By Ashok Nilakantan Ayers
NEW YORK: The second day of the 81st United Nations General Assembly saw diplomatic spotlight shifting from the opening-day clash of competing worldviews to the harder business of finding common ground — over Gaza, Ukraine, Iran, development, climate, artificial intelligence and the future of multilateral institutions.
For India, this was an especially important day. External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar is not scheduled to deliver India’s principal General Debate address until September 26, but New Delhi is already using the margins of the Assembly to demonstrate what it describes as a policy of engagement across geopolitical divides rather than alignment with one camp. The UN General Debate continues under the overarching theme chosen for the 81st session: “Restoring trust, managing transformation: a United Nations that delivers for all.”
The General Assembly Hall continued hearing national statements, while two major high-level meetings took place elsewhere at UN headquarters.
The first is the 40th anniversary commemoration of the Declaration on the Right to Development, running in morning and afternoon sessions. Its central question is increasingly relevant to the geopolitical tensions surrounding the Assembly: how can developing countries secure economic growth, technology, finance and opportunity when the international system itself is under strain?
The second is the high-level meeting on climate action and a just transition, convened by Secretary-General António Guterres. It will focus on accelerating the transition to renewable energy, financing developing countries and reconciling energy security with climate action.
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, whose appearance came amid the continuing US-Iran confrontation and diplomatic efforts around the Strait of Hormuz, gave a rousing speech at the UNGA, holding up the photos of the school children killed in American missile strikes earlier this year. The Iranian president castigated Israel, and highlighted the hypocrisy of the nuclear powers of the world, who turn a blind eye to Israel’s undeclared weapons of mass destruction.
Parallel diplomacy took place when US Secretary of State Marco Rubio met the Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, while American and Iranian representatives have already been communicating indirectly through mediators. New York during UNGA becomes a crowded diplomatic marketplace where formal UN diplomacy and private negotiations are occurring simultaneously.
The opening day established the central contradiction of this year’s Assembly. Secretary-General Guterres warned of a world facing multiple conflicts, geopolitical fragmentation and technological disruption, while UNGA President Khalilur Rahman framed the institutional challenge starkly: people outside the UN are increasingly asking whether the organisation actually works. He argued that the answer must be institutional reform, greater inclusion and renewed confidence in multilateralism.
President Donald Trump, meanwhile, used his UN address to emphasise American sovereignty, strength and national interests and to reject what his administration regards as excessive global constraints on US decision-making. The White House itself characterised the speech as a declaration that “America is back” and would defend American sovereignty. Trump also made highly criticized comments on escalating the war against Iran.
The contrast is significant. The UN is trying to repair confidence in collective institutions at precisely the moment when the world’s most powerful country is questioning some of the assumptions underpinning them.
Wars supplied the other dominant backdrop: Gaza, Ukraine and the US-Iran confrontation, alongside the economic consequences of disrupted energy and supply chains. AI governance, climate finance and reform of the Security Council are the other major strands running through the week.
India’s role is becoming clearer precisely because it is participating in several different diplomatic circles simultaneously.
On Monday, Jaishankar co-chaired the inaugural Partners for Multilateralism, International Law, Peace and Prosperity — P4M — summit with European Council President António Costa. Jaishankar argued for stronger multilateral institutions, international law and safeguards around emerging technologies, while warning against excessive dependence on single sources or chokepoints in the global economy.
His emphasis on the “4F” challenge — fuel, food, fertiliser and finance — links geopolitical conflicts directly to the vulnerabilities of developing countries. India’s message is therefore not simply that multilateralism is desirable, but that it needs to become more representative, transparent and capable of dealing with today’s economic and security realities.
Then came the first-ever V4+India foreign ministers’ meeting, bringing India together with Poland, Hungary, Slovakia and the Czech Republic.
This is particularly interesting because the Visegrád countries sit in a politically sensitive space between the traditional Western European core and Central/Eastern Europe. The five countries agreed to increase political, economic and defence cooperation, with plans for an annual foreign ministers’ meeting and a business forum.
More importantly for India, the four V4 countries backed New Delhi’s campaign for a permanent seat on a reformed UN Security Council. India can therefore present itself not simply as another claimant from the Global South, but as a country capable of talking simultaneously to Arab states, European powers, Central Europe, the United States, Russia, Japan and developing countries.
That is the essence of the “bridge-builder” argument. India’s European diplomacy is also broader than the V4. Jaishankar met French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot, with the Ukraine and Gulf crises among the issues discussed. India has also been active with the G4 — India, Brazil, Germany and Japan — over Security Council reform, giving New Delhi another channel that connects the Global South with major European and Asian economies.
The emerging picture is therefore four-dimensional: India is talking to the Arab world about energy and West Asian security; to Europe about Ukraine, trade and strategic autonomy; to Central Europe about defence, technology and connectivity; and to the wider Global South about development and reform of international institutions.
There is an important distinction here. As of now there is no verified jaishankar-Rubio meeting during the 81st UNGA from the official/current reporting available. The well-documented Jaishankar-Rubio meeting on the UNGA sidelines occurred during the 80th UNGA in September 2025, when the two discussed bilateral ties and Quad cooperation.
That does not mean contact is absent. US-India diplomacy is continuing on multiple tracks, including energy, digital infrastructure, AI and defence cooperation. An India-US roundtable on “Powering the AI Economy” was held on the margins of UNGA this week.
The absence of a publicly confirmed Jaishankar-Rubio meeting so far is itself worth watching because Washington and New Delhi have substantial issues to manage — trade, technology, energy, Russia-related policy, the Quad and the wider Indo-Pacific.
India’s strategy appears to be to let the diplomacy precede the speech. By the time Jaishankar reaches the UN lectern on September 26, India will have participated in the P4M framework, the V4+India dialogue, G4 consultations, meetings with European and Asian partners, Global South discussions and bilateral diplomacy. The message emerging from those engagements is not an anti-Western one. Nor is it a straightforward Western alignment.
It is closer to multi-alignment through multilateralism: India wants Western powers to remain important partners, wants Russia and other non-Western powers within the diplomatic conversation, wants stronger ties with Arab countries, and wants developing nations to have a greater voice in institutions created largely in the aftermath of 1945.
That gives India’s UNGA diplomacy a distinctive proposition: New Delhi does not have to choose between East and West to advocate reform of the system. It can argue that the system itself has to become broad enough to accommodate both.
The test will come when Jaishankar finally speaks on September 26 — particularly on Ukraine, Gaza, cross-border terrorism, sovereignty, tariffs and unilateral economic pressure, Security Council reform and India’s relationship with the West.
Until then, the margins of UNGA 81 may tell us as much about India’s diplomacy as the podium does. (IPA Service)
