When President Trump addresses the United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday, he should focus on three main priorities: international cooperation where it matters and is possible, the need for U.N. reform, and the expectation that other nations treat America with respect.

While the current international order based on democracy and the rule of law faces challenges from China and Putin's Russia, areas exist where international actors can cooperate. One such area is greater collaboration in counter-terrorism. Trump might, for example, offer to establish an international center for countering terrorism. Based in Washington, D.C. and staffed by security specialists from each embassy, the center could act as a place to share intelligence, analysis, and best practices. Another possible area for consensus is on the environment. Specifically, the health of the oceans in relation to plastic pollutants in the food chain and overfishing. With some U.S. leadership, major action to address both of those concerns would be possible. China wouldn't agree, but the U.S. could support governments in denying Chinese vessels access to their exclusive economic zones, or simply shame China into being the odd one out. If nothing else, this focus would show that Trump isn't reflexively opposed to multilateralism.

Then there's reforming the U.N. While it's never easy to criticize someone in their own house, Trump has a moral mandate to deliver a tough message to the general assembly congregation. Successive U.S. administrations have pushed the U.N. to engage in reform efforts, and the U.N. bureaucracy hasn't budged. That has meant billions of wasted U.S. taxpayer dollars.

Moreover, the motivation for reform is inherently moral. It is an outrage, for example, that the U.N. Human Rights command continues to be defined by autocracy, corruption, and an anti-democratic ideology. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. It was just last week that we learned how the U.N.'s environment director, Erik Solheim, has been using the U.N.'s ludicrously generous expense system as a way to fly the world. Note the irony of Solheim's carbon footprint being one of the world's largest. What's even more pathetic, however, is that Solheim, like so many profligate U.N. officials, will likely keep his job, because there is simply no accountability at the U.N.

Finally, when it comes to respecting the U.S., Trump should make clear that while he believes in innovative forums of diplomacy (he can reference his meeting with Kim Jong Un and amenability to meeting President Rouhani of Iran), he will not sit idle in face of repeated efforts to use multilateral institutions to undercut American interests. As an example, the president can point to the International Criminal Court's unjustified investigation of U.S. military personnel. Trump could also make clear that multilateral diplomacy must actually serve mutual interests rather, than as with the Paris climate accords, privileging other nations above America.

Ultimately though, Trump should aim at delivering a pointed but honest message. A message of sought engagement with the world, but on terms that make the U.N. more efficient and effective, and without jeopardizing America.