«We didn’t stand up in the past when Russia spoke, we didn’t stand up when Iran spoke». With this statement, Foreign Secretary Luca Beccari puts to rest the case of the empty seat at the UN.
On Thursday, September 24, during Benjamin Netanyahu‘s speech, the San Marino delegation was engaged in bilateral meetings at the Glass Palace, and even if they had been in the chamber, they would not have left the room, because San Marino never does.
Reached directly by our newsroom, Beccari leaves no room for ambiguity: that absence carries no political meaning whatsoever, because the Republic’s position is the one delivered from the podium on Saturday.
That alone is enough to dismantle the two boldest interpretations circulating in recent days.
Some saw it as a protest, with San Marino lumped in among countries that walked out of the chamber; others saw it as the Titan effectively siding with Iran: both readings start from the same mistaken premise.
If, as Beccari assures, San Marino doesn’t leave the room even when Tehran speaks, an empty chair can be neither a boycott nor an alliance. What remains is the third version — the one about a global embarrassment, complete with speculation about delegates lost in the corridors or stuck in the restroom. For that, all it takes is a bit of memory.
A year ago, during Netanyahu’s speech at the 80th General Assembly, the San Marino delegation was also absent from the chamber.
Several outlets had already counted it among the countries that had walked out in protest. Once it was clarified that the delegation was engaged elsewhere, the story deflated within hours — including in the pages of those who this year cried embarrassment. Same situation, one year later: only the narrative changed.
Beccari’s explanation comes four days later, and had it come sooner, it might have spared quite a few speculative accounts.
Beccari starts by explaining how UN week actually works.
On one side there are the General Assembly proceedings, where leaders speak. On the other, running in parallel and at the same time, are panels, meetings, roundtables and working groups that countries attend according to their own needs.
This is why small delegations like San Marino’s — but also those of much larger states — cannot guarantee physical presence in the chamber for the entire duration of the proceedings.
«This is something that affects everyone, including large countries with delegations far bigger than ours».
On Thursday the delegation was in the building, just in a different room.
«At the moment of Netanyahu’s speech we were engaged in bilateral meetings in the area of the UN Palace dedicated to bilateral meetings between states», Beccari recounts. That is where ministers and their counterparts from other countries meet, and these are «particularly important moments for bilateral activity within the UN».
One only has to scroll through San Marino’s schedule in New York during those days.
There is the signing of agreements to establish diplomatic relations with Trinidad and Tobago and with Namibia, meetings with the foreign ministers of Cyprus, Singapore and Liechtenstein, the summit of small European states, and the signing of the new UN Convention against Cybercrime.
As for walking out of the chamber, for Beccari the question simply doesn’t arise. «What matters is that, if we had been in the room, we certainly wouldn’t have stood up».
Not to attach any particular meaning to the gesture, but because of a practice that, in his view, knows no exceptions.
«San Marino never leaves the chamber when other leaders speak, even when, unfortunately, speeches are given that do not align with our thinking. We never do it, neither at the UN nor in other settings».
For the Foreign Secretary, the debate has focused on the wrong issue.
What matters is whether one agrees or not with what Netanyahu said, and in that narrative San Marino would not have found itself agreeing, «even if we had been in the room». «If the point is that everything comes down to physical presence during someone’s speech, then anything can be said in the chamber, and afterward if you’re there it looks like you agree, and if you’re not there it looks like you don’t. That’s not how it works».
The substance, Beccari insists, lies in Saturday’s address, delivered «without hiding, without seeking alibis».
San Marino unreservedly condemned terrorism and the October 7 attacks and reaffirmed the right of the Palestinian people to their own state.
It confirmed its recognition of Palestine and support for the two-state solution, and called for a permanent ceasefire, full humanitarian access and protection of civilians. Beccari notes that the Republic has also always supported Israel’s right to defend itself.
He does, however, stress the urgency of halting military operations in Gaza, which are inflicting «unspeakable suffering» on the population. In the same speech, San Marino once again condemned Russia’s aggression against Ukraine.
It is the very same Russia in front of which, Beccari says, the delegation has never stood up. Condemnations are made from the podium, not with chairs.
Beccari notes that not many states without superpower status take clear positions at the UN.
San Marino, in its own small way, does so «directly», whenever it has the space to do it.
«We were not present for Netanyahu’s speech; for us, it carries no political meaning.
The political meaning was expressed during our own address, where we said very specific things: that is San Marino’s position, the one that counts — not the one interpreted from whether or not the delegation was sitting in the room».
Anyone who wants to know where San Marino stands has a speech to read, not a chair to photograph.
