INCREASE IN NUMBER OF PERMANENT SECURITY COUNCIL SEATS WILL SERVE INTERESTS OF ONLY FEW COUNTRIES, ITALY TELLS GENERAL ASSEMBLY
Press Release
GA/9372
INCREASE IN NUMBER OF PERMANENT SECURITY COUNCIL SEATS WILL SERVE INTERESTS OF ONLY FEW COUNTRIES, ITALY TELLS GENERAL ASSEMBLY
19971204 Debate Begins on Reform Options; India Urges Stronger Representation for Developing Countries, Brazil Decries "Rotation" PlanAny increase in the permanent membership of the Security Council would only serve the interests of a few countries to the detriment of small and medium States, the representative of Italy told the General Assembly this morning as it began considering equitable membership and reform of the Council.
He said a framework being discussed would mean three categories of permanent membership: those with the veto; those without; and "pseudo- permanent members" from developing countries. There would also be fourth- class non-permanent members. He said Italy would never accept relegation to third or fourth class status.
The representative of Singapore called for a re-examination of the role of permanent members of the Council. Some of the current permanent members no longer had significant global power status, he said, and what they had was mainly because they were already permanent members.
The representative of the United Kingdom said most Member States did not want temporary, half-hearted reform in one category of Council membership but a durable, significant reform in both permanent and non-permanent categories, and one that increased developing country membership in both.
The representative of Brazil said a proposal to ascribe full permanent seats to two industrialized countries and rotating seats to the developing world was unacceptable. He said Brazil was willing to accept permanent membership and carry out the role as the representative of Latin America and the Caribbean.
The representative of India said developing countries needed equitable representation in the Council's permanent membership, otherwise its actions would be seen as less representative at a time when it was increasingly being called on to act on behalf of the world community. Expanding both permanent and non-permanent seats would strengthen the Council.
General Assembly Plenary - 1a - Press Release GA/9372 62nd Meeting (AM) 4 December 1997
Statements were also made by the representatives of Germany, Indonesia, Senegal, Mexico, Austria, India, Algeria and the Republic of Korea.
The Assembly will meet again at 3 p.m. today to continue its consideration of Security Council reform.
Assembly Work Programme
The General Assembly met this morning to begin its consideration of the question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council and related matters. It had before it a draft resolution (document A/52/L.7), by which the Assembly would stress that Council reform is of such importance that it cannot be subject to any imposed time-frame. It would, therefore, recognize the need to allow Member States adequate time to further reflect on the question to identify solutions on which general agreement can be reached.
Further, the Assembly would emphasize the need to comply faithfully with provisions of Article 108 of the Charter with respect to any resolution with Charter implications. It would reiterate that the Open-Ended Working Group shall continue its work in 1998 in order to examine all proposals and submit a report to the Assembly before the end of its current session. [Note: Article 108 describes the conditions required to amend the Charter.]
The text is sponsored by Canada, Egypt, Guatemala, Italy, Lebanon, Mexico, Pakistan, Qatar, Syria and Turkey.
Also before the Assembly are amendments to that text proposed by Germany (document A/52/47). In the second preambular paragraph, instead of "noting the work of" the Open-Ended Working Group on Council reform, it would welcome the progress it made during its fifty-first session. The full title of that Working Group would also be corrected by replacing "representation of" with "representation on". The third preambular paragraph, which notes that differences continue to exist within the Organization on the question of Council reform, would be deleted.
In operative paragraph 1, while still stressing that the matter of Council reform shall not be subject to any imposed time-frame, the Assembly would also recognize the importance of treating Council reform "as a matter of urgent attention".
In operative paragraph 2, the reference to "any resolution with Charter amendment implications" would be replaced by "any resolution which contains amendments to the Charter".
A new operative paragraph 3 would be added, as follows:
"3. Confirms that decisions on important questions of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council and other matters related to the Council shall be made by a two-thirds majority of the members present and voting;"
The current operative paragraph 3, which reiterates that the Working Group shall continue its work in 1998 and report to the Assembly before the
General Assembly Plenary - 4 - Press Release GA/9372 62nd Meeting (AM) 4 December 1997
end of its current session, would be expanded in a new operative paragraph 4, as follows:
"4. Reiterates that the Open-Ended Working Group should continue its work, taking into account the progress achieved during the forty-eighth, forty-ninth, fiftieth and fifty-first sessions as well as the views expressed during the fifty-second session of the General Assembly, and submit a report to the Assembly before the end of its fifty-second session, including any agreed recommendations."
BILAHARI KAUSIKAN (Singapore) said that most of the Permanent Members of the Security Council no longer had the will or capability to exercise power on the global scale necessary to maintain international peace and security as envisaged by the Charter. If they enjoyed global power status, it was primarily because they were already Permanent Members.
Discussion on Security Council reform would progress better, he continued, if the General Assembly temporarily abandoned futile arguments over the number and identity of members for a more fundamental re-examination of the meaning of permanent membership in the last years of the 20th Century. What should be examined was what was really needed to maintain international peace and security, so discussion on Security Council reform should begin with an examination of the criteria for permanent membership.
A reformed Security Council must reflect the post-cold war geopolitical configuration, if it was to be effective, he said. The United Nations and the Security Council would be done grievous damage, if the Assembly took decisions that may eventually have only a tenuous relationship with what finally evolved in the real world. That was why his delegation had been consistent in cautioning against a hasty decision on Security Council reform.
STEPHEN GOMERSALL (United Kingdom) said it was always easier to attack the existing system than to speak clearly about the way forward. The only way was through painstaking negotiation. There had been much progress. Proposals by last year's Assembly President and the then Chairman of the Open-ended Working Group on Security Council Reform, Ismail Razali (Malaysia), offered a way to address admittedly very difficult questions.
Everyone agreed on the objective of enlarging the Council, he said, but a ratifiable proposal had yet to emerge. The consultations carried out by the co-vice-chairmen of the Working Group revealed that most Member States did not want temporary, half-hearted reform in one category of Council membership, but a durable, significant reform in both permanent and non-permanent categories, which increased developing country membership in both. Several permanent members endorsed that view.
The draft resolution presented by Ambassador Razali last year identified the mainstream current in the debate, and was regarded as representing the
General Assembly Plenary - 5 - Press Release GA/9372 62nd Meeting (AM) 4 December 1997
negotiating middle ground. Although presenting problems for a number of delegations, including his, it offered the best prospect so far for a solution. It sparked positive consideration of how some remaining issues might be solved.
He said the United Kingdom recognized the need to respect Article 108 in relation to amendments to the Charter, but the required statutory two-thirds majority would be a barely acceptable minimum. The United Kingdom wanted further efforts on a concrete proposal to reconcile the views of the greatest possible number of States. The draft resolution before the Assembly was an invitation to eternal delay. It offered a back-handed endorsement of the status quo and ignored progress made last year. He welcomed the Assembly President's announcement that no action would be taken on it at this stage. There was now a much greater understanding of the parameters within which a workable outcome could be reached, and the United Kingdom would continue efforts with likeminded countries "to bring this necessary reform to early fruition".
TONO EITEL (Germany) said Assembly discussions on Security Council reform should address four main points: recognition of Germany as part of the mainstream; putting an end to self-centred discussions; the need for an agenda rather than an imposed time-frame; and faithful application of Article 108 of the Charter (on the procedure for amending the Charter). He recommended an enlargement package for the Council that allowed for four new non-permanent members; five new permanent members, three from the "south" and two from industrialised States; election of the possible new permanent members by the Assembly. He also recommended that the original permanent members should be engaged in a dialogue on their veto power; and the Assembly should decide about the veto for the new permanent members.
He said that the topic of Security Council enlargement could not continue to be discussed in an abstract and endless manner. Spending too much time and too many resources on "home-made" challenges was not in line with the moral obligation of the United Nations to tackle pressing issues. No one could impose a time-frame on the General Assembly, but it should create an agenda for its work on the topic. Without such an agenda, there would be a continuation of fruitless and antagonising exchanges in the Open-ended Working Group.
He said Security Council reform was too important an issue to be left to ambiguities. He noted that Article 18 of the Charter foresaw that "important questions" needed a voting majority of two-thirds of Member States present and voting. It was Germany's view that this majority must apply to resolutions on Security Council reform. Article 108, on the other hand, required that amendments to the Charter be approved by two-thirds of the entire membership of the Organization.
CELSO L. N. AMORIM (Brazil) said a large majority of Member States favoured an increase in both permanent and non-permanent membership of the
General Assembly Plenary - 6 - Press Release GA/9372 62nd Meeting (AM) 4 December 1997
Security Council, with permanent members from both developing and industrial- ized countries. When the Open-Ended Working Group on Security Council Reform resumed its work next January, it should embark fully on the negotiating process. Brazil did not favour artificial targets of any kind for completing work, but it opposed attempts to unduly slow down proceedings.
Brazil, he said, was willing to accept the responsibilities of permanent membership, and to carry out the role as the representative of Latin America and the Caribbean. As a non-permanent member, Brazil had tried in the past to maintain close coordination with countries of the region.
He said the proposal in Annex 1 of the 1997 report of the Working Group by the Permanent Representative of Malaysia -- the so-called "Razali proposal" -- was an appropriate framework, with the necessary adjustments, for reforming the Council in a non-discriminatory and democratic way. It would allow Member States to express themselves in the Assembly on candidacies for permanent membership from both the industrialized and the developing world. It provided sufficient leeway for regional consultation and did not prejudge any outcome. Reform which ascribed full permanent seats to two industrialized countries and rotating seats to the developing world would be unacceptable. There was no market for such an idea in the Latin American and Caribbean region.
Brazil believed there should be no discrimination, in principle, between current and new permanent members. New permanent members might consider the option of not exercising their veto rights, without relinquishing them, until there was a comprehensive agreement on decision-making, involving all permanent members. The veto issue might be sensitive, but it should not prevent countries from moving ahead on expanding the Council's composition.
He said a few delegations still had misgivings about more than 21 members, in contrast to the majority preference for a higher figure -- somewhere in the mid-twenties. The strongest opposition to expanding permanent membership was in the industrialized world. The veto and the question of numbers were the real issues impeding progress and should be the focus of future discussions.
SUTJIPTOHARDJO DONOKUSUMO (Indonesia) said the fact that Security Council reform was urgent and long overdue should not lead the General Assembly to hasty and ill-considered solutions. The working group's deliberations on the topic should continue. He said Indonesia endorsed the call for taking the time needed so that a general agreement could be reached.
The complex issues relating to the expansion of the Council and its reform were not currently amenable to general agreement. More time was needed not only for a review and reappraisal of the proposal already submitted, but also to consider new proposals such as two new permanent members for the developing countries of Africa, Asia and Latin America. That consideration
General Assembly Plenary - 7 - Press Release GA/9372 62nd Meeting (AM) 4 December 1997
would also deal with Article 108 of the Charter, which would be invoked for amendments and whose centrality and sanctity must be preserved.
IBRA DEGUÈNE KA (Senegal) said the proposals of Member States that came out of the Working Group, as well as the decisions made by the Conference of the Non-Aligned Movement and the Organization of African Unity (OAU) Summit, and the proposals of the United States were important steps in the discussion of Council reform. Many questions remained unresolved, including expansion of the Security Council membership in both permanent and non-permanent categories; the Council's composition; use of the right of veto; and improvement of the Council's working methods and the question of periodic review.
He said there was still disagreement between those in favour of expanding both categories of membership and those wanting to limit expansion to the non-permanent category. The African countries insisted that Africa have at least two permanent and two non-permanent seats, attributed on the basis of decisions by the African countries themselves on a system of rotation.
Senegal, he went on, supported a compromise between proposals on enlarging the Council to either 26 members, which would be in the interest of democratization, or 21 members, which would be in the interest of efficiency. However, that compromise must not be to the detriment of the African countries. Senegal also supported an in-depth debate with the permanent members on the veto. A limited but open committee should examine the issue, taking account of the views of all Member States. The committee should work simultaneously with the Working Group so that its conclusions could be submitted to the Working Group and harmoniously integrated into a general agreement on Council reform. Once the scope of application of the veto was defined and accepted, the right to use it should be the same for all permanent members, old or new. A periodic review system should be established.
He said Council reform offered the only opportunity for Africa to be better represented. The chance for African countries to become non-permanent members and permanent members with the right of veto must not be lost.
MANUEL TELLO (Mexico) said the category of permanent members of the Security Council established a discriminatory situation, exacerbated by the fact that they had the right of veto. In 1995, the Mexican delegation had submitted a proposal which provided for an increase of five members in the non-permanent category. His country was convinced that the Council needed to be enlarged to reflect the current composition of the Organization, and to ensure that it acted efficiently and effectively, and was more transparent and more democratic. Some countries, headed by the "pretenders", argued that the present situation in the world could be reflected only by increasing the number of permanent members on the Council. This, it was said, would confer greater legitimacy on the Council's decisions. But those countries could not
General Assembly Plenary - 8 - Press Release GA/9372 62nd Meeting (AM) 4 December 1997
explain how a Council with 10 permanent members would be more efficient and more effective, or how it would act more transparently and be more democratic.
If those aspiring permanent members had their way, there would be a Council in which the European Union, made up of 15 States, would have three permanent members. The cold war was over, yet the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) established in the context of bipolar confrontation and made up of 16 countries, wanted to have four permanent members. What would happen, he asked, to the group of States known as the "Group of Eight"? That handful of countries would have six permanent members as part of the privileged category. The Council would thus be made up of a privileged group, predominantly European and developed. Would that not overlook the principle of equity and representativeness?
On the veto, he said Member States had learned to live with the injustice of a provision which they had been assured would maintain the unity among the victors of the second world war. The veto did not serve that purpose; the rivalry between the powers was apparent from the very beginning of the Organization.
In San Francisco in 1945, Mexico was opposed to the granting of the veto, and supported the Australian proposal that its scope be confined to measures undertaken on the basis of Chapter VII of the Charter. He said, Mexico urged the victors from the second world war to reconsider their attitude; unilateralism must make room for the collective aspirations of equality and democracy. The exercise of enlarging the Council was an issue that was too important to be dealt with hastily. Reform of the Council should be a matter to unite Member States and not to divide them.
ERNST SUCHARIPA (Austria) said that all Member States were united in feeling that Council expansion and revision was urgently needed to ensure its representative character and legitimacy. Expansion should occur in both the permanent and non-permanent categories of membership, while maintaining a balance in composition and no more than 25 States. Expansion of both categories should ensure better representation for developing countries. While Austria supported the interest of Japan and Germany in serving as permanent members, it equally supported parallel interests from qualified countries in the south.
He said his country advocated curtailing the veto power -- ideally to actions under Chapter VII of the Charter -- and did not wish more prominence to be given to that instrument through an expanded permanent membership. Austria strongly supported increased transparency, including enhanced possibilities for hearing the views of non-members of the Council. It also supported a periodic review of the Council's composition to examine whether potential future changes in international relations should be reflected through further structural changes in its membership.
General Assembly Plenary - 9 - Press Release GA/9372 62nd Meeting (AM) 4 December 1997
He cautioned against creating linkages between the Secretary-General's reform proposals and Security Council reform. Unanimity was required for Council reform. Even after four years of intensive discussions, further clarifications and negotiations might be profitable, particularly with respect to the overall size of the Council, its decision-making process, and rotating permanent membership. Agreement must be reached on the acceptable outer limits of expansion. Also worth exploring might be a combination of measures to reduce the veto power of existing permanent members and define the action threshold in an enlarged Council. While he had certain difficulties with the concept of rotating the permanent membership, if that was the "key to the magic solution", it would likely gain sufficient support.
KAMALESH SHARMA (India) said the challenge facing the Organization was to translate the consensus that existed in favour of Security Council reform into a general agreement on the nature and modalities of such reform. Expansion of membership, improvement of working methods and changes in decision-making procedures had been widely identified as essential ingredients of the reform package. The present permanent members of the Council had a combined population of about 1.8 billion, leaving two-thirds of the world's population without representation in the permanent category. That imbalance was also seen in the high representation of a particular group of countries. If developing countries were not represented equitably in that category, the Council's actions would be seen as progressively less representative.
The expansion of the Council through an inclusive approach would strengthen it, he said. The requirement for expansion in both permanent and non-permanent categories was self-evident. The aim was to achieve a broad- based rather than piece-meal expansion. Elements to be considered should include the share of humanity represented by a country, its geographical spread and size, economic potential, contributions within the United Nations system -- particularly to peacekeeping -- and its independent and constructive engagement in world affairs. The Assembly was the forum where the choice of new permanent members should be made, without any precondition or any predetermination. Council reform also provided an opportunity to review its working methods, so as to provide for enhanced transparency, greater accountability through a more purposeful relationship with the Assembly, and a new understanding with respect to its decision-making procedures.
The Non-Aligned Movement hoped that the forthcoming discussions on the Open-ended Working Group would lead to further progress on how to proceed with the institutionalizing of agreed measures, he said. There was a clear consensus in his country that it could appropriately shoulder the responsibilities of permanent membership in an expanded Council. Permanent members were expected to bring a global vision and responsibility with them. From the earliest days of the Organization, India had been most instrumental in placing on the United Nations agenda issues on which it had experienced the most success -- including decolonization, apartheid and human rights. Permanent members had a special responsibility for the maintenance of
General Assembly Plenary - 10 - Press Release GA/9372 62nd Meeting (AM) 4 December 1997
international peace and security and India had shown a constant commitment to that objective. Since the creation of the United Nations, India had been a leading contributor to the Organization's peacekeeping operations.
ABDELKADER MESDOUA (Algeria) said the differences of view on the size and composition of a reformed Council, and the selection of new permanent members and the right of veto had actually widened over the past year. Algeria and many other countries wanted more than just a "facelift" that would merely increase the membership. He said it was regrettable that the idea of a rotating permanent membership, proposed by the African group, had not been sufficiently explored. It was a viable formula that, contrary to the view of its detractors who wanted to limit membership to a specific geographic area, would make membership more equitable.
Despite the lack of progress, there had been achievements in the area of reforming the Council's working methods, such as the institutionalization of measures taken by the Council itself to make it more transparent. Those measures were essentially put forward by the Non-Aligned Movement, and their positive influence within the Working Group should continue. The rejection of a deadline while recognizing the need to reach a solution quickly were the principles that must continue to guide the reform debate.
FRANCESCO PAOLO FULCI (Italy) said the Open-ended Working Group on Security Council reform had spent the last four months on the "so-called Razali framework" resolution, named after the former Assembly President, Ismail Rizali (Malaysia). The core of his proposals was that two permanent seats be given to industrialized countries and three to the developing nations of Africa, Asia and Latin America and the Caribbean. That gave those three regions two possibilities: the unlikely eventuality of one country from each continent being selected, or the likelihood of "permanent rotating seats", in other words "the quick fix". He said no one had been able to explain the difference between permanent rotating seats without the veto, and regular non- permanent seats. The Razali proposal would grant two real permanent seats with full rights and privileges to industrialized countries, in exchange for three "pseudo-permanent seats" to the nations of the south. The number of countries from the north would increase from five to seven, with no real permanent seats going to the south. How could anyone imagine the developing countries would accept such an exchange? he asked.
He said both the Razali proposal and its United States "offspring" announced in July would mean three categories of permanent membership: those with the veto; those without; and "pseudo-permanent members" from developing countries. There would also be fourth-class non-permanent members. The "pretenders" to the new permanent seats claimed a solution was tantalizingly close. "I fail to be tantalized", he said.
Italy was not favouring the status quo, he went on. It was just firmly opposed to unfair and discriminatory proposals. Any increase in permanent
General Assembly Plenary - 11 - Press Release GA/9372 62nd Meeting (AM) 4 December 1997
membership would serve the interests of only a few countries to the detriment of small and medium States. Italy, strongly believing Council reform was long overdue, had presented its own proposals. If developing countries were forced to rotate, industrialized countries must also rotate. Italy was willing to examine and support other formulas. One possibility was that of the non- aligned movement suggesting that, if there were no agreement on other categories of membership, there be an increase, for the time being, only in non-permanent seats.
He said Italy had co-sponsored the draft resolution (A/52/L.7) as a measure of "preventive diplomacy". It addressed three basic issues: the need to avoid a time-frame until general agreement; the quorum required to pass any enlargement of the Council; the need to continue discussion of the question in the Open-ended Working Group to give all members the chance to participate. The necessary quorum was the most important of the three. All sides had argued on the need for "general agreement" without saying what that meant. It could not be less than two thirds of the Member States, not less than 124 votes -- the same number prescribed in Article 108 of the Charter.
He said the Working Group was the only place to close differences on the issues. All representatives promoted their national interests. Italy -- the fifth largest producer of wealth in the world and soon to become the fifth largest contributor to the United Nations regular budget -- would never accept relegation to third or fourth class status. It hoped that, in the future, there would be a common European seat on the Council; increasing the number of permanent seats from European Union countries would set back that dream.
PARK SOO GIL (Republic of Korea) said reform of the Security Council was of vital importance for the United Nations, and for the health of international relations in the next Century. Global changes in recent decades warranted expansion of the Council membership. Reform should be based on an analysis of the problems and shortcomings of the Council's operations thus far.
He suggested that the situation could be met by an increase in the non- permanent category of Council membership alone, with a mechanism under which countries with distinguished capabilities to contribute to international security could be elected to the Council with greater frequency or longer tenure than others.
He said the idea of creating five new permanent seats could create more problems than it solved. There was no clear way to determine which countries were qualified for permanent membership. The process would result in a worse system of discrimination than already existed. Countries would feel alienated and less inclined to contribute to the work of the Organization. Another problem would be a reduction of the efficiency of the Council in responding to conflicts, as more time would be spent working out differences among a larger number of permanent members. The virtual irreplaceability of permanent members was another potential problem. "If a one-time decision were to hold
General Assembly Plenary - 12 - Press Release GA/9372 62nd Meeting (AM) 4 December 1997
sway for all time, Member States would be forced to live forever with the results". Such a decision would not reflect the dynamic evolution of international relations that might unfold in the future.
The Asian Group was under-represented in the Security Council, he added. Given the number of countries in the Group, and other relevant factors, the Asian Group deserved at least as many non-permanent seats in an expanded Council as the African Group.
* *** *