GENERAL ASSEMBLY TOLD OF CONCERN THAT LACK OF RESOURCES MAKES SECURITY COUNCIL SEEK OUTSIDE HELP IN CRISIS SITUATIONS

26 November 1996

Press Release
GA/9175

GENERAL ASSEMBLY TOLD OF CONCERN THAT LACK OF RESOURCES MAKES SECURITY COUNCIL SEEK OUTSIDE HELP IN CRISIS SITUATIONS

19961126 As Debate on Report Continues, Nigeria Says Impasse in Choice Of Secretary-General Shows Weakness in Council's Decision-Making

Concern over the tendency of the Security Council to rely on options outside the United Nations to respond to certain crisis situations was expressed this afternoon, as the Assembly concluded its discussion of the Council's annual report. The representative of Canada referred to the Council's reliance on external options, stating that that was largely because the United Nations, and the Department of Peace-keeping Operations in particular, still did not have the resources or capabilities necessary for it to be the instrument of choice when the Council decided to address a particular crisis.

The representative of Nigeria said that if there was any remaining doubt about the need for reform of the Security Council decision-making processes, the current exercise on the appointment of a Secretary-General must have erased them. The collective decision of an entire continent, he said, was being overridden by the posture of one powerful State.

The creation of a post of Rapporteur of the Security Council to inform the General Assembly regularly of the Council's activities was proposed by the representative of Mexico. He also said that it was time for the materialization of the special reports from the Council to the Assembly, as indicated in Articles 15 and 24 of the United Nations Charter.

The representative of Egypt also stated that the time had come to define such cases when the Council should present special reports to the Assembly. It should happen, he said, when the Council was unable to discharge its responsibilities due to a lack of unanimity, and when the Council decided to establish a new peace-keeping operation or terminate an existing one.

The representative of Iran said that Council's reporting obligations were to ensure that Member States not on the Council could be fully informed of the Council's activities. Although the majority of Member States had

General Assembly Plenary - 1a - Press Release GA/9175 66th Meeting (PM) 26 November 1996

emphasized the need for comprehensive and substantive reports from the Council to the Assembly, the Council had not reacted positively. The Council could not claim that it was functioning on behalf of the general membership, while it ignored the legitimate and Charter-based requests of the Member States.

Statements were also made by the representatives of Botswana, Brazil, Japan, Singapore, Slovenia, Tunisia, United Kingdom and Zimbabwe.

The Assembly will meet again at 10 a.m. tomorrow, 27 November, to discuss cooperation between the United Nations and the Organization of African Unity (OAU), cooperation between the United Nations and the Economic Cooperation Organization, and the elimination of coercive economic measures as a means of political and economic compulsion (agenda items 42, 26 and 159).

Assembly Work Programme

The General Assembly met this afternoon to continue its consideration of the annual report of the Security Council (document A/51/2). (For further details, see Press Release GA/9174 issued today.)

Statements

MASAKI KONISHI (Japan) said his country would assume a non-permanent seat on the Council in January 1997. While the Council held the primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, the role of the Assembly could not be forgotten. The restructuring of the Council, as well as improving its method of work, would enhance its credibility. The entire United Nations membership should make every effort to reach an agreement on comprehensive reform of the Council. Japan, while welcoming steps taken by the Council to enhance transparency, would devote its energies while on the Council to improving two-way communication between the Council and non-members.

Briefings of delegations not on the Council by the Security Council President had proven to be a valuable initiative, he said. So were the increased consultations between the Council and troop-contributing countries. It was important that such consultations be held before the Council began consideration of a mission mandate in its informal consultations. Regarding the Council's annual report, he said Japan would welcome any substantive improvements in it. Even if the Council as a whole was unable to agree on an analytical assessment, the insight of its individual members could enhance the Assembly's discussion

MANUEL TELLO (Mexico) told the Assembly that the wish for more transparency and democratic methods in the Council was linked to the constructive participation of Member States in the Security Council's work. Mexico welcomed the greater number of public meetings of the Council and would also favour a greater use of Article 31 of the Charter, by which any Member State could take part, without voting, in the discussion of any matter before the Security Council. The fact that the briefings by the chairmen of the sanctions committees to interested Member States now appeared in the Journal was also to be welcomed.

It was time, he continued, for the materialization of the special reports as indicated in Articles 15 and 24 of the United Nations Charter. Reports every three months from the Council to the Assembly would also strengthen the links between the two organs. The regular briefings by the President of the Council had been very useful, but Mexico believed, however, that a rapporteur of the Security Council, who could inform Member States of the Council's work, would improve the collaboration between the Council and Member States of the Organization. It was also to be hoped that the Council's

General Assembly Plenary - 3 - Press Release GA/9175 66th Meeting (PM) 26 November 1996

next report would include information on the consultative meetings with troop- contributing countries.

ISAAC E. AYEWAH (Nigeria) said that since the establishment of an informal working group on documentation and other procedural matters, and partly as a result of the work of the open-ended working group on Security Council reforms, a series of steps had been taken by Council members to provide for greater transparency, and increased interaction and consultation between Council members and non-members. The measures had added to the credibility of the Council, but had fallen short of the desired openness and transparency that Member States desired. Closed-door consultation continued to be the preferred approach of the Council.

Another important improvement was the institutionalization of the system of consultations between the Council and troop-contributing countries. He said that as part of the efforts to improve the documentation of the Council, its members, through the President's note S/1996/603, further clarified by S/1996/704, had instituted measures to help determine which items should be deleted from the Council's agenda, and when. The report, however, was basically a compilation of the various communications received by the Council and the decisions adopted by it during the period; it provided no analysis of the activities of the Council, the decisions taken or how far those decisions had evolved over time.

He said the workload of the Council in the discharge of its primary responsibility for the maintenance of peace and security continued to be heavy, increasing in volume and scope. His delegation had always believed it was important to avoid the appearance of double standards in the Council's handling of conflicts that had potential for undermining peace and security. If there was any remaining doubt about the need for a reform of the Council, including its decision-making processes, the current exercise on the appointment of Secretary-General must have erased them. "Where", he asked, "is democracy or transparency in the decision-making process if the overwhelming desire of the majority is held hostage to the political posture of one State, however powerful, and the collective decision of an entire continent is being overridden by that posture?"

VIJI MENON (Singapore) said that one way of enhancing the relationship between the Assembly and the Council was for the Council to provide timely and more informative accounts of its work in its reports to the Assembly. At present, the reports tended to be of a routine and superficial nature, and then were submitted to the Assembly only once a year, long after decisions had been taken by the Council and conflicts resolved. They had become academic exercises to which little attention was being paid. It would be helpful if reports included information on the informal consultations through which most of the work of the Council was conducted these days.

General Assembly Plenary - 4 - Press Release GA/9175 66th Meeting (PM) 26 November 1996

She said the current unsatisfactory state of affairs with regard to the submission of the annual report of the Council reflected a general lack of transparency and interaction between the Council and the larger membership. While the Charter conferred on the Council the primary responsibility for the maintenance of peace and security, it was by no means solely responsible for such questions. Nevertheless, she continued, all Member States were presented with the bill for financing the peace-keeping operations which had been established, and there must be a way for better and more structured consultations between both bodies before the establishment of such operations. The vast majority of Member States had voiced those concerns in various forums in the past few years; only a truly transparent, accountable and responsive Security Council could exercise legitimate and representative leadership in the twenty-first century.

LEGWAILA J.M.J. LEGWAILA (Botswana) said Member States had demonstrated their willingness and determination to participate in efforts to maintain international peace and security. Governments had become dependable partners in the work of the Security Council. However, regional arrangements could not be expected to assume responsibility for such efforts. The Council must respond quickly to emergency situations and coordinate its activities with those of regional organizations.

The Council should increase the number of open meetings to enable a smooth and systematic exchange of views between the Council and non-members, he said. Reports of the Secretary-General should be discussed in open meetings to give non-members the opportunity to contribute to the debate. To improve the working methods of the Council, his Government supported the creation of subsidiary bodies to assist the Council in its functions; revision and finalization of its rules of procedures; regular meetings of the Presidents of the Council and the Assembly; and strengthened transparency in the work of the Sanctions Committee.

STEPHEN GOMERSALL (United Kingdom) said recent efforts to increase the transparency of the Council's working methods were of great importance. The greater resort to open meetings provided an opportunity for non-members to contribute to the Council's consideration. The United Kingdom was open to more such meetings. Other changes, such as the daily briefings offered by the presidency to non-members, had increased the flow of information to those outside the Council. Regrettably, those meetings were sparsely attended.

He said the Security Council, like the rest of the United Nations, confronted a number of very complex challenges with limited resources. However, the Council had continued to perform its responsibilities with relative efficiency, in a practical and harmonious manner. The United Kingdom would continue to work for the strengthening of the Council, by strengthening the conflict-prevention and peace-keeping infrastructure of the Organization.

General Assembly Plenary - 5 - Press Release GA/9175 66th Meeting (PM) 26 November 1996

Also, efforts would be made to strengthen the Council through its enlargement and the development of its relations with the Assembly.

CELSO L.N. AMORIM (Brazil) said a critical look at the Security Council's present standing revealed a number of paradoxes. The authority of the Council seemed to have increased, but there were important international issues which were not brought before it. The Council appeared to have acquired greater influence, but at times its decisions and recommendations were disregarded. To encourage interaction between the Council and the Assembly, the President of the Assembly should take part in consultations of the Council. The Council could enhance its own role as mediator by developing closer contacts with representatives of the parties engaged in conflict or by sending fact-finding missions to the field.

Reviewing areas of activity of the Council, he said the International Criminal Tribunals were still struggling to bring justice to the former Yugoslavia and to Rwanda. Democracy and national reconciliation continued to make inroads in many regions previously experiencing civil strife. However, the tide of democracy and reconciliation had spread less evenly in Africa. Achievements such as those in Mozambique were welcome. In the case of Angola, the appeals of the international community had gone unheeded by parties to the conflict. The Organization of African Unity (OAU) and other subregional groups retained an essential role in clarifying the focus of international responses. The proliferation of humanitarian emergencies necessitated the definition of collective responsibility. Criteria must be developed to determine what situations were deemed as threats to peace.

NGONI F. SENGWE (Zimbabwe) said that the Council report was presented as a mere annual ritual, and failed to take into account the various concerns expressed in the past by most delegations. The rest of the Member States in the Assembly, on whose behalf the 15 Council members purported to act, were not privy to the decisions which were made in numerous informal consultations, which had become routine. The Council continued to take decisions affecting the destiny of peoples and nations in informal consultations. What the other members received were bare resolutions adopted in the Council Chamber.

Not only should the Council reports be analytical and reflective of the debates preceding resolutions, he went on, but the Council should submit them on a regular basis given the fact that the Council dealt with important matters of peace and security. That was consistent with the principle of accountability and democratic practice. He hoped that as the Assembly pursued the reform programme through the various working groups discussing reform of the United Nations, the Council's working methods would also be reformed to make them more democratic and reflect the interests of the rest of the Member States.

General Assembly Plenary - 6 - Press Release GA/9175 66th Meeting (PM) 26 November 1996

SLAHEDDINE ABDELLAH (Tunisia) said the report of the Security Council gave Member States the opportunity to offer their points of view, relating to the strengthening of international peace and security. The General Assembly had a role in peace-keeping, he noted, and in that sense, it must interact with the Council. Council actions had to be justified in various ways so that lessons learned might be useful in the future. Special reports should be submitted to the Council when it came to new peace-keeping operations, or in changing the character of an existing one.

He suggested periodic meetings between the Presidents of the Council and the Assembly to enhance understanding. The participation of States involved in an issue was to be encouraged, he said, as it would strengthen the legitimacy of the Council. He further suggested the institutionalization of consultation between troop-contributing countries. It was by taking into account in the viewpoints of Member States that the Council's actions would become more legitimate.

DAVID KARSGAARD (Canada) said the report illustrated both the Council's successes and shortcomings, in responding to challenges to peace and security. On peace-keeping operations, he said that a fundamental principle was to ensure that mandates set by the Council were matched by adequate resources to carry them out. While the Council was increasingly sensitive to that, it had not always been entirely successful in acting accordingly, as in two cases where Canada was directly involved this year: Rwanda and Haiti.

In Rwanda, he said, the Council had decided to reduce the force levels of the United Nations Assistance Mission for Rwanda (UNAMIR) while maintaining a mandate that the remaining personnel could not possibly carry out. Such decisions created the false impression about what an operation could achieve. With regard to Haiti, Canada strongly welcomed the Council's decision to continue its engagement in that country. However, the Council's troop authorization for the United Nations Mission in Haiti (UNMIH), and then for its successor United Nations Support Mission in Haiti (UNSMIH), also fell short of what the Secretary-General had indicated was required to implement the mandate of those operations.

Canada was concerned about the tendency of the Council to rely on options outside the Organization to respond to certain crisis situations. That was largely because the United Nations, in particular the Department of Peace-keeping Operations, still did not have the resources or capabilities necessary for it to be the instrument of choice when the Council decided to address a particular crisis.

That was not the Council's responsibility alone. He continued, "We continue to fail, as Member States, to provide the conceptual framework within which the United Nations, in particular the Department of Peace-keeping Operations, could develop into a more flexible instrument, more ready to

General Assembly Plenary - 7 - Press Release GA/9175 66th Meeting (PM) 26 November 1996

respond to the various and variegated challenges facing us." Also, any Member State, either as a directly affected party or as a major troop-contributing country, should be able to make its case directly to the Council as a whole when its immediate interests were involved. Greater participation by non- members would allow the Council to take more informed action and would enhance the Council's credibility.

NABIL ELARABY (Egypt) said that the Security Council's report should take a totally different form. As it was, it did not take into consideration the need for further transparency. Despite the Secretariat's efforts, it was merely a compilation of documents obtained previously by delegations at the appropriate time; it did not provide any new information and was, thus, a waste of effort and material resources. It did not include information about the deliberations of the Council in its consultations of the whole. It did not provide any analysis of the situations considered or any reasoning behind actions, nor any evaluation of the impact of its action on the ongoing crisis. Nor did it include information about oral presentations and briefings made by its President, the Secretary-General, his representatives or others. And there was no information about the informal meetings of subsidiary organs of the Council.

He said Egypt had submitted specific proposals for improving the Council's report. Those proposals were not aimed at reducing the efficiency of the Council nor to limiting the ability of Member States to express their views freely in the consultations of the whole. Egypt also believed that the time had come for the beginning of a fair implementation of Article 24, by defining cases when the Security Council should present special reports to the Assembly. Those should occur when the Council was unable to discharge its responsibilities due to a lack of unanimity; when the Council decided to establish a new peace-keeping operation; when it decided to withdraw or terminate an existing peace-keeping operation; when it authorized a State or group of States to undertake a military operation on its behalf; and when it decided to impose sanctions on any Member State.

KAMAL KHARRAZI (Iran) said the Charter authorized the Assembly to receive both annual reports and special reports from the Security Council. The Assembly had not received any such special reports. It was imperative that the conditions for submitting special reports be defined. The annual reports were drafted in manner which left no room for Assembly consideration. The Council's reporting obligations, as spelt out in the Charter, were intended to ensure that Member States not on the Council could be fully informed of the Council's activities. However, it was doubtful if that idea had ever materialized.

The main avenue available to all non-members of the Council to become informed on the informal consultations was to attend the briefings of the Council's President, he said. However, the briefings were totally dependent

General Assembly Plenary - 8 - Press Release GA/9175 66th Meeting (PM) 26 November 1996

on the individual approach of the current President. The content of those briefings could instead be transmitted in written form and included in the annual report. The majority of Member States had emphasized the need for comprehensive and substantive reports. If the Council could not react positively to the desire of the great majority, its credibility would face serious damage. The Council could not claim that it was functioning on behalf of the general membership while it ignored legitimate and Charter-based requests of the Member States.

DANILO TURK (Slovenia) said the last year of work of the Council had been characterized by certain improvements. The practice of holding open- orientation debates had been developed. Transparency in the work of the Council had been improved to some extent as a result of briefings by the President of the Council. However, the need remained to bring the relationship between the Council and the Assembly closer to the requirements of the Charter.

The practice of reporting by the Council to the Assembly should be developed, he said. Special reports of the Council should be submitted when necessary, and the Council's reports should be more frequent, a change which would enhance the relationship between the Council and the Assembly. In addition, the reports must be more substantive. More substantive assessment of the issues of world peace and security could emerge as a result of an intensified communication between the Council and the Assembly.

* *** *