SECURITY COUNCIL WORKING METHODS CALLED SECRETIVE, RIGID, EXCLUSIONARY, AS ASSEMBLY CONSIDERS ANNUAL COUNCIL REPORT

Press Release
GA/9637

SECURITY COUNCIL WORKING METHODS CALLED SECRETIVE, RIGID, EXCLUSIONARY, AS ASSEMBLY CONSIDERS ANNUAL COUNCIL REPORT

‘Regional Military Intervention’ in Kosovo Post-Second World War Europe’s Biggest Humanitarian Disaster, Says China

Amidst widespread criticism of the annual report of the Security Council this morning, including its “lack of information”, “simple reference to resolutions in its analytic part”, “minimal evaluation of monthly activities” and “rigid and exclusionary working methods”, the representative of China told the General Assembly that the regional military intervention in Kosovo had resulted in intensification of the conflict and the biggest humanitarian disaster in post- Second World War Europe.

While the international community had no reason to sit back and do nothing in the face of various humanitarian crises around the world, he said, only the Security Council could decide whether certain developments threatened international peace and security and determine when, how and who should intervene. Kosovo was a hard and costly lesson in that regard. Such “humanitarian” intervention should not be allowed to happen again.

The principle of non-interference was universal but not absolute, the representative of Lithuania stressed. International relations were increasingly based on something more human, more reasonable and more progressive than State sovereignty. The most outstanding example of conflict resolution was Kosovo. Claims about the lack of an explicit mandate from the Security Council for the military action in Kosovo did not hold water. Faced with the murder of helpless people, the answer had been that improvement of the international system, however urgent, could wait, while threatened lives could not.

He said the newly evolving concept of humanitarian intervention was now a real fact -- it had taken place in practice and was likely to be repeated. It was probable that State borders and sovereignty would gradually lose their significance in the next century: it had already happened in economics. It was therefore essential for the Council, in adapting to a new philosophy of international relations, to transform itself.

The representative of Australia said a number of Member States had drawn attention to circumstances where their own interests were directly affected by an

General Assembly Plenary - 1a - Press Release GA/9637 35th Meeting (AM) 20 October 1999

issue under discussion, yet they were excluded from informal consultations of the Council. While he recognized that informal consultations were an indispensable tool for consensus-building and effective decision-making, the Council had developed an unhealthy reliance on them, to the detriment of both transparency and, in many cases, effectiveness.

The representative of The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia said it was not wise to leave everything to the Council and marginalize the Assembly. Both should be involved, and all Member States should be given a chance to express their views. Instead of once a year, the Council could report to the Assembly on its work on a quarterly basis. The Secretary-General could also advance that process by informing the Assembly every quarter on the work of the Organization, and use those occasions to make suggestions for action. If those proposals were followed, the work of the Assembly would be energized.

While welcoming the new inclusion of the report of the Sanctions Committee in the Council’s annual report, the representative of Egypt noted that it did not analyse sanctions situations, and did not study their results and effects on States and populations. He called for official meetings to deal with the work of the Sanctions Committee. Sanctions were exceptional measures; they should be imposed only after all other efforts had been tried, and in accordance with declared objectives and a fixed time-frame

Statements were also made this morning by the representatives of the Russian Federation, Japan, Ukraine, Mongolia, Ireland, Indonesia, Colombia, Belarus, Kuwait, Côte d’Ivoire, Slovenia and Cuba.

The Assembly will meet again at 3 p.m. to continue its consideration of the report of the Security Council.

Assembly Work Programme

The General Assembly met this morning to consider the report of the Security Council, covering the period from 16 June 1998 to 15 June 1999. The report (document A/54/2), a guide to the Council's activities during that 12-month period, was submitted to the Assembly in accordance with the provisions of the Charter.

During the year under review, the Council held 121 formal meetings, adopted 72 resolutions, issued 37 statements by the President and held 239 consultations of the whole, totalling some 511 hours. Council members considered more than 90 reports of the Secretary-General and reviewed and processed over 1,437 documents and communications from States as well as regional and other intergovernmental organizations.

Part I of the report deals with questions relating to the Council's responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. In open meetings, members devoted much of their attention to conflicts in Africa, Iraq and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.

The Council met frequently on the following items: Iraq and Kuwait, Eritrea and Ethiopia, Kosovo, Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, Sierra Leone, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Central African Republic, Afghanistan, Guinea-Bissau, Tajikistan, Somalia, Angola, Georgia and East Timor.

In addition, the Council also met on: the Middle East, Western Sahara, Cyprus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Rwanda, Haiti, the situation in Africa, threats to international peace and security caused by international terrorism, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)-led bombing of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, the bombing of Iraq in November, the bombing of the United States Embassies in Kenya and the United Republic of Tanzania in August, the bombing of the Sudan, protection for humanitarian assistance, maintenance of peace and security and post-conflict peace-building, protection of civilians in armed conflict, and humanitarian activities related to the Council.

Part II of the report deals with other matters considered by the Council, such as the draft report to the General Assembly and matters relating to the documentation and working methods and procedures of the Council. Part III covers the work of the Military Staff Committee, while Part IV lists communications on matters brought to the Council’s attention.

Part V of the draft report reviews the work of the subsidiary organs of the Council. It states that the period covered by the present report had been one of the most challenging in the relationship between the Council and Iraq. For more than half the period under review, the United Nations Special Commission, established by Council resolution 687 (1991) to monitor the elimination of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction, had no presence in the country.

Other subsidiary organs active during the year under review included: the Governing Council of the United Nations Compensation Commission; the International Criminal Tribunals for Rwanda and the Former Yugoslavia; and the Security Council Committees dealing with Iraq and Kuwait, Libya, Somalia, Angola, Rwanda, Liberia and Sierra Leone.

Regarding the Council’s membership, the report recalls that on 8 October 1998, the Assembly elected, effective 1 January 1999, Argentina, Canada, Malaysia, Namibia and the Netherlands to fill vacancies resulting from the expiration on 31 December 1998 of the terms of Costa Rica, Japan, Kenya, Portugal and Sweden. The new Members’ terms will expire on 31 December 2000.

It should be noted that, in addition to the extensive coverage provided in part V of the work of the subsidiary organs of the Council, the annual reports of the sanctions committees are to be found in Appendix XII of the report. Further, the monthly assessments of the work of the Council by former Presidents -- for the period covered by the report -- have been expanded to include statements to the press by those Presidents following consultations of the whole of the Council.

Statements

SERGEY LAVROV (Russian Federation), introducing the report as President of the Security Council, said the range of issues considered by the Council had remained very wide, covering all major aspects of the maintenance of international peace and security. Issues related to the settlement of regional conflicts and to ensure stability in Africa also remained very high on its agenda, leading to the adoption of a number of specific long-term decisions. In addition, the Council had paid close attention to the issues of prevention and settlement of conflicts and stabilization of the situation in the Balkans. The adoption of a resolution on the situation in Kosovo had significantly strengthened the Council’s central role in the maintenance of international peace and security.

Issues related to the settlement of conflict situations in the Middle East, Persian Gulf, East Timor, Afghanistan, Tajikistan and Georgia, among others, had also figured prominently in the Council’s work during the period covered by the report. In other areas, including decisions relating to post-conflict peace- building, and humanitarian assistance to refugees and other civilians during conflict situations, the General Assembly and other United Nations organs could assist the Council in fulfilling its tasks. During the period under review, he said, the Council had adopted several measures designed to improve its working methods, as well as those of the sanctions committees.

YUKIO SATOH (Japan) drew attention to the growing involvement of non- Security Council members in facilitating and supporting Council actions on humanitarian crises in recent years. That had not been mentioned in the annual report to the General Assembly, he said. He mentioned Kosovo and East Timor in particular as examples of that trend.

On Kosovo, he said it was a combination of intensive efforts by some non- Council members and Council members that laid the groundwork for Council resolution 1244. Countries belonging to the Group of Friends of Kosovo had also played a constructive role in helping the United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK) carry out its task.

On East Timor, he pointed out that the Security Council was able to act considerably faster than in Kosovo because the Indonesian Government had cooperated fully. That cooperation, he said was a result of the crucial role played by the Secretary-General in persuading the Government to cooperate, as well as the quiet advice given to the Indonesians by some friendly nations in the region. He added that it was consultations and preparations by countries of the region that paved the way for the successful popular consultation on August 30, and later for the quick establishment of an international force in East Timor, in accordance with Council Resolution 1264.

In Africa, however, the Security Council had been less successful -– particularly in Angola, where its resolutions had been ignored by the warring parties and the sanctions it imposed had not been observed. Those unfortunate developments over the past year had not only shown the difficulties the Council faced when it acted in the absence of a commitment to peace by the warring parties, but also the importance of securing compliance with its decisions by countries in the region.

He went on to outline encouraging examples of regional initiatives which had complemented the Security Council’s activities. In Sierra Leone, the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and its military sub-organization, the Economic Community of West African States’ Monitoring Observer Group (ECOMOG), had acted with countries in the region to play a significant role in restoring and maintaining peace in the country. In Burundi, the efforts of late Tanzanian President Julius Nyerere had enhanced the peace process in that country. In the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the actions of concerned countries and the Southern African Development Community (SADC) had been vital in ensuring a ceasefire agreement.

Notwithstanding those encouraging regional initiatives, however, African countries still needed the support and assistance of developed countries in order to prevent a recurrence of conflict and humanitarian emergencies on the continent. He called for stronger leadership from the Council in drawing the international community’s attention to crises in Africa, and stressed that it was important for the entire United Nations membership to respect and observe the Council’s decisions.

VOLODYMYR YEL’ CHENKO (Ukraine) called on the Security Council to give equal attention to conflicts in different regions as a prerequisite for upholding its authority in the field of international peace and security. Citing Africa as an example, he said that the kinds of response provided so far by the Council had not adequately met the needs and demands of the continent.

However, he noted that the Council had started making drastic changes in its overall attitude towards Africa: important evidence of that change was the fact that it was about to authorize a peacekeeping mission in Sierra Leone, and was giving consideration to authorizing a peacekeeping operation to help implement the Lusaka Agreement on the Democratic Republic of the Congo. He said that the final outcome of those actions would be significant for the whole of Africa.

On the issue of the prevention of conflicts, he said he agreed with the Secretary-General’s argument that it was imperative for the United Nations to “start the transition from a culture of reaction to a culture of prevention”. There was an urgent need, he said, to reinforce the preventive dimension in the Security Council. Preventive diplomacy, preventive deployment and preventive disarmament should be the Council’s main short-term strategies; while comprehensive peace-building would serve as a long-term preventive strategy in addressing root causes of conflicts.

While welcoming the steps the Council had taken towards increased openness and transparency in its activities, he called for urgent changes in the “overdue problem” of increasing the membership of the Council and modernizing its decision- making process. He noted, however, that transformation of the Security Council would not be easy.

J. ENKHSAIKHAN (Mongolia) told the Assembly that his country had decided to take part in United Nations peacekeeping operations, and had signed a memorandum of understanding on standby arrangements. Though Mongolia was not a military power, it subscribed to the holistic approach to security and could contribute staff officers, military observers and medical officers for peacekeeping operations.

The issue of humanitarian intervention, however, raised many delicate, debatable and pertinent questions, including State sovereignty and the moral imperative to act forcefully in the face of gross human-rights violations. He said he agreed with the Secretary-General that enforcement actions without Security Council authorization threatened the very core of the international security system founded on the Charter of the United Nations.

When responding to humanitarian emergencies, he said that the Security Council should equally apply the principles of multilateralism and humanitarian ethics, based on the criterion of human need. He went on to point out the importance of involving regional organizations in peacekeeping operations, but added that a clear line of authority should be established on the ground. The central role of the United Nations, particularly that of the Security Council, should be upheld.

He welcomed the Council's innovative practice of holding open thematic debates on such topics as child soldiers, land-mines, peace-building and the protection of civilians in armed conflicts. Such debates allowed non-Council members to contribute to examination of the issues and in some instances to offer solutions. He suggested that one issue on which the Council could consult with the general membership in the future was non-proliferation. That issue he felt warranted the Council's attention, if not action.

Commenting on the work of the Assembly working group on the Security Council, he said that it had so far done a "fair job", and noted that some of the changes made by the Council with respect to its working methods had been prompted by proposals made by the group. He ended by calling for the reform of the Security Council, which would be an important part of the reform of the United Nations and would benefit all peace-loving States.

RICHARD RYAN (Ireland) said it was time the Council heeded calls for more of its day-to-day business to be conducted in formal session. The general membership of the Organization would like to see more briefings like the one given on Afghanistan on 28 August by Under-Secretary-General Kieran Prendergast.

He noted that when international law was being flouted, the Council’s ability to act would be strengthened rather than weakened if details were laid bare in open session, and if non-council Members were able to give their views in open debate. He said the Council meeting of 11 September on East Timor was a dramatic example of what he meant.

He added that it was important for the Security Council to be united in its action, and noted with sadness that there were issues which had divided the Council in the past year and had resulted in failure to act to end conflict and suffering when Council indecisiveness resulted in delayed action, those who would flout international law and undermine international security took heart.

He welcomed the consideration given to human security issues in the Council’s report, noting that civilians were the main sufferers in modern armed conflict. He also noted the proponderance of conflicts in Africa, and the fact that African leaders and subregional organizations were taking determined action to address those issues. However, while such action was essential, the support of the international community was equally important.

He ended by commended the report as a fine document of record, and expressed the hope that permanent and non-permanent members of the Council would pay attention to suggestions and ideas from the General Assembly.

HAZAIRIN POHAN (Indonesia) said although there had been a substantial number of positive developments in the work of the Council, it must be added that several areas, encompassing issues of substance as well as the Council’s working methods and practices, that still needed to be addressed. The credibility of the Council had improved, as had its relationship with Member States of the Organization. However, his delegation was requesting that issues scheduled for consideration under the agenda item “Other Matters” be publicized in the United Nations Journal. With regard to sanctions, he said his country would like to reiterate the view that those should be used as a last resort and to serve specific purposes.

There was also an urgent need to review and draw conclusions from recent experiences in peacekeeping, he said, since those activities had moved beyond the traditional to a multidimensional concept. He suggested that it would be beneficial if such interaction could occur between representatives of troop- contributing countries and Council members before the Council took any decision. In addition, there should be a mechanism to monitor and supervise peacekeeping activities to ensure the neutrality of the Organization, as well as respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the States concerned. His delegation was also concerned about the imbalance between the Council’s formal meetings, and its more frequent recourse to informal consultations, where the Council actually finalized its decisions. In situations where a country had a special interest in the issue being discussed, it should be allowed to present its views, at an early stage in the Council’s decision-making deliberations.

ALFONSO VALDIVIESO (Colombia) said that one of the most disappointing moments -- and remarkable events -- in the Security Council’s work had been the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) intervention in Kosovo. The fact that NATO acted without the authorization of the Security Council was unacceptable. Moreover, the later involvement of the Security Council in the Kosovo conflict did not diminish the magnitude of the incident. It was therefore important to stress that although the Council was responsible for the maintenance of peace and security, agreements among Member States were essential prerequisites for action.

Regarding Member State involvement in humanitarian topics through open meetings, he asked whether the Security Council should concern itself with humanitarian issues. In that context, he said that it was necessary to define the role of the Security Council, the Economic and Social Council, and the General Assembly in dealing with such questions.

Turning to the theme of humanitarian intervention, he expressed concern about the spread of internal conflicts and the tendency to disregard the principles of human rights. The establishment of the International Criminal Court could help guarantee the punishment of people responsible for acts of violence. It was also important to define the role of the international community in the prevention of conflicts and violence.

He added that it was essential to focus on the working methods of the Security Council and on ways of improving its performance. He called for priority attention to examination of the Council’s mandate.

QIN HUASAN (China) said that in the past year the Security Council had been tested as never before. At the beginning of a new century, it must be asked how the Council could best represent the will of Member States, carry out its Charter responsibilities meaningfully and effectively, and contribute to the establishment of a fair and reasonable international order? Addressing humanitarian intervention, he said “nothing between the sky and earth is more precious than human beings, and benevolence is not benevolence if it does not treasure human life”. Expressing concern at the various humanitarian crises around the world, he said the international community had no reason to sit back and do nothing. Only the Council, however, could decide whether certain developments threatened international peace and security, and decide when, how and who should intervene.

The mandate to intervene did not rest with some individual country or group, he continued. Kosovo was a hard and costly example. In the absence of Council authorization and in the name of humanitarianism, a regional military organization mounted a large-scale military intervention against a sovereign State. That intervention resulted in intensification of the conflict and the biggest humanitarian disaster in Post Second-World War Europe. Such “humanitarian” intervention should not be allowed to happen again, he stressed. Addressing sanctions, he said they were easy to impose but difficult to lift. The nine-year old sanctions against Iraq had caused human disasters and brought untold suffering to tens of thousands of civilians, especially women and children. The United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) had presented a detailed report on the deteriorating health conditions of Iraqi children and the potential severe consequences of sanctions.

Facts and figures in the UNICEF report were shocking, he said. “How can anybody who remains indifferent to such human tragedy have the luxury to talk about humanitarianism of humanitarian intervention?” he asked. If mistakes were not entirely avoided in the first place, then at least “we should have the courage and ability” to correct them. The Council should immediately lift or suspend sanctions against Iraq. “More importantly, we should learn a lesson here and be extremely cautious in deciding to impose sanction in the future”, he cautioned. Moreover, the goal, scope and time-frame of sanctions should be clearly defined. Turning to Africa, he said the Council needed to invest the same energies in the African continent -- if not more -- as it did in other regions. Only when the Council changed its pattern of “more words than deeds” and abandoned its double standards would it regain the trust and confidence of African States.

SERGEI MARTYYNOV (Belarus) said the decision to include the report of the sanctions committee in the Security Council’s annual report was a very important step that would make the Council more adaptive to today’s challenges. Until recently, such information had been inaccessible to the majority of Member States. Increasing transparency and openness, both in the substantive part of the report and in the working methods of the Council, would make the Council more sophisticated. However he expressed regret that the major part of informal consulations remained closed to most of the United Nations membership. In the analytical part of the report, the simple reference to resolutions adopted and the minimal evaluation of monthly activities could not create a firm basis for a large-scale and comprehensive dialogue between the Council and non-members. “We are convinced that this discussion, while bilateral by nature, should be based on comprehensive evaluation of the implementation of certain Security Council decisions”, he said.

He said the latest developments in the international situation had raised the need to reform the Council and adapt it to the realities of the world. Reform was an absolute imperative. Maximum transparency and adequate geographic representation of Member States were the key pillars of the framework for the strategy of the open-ended working group on Council reform. Belarus did not believe that current problems could be resolved in one instant. It was convinced, however, that consideration of all aspects related to improvement of the Council’s work should acquire new dynamics. His Government had adopted a decision to present Belarus’ candidature for a non-permanent seat in the Council at the election to be held in 2001.

NASTE CALOVSKI (The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) said that his country had been host to the first preventive peacekeeping mission of the United Nations –- United Nations Preventive Deployment Force (UNPREDEP), which was established in late 1992 and ended in February this year. However, the last request by the Secretary-General and by the Government of Macedonia to extend the mission had been denied because one Permanent Member of the Council voted against the resolution proposed by many Council members. That had occurred despite Article 24 of the Charter, which requested the Council to act on behalf of Member States. It had been a disappointing moment in the Council’s work and it had a negative impact on the situation in the region.

Turning to the Kosovo crisis, he noted that the positions of the Permanent Members of the Council had been at variance, and the Council could neither prevent the conflict nor solve it. The Council’s role in the Kosovo conflict initiated discussion of the principles of the sovereign equality of States, non- interference, and the issue of humanitarian intervention. In that context, he said that the international community could not remain indifferent to massive violations of human rights: the legal ground for action was the United Nations Charter. The organs of the United Nations mandated to deliberate and act on those issues were the General Assembly and the Security Council.

However, it was unwise to focus totally on the Council and ignore or marginalize the General Assembly. Both should be involved, and all Member States should be given a chance to advance their views and help. For example, the Council could provide a quarterly rather than an annual report on its work to the General Assembly. The Secretary –General could use those occasions to make suggestions for action. If such proposals to the Security Council and to the Secretary-General were followed the work of the General Assembly would be energized, to the benefit of the United Nations and its Member States.

MOHAMMAD A. ABULHASAN (Kuwait) said that the Council was continuing to fulfil its role in maintaining the security and stability of Kuwait and the Gulf region. His delegation also wished to express appreciation for the renewal of the mandate of the United Nations Iraq-Kuwait Observation Mission (UNIKOM) earlier this month. Kuwait attached great importance to reaching a consensus in the Security Council on the issue arising from its situation with Iraq, particularly on the questions of Kuwaiti prisoners in that country and the return of stolen Kuwaiti property. A Council resolution would ensure full implementation by Iraq, as well as lend more relevance and legitimacy to previous resolutions on the matter.

Addressing the report, he noted improvements in the presentation of its analytical component. He also encouraged more open meetings of the Council, citing the recent open debates on the causes of conflict in Africa and the meeting on international terrorism. The Council should react to the views of non-Member States, since that would reflect its desire to improve its working methods. He added that Member States should support the Security Council to help them fulfil their goal of maintaining global peace and security.

OSKARAS JUSYS (Lithuania) said the most outstanding example of conflict resolution by the Council was Kosovo. Claims about the lack of an explicit mandate from the Security Council for the military action there did not hold water. A five-digit number of people slaughtered in two months was a symptom of flaws in the international security system. When there was evidence of the brutal murder of helpless people, the dilemma before the international community became a moral choice: between the sanctity of human lives and strict international standards. Once the dilemma arose, however, the answer was that improvement of the international system, however urgent, could wait while threatened lives could not. The Kosovo lesson should not have cost so many innocent lives. The principle of non-interfrence was universal but not absolute. International relations were increasingly based on something more human, more reasonabale and more progressive than the divinity of State sovereignty.

He said States did not own individuals, whether they were citizens or not. Nor could States do everything they pleased with individuals within their jurisdiction. New trends in inter-State relations tended to justify involvement from the outside to stop flagrant violations of human rights. The newly evolving concept of humanitarian intervention was now a real fact: it had taken place in practice, and was likely to be repeated. The concept lagged behind reality, triggering controversy that could have been avoided had consensus guidelines been worked out by Member States beforehand. It was probable that State borders and sovereignty would gradually lose their significance in the next century. It had already happened in economics. That meant a growing role for regional and global intergovernmental institutions, including the United Nations. It was therefore essential for the Council, in adapting to a new philosophy of international relations, to transform itself.

The Council was too small to reflect the diversity of nations. It was a paradox that two-thirds of the Council’s agenda was about Africa, which was grossly underrepresented in the body that decided its fate. It was however, less of a paradox when under-representation of Africa allowed the Council to shun its responsibilities to that continent. Rwanda was the most horrible example in that regard. Lithuania therefore concurred with calls made during the general debate to give Africa legitimate and sufficient representation in the Council. In addition, the secrecy that surrounded informal consultations was less and less convincing in terms of the confidentiality needed for decision-making, and increasingly more suspicious. Were Council members reluctant to disclose their methods for solving conflicts, or were they concealing the absence of solutions?

PENNY WENSLEY (Australia) said that the past year had been a challenging one, due to the increase in the number and scale of peacekeeping operations and the crises in Kosovo and East Timor. It had become even more critical for the Security Council to reform and revitalize itself in order to respond swiftly and adequately to the renewed pressures upon it. The Council's working methods continued to be too rigid and exclusionary. A number of Member States whose own interests were directly affected by an issue were nevertheless excluded from informal consultations of the Council. Australia did not advocate an end to the use of informal consultations by the Council. But the Council had developed an unhealthy reliance on them, to the detriment of transparency and, in many cases, effectiveness. Many routine briefings and reports by the Secretary-General could and should take place in sessions open to Member States.

Australia also believed there were circumstances where the Council could contribute to the resolution of disputes or to the easing of tensions between Member States by giving itself the option of direct access to the disputing parties. Australia's recent experience as leader of the multinational force in East Timor had reinforced its concerns about rigidities in Council procedures. Under Security Council resolution 1264, the leadership of the multinational force was required to provide period reports to the Council. This Australia was doing, with two fortnightly reports submitted so far. But whereas in the case of a full United Nations peacekeeping operation the Council could engage in discussion with a senior representative of that operation, there was no provision for the multinational force leadership to brief the Council directly. Despite its responsibility for leadership of a multinational force authorized by the Security Council, Australia's status as a non-member of the Council precluded such direct briefings, even on an occasional, as-needed basis.

The recent Security Council mission to East Timor was, by contrast, an example of where quick and creative action by the Council had a positive effect on resolution of a complex issue. The mission enabled members of the Council to see first hand the nature and extent of the problem, talk directly to the main players and come to a more informed view about what to do next.

Australia was aware, she said, that many of those ideas had been the subject of discussion not only in the open-ended working group on Security Council reform, but also in the Council's own informal working group. She applauded those delegations that had been advocating greater transparency and flexibility in the Council's working methods. There was no question that the Security Council should remain master of its own procedures. But it was being hamstrung by the rigidities of those procedures. The need for greater flexibility and openness was overdue.

CLAUDE STANISLAS BOUAH-KAMON (Côte d’Ivoire) said his delegation had observed that regional organizations were becoming more involved in countries experiencing conflict and in peacekeeping processes. The situation in Kosovo was an excellent example of that phenomenon. As a consequence, could the Security Council’s role in maintaining global peace and security become more limited? After the failure in Somalia, peacekeeping troops had not been sent to Africa, nor had the Council seriously considered such a move. However, if regional organizations (particularly in Africa, where there were only developing countries with limited resources) did not receive economic assistance, the maintenance of peace and security would be severely hampered. Therefore, should the Security Council become defunct, it would be difficult to find a replacement to perform its functions within the international community.

The Council needed to make an effort to retrieve its credibility by closely examining the present situation in Africa, he said. Currently it concentrated only on certain countries, and that was undesirable. Would a renewed and enlarged Council with wider global representation be able to make better decisions? As it stood now, the Security Council had almost become obsolete. His delegation was therefore suggesting that a wider membership would be better able to face the challenge of maintaining international peace and security in the future. Some of the aspects that might be considered in the quest for peace by the United Nations and regional organizations could include early warning, preventive deployment, disarmament and humanitarian assistance.

AHMED ABOUL GHEIT (Egypt) said that the report of the Security Council seemed a mere compilation of documents. It was not in conformity with the austerity of the United Nations. Regarding the spread of conflicts all over the world, particularly among factions within a country, he called upon the Council to examine human-rights violations through modern democratic dialogues and transparency.

He welcomed the report’s section on the Sanction Committees. However, that section did not analyse the situations of the individual sanctions regimes, and it did not study the results of their imposition and their effect on States and populations. He therefore called for holding official meetings to deal with the work of the Sanction Committee. Sanctions were exceptional measures born of extreme situations and should be imposed only after all other efforts had been tried. They should be designed to meet declared objectives, and should be given firm final dates. It was too easy to impose sanctions, and too hard to lift them.

He also called upon the Security Council to consider establishing further measures to hold consultations with States facing great economic problems. It was necessary to create a clear legal framework for the work of the Security Council. He called upon the Council to record its proceedings during informal consultations, and hoped that the next report would include them.

DANILO TURK (Slovenia) criticized some group of States which purported to assist the Security Council in dealing with particular crisis situations, but whose efforts at assistance turned out to be mere illusion. He singled out the group of States that had argued against military assistance to the parties in Afghanistan, but had failed to give practical effect to those pleas, as well as the Contact Group on the former Yugoslavia, which had been unable to provide meaningful contributions to addressing the issues of Kosovo and Bosnia and Herzegovina. He added that while the contribution of Member States should in theory be welcomed in crisis situations, such examples gave rise to concern.

He went on to call for improvement in the political management of cooperation between regional groups and the United Nations, adding that this should be done in strict accordance with the Charter and the primacy of the United Nations role should not be impaired.

On the issue of the use of the veto by permanent members of the Council, he said that the veto should be used only in the interests of international peace and security, and that the element of national interest should be measured carefully. He said that serious consideration should therefore be given to proposals to curtail the use of the veto.

BRUNO RODRIGUEZ PARRILLA (Cuba) said despite the many criticisms expressed, his delegation noted that the current report was analogous to previous ones. However, it did not satisfy the needs of Member States, which would have preferred a more analytical report. Also, the preparers of the report had not taken into account the previous recommendations given at earlier forums. The credibility of the Council had suffered irreparable damage following its failure to address the issue of Kosovo properly either in its last report or in the current one.

During the past year, he further stated, while 120 formal meetings had been held, there had been over 220 private meetings. It was important to know whether the more than 500 hours spent in those informal sessions had been offset during the formal meetings. Secrecy was so enshrined in the work of the Security Council that even briefings by the Secretary-General were given in private consultations. The rule must be established to hold formal meetings. Annual debates were presently held in informal meetings, he noted. It was also noteworthy that the monthly assessments given by former Presidents, and the incorporation of the yearly report of the Sanctions Committee, were a step forward to transparency. Those inclusions, especially the report of the Sanctions Committee, would also prevent certain States from practising nepotism.

Finally, he pointed out, although most of the report’s topics had focussed on Africa, during the year the Security Council had not addressed the actual peace and security needs of countries on that continent. He emphasized that the first step towards transparency of the Council’s work would be to adopt suggestions for improvement by Member States and include them in formal debate.

* *** *