Uruguayan President Yamandú Orsi defended the United Nations' relevance and condemned the economic embargo on Cuba before the General Assembly on Thursday, in an address of just under twenty minutes that contrasted with that of his Argentine counterpart, Javier Milei, two days earlier from the same podium.
“The UN has more reason to exist every day,” Orsi said, while calling for multilateral institutions that are “more effective, more representative” and closer to people's needs. “We cannot go on being hostages to the will of a handful of countries that can be counted on the fingers of one hand,” he said, referring to the workings of the Security Council. Milei, on Tuesday, had described the organisation as a fossilised institution and questioned the point of resolutions that go unenforced.
Orsi speaks from a dual regional position: he holds the pro tempore presidency of Mercosur since July 1 and that of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States since March 21. It was his second address to the assembly since taking office on March 1, 2025.
The passage with the greatest domestic political impact concerned Cuba. “We cannot be indifferent to the pain of an endless state of war, the fear and pain generated by organised crime, the permanent threat of terrorism, the repression that arises from tyranny, or the suffering caused by a tight economic blockade such as the one the Cuban people endure,” he said. Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva had already denounced the embargo on Tuesday.
The speech opened with a greeting to the American people on the 250th anniversary of their independence, marked in July, and a reference to that country's founding values: that people hold rights, that life, liberty and happiness should guide every government, and that the governed decide who governs them, principles he said were inherited in South America half a century later.
AHORA | HABLA EL PRESIDENTE ORSI EN LA ONU
— Telemundo (@TelemundoUY) September 24, 2026
“Ninguna nación tiene el monopolio de las soluciones; ningún pueblo debería ser condenado a elegir entre modelos impuestos desde afuera”
“Hoy vivimos un tiempo particularmente difícil” con “desigualdad extrema”, “pobreza” y ”las… pic.twitter.com/MZ7Z5cEK0Z
Orsi described Uruguay as a country “of great convictions” rather than “great stridency”, championed humility in international relations — “nobody is more than anybody”, “no country owns the absolute truth” — and said no people should be forced to choose between models imposed from outside. He reaffirmed Uruguay's participation in UN peacekeeping missions and argued that peace is not “simply the absence of war”. He closed with the phrase “we are and we transform ourselves together”.
The president avoided taking sides in ongoing conflicts and did not mention Gaza or the Middle East. “We do not believe that taking one side or the other in a war, a confrontation or a dispute necessarily helps resolve it. Often, on the contrary, it deepens those divisions,” he said. In another passage, without naming any country, he said: “We know well that this is not about good guys and bad guys. Often the good become bad very quickly, or those we condemned harshly yesterday magically become reference points in our alliance for good.” Executive sources cited by the Uruguayan daily El País read that passage as distancing from US policy towards Venezuela; the president made no reference to that country.
Figures from the National Party, unnamed in that same coverage, called the speech “vague” and said the president had acted as “a spokesman for the Cuban regime”. Reception within the governing coalition was favourable, including among sectors that have voiced differences with the government's foreign policy: Socialist senator Gustavo González highlighted the reference to the embargo as “a humanitarian situation that must be addressed”.
Top Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesNo comments for this story
Please log in or register (it’s free!) to comment. Login with Facebook
Facts Only
* Uruguayan President Yamandú Orsi defended the UN's relevance and condemned the economic embargo on Cuba at the General Assembly.
* Orsi called for multilateral institutions that are "more effective, more representative" and closer to people's needs.
* He stated that nations cannot be hostages to the will of a few countries regarding the Security Council.
* Orsi spoke from his positions as pro tempore president of Mercosur and the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States.
* He addressed the pain caused by the Cuban economic blockade, organized crime, terrorism, tyranny, and state of war.
* The speech opened with a greeting to the American people regarding their independence anniversary.
* Orsi cited founding values: rights, liberty, and happiness guiding government, and the governed deciding governance.
* Orsi stated that no nation has a monopoly on solutions and people should not be forced to choose between imposed models.
* He argued that peace is not simply the absence of war.
* Orsi avoided naming specific countries or mentioning Gaza or the Middle East in his remarks about conflict.
Executive Summary
Full Take
The address illustrates a rhetorical strategy focused on asserting moral authority and promoting universal principles while navigating highly charged geopolitical issues. Orsi utilized a framework rooted in shared historical concepts—liberty, rights, and self-determination—to establish an appeal that transcends specific political alignments, positioning Uruguay as a champion of humility and multilateralism. The shift from addressing the specific injustice of the Cuban embargo to a broader philosophical stance on international relations reveals an attempt to build legitimacy by appealing to abstract ethical concerns rather than concrete diplomatic maneuvering.
The avoidance of taking sides in conflicts like Gaza or the Middle East demonstrates a calculated effort to create rhetorical distance, framing the speaker as an objective mediator rather than an actor within polarized conflicts. This technique is employed when the goal is to establish a position outside the binary, suggesting that true progress lies beyond simplistic adversarial choices. However, the subsequent reaction from domestic political actors, such as unnamed National Party figures labeling the speech "vague" or accusing him of acting as a "spokesman for the Cuban regime," suggests that the philosophical appeal did not successfully override pre-existing partisan narratives regarding foreign policy stances. This reveals a pattern where high-level moral discourse often collides with entrenched domestic political interpretations, regardless of the speaker's intent to transcend those views.
The underlying tension lies in reconciling the ideal of universal human rights and multilateral cooperation with the reality of national self-interest and geopolitical conflict. The statement that "we transform ourselves together" is an assertion of shared agency, yet the immediate friction generated suggests a gap between aspirational rhetoric and political positioning. What concerns is whether this emphasis on abstract principles can effectively mitigate the tangible pressures imposed by real-world economic coercion and conflict, or if it functions more as a layer of symbolic defense rather than a mechanism for tangible change.
Bridge Questions: How do societies balance the appeal of universal ethical frameworks against immediate, localized political demands? What mechanisms exist for translating aspirational multilateralism into enforceable action when internal political structures resist external consensus? If leaders focus on avoiding polarization, what responsibility remains to actively mediate entrenched partisan divides in international affairs?
Sentinel — Human
This text exhibits the characteristics of human-written journalism, synthesizing multiple political statements and contextual reactions into a cohesive report on a diplomatic event.