GENERAL ASSEMBLY CONTINUES DEBATE ON SECURITY COUNCIL REFORM WITH FOCUS ON CHANGING VETO, PERMANENT MEMBERSHIP

Press Release
GA/9692

GENERAL ASSEMBLY CONTINUES DEBATE ON SECURITY COUNCIL REFORM WITH FOCUS ON CHANGING VETO, PERMANENT MEMBERSHIP

“There are a few countries which appear to believe that the only yardstick by which progress on the issue of Security Council reform can be measured is the achievement of their ambition to become a permanent member”, the representative of Pakistan told the General Assembly this morning, as it continued its consideration of the question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Council.

Pakistan’s representative said those seeking permanent status were not motivated by noble sentiments, but rather “an undisguised grab for power and privilege”. In new millennium, however, the Assembly could not be expected to bestow special privileges on some, while denying them to the vast majority of nations. The addition of more permanent members would make the Council more undemocratic, unrepresentative and unresponsive to the concerns of the vast majority. It was the small and medium-sized countries who constituted the overwhelming majority of the Assembly, and it was they who must be given greater representation in the decision-making processes of the Council.

As a number of speakers once more highlighted either curtailing or limiting the power of the veto as intrinsic to reform of the Council, the representative of the Russian Federation flatly rejected the claim that the concurring votes of the five permanent members almost led to a paralysis of the Council. That allegation, he said, distorted the reality and played into the hands of those who advocated use of military force that side-stepped the Council, under humanitarian or other pretexts. The veto had proven to be an irreplaceable tool for coordinated Council activities and balanced decisions within its framework.

The representative of the United States said his country would oppose any expansion that threatened the ability of the Council to carry out its responsibilities under the Charter. The gravity of those responsibilities was simply too great to risk compromising the Council’s ability to meet them, he stressed.

Iraq’s representative said that the need to reform the Council was made more urgent by United States hegemony, which was used to secure narrow political objectives. The Council was now a cover for the perpetration of crimes against humanity and genocide. Sanctions ran counter to the Charter and humanitarian law. The United States had exploited Council-imposed sanctions to change Iraq’s political regime and exact revenge against the Iraqi people. Resolution 1284 (1999) was defective and deceptive and rewrote previous Council resolutions.

General Assembly Plenary - 1a - Press Release GA/9692 85th Meeting (AM) 20 December 1999

Kenya’s representative said the different responses to situations by the Council exposed the inadequacies in its present structure and working methods. “We continue to witness a situation in which the Council’s authority is gradually being eroded and yet there is no evidence of action from within the Council or indeed the United Nations membership to address this problem”, he said. That development could lead to the weakening of the very system that had maintained international peace and security over the last 50 years.

Stressing that at the approach of new millennium, time was running out, Nepal’s representative said that any further delay in reform of the Council might be construed as a mark of the unpreparedness of the United Nations to step into the next century with a full measure of authority, legitimacy, credibility and mission.

Also this morning, Theo-Ben Gurirab (Namibia), President of the General Assembly, on behalf of members, extended deepest sympathy to the Government and the people of Venezuela for the tragic loss of life and extensive material damage that had resulted from recent floods and mudslides in that country. He hoped the international community would show its solidarity and respond promptly and generously to any request for help.

The Assembly was also informed that following its consideration of the reports of the Second Committee (Economic and Financial) on Wednesday morning, it would continue its consideration of the strengthening of the coordination of humanitarian assistance and take action on a related draft resolution (document A.54/L/74), which was issued this morning.

Statements were also made this morning by the representatives of Slovakia, United Arab Emirates, Viet Nam, Syria, Bhutan, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Philippines, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Belarus, Colombia, Bulgaria and Malaysia.

The Assembly will continue its consideration of the question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Council this afternoon at 3 p.m.

Assembly Work Programme

The General Assembly met this morning to continue its consideration of the question of the equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council and related matters. The current debate on this item began on Thursday 16 December. (For details see Press Release GA/9688 of 16 December.

Statements

THEO-BEN GURIRAB (Namibia), President of the General Assembly, on behalf of Members, extended deepest sympathy to the Government and the people of Venezuela for the tragic loss of life and extensive material damage that had resulted from recent floods and mudslides in that country. He hoped the international community would show its solidarity and respond promptly and generously to any request for help.

CARLOS BIVERO (Venezuela) expressed his Government’s appreciation for the message of solidarity, in light of the tragic losses suffered in his country. The tragedy was one of extremely significant dimensions due to the persistent rains, which had led to massive flooding and mudslides. The highly populated regions of the country, particularly the central areas which were far from the capital, had been most affected. It was estimated that more than 150,000 people had been affected by the natural phenomenon, with more than 2,000 deaths. However, his country had received great evidence of solidarity from Member States. The Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs had conveyed the status of the situation. He asked everyone to stay in contact in terms of international assistance.

PETER TOMKA (Slovakia) said while there was agreement that the Security Council should be expanded, there was no convergence of views on which category of membership should actually be enlarged and how. If Member States could find common ground, a final formula on Council reform would be much easier to reach. He warned against turning a blind eye to the several risks related to possible enlargement in the permanent membership. The category of permanent membership was not designed for nor intended to address the simple principle of equitable geographic representation. It had specific parameters determined by the political circumstances of the new global order that had emerged after the Second World War.

The continued relevance of that concept and the actual capability and willingness of the current permanent members to play the role envisaged for them might now be questioned, he continued. Nevertheless, by ignoring the nature of the concept “we may run the risk of enlarging this category in a way which is incompatible with its unique parameters or, in other words, of taking a methodically wrong approach with unpredictable consequences for the functioning of an enlarged Council”, he said. The two-stage approach proposed by some, where the Assembly would decide to enlarge the permanent category by a concrete number of seats, as a first step, while the names of new permanent members would be actually known at a subsequent stage, was a methodically wrong approach.

He said the veto, although originally designed to foster unity and promote the search for understanding among the great Powers, eventually turned out to be a tool, often misused, either in ideological battles among bitter rivals during the cold war or for narrow political interests. Even now, it could paralyze the Council, rendering it unable to take effective action on behalf of Member States. The rules of procedure of the Council failed to clarify the scope of application of the veto over the last decades and, thus, remained provisional. The aspirations of the developing countries to ensure their appropriate representation was fully understandable, as well.

MOHAMMAD J. SAMHAN AL-NUAIMI (United Arab Emirates), said that the worldwide economic and political developments over the last half-century, particularly those following the cold war, made it necessary to increase the membership and effectiveness of the Security Council, so that it could fulfil its tasks under the United Nations Charter.

Six years of working group meetings and reports on the issue of Security Council reform had yielded clear differences of opinion on the size of the increase in membership, equitable procedures and measures of implementation, he said. The debate should be redirected to include consideration of the political interests of all States. That would make any decision concerning reform of the Security Council a better and more just one.

He welcomed recent measures by the Security Council to improve its procedures, such as holding open meetings to deliberate on the proposals of states on relevant issues, and promoting such measures in a framework of objectivity. In the current political climate, it was most important to give under-represented countries a more influential role in working methods of the Security Council. He also supported review of veto power on the Security Council, and suggested that its use be limited. Finally, he said that regular, comprehensive review of the Security Council’s activities was needed to study how it’s views and objectives would be implemented.

PHAM BINH MINH (Viet Nam) stressed that the current impasse must be broken if the international community's common aspiration for a democratic and accountable Security Council was to be heeded. The objective was to bring the Council better in tune with current economic and political realities and to come to grips with the challenges of the next century. Security Council reform would be durable and fruitful only if it fully reflected the principles of sovereign equality of Member States, equitable geographical distribution, accountability and democratization and transparency in the Council's working methods, including its decision-making process.

Viet Nam supported expansion of the Council in both the permanent and non- permanent categories, he said. Developing countries must have adequate representation, taking into account the fact that most of the issues under the Council's authority took place in, or were of vital interest to, the developing world. It was also reasonable that new permanent seats should be allocated to industrialized countries that were willing to undertake greater commitments and responsibility to the work of the United Nations. Viet Nam reaffirmed that the veto should only be used in matters falling under Chapter VII, and that it should eventually be eliminated.

MIKHAIL WEHBE (Syria) said six years had passed since discussions had been initiated on Council reform. The inevitable question to be asked was what had been achieved so far in reforming that body -- nothing, other than the marginalization of its standards and encroachment into its fundamental role in maintaining international peace and security. The increase in the number of Member States since the Second World War, meant that there were a great number of countries who wanted their legitimate interests represented. Germany, Japan and Italy for example, were all countries that wanted membership in the Council, but there was no imminent solution for achieving consensus in the United Nations in that regard.

He said debates showed deep-seated differences between permanent members of the Council and those seeking to make the Organization more democratic and transparent. Also, in addressing the issue of Council reform, the voice of the members of the Non-Aligned Movement, 80 per cent of the United Nations membership, could not be ignored. Neither could those of the African, Arab or Asian States. The composition of the Council must be truly democratic and reflect the increase in the number of Member States of the Organization. There was also a need to expand membership of the Council to no less than 26, in line with the Movements position.

If permanent membership was to be increased, the Group of Arab States demanded a fully fledged rotating permanent seat based on criteria set by the Group, he said. The veto must also be limited and streamlined as a first step toward eliminating such a right. What was the logic in the use of the veto when a draft before the Council had obtained 14 out of 15 votes? Was such an action in line with the principles of democracy and the interests of the United Nations in securing peace and justice in the world? The veto must be rationalized since there was no need to use it when a draft resolution had obtained majority support without hegemony.

OM PRADHAN (Bhutan) said expansion of the Council in both the permanent and non-permanent categories, which he considered imperative, should be responsive to the changed global and economic climate. Equally essential was the adequate representation, both as permanent and non-permanent members, of developing countries, who had long endured unjust marginalization within the Council.

Decisions on the details of the creation of rotating permanent seats must be arrived at within regional groups, he continued. “We understand and respect the prerogative of the African Group to pursue this model, but believe that the same may not necessarily be suitable for all other regions.” Bhutan was concerned that such an arrangement could create a complex hierarchy within the Council.

He shared the view of the Non-Aligned Movement that the veto should be curtailed with a view to its elimination, and that the Charter should be amended so that initially the veto power should only apply to actions taken under Chapter VII of the Charter. In the interim, new permanent members should be entitled to the same rights and privileges enjoyed by the current permanent five. While Bhutan was flexible on the exact size of the Council, it believed total membership should be increased by no less than 11.

NASSIR ABDULAZIZ AL-NASSER (Qatar) said that current world events and new circumstances in the international community demanded that the equity factor be at work for all the States gathered around the United Nations banner. It was an imperative, he said, that the debate on Security Council reform should conform to the principle of absolute transparency. Transparency was the best way to involve all the Member States and ensure that their ideas would be heard equitably and fairly.

Many States had suffered from the veto power, as exercised by the permanent members of the Security Council, he said. He called for a restriction of the uses of the veto power to issues involving Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, with an eventual view to abolishment. Further, the issue of Security Council reform needed very lengthy discussion, which could best be accomplished in the working group. While grateful for the opportunity to discuss the issue before the Assembly, “any reform should be a full and complete process”, he said.

INAM-UL-HAQUE (Pakistan) said the objective of reform should be a transparent, democratic and effective Council that enjoyed the support and confidence of the membership of the United Nations. “There are a few countries which appear to believe that the only yardstick by which progress on this issue can be measured is the achievement of their ambition to become a permanent member of the Council. Their desire to seek a permanent status on the Security Council is not motivated by altruistic or noble sentiments. It is an undisguised grab for power and privilege.”

In the new millennium, the Assembly could not be expected to bestow special privileges on some while denying them to the vast majority of nations, he continued. The addition of more permanent members would make the Council more undemocratic, unrepresentative and unresponsive to the concerns of the vast majority. It was the small- and medium-sized countries who constituted the overwhelming majority of the Assembly, and it was they who must be given greater representation in the decision-making processes of the Council.

He shared the position of the Non-Aligned Movement calling for the eventual elimination of the veto. He also agreed with the Movement’s position that in the event there could be no agreement on other categories, there should be expansion only in the non-permanent membership of the Council for the time being. Noting that the size of the Council had remained frozen since 1965, he said that in the Asian Group, candidacies for non-permanent seats in the Council had been announced up to the year 2018-2019. That was reflective not merely of the desire to serve on the Council but also of the fact that countries rarely had the opportunity to do so. Future consideration of reform and expansion of the Council must continue to be based on an open and transparent discussion in the Open-ended Working Group established by the Assembly. There could be no “quick fixes” or partial solutions to meet self-imposed or artificial deadlines.

LEE SEE-YOUNG (Republic of Korea) said the overarching goal was to enhance democratic representation, accountability and efficiency of the Council. With respect to categories and the size of the Council, all Member States must be given a fair opportunity to serve with reasonable frequency, commensurate with their capability -– both actual and potential -– to contribute to international peace and security, and with their willingness to do so. Regardless of whether or when the international community was able to find answers to the unresolved questions of permanent membership, the Republic of Korea was prepared to go ahead with the expansion of the non-permanent members, which would better guarantee democratic representation. Non-permanent seats should be distributed on a more equitable geographical basis. Given the enlargement of the Asian Group membership and its vast geographical coverage, it deserved special consideration in the composition of an expanded Council.

Consensus seemed to have emerged on the need for greater transparency in the Council's work, which would imbue it with greater democracy and accountability, he continued. It would also encourage the majority of Member States to render their full support and contribute to the work of the Council through more active participation. Transparency was not necessarily detrimental to efficiency. In fact, the two could be mutually reinforcing if managed effectively.

Regarding the Council's decision-making processes, he said the number of veto-holders should not be enlarged. The veto was an exception to the principle of sovereign equality, made under the special circumstances after World War II. Even in the post cold war era, vetoes had prevented the Council from responding promptly to situations where its action was required. Veto power should not be expanded, it should be rationalized. The Republic of Korea also attached importance to the issue of the periodic review of the Council's composition, which should be undertaken within a reasonable timeframe.

MARIA LOURDES V. RAMIRO-LOPEZ (Philippines) said her country wanted expansion of the Security Council in both the permanent and non-permanent categories. The gross under-representation of developing countries in that body was perfect proof of a deplorable lacuna which needed to be addressed immediately. The notion of rotating permanent seats was interesting. However, a number of technically and politically difficult issues had to be addressed -– the term of each seat and the manner of election. Rotating permanent members without the right of veto would put them on the same footing as non-permanent members who, in effect, rotated every two years. In the case of a general agreement on expansion of the permanent category, the Philippines subscribed to the Non-Aligned Movement’s fallback position which called for an increase, for the time being only, in the non-permanent category.

She said the question of enlargement of the Council was intrinsically linked to the veto. The veto should be abolished or at least curtailed because it was anachronistic, anti-democratic and an affront to the United Nations principle of sovereign equality of States. As to the question of extending the veto power to any additional permanent members, the Philippines believed that they should be given the power of the veto, otherwise there would be two categories of permanent members – those with veto power and those without. Nevertheless her Government hoped that the agreement to limit the power of the veto would be reached and made applicable to all Member States, old and new. Her country believed that the number of additional seats to be allocated to both permanent and non-permanent categories should be no fewer than 26. There should also be a periodic review of an enlarged Council, which should take place at agreed intervals.

JAMES CUNNINGHAM (United States) said that a reformed Security Council, viewed as more representative by the Member States, would enjoy enhanced legitimacy as it exercised the primary responsibility of maintaining international peace and security.

The magnitude of the Council’s responsibilities and the complexity of the issues it faced were mirrored in the “complexity and scope of the issues directly related to Council reform”, he said. The working group must balance the legitimate desire for greater representation with the equally compelling need to preserve the Council’s ability to react decisively against fast-breaking challenges to international peace and security.

Although the working group had not yet been able to surmount many of the complexities of the task before it, those difficulties should not serve as an excuse for diminishing the shared commitment to full and equitable Security Council reform. Attempting to identify a single source for the lack of consensus on the working group was fruitless and counterproductive. Security Council reform clearly qualified as an issue of vital importance to the United Nations and the guiding principle should be “do it right”.

Without repeating his position in detail, the representative said that the United States remained committed to expanding the size of the Security Council, and supported the inclusion of Japan, Germany and representatives from the African, Asian and Latin American regional groups as permanent members. However, he remained unconvinced that a Council expanded beyond 21 members would retain its ability to function efficiently and effectively. “We will oppose any expansion that threatens the ability of the Council to carry out it’s responsibilities under the Charter”, he said. “The gravity of those responsibilities is too great to risk compromising the Council’s ability to meet them.”

Future efforts of the open-ended working group might be more productive if they were redirected to include, or even emphasize, a more thorough and analytical examination of an expanded Council, he said. Such an analysis, to be meaningful and useful, would have to consider possible Councils of different sizes and compositions. The United States would be an active and engaged participant in such an effort.

ALOUNKEO KITTIKHOUN (Lao People's Democratic Republic) said his country favoured an increase in both permanent and non-permanent members of the Security Council. Due to existing global realities, two new permanent members could be provided by the industrialized countries and three could be from the developing countries. While that position did not have the support of all, it was a basis for future discussion. As for non-permanent members, the proposal that Asia, Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean and Eastern Europe should each be represented in an expanded Security Council deserved deeper examination.

Like other members of the Non-Aligned Movement, he said, his country was in favour of transparency in the Council's working methods. Such transparency, particularly in the Council's decision-making process, would allow all Member States to understand the legitimacy of decisions taken by the Council, thereby helping it to gain the confidence of all Member States.

ALYAKSANDR SYCHOV (Belarus) said that over the past year, the Security Council had been slowly broadening its transparency, to bring into its discussions an increasing number of Member States. The Council had also recognized the value of regular briefings and monthly reviews for the benefit of member delegations. Those changes should not be underestimated. They had shown that the United Nations could play an effective role in conflict management and prevention in Kosovo, East Timor and Africa.

Those changes, however, should not lead to self-satisfaction, he said. The Security Council was still not completely up to the realities of the current world. Without decisive steps, the working methods of the Council would become less and less functional. Intensive work was still needed in the working group to determine the basic parameters of Security Council reform. Most importantly, reform of the Security Council needed to ensure equitable representation. Developing nations, such as those of Africa, should be represented in both permanent and non-permanent membership categories.

ALFONSO VALDIVIESO (Colombia) said that once again the international situation was a reminder that the Organization could not and should not avoid real reform of the Security Council. Such reform should improve the quality of Council decisions and restore legitimacy to that body via an equitable expansion. The situation in Kosovo had demonstrated that whenever the preponderant Powers avoided the Council, they compromised its authority as the main guarantor of peace and international security. By insisting on “de facto” reforms, some States were dangerously jeapordizing the fundamental principles of the Charter, as well as the legitimacy of the Council.

He said discussing the veto was a priority. The working group must resolve two basic considerations: first, what justified the existence of the veto; and second, how to channel the desire of more than 180 Member States who wished to modify or curtail the veto.

He said that, in expanding the permanent member category, it was necessary to strictly observe and respect the dynamics of each region, as well as their own proposals for participation. It was also natural and rational that, in a democratic international community based on the principles of equitable geographic representation and sovereign equality of States, any changes to the collective- security setting be the result of a genuine general agreement, not the result of impositions. “Whatever we do today with the current structure must be sufficiently visionary to allow for future adjustments that respect the principles and the changing realities of the international system and its distribution of power”, he said.

SERGEI LAVROV (Russian Federation) said the number of members in an enlarged Council should not exceed 20 or 21. Going beyond that number would have a negative impact on the Council's efficiency. Within those quantitative limits, the Russian Federation was open to discussion of any proposals on membership categories. Its principal position was that enlargement in either category should include both industrial nations and developing countries, and that they should both enjoy the same status. That was indispensable for maintaining the overall balance in international relations while upholding the principles of a multipolar world order. The action taken by NATO in the Kosovo crisis had only substantiated his country's belief that there was no alternative to such an approach to Council enlargement. The Russian Federation believed that India was a strong and worthy candidate for a permanent membership seat in the Council, should the Council be decided to enlarge both categories. There were also strong candidates from Latin America and Africa.

In principle, the Russian Federation had nothing against the idea of States occupying new permanent positions on the basis of rotation, he continued. The specific modalities regulating that formula, provided it received support, should be considered by the relevant regional groups. As for extending the veto right to possible new permanent members, a decision in that regard should be taken only after a concrete composition of the enlarged Council had been agreed upon.

An inevitable prerequisite for that step was the full maintenance of the full status of the incumbent permanent members of the Council, he continued. The Russian Federation flatly rejected the thesis claiming that the basic principle of the Charter -– concurring votes of the five permanent members -– led almost to a paralysis of the Council. The allegation distorted the reality and played into the hands of those who advocated use of military force that side-stepped the Council, under humanitarian or other pretexts. The veto right had proven an irreplaceable tool for coordinated Council activities and to arrive at balanced decisions within its framework. As the open-ended working group continued to focus on the issues of improving the Council's working methods and procedures, healthy pragmatism and a rational approach were the best guides.

VLADIMIR SOTIROV (Bulgaria) said that the expansion by five additional seats, both in the permanent and in the non-permanent membership of the Security Council, would restore balance and would add more credibility and legitimacy to the Council's decisions. One of the additional non-permanent seats should be allocated to the Eastern European regional group. Adding additional categories of membership was not productive, as it would dilute and complicate the reform exercise.

He said that the curtailment of use of the veto was essential for the effectiveness of the Council's work. That could be achieved without amendments to the Charter. Permanent members, mindful of the fact that they were acting on behalf of the Organization as a whole, should exercise the veto only when they considered the question to be of vital importance. A number of exclusion clauses for the application of the veto should be agreed upon. The future new members should be entitled to the same prerogatives as the present permanent members, including a curtailed right of veto.

A periodic review of the Council's decision-making was a vital tool for accountability and for ensuring responsible performance. That review process should be transparent and comprehensive, addressing all elements of the Council's activities, he said.

B.K. MBAYA (Kenya) said an analysis of the work of the Security Council over the last 10 years clearly demonstrated the urgent need for reform. Its response to different situations exposed the inadequacies in its present structure and working methods. “We continue to witness a situation in which the Council’s authority is gradually being eroded and yet there is no evidence of action from within the Council or indeed the United Nations membership to address this problem”, he said. That development could lead to the weakening of the very system that had maintained international peace and security over the last 50 years.

He said his delegation reiterated the African position that Africa must have two permanent seats and five non-permanent seats on the Council. On the question of the veto, he reiterated the Non-Aligned Movement position to actively promote its curtailment by limiting its use for actions taken under Chapter VII of the Charter, which addresses threats to and breaches of the peace and acts of aggression. He also reiterated that, if the veto had to be retained in any form or shape, the privilege must be extended to all new members without discrimination.

Furthermore, he stressed, there should be a deliberate effort made, in subsequent actions of the Council, to incorporate the views of the United Nations membership. The Organization needed to be more transparent, along with all its associated organs.

SAEED HASAN (Iraq) said that the United States continued to use Security Council resolutions to obtain narrow political objectives which made the need for Council reform all the more urgent. Full reform would create a more democratic Security Council, in accordance with the United Nations Charter.

He said that, in addressing the Security Council’s loss of credibility, the working group should take into account that there had been several serious shortcomings in the way that the Council had handled the situation in Iraq. First, the Council had become a cover for the perpetration of crimes against humanity and genocide. United States-imposed sanctions ran counter to the United Nations Charter and international humanitarian law and had led to senseless deaths of women and children in Iraq. The United States had exploited those sanctions in order to change the Iraqi political regime and exact revenge on the Iraqi people. Security Council resolution 1284 was “both defective and deceptive” and rewrote previous resolutions, he said.

Second, he said, the Security Council had given up on its role of halting crimes of aggression and bringing their perpetrators to accountability. No-fly zones instituted by the United States and the United Kingdom allowed those countries to continuously bombard Iraq. Iraq had informed the Security Council of those acts of aggression, but the Council appeared unable to do anything about it. It was ironic, that the United States, who co-sponsored Resolution 1284, included a text demanding respect for the integrity of Iraq. “Before the ink dried”, he said “they breached the tenets of the resolution by their aggression toward Iraq”.

Continuing he also said that the Security Council procedures had been abused to spy on Iraq. Those wearing “blue hats” should be United Nations civil servants, not spies. That issue required a “serious stand”, and he called on the working group to prevent the Security Council from turning into a Central Intelligence Agency or Mossad body. Finally, the Security Council had ignored a fundamental principle of the United Nations Charter: Non-intervention.

It appeared, he said, that the United States was judge and jury in the Security Council. If any other State had done to the United States or United Kingdom one-tenth of what those two countries had done to Iraq, “missiles would rain down” and sanctions would surely follow. The working group should take all those issues seriously. While cooperating on every level in the discussion of Security Council reform, “Iraq will continue to resist United States hegemony”, he said.

DURGA PRASAD BHATTARAI (Nepal) said, despite the strong need for change, six years of collective exercise on the question of Security Council reform had borne no fruit. Reform was a continuing process and could, therefore, not be worked out on prescribed time limits. Reform of that body would be neither meaningful nor complete unless “we arrive at a ratifiable global consensus in the composition and functioning of a reformed Council”, he said. Nepal had accepted the purposes and principles of the Charter as basic plank of its own foreign policy and could not think of making the Organization more removed from the ideals, values and culture of a democratic institution.

He said Nepal also believed in the primacy of the Council in the maintenance of international peace and security. In the exercise of its power, that body must uphold the purposes and principles of the Charter, be democratic in its composition and be transparent in its functioning. It must also never endeavour to curtail the authority of the Assembly, the most democratic of all the United Nations bodies. At the approach of the new millennium, time was running out. Any further delay in reform of the Council might be construed as a mark of the unpreparedness of the United Nations to step into the next century with a full measure of authority, legitimacy, credibility and mission.

HASMY AGAM (Malaysia) stressed the need to improve the Security Council's effectiveness and transparency. There was a need to hold more frequent open debates and formal private meetings. Welcoming the innovative format of interactive open Council meetings initiated by the United Kingdom presidency last Wednesday, Malaysia felt that more frequent such meetings would go a long way in making the Council more transparent and accessible to the larger United Nations membership. Member States must face the challenge of further examining different aspects of Security Council reform, and expedite the process of putting together the necessary outline of a reform package to be developed and refined to meet the "general agreement" stipulated in General Assembly resolution 53/30.

Points of convergence must continue to be consolidated and strengthened while Member States worked to bridge the remaining gaps towards a compromise solution, he said. The task was not insurmountable if there was political will to carry the process forward to its logical conclusion. The upcoming working group discussion must, therefore, propel the process forward if interest in the subject was to be sustained. Unless that question was addressed constructively and adequately, and unless there was the political will necessary to move on to serious negotiations on a final package, there was a real risk of deepening further the current impasse, thereby increasing the creeping sense of cynicism and pessimism among Member States. That would be detrimental to the entire reform process.

* *** *