（下边有中文翻译请继续看到底。 谢谢。）
When President Donald Trump took the podium at the United Nations General Assembly on 23 September 2025, the world anticipated leadership worthy of a superpower. From Gaza to Ukraine, from famine to climate change, the international community hoped for direction and solutions. Instead, what they received was a speech steeped in self-congratulation, scorn for allies and institutions, and a startling absence of vision.
This was a missed opportunity. At a time when millions face displacement, hunger, and violence, global audiences were looking for substance. Instead, they were offered rhetoric.
A Speech About “Me,” Not “We”
The most striking feature of the president’s remarks was their intensely personal tone. He spoke less as a statesman guiding the world through crises and more as a politician defending his own legacy. At one point, he declared: “It’s too bad that I had to do these things instead of the United Nations doing them.” Such lines sounded less like global leadership and more like a campaign speech.
By highlighting his own “achievements” rather than global solutions, President Trump diminished the gravitas of the occasion. The UNGA is not a rally—it is the world’s most inclusive diplomatic stage.
Attacking the UN While Claiming to Support It
Perhaps the most jarring aspect of the speech was its treatment of the UN itself. Trump described the UN as producing “empty words,” suggested it “does nothing,” and even mocked technical mishaps, saying: “These are two things I got from the United Nations, a bad escalator and a bad teleprompter.”
Yet, minutes later, he insisted: “Our country is behind the United Nations 100%.” This contradiction reveals the underlying problem: rhetoric that undermines the very institution the U.S. claims to support.
The danger is not abstract. To disparage the UN on its own stage emboldens cynics, weakens multilateralism, and signals to the world’s vulnerable states that the U.S. may no longer be committed to collective problem-solving. The risk of America one day walking away from the UN altogether—just as it has quit UNESCO, WHO, and the Paris Agreement—feels uncomfortably real.
Gaza: A Painful Silence
Nowhere was the gap between expectation and delivery clearer than in Trump’s handling of Gaza. The humanitarian catastrophe is among the most urgent issues on the global agenda—genocide, starvation, and mass displacement demand moral clarity and bold action.
Instead, President Trump avoided even mentioning “Gaza” directly. He spoke only of Hamas, blaming it for rejecting peace, while ignoring the suffering of more than two million Palestinians under siege. He offered no vision for a ceasefire, no acknowledgment of mass civilian casualties, and no roadmap toward Palestinian statehood—an aspiration recognized by over 80 percent of UN member states.
For many around the world, this was hypocrisy in plain sight. To champion peace while refusing to name the crisis, to invoke Hamas while ignoring Israel’s responsibility, is to erode America’s credibility as an honest broker.
Ukraine: Rhetoric Without Roadmap
On Ukraine, President Trump resorted to bold declarations: calling Russia a “paper tiger,” insisting Ukraine could regain all lost territory, and urging Europe to cut off Russian energy. But beyond the bravado, he offered no practical steps. No timelines, no guarantees, no strategy.
By declaring outcomes without showing the path, the president raised expectations he cannot fulfill. Ukraine’s survival depends on diplomacy, unity, and resources—not on speeches crafted for applause.
Alienating Allies
Equally troubling was Trump’s treatment of America’s closest partners. He admonished European nations with lines such as: “Your countries are going to hell” if they do not reverse immigration policies. He accused Germany and the UK of “destroying their heritage” and warned of collapse if they did not heed his advice.
Diplomacy is built on persuasion and partnership. Publicly chastising allies may play well to certain audiences at home, but it corrodes trust abroad. It sends a message that America seeks obedience, not cooperation.
Climate Change Dismissed
Adding to the list of disappointments was Trump’s assertion that climate change is “the greatest con job ever perpetrated on the world.” At a moment when climate-induced disasters are intensifying, this statement not only ignores science but also belittles the struggles of vulnerable nations.
For small island states facing rising seas and millions living through extreme weather, dismissing climate change is not just offensive—it is dangerous.
Leadership Lost
The United Nations General Assembly is the world’s common platform, designed to transcend national grievances and focus on shared survival. President Trump, however, used it as a stage to settle scores, elevate himself, and scold others.
This approach undermines the very idea of global leadership. A true leader does not avoid naming humanitarian catastrophes, does not alienate allies, does not ridicule institutions, and does not trivialize existential threats. Leadership is measured not by applause lines, but by vision and responsibility.
America’s Reputation at Risk
If the United States continues down this path, the cost will be steep. By vetoing Security Council resolutions that seek to stop bloodshed in Gaza, by alienating allies, and by dismissing climate realities, Washington risks not only its moral standing but also its strategic influence.
The world expects better. America has historically been at its strongest when it combined power with principle—when it elevated international law, protected human rights, and worked through institutions rather than against them.
The Choice Ahead
Ultimately, it will be the American people, scholars, media, and policymakers who decide whether this posture reflects the kind of leadership they want representing them on the world stage. Mid-term elections may serve as a critical test.
For now, however, one truth is clear: the 2025 UNGA speech did not meet the moment. Instead of uniting the world, it left many nations questioning whether the United States still sees itself as a responsible global leader—or merely as a solitary actor, consumed by self-image.
History will remember this speech not as a turning point for peace, but as a reminder of what happens when leadership is lost to bluster.
错失的时刻：特朗普的联大演讲辜负了全球的期望。
2025年9月23日，当唐纳德·特朗普总统走上联合国大会的讲台时，世界期待着一个超级大国的领导。从加沙到乌克兰，从饥荒到气候变化，国际社会希望找到方向和解决办法。相反，他们收到的是一篇充斥着自我祝贺、对盟友和机构的蔑视，以及令人吃惊的缺乏远见的演讲。
这是一次错失的机会。在数百万人面临流离失所、饥饿和暴力的时候，全球观众都在寻找实质内容。相反，他们得到的是花言巧语。
关于“我”而不是“我们”的演讲
总统讲话最显著的特点是其强烈的个人语气。他的讲话与其说是作为一个引导世界度过危机的政治家，不如说是作为一个捍卫自己遗产的政治家。他一度宣称，“我不得不做这些事情，而不是由联合国来做，这太糟糕了。”这句话听起来不太像全球领导力，而更像是一场竞选演讲。
特朗普总统强调自己的“成就”，而不是全球解决方案，削弱了这一场合的庄严。联合国大会不是一次集会，而是世界上最具包容性的外交舞台。
一边支持联合国，一边攻击联合国
也许演讲中最不和谐的部分是对联合国本身的处理。特朗普形容联合国“空话连篇”，暗示它“什么都不做”，甚至嘲笑技术事故，他说：“我从联合国得到的只有两样东西，一个糟糕的自动扶梯和一个糟糕的提词器。”
然而，几分钟后，他坚称：“我们的国家100%支持联合国。”这种矛盾揭示了一个潜在的问题：言论正在破坏美国声称支持的机构。
这种危险不是抽象的。在联合国本身的舞台上贬低它会助长愤世嫉俗者的气场，削弱多边主义，并向世界上脆弱的国家发出信号，表明美国可能不再致力于集体解决问题。美国有一天会像退出联合国教科文组织、世界卫生组织和《巴黎协定》一样，彻底退出联合国，这种风险让人感到不安。
加沙：痛苦的沉默
在特朗普对加沙的处理上，没有什么比预期和实际行动之间的差距更明显了。人道主义灾难是全球议程上最紧迫的问题之一，种族灭绝、饥饿和大规模流离失所需要明确的道德和大胆的行动。
相反，特朗普总统甚至没有直接提到“加沙”。他只谈到了哈马斯，指责它拒绝和平，同时无视被围困的200多万巴勒斯坦人的苦难。他没有提出停火的愿景，没有承认大量平民伤亡，也没有巴勒斯坦建国的路线图——这是80%以上的联合国成员国认可的愿望。
对世界各地的许多人来说，这是显而易见的虚伪。在捍卫和平的同时又拒绝说出危机的名字，在援引哈马斯的同时又忽视以色列的责任，这将削弱美国作为一个诚实调解人的信誉。
乌克兰：没有路线图的空谈
在乌克兰问题上，特朗普总统采取了大胆的声明：称俄罗斯为“纸老虎”，坚称乌克兰可以收复所有失去的领土，并敦促欧洲切断俄罗斯的能源。但除了虚张声势之外，他没有提出任何实际措施。没有时间表，没有保证，没有策略。
总统在没有指明道路的情况下宣布结果，让人们对他产生了无法实现的期望。乌克兰的生存取决于外交、团结和资源，而不是为博得掌声而精心制作的演讲。
疏远的盟友
同样令人不安的是特朗普对待美国最亲密伙伴的方式。他警告欧洲国家，如果他们不改变移民政策，“你们的国家会下地狱”。他指责德国和英国“破坏他们的遗产”，并警告说，如果他们不听从他的建议，就会崩溃。
外交建立在说服和伙伴关系的基础上。在国内，公开谴责盟友可能对某些观众有好处，但在国外却会腐蚀信任。这传递了一个信息，即美国寻求服从，而不是合作。
气候变化不受重视
更令人失望的是，特朗普断言气候变化是“对世界犯下的最大骗局”。在气候引发的灾难日益加剧的时刻，这种说法不仅忽视了科学，而且贬低了脆弱国家的斗争。
对于面临海平面上升的小岛屿国家和数百万生活在极端天气中的人来说，忽视气候变化不仅是一种冒犯，而且是危险的。
领导失去了
联合国大会是世界的共同平台，旨在超越民族不满，关注共同生存。然而，特朗普总统却把它当作了清算、抬高自己、责骂别人的舞台。
这种做法破坏了全球领导地位的理念。一个真正的领导人不会回避人道主义灾难，不会疏远盟友，不会嘲笑制度，也不会轻视存在的威胁。衡量领导力的标准不是掌声，而是远见和责任。
美国的声誉岌岌可危
如果美国继续沿着这条路走下去，代价将是巨大的。通过否决寻求停止加沙流血的安理会决议，疏远盟友，无视气候现实，华盛顿不仅冒着道德地位的风险，也冒着战略影响力的风险。
世界期望更好。历史上，当美国将力量与原则相结合时，当它提升国际法、保护人权、通过制度而不是与之对抗时，美国一直处于最强大的状态。
未来的选择
最终，美国人民、学者、媒体和政策制定者将决定这种姿态是否反映了他们希望在世界舞台上代表他们的那种领导。中期选举可能是一次关键的考验。
然而，就目前而言，有一个事实是明确的：2025年联合国大会的演讲没有满足这一时刻。它没有让世界团结起来，反而让许多国家质疑美国是否仍然认为自己是一个负责任的全球领导者，或者仅仅是一个被自我形象所吞噬的孤独的行动者。
历史不会把这次演讲作为和平的转折点来铭记，而是提醒人们，当领导败给咆哮时会发生什么。
( 注意： 本文是用AI翻译的，或有误差。请以原版英文为准。谢谢。)
Reference Link:- https://www2.apdnews.cn/en/item/25/0929/axjfdzdzed7cc58069bd28.html;