begin the discussions this morning. So my friends, with these comments, I’d like to open the floor now to see if there are any views or whether any delegations wish to express their views on the conference room paper which contains the draft final report. Thank you very much. I have a few speakers with us for the floor, so we’ll start with India, to be followed by Portugal.

India: Thank you, Chair. India wishes to place on record its deep appreciation for your exemplary leadership and the meticulous efforts of your team throughout the OEWG process. It is commendable that this long journey of more than five years of this OEWG and other previous mechanisms also, marked by consensus and cooperation, is now at the dawn of a new phase with the establishment of a permanent mechanism. The OEWG’s work in discussing the many crucial elements of the continuously evolving landscape of cyberspace stands as a testament to the value of multilateral dialogue and consensus. While noting that many additional elements could have been incorporated in the conference room paper, India recognises that, in the spirit of consensus, it is essential to agree on the common grounds at this stage. Further, the global mechanism will provide a permanent platform to deliberate on further elements as and when required. We underscore the importance of continuing the discussions on existing and potential threats, since several new and emerging threats like AI power tools will need closer coordination and discussions. if we are to stay ahead of the malicious actors. In a similar vein, we recognize the merit in continuing discussions and facilitating common understandings on the application of international law in cyberspace, as well as in exploring the possibilities of requirement of additional norms, should it be warranted in future. We are very pleased to note that capacity building has been accorded the prominence it deserves. The establishment of the Global ICT Security Cooperation and Capacity Building Portal is a milestone and a concrete outcome of this crucial OEWG process. It is an important step in bridging the digital divide and has been an important ask, particularly of the Global South countries. We reiterate that India stands ready to provide any support necessary to ensure its success. India aligns itself with the positive sentiments expressed by many delegations regarding dedication of a separate dedicated thematic group focused on ICT security capacity building. With these points in mind and in the interest of consensus, India has shown flexibility and is extending its support to the conference room paper, as we view it as a balanced and pragmatic document that advances international cooperation and strengthens trust among States. We emphasize that all decisions in the future permanent mechanism should continue to be based on consensus as articulated in the Third Annual Progress Report. India remains committed to constructive engagement and international cooperation in the evolving landscape of ICT security. We look forward to a positive conclusion of this process and a swift realization of the future permanent mechanism. Thank you, Chair.

Chair: Thank you very much, India, for your statement and for your support for the conference room paper. I give the floor now to Vanuatu, to be followed by Tunisia.

Vanuatu: Mr. Chair, good morning. On behalf of the Vanuatu delegation, I wish to extend to you, your team, and the Secretariat Our sincere thanks. Your respect for the views of small island-developing states like Vanuatu has been evident to us throughout these almost five years. Chair, on the other hand, we were saddened to see some references to cross-regional papers that we were supportive of were taken out in the latest draft. Those were important pieces of work where small island-developing states were contributing to the development of the framework for responsible state behaviour. On the other hand, we were pleased to see several of our comments on capacity building reflected in REF 2 and now in this CRP. And to us, this is the nature of diplomacy. None of us get everything we want. Mr. Chair, when you spoke about a fine balance, please rest assured that the Vanuatu delegation was listening. Mr. Chair, we are ready to adopt the CRP as presented. Thank you.

Chair: Thank you very much, Vanuatu, for your very important statement. It is indeed in the nature of diplomacy that each one of us need to show flexibility to give and take and to move forward. I appreciate your comments and your support for the CRP. Tunisia, you have the floor, please.

Tunisia: Mr. Chair, Mr. Bouran Dafur, the Republic of Tunisia is making this statement on behalf of the Arab group to explain its position on this document. document within the OEWG under Resolution 75240. At the outset, we thank you for your outstanding leadership of our work over the past five years, five years of serious work. We pay tribute to Singapore, a member of the Non-Aligned Group, which we are also members of, and we thank Singapore for its support within the OEWG in helping us arrive at the desired results. The Arab Group reiterates here its commitment to a transition toward a permanent mechanism, a comprehensive mechanism based on consensus within the UN. For us, this is a crucial goal that we are addressing in our meeting here, and it will lead us toward a global level of cybersecurity to tackle challenges, address risks, the risks that countries are increasingly facing in cyberspace, as well as in the use of ICTs. We commend these successes and your efforts, but would also like to make the following remarks. First of all, the fact that the section reserved for international law and cyberspace was removed exacerbates concerns by certain states regarding the use of ICTs. At a time when a common understanding is still far from certain with regard to the application of international law and its principles in cyberspace, we’re thinking about a particular international humanitarian law. We’ve seen clear violations of IHL in the Middle East with the use of ICTs. The Arab Group believes that the first working group and its extremely broad mandate does not allow for an in-depth discussion of this very important issue. That is the first thematic group. With regard to paragraphs 9 and 10 of the Annex, we will present proposals for amendments and we ask the Chair of the Mechanism to hold a conference on the application of international law. Secondly, the weakness of the section on capacity building, at a time when we are hoping that a thematic group dedicated to this issue, it was not possible to set up a voluntary fund or a fellowship program. We also note the lack of a mechanism that could support capacity building that would be adequately funded and predictable. For this to be possible, or at least part of it to be possible, we ought to support developing states. and help close the digital divide, but this remains only on paper. Thirdly, the Arab group is concerned about the significant changes to the international law section, which concerns very important principles supported by the Arab group, especially national sovereignty, as well as non-interference in domestic affairs of states, as well as non-use of force, respect for international humanitarian law, and the Orthomatic Group on International Law has been removed, and this exacerbates our concerns when it comes to international law being upheld under the permanent mechanism. Fourthly, the Arab group welcomes the fact that the intergovernmental nature of the mechanism has been maintained. If maintained, this mechanism would be led by states. The participation of stakeholders is also guaranteed, that is, stakeholders that have consultative status with ECOSOC under the no-objection procedure. In conclusion, the Arab group remains committed to constructive discussions within this forum to protect ourselves from pressing threats and challenges, we join the consensus on the CRP paper that contains the draft report, but we do express certain reservations on the final form of the report as well as complementary measures of the global mechanism. This might lead to the creation of a new process without taking into account the concerns that we have around strengthening peace and security.

Chair: Thank you very much Tunisia. Speaking on behalf of the Arab group, the statement is well noted and thank you very much also for indicating that your group is in a position to join consensus. Excellencies, dear friends, I am very heartened by the fact that you have taken into heed my message on the need to maintain the capital balance in the CRP. I see no further requests for the floor and it is my intention now to proceed to the adoption of the report as contained in document CRP 1, but I would like to assure you that you will all have an opportunity to make your statements after the adoption. May I take it that it is the wish of the Working Group to adopt the draft final report of the Open-Ended Working Group as contained in document AAC.292.2025.CRP 1 and to include it in the report of the Working Group. I see no objection. It is so decided. Thank you. Thank you very much for the applause. I think it was an applause of collective relief. Needless to say of collective joy and satisfaction, I hope, that with this adoption, ladies and gentlemen, we have taken a step into the future. Congratulations to you. So we will continue now with any delegation wishing to make statements. And after we have heard those who wish to make statements, we will move to the consideration of the draft procedural report because, as you know, there is a procedural report that is containing document L1. And then we’ll close the meeting. So I’d like to now open the floor for those delegations or groups of delegations wishing to make any statements. And once again, please be brief. we can be efficient in the use of our time. And I also wanted to highlight at this point that, yes, yeah, I also wish to highlight that you also have the option of sending in statements and explanation of position on the adoption of the final report. And these statements will be circulated in an information note by the Secretariat in the original language in which it has been submitted. And so you have the option of submitting any written statement, individually or as a group, three weeks after the meeting today, and the Secretariat will compile all statements in explanations of position on the adoption of the final report. And that is another option too, but I will not stop delegations from taking the floor at this point. The floor is now open. Tonga to be followed by Venezuela. Thank you.

Tonga: Thank you, Chair, and thank you for giving me the floor to speak first after this adoption, which is indeed an honor. On behalf of the Pacific Island Forum member states with a presence in the United Nations, I wish to express our deepest appreciation to you, Ambassador Gafoor, and to your entire team for your tireless work, unwavering commitment to multilateralism, and genuine passion you have brought to this process. The framework of responsible state behavior in cyberspace has been to this process, strengthened under your stewardship, and we thank you for guiding this group in such dedication, patience, and inclusivity. We also wish to acknowledge the tireless efforts of Matthew Wong in supporting your leadership. We also extend our sincere thanks to the Secretariat, and in particular to Ms. Catherine Priseman, whose steady support and wise advice and diligent work has been instrumental throughout these four years. The Secretariat’s professionalism has ensured that all states, regardless of size or resource, have had the opportunity to meaningfully participate in shaping this process. Chair, one of the most meaningful achievements of this OEWG has been the inclusion of small island developing states. For our region, this has not been a symbolic gesture, it has been practical and transformative. We thank all our development partners who have made this participation possible. In particular, we highlight the Women in International Security and Cyber Fellowship, which has not only expanded SIDS and women’s participation, but also built a global community of cyber practitioners. That community, diverse, capable and connected, is one of the enduring legacies of this group, and we look forward to seeing it continue to grow. The OEWG has not been just a venue for discussion, it has been a catalyst for action. In our region, this process has driven national and regional change in strengthening our cyber resilience. Together, we have articulated common regional positions on many core issues. The unity shaped through dialogue, grounded in shared values, will outlast this working group and guide us into the next phase. Thank you Chair, and thank you all colleagues in this room. In the Pacific, we are voyaging peoples. We understand that to cross great oceans, we must travel together, each person with a role to play, each voice guiding the course. As we move forward, we hope the future mechanism will be built in the same spirit, steady, collective, inclusive, and with all states aboard. I thank you.

Chair: Thank you very much, Tonga, for your statement. Venezuela, to be followed by El Salvador.

Venezuela: Chair, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela aligns itself with a statement that is to be delivered by the delegation of Nicaragua on behalf of a group of like-minded countries. Chair, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela wishes to take this opportunity to express our profound thanks for the work that, without a doubt, can be described as excellent and spectacular. Over the course of the last five years, the work of the chair of this OEWG has been exemplary. However, over the last two years, you have shown how the curve of learning of the chair’s team has been even more impressive. Mechanisms for decisions such as voting are easy to implement, but understanding and applying a genuine sense of consensus across more than 100 countries to produce a document that reflects some of the opinions of all of the participants, who themselves have very diverging and sometimes even contradictory views, is a truly impressive achievement. All delegations here have a great debt of gratitude to the efforts, patience, and the temperance of the chair of this group. Chair, you stand as an example of how the member states of this organization should truly promote multilateralism internationally. The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela naturally does not see that all of our considerations are included in the final report. But at the same time, Venezuela, together with the chair of this group, both of us, I think, understand the nature of consensus and that this is about multiple voices and ideas, all with the same right to be expressed and to be a part of international affairs. And for this reason, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela has joined the consensus in ratifying the latest version of the draft final report of the OEWG. We take this opportunity once again to congratulate you, Ambassador Gaffer, on your excellent work. Thank you very much.

Chair: Thank you very much, Venezuela. El Salvador, please, to be followed by Islamic Republic of Iran.

El Salvador: Thank you, Chair. El Salvador wishes to express our sincere thanks to you for your tireless efforts, Ambassador Buhanga, for. And we thank you for the commitment of your team in this process. We extend special recognition to Madam Clarice Ling, Mr. Matthew Wong, and Ms. Jinyang Goh, with whom we have worked very closely. We also extend our thanks to those, perhaps invisible people, who are part of this core team. We would like to extend special thanks to Catherine Preisman and Virginia Browning from the Science and Technology Unit of the Office of Disarmament Affairs for their valuable dedication throughout this whole process. As the women in cyber and the privately funded fund has allowed us to participate, and we are deeply grateful. for these opportunities. Chair, El Salvador has firmly supported this process from its very beginning. We know that this is not a perfect document. We had aspired to a more progressive vision as to how to progress to implementation of the framework on responsible behavior. Nevertheless, from the perspective of a small state, we have gained a great deal. In an area that historically has been dominated by actors with greatest technological power and greater political influence, small states such as El Salvador have actually been able to position critical priorities. And we have done so by driving the strengthening of cybernetic capabilities and the development of national resilience, as well as raising awareness about emerging threats and highlighting the debate as to how international law can be applied to cyberspace. We consider that we have contributed to balancing these deliberations and to guaranteeing that the framework reflects a broader range of perspectives and development realities. El Salvador will continue promoting inclusive dialogue, greater trust, and digital solidarity. We do this because, for us, these are not mere abstract principles. These are concrete necessities in order to achieve effective governance for the protection of critical infrastructure and in order to ensure that technologies contribute to international peace and security. I thank you, Chair.

Chair: Thank you very much, El Salvador. Islamic Republic of Iran, to be followed by Mauritius.

Islamic Republic of Iran: Thank you, Mr. Chair. My delegation would like to express its sincere appreciation to you, your team, and the Secretariat for your dedicated, tireless, and professional efforts throughout the OEWG process. Your commitment to fostering an inclusive, transparent, and constructive dialogue has been instrumental in guiding our collective work and advancing progress on this complex and vital agenda. We commend your leadership in building consensus among member states and in facilitating a smooth transition to the global mechanism. My delegation aligns itself with the joint statement of the LMG Group, which will be delivered later today. Mr. Chair, while we welcome and appreciate the positive improvements introduced throughout the various parts of the final report and acknowledge the progress made, my delegation remains concerned that it does not fully reflect the breadth of the Threat Landscape. My delegation remains concerned that it does not fully reflect the entire range of the Threat Landscape, as it overlooks several threats identified by a number of states during the OEWG deliberations, particularly those related to the responsibilities of the private sector and platforms with extraterritorial impact. To address this significant gap and ensure a more balanced and comprehensive representation of the OEWG mandate, my delegation put forward a compromise proposal to compile a list of threats identified by states throughout the OEWG process to serve as a valuable reference for the work of the global mechanism. We continue to strongly believe that our proposal offers a constructive way to address this substantive shortcoming in the threat section. In line with the final sentence of paragraph 14 of the final report, which acknowledges the need to continue addressing the diverse landscape of ICT threats in a manner that reflects the realities of all countries and regions, my delegation will remain engaged in advancing the consideration of critical threats identified by a number of states including my own, within the framework of global mechanism. Mr. Chair, the consensus-based decision-making modality of the global mechanism is clearly articulated in Annex C of the third APR, which states the future permanent mechanism would take all decision based on the principle of consensus. This language leaves no ambiguity regarding the intended approach. Decision within the future mechanism are to be made by consensus. Any interpretation that diverge from this agreed and fundamental principle would compromise the very foundation of the global mechanism and is therefore not acceptable. I thank you, Mr. Chair.

Chair: Thank you, Iran, for your statement. Mauritius, to be followed by Israel.

Mauritius: Thank you, Chair. The Mauritian delegation wishes to express our strong support for the adoption of the CRP as presented. The text reflects a balanced and constructive outcome of our collective efforts, and we commend the Chair, his team, and the Secretariat for their inclusive approach and diligent facilitation throughout the process. The CRP captures the key priorities and perspectives shared by delegations over the course of our discussions and represents a meaningful step forward. Furthermore, the CRP reflects the needs of small island developing states like Mauritius, offering concrete avenues for inclusion and capacity building support. We believe its adoption will contribute significantly to advancing our common objectives and reinforcing international cooperation in this important area. Before ending, and on a personal note, allow me, Chair, to extend my heartfelt thanks to everyone who has been part of. this journey. Yourself, Ambassador Goufour, Catherine, Virginia, Matthew, and everyone else. It has been a privilege to work alongside such dedicated and thoughtful colleagues right from the beginning. Your support, collaboration, and shared commitment over these past years have been deeply meaningful. Thank you for the trust, the conversations, and the many moments of shared purpose. I look forward to what we can continue to achieve together in the spirit of partnership and mutual respect. Thank you very much.

Chair: Thank you very much, Mauritius, for your statement and for your kind words. Israel, to be followed by Cuba.

Israel: Thank you, Chair, for giving us the floor. Dear Chair, Israel wishes to express its sincere and deep appreciation to you and your very, very able team for your dedicated leadership throughout this process, culminating today in the successful adoption of this consensual report. This achievement underscores the importance of the principle of consensus as a cornerstone of our work. It is this spirit of inclusivity and shared ownership that has enabled all of us to advance a common understanding of responsible state behavior in cyberspace. Some of our reservations still remain unanswered, and unfortunately not all our concerns were fully addressed in the final version of the CRP. However, in the spirit of consensus, wishing to express positive will and in the light of all the constructive cooperation presented through the last few days here in New York by so many delegations, we understand the need for a certain degree of flexibility. Israel joined all delegations and is pleased to support this CRP. We can assure you that the Israeli delegation remains committed to work with all other states and to continue to present a constructive approach to further advance the dialogue on cybersecurity in the UN framework. As the mandate of the Open-Ended Working Group ends today, and we look ahead to the establishment of a global mechanism, Israel has constantly maintained that consensus must continue to guide us in all our decision-making, whether on procedural or substantive matters. Only by preserving this principle and decision-making modality can we assure that the interests and perspectives of all Member States are duly respected and that our collective efforts remain credible, balanced, and effective. We are encouraged by the fact that our discussions have time and again proven that this notion is universally shared by Member States, and we welcome the agreement on this matter, as it clearly reflects in the third APR and in the current final report as well. On a personal note, I have been personally deeply honored to take part in this process from its inception. As Israel has been an active and contributing member of several GGEs and both Open-Ended Working Groups, including as a member of the 2015 GGE which led the foundation of the framework of responsible state behavior in cyberspace, we can assure you, Mr. Chair, that Israel will continue to work to build global cyber resilience and to promote the security and stability of cyberspace. I thank you.

Chair: Thank you very much, Israel, for your statement and also for your expressions of support. Cuba to be followed by Republic of Korea, please.

Cuba: Thank you, Chair. We are grateful to you for your intense efforts in achieving the final report of the OEWG on security of and in the use of ICTs following five years of RGF’s work. We also appreciate the professionalism of your team and the support from the Secretariat. The agreement for the establishment of an intergovernmental mechanism that will be maintained through consensus and will allow regular institutional dialogue under the auspices of the United Nations is truly a meaningful achievement. The Cuban delegation has been working actively towards this end as part of our commitment to the OEWG, a forum created under the proposal of the Russian Federation together with a group of countries, and this is especially important for developing countries. We’re also grateful to delegations for their cooperation that allowed this result despite such divergent positions and intense days of deliberations. Chair, with a view to discussions under the future mechanism, we wish to place on the record that there is not currently a common understanding on the supposed neutralities of technologies, a notion that is mentioned in paragraph 26 of the final report. At the same time, we should not force the notion of the applicability of IHL onto cyberspace in light of concerns because some countries are developing offensive capacities in relation to the use of ICTs, and so we think that rather than tacitly agreeing to the possibility of a scenario of armed conflict in cyberspace, rather we should be focused on the essential purpose which is preserving ICTs for exclusively peaceful purposes aimed at furthering development. We hope that this new chapter that is being opened Now, we’ll make progress in legally binding obligations in the area of ICT security and their use. This would facilitate common understanding as to how international law applies to this area. It will address legal gaps, and we hope establish clear obligations for all states. Cuba maintains its commitment to actively contribute to this end. I thank you.

Chair: Thank you very much, Cuba, for your statement and also for your expressions of support for the outcome document. Republic of Korea, to be followed by Egypt.

Republic of Korea: Thank you, Chair. You and your team’s excellent leadership and dedication to this OEWG process and multilateralism. As you rightly pointed out, it is a rare thing to enjoy 100% satisfaction about the outcome of multilateral negotiation. Nevertheless, we’re hopeful because you said that this outcome of our work is not final. This is only part of a long journey where we can achieve more in the end. So I believe we have still a long way to go, but under your leadership, I think we can continue to constructively engage with other distinguished colleagues here and achieve meaningful outcome in the end. I thank you.

Chair: Thank you very much, Republic of Korea, for your statement and also for your support and kind statement. Just a slight clarification to your statement. It will no longer be me under my leadership. You are right that we have a long journey ahead. I am confident that all of you with the spirit of goodwill. that you have built over the years will be able to make that long journey, but it will not be under my leadership. Thank you very much for that. Egypt to be followed by China.

Egypt: Thank you, Chair. And the first thing that we say that we invite you to reconsider. Chairperson, we align with the statement delivered earlier by Tunisia on behalf of the Arab group as well as the statement delivered yesterday by Nigeria on behalf of the African group. In the first intervention by the Egyptian delegation during this 11th meeting, we underscored that our main and key priority would be to ensure a seamless transition to a future permit mechanism that can enable the continuation of a single-track, action-oriented, and consensus-based UN-led process on security of and in the use of ICT and not to open the space for a vacuum or competitive initiatives. From this prism, Egypt joins consensus today around the draft report. We based our decision on a number of considerations, including the fact that this report complements the three annual progress reports previously adopted by consensus, and that the normative framework of responsible state behavior continues to be cumulative and evolving. We welcome also the steps taken at this report to reflect a more diverse and representative landscape of threats that captures the reality in different regions. Nevertheless, and as explained on previous occasions, we continue to be deeply disappointed with some crucial points with this report and its annex. The omission of a dedicated DTG on the application of international law in the context of cyberspace is very alarming, and along with the significant reduction in the content of Section D on international law, Egypt, like many others, is concerned with how the application of and compliance with respective international law obligations, including international humanitarian law, will be approached under the new global mechanism. It is important to indicate once again that our interest and commitment to discussion supporting respect to international law and the UN Charter does not in any meaner way indicate conclusive preference or pre-empting a discussion on a legally binding instrument as an indispensable pathway. As mentioned by the Arab Group, we will continue to advance this avenue at the upcoming review meeting and request the Chairperson of the Global Mechanism to convene a focused roundtable on application of international law. In addition, we maintain our view that the content and recommendations in relation to capacity building is significantly lower than our expectations. Without concrete and meaningful steps to establish a UN-led capacity building vehicle, including through the Voluntary Fund and Sponsorship Program, and availing adequate, sufficient and predictable resources for this purpose, the discussion at DTG 2 will not realize its desired potential. Making meaningful and prompt progress on this front will be crucial for the level of confidence and the credibility of the newly born mechanism. Mr. Chairperson, having said that, we won’t miss on paying tribute to your exemplary leadership. Chairperson, we have mentioned before, and we are saying it once again, you were consistently the most serious and diligent participant in this process. From its inception until its conclusion, without your strong and impactful leadership, this process would have been in a very different place, which is way less effective and ambitious. I want also to extend our gratitude to my two dear colleagues and friends from your team, Matthew Wong and Clarice Lim, and the very dedicated team at the Secretariat, Ms. Preissman and Ms. Browning. Chairperson, thank you for taking us forward at a time when consensus around progress at the UN is becoming the exception rather than the norm. Thank you.

Chair: Thank you very much, Egypt, for your statement and for your very kind words. address to me and members of my team. China to be followed by Argentina.

China: Thank you, Chair. This morning’s meeting, obviously, which leaves me with the most impression is the round of very loud applauses. I believe that everybody has different interpretation of that round of applauses. But in the past week, the delegates who had the least sleep would have the most feelings about that round of applauses. What I mean is the most of the people that I was talking about are on the podium right now. And that is why I would like to take this opportunity to thank you, the Chair. Thank you, you and your able team, as well as colleagues from the Secretariat. I would like to thank you for your hard work. Obviously, undoubtedly, today is a very special, successful day with far-reaching consequences. I would like to make the first point, that is, the outcome of today’s meeting shows that our mechanism has passed a very important stress test. Given the current geopolitical landscape, which is filled with challenges, hot-spot conflicts in regions are ongoing, and in countries we see that some countries are not so keen on the concept of multilateralism. Given this context and background, I would like to ask you to give us some examples of how you would like us to respond. The success of our meeting is of a special, great significance. As the multilateral system is faced with such difficulties, today’s meeting and success increases our confidence in multilateralism. The second point I would like to make is, in terms of multilateral process on ICT security, we are seeing a new milestone today. The topic became a topic under the consideration of the UN as early as 1998, and in the past 27 years, if we look back, we have achieved two most important milestones, the first one being framework of responsible state behavior in cyberspace, the other being the draft report on the creation of a future permanent mechanism. As technology evolves, there are new emerging topics and subject matters, and cyberspace, in fact, is one of the more mature topics. In the past 27 years, the success we have achieved would be a very good example that we could learn when we deal with other governance issues in emerging areas. And when we look at new emerging topics, and if we look forward for another 27 years, they may not see as good an outcome as what we have today. I may be the delegate with the longest working history in the area of cyberspace, and I would like to say that I am proud of that experience. The third point I’d like to make is that China has always been an advocate for multilateralism, as well as a strong supporter of the United Nations’ international rules, among others. And we know that the current multilateral system is far from being perfect. The rules are far from being complete. The current reality of abiding by these rules are not satisfactory either. But China believes that, through multilateral efforts, we need to improve and strengthen current mechanisms, instead of just walking away or abandoning them. Because we believe that without a multilateral mechanism, the international community will turn into a place where it is more – it more resembles a jungle world, where everybody speaks from strength. I would like to say that only a very small number of countries will be able to sit by the table of the international community while the majority of the countries will become what’s put on the table, put on the menu. That is why multilateralism or the multilateral system for all member states, in particular for small and medium countries, has special and significant importance. The third point I would like to make is that the achievement we have seen today is the result of the collective efforts of all member states. But I would like to be very objective in saying that our success is because we have an exceptional chair. Thanks to your abundant diplomatic experience and excellent diplomatic skills, as well as your deep understanding of different positions of all countries, as well as the cyberspace itself in the past five years, given such a context that is filled with challenges. Thanks to your leadership, our sessions have reached today’s outcome, which is really hard work. Compared with other excellent diplomats, you, the chair, has a unique strong suit. At the critical moment of a negotiation, through changing the color of your outfit, you would send sensitive but important messages to all delegates. From yesterday, I actually was looking forward to enjoying today’s success. In closing, I would like to say that this document, or this new milestone, is a success of multilateralism. It is also a success of all delegations. This is also the success of all the diplomats sitting here in this conference room, working in the area of cyberspace. Thank you, Chair.

Chair: Thank you very much, China, for your very, very kind remarks addressed to me and my team, and also for your support for the outcome document and for this process. And as you say, as one of the longest-serving representatives in the room at this point now, who has been involved in this process for such a long period, I think your role has been very helpful. And I would also say, for those who have not served as long, or even if this is your very first meeting, I think each one of you who has contributed to the outcome of this process and the outcome of this meeting today, you have the responsibility to play that role of being a catalyst for consensus, as a facilitator for convergence, as a trust-builder and a bridge-builder. Because multilateralism is not just a process that is mechanical. It is a process where people have views. People have agency, people can make a difference, and people need to build trust. And so while quite a number of you have said very kind words about me and my team, I think ultimately this is your success. I wasn’t going to respond to all these comments. I was going to make some closing remarks, which I’d like to do. But we do have a long list of speakers. I’d like to hear as many of you as possible. But keep in mind that ultimately this is your success, it is your process, it is your outcome, and it is you who will have to take this and continue this journey of 1,000 miles. So thank you very much. But it is correct that I have a colorful handkerchief today. And I thought I should cheer myself up because it’s Friday. But ultimately it’s all of you who have cheered me up. So I thank you very much for all your friendship. Long list of speakers, but let me add at this point that it’s my intention to conclude our meeting at 1 p.m. So that you can have the afternoon free to do what you need to do. So I’d like to hear as many of you as possible, then we have to adopt the procedural report, and then I’ll make some concluding comments in terms of what we need to do moving forward, including the first committee resolution that needs to be adopted as well to complete the passage of this report. But we’ll continue with the speakers list. Argentina to be followed by the European Union.

Argentina: Senor President. Chair, I’m taking the floor to express an explanation of position in relation to the final report of the OEWG on the security of and in the use of ICTs. We welcome the report, and we thank everyone for its adoption. On the word gender, Argentina understands in the framework of international law which refers to two sexes. male and female in accordance with the Rome Statute 7.3. The commitment of Argentina to women’s rights has been sustained over time and is reflected in international practices that actually goes beyond international standards. As regards to Agenda 2030, Argentina recalls that it is not legally binding that each state in exercise of their sovereignty has the right to interpret and pursue freely. Chair, we wish to express our gratitude to you for the effective, transparent, and inclusive manner in which you have led the work of this group over the past five years of its mandate. We especially value the momentum from all delegations as well as the professionalism of the Secretary of the ODA and also the work of the interpreters whose technical support has been essential throughout this process. We highlight that the contributions made by states are reflected in a balanced way in the final document as the exercise of a genuine negotiation process. This confirms the collective commitment to maintaining an open, interoperable, stable, secure, and peaceful cyberspace. We are especially gratified to see the incorporation of a thematic group dedicated to capacity building, a proposal that had firm support from my delegation and many other countries in our region throughout the process. We consider that the final report represents a meaningful contribution to strengthening the multilateral framework in the area of cyber security and cyber resilience and builds on more than two decades of multilateral work made up of principles, capacity building measures, and understandings that will continue to guide progress in an international framework on security in the use of ICTs. Thank you. you, your team, and the Secretariat will build on achievements to date, preserving the spirit of consensus, transparency, and representativeness that has characterized this process. The present explanation of position has been submitted to the Secretariat for publication. I thank you.

Chair: Thank you very much, Argentina, for your statement. European Union, to be followed by Mozambique.

European Union: Thank you, Chair. I know that all of EU member states would want to take the floor to thank you, and some will certainly do that. But at the same time, saying for the last time this week that I have the honor to speak on behalf of the EU member states, I also know that we likely run the risk to go into the afternoon with all our thank yous. So therefore, please note, indeed, I speak on behalf of all of the EU member states. If you don’t hear them all, this is certainly from them all. Not only this week, but over the past years, we’ve shown commitment. We’ve shown flexibility and dedication with the aim to advance responsible state behavior in cyberspace and conclude this process with a smooth and seamless transition to a single-track future permanent mechanism. Our ambitions in the report might have been different, as our intervention over the past days has shown. This week and this morning has also proven that the ambition to establish a permanent mechanism has been at the core of what unites us all. While we all have our additional wish list for the report, all well known, we applaud our collective achievement to agree on a global mechanism that will allow us to walk the talk, to take real action, using the tools that the UN framework and all its pillars offer us against the real challenges that we are all facing in cyberspace, challenges that affect our security, our economy, and our democracies. And we look forward to take this next step together, working together to advance responsible state behavior in cyberspace, building upon our collective achievements since the first UN group of governmental experts. and including this final Open-Ended Working Group report. The EU and its Member States want to wholeheartedly thank you, you and your team, for your efforts and the good cooperation. Matthew, Clarice, Gillian, as well as the UNODA, Catherine and Virginia, as well as UN Secretary General Nakamitsu, it has been a real pleasure to work with you all. Chair, your wise leadership has allowed us to make history. It has collectively moved us forward to advance responsible state behaviour in cyberspace and will serve to demonstrate the value of multilateralism. Thank you.

Chair: Thank you very much, European Union, for your kind statement. Mozambique, to be followed by Brazil.

Mozambique: Thank you, Mr. Chair, for giving us the floor. My delegation commend you and your team for your hard work. We especially congratulate you on your outstanding leadership and the successful conclusion of the Open-Ended Working Group mandate. The adoption of the final report is a major milestone in international cyber diplomacy and a testament to your commitment to transparency, inclusivity and consensus. We also wish to acknowledge the Women in International Security and Cyberspace Fellowship, which has significantly empowered women delegates, including Mozambicans, in a meaningful way. It stands as a model for inclusive and impactful capacity building. As we close this chapter, Mozambique looks ahead with optimism to the operationalisation of the future global mechanism. We remain committed to working constructively with all Member States and stakeholders. to ensure it becomes an effective and action-oriented platform that reflects the priorities of all state special developing countries. Technology will continue to evolve, just as trade will. Undoubtedly, we will face new challenges, but today we leave behind a meaningful legacy. This is not the end, but a beginning, and we will surely have further opportunities to come together, united to shape our common future in the digital world. Parabéns, congratulations, and I will say it in my mother tongue language, Makorokot, Mr. Chair, and all of us, I thank you, Mr. Chair.

Chair: Thank you very much, Mozambique, for your support and very kind statements. Brazil, to be followed by the UK.

Brazil: Mr. Chair, I would like to express my delegation’s deepest appreciation to you and your team for the outstanding work throughout the past five years, which culminated in the adoption of our final report this morning. One of multilateralism’s greatest clichés is that a fair and balanced document is one that no delegation finds perfect, but with which everyone is equally unhappy. It is true that we would have liked a higher level of ambition in some sections, particularly international law. Nevertheless, we still have a fair and balanced document, which is a meaningful addition to our acquis, and an important contribution to the promotion of an open, safe, secure, stable, accessible, peaceful, and interoperable ICT environment, and which lays the groundwork for a seamless transition to a single-track permanent mechanism to address ICT security. Achieving this by consensus in such challenging geopolitical circumstances is a testament to the crucial importance and effectiveness of multilateralism. Brazil has been an active participant throughout this process, and you can count on us to continue our constructive engagement the future mechanism. On a final note, Brazil joins other delegations in thanking you for your extremely able leadership and unwavering commitment to a fair and balanced, to fair and balanced since the beginning of this process. We must also acknowledge Clarice Lim, Matthew Wong and Gillian Goh from your team and Catherine Priesman and Virginia Browning from the Secretariat for their exceptional work throughout this process. I thank you.

Chair: Thank you very much Brazil for your support and kind words. UK to be followed by Portugal. Thank you chair.

United Kingdom: We would like to offer our sincere and heartfelt congratulations to you, to your team and to the Secretariat. I won’t repeat their names again but they know who they are, for delivering this critically important outcome on behalf of UN member states today. The UK welcomes the adoption of the CRP by consensus, which marks a meaningful and important step towards advancing a free, open, peaceful, secure international order in cyberspace. The UK has contributed to international cybersecurity discussions at the UN for over 25 years. We remain as committed as always to these consensus discussions at the UN and the importance of the UN framework on responsible state behavior in cyberspace and its role in strengthening and safeguarding stability in cyberspace. We look forward to the global mechanism building on and deepening the many successes of this OEWG in March 2026. Thank you chair.

Chair: Thank you very much UK. Portugal to be followed by the Russian Federation.

Portugal: Mr. Chairman, Portugal aligns with your statement but would like to add some comments on the meaning of the adoption of the final report of this open-ended working group, including the mandate for the next and permanent mechanism. for Institutional Dialogue on Responsible State Behaviour in Cyberspace eventually agreed by consensus to a great extent thanks to your superior diplomatic talents and engagement. As we all required, the mandate provides for regular institutional dialogue focused on the implementation of the consensually agreed normative framework of responsible state behaviour in cyberspace, repeatedly endorsed by the UN General Assembly since 2015. The future dialogue, focused on implementation of the normative framework, is meant to contribute decisively to upgrade national cyber capabilities across divides and to enable us to move on to a formal system of mutual accountability that levels up all Member States’ contributions to peace and security in the digital space, so that all of them can peacefully and securely benefit from the digital transition. The future cross-cutting working group designed to address specific security challenges to an open, stable, accessible, peaceful and interoperable cyberspace, and the cross-cutting working group designed to accelerate cyber security capacity building in tandem with the global roundtable, have the potential to lead us towards action-oriented results and towards further layers of understanding of the applicability in cyberspace of existing international law, including the UN Charter, human rights law and international humanitarian law. It goes without saying that the Member States should have been able to agree on more equitable and transparent future modalities for the selection of non-governmental interested parties, especially from the industry, given the private nature of the gatekeeping tech companies and of the vast majority of the critical infrastructures of our countries. But as you, Mr. Chairman, very well reminded us yesterday, there are no perfect UN documents. After all, at the review conferences of the next mechanism, Member States will, of course, remain free to, according to their evaluation of the results achieved, not only revisit the initial cross-cutting working group structure, but also improve the modalities of stakeholder participation. What we have achieved in three and a half years will be crucial to the contribution of the next mechanism of institutional dialogue to what I see as a desirable long-term voluntary universal system of periodic compliance reporting, which would involve all of us in monitoring and assisting one another to achieve a higher degree of accountability in ensuring peace and security all along the digital development of our nations. Therefore, I would like, on behalf of my government, to once again thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your outstanding dedication and wish you all the best going forward in your career. Thank you.

Chair: Thank you very much, Portugal, for your very kind words. Russian Federation, to be followed by the United States.

Russian Federation: Mr. Chair, distinguished colleagues, the Russian delegation, thanks you, Mr. Chair, and your team for all the work you’ve done over the past five years, very difficult work as the chair of this working group. Under your wise leadership, the group became a truly effective mechanism and reaffirmed its status as the essential UN platform for issues relating to security in the use of ICTs. Over the past five years, besides adopting full consensus reports, the group was also able to achieve concrete and practical results, including, first and foremost, the Global Intergovernmental Directory of Points of Contact, which was launched on Russia’s initiative in May 2024, and became the first universal confidence-building measure. And this all is to your credit, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, Russia welcomes the consensus-based agreement to establish a single permanent mechanism on security in the use of ICTs. This mechanism further augments the role of the UN in overseeing this important topic and makes her body to the OEWG a central universal format to discuss issues of security in the use of ICTs. Mr. Chair, Russia joined the consensus on the final report of the OEWG. In the report, what was important for us in many states was reflected, however, to our deep disappointment, a number of our ideas, initiatives, and proposals that had been supported by other delegations over the past five years of the OEWG’s work and which are objective reflections of our discussions were not taken into account. And so there was a balance on a number of important topics that was not adhered to. We tried to reflect fairly the views of many states within the future mechanism and other relevant UN platforms in accordance with the principle of sovereign equality of states. It’s unacceptable for a group of states to impede the expression of views of other states, placing their interests over those of others. That runs counter to the fundamental principles of the UN Charter. Mr. Chair, I’d like to make the following clarifying statement. Russia holds, as agreed by the OEWG, its reports and relevant geo-resolutions that this mechanism is useful and ought to develop new norms of international law for digital security. And we support the continuation of relevant discussions in the future mechanism. Mr. Chair. An automatic and unconditional application of international law to the digital sphere is unacceptable. Reference to alleged sufficiency of certain norms of international law do not hold water. And this is against the discussions of the OEWG and its work on the first universal agreement on information security, the UN Convention Against Cybercrime. We call on all states to join this convention and to allow for it to enter into effect as soon as possible. The future global mechanism ought to work on issues of security in the use of ICTs as well as ICTs themselves. The mechanism ought to work to strengthen confidence between states, to prevent conflict between states, and will facilitate decisions by consensus in the information sphere. The basis for this is the unanimous adoption of the Russian initiative to create this intergovernmental global directory of points of contact. The participation of non-state actors in the activities of the OEWG were of limited utility when it comes to conflict settlement and building up technical capacity. In addition, certain NGOs and private ICT actors abused their status, undermining diplomatic efforts by leveling accusations against states. We believe it’s unacceptable to undermine the intergovernmental nature of discussions on security in the use of ICTs within the future mechanism, and we welcome the maintenance of the sovereign right of states to remove themselves from the work of the – that is, to remove from the work of the future mechanism NGOs that display inappropriate behavior. We see continued attempts to focus attention on certain topics, for example, AI, quantum computing, Internet of Things, ransomware and underwater cameras, and other such issues. We believe that these actions are not constructive and do not facilitate – and they increase the digital inequality between states. We welcome the consensus decision of the OEWG to create a thematic group on capacity building under the Global Mechanisms, this important step toward overcoming the digital divide between countries. We hope for the occupation of all member states of the UN in implementing these tenets. We support capacity building in developing countries in the field of information security, including by signing legally binding agreements with these countries to strengthen their digital sovereignty. We support the development of a universal convention on international information security, the concept of which was presented by Russia together with likeminded states at the UN in April 2023. Mr. Chair, I ask you to include this statement in the Compendium of National Statements, which is an integral part of the final report of the OEWG. In closing, I’d like to thank Scott Harriot and the interpreters for their immense contributions to the success of this event.

Chair: Thank you very much, Russian Federation, for your statement and also for your… very kind words. One day I’ll sit back and reflect on what these applauses actually mean, because obviously there could be varying interpretations of the applauses, and also possibly statements in the explanation of applauses. But thank you very much, Russian Federation. Before I give the floor to the next speaker, it’s 12 o’clock. I would really like to conclude our meeting at 1 p.m., so that all of us can take the afternoon off to do the many things we need to do. Secondly, I kindly ask you to be as succinct in your comments as possible, knowing that you have the possibility of submitting your statements over the next few weeks, all of which will be compiled in a compendium of statements and explanations of position on the adoption of the final report of the OEWG, which in turn will be circulated as an information note by the UN Secretariat. Thirdly, at 1 p.m. sharp, I’ve arranged for the UN photographer to be here so that we can take a family photo. So those of you who wish to be associated with this photo, you are welcome to be present here at 1 p.m., and we will all be seated or gather around in this room to take one picture that we can hopefully keep for ourselves. So that is the family photo at 1 p.m. before we close and adjourn. So we’ll go through the list of speakers, and then we’ll go through the other remaining issues on the agenda. United States, to be followed by Switzerland.

United States: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like to start by recognizing the work that you, your team, and the Secretariat have undertaken this week to get to the final report today. We appreciate your efforts to produce a document that is a better reflection of the work this OAWG has undertaken over the course of its mandate. In particular, the report sets the stage for a smooth transition to a single-track, global mechanism that will continue important discussions on cyber stability and responsible state behavior while making meaningful progress on implementation of the framework through its dedicated thematic groups. We recognize the significance of capacity-building to states’ ability to implement the framework, and we are pleased to have found a path to retaining the capacity-building thematic group. We also appreciate that the report more accurately conveys the progress made in discussions on the application of existing international law to cyberspace, in particular by referencing discussion on international humanitarian law. Mr. Chair, the United States would like to express its disassociation with paragraphs 9, 12, 28, and 53A of the report. The United States remains deeply disappointed that the report retains references to gender and the Sustainable Development Goals. The United States strongly supports protecting women and girls, defending their rights, and promoting women’s empowerment, and promotes the ability of women and girls to engage in all aspects of social, civic, political, and economic life. However, the United States does not support references in the final report to gender. Additionally, the Sustainable Development Goals advance a program of soft global governance that is inconsistent with U.S. sovereignty and adverse to the rights and interests of Americans, and the United States does not support references in the final report to SDGs. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Chair: Thank you very much, United States, for your statement. Your statement is well noted. I thank the United States for joining consensus on the document. your statements with regard to dissociating your delegation from certain paragraphs is also noted. Switzerland, to be followed by Canada.

Switzerland: Thank you, Mr. Chair. As you said, the final report is a very balanced overall package. It’s not a perfect document. We would have liked to see a much more ambitious report, particularly regarding international law, with a focus also on international humanitarian law. While the Open-Ended Working Group hasn’t achieved breakthrough results on the most contentious issues, it has succeeded in maintaining multilateral dialogue, building capacity, contributing to confidence, and creating practical results. We must measure its success against the complex nature of cybersecurity and the political divisions that exist among states on these issues. The broad participation by all member states and stakeholders ensured that a wide range of perspectives and concerns were considered, making the discussions more comprehensive and representative of divergent interests. This Open-Ended Working Group and the final report are very important but incremental steps in our common ambition to building an open, safe, secure, stable, accessible, peaceful, and interoperable ICT environment. To achieve this, our work will continue in and outside the global mechanism. Mr. Chair, this morning I asked an AI model whether the chair of the Open-Ended Working Group has done a good job. The answer was, and I quote, the chair of the Open-Ended Working Group, Ambassador Burhan Kapur of Singapore, has widely been regarded as having done a commendable and effective job, especially given the highly polarized and sensitive nature of the subject. We know that AI models sometimes hallucinate, but in this case it was right. Under your leadership, we have adopted a final report that crowns a five-year process. You and your team have done a great job. We would like to thank you, Mr. Chair, as well as Catherine, Virginia, Clarice, Matthew and of course Jillian. She is the one with the historical memory of the GGE 2021, the first open-ended working group and this open-ended working group. Finally, we would like to thank all delegations for their flexibility and the stakeholders for their participation and valuable contributions. I thank you, Mr. Chair.

Chair: Thank you very much, Switzerland, for your statement and for your very kind remarks. I will not ask you to put on record which particular AI program was making those comments, but your comments are very much appreciated. Thank you. I will give the floor now to Canada to be followed by Nicaragua.

Canada: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I debated taking the floor, but I am told this process cannot end without one more reference to our shared birchbark canoe. You and your team have showed exemplary dedication in consulting all states and also towards giving stakeholders informal opportunities to be heard over the last years. We commend your effort and we thank you sincerely for your defence of multilateralism as a pillar of peace and security. You have guided our canoe over the rapids, moved us forward without tipping over and without too much going in circles, and we have landed safely at a harbour where we are ready for our next journey. You will not be surprised that Canada has some final comments on international law. We are glad to see the report reflects to a considerable extent the significant progress and achievements made by our OEWG. We have fostered common understandings and converging views, built capacities, and we are proud to be a part of the OEWG. Thank you.

Chair:

Canada: strengthened cross-regional dialogue, and concluded with solid, action-oriented recommendations. That said, we profoundly regret that the final report fails to capture the substantive convergence on international law that has become clear in the room. We regret the report leaves an incomplete record of our years of work on international law. But this does not alter the reality that real progress and momentum was achieved under your guidance during this OEWG. My delegation is committed to pursuing these fruitful discussions on how international law applies in the global mechanism. The future mechanism represents a solid stepping stone to elevate the practical nature of our discussions. As we move forward, we call on all states to offer ultimate flexibility in allowing stakeholders to engage in our global mechanism. I wish to take this opportunity not only to thank you, your team, and the Secretariat for their dedicated work, but also thank our stakeholders. Their input, side events, and dedicated engagement has also helped us get this far. Many thanks again, Mr. Chair. It has been a journey. The next one awaits us, and Canada is enthusiastic to work with all member states as we work to further responsible state behaviour in cyberspace, while also working to come up with a new, but still Canadian metaphor for a future process. Perhaps something about snowshoes and avoiding polar bears.

Chair: Thank you very much, Canada, for your statement and for your expressions of support. Nicaragua, to be followed by Malaysia.

Nicaragua: Thank you, Chair. I speak on behalf of a group of like-minded states, the Republic of Belarus, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, the People’s Republic of China, the Republic of Cuba, the State of Eritrea, the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Republic of Niger, the Russian Federation, the Republic of Sudan. the Republic of Zimbabwe, and my own country, the Republic of Nicaragua. We appreciate the efforts made by you and your team in preparing the final report of the OEWG and joint consensus over this document. Due to your long-standing commitment to the OEWG process, the decision to establish a single-track, state-led, consensus-based global mechanism on developments on the field of ICTs in the context of international security and advancing responsible state behavior in the use of ICTs to deal comprehensively with a wide range of issues related to security of and in the use of ICTs has become possible. We admit that a number of improvements have been made in the final report with the proposals of the LMG Group taken into account. At the same time, we are disappointed with an overall misbalance between the implementation of the existing voluntary, non-binding rules of state behavior and the development of new norms, including the elaboration of legally binding obligations in the use of ICTs. As for the modalities for NGOs’ participation, we welcome that accredited stakeholders will participate on a non-objection basis and obtain a solely consultative status, as the future permanent mechanism is strictly an intergovernmental process. It is of utmost importance to ensure that all five pillars of the mandate of the mechanism would be treated equally during the discussions with respect to the state’s sovereignty and decision-making by consensus, which may not be challenged or conditioned according to modalities adopted by Consensus UNGA Resolution 79-237. Our group remains committed to working constructively within the mechanism to contribute to enhancing security of and in the use of ICTs. Chair, in our national capacity, please allow us to make a few brief additional remarks. We wish to express our heartfelt appreciation for how you have conducted the process of the OEWG on security of and in the use of ICTs. We value the open and inclusive approach that allowed for the full participation of all Member States on an equal footing, regardless of their size, their level of development or technological capacity, reflecting the true spirit of multilateralism and democracy that should guide our deliberations on an issue that is so critical to the peace and security of all nations. We extend our gratitude to you, Chair, and to your team for your dedication, impartiality and tireless efforts to guide our complex deliberations towards a consensus document. We are also grateful for the critical technical and substantive support provided by the Secretary at the Interpreters and the support staff, whose work has been indispensable to the effective functioning of this process. The utmost priority of this session was to achieve a smooth transition from the OEWG to the future mechanism, under the auspices of the United Nations, to be guided by the same spirit and consensus decision-making. In this regard, we wish to highlight that in our forthcoming discussions, special attention should be paid to implementation of mechanisms that effectively promote international cooperation, with the aim of ensuring that developing countries can participate in future meetings of the mechanisms on an equal footing and strengthen the capacities of developing countries. We reiterate our position on the peaceful use of ICTs, on the prevention of an arms race in cyberspace, and our condemnation of the use of these technologies for hostile or aggressive purposes. We therefore reject any attempt to forcibly impose the applicability of international humanitarian law to cyberspace. The international community should focus its efforts on promoting the use of ICTs for the development of our peoples and in preventing conflicts created by cyberattacks. We hope that discussions for a legally binding instrument in the field of ICT security and their use will continue in the future mechanism. Such an instrument will allow us to address legal gaps in cybersecurity and establish obligations for all states. Chair Nicaragua reaffirms its commitment to this multilateral process. We will continue to participate actively and constructively in the future stages of the mechanism, as always advocating for cyberspace that is a space of peace, cooperation, development and respect for the sovereign rights of all nations. It’s essential for the outcomes of this group to find expression in concrete actions that benefit all of humanity and prevent the use of ICTs as instruments of war or domination. I thank you.

Chair: Thank you very much, Nicaragua, for your statement. Australia, sorry, Malaysia, to be followed by Australia, please.

Malaysia: Mr Chair, allow me to speak on behalf of ASEAN. ASEAN would like to express its high appreciation for your efficient leadership and the dedicated efforts of your team throughout this OEWG. ASEAN is also proud that an esteemed ASEAN member state has been chairing this process. We are pleased to see the successful adoptions of the final report under your capable guidance, which marks an important step towards ensuring a smooth transition to the global mechanism on ICT security in the context of international security. ASEAN has remained steadfast in its commitment to this process and has consistently sought to contribute to our shared efforts to uphold peace and security and stability, while fostering an open, secure, stable, accessible and peaceful and interoperable ICT environment. We also recognise the importance of continuing discussion and reaffirm our intention to actively engage in the global mechanism. Thank you.

Chair: Thank you very much, Malaysia, for your very kind statement on behalf of ASEAN, and thank you very much for ASEAN’s support for this process. Now before I go to Australia, friends, the list is growing, and it seems that you are reluctant to let go of this process. I think you need to be ready to release yourself from this process, and I’m very keen to release you from this process. But the list of speakers is long, so can I please suggest that you try and make your statements in about two minutes so that we give everyone a chance. We have some procedural reports to adopt, and I think it’s important that we do that. And I want to close with some comments as well about next steps. So Australia, over to you to start with two minutes.

Australia: Thank you, Chair. Australia aligns with the Pacific Islands Forum Statement and wishes to make the following remarks in our national capacity. Australia wishes to express its sincere appreciation to you and your dedicated team for your leadership throughout this process. The adoption of the final report and the establishment of the new… new permanent mechanism by consensus represents a significant milestone in our collective efforts to uphold the rules-based international order and the framework for responsible state behavior in cyberspace. The outcome underscores the enduring value of multilateralism and reaffirms the central role of the United Nations in facilitating dialogue, fostering understanding, and enabling member states to navigate new and complex challenges together. It reflects the determination of our chair, the importance that all governments place on this issue, and the collective commitment demonstrated by every delegation throughout these negotiations. While certain elements of the final report do not fully align with Australia’s national positions, we acknowledge the finely balanced package to achieve consensus. In the spirit of cooperation and flexibility, we accept the outcome that has been reached. Australia believes the final report provides a strong foundation for our work ahead. It consolidates decades of work since the first GGE and set the clear direction for the new permanent mechanism to advance the framework for responsible state behavior. As we take stock of our progress, Australia notes two major disappointments on the final report. Firstly, on international law, Australia is disappointed that the chapter does not capture all the progress made, and the emerging convergence has reached over almost five years. We would have liked references to the application of international human rights law, the law of state responsibility, and international humanitarian law as reflected in the cross-regional paper on international law. We’re also disappointed that references to the ICT resolution of the 34th Conference of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent, an important consensus document, was deleted, as were the two OEWG cross-regional working papers, which remain important pieces of work. On stakeholders, we regret that we were not able to make more progress on improving inclusiveness and transparency. However. Australia welcomes the final report’s recognition of the high level of participation by women delegates and the integration of gender perspectives in our discussions. We would particularly like to acknowledge the valuable contributions of the Women in International Security and Cyberspace Fellows, which has enriched our deliberations and strengthened the collective outcome. Australia encourages all member states to support and increase the meaningful participation of women, both within the new permanent mechanism and across the landscape of cybersecurity and international security. In closing, Australia extends its sincere appreciation to all delegations, to our Chair and to his exceptional team for their tireless efforts in achieving a consensus outcome. We look forward to continuing our work under the new permanent mechanism and advancing our shared goal to protect and promote a peaceful, stable and interoperable cyberspace for all. Thank you.

Chair: Thank you very much, Australia. Malawi to be followed by Ghana.

Malawi: Chair, the Republic of Malawi takes the floor, not only to express its final views, but to extend our sincere appreciation and gratitude. We came to this process not just to share our national concerns and views, but also to thank you for your tireless leadership throughout this complex but rewarding journey. Chair, you have demonstrated patience, balance and unwavering commitment to inclusivity. You gave every delegation, regardless of size or resources, an equal platform to be heard. For countries like Malawi, this has meant the world. My delegation is further grateful for the WIC Fellowship and all sponsoring countries for allowing the wonderful ladies from across the world to participate in these discussions. We are particularly encouraged that consensus has been reached. This outcome is not just a document, it is a testament to what is possible when the international community engages in good faith, listens to one another and works towards shared goals. The concerns and priorities of developing countries, including capacity building, protection of critical infrastructure, and the applicability of international law, have found meaningful expression in the final report. As we transition into the global mechanism, we carry forward a spirit of unity, responsibility, and cooperation. The Republic of Malawi stands ready to continue contributing constructively, ensuring that the framework we’ve built here endures and grows stronger. Once again, congratulations on bringing us across the finish line. From the warm heart of Africa, to you, Chair, we say, Zigo Mwambili. Thank you very much, Chair.

Chair: Thank you very much, Malawi, for your statement, and thank you very much, Africa, for your support. Ghana, you have the floor, please.

Ghana: Thank you, Chair. Although my delegation, like others, would have liked to see progress in certain areas of the text, for us this would have been elaboration on how the DTGs will be discussed in the future permanent mechanism, we welcome all the efforts that have been made to present a delicately balanced conference paper. This, indeed, has been no small feat. Ambassador Kofor, your exemplary leadership, wealth of experience and wisdom, delivered with a touch of humor, has been evident from the very beginning. On a personal note, I leave this process with a reminder to approach life and work in bilateral and multilateral processes with cautious, hopeful optimism, a term you have so often used. I would have definitely liked to see you in a brighter outfit this week. However, we take it as it is. I trust this will be sent to your holidays, which you’ve been looking forward to. We acknowledge that this OEWG has been a consensus-building measure and led to tangible outcomes. My delegation joins others in expressing sincerest appreciation to your entire team, as echoed by others. Matthew, Catherine, Virginia, and all the unsung heroes working diligently behind the scenes. Thank you very much. To this end, Gardan would like to join other colleagues in thanking the Women in Cyber Fellowship for the support provided to women to have an opportunity to be part of the process. To all those who conceptualized the program and put in tireless effort to build capacity, we say thank you. Thank you for ensuring that women did not just take up space in this room, but we contributed meaningfully to this process. This process that has been extremely transformative. It has turned technocrats into diplomats and turned diplomats and policy makers into technocrats. As we continue to strengthen our capacity to engage in meaningful dialogue and navigate future processes to address existing and potential threats, we will reference this moment as proof that with patience and collaboration, we are able to work together. Mr. Chair, to conclude, Ghana will continue to work in a spirit of flexibility in the future permanent mechanism. And as such, we look forward to a safe and secure digital future. I thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Chair: Thank you very much, Ghana, for your very kind statement. I think I’ll need to go to Accra to refresh my wardrobe, to look for some colorful floats. But thank you very much. Friends, we still have about 15 speakers. This is how I intend to proceed. At this point, we will proceed to the next agenda item, which is the consideration of the draft procedural report. I think it’s important that we have that report adopted. Then after that, I’ll return to the speaker’s list. So distinguished delegates, with your permission, we shall now move to the consideration of the draft procedural report of the Open-Ended Working Group as contained in document A-AC-292-2025-L1. And let me, by way of background, explain that. The procedural report has a section on introduction, attendance, it describes the offices of the meeting, which is namely the chair, the organization of work, the documentation, proceedings of the working group, and the final section, which says that the working group adopted its final report. It’s a procedural report. It is not substantive. And in keeping with the practice of the working group, we will now proceed to have it adopted. I see no objections. It is so decided. I also take it that it is the wish of the working group to authorize the chair to finalize the report. It is so decided. Thank you. We return to the speakers list. At this point, I think we do need to stick to two minutes, and I kindly invite you to please do your best to be as succinct as possible, and do send us your final statements, if that is a good way to capture your positions. Colombia, to be followed by Fiji.

Colombia: Thank you, Chair. My delegation wishes to congratulate you and to recognize your leadership of this OEWG in the last four years. We are gratified to see the outcome of your efforts taking concrete form today through the adoption by consensus of the final report of this group and the creation of the permanent mechanism that will guide discussions on the use and security of ICTs under the UN framework. Thank you. The most important achievement has been to achieve an overall balance across the different elements making up the report, which means that we can take it as a whole, even though it doesn’t really represent an end point in itself, but rather accumulation of processes, previous APRs, and all of your efforts are part of this important package of results. I’d also like to thank you for the importance that you gave to the Capacity Building Group, whose work is going to be essential in strengthening the capacity of developing states in a practical way to ensure the functioning of the Future Permanent Mechanism. This group was a concrete example of how to be more inclusive and results-oriented. As reiterated by you, Chair, on many occasions, consensus cannot be taken for granted. It is fragile, especially in the current circumstances, and this is why we extend thanks to Member States who are present here, who have together shown flexibility in the spirit of compromise, adjusting to current circumstances, and we have shown how multilateralism can prevail over differences to achieve a joint result. Today we can all be certain that we have made a contribution to international peace and security, as demonstrated by all of the statements that went before me. I wish to highlight, recognize, and celebrate, as the Delegation of Colombia, the leadership, meaningful participation of women in this working group. Their contributions were crucial to building trust, finding innovative solutions, and reflecting the priorities of their delegations in the work of our group. And here we highlight the creation of the Women in Cyber Fellowship that actively promoted a gender balance in this space devoted to security of and in the needs of ICT. We thank regional organisations and civil society for their contributions to this and over the past years that have allowed us to go deeper in our understanding on many topics. I thank you, Chair.

Chair: Thank you, Columbia, for your statement. Fiji to be followed by France.

Fiji: Thank you, Chair. Chair, I have the honour to deliver this statement on behalf of a cross-regional group comprising Australia, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Fiji, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Kiribati, Latvia, Luxembourg, Mexico, Moldova, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Poland, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Thailand, the United Nations and Vietnam. Chair, as outlined in the working paper, our group submitted to this working group in February. We reaffirmed the critical importance of the full, meaningful and equitable participation and leadership of women in all decision-making processes related to the use of ICTs. In this respect, our group welcomes the references to gender included in the final report. We also wish to highlight the valuable role of the Women in International Security and Cyberspace Fellowship, which has enabled more women to engage meaningfully in the work of this OEWG. We believe the text presents a balanced and accurate reflection of the significant role that women have played in this OEWG and will continue to play in all future ICT-related discussions, including with the permanent mechanism. Chair, inclusive and gender-responsive approaches are not only a matter of equity, they are essential to building a secure, resilient and representative international cyber governance framework. We look forward to continued collaboration to ensure these principles are embedded in the foundation of our collective work. Thank you, Chair. Chair, I also seek your indulgence if I could please give remarks, a few remarks in our national capacity. Chair, Fiji fully aligns with the statement delivered by Tonga on behalf of the Pacific Island Forums and also wishes to deliver brief remarks in our national capacity. We also echo other delegations in our sincere appreciation to you, Chair, for your thoughtful leadership in navigating us through these challenging times, a massive vinaka wakalewu. For the Pacific and indeed for Fiji, this forum has been a key priority in voicing our lived realities, addressing our compounded crises, informing and synergizing our domestic and regional efforts such as Fiji’s National Digital Strategy and the Regional Lakatoi Declaration and continuing to build trust and confidence amongst member states. Our final report is an excellent document for the work that must be done to ensure that the United Nations maintains its place as the beating heart of global security in the face of unprecedented technological changes. And our heartfelt thanks also goes to the A-Team, to Clarice, Matthew, Jillian, Catherine, Virginia and the Secretariat for their meticulous efforts in providing support to all of us during our journey together. Chair, we reemphasize the Pacific Islands Forum Capacity Building Paper that was submitted in May and as mentioned by Vanuatu earlier, we look forward to working with all member states and stakeholders in this regard. Chair, Fiji sees substantive value coming out of our incremental steps and especially now with our final report and we’ve communicated this consistently during our journey. At the beginning of our journey, Fiji was represented by one delegate. Today I’m proud to say that we’re a delegation of four that have traveled from Fiji and we’d like to record our thanks for our partners. But this also demonstrates the trust and the confidence amongst states that have been building in our journey and the increased dedication and commitment amongst states. And so Fiji continues to remain steadfast in our commitment that we must advance our work and implement the action items and our consensus final report and ensuring a seamless transition into our next phase. Chair, Fiji reiterates that our final report serves as a unifying force much like the vast expanse of the Pacific Ocean. bringing together collective aspirations, and we remain committed in our next phase of work together, the global mechanism. On a personal note, Chair, and having been part of this OEWG journey, it has been an absolute honor to work with you, your team, and the delegations here today who have turned into friends. On a final note, wishing everyone safe journeys back home. Vinaka Vakilevu, Chair. Thank you.

Chair: Thank you very much, Fiji, for your statement. France, to be followed by Pakistan.

France: Mr. President. Mr. Chair, my delegation aligns itself with the statement of the European Union and I would like to make the following remarks in its national capacity. Allow me at the outset to thank you most sincerely, you and your entire team, as well as the Secretariat and, of course, the interpreters, for your commitment and your efforts throughout the last five years. The successful conclusion of the work of this group is all to your credit and the constructive way in which you’ve always led our work. This consensus-based result is historic for work on the cyber issues and the first commission. And after more than 25 years of discussion and gradual consolidation of the normative framework for responsible behavior of states in cyberspace will allow us to establish a global, a single global mechanism that is action-oriented. This report is not perfect, but as others have underscored, this is the very nature of diplomacy. In accordance with the constructive spirit that my delegation has shown from the first to the last moments of this OEWG, France welcomes the adoption of this final report, which will become part of our collective heritage. The transregional proposal of the program of action, France and its partners wanted to see – ensure that all states were able to implement this normative framework because it is our first line of collective defense against cyber threats. We are pleased that this report, especially the section on capacity building, and how it interacts with the modalities of the global mechanism create the conditions needed for significant progress in this regard. Mr. Chair, you can count on France to support the operationalization of this report through the resolution that you will be submitting to the First Commission this fall. This resolution will allow for the establishment of the global mechanism and a seamless transition toward 2026 and beyond. In closing, I would like to cite a very wise man that many of you know, Ambassador Henri Verdier, who said to me one day, you know, our goal is not to create a new mechanism at the UN. Our real goal is to strengthen our collective cybersecurity. Mr. Chair, distinguished colleagues, I hope that collectively we will not lose sight of this goal. Thank you.

Chair: Thank you very much, France, for your statement. Pakistan to be followed by Algeria. And dear friends, I have to do the unpleasant task of cutting off microphones. And I apologize for this, my humble, humble and sincere apologies, because I do want us to be able to complete by 1 p.m. And it’s doable, but it is important that we give everyone a chance. So, Pakistan, over to you. My apologies in advance, and please let us have your full statement if you think that you need to put on record other points of view as well. You have the floor, please.

Pakistan: Thank you, Mr. Chair. We commend dedication and tireless efforts of you and your team in this OEWG, as we have done in the past. We duly recognize your contribution to this process. Chair, the adoption of OEWG’s final report is indeed a historic milestone. a hard-won achievement and a victory for multilateralism. Today’s success is a relief amidst geopolitical environment which has been less conducive to multilateralism. All of us have our share of disappointments, regrets and reservations. However, as we said in our first intervention on Monday, for us and indeed for a large majority of countries, the foremost priority was to make a seamless transition to global mechanism. We hope that our decision today is a right step in this direction.

Chair: I apologize Pakistan to you, sincere apologies. Algeria to be followed by New Zealand.

Algeria: Thank you Mr. Chair. Algeria aligns itself with the statement delivered by Tunisia and Nigeria on behalf of the African group. While Algeria shares the concerns expressed by the Arab group and the African group regarding the removal of dedicated space for discussing international law applicability in cyberspace and insufficient provision for capacity building, we have joined the consensus in the spirit of multilateral cooperation and our commitment to maintaining constructive dialogue within the UN framework. Having said that, my delegation wishes to express its profound gratitude for your outstanding leadership demonstrated throughout the five-year mandate of the OEWG. We commend your efforts in ensuring that the OEWG has successfully fulfilled its mandate, culminating with the adoption of a consensus outcome which, despite the stumbling blocks and shortfalls, reflects our collective commitment to diplomacy and multilateralism. We reiterate our sincere appreciation to you, your team, the Secretariat, and the translation team, all of whom have worked tirelessly to achieve this outcome. And indeed, the pocket square indicated a successful conclusion. I thank you.

Chair: Thank you very much, Algeria. New Zealand to be followed by Ireland.

New Zealand: Thank you, Chair. You started this week stating that you thought a narrow pathway to consensus was visible. At that time, perhaps not everyone shared your optimistic foresight. So today we’re very pleased that your vision has become a reality. And even more so, we’re pleased to see the strong support in the room for that vision. Of course, that doesn’t mean we see perfection, but as you noted, the cause of multilateralism is not perfection. Today’s consensus outcome is an important demonstration of our collective commitment to ongoing dialogue on our differences and to advance responsible state behavior in cyberspace. Thank you very much for your leadership and the excellent work of your team.

Chair: Thank you very much, New Zealand, for your vision. Ireland to be followed by Germany.

Ireland: Thank you very much, dear Chair. Ireland aligns with the EU statement, but wanted to come in to thank you, your team, the Secretariat, and the translators for your extraordinary efforts both this week and over past years. Your careful, thoughtful, and effective chairmanship has led to this consensus outcome, threading the narrow pathway, as you said, to success through the many conflicting opinions reflected here. This is a success for you, for us all, but also more broadly for the UN and for multilateralism. Of course, there were points we would have liked to see in the text, in particular on international law, IHL and IHRL, where we consider our many discussions in this process were not fully reflected in the text. in the text, but there is also much that is good in the text and which we strongly support. What you have achieved here provides the base and tools from which we can build the new global mechanism. We look forward to the challenging but vitally important work to come in the new mechanism, drawing on the work done over the past five years, and we also look forward to working with all here in that regard. Thank you.

Chair: Thank you very much, Ireland, for your brevity as well. Germany to be followed by Greece.

Germany: Chair, yesterday you alluded to the Open-Ended Working Group being the first step on a 1,000-mile journey. We believe with the decision today, we have made a major, important, and yes, historic step forward, ensuring a seamless transition to a single-track, inclusive, consensus-based, and action-oriented permanent mechanism. And we thank you and commend you and your team for your tireless efforts and leadership steering us towards convergence and to consensus today. Even if it is a major step forward, more steps will need to follow on this journey, and we have to remain ambitious to advance and implement a framework for responsible state behavior in cyberspace. And we look forward to take this on in the new single-track global mechanism. In addition to that, and for reasons of brevity, we would just like to align with the statement of the European Union and support the statement made by Fiji on behalf of a cross-regional group. To conclude, I want to again join others in wholeheartedly thanking you and congratulating you and your team and the Secretariat for your outstanding work. Thank you.

Chair: Thank you very much, Germany, for your brevity. Greece, to be followed by Albania.

Greece: Thank you, sir, for giving me the floor. Greece aligns with the statement delivered by the European Union. I would like to take this opportunity and extend our deepest gratitude to you and your team for all your efforts and commitment driving this group from the beginning all the way through the finish line. I am certain one of the first challenges that the future mechanism will face is finding a chair of the same caliber. For our delegation, it has been a privilege and an honor being part of this process, a process we see… as a milestone, not only to the subject at hand, but to multilateralism as a general. Thank you, Chair.

Chair: Thank you very much, Chris, for your brevity. Albania, to be followed by Papua New Guinea.

Albania: Honourable Chair, distinguished colleagues, on behalf of Albania, I am honoured to take the floor at this historic moment. After five years of dedicated work and five intensive days of negotiation, the Open-Ended Working Group has achieved consensus on a meaningful and action-oriented final report. This is a remarkable success for multilateralism and for the United Nations, especially as we mark the 80th anniversary. Albania strongly welcomes this outcome. We believe that despite the challenges, geopolitical context and the complexity of issues at stake, our collective efforts have delivered a report which consolidates the progress made throughout the years, reaffirms the importance of international law on cyberspace and strengthens the framework of responsible state behaviour. We are particularly pleased that the report emphasised capacity-building, confidence-building measures and the importance of inclusive participation. These are essential to building trust, resilience and security in the digital environment. The concrete actions and cooperative measures contained in this report will help all states, regardless of their level of development, to address the evolving security challenges in the use of ICT. This is a foundation upon which the future permanent mechanism can build, ensuring continuity and progress in our shared work. Albania is proud to have contributed to this progress and remains committed to an open, secure, stable, accessible and peaceful ICT environment. Let us continue to uphold the spirit of consensus and cooperation as we move working together. Thank you, Chair.

Chair: Thank you very much, Albania, for a kind statement. Papua New Guinea?

Papua New Guinea: Mr. Chair, Papua New Guinea aligns itself with the statement made earlier by the Pacific Island Forum and makes the following remarks in our national capacity. We echo the sentiments expressed of your stellar leadership and commitment to the framework for responsible state behavior in cyberspace, leading to today’s successful adoption of the final report. We thank you for guiding this process with dedication and inclusivity. We also commend the excellent efforts of your able and professional team. We recognize the work that has gone into finding a balance. We can see where compromises have been struck. We also acknowledge the generous support of donors to the Women in International Security and Cyberspace Fellowships for enabling more women, including from small island developing states like mine, to meaningfully engage in the work of the OEWG. I thank you, Chair.

Chair: Thank you very much, Papua New Guinea. Philippines, to be followed by Sierra Leone.

Malaysia: Thank you, Mr. Chair. The Philippine delegation aligns itself with the ASEAN statement, and in my national capacity I wish to extend our sincere congratulations to you, Mr. Chair, for your exceptional leadership and to your dedicated team and the Secretary for the tireless work, professionalism, and inclusive spirit throughout the years. The Philippines particularly appreciates the inclusion of initiatives such as the ICT Security Capacity Building Catalog in the final report, adopted final report. This reflects the maturing of our collective understanding of capacity building and provides a stronger foundation for operationalizing targeted needs-based support in the global mechanism, particularly for member states with limited ICT security capabilities. Philippines also expresses its appreciation to all member states for the flexibility and the constructive engagement demonstrated in the final stages of this process. The willingness to compromise and build consensus has allowed the group to grow. to deliver a credible and forward-looking outcome. Mr. Chair, the Philippines stands ready to support the continued strengthening of this process for delivering a result that reflects balance, inclusion, and future-oriented cooperation. Terima kasih. Maraming salamat.

Chair: Thank you very much, Philippines, for your kind statement. Sierra Leone, please.

Sierra Leone: Thank you, Mr. Chair, for giving us the floor. We will stay brief. We want to thank you and your outstanding team for steering the ship over the years. We thank the Women in Cyber Fellowship and their partners for their support as well. Mr. Chair, I would like to say that if patience was a protocol, yours would be end-to-end encrypted. We thank you.

Chair: Thank you very much, Sierra Leone, for your very, very kind words. Pakistan, for a brief intervention, do you want to come back? Okay, thank you very much, Pakistan. Thank you so much for your kind consideration, all of you, and your brevity. There is one other agenda item that remains on our work, which is other matters, and it is my understanding that there are really no other matters that need to be discussed. May I take it that it is the case? Australia, for a very brief remarks.

Australia: It’s a really important gender marker for measuring the degree of gender equality in the interventions made in this forum. And for context, when the OEWG began, similarly to other processes in the international security pillar, about one third of interventions were made by women. And since then, we’ve been tracking a very encouraging trend. And I want to confirm this figure, but I think it is 55%. It was 55% in February, and it’s 53% at this session. And it is very encouraging that we are now really getting gender balance into our interventions. And we’d like to commend all delegations for their efforts in promoting inclusive representation. Thank you.

Chair: Thank you very, very much, Australia, for the public service announcement, and for tracking the data, and most of all, for thanking for your work in this particular domain of encouraging and facilitating the participation of women delegates in our process. Not just Australia, but I think there’s a cross-regional group. And I take this opportunity to really commend all the women in cyber fellows who have been involved in this process. But not only that, but all the women delegates who have been involved in this process. Your role has been really critical in getting us to where we are in this process now. Thank you. So distinguished delegates, we have now completed all the agenda items. And therefore, our deliberations for the final session. So with your indulgence, I’d like to make a few closing remarks as chair of. the working group. It would be remiss on my part if I do not, at this point, as chair of this process, thank my own very, very excellent team of colleagues who have been with me. So before you give them a round of applause, I’d like to invite them to rise, Dr. Gillian Goh, Matthew Wong, Clarice Lim, and Dennis Scott. I must say that I’m very, very proud and so, so lucky to have them on my team. Gillian is an institution in the UN system, and the fact that she is from Singapore and has now moved back to Singapore is a source of great pride for me, and thank you for joining us. Gillian and Matthew and Clarice are really cyber Matthew and cyber Clarice, and I really could not have done this without them, but our secret weapon this week was our intern from the foreign ministry, Denise Chan, who is the young lady at the back. So she will be in some ways or other be involved in the future mechanism, which now has a name, Global Mechanism. Perhaps we could call it by a nickname, GMAC perhaps. UN Global Mechanism, GMAC for short perhaps. Second, I also want to thank the excellent, wonderful people on the podium. A lot of you have mentioned it, but it would be remiss on my part if I, as chair of the process, do not recognize the incredible work that they have done over the last a few years, and the patience they have shown to me, the support they have given, the very late nights, including yesterday, very late in the evening, going through the documents before the emails were sent out. So Catherine Priceman, please, please rise, Catherine. Also thank you, thank you very much, Catherine, and of course Secretary Alexander Lomia, Natalia Uliana, Natalia is behind, please rise, Alexander. And of course Virginia Browning, Gina, where are you? And also Orio Del Basto and Catherine, who are there at the secretariat table. And the excellent conference officers who are in the room by the side, over there, and also the wonderful, wonderful interpreters. They have been consistently giving us extra minutes, so thank you very much, thank you very much. I always start the meeting by wanting to finish at one, but it always exceeds the time allocated, as it is likely to do today, so very grateful to the wonderful work that they do, the interpreters, because without the interpreters, you’re not going to have multilingualism, and without multilingualism, you’re not going to have multilateralism. So I think it’s a very important part of the work of the UN. Another person, Under-Secretary General Izumi Nakamitsu of UNODA, has been a stalwart of support. I just texted her to say that we have adopted the report. She is very pleased and I think I wanted to take this opportunity to place on record my deep appreciation to UNODA and Under-Secretary-General and High Representative for Disarmament, Ms. Izumi Nakamitsu. Friends, a lot has been said and of course you know me, I can go on and on, but you know I want to be as brief as possible, but I think there are some things that need to be said. The outcome today is a win for multilateralism. It is a win for the United Nations. It is of course a win for our own process, the OEWG, and it is a step into the future of creating the global mechanism. So I think this is something that all of us can be incredibly satisfied with, and this is the result of your work. I have also been saying that at the UN, success is not guaranteed, but failure is not an option. And I think like any process at the UN, we have to work for success, we have to work for consensus, which is never granted, and I think this process has demonstrated that when there is a commitment and willingness to listen to each other, and when there is a spirit of flexibility, it is possible to take small steps forward. The UN is an exercise in incrementalism, and the UN is a very bold experiment started 80 years ago. And in a variety of domains, it is important that we give life to the spirit of the UN Charter by making things work. And I also wanted to share with you that looking back at this process, which started in 1998, as some of you pointed out, and some of you have been involved for more than a few months or years, but decades, we have done some incredible work. The GGE process laid some foundation stones. But looking back, I think there was a wisdom in beginning the OEWG process. I know the OEWG process was contested when it was first initiated and launched, but there is a certain wisdom in the process in the sense that it made things inclusive. It was no longer a limited circle of representatives, experts, 25, 30 people discussing issues. Those are important, but multilateralism means making things inclusive, making things transparent. And that is helpful to build trust, and that is helpful and needed to build confidence. So we made that transition from the GGE to the OEWG, and the two OEWGs now have produced consensus reports. And that has laid a very strong foundation for a single-track process leading into the future, the UN Global Mechanism. But mechanisms and institutions are only there as they are designed, but they will not fulfill their potential if there is no commitment, there is no patient cultivation of ideas and relationships to give the institutions the potential that they have. So my friends, the Global Mechanism. is very promising, filled with great potential, but the success of the global mechanism depends on all of you. This leads me to the next point, which is that I am so incredibly grateful that so many of you have contributed to the consensus that we have in this process, especially today. Each one of you have made it possible. In spite of the statements you have made to register the position of your delegation, and I know that behind the nameplates there are individuals who were committed to this process, and that, I think, is the reason for the consensus outcome we have today. So I’m incredibly grateful for that, and I thank each one of you for making this consensus outcome possible. Now, there are a lot of things that I wanted to say and scribbled, but I really want to look forward in terms of what we do in the First Committee. My intention is to present a very simple draft resolution in the First Committee, and my only plea to you is that that resolution should be kept simple. Please do not look at that resolution as a means to reopen or re-litigate issues. The First Committee resolution that will endorse the final report of this working group is intended to formalize and have things approved by the General Assembly, and then in the Fifth Committee, and for the mechanism to come into force starting from here. So the First Committee resolution that Singapore will table once again, as we did in previous years. please look at it as a procedural enabling resolution to endorse the outcome. So it is not my intention to see that as a re-opening of discussions on the outcome document. The other thing that I would kindly request is that in the first committee, I’d like to appeal to all delegations to just have one single resolution on ICT security, not multiple resolutions, because we now have made the decision to have a single-track process. And we can’t have a single-track process and then have multiple resolutions. So let’s have just one single, simple enabling resolution to endorse the outcome, and that will then open the door for the beginning of the global mechanism to start its work, starting with the organizational session, which needs to be convened no later than March next year. So that’s the other point that I wanted to make as well. And the final point is about stakeholders. I know that this has been a debate, but leaving aside the question of modalities, if the modalities are what they are, it will enable to some degree the participation of stakeholders, not to a perfect degree, but it will nevertheless enable them to participate. But my advice to you as a friend of this process, but also as your friend, is to keep an open mind to the participation of stakeholders. If you want to make the potential of the global mechanism great, and if you want everyone in the world… to understand what the global mechanism can do and what we have done is to really also find ways to engage stakeholders in the process. So that is my humble advice to you as your friend. Of course, there will be differences in points of view. There are also differences in points of view between governments. But I would also appeal to you that it is important to some extent that we continue to have a strong degree of mutual trust, mutual respect. Even if there is not so much trust, I think we need to start from the premise of respect. I think that’s what multilateralism is about. Even if there is deep distrust, I think we need to start from the point of view of respect. And that means listening to people. And I know that in this process it has been very difficult for some of you to even talk to someone else or be seen to be talking to someone else. These are the consequences of geopolitics. And it is my hope that at some point in the future, at a place like the United Nations, in a process that is run from the United Nations, that people will be able to talk to each other with respect in spite of whatever differences there might be. Because it is this talking to each other with respect and listening to each other with respect that is so much needed. That is so much needed, not only for the UN, but I think to make the world a better place. I see that I’m nearing 1.10, two minutes left. And I think I also need a microphone cut off. Otherwise it’s an occupational hazard of diplomats that they don’t know what to do. when to stop. But just to say that it’s been an incredible journey. Thank you very much. I wish you all a safe journey back home. Please stay in touch. I will no longer be on the podium, but I will be perhaps on the other side, on the seat when the next, when the global mechanism meets. And do not forget the family photo. I think we have the photographer in town. And so please remain here for a very quick family photo. In the meantime, thank you very much, the meeting is adjourned.

Agreement points

Appreciation for Chair’s Leadership and Process Management

Speakers

– India
– Vanuatu
– Tunisia
– China
– European Union
– Brazil
– Egypt
– Mauritius
– Israel
– Cuba
– Algeria
– New Zealand
– Pakistan
– Albania
– Tonga
– Venezuela
– El Salvador
– Islamic Republic of Iran
– Malawi
– Ghana
– Mozambique
– Fiji
– Papua New Guinea
– Ireland
– Philippines
– Switzerland
– Malaysia
– France
– Colombia
– Republic of Korea
– Greece
– Germany

Arguments

Deep appreciation for exemplary leadership over five years

Thanks for respect shown to small island developing states

Commendation for outstanding leadership and serious participation

Recognition of Chair’s exceptional diplomatic skills and leadership

Recognition of Chair’s wise leadership allowing historic achievement

Heartfelt thanks for thoughtful leadership and effective chairmanship

Gratitude for stellar leadership and commitment to framework

Thanks for patient, balanced and inclusive leadership

Appreciation for exceptional leadership and inclusive approach

Recognition of Chair’s commendable and effective job performance

Summary

Universal appreciation and gratitude expressed by all speakers for the Chair’s exceptional leadership, diplomatic skills, patience, inclusivity, and commitment throughout the five-year OEWG process, with many noting the Chair’s ability to navigate complex negotiations and build consensus among diverse viewpoints.

Topics

Legal and regulatory

Support for Conference Room Paper (CRP) Adoption

Speakers

– India
– Vanuatu
– Tunisia
– China
– European Union
– United Kingdom
– Brazil
– Egypt
– Mauritius
– Israel
– Cuba
– Algeria
– New Zealand
– Pakistan
– Albania
– Australia
– Switzerland
– Canada
– Nicaragua
– Malaysia
– France
– Colombia
– Venezuela
– El Salvador
– Islamic Republic of Iran
– Malawi
– Ghana
– Mozambique
– Fiji
– Papua New Guinea
– Ireland
– Philippines
– Russian Federation
– Argentina
– Portugal
– Greece
– Germany

Arguments

Support for CRP as balanced document despite imperfections

Willingness to adopt CRP recognizing diplomatic compromises

Joining consensus while expressing reservations on international law sections

Support for CRP as finely balanced package

Appreciation for balanced approach and consensus achievement

Welcome of CRP adoption by consensus

Support for consensus outcome as meaningful step forward

Joining consensus despite disappointments with certain sections

Support for final report as balanced and pragmatic document

Flexibility shown in spirit of consensus

Summary

All speakers ultimately supported the adoption of the Conference Room Paper despite various reservations and disappointments, recognizing it as a balanced compromise that enables consensus and represents a meaningful step forward in establishing the global mechanism.

Topics

Legal and regulatory

Recognition of Multilateralism and UN Framework Success

Speakers

– India
– China
– European Union
– Brazil
– Pakistan
– Albania
– Chair
– Greece
– Germany

Arguments

Recognition of achievement as testament to multilateral dialogue value

View of success as important for multilateral system confidence

Appreciation for success demonstrating multilateralism effectiveness

Welcome of consensus outcome as historic milestone

Alignment with consensus as victory for multilateralism

Recognition of outcome as win for multilateralism and United Nations

Recognition of process as milestone for multilateralism

Recognition of major historic step forward ensuring seamless transition

Summary

Multiple speakers emphasized that the successful consensus outcome represents a victory for multilateralism and demonstrates the effectiveness of the UN framework, particularly significant given current challenging geopolitical circumstances.

Topics

Legal and regulatory

Support for Women in Cyber Fellowship and Gender Inclusion

Speakers

– Tonga
– Ghana
– Mozambique
– Fiji
– Australia
– Colombia

Arguments

Appreciation for Women in International Security and Cyber Fellowship

Thanks for Women in Cyber Fellowship enabling meaningful participation

Welcome of references to gender included in final report

Recognition of valuable role of Women in Cyber Fellowship

Recognition of meaningful participation and leadership of women

Summary

Strong consensus among speakers about the value and importance of the Women in International Security and Cyberspace Fellowship, with recognition that it has been transformative in enabling meaningful participation of women from small island developing states and building a global community of cyber practitioners.

Topics

Human rights | Development

Capacity Building and Development Priorities

Speakers

– India
– Tunisia
– Algeria
– Russian Federation
– Argentina
– Philippines

Arguments

Pleasure with establishment of Global ICT Security Cooperation Portal

Support for dedicated thematic group on ICT security capacity building

Disappointment with weakness of capacity building section

Concern about insufficient provision for capacity building

Welcome of consensus decision to create capacity building thematic group

Gratification with incorporation of capacity building thematic group

Appreciation for inclusion of ICT Security Capacity Building Catalog

Summary

Speakers agreed on the importance of capacity building, with appreciation for the establishment of capacity building mechanisms and thematic groups, though some expressed disappointment that more ambitious funding mechanisms were not included.

Topics

Development | Cybersecurity

Similar viewpoints

These speakers shared significant disappointment about the reduction or removal of international law content from the final report, particularly regarding international humanitarian law and the lack of a dedicated thematic group on international law application in cyberspace.

Speakers

– Tunisia
– Egypt
– Algeria
– Canada
– Ireland
– Australia

Arguments

Disappointment with removal of international law section and thematic group

Concern about how international law compliance will be approached

Disappointment with removal of dedicated space for international law discussion

Regret that final report fails to capture substantive convergence on international law

Disappointment that international law chapter doesn’t reflect progress made

Topics

Legal and regulatory | Human rights

These speakers shared a position rejecting the automatic application of international law to cyberspace, emphasizing state sovereignty and supporting the development of new legally binding instruments rather than applying existing international law frameworks.

Speakers

– Russian Federation
– Nicaragua
– Cuba

Arguments

Rejection of automatic application of international law to digital sphere

Emphasis on sovereign rights and non-interference principles

Support for development of universal convention on international information security

Topics

Legal and regulatory | Cybersecurity

Both speakers expressed specific reservations about gender-related language in the document, with the US dissociating from gender references entirely and Argentina clarifying their interpretation of gender as referring only to two biological sexes.

Speakers

– United States
– Argentina

Arguments

Dissociation with specific paragraphs on gender and SDGs

Explanation of position on gender terminology referring to two sexes

Topics

Human rights

Small island developing states and smaller countries expressed particular gratitude for the inclusive approach that gave them equal voice regardless of size or resources, and specifically appreciated support mechanisms like the Women in Cyber Fellowship.

Speakers

– Vanuatu
– Tonga
– Fiji
– Papua New Guinea
– Mauritius
– Malawi
– El Salvador

Arguments

Thanks for respect shown to small island developing states

Appreciation for Women in International Security and Cyber Fellowship

Gratitude for stellar leadership and commitment to framework

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory

Unexpected consensus

Universal Support Despite Significant Reservations

Speakers

– Tunisia
– Egypt
– Algeria
– Russian Federation
– United States
– Iran
– Cuba
– Nicaragua

Arguments

Joining consensus while expressing reservations on international law sections

Joining consensus despite disappointments with certain sections

Concern that report doesn’t fully reflect breadth of threat landscape

Dissociation with specific paragraphs on gender and SDGs

Explanation

Despite expressing significant concerns and reservations about key aspects of the final report (international law provisions, threat landscape coverage, gender references), all speakers ultimately joined the consensus. This demonstrates remarkable diplomatic flexibility and commitment to the multilateral process over perfect outcomes.

Topics

Legal and regulatory

Consensus on Future Mechanism Structure Despite Procedural Concerns

Speakers

– Islamic Republic of Iran
– Nicaragua
– Russian Federation
– Portugal
– France
– Germany

Arguments

Emphasis on consensus-based decision-making in global mechanism

Support for single-track, state-led, consensus-based global mechanism

Support for mandate providing regular institutional dialogue on responsible state behavior

Readiness to support operationalization through First Committee resolution

Commitment to continued work in new single-track global mechanism

Explanation

Despite having different views on substantive issues, there was unexpected consensus on the structural and procedural aspects of the future global mechanism, with all speakers agreeing on consensus-based decision-making and the single-track approach.

Topics

Legal and regulatory | Cybersecurity

Overall assessment

Summary

The discussion demonstrated remarkable consensus on procedural and structural issues, with universal appreciation for the Chair’s leadership, support for the CRP adoption, recognition of the process as a victory for multilateralism, and agreement on the importance of capacity building and women’s participation. However, significant substantive disagreements remained on international law application, threat landscape coverage, and gender-related language.

Consensus level

High procedural consensus with moderate substantive consensus. The ability to achieve unanimous adoption despite significant reservations demonstrates the strength of multilateral diplomacy and commitment to the UN framework. The consensus enables the transition to a permanent global mechanism while preserving space for continued dialogue on contentious issues. This suggests a mature diplomatic process where participants prioritized collective progress over individual preferences, setting a positive foundation for future work in the global mechanism.

Different viewpoints

International Law Provisions and Thematic Groups

Speakers

– Tunisia
– Egypt
– Algeria
– Australia
– Canada
– Ireland
– Russian Federation

Arguments

The fact that the section reserved for international law and cyberspace was removed exacerbates concerns by certain states regarding the use of ICTs

The omission of a dedicated DTG on the application of international law in the context of cyberspace is very alarming

Australia is disappointed that the international law chapter does not capture all the progress made and emerging convergence reached over almost five years

Canada profoundly regrets that the final report fails to capture the substantive convergence on international law that became clear in the room

An automatic and unconditional application of international law to the digital sphere is unacceptable

Summary

Arab states, African states, and Western countries disagreed on international law provisions. Arab/African states were concerned about removal of dedicated international law sections and thematic groups, while Western countries regretted that convergence on international law wasn’t fully captured. Russia opposed automatic application of international law to cyberspace.

Topics

Legal and regulatory | Human rights

Gender References and Terminology

Speakers

– United States
– Argentina
– Fiji

Arguments

The United States remains deeply disappointed that the report retains references to gender and the Sustainable Development Goals

Argentina understands the word gender in the framework of international law as referring to two sexes, male and female, in accordance with the Rome Statute 7.3

Fiji welcomes the references to gender included in the final report and highlights the valuable role of the Women in International Security and Cyberspace Fellowship

Summary

The US opposed gender references entirely, Argentina provided a restrictive interpretation limiting gender to two sexes, while Fiji and cross-regional groups welcomed gender references and women’s participation initiatives.

Topics

Human rights

Stakeholder Participation Modalities

Speakers

– Portugal
– Russian Federation
– Nicaragua

Arguments

Portugal expresses disappointment that Member States were not able to agree on more equitable and transparent future modalities for selection of non-governmental interested parties

The participation of non-state actors in the activities of the OEWG were of limited utility when it comes to conflict settlement and building up technical capacity

Nicaragua welcomes that accredited stakeholders will participate on a non-objection basis with solely consultative status, maintaining the strictly intergovernmental nature

Summary

Portugal wanted more inclusive stakeholder participation, Russia viewed non-state actors as having limited utility and potentially undermining diplomatic efforts, while Nicaragua and like-minded states supported restrictive consultative-only status to maintain intergovernmental nature.

Topics

Legal and regulatory

Capacity Building Mechanisms and Funding

Speakers

– Tunisia
– Algeria
– Russian Federation

Arguments

The weakness of the section on capacity building, at a time when we are hoping that a thematic group dedicated to this issue, it was not possible to set up a voluntary fund or a fellowship program

Algeria maintains that the content and recommendations regarding capacity building are significantly lower than expectations. Without concrete steps to establish a UN-led capacity building vehicle with adequate resources, the discussions will not realize their desired potential

Russia welcomes the consensus decision of the OEWG to create a thematic group on capacity building under the Global Mechanism, viewing this as an important step toward overcoming the digital divide between countries

Summary

Arab and African states expressed disappointment with insufficient capacity building provisions and lack of concrete funding mechanisms, while Russia welcomed the capacity building thematic group as sufficient progress toward addressing digital divides.

Topics

Development

Unexpected differences

Sustainable Development Goals References

Speakers

– United States
– Argentina

Arguments

The United States remains deeply disappointed that the report retains references to gender and the Sustainable Development Goals. The Sustainable Development Goals advance a program of soft global governance that is inconsistent with U.S. sovereignty

Argentina recalls that Agenda 2030 is not legally binding that each state in exercise of their sovereignty has the right to interpret and pursue freely

Explanation

The disagreement over SDG references was unexpected as these are widely accepted UN frameworks. The US opposition based on sovereignty concerns and Argentina’s emphasis on non-binding interpretation revealed deeper tensions about global governance frameworks that weren’t anticipated in a cybersecurity context.

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory

Threat Landscape Comprehensiveness

Speakers

– Islamic Republic of Iran

Arguments

Iran remains concerned that the final report does not fully reflect the entire range of the threat landscape, as it overlooks several threats identified by states during OEWG deliberations, particularly those related to private sector responsibilities and platforms with extraterritorial impact

Explanation

Iran’s specific concern about private sector responsibilities and platforms with extraterritorial impact was unexpected, as most other speakers focused on state-to-state issues. This highlighted a different perspective on cybersecurity threats that emphasized private sector accountability rather than just state behavior.

Topics

Cybersecurity

Overall assessment

Summary

The main areas of disagreement centered on international law provisions, gender references, stakeholder participation, and capacity building mechanisms. Despite these disagreements, all speakers ultimately joined consensus.

Disagreement level

Moderate disagreement level with significant implications. While all parties achieved consensus, the disagreements reveal fundamental differences in approach to cybersecurity governance – particularly between Western emphasis on international law convergence versus developing country concerns about capacity building and sovereignty, and between inclusive versus restrictive approaches to stakeholder participation. These underlying tensions will likely continue in the future global mechanism.

Partial agreements

Similar viewpoints

These speakers shared significant disappointment about the reduction or removal of international law content from the final report, particularly regarding international humanitarian law and the lack of a dedicated thematic group on international law application in cyberspace.

Speakers

– Tunisia
– Egypt
– Algeria
– Canada
– Ireland
– Australia

Arguments

Disappointment with removal of international law section and thematic group

Concern about how international law compliance will be approached

Disappointment with removal of dedicated space for international law discussion

Regret that final report fails to capture substantive convergence on international law

Disappointment that international law chapter doesn’t reflect progress made

Topics

Legal and regulatory | Human rights

These speakers shared a position rejecting the automatic application of international law to cyberspace, emphasizing state sovereignty and supporting the development of new legally binding instruments rather than applying existing international law frameworks.

Speakers

– Russian Federation
– Nicaragua
– Cuba

Arguments

Rejection of automatic application of international law to digital sphere

Emphasis on sovereign rights and non-interference principles

Support for development of universal convention on international information security

Topics

Legal and regulatory | Cybersecurity

Both speakers expressed specific reservations about gender-related language in the document, with the US dissociating from gender references entirely and Argentina clarifying their interpretation of gender as referring only to two biological sexes.

Speakers

– United States
– Argentina

Arguments

Dissociation with specific paragraphs on gender and SDGs

Explanation of position on gender terminology referring to two sexes

Topics

Human rights

Small island developing states and smaller countries expressed particular gratitude for the inclusive approach that gave them equal voice regardless of size or resources, and specifically appreciated support mechanisms like the Women in Cyber Fellowship.

Speakers

– Vanuatu
– Tonga
– Fiji
– Papua New Guinea
– Mauritius
– Malawi
– El Salvador

Arguments

Thanks for respect shown to small island developing states

Appreciation for Women in International Security and Cyber Fellowship

Gratitude for stellar leadership and commitment to framework

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory

Key takeaways

The Open-Ended Working Group (OEWG) successfully adopted its final report by consensus, establishing a single-track permanent mechanism called the ‘Global Mechanism’ for responsible state behavior in cyberspace

The consensus represents a significant achievement for multilateralism and the UN framework, despite challenging geopolitical circumstances

All delegations expressed some level of dissatisfaction with aspects of the final report, but showed flexibility in the spirit of consensus and diplomatic compromise

The report consolidates decades of work since 1998 and builds upon previous GGE and OEWG processes to create a framework for the future permanent mechanism

Strong appreciation was expressed for the Chair’s leadership over five years and the inclusive, transparent process that enabled meaningful participation by all member states

The Women in International Security and Cyberspace Fellowship was widely praised for enabling greater gender balance and meaningful participation of women delegates

The process demonstrated that multilateral consensus is possible even in difficult geopolitical times when there is commitment to listening and flexibility

Resolutions and action items

Adoption of the final report of the OEWG as contained in document A.AC.292.2025.CRP.1 by consensus

Adoption of the procedural report authorizing the Chair to finalize it

Establishment of the Global Mechanism (UN Global Mechanism) as a permanent single-track process starting with an organizational session no later than March 2026

Singapore to present a simple enabling resolution in the First Committee to endorse the final report and formalize the outcome

Chair’s appeal for only one single resolution on ICT security in the First Committee, not multiple resolutions

Future mechanism to include dedicated thematic groups on capacity building and cross-cutting working groups

Establishment of the Global ICT Security Cooperation and Capacity Building Portal as a concrete outcome

Delegations given option to submit written statements within three weeks to be compiled by the Secretariat

Unresolved issues

Concerns about insufficient provisions for international law discussions in the future mechanism, particularly regarding international humanitarian law

Disagreement over the automatic applicability of international law to cyberspace, with some states rejecting this approach

Insufficient capacity building mechanisms and funding, including lack of voluntary fund or fellowship program

Concerns about stakeholder participation modalities and transparency in the future mechanism

Debate over the neutrality of technologies concept mentioned in the report

Disagreement over references to gender and Sustainable Development Goals in the report

Concerns about the threat landscape not fully reflecting all identified threats, particularly those related to private sector responsibilities

Questions about how compliance with international law obligations will be approached under the new mechanism

Suggested compromises

Chair’s ‘surgical and strategic’ approach to amendments, making minimal changes to maintain overall balance

Acceptance of imperfect document in the spirit of consensus, with delegations showing flexibility despite reservations

Maintaining intergovernmental nature while allowing stakeholder participation under specific modalities

Inclusion of capacity building thematic group as compromise for developing countries’ priorities

Consensus-based decision making to be maintained in the future mechanism to respect all member states’ interests

Iran’s proposal to compile a list of threats identified by states throughout the OEWG process as reference for future work

Arab Group’s request for the future mechanism Chair to convene focused roundtables on international law application

Balance between different priorities across the five pillars of the mandate while respecting state sovereignty

The Chair’s opening statement about the CRP being ‘a very finely balanced package’ and walking ‘a very fine line, almost a tight rope’ while making only ‘surgical amendments and tweaks’ rather than extensive changes.

Speaker

Chair (Ambassador Gafoor)

Reason

This comment is insightful because it frames the entire discussion around the delicate nature of diplomatic consensus-building. The Chair explicitly acknowledges that achieving balance means everyone will experience ‘disappointment, displeasure, dissatisfaction, and even possibly frustration’ – a rare moment of diplomatic candor about the inherent compromises in multilateral negotiations.

Impact

This comment set the tone for the entire session by establishing realistic expectations and discouraging further amendments. It created a framework where delegates understood that requesting changes could ‘upset the apple cart’ and derail five years of work. This strategic framing helped secure consensus by making delegates reluctant to reopen negotiations.

The Chair’s philosophical observation: ‘avoid making the search for perfection the enemy of the good’ and describing the report as ‘a crystallization of efforts not just this week, not just this past few months, not just these past few years, but a consolidation of decades of work starting with previous OEWGs and GGE processes.’

Speaker

Chair (Ambassador Gafoor)

Reason

This comment provides crucial historical context and philosophical grounding for the negotiations. It reframes the current document not as an isolated product but as part of a decades-long evolution in international cyber governance, making it harder for delegates to dismiss the current compromise.

Impact

This historical perspective helped delegates view their current dissatisfactions within a longer arc of progress. It shifted the discussion from focusing on immediate shortcomings to appreciating incremental advancement, contributing significantly to the consensus-building atmosphere.

Tunisia’s statement on behalf of the Arab Group expressing ‘concerns regarding the use of ICTs’ and noting ‘clear violations of IHL in the Middle East with the use of ICTs’ while requesting ‘the Chair of the Mechanism to hold a conference on the application of international law.’

Speaker

Tunisia (on behalf of Arab Group)

Reason

This comment is thought-provoking because it connects abstract cyber governance discussions to concrete geopolitical realities. It demonstrates how current conflicts directly influence multilateral cyber negotiations and reveals the tension between consensus-building and addressing urgent security concerns.

Impact

Despite expressing significant reservations, Tunisia’s decision to ‘join the consensus’ while maintaining these concerns established a pattern for other delegations. It showed that strong disagreement with specific elements didn’t preclude overall support, encouraging other hesitant delegations to follow suit.

China’s observation about the ‘stress test’ of multilateralism: ‘Given the current geopolitical landscape, which is filled with challenges, hot-spot conflicts in regions are ongoing, and in countries we see that some countries are not so keen on the concept of multilateralism… The success of our meeting is of a special, great significance.’

Speaker

China

Reason

This comment provides a meta-analysis of the achievement, contextualizing the consensus within broader challenges to multilateral cooperation. It’s insightful because it recognizes that technical cyber governance discussions cannot be separated from larger geopolitical tensions.

Impact

China’s framing of the consensus as a victory for multilateralism itself elevated the significance of the achievement beyond cyber governance, encouraging other delegates to view their participation as supporting the broader multilateral system during a period of global tension.

The Chair’s closing reflection on the evolution from GGE to OEWG: ‘there was a wisdom in beginning the OEWG process… it made things inclusive. It was no longer a limited circle of representatives, experts, 25, 30 people discussing issues… multilateralism means making things inclusive, making things transparent.’

Speaker

Chair (Ambassador Gafoor)

Reason

This comment provides important institutional analysis about the democratization of cyber governance discussions. It’s insightful because it explains how procedural changes (moving from expert groups to open-ended working groups) can fundamentally alter the nature and legitimacy of international negotiations.

Impact

This observation helped frame the entire five-year process as a successful experiment in inclusive multilateralism, providing intellectual justification for the consensus approach and reinforcing the value of the process itself, regardless of specific textual outcomes.

Australia’s data point about gender representation: ‘when the OEWG began… about one third of interventions were made by women. And since then, we’ve been tracking a very encouraging trend… it is 55%. It was 55% in February, and it’s 53% at this session.’

Speaker

Australia

Reason

This empirical observation is thought-provoking because it provides concrete evidence of changing participation patterns in international security discussions, traditionally male-dominated fields. It demonstrates how intentional efforts (like the Women in Cyber Fellowship) can measurably impact diplomatic representation.

Impact

While brief, this data point validated the process’s commitment to inclusivity and provided tangible evidence of progress beyond the substantive negotiations, reinforcing the broader theme of the OEWG as an evolution in diplomatic practice.

Overall assessment

The key comments shaped this discussion by establishing a framework of managed expectations and historical perspective that facilitated consensus despite significant substantive disagreements. The Chair’s strategic framing of the document as a ‘finely balanced package’ that shouldn’t be reopened, combined with the historical contextualization of the work as part of decades-long progress, created psychological pressure for consensus while allowing delegates to express reservations. The pattern established by Tunisia – expressing strong concerns while still joining consensus – provided a template for other delegations to follow. China’s meta-commentary about multilateralism under stress elevated the stakes beyond cyber governance to the credibility of multilateral cooperation itself. Together, these comments created a narrative arc where consensus became not just desirable but necessary for the legitimacy of both the process and multilateralism more broadly. The discussion’s success lay not in resolving substantive disagreements but in creating a framework where those disagreements could coexist with procedural consensus.

How will the application of international law, particularly international humanitarian law, be approached under the new global mechanism given the removal of the dedicated thematic group on international law?

Speaker

Tunisia (on behalf of Arab Group), Egypt, Iran

Explanation

Multiple delegations expressed concern about the significant reduction in international law content and removal of the dedicated thematic group, particularly regarding IHL application in cyberspace

How will adequate, sufficient and predictable funding be established for capacity building initiatives, including a voluntary fund and fellowship program?

Speaker

Tunisia (on behalf of Arab Group), Egypt

Explanation

Delegations noted the weakness of capacity building provisions and lack of concrete funding mechanisms to support developing states

How will the global mechanism address the diverse landscape of ICT threats that reflects the realities of all countries and regions?

Speaker

Iran

Explanation

Iran expressed concern that the threat section doesn’t fully reflect the breadth of threats identified by states, particularly those related to private sector responsibilities

How will discussions on legally binding obligations in ICT security continue under the future mechanism?

Speaker

Cuba, Nicaragua (on behalf of like-minded states)

Explanation

Several delegations emphasized the need to continue work toward legally binding instruments to address legal gaps in cybersecurity

How will the modalities for stakeholder participation be improved to ensure more equitable and transparent selection processes?

Speaker

Portugal, Chair

Explanation

Portugal noted disappointment with stakeholder participation modalities, and the Chair encouraged keeping an open mind to stakeholder engagement

How will the future mechanism ensure that all five pillars of the mandate are treated equally during discussions?

Speaker

Nicaragua (on behalf of like-minded states)

Explanation

The group emphasized the importance of balanced treatment of all mandate pillars in future discussions

How will the review conferences of the mechanism evaluate results and potentially improve the initial structure and stakeholder participation modalities?

Speaker

Portugal

Explanation

Portugal noted that member states will remain free to revisit the working group structure and improve stakeholder participation at review conferences

How will the global mechanism work toward a voluntary universal system of periodic compliance reporting for responsible state behavior?

Speaker

Portugal

Explanation

Portugal envisioned the mechanism contributing to a long-term system of mutual accountability and compliance monitoring