Milei Slams UN as ‘Useless’ Over Falklands Dispute

Argentine President Javier Milei has criticised the United Nations, describing the organisation as “useless” and accusing it of failing to make progress on the longstanding Falkland Islands sovereignty dispute between Argentina and the United Kingdom.

Milei made the remarks on Wednesday, September 23, while addressing the 81st United Nations General Assembly in New York. He used the speech to renew Argentina’s claim to the islands, which Argentina calls the Malvinas, and demand a peaceful resolution to the dispute.

The Argentine president accused the UN of failing to act on resolutions concerning the Falklands and said the organisation had effectively “looked the other way” while the dispute remained unresolved.

Milei pointed particularly to UN General Assembly Resolution 31/49, adopted in 1976, which called on Argentina and the UK to refrain from unilateral actions that could complicate the sovereignty dispute while negotiations continued. The UN has repeatedly called on both countries to pursue negotiations for a peaceful and lasting settlement.

READ ALSO:

• Lagos Arrests Man Over Viral Video of Toddler Being Flogged
• Kwara Police Deny Shooting Motorcyclist at Oyun Bridge, Explain Viral Video
• Police Probe Alleged Self-Kidnapping of Adeleke’s Aide in Osun

The dispute has gained fresh attention amid tensions over offshore oil exploration around the Falkland Islands. Argentina has objected to British-backed oil activities in the area and recently introduced measures aimed at increasing sanctions against companies involved in activities it considers unauthorised.

The UK, however, maintains that the Falkland Islands are British and says the islanders have the right to determine their own future and develop their natural resources. The British government has also rejected Argentine pressure on companies involved in economic activities around the islands.

Milei reaffirmed Argentina’s position that the Falklands are Argentine territory and called for the UK to return to negotiations. He stressed that Argentina’s claim would be pursued peacefully.

The disagreement over the islands dates back decades and led to the Falklands War in 1982, when Argentina invaded the territory and Britain sent military forces to retake it. The conflict ended with Argentina’s surrender after about 10 weeks.

The islands have remained under British administration since then, while Argentina has continued to press its sovereignty claim through diplomatic and international channels.

Beyond the Falklands dispute, Milei used his UN address to criticise the organisation’s broader role in international affairs. He accused the UN of failing to adequately address collective security, human rights, conflict and terrorism, arguing that it had become ineffective in dealing with major global crises.

His latest remarks come as Argentina and the UK remain divided over sovereignty, negotiations and the development of natural resources around the islands. While Buenos Aires continues to demand negotiations over sovereignty, London maintains its position that the Falkland Islanders’ right to self-determination must be respected.

Milei’s intervention has therefore brought the Falklands dispute back into focus at the UN, with the disagreement now also linked to the increasingly contentious issue of offshore oil exploration.

Milei Slams UN as ‘Useless’ Over Falklands Dispute

Iran Delegation Walks Out as Trump Threatens to ‘Annihilate’ Islamic Republic

Members of the Iranian delegation walked out of the United Nations General Assembly during US President Donald Trump’s address after he threatened to “annihilate” the Islamic Republic if Washington and Tehran fail to reach an agreement to end the conflict.

The dramatic walkout occurred on Tuesday, September 22, during the opening day of the 81st United Nations General Assembly (UNGA 81) in New York, where Trump devoted a significant portion of his speech to defending the US military campaign against Iran.

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, who were in New York for the annual UN meeting, did not attend Trump’s address in the General Assembly chamber. Most members of Iran’s delegation who were present left the hall about 10 minutes into the speech, while a lower-ranking Iranian diplomat remained in the chamber.

Trump used the address to defend the US military action against Iran, arguing that the campaign had prevented Tehran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

He said Washington faced a choice between reaching an agreement that would allow Iran to rebuild and taking further military action against the country.

Trump asked whether a deal would allow Iran to become “a far greater country” or whether the United States should “annihilate the Islamic Republic” and “drive them into hell with no chance of survival.”

The remarks represented a fresh escalation in Trump’s public warnings against Iran, although he simultaneously indicated that he expected diplomacy to eventually produce an agreement.

Trump said he believed a deal could be reached after the November 3 US midterm elections, while insisting that the election would not determine his administration’s policy towards Iran.

He also called on other countries to join the United States in imposing economic pressure on Tehran, arguing that international isolation would increase pressure on the Iranian government to negotiate.

READ ALSO:

• 2027: Tompolo-Backed Group Deploys 44 Vehicles for Tinubu-Shettima Campaign in Borno
• MTN, Gates Foundation Launch $25m AI Maternal Health Initiative for 500,000 Nigerian Women
• Niger Mosque Attack: Bago Says 63 Abducted, 14 Freed, Three Killed

The Iranian delegation’s departure provided a visible response to the remarks and underscored the continuing diplomatic divide between Washington and Tehran. Reports from the General Assembly said the delegation left as Trump moved into his warnings about the Iranian government and its nuclear programme.

The walkout came despite continuing diplomatic contacts between the two countries on the sidelines of the UN gathering.

Shortly after his speech, Trump said US officials had held what he described as a “very good” and productive meeting involving Iranian representatives and mediators.

He later clarified that US special envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner had met with mediators involved in the Iranian discussions, rather than necessarily holding a direct meeting with Iranian officials themselves.

Reuters reported that Trump subsequently said he believed a settlement between the United States and Iran would eventually be reached.

The diplomatic activity has highlighted the conflicting tracks surrounding the US-Iran conflict: public threats and military pressure on one side, and continued efforts to negotiate an end to the confrontation on the other.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio had earlier confirmed that Washington was open to meeting Iranian representatives at the UN, although he said at the time that no formal meeting had been scheduled. Rubio said any engagement would need to address the US objective of preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

Arab countries have also been involved in efforts to facilitate communication between Washington and Tehran.

Qatar, which has previously played a mediating role in regional disputes, has urged both sides to pursue diplomacy. Qatari Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani told the General Assembly that the Gulf was experiencing a dangerous period and argued that the crisis could be addressed through diplomatic means, including efforts to reopen the Strait of Hormuz to maritime navigation.

The strategic waterway has become a major issue in the conflict because of its importance to international energy and shipping.

Iran has reportedly linked the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz to conditions including an end to the naval blockade, the release of frozen Iranian assets and an end to hostilities across the various fronts involved in the conflict.

The demands illustrate the substantial gap between Tehran’s conditions and Washington’s position, particularly over Iran’s nuclear programme and the future of military and economic pressure.

Trump’s UN speech also sought to rally international support for his administration’s approach to Iran.

He argued that previous US administrations had failed to adequately confront Tehran and maintained that his administration’s military campaign had prevented Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

Iran has rejected the US military campaign and continued to call for diplomatic efforts to address the conflict on terms acceptable to Tehran.

The presence of both diplomatic contacts and military threats has created uncertainty over whether the latest negotiations can produce a lasting settlement.

The Iran nuclear dispute remains at the centre of the confrontation, with Washington insisting that Tehran must not obtain a nuclear weapon while Iran has maintained that its rights and national interests must be respected in any negotiations.

Trump’s remarks also came as the United States sought broader international support for its position.

During the same UN address, he criticised Cuba and said its communist government was failing, prompting members of the Cuban delegation to leave the chamber as well.

The Iranian walkout, however, was particularly significant because it occurred during Trump’s direct warnings against Tehran and came as mediators were working to bring the two sides closer to negotiations.

The developments have placed the UN General Assembly at the centre of renewed diplomatic activity surrounding the conflict.

Pezeshkian’s expected appearance before the General Assembly provides Tehran with an opportunity to present its position on the war, the nuclear dispute and the conditions it considers necessary for diplomacy.

For Washington, the priority remains preventing Iran from developing or obtaining a nuclear weapon, while Trump has continued to combine military pressure with calls for a negotiated settlement.

The immediate outcome of the latest diplomatic efforts remains uncertain. Trump has said he expects an eventual settlement, while significant differences remain over the conditions for ending the conflict and reopening key regional waterways.

For now, the Iranian delegation’s walkout has become one of the most visible moments of UNGA 81, highlighting the sharp tensions between Washington and Tehran even as officials and mediators continue to explore a possible diplomatic path.

Iran Delegation Walks Out as Trump Threatens to ‘Annihilate’ Islamic Republic

UNGA 81: Trump Threatens to ‘Annihilate’ Iran if No Deal Is Reached

United States President Donald Trump has threatened to “annihilate” Iran if Tehran fails to reach a deal with Washington, using his address to the 81st United Nations General Assembly (UNGA 81) to defend the ongoing US military campaign against Iran.

Trump issued the warning on Tuesday, September 22, 2026, while addressing world leaders at the United Nations headquarters in New York. He framed the conflict around his administration’s stated objective of preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and reducing what he described as Tehran’s ability to threaten countries across the Middle East.

Trump said he faced what he described as a major decision over the future of the conflict, contrasting the possibility of a negotiated agreement with further military action against Iran.

“I have a big decision to make,” Trump told the General Assembly, before asking whether a deal would be reached with Iran or whether he should “annihilate the Islamic Republic.” He also threatened to drive Iran “into hell” if an agreement was not reached.

The remarks represented a sharp escalation in the public rhetoric surrounding the US-Iran conflict, although Trump simultaneously indicated that he believed a diplomatic settlement remained possible.

Trump said he expected the United States and Iran to reach an agreement after the November 3 US midterm elections, suggesting that Tehran was waiting to see the outcome of the elections before committing to a deal.

He nevertheless said the elections would not determine his policy towards Iran and insisted that his decisions would be based on what he considers to be US national-security interests.

Trump used his UNGA 81 speech to defend the military campaign against Iran, arguing that US action had prevented Tehran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and had significantly weakened its military capabilities.

He accused Iran of supporting militant groups and contributing to instability across the Middle East, while reiterating that the United States would not accept Iran acquiring a nuclear weapon.

Trump also urged countries around the world to maintain economic pressure on Iran, calling for what Reuters described as complete economic isolation of Tehran.

The US president’s comments came as Washington and Tehran continued to face pressure to find a diplomatic route out of the conflict.

READ ALSO:

• Mambilla: Malami Defends $200m Settlement, Rejects ICC Corruption Findings
• Obasanjo Family, Orji Kalu Among Nigerians Linked to $271m US Property Investigation
• Nationwide Blackout Looms As Electricity Workers Give NAF Three-Day Ultimatum

Iran has previously signalled conditions for ending the fighting, including an end to hostilities, the release of frozen Iranian funds and an end to the US naval blockade of Iranian ports, according to reporting ahead of the UN summit.

The Iranian delegation’s response to Trump’s speech underscored the depth of the diplomatic divide.

Iranian representatives reportedly walked out of the General Assembly chamber as Trump delivered his address and criticised Tehran’s conduct.

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi were in New York for the UN General Assembly, although they did not attend Trump’s address in the chamber.

Trump also used the speech to claim that the US military campaign had altered Iran’s ability to operate as a regional power.

He described Iran as having previously been a major source of regional instability and argued that American military action had changed the balance of power.

Iran, however, has rejected Washington’s characterisation of its nuclear programme and military activities and has continued to call for diplomatic engagement based on its own conditions.

The confrontation has implications beyond the two countries because of the importance of the Strait of Hormuz, a major global energy shipping route.

The waterway has remained a central concern during the conflict, with disruptions affecting oil supplies and contributing to higher energy prices. Gulf countries have also faced the risk of being drawn further into the confrontation because of their geographical proximity to Iran and their strategic relationship with Washington.

The impact on energy markets has become an increasingly important part of the political debate in the United States, particularly as the country approaches the 2026 midterm elections.

READ ALSO:

• Phyna, Nkechi Blessing Take Social Media Feud To Boxing Ring In Lagos
• Edo Police Arrest Cleric Over Alleged Abduction, Sexual Abuse Of Five Girls
• Abia Police Rescue Four-Day-Old Baby, Arrest Four Over Alleged Theft, Trafficking

Trump has argued that a deal with Iran could eventually help stabilise the situation and bring energy prices down, while continuing to maintain that military pressure is necessary to force Tehran towards an agreement.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has also indicated that Washington remains open to negotiations, even as the Trump administration maintains pressure on Iran.

Trump’s UN appearance was part of a wider diplomatic programme that included meetings with leaders from Europe, the Middle East and other regions.

The Iran war nevertheless dominated much of the attention surrounding his speech because of its implications for regional security, energy supplies and US foreign policy.

Trump also addressed the Russia-Ukraine war and other international issues, presenting his administration’s foreign policy as an effort to use American military and economic power to pressure adversaries towards negotiations.

The president portrayed his approach as different from previous US administrations, arguing that Washington had been more willing to use American power to confront international conflicts.

The remarks on Iran, however, were the most consequential part of the address because Trump explicitly presented further military escalation as an alternative to a negotiated settlement.

His comments did not result in an immediate agreement between Washington and Tehran.

Instead, the United States continued to demand major concessions from Iran while indicating that diplomacy remained possible.

Trump’s statement that a deal could be reached after the November election also leaves open a potentially significant diplomatic window, although there was no indication from Tehran during the UN session that an agreement was imminent.

The US-Iran conflict has already created wider regional consequences, including pressure on shipping, energy markets and Gulf states concerned about retaliatory attacks.

Gulf leaders meeting Trump in New York have been seeking to prevent further escalation while protecting their own countries from the consequences of an expanded war. CNN reported that Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar had previously urged Trump against a major escalation and were again concerned about being drawn deeper into the conflict.

The possibility of renewed negotiations therefore remains alongside the threat of further military action.

For now, Trump’s “annihilate Iran” warning represents a public statement of the consequences he says Tehran could face if it refuses an agreement, while his prediction of a possible post-election deal indicates that Washington has not closed the door on diplomacy.

The UN General Assembly address produced no immediate breakthrough between the two countries, leaving the conflict at a critical point as international pressure continues to build for a negotiated settlement.

UNGA 81: Trump Threatens to ‘Annihilate’ Iran if No Deal Is Reached