THERE is a certain irony in the way the world speaks about the Pacific. Our region is often described as remote, vulnerable, and small. I recently took part in an online panel organized in Europe where the Pacific was referred to as “the end of the world”. Yet some of the most consequential ideas about our collective future have come from these remarkable islands states.
From protecting the ocean to advancing climate justice, Pacific nations have demonstrated that influence need not be measured by military might, GDP or population size. It can also be measured by conviction, persistence and the ability to bring others together.
This is an important lesson as the United Nations marks its 81st anniversary.
The United Nations was founded in 1945 on a simple but revolutionary idea: that nations, regardless of their size or power, should have a place at the table, and that international relations should be governed by agreed and universal rules rather than force alone.
Eighty-one years later, that promise is being tested.
Wars continue to devastate countries and communities. International law is increasingly challenged and even actively undermined by some. The triple planetary crisis (climate change, biodiversity loss, and pollution) is accelerating, while geopolitical competition places growing pressure on international cooperation. The United Nations itself faces financial constraints, political divisions and questions about its effectiveness.
We should not pretend otherwise.
But the question is not whether the United Nations is perfect. It never has been. The more important question is what kind of world we would inhabit without the principles upon which it was founded.
For the Pacific, that question is far from abstract.
Small islands, consequential voices
Consider Vanuatu.
A nation of just over 330,000 people helped lead a global movement that brought the question of states’ obligations on climate change before the International Court of Justice. In July 2025, the Court delivered a historic advisory opinion clarifying those obligations.
This achievement did not come from economic leverage or military power. It began with an idea championed by Pacific young people, carried forward by Vanuatu’s leadership and supported by a global coalition.
Consider also Tuvalu, where rising seas raise profound questions about sovereignty, cultural identity and the continuity of a nation. Tuvalu’s determination to safeguard its statehood and maritime rights is helping shape international discussions far beyond the Pacific.
This leadership was again evident earlier this month when Fiji and Tuvalu, working in partnership with Australia, hosted the Pre-COP in the Pacific, ahead of COP31 later this year.
In Tuvalu, international leaders witnessed the realities of climate change in one of the countries most directly affected by rising seas. In Fiji, discussions focused on translating global commitments into practical action, including climate finance, adaptation and community resilience.
It was particularly meaningful to welcome United Nations Deputy Secretary-General Amina J. Mohammed to both countries. Her engagements with Pacific leaders and civil society reinforced a central message: climate action must be judged not simply by international promises, but by the difference those commitments make to people’s lives.
These gatherings also reflected priorities advanced through the recent Pacific Islands Forum Leaders Meeting, held this year in Palau, including regional solidarity and the vision of an Ocean of Peace.
These are not achievements of passive recipients of international assistance. They are achievements of countries helping write the rules of the future.
An ocean of shared responsibilities
The Pacific Ocean covers nearly one-third of Earth’s surface. For Pacific peoples, it has never merely separated distant islands. It is a source of identity, livelihood, knowledge and connection.
Yet the ocean also exposes contradictions in our international system.
Pacific countries contribute only a tiny fraction of global greenhouse gas emissions, 0.02% to be precise, but their communities face some of the most severe consequences of climate change.
Families confront coastal erosion and destructive disasters. Communities face difficult choices about protecting ancestral lands, livelihoods, traditions, and cultural heritage.
Climate justice is therefore not simply a request for assistance. It is a demand for fairness, responsibility and respect for international commitments.
The same principle applies to peace and security.
The Pacific understands the costs of colonialism, nuclear testing, internal conflicts and external competition. Today, amid growing geopolitical tensions, Pacific leaders have advanced the vision of an Ocean of Peace.
That vision deserves attention far beyond the region.
Peace is not merely the absence of war. It requires trust, accountable institutions, meaningful participation, respect for human rights and peaceful resolution of differences. It also requires that Pacific countries retain the freedom to determine their own futures.
Multilateralism must deliver where people live
The United Nations cannot defend its relevance through declarations alone. Its credibility must be demonstrated in people’s daily lives.
For families rebuilding after disasters in Vanuatu, cooperation matters when it strengthens preparedness and restores essential services.
For young people in Solomon Islands, it matters when they can participate in decisions shaping their communities.
For Fiji, it matters when dialogue, reconciliation and inclusive institutions strengthen trust.
For Tonga, it matters when cooperation expands opportunities and strengthens resilience.
And for Tuvalu, it matters when international commitments help protect homes, livelihoods and the nation’s future.
These examples remind us that peace, development, human rights and climate resilience are inseparable.
Across the five countries served by our United Nations Multi-Country Office, our responsibility is to work alongside governments, civil society and communities to translate these connections into results.
This means listening as much as advising, respecting national ownership and recognising that Pacific communities possess knowledge and traditions of cooperation from which the world can learn.
A United Nations that must change
Defending multilateralism does not mean defending everything about the United Nations as it exists today.
The organisation must change.
Through the Secretary-General’s UN80 reform initiative, we must become more effective, coherent and accountable, reducing duplication and demonstrating meaningful results.
For the Pacific, reform must recognise the circumstances of small island developing states. Development needs cannot be measured through income alone. Geographic isolation, disaster exposure, economic vulnerability and high transport costs must also count. Climate finance must become more accessible and responsive. International institutions must better reflect the voices of smaller countries.
Above all, international law must be applied consistently, not selectively.
For smaller nations, this is not a philosophical distinction. It is fundamental to sovereignty and security.
The Pacific is not waiting for the future
There is a tendency to describe the Pacific primarily through what it stands to lose: land, livelihoods, cultural heritage and economic opportunities.
These risks are real. But they are not the whole story.
This is also a region of political imagination, cultural strength and diplomatic leadership.
Pacific nations have demonstrated that they can build coalitions, influence international law and shape global priorities.
As the international order becomes increasingly fragmented, the Pacific’s emphasis on dialogue, solidarity and peaceful cooperation offers something of genuine global value.
On United Nations Day 2026, we should remember that no nation, however powerful, can secure its future alone.
The atmosphere does not recognise borders. The ocean does not distinguish between the emissions of rich and poor countries. Our futures are connected whether we acknowledge it or not.
The United Nations remains one of the few places where every sovereign state, large or small, has an equal voice. That principle is worth protecting, even as we work to make the institution more effective and just.
The United Nations does not need the Pacific simply as a region to assist.
It needs the Pacific as a source of leadership, ideas and moral clarity.
The future of multilateralism will not be determined by the world’s most powerful countries alone. It will also be shaped by smaller nations insisting that international rules matter and that every voice deserves to be heard.
The Pacific is not on the margins of that future. It is helping to define it.
