Transcript of Minister for Foreign Affairs Dr Vivian Balakrishnan's Wrap-up Interview with Singapore Media During the 81st Session of the United Nations General Assembly High Level Week in New York, 26 September 2026

Minister for Foreign Affairs Dr Vivian Balakrishnan: The week of the UN General Assembly is always the absolutely most hectic in the diplomatic calendar for the year. Just give you an idea of the scale. In the last four days, I've met at least 75 leaders and counterparts in an intensive series of meetings, conferences, informal and formal sessions. Even in this day and age of digital diplomacy, there is still no substitute for face-to-face interaction, handshakes, looking at the other person and understanding what their key concerns and hopes are.

I've chaired the Global Governance Group Ministerial Meeting, which consists of medium and small economies who want to engage the G20. We've hosted the Forum of Small States (FOSS), which has 108 members, and held a reception here (at the Permanent Mission of Singapore to the UN). I've also co-chaired the ASEAN-Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) meeting in the course of the week. It's been absolutely hectic, but it has been good. It has been productive. It's allowed my team and I to get a sense of the zeitgeist.

I think leaders were concerned about several issues. Obviously, at the same time, everyone was watching the summit in Washington D.C. between President Trump and President Xi. They were also concerned about the wars that are still going on in Ukraine, Middle East, Sudan and Africa. There was also considerable interest this year on Artificial Intelligence (AI) – both the promise and the peril that it presents, and a whole variety of ideas were presented to deal with the challenges and the dangers of AI.

So, all in all, it's been a very hectic session, and earlier today, I also presented a statement on behalf of Singapore at the General Assembly. We focused on the state of the world. We recognise both the peril and the promise. We emphasised the need to consistently apply and comply with international law. Second, to reform the UN to ensure that it remains fit for purpose in a very fractured, fractious world, and in the midst of a technological revolution. Third, we also made the case that we have to be prepared to formulate new rules, new norms, new institutions, if need be, new processes to deal with new technologies, in particular, AI. There have been a variety of ideas floated, and we also offered the possibility of considering whether it is necessary to have a UN Framework Convention on AI Safeguards. Too early to conclude yet, but at least the discussions have begun.

I'll be happy to take questions.

Mitch McCann (CNA TV): What is Singapore's view on the outcomes from the Trump-Xi Summit that you just mentioned?

Minister: Well, I'm glad they met. In fact, this is the second time they met this year. I think the earlier meeting was in China in May this year. We are now in September, and I think we're hoping that they'll meet another two times this year – at the APEC meeting at Shenzhen, and hopefully also in Miami for the G20.

The relationship between China and the US is the most critical for both of them, obviously, but also for the rest of us in the world. These are the two premier superpowers. The questions of war and peace, the norms by which they contest and assert their rivalry, the impact on supply chains, trade, and tariffs all depend to a large extent on how they manage that relationship. The fact that they meet, that the two Presidents appear to have a good personal relationship, is certainly very helpful.

This doesn't mean that all the problems have miraculously been cleared up. I would characterise the current situation as a truce, because neither side wants to have a collision or an accident, or certainly a major confrontation. If you look, for example, on trade, the truce has been extended by several months. All that is positive and within the bounds of what we were hoping for.

In the longer term, the reason why they have to keep meeting at the presidential level and at the senior-officials level is that slowly, bit by bit, they have to build strategic trust. With their trust, we hope that they can get to grips with the core thorny issues that lie at the crux of their relationship. I think it went as well as we hoped for. I think everyone, at least everyone I met in the UN General Assembly, was pleased that the meeting proceeded, and at least based on the readouts that we have had access to, have been relieved.

Bhagyashree Garekar (Straits Times): Thank you very much for making time at the end of your very hectic days. You spoke of the Trump-Xi Summit. We know that there have been talks between the US and Iran – perhaps not concluding as well, because I think President Trump has just rejected the Iran proposals for peace. You brought up AI safety, and then there is also the possibility of a new UN Secretary-General, possibly a woman for the first time. There's a push for institutional reforms. A lot to take in, and like you said, it was a very hectic session. My question is: do you detect now a serious momentum to address these big challenges that are before us? And are you at the end of this UN General Assembly session going back to Singapore with more optimism than you came, and what concrete benefits do you see flowing on to Singapore?

Minister: Well, that's a whole series of questions. So let me start at the beginning.

First, the world is at a particularly disruptive and potentially dangerous phase. That's why there's so much on the agenda.

The second point – the fact that all the important issues are on the table and the agenda, and that there are intensive discussions going on bilaterally and multilaterally in speeches and conferences, is a good thing.

The third point is that you're not going to get this all solved in one week, or frankly, even in one year. But the fact that the conversations have begun, the options are being placed on the table, the implications are being studied, and people are assessing each other's bottom lines, red lines, concerns, and ambitions is a very useful step.

I will not go home relieved and relaxed, but I will go home slightly encouraged that people recognise the gravity of the situation and are trying their best to get to grips with it. There are some problems which are going to be very difficult. You've just mentioned the war in the Persian Gulf. I don't see a quick resolution, and yet unfortunately, it's got profound implications. Certainly, economic implications in terms of energy supplies. But from Singapore's perspective, the problem in the Persian Gulf goes beyond energy and economics. It is the stress test of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and the freedom of navigation and overflight in straits used for international navigation, which is precisely what the Strait of Hormuz’s situation is. All this is also at stake, so that's why we have to watch closely and carefully, and we also have to stand up and make our voices heard and stake out our position – not gratuitously and provocatively, but carefully, deliberately and firmly. So that's the situation which the world is in.

And as you said, we've got a really full agenda this year. In fact, in the years ahead, this is also a time of change for the UN. There's going to be a new Secretary-General. We still do not know who is likely to win, but again, that person, whoever he or she is, is going to inherit a world where the in-tray will be sky high. There's going to be great demands on their skills and bandwidth. I've had the privilege of meeting several of the candidates. They're all good candidates, well-experienced, well-meaning, and with bandwidth and more importantly the courage and commitment to move the agenda for reform of the UN and to deal with the world as it is.

From the point of view of Singapore, we are a small country. We are just one member in an organisation with 193 Member States. We need to remain consistent, constructive, helpful and relevant. That's what Singapore has always sought to do in the 61 years that we've been here.

In terms of benefits for Singapore, we have to take a longer-term view of it, because we are small and trade dependent. We need a world that is stable, predictable, where rules apply, sanctity of contract is recognised, and where states behave accordingly. That sounds like a wish list, and it's not something which Singapore can impose on other countries. Nevertheless, the fact is that we have a UN, the only apex international organisation with universal participation, and it is better that we spend more time meeting and talking, rather than resorting to coercive measures or worse, hot wars and confrontations. We have to do our part, but Singapore has to be realistic and take the world as it is. There are no easy solutions.

Constance Tan (Mothership): Singapore has consistently emphasised that small and medium states can retain agency even amidst the changing world order. What was your sense of the general mood of these states at the UNGA this year?

Minister: I would use two words. We're all realistic. We recognise the danger. We recognise that the dangers are amplified for small States, but I still detect resolve that we're not just going to surrender to our fates. We're going to make our voices heard, and more importantly, we are going to make common cause, and to the extent possible, make the case for multilateralism. Make the case for consistent application of international law gently but categorically, and remind the big powers of this.

Actually, it's in their own enlightened long-term national interest for the world to operate with international law, for the UN Charter to apply, and for hard power to be exercised with restraint. Soft power, persuasion, the diffusion of technology, the growth of interdependent markets – that formula has brought us eight decades of relative peace and prosperity under the aegis of the current UN. Whilst we recognise the need for UN reform, don't just throw the baby out with the bathwater. We need judgment to decide what to change, when to change, how quickly to change, to disrupt what needs to be disrupted, but not to engage in the gradual destruction of the pillars needed for the stability of the world.

Fabian Koh (CNA Digital): Minister, my question is related to the ASEAN bloc. As Singapore takes over the ASEAN Chairmanship next year, what is one concrete thing that the country wants the bloc to do differently, so that Southeast Asia retains agency rather than just becoming an arena for major power competition?

Minister: To be fair, ASEAN has retained convening power – meaning our ASEAN meetings are well-attended. Foreign leaders from near and far make the effort to attend ASEAN meetings because they know they can engage a group of serious-minded leaders. There's business to be done. There are side meetings and other benefits from that. So, convening power.

Second, it's worth reminding ourselves and others that in fact, if you add up the aggregate GDP of all the 11 ASEAN Member States, ASEAN would rank somewhere between fourth or fifth largest in the world. It's not something to be dismissed. It is something which we have built up over decades, and more importantly, we have the potential to increase that significantly. Therefore, the value proposition of ASEAN is that we ask our external partners to view Southeast Asia on our own merits, and not just as an extension of superpower rivalry or regional contestation. We are making steady headway on that front.

As we look forward to next year when we chair ASEAN, we will be very focused on broadening these partnerships, but at the same time, understanding that for ASEAN to remain relevant, we need to double down on our integration. We need to continue to bring our economies more tightly interwoven with less barriers – both tariff and non-tariff. We have to consistently abide by international law, and because we are small nations – with the exception of Indonesia – we have to make our voices heard by making common cause and by being coordinated. The more coordination there is, the better for us to protect our national interests and for us to advance our agenda. Next year will be an even busier year, certainly for the Singapore Ministry for Foreign Affairs.

Bhagyashree Garekar (Straits Times): Do you think you managed to convince Mr Kevin Rudd in your conversation with him (at the engagement at Asia Society on 25 September 2026)?

Minister: I see you watched that session. Kevin Rudd is an old friend. I've known him for many years, he and I have a relationship in which both of us can and expect each other to be robust. You have noticed that conversation – he pushes, I push back, and the to and fro occurs. The objective is not to convince each other. The objective is to sharpen our perspectives and to explore the issue in greater depth and breadth than we would otherwise. I personally found it a very enjoyable conversation, and you need interviewers and moderators who will push back. At the same time, if you parse the contents of the conversation that we had, we covered a wide variety of topics at significant depth. Now, the people who watch that conversation don't have to agree with Kevin or me. But if Kevin and I have succeeded in making you think about the issues, then we have succeeded. And I'm fairly sure if you ask Kevin, you'll get the same answer.

.    .    .    .    .

MINSTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS

SINGAPORE

27 SEPTEMBER 2026