High Commissioner’s closing statement to the 76th plenary session of the Executive Committee of the High Commissioner’s Programme

Mr. Chairman, Señor Presidente,

Dear friends and colleagues,

Sincere thanks, on behalf of all of us at UNHCR, for the substantive and frank engagement throughout the week.

As I sat for the tenth and last time on this podium - where I have now spent 50 days of my life - and as I tried to respond to 155 statements in the general debate (which means that I must have responded to about 1,500 statements during my tenure at ExCom alone - sorry, I am bragging, but it was a worthwhile effort!), I was reflecting on how relevant this exercise, beyond the formalities, continues to be.

Because we did not always agree. You did not always agree with each other. But this is exactly the soft power of humanitarian diplomacy, the strength of multilateralism (if you allow me this word), and I am proud that we at ExCom proved it, in our small way, during the week in which diplomacy may - may! - have prevailed again over brute force to put an end to disaster in Gaza. Because here at ExCom, too, diplomacy has been at work. Each one of you drew on your respective experiences and perspectives, but also reflected your sometimes divergent priorities. But through very different but always constructive perspectives, we focused on what brings us together: how to protect refugees, displaced and stateless people; how to find solutions to their plight. But also, how to ensure that UNHCR remains strong and how the organization can become even more efficient.

I want to thank all those who approached this year's session with a positive spirit. I am concerned, however, about divisions within this body that have unfortunately grown more visible in the last few years. The very unfortunate divisions created by the vote on the budget amendments prove this point. UNHCR is committed to listening and working with all of you in a manner that continues to take into account the concerns that you have raised.

Nonetheless, I welcome the return to the adoption of UNHCR's budget by consensus, which is a critical symbol of trust in the organization. This return to tradition is important because it shows that - despite our differences - with cooperation, with compromise, multilateralism can work. Please resist temptations to abandon these good practices.

Mr. Chairman,

I opened this session on Monday with a defence of the 1951 Refugee Convention. I thought it was necessary as I felt its principles were being questioned. I am therefore relieved to have heard many statements highlighting the continued relevance of those principles. Asylum saves lives. And as Haiti compellingly put it, people who seek protection are only asking for their humanity to be recognized. Nothing more. And, just as importantly: nothing less. This should be our guiding star.

Many of you highlighted, however, the real challenges you face, particularly in situations of mixed movements. Challenges which - let me repeat it once and for all - UNHCR fully appreciates. In July, in my own country, I visited Lampedusa - a microcosm of the broader dynamics of mixed movements, a small island that sits closer to the African continent than it does to mainland Europe. Thousands of people - refugees and migrants - land there every month after dangerous sea journeys, as they do in many other places around the world. Thousands have died along the way, either at the hands of smugglers and traffickers on the way to Libya, or as they attempt to cross the Mediterranean.

As Colombia, South Africa, Sierra Leone, Greece and Italy itself, and many others, outlined in their statements, the response to such complex movements must consist of measures that strengthen borders or reinforce the integrity of domestic asylum systems; but they must also be combined with a wider approach, aimed at addressing root causes of displacement in countries of origin, at providing protection and opportunities along the way for those who need it, and establishing regular migration pathways (or return to their countries) for those who do not.

In short, this means implementing the route-based approach, a proposal exemplifying how UNHCR can support you in identifying and implementing solutions tailored to your needs, in a manner that reaffirms the sovereignty of States while respecting their international obligations.

Mr. Chairman,

The interventions this week leave little doubt that an aid model based on refugee inclusion and self-reliance represents the way forward in situations of forced displacement - especially the large and protracted ones. I am pleased by how wide-ranging the statements have been supporting this notion - Malawi, Mexico, Rwanda, Jordan, Uganda, Poland, Iran, Moldova, Ethiopia, and many others have all come to the same conclusion: refugees should have access to documentation, services and jobs while they are hosted. Or, as article 3.1 of Brazil's newly adopted National Policy puts it: migrants, refugees and stateless people are drivers of economic and social development.

To be clear, inclusion does not equate to integration. Inclusion does not mean that refugees cannot eventually go back to their countries of origin, once conditions allow and they are able to do so safely. Instead, inclusive aid models recognize that bringing displaced people in leads to better outcomes than leaving them out. Especially at a time when humanitarian funding has shrunk so dramatically.

It is important to reiterate a point that many of you made: the shift by refugee-hosting countries toward more sustainable responses should not lead donors and partners to cut funding. On the contrary, though the type of support must change, responsibility toward refugees must remain shared. And this transition - the famous nexus - has to be handled gradually and cautiously. Otherwise - as we heard from Kenya and others - both refugees and the communities that host them risk being destabilized just as they embark on inclusion, a delicate process in any country.

Similarly, not investing enough in situations where solutions are at hand could be equally if not more destabilizing. We have spoken of the return of Syrians to their country, and of the need to stabilize those returns inside Syria if we are to avoid renewed displacement in the region and beyond. This same dynamic applies to other return operations in protracted refugee crises that do not get much attention or resources. In the Central African Republic, for example, or in Burundi. Both offer the promise of a solution - if we are able to mobilize funding - or the peril of another humanitarian emergency should we not.

Mr. Chairman,

I also want to address briefly the issue of UNHCR's core mandate, which has been mentioned on several occasions. There have been suggestions that the organization has somewhat strayed from its original purpose and, as a result, lost its focus or become less effective. I disagree with that assertion on several counts.

The mandate is actually quite clear: to ensure the protection of refugees and to help States seek solutions to their plight. Various legal instruments require UNHCR to also work towards the elimination of statelessness and contribute to supporting internally displaced people.

Those are our foundations, which I hope nobody disputes. Then, of course, we can discuss how they are translated into practical action, especially in terms of material assistance. I reject the notion that the scope of our activities in the past has led us away from the core mission - for example, financial constraints may oblige us to unfortunately reduce education or health activities, but in refugee contexts, these are both life-saving programmes crucial to both protection and solutions. So, these cuts are losses (for which we will have to seek alternative arrangements), not a return to our "core mandate".

Similar questions may be put in respect of our work on climate action, but this is an area in which - as many of you stated, for example, Bangladesh, Somalia or Ireland - it is important that UNHCR's work adapts to circumstances. Failing to do that would ignore the reality of contemporary forced displacement. We cannot - and should not - ignore the impact of large population movements on the environment in Cox's Bazaar, Dadaab, or Zaatari. We cannot ignore the complex interplay of conflict and the adverse effects of climate change that displace people across the Horn of Africa or the Sahel - many of whom need protection.

Of course, our engagement in climate work - as in all other sectors of assistance, I should add - must remain strategic and clearly defined, taking into account our comparative advantage (or not). As laid out in our strategic plan for climate action, our work in that area is limited to well-defined tracks - protection, solutions, resilience, and adaptation - that are within our broader mandate. That is the message I will take with me to COP30 in Belem in a few weeks.

The Global Refugee Forum Progress Review will provide another opportunity in December to discuss these issues of partnership, efficiencies and transformation - in the context also of UN80 and broader humanitarian reforms, which are as important to us as they are to you.

Mr. Chairman,

I want to recognize the unanimous expressions of support at a time when the humanitarian sector is in crisis due to cuts in foreign aid.

As many of you have rightly said, this is first and foremost a crisis for all refugees and those who count on us. For all the families who will have less food to eat. All the girls who will no longer be able to study. All those who - through no fault of their own - will suffer the most direct and severe consequences of these cuts.

It is also a crisis for many refugee-hosting countries, who have kept their doors open even as funding has dried. As you heard repeatedly during this week, many feel abandoned, taken for granted. As if they (just like donor countries) did not also have to contend with the reasons why aid budgets had to be cut: economic crises, budgetary limitations, domestic political pressures, security concerns. And, on top of all that, they host refugee populations, which is rarely the case for donors.

Finally, this is a crisis for UNHCR - and I thank you for the kind words of support, especially for all the colleagues who have been impacted by these reductions. You heard directly from the chairperson of our staff council. We are ready to do more. We can do more. But we need additional funds.

And so, I must appeal to you once more, on everyone's behalf.

We need at least $300 million to end the year. Please help.

To all those who can provide additional, flexible support for 2025 - now is the time. To all those donors or potential donors who may have sat on the sidelines, and who could do more - especially in the Gulf region, or in Asia, now is the time. Without urgent, flexible support, we will have to make more cuts in large humanitarian operations, where many of our activities are life-saving.

I pushed back on the notion that we can do more with less. I will now officially stop saying that we will do less with less. We will actually do as much as resources allow - but one thing is sure, we will do it well.

And that is the message, Mr. Chairman, with which I take leave from this committee - from you, our main partners, interlocutors and friends. After ten intense, challenging, gripping years. Like all human beings, I could have done more. I have made mistakes. But I have tried to give it all of myself - conscious of the responsibilities that come from leading an organization tasked, yes, with saving lives, in the broadest sense. An organization which provides an extraordinary perspective on the worst - but also the best - of our world.

And before I wrap up, I would like, as is tradition, to thank you, Ambassador Bermudez, Señor Presidente, dear Marcelo, for your steady stewardship of this year's Executive Committee - not only during this plenary but throughout a difficult year. Thank you for your dedication, your serene diplomacy and your personal commitment.

I would also like to extend my congratulations to my friend Ambassador Oike of Japan on his election as Chair - welcome, Atsuyuki, to this important task. My congratulations also to the rest of the bureau, including Ambassador Daka of Ethiopia as First Vice Chair, Ambassador Endresen of Norway as Second Vice Chair, as well as the new Rapporteur Arango Blanco of Colombia.

Thanks are also in order to Anne Keah and the entire UNHCR teams - past and present - of the ExCom Secretariat for their tireless work, and without whom these sessions would not be possible.

Finally, to end on a personal note, I was humbled that many delegations shared expressions of appreciation for my tenure as High Commissioner for Refugees.

Let me be clear, though - I would have achieved nothing without the extraordinary support of my colleagues: my deputies, Deputy High Commissioner Kelly Clements, and Assistant High Commissioners Raouf Mazou and Ruven Menikdiwela, as well as their predecessors George Okoth-Obbo, Volker Türk and Gillian Triggs; my chief of staff, Shahrzad Tadjbakhsh, and her predecessors; all directors, some of whom are here, past and present, in the Senior Management Team; the chair of the Staff Council and all staff representatives; and last but not least, the patient and hard-working colleagues in the Executive Office since 2016 - and of course ALL colleagues in the organization in which I have grown up myself, as a professional and as a person.

To all of them go my most sincere gratitude - for their work, their dedication, and their friendship - and for making UNHCR so unique.

I will carry you all in my heart forever.