SPEAKERS CALL FOR ENHANCED WORKING METHODS, GREATER TRANSPARENCY, AS GENERAL ASSEMBLY BEGINS DEBATE ON ANNUAL REPORT OF SECURITY COUNCIL

Fifty-eighth General Assembly

Plenary

28^th & 29^th Meetings (AM & PM)

SPEAKERS CALL FOR ENHANCED WORKING METHODS, GREATER TRANSPARENCY, AS GENERAL

ASSEMBLY BEGINS DEBATE ON ANNUAL REPORT OF SECURITY COUNCIL

The need to enhance the working methods of the Security Council -- primarily increasing transparency, modifying its decision-making processes and strengthening coordination with regional organizations -– was the focus of the discussion today as the General Assembly began its debate of the Council’s annual report.

While some delegations embraced the report’s succinct format, and welcomed the more reader-friendly narrative overview of the Council’s work -- an innovative carryover from last year -- others felt it lacked the analytical edge that would provide Member States detailed and comprehensive insight into the body’s important work and decision-making processes.

On that point, the representative of Brazil said it was telling that the situation in Iraq, one of the subjects that had figured most prominently in the Council’s agenda over the past year, had been given no more than three sentences in the report’s opening section.  While recognizing that confidentiality was “part of the business” of the Council’s decision-making process, that safeguard could not compromise its accountability or the legitimacy of its work.

Canada’s representative added that the concise nature of the report provided the opportunity to hold a single debate on relevant issues –- on the report itself and equitable representation in the 15-nation-body.  But the Assembly had taken a step backwards and scheduled two time-consuming debates -– seemingly at odds with the push for wider Organizational reform.

Introducing the report, the representative of the United States, Council president for the month of October, said although the past year had been an especially busy one, the Council had continued to enhance its transparency, which allowed the wider United Nations membership to remain in touch with its deliberations.  Indeed, of the 200 meetings held during the reporting period, only eight had been closed.  That compared with 32 closed meetings during the previous period.

The representative of Italy said that further progress, however, could be made in the area of transparency in the Council’s work.  Not only was transparency the means by which non-Council members were kept informed of the state of deliberations within the Council, it was also the viaduct by which they could channel their views and positions on specific issues.  Another area, in which further progress could be made, was increased interaction between Council members and those non-members whose interests were especially affected by an issue under discussion.

While a host of speakers welcomed the Council’s continued interest in the complex situations in Africa, and stressed the importance that enhanced cooperation with regional organizations played, others believed that much remained to be done to ensure broader peace and development on the troubled continent.  For instance, the representative of Jamaica expressed concern with the level and urgency of the Council’s response to developments in both Liberia and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, which had been “hesitant and tardy”. In general, he believed the Council’s engagement in Africa could have been fortified by a larger commitment of resources, in terms of manpower and economic assistance.

The representative of Libya was among those who said that while the Council had been active in dealing with many conflicts during the past year, it had, nevertheless, been quiet in one crisis -– the situation in the occupied Palestinian territories.  Saudi Arabia’s representative said that while his country appreciated the Council’s interest in the Middle East region, there was cause for concern, in that Israel had refused to implement relevant Council resolutions, which sought to resolve the conflict.  That had harmed the credibility and effectiveness of the Council.

The representative of Ghana was among the many delegations stressing that along with security and political issues, socio-economic concerns were at the heart of post-conflict and reconstruction initiatives.  Therefore, a more active relationship between the Council and the Organization’s other main bodies, particularly the Assembly and the Economic and Social Council, was critical.

At the top of the meeting, the Assembly acted on the recommendations of its General Committee, and decided to include two additional items in the agenda of the current session:  “Financing of the United Nations Mission in Liberia (UNMIL)”, and “Admission of the International Criminal Court to membership in the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund”.  It also decided to allocate those items to the Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary).

The Assembly also decided to consider matters related to crime prevention and criminal justice directly in plenary meeting for the sole purpose of ensuring that the draft United Nations Convention against Corruption could be adopted in a timely manner and transmitted for signing to the high-level political conference to be held from 9 to 11 December 2003, in Mérida, Mexico.

In addition, the Assembly took note of a document, in which the Secretary-General notified the Assembly of matters relative to the maintenance of international peace and security that are being dealt with by the Security Council and of matters with which the Council has ceased to deal.

Also addressing the Assembly today were the representatives of Japan, Namibia, Nigeria, Algeria, Iran, Peru, Egypt, Spain, Malaysia, Ukraine, Mexico, Viet Nam, Guatemala, the Republic of Korea, Cuba, Singapore, Syria, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Azerbaijan, Romania, Belarus, Angola and Venezuela.

Speaking in exercise of the rights of reply were the representatives of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Armenia and Azerbaijan.

The Assembly will meet again tomorrow at 10 a.m., to continue its debate of matters related to the Security Council, including the question of equitable representation on and increasing membership in the 15-nation body.

Background

The General Assembly met this morning to begin its two-day debate of matters related to the Security Council, including the question of equitable representation on and increasing membership in the 15-nation body.  The Assembly is also expected to consider the issues related to peace and security with which the Council has dealt since 2001.

Among the documents before the Assembly is the Security Council’s annual report (document A/58/2), which details the issues considered and decisions taken in the Council over the past 12 months.  It notes that during that period, the trend towards a steady increase in the Council’s workload continued.  There was also an increase in the growing trend towards transparency.

Iraq figured prominently in the Council’s agenda from the summer and autumn of 2002 and into the spring of 2003.  The Council found its way to unanimity with the adoption of resolution 1441 (2002), which set up an enhanced inspections regime under the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC).  And, in spite of later divisions over the course of action to be taken on Iraq, the Council managed to find that path again with the adoption of a series of resolutions culminating in 1483 (2003), which requested the Secretary-General to appoint a Special Representative for the country.

Still, the report notes that the Council did not lose sight of other priority issues, and Africa once again was a major priority.  The Council continued to devote most of its efforts to the African region, including through debates, many of them open meetings, on several conflict situations in the continent, such as those in Liberia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Burundi, Somalia and the Central African Republic.  The Council also undertook two missions in June and July 2003 to Central and West Africa, respectively.

The situation in the Middle East continued to be considered on a monthly basis, the major development being the publication of the Quartet’s “Road Map” peace plan in April.  Afghanistan was also the subject of debate every four to six weeks, sometimes with regard to specific issues -– security in February 2003, and drug trafficking in June 2003.  The report notes that Afghanistan will be the focus of a Council mission this autumn.

On general issues, counter-terrorism remained a matter for the Council’s attention, mainly through the work of its Committee established pursuant to resolution 1373 (2001), but also through the political impulse received in open meetings of the Council devoted to the question.

The Assembly will also consider a note by the Secretary-General on notification under Article 12, paragraph 2 of the Charter of the United Nations (document A/58/354), which advises the Assembly of matters relative to the maintenance of international peace and security that have been addressed by the Council and of matters with which the body has ceased to deal since the fifty-sixth session in 2001.

[Article 12, paragraph 1 of the Charter stipulates that, while the Council is exercising the functions assigned to it, in respect to any dispute of situation, the Assembly shall not make any recommendation with regard to that dispute or situation unless the Council so requests.]

Also before the Assembly is the second report of the General Committee (document A/58/250/Add.1), in which the Committee recommends the inclusion in the Assembly’s agenda of two additional items, namely “Financing of the United Nations Mission in Liberia” and “Admission of the International Criminal Court to membership in the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund”.  The Committee further recommends that both items be allocated to the Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary).

The Committee also recommends that agenda item 108, “Crime prevention and criminal justice”, be considered directly in plenary meeting for the sole purpose of taking action on the draft United Nations convention against corruption.

Introduction of Security Council Report

JOHN D. NEGROPONTE (United States), president of the Security Council for the month of October, introduced the 15-nation body’s annual report.  He said the report, which covered the period from 1 August 2002 to 31 July 2003, indicated that the Council’s seemingly ever-increasing workload continued to grow.  There were many areas of focus, including Iraq, the Middle East, and Afghanistan, which were covered in detail in the report.  Africa, he continued, was also considered a high priority throughout the year, with the Council responding to worsening conflicts in Côte d’Ivoire and Liberia, while also working to encourage continuing progress in bringing peace and stability to the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Burundi.

The Council, he said, had taken missions to Central and West Africa, and had focused on several issues affecting Africa, such as the threat of small arms and mercenaries, and the role of Council missions and other United Nations mechanisms in promoting peace and security on the continent.  In addition to addressing specific ongoing conflicts, the Council also held thematic discussions and open debates, including on women, peace and security; children and armed conflict; and the pacific settlement of disputes.  He added that the fight against terrorism also continued to be a major focus of the Council’s work, with the Counter-Terrorism Committee working extensively to fulfil its mandate set out under resolution 1373 (2001).

Highlighting a few specifics about the reporting procedure and the document itself, he said that as the Assembly had suggested in the past, the Council this year had produced a more focused report that was 68 pages shorter than last year’s.  That was some 300 pages shorter than the year before.  The report also opened with a narrative overview of the Council’s work, an innovation begun last year at the suggestion of the Assembly.

Although the past year had been an especially busy one, there had been an increase in the already growing trend towards enhanced transparency in the Council’s work, he stated.  The Council had held as many open meetings as possible, regularly conducted wrap-up sessions, and provided opportunities for all Member States to attend briefings.  For example, of the 200 meetings held during the reporting period, only eight had been closed, excluding ongoing consultations with troop contributing countries.  That compared with 32 closed meetings during the previous period.  The emphasis on greater transparency was intended to allow the wider United Nations membership to remain closer in touch with the Council and its deliberations.

KOICHI HARAGUCHI (Japan) said that the issue of Iraq had figured prominently on the Security Council’s agenda during the period under review, and had consumed much of the Council’s time and energy.  Regarding the drafting process for the Council’s report, he had hoped to hear each member of the Council express its view on the subject, in a frank manner in an open meeting.  It was disappointing that no Council member had taken the floor during the Council’s open meeting on its report to make such a presentation, as had been done in previous years.

He said that while efforts to ensure the openness of Council activities had been welcome, there was often too little notice when open briefings were changed to open debates.  As a result, many non-Council members were unable to take full advantage of such opportunities.  Reasonable advance notice should be given in case of such changes.  And, although it was understandably difficult to announce the holding of an “emergency session” well in advance, the Council must search for a means to ensure that all non-members were informed of such sessions beforehand.  Furthermore, “wrap-up” sessions should not be used as forums for thematic discussions completely unrelated to the Council’s activities of the past month.

The Council, he added, should also continue to look for ways to involve those non-Council members with a vital interest in the issue under discussion more substantially in its decision-making process.  Of particular importance was the need to ensure transparency, especially for those countries that are major financial contributors, with regard to those resolutions with budgetary implications, such as peacekeeping operations, political missions and peace consolidation.  A mechanism similar to that which provided for consultation between the Council and troop contributing countries on specific peacekeeping operations was needed for major financial contributors, as well.  As those countries were held to account by their taxpayers, it was unreasonable to expect them to passively issue checks without being consulted as to decisions taken. 

MARTIN ANDJABA (Namibia) viewed as a positive step, the fact that the Security Council had approved a new concept of operations for the United Nations Organization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUC) after three years of continuous appeal by African Member States.  While he welcomed the establishment of the transnational government, he remained concerned that the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Democratic Republic of the Congo continued to be violated.  Additionally, he felt, in order to achieve the desired goal of intolerance to impunity, pressure must be exerted on those who hold influence over armed factions in the country.  “It is not enough to deplore the impunity, that goes with the aggression and the illegal exploitation of the natural resources of the country, those responsible must be held accountable”, he stressed. 

He insisted that Security Council resolutions were binding on all Member States, and that anything else would discredit the Organization.  Saying that it was incomprehensible that Security Council resolutions on Palestine continued to be flouted with impunity, he maintained that international law could not be upheld when adherence to Security Council resolutions was an option to some and an obligation to others.  “Pressure cannot be exerted on the occupied, while the occupiers are being exonerated”.  On Security Council reform, he said that the challenges confronting leaders in the area of peace and security were a direct result of the “unrepresentative and undemocratic nature of the composition and decision-making nature of the Security Council”.  For 12 years brilliant ideas were advanced on how to correct the situation.  “How much more should the international situation deteriorate before we make the Security Council relevant to today’s challenges?”

RONALDO MOTA SARDENBEG (Brazil) said that while the Council’s annual report, particularly its introduction, conveyed a sense of that body’s response to new and continuing challenges, his delegation looked forward to a report that perhaps provided a more comprehensive analysis of how the Council dealt with issues under review.  He added that it was telling that the situation in Iraq, one of the subjects that had figured most prominently in the Council’s agenda -– including ministerial level debates -– had been given no more than three sentences in the analytical section of the report.  While recognizing that confidentiality was “part of the business” of the Council’s decision-making process, that safeguard could not compromise its accountability or the legitimacy of its work within the wider United Nations family and global community.

He went on to say that transparency and wider participation could only enhance the Council’s credibility and effectiveness.  Transparency was, above all, an asset that could render even greater support to the Council’s decisions.  A better clarification of the body’s modus operandi could “dispel misgivings regarding effectiveness and relevance”.  On the positive side, he noted the monthly “wrap-up” sessions and the briefings given by the President, which were a means to enhance interaction and synergy.  Also, regular open debates provided a chance for the Organization’s wider membership to express views on the most relevant international peace and security issues of the day.

On the other hand, he stressed that opportunities for exchanges between members and non-members remained largely formal, with limited interaction.  Notwithstanding the need for Member States to lay out their national positions in the Council, there were times when the meetings and discussions could be more free- flowing.  He added that along with security and political issues, socio-economic concerns were at the heart of post-conflict and reconstruction initiatives.  Therefore, he favoured a more active relationship between the Council and the Organization’s other main bodies, particularly the Assembly and the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC).  To that end, the Council could make broader use of Article 65 of the Charter, which states that ECOSOC could assist the Council at its request.

O.A. ASHIRU (Nigeria) said that while appreciable progress had been made in resolving some conflicts, the Council, along with the international community, could still make the world a safer place.  He noted the continued progress in Sierra Leone, and urged the Council to assist in the ongoing integration of ex-combatants, as well as establishing effective civilian and political institutions.  He also lauded the Council’s role in addressing the complex humanitarian, political and security situation in the Mano River Union States, as well as in Guinea Bissau and Côte d’Ivoire.  He cautioned, however, that to guarantee lasting peace in the subregion, the Council needed to come up with a comprehensive security arrangement for the entire Mano River Union area that addressed the cycle of strife, instability and conflicts.

Similarly, he commended the Council’s efforts at implementing its current mandate in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, but regretted that continuing violence and obstructionist activity by “some leaders” of armed groups had hampered progress there.  He also praised the Council’s remaining engagement in the Liberian conflict, which had tested and stretched the ability of the international community to respond pro-actively to a humanitarian catastrophe.  Nigeria’s offer of political asylum to former Liberian President Charles Taylor and the early deployment of its troops was a humanitarian gesture to arrest the deteriorating situation and facilitate the deployment of the multinational force.  To that end, he welcomed Council resolution 1509 establishing the United Nations Mission in Liberia (UNMIL), and called on the international community to support and ensure the resolution’s effective implementation. 

Notwithstanding the Council’s efforts in the maintenance of international peace and security, he was committed to the reform and expansion of that organ to make it more responsive to contemporary global needs and challenges.  He was dismayed, however, that obstacles continued to be placed against the adoption of any of constructive reform proposals.  While appreciating the changes being made in the Council’s working methods in response to demands by Member States, he reiterated that fundamental reform, including expansion of the permanent and non-permanent membership of the Council, was required.  Only such reform would re-position the Council to enable it to respond to international peace and security issues in a more comprehensive, objective and effective manner.

ABDALLAH BAALI (Algeria) said that it was a matter of the Security Council’s credibility that its internal rules and procedures remained merely provisional, 58 years after the organ’s creation.  That had led to some non-desirable situations, such as the one that occurred during the open debate on the Middle East last month.  Each delegation’s intervention had been restricted to a mere three minutes to explain its position on such a complicated subject.  There had, however, been some positive changes in the Council’s practices, especially in regard of the number of public meetings held and the innovative “wrap-up” sessions.  However, the consultations following open meetings should be more regularly open to those parties concerned by the issue under discussion.  The continued holding of most of the briefings by the Secretariat or representatives of the Secretary-General in private session, as well as the holding by some Council members of consultations at which the 10 non-permanent members were not present, was of concern.

On the substantive side, he noted, the number of Council activities during the reporting period had been extraordinary.  The Council had some successes, including on the issues of terrorism and peacekeeping operations.  For example, it had adopted resolutions 1455 and 1456 (2003), which strengthened the Counter-Terrorism Committee.  Its actions had also had positive effects on conflicts in Africa, in which regard the Council was encouraged to formalize and expand its activities.  It should also take the opportunity to provide useful support to the African Union and its mechanisms.  However, the Council had fallen well short of expectations with regard to the Middle East.  Its debates and proposed resolutions had not impacted the situation on the ground in the occupied territories.  Moreover, with regard to Iraq, the Council had faced its most crucial period to date.  It must play the central role, incumbent upon it, in helping to end the suffering of the Iraqi people.

STAFFORD NEIL (Jamaica) said that, on the subject of Iraq, due to the profound divisions within it, the Council had failed to control or determine the course of events following the decision by a coalition of States to take military action without Council authorization.  Political realities had created a difficult time for the Council, which was still grappling with the complications flowing from the unfolding events.  Africa, another area of the Council’s concentrated effort, showed positive indications of the Council’s effectiveness in dealing with particular areas of conflict.  He noted the improving situations in Sierra Leone and Angola, and the intervention in the conflicts in Côte d’Ivoire, Liberia and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

He observed that there were concerns with the level and urgency of the Council’s response to developments in both Liberia and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, which was “hesitant and tardy”.  The slowness to engage in Liberia might have caused a worsening of the humanitarian situation up to the time of the deployment of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) vanguard force.  In general, he believed the Council’s engagement in Africa could have been fortified by a larger commitment of resources, in terms of manpower and economic assistance.  On the Middle East, he said that although the Road Map had been heralded as opening the way for peace, the process had unravelled to such an extent that a peace settlement was now a remote prospect.  The Security Council’s role in that situation appeared to be uncertain and tentative.  While, the United Nations was declared as being a party to the Quartet, under whose sponsorship the Road Map was launched, it was not clear to some through what agency the Organization was represented in that process. 

He noted the continued concerns about a lack of transparency and a failure to give due attention to the views of the wider membership in Council debates.  Also, the tendency to concentrate decision-making among the permanent Members and giving a marginal role to the elected members of that body remained a source of concern.  Such a concentration of power in the decision-making process was undemocratic and undermining the legitimacy of the Council’s decisions and its authority to act.  He regretted the lack of progress on Council reform and underscored the importance of enlarging the Council’s membership to make it more representative.

MARCELLO SPATAFORA (Italy), noting efforts to increase the transparency and openness of the Security Council’s work, said that further progress could be made.  Not only was transparency the means by which non-Council members were kept informed of the state of deliberations within the Council, it was also the viaduct by which they could channel their views and positions on specific issues.  Another area in which further progress could be made was in increased interaction between Council members and those non-members whose interests were especially affected by an issue under discussion.

Increased participation by non-Council members on issues such as conflict prevention, peacekeeping and transitions to post-conflict peace-building, he continued, could add substantial value to the Council’s decision-making and help to mobilize the active support of the international community.  Enhanced dialogue with non-Council members could also contribute to the forging of more effective and coherent policies regarding global challenges.  Issues such as the promotion of the rule of law, protection of civilians in armed conflict and gender mainstreaming, could also benefit from the Council’s interaction with the broader membership of the Organization.

Among other suggestions, he proposed that the Council further develop its relations and consultations with regional organizations, particularly those that had developed their crisis management capacity, to enable them to effectively contribute to the collective action of the international community.  Such regional organizations were often equipped with significant political and financial resources and were often better able to mobilize the will of the main regional actors.  The same theory applied to the implementation of sanctions; close cooperation between regional organizations and the United Nations sanctions committees and monitoring groups could have satisfactory results.

MOHAMMAD HASSAN FADAIFARD (Iran) said this year’s report was an improvement over previous ones, but the introduction of the report could be more analytical and less descriptive, providing information about informal consultations and rationales behind the Security Council’s decisions.  As a result of the high number of open meetings held during the reporting period, non-members had more opportunity to participate in the Council’s work.  It was important that the Council build on that achievement and enhance links between its members and those of the General Assembly.  He noted that the five permanent members were increasingly acquiring special privileges in considering and coordinating among themselves, while elected members were absent.  Last year, the number of issues in which the permanent five resorted to exclusive deliberation and embarked on decision-making on their own, was on the rise.  That contrasted with the trend towards more transparency and democratization.

The decision-making process in the Council was becoming more complex, he stated.  The number of subsidiary organs were increasing, with committees and monitoring groups playing a more important role in the work of the Council.  It was important that those groups worked in a way that the general membership of the United Nations could receive adequate information about their roles and functions. He reiterated his country’s frustration with the Council’s inability to address the Palestinian question, and hoped that the monthly briefings continued in the current year.  He acknowledged that several resorts to using the veto in the past two years were responsible for the paralysis of the Council in that area.

OSWALDO DE RIVERO (Peru) reaffirmed the fundamental value of the United Nations and of the Security Council as the organ in charge of applying international collective security.  He insisted that the functions of the Security Council must be improved, so that it could become a more representative organ in its composition and reflect the current reality of global power.  He advocated a reform of the Council that included a revision of the process of decision taking and its working methods, which allowed it to assume its responsibilities with efficiency in the actual context.  But before reform could take place, he said it was imperative to fulfil the resolutions and decisions of the Security Council, in order to avoid the loss of credibility and standing.

He believed that the report of the Security Council needed to reflect the global situation, as well as be of better analytic content, including not only an outline of documents but also the relation of the vetoes produced and the arguments used, a list of unimplemented resolutions, and a summary of proposals presented in open meetings.  He pointed out that in the globalized world, the intense work of the Security Council and its main efforts were not well transmitted and risked falling into oblivion.

AHMED ABOUL GHEIT (Egypt) said that certain situations during the past year had called into question the unity, effectiveness and credibility of the Council.  However, when its members and non-members worked together and in transparency, its decisions reflected its role as an important tool in matters of international peace and security.  He went on to highlight some of the important issues covered by the Council, including dealing with conflict situations, and expressed hope that the coming year would bring more interaction and dialogue between the Council and the wider United Nations family.  In order to foster and encourage greater partnership, he hoped that the Council would also continue its enhanced meetings with troop contributing countries.

He looked forward to all non-members of the Council being able to express their views before the body without some parties attempting to hamper that process.  Turning to Africa, he welcomed the Council’s continued interest in the conflict situations on the continent, as well as its recent missions to Central and West Africa.  Still, the Council needed to find a way to address its reluctance to deal with certain other issues, particularly the speed with which it acted in the face of deepening conflict situations and violations of human rights.  The Council still faced serious problems in dealing with post-conflict situations in Africa.

He said the Council was duty bound to extend every effort to foster the maintenance of peace and security in coordination and cooperation with regional organizations, as well as other United Nations bodies, particularly the Assembly and ECOSOC.  That would be the best way to ensure that socio-economic concerns were integrated into the wider United Nations vision of maintaining security and peace.

INOCENCIO F. ARIAS (Spain) said that during his country’s two-year term as a non-permanent member of the Security Council, it had witnessed the significant enhancement of transparency in the Council’s working methods.  For example, there had been a total of 17 open meetings, which was more than the number of informal consultations held, during the same period.  Moreover, Spain had drafted, in conjunction with the United Kingdom, the introduction to the Council’s annual report, with the objective of making it more accessible to all members.  Yet, he warned, such progress must not lead to complacency; further improvements were needed.

Declaring it a mistake to focus exclusively on the expansion of membership in approaching the subject of Security Council reform, he said three elements must be considered:  composition, working methods and decision-making.  The reform of the Council’s working methods had been addressed above.  On the issue of composition, he recalled his President’s statement before the Assembly, which pointed out that increasing the number of the Council’s members would not necessarily increase its effectiveness.  Furthermore, the Council could only be made more truly representative through an increase in the number of its elected members.  Any increase in the permanent membership would be counterproductive, as it would enhance the “aristocracy” of the United Nations and endow more members with the veto, which had already been the subject of innumerable complaints.

With regard to the third element of reform, he continued, the Council’s decision-making process must show a greater balance between the two elements of democracy and effectiveness.  Having experience of the veto, he had seen illustrated the unusual power of the Council’s permanent members and the abyss that separated the non-permanent members from them.  In conjunction with the majority of Member States, he felt that the number of cases in which one could wield the veto should be reduced.  It should be limited to use in Chapter

VII cases and in situations of massive violations of human rights.  It must also be noted that such reforms would only be achieved with the agreement of those already endowed with extraordinary powers by the Charter of the United Nations.

RASTAM MOHD ISA (Malaysia) considered the annual reporting process by the Security Council to the General Assembly an important step, as it not only fulfilled the relevant Articles of the Charter of the United Nations, but also maintained the relationship between the Council and the Assembly.  The annual report also served as a means for the general membership of the United Nations to get better acquainted with the work of the Security Council.  He noted that improvement in this year’s format did not necessarily bring a qualitative improvement in the substance of the report.  The holding of 15 thematic discussions, as listed in the report, was useful, he felt, to improve the effectiveness of the Council and the exchange of views between non-Council and Council members on issues relating to international peace and security.

To improve and maintain its credibility on the Israeli-Palestinian issue, the Council needed to enforce its authority, in particular with respect to the commitment to the Road Map.  Also, the Council must not allow its resolutions to be manipulated or allow itself to be prevented from doing anything meaningful.  The Council should resolutely take action on the illegal construction of the Israeli expansionist wall, as well as decisively on the recent flagrant violation of Syria’s territory by Israel.

He hoped that the Council would be able to draw clear lessons from its experience with the particularly difficult Iraq issue, and prevent such a situation from occurring again in the future.  The United Nations must assume its central role in the maintenance of peace and security, and be given a major responsibility to solve the problem in Iraq, so that Iraqis could regain their sovereignty.  He was opposed to sanctions, which should be utilized as a measure of last resort and after careful consideration of their ramifications.  Maintaining that sanctions should hit intended targets and not the innocent, he welcomed the Council’s lifting of sanctions against Iraq and Libya.  On the issue of Council reform, he said the body’s membership should be democratized, and it must play its role without discrimination to ensure that all Member States adhered to and implemented its resolutions.

VALERIY KUCHYNSKY (Ukraine), speaking on behalf of the GUUAM Countries – Azerbaijan, Georgia, Republic of Moldova, Ukraine and Uzbekistan, said that the formula of the Council’s success consisted of four major elements, namely, unity, political will, sufficiency and transparency.  Another major element was the transformation of its composition and geographical representation.  Despite the “understandable frustration over the slow progress in this area”, he still counted on common will to reach a reasonable compromise for undertaking a comprehensive reform of the Council in all its aspects.  Everyone was interested in a strong, proactive and powerful Security Council.  In spite of its real and perceived imperfections, the Council could and should be ready to provide responses to new demands.

He believed the Security Council could play an even more prominent role as it related to the issue of Iraq, which had divided the world community.  For that reason, he looked forward to adopting a new Security Council resolution, which clarified the path towards Iraq’s self-governance while ensuring peace, stability and recovery.  Also, the Security Council had been further challenged by developments in the Middle East and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.  The first encouraging steps in the resumed peace process, based on the Quartet’s Road Map, gave way to scepticism over the viability of the peace plan.  While there were periods of relative calm, the recent suicide bombing in Haifa and the Israeli air strikes on Syria had escalated tensions.

Regarding issues in Europe, he was concerned about the lack of progress in the settlement of the conflict in Abkhazia, Georgia and called on the Abhkhaz side to abide by the relevant Security Council resolutions.  Turning to some of the Council’s activities, he was pleased with the final settlement of the Libyan problem, as well as the enhanced cooperation between the Council and the European Union and African regional organizations.  In particular, deployment of European Union forces under the authority of the Security Council in Bunia was instrumental in dealing with security and humanitarian crisis in the region.  He was also pleased with the continued cooperation between the troop contributing countries, the Council and the Secretariat, which was indispensable for conducting peacekeeping operations in the most effective manner at every stage.

NANA EFFAH-APENTENG (Ghana) said he had been encouraged by the Council’s focus on peacekeeping and its comprehensive approach to fulfilling its mandate.  Encouraged by the Council’s particular attention to conflict prevention, resolution and management in the past year, he urged continued focus on such issues, given their complexity and the need to ensure broader peace and security, which were prerequisites for promoting stability and sustainable development.  In that regard, the need for the Council to cooperate with the Assembly, ECOSOC and other development bodies could not be overestimated.  He also noted with appreciation, the Council’s continued focus on situations in Africa, and hoped that the time and effort of the many relevant public meetings, as well as the missions to Central and West Africa, would translate into concrete solutions to the conflicts plaguing the region.

       Turning to the Council’s annual report, he said, while the document’s new compact format was more reader friendly, much remained to be done to improve the analytical framework.  The report again lacked the requisite information to evaluate the Council’s work.  While welcoming the increased number of open meetings, he stressed that those gatherings should entail more than “just going through the motions”, and the views expressed by all Member States should be taken into account when the Council arrived at its decisions.  Finally, he said that the schisms that had arisen surrounding the Council’s course of action on Iraq had made it imperative that the body’s credibility be enhanced through substantive reform, guided by the principles of democracy, sovereign equality of States and equitable geographical representation.

PAUL HEINBECKER (Canada) highlighted three points, stressing that the Assembly could have held a single debate on issues related to the Council rather than two, the Council’s processes could be further improved, and all States must support the Secretary-General’s efforts to launch broader Organizational reform, while continuing efforts to reform the Council, the Assembly and other main bodies.  While the Council’s annual report had been concise and would have provided the opportunity for a single debate on relevant issues –- on the report itself and equitable representation in the 15-nation body, the Assembly had taken a step backwards in holding two debates.  That would be time-consuming and seemed to go against the flow of the wider push for reform.

On the Council’s methods of work, he would still like to see greater transparency, he said.  He would also like to see greater self-discipline in the resort to the threat or use the veto, as well as a voluntary commitment by veto holders to explain why the veto had been used.  And as regards the International Criminal Court (ICC), greater adherence to the Charter was required.  He would also suggest more systematic consultations with non-Council members on matters significant to them.  To that end, he welcomed the Council’s more formalized meetings with troop contributing countries on military mandates.

As recent events had caused many to lose faith in the Organization, it was clear that, despite over 50 years of achievement in areas such as peacekeeping, the creation of arms-control regimes and six core human rights treaties, “all is not well here”.  To continue on with business as usual would be an exercise in complacency.  Far-reaching reform was needed to ensure the Organization serves the “least and the greatest among us”.  The Secretary-General was attempting to break the logjam of reform, he said, and the Assembly should agree that there was a collective responsibility to protect innocent lives and prevent conflicts.  He urged the Assembly to work with the proposed panel of eminent personalities so that, in a year’s time, it could make the soundest possible proposals for change.

ADOLFO AGUILAR ZINSER (Mexico) said the need to draft a substantive introduction to the report of the Security Council, to include analytical elements of interest, must be stressed.  Although Council members were already more open, much still remained to be done to ensure the report’s usefulness as a point of reference for those Member States who did not take part in the Council’s decision-making process.  There was also a need to include progress indicators on the activities of the Council in the report, which would allow Member States to gauge those areas that required more attention.  The monthly appraisals had helped to enhance Member States’ knowledge and understanding of the Council’s work, and they should represent an important input for the preparation of the annual report.

As a member of the Council for the last two years, Mexico had sought to make the Council more transparent, more responsible and sensitive to the need to base its actions in the common interest, he added.  There should be no “first- versus second-class citizens” on the Council.  Moreover, it should work towards greater interaction with the General Assembly, as well as other bodies, with a view to ensuring the improvement of its work with those other bodies that played a part in conflict resolution.

Determined to continue its constructive participation in the Open-Ended Working Group, he had recognized that there had been stagnation on the issue of increasing the membership of the Council.  However, that was a result of the polarized positions some States had adopted, not a result of the format adopted by the Working Group.  Furthermore, the way to achieve reform did not lay in expanding the pool of those possessing anachronistic powers, but through achieving an equitable geographic balance.

JUMA AMER (Libya) said that as the Council was striving to become more transparent, it was important for the 15-nation body to not only enhance its consultations procedure with troop contributors and the Organization’s wider membership, but also to brief Member States when missions were dispatched to crisis areas.  Member States should be informed about the work undertaken on important Council missions such as those undertaken in Central and West Africa, a few months ago.  The Council should also consult the International Criminal Court more often, particularly on matters related to justice, to help it meet current challenges.  He stressed that the Council needed to enhance its consultation procedures, overall, in order to increase its transparency. 

While the report had shown that the Council had been active in dealing with many conflicts during the past year, it had, nevertheless, been quiet in one crisis -– the situation in the occupied Palestinian territories.  On that issue, the prerogative of the veto had time and again paralyzed the body’s work.  That called for a review of the right of veto.  It was clear, he added, that the Council had spent much time dealing with various situations on the African continent.  But, in order to comprehensively address overall peace and security in Africa, it would be necessary to focus equal attention to socio-economic issues, such as poverty eradication, marginalization and debt relief.  When the current debate ended, the Assembly should do more than just take note of the report as had been customary.  Indeed, the proposals discussed over the next two days needed to be submitted to the Council, so that it could enhance its working methods and reinforce the Assembly’s work in matters related to the maintenance of international peace and security.

NGUYEN THANH CHAU (Viet Nam) said while collective response to events had, in some cases, been hesitant and tardy, and peace in such places remained highly fragile, the Security Council last year succeeded in adopting resolutions on some conflicts in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Burundi, Sierra Leone, Côte d’Ivoire, Liberia, Western Sahara and Somalia, and such developments, gave the international community cause for optimism and hope.  It was unfortunate, however, that the Council’s work had often not been fruitful as in the case of Iraq.  It was sad that although the United Nations “did not make the bed, it had to lie deep in it”, and suffered the tragic losses of the bombing of its Baghdad headquarters twice.

The ongoing crisis in the Middle East, he said, was a source of profound continuing concern for Member States and was a challenge to the credibility of the Security Council.  The failure to secure the implementation of some resolutions, and to reach a consensus among the Council members on issues of the conflict, had led to further deterioration of the already volatile situation in the region.  The Palestinians deserved the Council’s resolute commitment so that their plight was alleviated and the peace process put back on track.  He warned that unilateral acts only worsened the situation.  Viet Nam was pleased that the Council had dedicated attention to making its work more transparent and inclusive for the rest of the United Nations membership.  He said that in order to meet the confidence and expectations of wide-ranging nations of the Organization, the Council had to be stronger and more democratized, with better representation of the developing countries, and those able to have positive contributions to the common objectives of the United Nations.

ABDUL MAJEED HAKEEM (Saudi Arabia) said that while his country appreciated the Security Council’s interest in the Middle East region, and the issuance of resolutions thereon, there was cause for concern in that Israel had refused to implement all of the Council’s resolutions, which sought to resolve the conflict.  That harmed the credibility and effectiveness of the Council.  Israel’s refusal to implement the Council’s resolutions, one after another, showed its determination to torpedo the restoration of peace in the Middle East.  On the issue of Iraq, he called on the members of the Council to come up with a resolution, which would allow the Organization to play a lead role in that country.

He noted the intention to introduce reform to all United Nations bodies, especially Security Council.  That situation had arisen due to the feeling that the body’s work had fallen far from its main objectives, particularly in relation to the maintenance of peace and security for all.  The Open-Ended Working Group reflected the consensus on the need to introduce necessary reforms through an increase in the membership of the Council to reflect equitable geographical representation.  There was also a need to make the Council’s decision-making process more transparent.  He hoped that this reform would make the Council more active, and that its members would not have double standards when it came to implementing Security Council resolutions.

GERT ROSENTHAL (Guatemala) said that throughout the years, delegations in the Assembly had stressed that the Council’s report was too descriptive and too lengthy, and that it hampered non-Council members from getting a comprehensive look at the body’s work.  And, while all had noted some improvements in the more succinct report last year, it was worrying that the document, under consideration today, appeared to hark back two years, as it was characterized by an abundance of information but, little in the way of analysis and even less interpretation.

He went on to say that the relationship between United Nations organs, particularly the Security Council and the Assembly, left much to be desired.  One could contend that concentrating decision-making powers on matters of the highest importance in the Council, which was dominated by its five permanent members, had been at the expense of the Assembly.  That did not have to be the case, inasmuch as the Charter provided that United Nations organs should cooperate with, and support each other.  Whatever the case, it was clear that it was necessary to complete reform of the Assembly’s working methods, as well as long-drawn-out efforts to reform the composition of the Council.

KIM SAM-HOON (Republic of Korea) said the Security Council’s increased workload corresponded with its enhanced transparency.  Such initiatives as briefings by the President of the Council, statements to the press, more open debates and an improved Web site, had also ensured timely dissemination of information to the general United Nations membership.  Throughout the past year, the Council had focused much of its work on Iraq, but challenges remained.  He expressed concern over the growing number of casualties and stressed the Council’s important role in achieving progress in the area of reconstruction, and in facilitating Iraq’s transition to a representative government.

Regarding the Council’s work in Africa, he said it had shown tremendous resolve in dealing with the conflict in Liberia and commended the Council’s prompt authorization of a multinational force, which had prevented the situation from escalating into a humanitarian crisis.  Moreover, the Council’s efforts in Sierra Leone, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Burundi had resulted in an overall improvement on the ground and the opportunities for peace.

Welcoming the Council’s significant contributions to restoring peace in Afghanistan, he said its sustained attention would be needed to address that nation’s fragile security, the viability of the peace process and elections for 2004.  It was hoped that the upcoming visit of a Security Council mission there would make positive contributions in that regard.  The Council was also seized of the nuclear issue concerning the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, which should be resolved expeditiously through the Six Party Talks.

The Republic of Korea also supported the continued efforts of the Council’s Counter-Terrorism Committee (CTC), the Council’s crucial role in curbing the illicit trade in small arms, and its close monitoring of arms embargoes, disarmament and reintegration programmes into peacekeeping missions that were essential to breaking cycles of conflict.

ORLANDO REQUEIJO GUAL (Cuba) said that the brief analytical summary of the report should not only reflect what had been done, but also those issues the Council had not been able to reach a decision on.  He continued to look forward to a report that contained a more analytical look at perhaps, at least the most important deliberations undertaken by the Council.  Member States had a right to receive such a report.  He added there was still a need for progress in other areas.  Over the past year, the credibility of the Council, which had already been diminished, had suffered another blow when certain countries decided to launch a war against Iraq, without having a decision taken in the Council.  That had been yet another example of the need to review the Council’s working methods.

The need for greater transparency in the Council was a pressing one, he said.  In an increasingly interdependent world, the decisions taken in the Council needed to be discussed among the Organization’s wider membership.  Despite the fact that the Council had held more public meetings, the bulk of the Council’s work continued to occur behind closed doors.  The monthly consultations and briefings on important issues and ongoing situations should be held in open session, and failing that, should at least be described in detail in the Council’s annual report.  There was a need to remove the “veil of secrecy” from the Council’s work.  It was troubling to see Council members giving information to the press, while the wider membership of the United Nations remained uninformed.  In addition, it was illogical that after so many years, the Council’s rules of procedure had not yet been codified.

KISHORE MAHBUBANI (Singapore) noted that the Assembly had held the present debate, on the report of the Security Council, annually for many years, yet its purpose in doing so remained unclear.  After 58 years, the relationship between the Council and the Assembly had never been clarified.  While some held that the Council should be subordinate to the Assembly, his country had learned, during its time on the Council, that Council members did not consider themselves subordinate to the Assembly.  Some argued that the Council had been intended as the Assembly’s equal.  What was clear was that, in recent years, the activities of the Security Council had become more important while the Assembly’s became less so, and that trend looked to continue.  Such a situation made it even harder for the Assembly to hold the Council accountable for its actions.  It would be useful for the two bodies to come to a common understanding as to their respective relationship and responsibilities.

Also at question was whether the Council’s report should be purely a factual account or an evaluation of the Council’s activities, he added.  There was no consensus on that issue either.  Yet, in the event that the evaluation aspect won out, the Assembly must come to a consensus on clear criteria with which to assess the performance of the Council.  Last year, his country had elaborated four evaluation criteria, including:  had the Council successfully managed the issues under its purview; had it improved its procedures and working methods to generate greater efficiency and effectiveness; had it become more transparent and open in its work and relationship with the Organization’s wider membership; and had it enhanced or diminished its prestige in the international community.

It was also disappointing to note that Council members had not expressed their frank views of the report upon its adoption by the Council, he continued, especially, as that would have provided a useful tool of evaluation to the Assembly.  The Assembly should request the Council to revert to its previous practice of allowing all 15 members of the Council to speak their mind on the subject of the report.

FAYSSAL MEKDAD (Syria), noting that the Council had made remarkable headway in terms of transparency in its work, cited the large number of open meetings held during the period under review.  Non-Council members had also taken an increasingly large part in the work of the Council.  Moreover, the Security Council had held closed meetings where its role was frankly discussed by members and non-members.

He reaffirmed the need for the Council to adopt the draft resolution presented by his country, which condemned the Israeli attack on Syrian territory.  Outside his region, it was quite clear that the Council had tried hard to address certain questions related to the African continent, especially regarding the restoration of peace in various regions.  Syria had, during its membership on the Council, strived to champion those matters related to developing countries and international peace and security.  It had been the first to propose monthly briefings, more than 20 of which had been held so far.  Those briefings had been beneficial in giving all Member States an opportunity to review developments in sensitive regions.

Syria, he concluded, had also strived to apply the principle of unanimity and consensus during its time on the Council.  The Council’s inability to reach a consensus because of the recourse to the veto was regretted, particularly regarding major challenges to international peace and security, such as the conflict in the Middle East.  Finally, he hoped that when States were no longer members of the Council, their ideas and contributions would not be forgotten.  As it was the last time his country would take the floor as an elected member of the Council on this agenda item, he reaffirmed that Syria had retained a sense of responsibility, seriousness and dedication.

PAK GIL YON (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea) said the Security Council should recognize that it had been “abused for the political purposes of the super-power on a number of occasions”.  It had departed from the principles of equity and objectivity in dealing with international cases, against the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter.  The Council should give priority to rejecting unilateralism and to ensuring multilateralism, based on sovereign equality.  The elimination of unilateralism and high-handedness was the prerequisite to enhancing the role of the Council.  Moreover, the world community had raised its voice to declare that individual countries should be prevented from using, or threatening to use, military force against other Member States without a clear cut resolution of the United Nations.

The Council must also ensure the transparency of its work, he added, as informal consultations, used in most cases by individual States for the pursuit of political purposes, were still within the mainstream of the Council’s work.  The Council should establish the principle of discussing and agreeing on major issues in open meetings, and if informal consultations were inevitably necessary, the parties directly concerned should be invited to participate, so that their views could be heard.

The Council should also maintain its fairness with regard to the Korean peninsula, he concluded, particularly on the nuclear issue, which was the outcome of the United States’ hostile policy towards his country.  That was not an issue on which the Council should intervene.  The Council should, however, draw attention to the United States’ hostile policy towards the Democratic People's Republic of Korea and its threat of pre-emptive nuclear attack, which had prompted the nuclear issue to arise.  The Council should also review the “UN Command”, which had nothing to do with the United Nations and the “UN Forces” who were United States troops.  The United States had “abused the UN name and flag for more than half a century to isolate and stifle” his country, he concluded.

YASHAR ALIYEV (Azerbaijan) urged the Security Council to be resolute and bolder in promoting and enforcing international law and restoring peace and security.  It should also be consistent in doing so to avoid shattering its credibility on charges of practicing “double standards” and using a selective approach.  Inaction or lack of sufficient action, on its part, in ensuring the implementation of its own decisions, sent a wrong and dangerous signal to the violators of justice and the rule of law, which led them to believe in their permanent impunity.  Thus, putting an end to that impunity should be the primary responsibility of the Council.  He, once again, drew attention to the four Council resolutions concerning the ongoing conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan, and called on the Council to implement its own decisions.

Speaking in favour of a stronger, more proactive and powerful Council, he stressed that unity, strong political will, increased efficiency and transparency were the key elements for attaining that goal.  In that context, he considered it crucial to attain more tangible progress on the question of equitable representation on and the increase in the membership of the Security Council.  He reiterated his support for the candidacies of Germany and Japan as new permanent members.  He also called for adequate Council representation for African, Asian and Latin American States.  Given the doubling in the number of States in the Group of Eastern European States, he believed it was necessary to increase the number of non-permanent seats for that group as well.

MIHNEA MOTOC (Romania) said the report had real potential to meet the information needs of the United Nations membership on issues related to international security.  He welcomed the improvement of the report, in terms of format and substance, and said that it also provided increased transparency and better reflection and analysis of Council activities.  New risks and threats to international security called for global approaches and solutions.  Globalization had become the main challenge to the adaptation of the United Nations and the Security Council to ongoing evolutions of political, economic and security realities.  The Council, he felt, provided the best suited institutional and conceptual framework to deal with most of the major challenges of globalization.  An increased role of the Council in dealing with the current complex international security environment required everyone to take up increased responsibilities.

He believed it was within everyone’s will and capacity to achieve a more effective and participatory Security Council.  The report was a “perfect mirror” for the significant increase in magnitude and objectives of United Nations peace missions.  Additionally, he observed that real progress had been achieved on many questions considered by the Council under its responsibility for maintaining international peace and security.  The more success stories that could be achieved, the more relevant and significant the Council could be.  While the engagement of the United Nations in so many areas of the world was evidence of the leadership and wide range of responsibilities that the Council could effectively assume, the situation in many parts of the world had seriously deteriorated over the past year.  As a result, efforts must be redoubled to put an end to ongoing conflicts.  He commended the Council’s progress in combating terrorism, the practice of thematic debates and the progress it had made in improving its working methods.

ALEG IVANOU (Belarus) reviewed the successes experienced by the Council in the area of peacekeeping within the past year, and said that the decision to lift the sanctions against Libya had been of particular importance.  Furthermore, the Council’s activities against terrorism were also laudable.  However, the Council had not fully lived up to international hopes with regard to the settlement of the Middle East conflict.  The Council had failed to agree on some important aspects, as a result of which, the violence between Israelis and Palestinians had continued.  Moreover, the lack of unanimity, with regard to Iraq, was worrisome and had called into question the ability of the Council to address such questions.

He was convinced that the Security Council should remain the central body for the maintenance of international peace and security.  Those actions that circumvented the Council, served to undermine international order.  To maintain its crucial role as the guarantor of peace and security, the Council must adapt to the new global environment, including through significantly increasing its membership, as well as the transparency and democracy of its decision-making.  Ten years after its establishment, the open-ended Working Group had made no real progress.  It was clear that the increase in membership was the sticking point.  He favoured a thorough reform, including through the addition of no fewer than

11 Council seats in both the permanent and non-permanent categories.  However, if no consensus could be reached on the expansion of the permanent membership, efforts should be concentrated expanding the non-permanent membership.

In addition, the scope of the veto should be limited, he continued.  It should also become part of Council practice to hold briefings at the level of foreign ministers on those issues of particular importance.  For its part, Belarus was prepared to cooperate constructively to elaborate decisions on the entire reform package.

ISMAEL A.GASPAR MARTINS (Angola) stated that peace was now a reality in his country.  One of the critical components of the implementation of the peace process was well advanced by August 2002 with the disarmament, demobilization and integration of former military personnel into the Angolan Armed Forces.  In the aftermath of a devastating and destructive war, the assistance of the international community integrated in a wider context of reconstruction for sustainable development, was the most important condition for success for countries, such as his, emerging from conflict situations.  Thus, he reiterated his appeal to the United Nations and to the international community to do their utmost to secure adequate resources to assist Angola and other countries emerging from conflict situations.

Despite significant progress, some issues on the Council’s agenda, like the situation between Israel and Palestine, clearly needed further attention, he said.  Resolution 1397 was a landmark resolution embodying a vision of two States, Israel and Palestine, living side-by-side within secure and recognized borders.  Yet, the Middle East crisis remained unsettled and, since March this year, was further aggravated by the Iraqi conflict.  The illicit trade of small arms and light weapons was yet another matter that deserved attention.  Arms embargoes helped to reduce the flow of weapons to targeted regions and groups, but did not address the issue of weapons already in conflict areas, he pointed out.  Therefore, disarmament, demobilization and reintegration programmes had to be addressed as a vital element to curb the illicit trade of small arms.

MILOS ALCALAY (Venezuela) said the Security Council report had raised great expectations in his delegation because Member States now had the opportunity to express their viewpoint, which was important for the functioning of the United Nations.  He welcomed the holding of thematic debates and the monthly “wrap-up” sessions, which were useful for States that were not members of the Council.  In addition, the Council should look at all issues, not just international peace and security, but also those that might arise in various organs of the Organization.  The Council should keep its priorities very clear, and not overload its agenda.

The situation in Iraq, the Middle East and combating terrorism had had an effect on the world, and thus on the Council, he stated.  Agreeing with the importance attached to those issues, he said they had underscored the importance of multilateralism.  Regarding Iraq, a broad and active presence of the United Nations was necessary and vital, ensuring territorial integrity and sovereignty.  Reaffirming that a position of peace was needed in the Middle East, he supported the right of the Palestinian people for self-determination.  A fair solution there would be rooted in Security Council resolutions.

Right of Reply

Speaking in exercise of the right of reply, the representative of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea said he categorically rejected the Republic of Korea’s allegations in reference to the nuclear issue on the Korean Peninsula.  The nuclear issue was the outcome of the United States’ hostile policy towards his country and was not, therefore, a matter to be handled by the Security Council.  His country did not care whether the Security Council discussed that issue or not.  But if the Council did handle it, it should with fairness call into question the United States’ responsibility as the chief party to blame in the outbreak of that issue.  However, the representative of the Republic of Korea had attempted to draw it into the Security Council.

His country, he said, wanted to take the opportunity to declare that it had fully implemented its obligations under the 1994 agreement with the United States, until it had withdrawn from the NPT.  Moreover, the Republic of Korea should know what would happen if the nuclear issue was brought into the Security Council.  He warned that it would not be beneficial for the Republic of Korea to attempt to put pressure on his country, following the direction of the United States.

The representative of Armenia said that the reference by the representative of Azerbaijan to so-called Armenian aggression was misleading.  The situation was a forced reaction to Azerbaijan’s own decision to use force to suppress the legitimate and just quest of the people of Nagorny-Karabakh to exercise their right to self-determination.  With regard to the Security Council resolutions of 1993, there had been a clear attempt by the representative of Azerbaijan to read and apply them selectively in a partial and self-serving manner.

Azerbaijan’s refusal to engage in direct negotiations with the elected representatives of Nagorny-Karabakh was one of the main impediments to the resolution of the conflict, he added.  The representative of Azerbaijan had continuously failed to acknowledge that his country had done exactly what the Security Council had called upon it to do:  to use its good offices to find a peaceful solution to the conflict.  He had attempted to discredit numerous efforts and initiatives undertaken by the co-chairs of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) Minsk Group -- the body entrusted with settlement of the conflict was regrettable.

The representative of Azerbaijan said that it was no surprise Armenia had reacted in such an inadequate manner to his statement.  He said he would have much appreciated being provided with at least one relevant argument on the issue.  However, while having no desire to be dragged into a useless and counterproductive exchange, he nevertheless reaffirmed that he viewed Armenia as an aggressor State because that country had violated the Charter, as well as fundamental principles of international law. 

Armenia had violated the territorial integrity and sovereignty of another Member State of the Organization and continued to occupy its territory, he added.  Armenia ignored the will of the international community and the Security Council, which in its resolutions had demanded the complete and immediate withdrawal of forces from Azerbaijani territory.  Among other things, Armenia had been responsible for acts of ethnic cleansing committed in Azerbaijani-populated areas of its own territory.  Having committed such crimes, Armenia still attempted to justify itself.  As for the Minsk Group, his country had been a supporter of it since the beginning.

The representative of Armenia said that Azerbaijan’s claim for “restoration of its territorial integrity” was historically, legally and politically deficient since Nagorny-Karabakh had never been part of that country.  The only time that Azerbaijan had enjoyed sovereignty over the autonomous region of Nagorny-Karabakh was during the Soviet regime, whose policy had been based on “divide and rule”.  Since the dissolution of the Soviet empire, the people of Nagorny-Karabakh had exercised their right to self-determination peacefully and in accordance with existing Soviet and international laws.  Calling on the representative of Azerbaijan to refrain from serving narrow political goals at the expense of falsifying the truth in the Assembly, he said his country remained determined to take all measures for a peaceful, negotiated outcome that ensured the people’s right to live free and secure in their homeland.

The representative of Azerbaijan said that he had nothing to add to his previous statement and advised the Armenian delegate to study the talking points touched on above.  On one point, he wished to add that his country had been recognized as a Member of the United Nations in 1992, within its present borders.  Armenia had, therefore, no basis to talk about the right of Nagorny-Karabakh to secede from Azerbaijan.

* *** *