GERMANY, JAPAN MUST BE PART OF ANY INCREASE IN PERMANENT MEMBERSHIP OF SECURITY COUNCIL, UNITED STATES TELLS GENERAL ASSEMBLY

30 October 1996

Press Release
GA/9147

GERMANY, JAPAN MUST BE PART OF ANY INCREASE IN PERMANENT MEMBERSHIP OF SECURITY COUNCIL, UNITED STATES TELLS GENERAL ASSEMBLY

19961030 Debate on Council Reform Continues, Speakers Call for Change in Veto, Increase in Total Membership

The United States would not accept any enlargement of the permanent membership of the Security Council that did not include Germany and Japan, the Assembly was told this afternoon as it continued its review on the progress of its working group on Council reform.

The representative of the United States went on to say that his Government would not agree to any change in the status, powers and obligations of the current permanent members, which were countries with global political and economic influence and a capacity to contribute to international peace and security. The total Council membership should not exceed approximately 20 seats.

Several Member States noted that it was unlikely that the right of veto within the Council would be abolished any time soon. Several speakers favoured a limitation of the right to veto, either by limiting its use to certain situations under Chapter VII of the Charter, or by procedural mechanisms. Algeria noted that with the permanent members' refusal to accept any changes in the use of the veto -- in opposition to the wish of the majority of Member States -- a situation had been created in which no new permanent memberships could be seriously envisaged.

Other countries, including Tunisia and the United States, favoured the proposal for permanent representation for regional groups, or regional rotation; Singapore, however, noted that it might exacerbate regional tensions.

Many speakers cited again the principle of sovereign equality as one of the criteria behind the reform of the Security Council. Sudan stated that the Council was mandated to act on behalf of all Member States, but had instead become a battle-ground for the settlement of differences between Council members and other Member States. Latvia suggested a long-term, multi-stage approach to changes in the Security Council, an approach that had worked well with other controversial issues.

Some States pointed out that while no consensus had been reached on the most controversial issues, there was nonetheless a wide measure of agreement on several matters. The main area of agreement seemed to be the measures implemented already by the Council aimed at improving transparency.

Statements were also made by Japan, Libya, Singapore, Guyana, Spain, Czech Republic, Croatia, United Kingdom, Indonesia, Maldives, Bahrain, Romania, Bulgaria and Viet Nam.

The General Assembly will reconvene at 10 a.m. tomorrow, 31 October, to elect the new members of the Economic and Social Council. Its discussion on reform of the Security Council was deferred to the morning of Friday, 1 November.

General Assembly Plenary - 1a - Press Release GA/9147 46th Meeting (PM) 30 October 1996

Assembly Work Programme

The General Assembly met again this afternoon to continue its review of the progress of its open-ended working group on the question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council and other matters.

The Assembly had before it the working group's report detailing its activities during the fiftieth session (document A/50/47 and Add.1). The working group was established by the Assembly in December 1993 to consider all aspects of Council reform. According to the report, during meetings and informal consultations beginning November 1995 and ending last month, the working group continued to discuss aspects of Council reform which have been a focus of its deliberations since it began work in January 1994, namely: proposals for the increase in permanent membership of the Council; proposals on the increase in non-permanent membership; proposals relating to rotation or shared Security Council seats; improvement in the Council's working methods and its transparency; and the decision-making process in the Council, including the veto power. (For details on that report, see Press Release GA/9144, issued 29 October.)

Statements

AIVARS BAUMANIS (Latvia) said that discussions to reform the United Nations were as long as the history of the Organization itself. In its three years of existence, the working group had made rather limited progress. The time may be ripe to begin a systematic discussion of the procedure for implementing reform when the group resumes its work next year. The group could explore a procedural possibility that looked promising: a long-term, multi-stage procedure for expanding and changing the composition of the Council. During the first stage of expansion, the procedure would make no changes in relation to the right to veto, but would respond to the new situation created by the many, mostly small States that had recently joined the United Nations. Gradual reform, first of all, was an approach that was practical regarding other issues, such as commitment to general nuclear disarmament. Secondly, States did not need to make permanent, irreversible commitments on the more controversial issues during the first stage. Latvia supported the view of Ukraine that the legitimate interests of the Eastern European group should be taken into account.

SLAHEDDINE ABDELLAH (Tunisia) said that the working group had made it clear that its discussions had clarified the issues; there was agreement on many points, in particular the need to review the composition of the Security Council. It was also necessary to review the working methods, and there was also agreement on the principles which should guide the proposed reform, including sovereign equality, equitable geographic representation and contributions to peace-keeping operations. To those principles it was necessary to add democracy, legitimacy, efficiency and transparency. It was apparent that any increase that would favour only developed countries would be

General Assembly Plenary - 1a - Press Release GA/9147 46th Meeting (PM) 30 October 1996

unacceptable.

Many favoured the elimination of the veto, or at least limiting its application. It was also necessary to institutionalize the changes concerning the Council's working methods. Many countries had suggested further measures, also aimed at a better transparency in the Council's mechanisms. The proposal of two permanent regional rotating seats on the Council, which would give it a more regional outreach, was also of interest. If permanent seats for Germany and Japan were to be considered, then permanent seats should also be given to Africa, Asia and Latin America. Permanent regional representation would be an adequate response to the world's new realities.

HISASHI OWADA (Japan) said countries in various parts of the world were turning increasingly to the United Nations, in particular the Security Council, for their own security. Unless the Council was thoroughly reformed and reconstituted, it would be unable to meet the challenges ahead. The United Nations could truly play a central role in the new international environment, and Member States must reject attempts to indulge in power games based on narrow parochial interests of individual States.

Japan believed the ultimate objective in reforming the Council was to create a stronger, more credible Council by enhancing legitimacy and effectiveness, he said. A package of reforms should include a limited increase in its permanent membership through the inclusion of countries -- both developed and developing -- who have the capacity and the willingness to assume global responsibilities for the maintenance of international peace and security. A rotational representation for Asia, Africa and Latin America and the Caribbean might be a realistic solution; it might be left for the regions themselves to decide. An appropriate number of non-permanent seats should be added and utmost care should be taken to maintain a balance. Also, the present geographical imbalance in the Council as a whole should be addressed.

He said his country was grateful for its recent election to a two-year term on the Council. As to the working group, it believed that the "moment of truth" was approaching, when States would have to take a political decision. Japan expected to increase its involvement in the full range of United Nations activities in the coming years. That was the reason why reform was so important; if merely a partial reform of the Council was decided, the goal of enhancing legitimacy and effectiveness of the United Nations would not be achieved.

MOHAMED A. AZWAI (Libya) said the Council's membership should be expanded in proportion with the Organization's current membership. Expansion should be based on equitable geographic distribution but should be limited to the non-permanent category of membership. If the number of permanent members was to be increased, it should be along the lines of equitable geographic distribution.

He said that change in the Council's membership would not be sufficient

General Assembly Plenary - 1a - Press Release GA/9147 46th Meeting (PM) 30 October 1996

without concomitant changes in its method of work. The Council was discriminatory in its dealings with Member States, holding regular consultations with countries that contributed troops to peace-keeping operations, but not with other countries directly concerned with questions being considered. The Council acted on behalf of all Members; its members should not allow any country to exploit its work as had occurred when one Council member had prompted that body to impose sanctions on the Libyan people before exhausting the means of the peaceful settlement of disputes.

Turning to the matter of the veto power, he said it invalidated the principle of equality of States guaranteed by the Charter. The veto power was sometimes defended with the claim that permanent members of the Council bore a bigger share in the Organization's financial burden, and for this reason should be able to employ the veto. However, many countries would be willing to pay more in order to get the privilege. Also, how could finances be a criterion when one country possessing the veto power had accrued membership arrears close to $1 billion? he asked. The veto had also been defended as being granted to countries that bore greater responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. Yet a certain country had used its veto power to shield it from international condemnation when it had acted aggressively towards Libya in a manner that jeopardized international peace and security.

HO TONG YEN (Singapore) said that in a world fraught with post cold war ambiguity, it was not surprising that it was not easy to decide who would belong to the new elite. Any change in the Council was politically sensitive and therefore three years was too short a time to lose patience with the working group.

He said some Member States had been stubbornly defending the status quo, resisting all but the most superficial and cosmetic changes. Improvements in one area should not be held hostage by lack of agreement in another. If no agreement could be reached on complex questions, the proposal of the countries of the Non-Aligned Movement should be considered as an intermediate position, with the understanding that the final outcome should still be a comprehensive reform package. The proposal for regional rotational permanent representation might work successfully in Africa, but not in any other region. Despite a professed common foreign and security policy, the European Union would not agree to a single rotating representative. In Asia, the practice could exacerbate regional tensions. There should not be any attempt to rush an

General Assembly Plenary - 1a - Press Release GA/9147 46th Meeting (PM) 30 October 1996

artificial consensus in the matter. Only through the broadest possible consensus could a truly democratic Security Council be built.

ABDALLAH BAALI (Algeria) said the goal of establishing a more democratic, representative and efficient Security Council remained distant. The unanimous and determined opposition of the permanent members to any initiative which might call into question the privilege inherent to their status had stalled progress. Together with the permanent members' refusal to accept any changes in the use of the veto -- in opposition to the wish of the majority of Member States -- a situation had been created in which no new permanent memberships could be seriously envisaged. Deliberations had indicated that the creation of new permanent seats with all the privileges, including the veto, for the already over-represented industrialized countries would be unacceptable. Also, economic might alone could not be the criterion for membership.

It was also clear that the veto power, resorted to frequently during the cold war, must be reformed, he said. To that end, the veto power should be separated from the status of permanent membership on the Council. The countries of the Non-Aligned Movement had proposed that as a first step the use of the veto be limited to issues being addressed under Chapter VII of the Charter. It was unfortunate that the proposal which enjoyed wide support among the Non-Aligned countries had not met the approval of the permanent members.

S.R. INSANALLY (Guyana), speaking for the countries of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), said the expansion of the Security Council should be based on the principle of sovereign equality of all Member States. As small nations, the members of CARICOM would insist on their right to sit on the Council and to make their contribution to peace. The vast majority of Member States -- among them the Non-Aligned countries which included CARICOM -- would prefer to see an increase in the non-permanent membership alone. However, such a plan might not be acceptable. The CARICOM found several proposals for new rotating seats worth further consideration.

Past proposals as well as new initiatives must be considered, he said. However, there must be a sense of urgency regarding the reform effort. The circumstances of the world did not allow for delay in restructuring the United Nations.

CARLOS WESTENDORP (Spain) said only through real consensus would the Council reform gain the necessary legitimacy. Spain favoured a moderate increase in the membership of the Council. Such an increase would allow for a more frequent presence in the Council of both States with legitimate aspirations to participate more in the work of the Council and of those States with considerable weight and involvement in international relations. Spain had presented a proposal which would establish a criteria for Council membership based on Article 23 of the Charter which outlines the composition of the Council. Such criteria would include the consideration of a Member

General Assembly Plenary - 1a - Press Release GA/9147 46th Meeting (PM) 30 October 1996

State's contribution of military and other personnel to United Nations peace- keeping operations; financial contributions to the United Nations budget; and population.

Spain had also put forward a proposal relating to Council decision- making, he said. Based on Article 27 of the Charter which outlines the Council's voting procedures, the proposal would involve establishing three categories which would encompass all Council decisions: procedural matters which would be adopted by an absolute majority; substantive matters related to the Chapter VII which would require a special qualified majority but would not be subject to the veto; and substantive matters relating to Chapter VII which would also require a special qualified majority and would be subject to the veto by permanent Council members.

DUSAN ROVENSKY (Czech Republic) said that for practical purposes, it was necessary to consider proposals to reform the Security Council that required amending of the Charter, from those that did not. Many of the proposals on improving transparency in the working methods of the Council could be implemented without amending the Charter and should be adopted without delay. Also, the Czech Republic believed that the working group could submit recommendations on the composition and working methods of the Council before the end of the fifty-first session.

The Czech Republic supported an increase in both permanent and non- permanent seats while insisting on safeguarding rapid and effective Security Council action, he continued. It opposed new categories of membership, under whatever guise that may be proposed. The Czech Republic had supported a broader interpretation of Articles 31 and 32 of the Charter, enabling non- members of the Council to participate in its discussions, a proposal which had received wide support.

MARIO NOBILO (Croatia) said if agreement on the working group could not be reached, then Member States should try to take action on those matters on which there were agreements. There was agreement, practically unanimous, that transparency was necessary and that more could be done, despite the measures already taken. Other matters, such as those regarding the Council's working methods, should be institutionalized. Croatia also believed that countries which hosted United Nations peace-keeping troops should participate in the meetings which the Council held with troop-contributing countries. States which were directly affected by Council decisions should be able to present their positions at relevant meetings of the Council, which could then make better informed decisions.

Croatia supported an increase in both permanent and non-permanent categories of membership in the Council, though the total membership should not exceed 25. The status of permanent membership should not be taken literally, but reviewed every 10 to 15 years. As to the right to veto, it was highly unlikely that it would soon be abolished; Croatia proposed that with increased Council membership at least two vetoes be required in order to

General Assembly Plenary - 1a - Press Release GA/9147 46th Meeting (PM) 30 October 1996

nullify a Council resolution.

SIR JOHN WESTON (United Kingdom) said that in the last three years, issues had been fully discussed, key concepts clarified and innovative proposals developed; but the goal of the working group -- the enlargement of the Council -- had not yet been achieved. Another year of general debate would not help, nor would it help the United Nations.

The proposals of Member States were now clear, and there was a wide measure of agreement on the manner in which the Council should be enlarged, on several issues. One was that certain countries, by virtue of their political, economic and diplomatic weight, deserved to be offered permanent membership. The United Kingdom welcomed the wide support offered to Japan and Germany. Secondly, there was agreement that the representation of developing countries should be enhanced. Third, the process of organic, evolutionary change in the Council's working methods, which had enhanced its transparency, should continue. Above all, the Council should remain effective and efficient, able to react quickly and decisively. Any enlargement must therefore be kept modest, to say 20 or 21 seats. The Council was an action-oriented body and not a debating club or a re-creation of the General Assembly.

EDWARD W. GNEHM (United States) said while final consensus continued to elude the working group there were some accomplishments. Discussion demonstrated that many shared the United States view that permanent membership for Japan and Germany was a sine qua non of Security Council reform. Japan and Germany would be valuable new permanent members whose contributions would strengthen the Council. Indeed, the United States could not agree to a Council enlargement that did not entail their permanent membership.

The United States would also accept a modest expansion of the Council beyond permanent seats for Germany and Japan, while keeping in mind the need to maintain the Council's efficiency, he said. Beyond Japan and Germany, additional membership remained a substantial question. While the United States took no position on how other seats might be apportioned, it believed that the total size of the Council should not exceed more than approximately 20 seats. In addition, the United States would not agree to any change in the status, powers and obligations of the current permanent members. All permanent members were countries with global, political and economic influence and a capacity to contribute to peace and security. On broadening the

General Assembly Plenary - 1a - Press Release GA/9147 46th Meeting (PM) 30 October 1996

participation of developing countries in the Council, he said the concept of permanent regional rotational seats deserved careful consideration.

ELFATIH ERWA (Sudan) said reform of the Council should be based on the principle of sovereign equality among States and other principles of the Charter. The Charter affirmed that the Council was mandated to act on behalf of the whole United Nations membership. It was regrettable that the true situation in the Council was otherwise and that its resolutions lacked justice and objectivity. The Council had become a battleground for the settlement of differences between Council members and other Member States.

The Council must become more representative and its membership should reflect the increased number of Member States, he continued. Sudan agreed with the Malaysian proposal that expansion of the Council should be done through a system of geographic representation. In seeking to obtain more transparency, the Council's tendency to hold informal meetings during which resolutions were discussed and drafted must be amended. In such situations, the open meetings were reduced to mere formalities for the adoption of the already drafted text. Issues, such as those falling under Chapter VII, should be considered in open meetings, as they had broad implications. He called for the abolishment of the veto which, he said, ran counter to the principles of equality and democracy.

NUGROHO WISNUMURTI (Indonesia) said expansion of the Council had often been erroneously portrayed as creating new centres of power and privilege, but new permanent members from developing countries would be committed to safeguarding the collective interests of the global community. Some developing countries seeking permanent membership had earned their place through contributions to the Organization's objectives. The Council could not remain unresponsive to changing international circumstances. Membership expansion that failed to include Non-Aligned and developing countries would be inequitable. Proposals for new categories of membership might unduly restrict the scope of the reform process. The concept of regionalism would deprive the General Assembly of its jurisdiction to elect members and might sharpen existing regional animosities. He supported the increase of non-permanent members based on the principle of equitable geographical representation.

On the Council's working methods, he said that marginal improvements had not addressed the core issues and were far from meeting the requirements of transparency, accountability and democratization. An adequate working relationship between the permanent and non-permanent members was a prerequisite for the Council's effectiveness. The veto should be eliminated for the sake of equity, equality and legitimacy. Its exercise ensured a dominant role for a few powerful nations, and was incompatible with efforts to reform the decision-making processes of the Council. He urged caution rather

than hasty decisions in the matter of Council reform, and supported the continuance of the working group.

General Assembly Plenary - 1a - Press Release GA/9147 46th Meeting (PM) 30 October 1996

ABDUL SATTAR MOOSA DIDI (Maldives) said his country had been among the ten Member States who originally urged the inscription of the item on the Assembly's agenda. Today, the question of increase in the Council's membership had gained the momentum it deserved. The time was propitious to reinvigorate sovereign equality and fair participation enshrined in the Charter. Any change in the composition of the Council would necessitate consideration of other matters, including the role of the veto and the Council's decision-making processes. Also of concern were issues relating to the Council's permanent membership, transparency, and its relationship with the General Assembly. Equitable representation was a delicate issue.

The Council should be more representative, democratic and transparent, he continued. The Organization should not become a corporate body where only the rich and powerful decided issues. While the reform process should not be prolonged, discussions must be continued until consensus had been reached on all important aspects. Less advantaged and small States had to turn to the Security Council for their security; the United Nations was therefore important for safeguarding their sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity. He appealed to the working group to be mindful of the concerns of all States, including the small, as it proceeded with reform discussions.

JASSIM MOHAMMED BUALLAY (Bahrain) said the Council membership should be increased and its working methods should be continually reviewed to enhance transparency and effectiveness. The increase in the United Nations membership must be taken into account. Any observer of the working group activities would note agreement on the need to increase the Council membership. An opportunity must be given to all States to participate in the work of the Council. However, effectiveness and efficiency of the Council must be maintained.

Currently, there was a balance in the membership of the Council which would be difficult to change, he said. Member States must be patient as the working group continued its difficult deliberations. Bahrain said that his country had put forward its candidature for membership on the Council for the period from 1998 to 1999.

ION GORITA (Romania) said any change in the composition of the Council should provide the most favourable conditions for the Council to perform its work. Thus, Romania supported a moderate increase in Council membership. His Government would encourage efforts aimed at reaching agreement by which the Council would be increased to 25 members.

A Member State's contribution to international peace and security should be used as a criterion for Council membership, he continued. Also, equitable geographic distribution must be maintained. Germany and Japan should be considered legitimate candidates for permanent membership. At the same time, the Italian proposal to create new non-permanent seats which would rotate on a regional basis deserved to be examined.

General Assembly Plenary - 1a - Press Release GA/9147 46th Meeting (PM) 30 October 1996

IVAN MAXIMOV (Bulgaria) said an increase in Council membership must strike a balance between enhancing the Council's ability to act and retaining its efficiency. The ratio between permanent and non-permanent members must be retained, while increasing representation. States which carried considerable weight in international politics and economics -- for example Germany and Japan -- should become permanent Council members, as should other countries with regional and global influence.

NGO QUANG XUAN (Viet Nam) said the need to expand the Council was urgent as its current membership was at odds with the growth in United Nations membership, and world economic and political realities. The Council must maintain its moral legitimacy by incorporating views of Member States in its decision-making process.

Viet Nam believed that a moderate increase in permanent and non- permanent seats would win support by the majority of Member States, he continued. New seats must be given to developing countries so as to address the current imbalance. The criteria for new permanent membership should be geographical representation; political and economic strength; and a country's commitment and capability to contribute to the maintenance of international peace and security. Most importantly, reform must be based on acceptable methods and efforts should be made to reach consensus.

Right of Reply

LORENZO FERRARIN (Italy) said he wished to reply to the statement made by the representative of the United Kingdom. He said the statement made yesterday by the representative of Italy which had referred to the scale of contributions to the United Nations budget had been based on official United Nations documentation which recorded Italy as the fifth largest contributor to the United Nations budget.

SIMON MANLEY (United Kingdom) said that the statement made earlier by his country had referred to the United Kingdom's contributions not only to the United Nations regular budget, but also to the peace-keeping budget. Within that context, the United Kingdom would continue to be the fifth largest contributor to the United Nations -- and proud of it.

* *** *