Fifty-ninth General Assembly

Plenary

26^th & 27^th Meetings (AM & PM)

AS GENERAL ASSEMBLY CONTINUES DEBATE ON SECURITY COUNCIL REFORM, SPEAKERS

 

CALL FOR LIMITING USE OF VETO, WITH ITS EVENTUAL ELIMINATION

Amid the continued clamour today in the General Assembly by many speakers, including three permanent members of the Security Council, for comprehensive reform of that body, the issue of what many described as the “anachronistic” veto was frequently raised with some calling for immediate actions to begin limiting its use, followed by a gradual phasing out, leading to complete removal.

Close to 50 speakers put forth their views on the second day of the joint debate on the report of the Council and the question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of that body.  While some acknowledged that the report was a good compilation of resolutions and decisions, others lamented the lack of inputs of a more political and analytical nature, that would have contributed to a more informative and meaningful debate.  On the issue of Council expansion, proposals to include Germany, Japan, India, Brazil and an African country as new permanent members elicited wide support.

The victors of the Second World War, said Uganda’s representative, had created a privileged, five-member, veto-wielding club of their own, and it would take strong political will, particularly on the part of the permanent Council members, to effect the necessary changes.  He advocated creating new permanent seats without veto powers, along with an increase in non-permanent membership.  For pragmatic reasons, the status quo with regard to the veto should be maintained.  Delegations could begin expanding the Council along those lines next year, while also examining how the veto could be better used to serve world peace and security.  The final step would be the veto’s removal at the appropriate time.

Eritrea’s representative called for the progressive elimination of the veto, which had been a bane on the Council’s effectiveness, urging that process to begin so that there could be progressive adjustment to its inevitable elimination.  Echoing that sentiment, Senegal’s representative said the veto was discriminatory and anachronistic, and its use needed to be limited, if not eliminated.  He recommended an in-depth debate on the issue with the permanent Council members.

During today’s debate, three permanent Council members expressed clear support for reform of that body.  The representative of the Russian Federation noted that the current discussion vividly proved that the time for reform was at hand.  But the depth of the differences between Member States over the Council’s expansion could not be ignored.  The broadest possible consensus was key to the reform process.  He underlined that increases in any category had to involve both developed and developing nations, with equal rights and responsibilities being shared between them.

The representative of China, another permanent member, said the Council had an important role to maintain peace and security.  It should keep pace with the times and implement the necessary reforms.  The under-representation of developing countries in the Council must be prioritised and further improvements made to its working methods.  The issue of Council reform had been debated for over 10 years and now needed to be given a sense of urgency.  It was important to demonstrate the requisite political will and compromise to achieve the broadest possible consensus.

France’s representative, speaking for yet another permanent member, not only expressed his country’s full support for Council expansion in both categories, but also backed the candidatures of Germany, Japan, India, Brazil and an African country for permanent membership.  He also reaffirmed that France would continue to give its full support to efforts to improve the Council’s working methods and, thus, fulfil the aspirations of the broader membership of the Organization.

Also today, delegations were informed that, in a letter dated 11 October, the Secretary-General informed Assembly President Jean Ping (Gabon) that 13 Member States were in arrears under the terms of article 19 of the United Nations Charter.

[By the terms of that article, a MemberState which is in arrears in the payment of its financial contributions to the Organization shall have no vote in the Assembly if the amount of its arrears equals or exceeds the amount of contributions due from it for the preceding two full years. The Article goes on to state that the Assembly may, nevertheless, permit such a Member to vote if it is satisfied that that the failure to pay is due to conditions beyond the control of that country.] 

Member States currently in arrears are the Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Georgia, Guinea-Bissau, Iraq, Liberia, Malawi, Niger, Moldova, Sao Tome and Principe, Somalia and Tajikistan.

Also participating in today’s debate were the representatives of Paraguay, Viet Nam, Singapore, Venezuela, Federated States of Micronesia, Ukraine, Kyrgyzstan, Timor-Leste, Mongolia, Myanmar, Argentina, Palau, Germany, Italy, Mali, Cambodia, Greece, Croatia, Trinidad and Tobago, Djibouti, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Malaysia, Portugal, Dominican Republic, Samoa, Czech Republic, Spain, Ecuador, Papua New Guinea, Costa Rica, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Ireland, Nepal, Sweden, Cameroon, Gambia, Serbia and Montenegro, Chile, Malawi, Libya, Guinea and Kenya.

The Assembly will meet again at 11:30 a.m. tomorrow, 13 October, to continue its debate on matters related to the Security Council.

Background

The General Assembly met today to continue its consideration of the report of the Security Council, as well as the question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of that body and related matters.  (For background, see Press Release GA/10273 issued on 11 October.)

Statements

ANDREY DENISOV (Russian Federation) said reform of the Security Council needed to aim at making that organ more representative and more effective in its decision-making.  The current discussion vividly proved that the time for reform was at hand.  At the same time, the depth of persistent differences between Member States with regard to the broadening of the Council’s composition could not be ignored.  He was convinced that the attainment of the broadest consensus remained the key benchmark in the reform process, and States had a huge responsibility to maintain unity in the Organization.  Their task was to lay the groundwork for strengthening the Council, as the main organ at the forefront of maintaining international peace and security.

He affirmed Russia’s readiness to continue to work to find an optimal model for the Council’s future composition, with the understanding that an increase in any category had to involve both developed and developing nations, with equal rights and responsibilities being shared between them.  He also cautioned that an excessive broadening of the Council could have a negative impact on its work, with repercussions for international security.  He felt Germany, Japan, India, Brazil and an African country would be worthy candidates to fill permanent seats, if that category of membership was expanded.  Like others, he looked forward to receiving the recommendations of the High-level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change.

ZHANG YISHAN (China) said that at the core of the United Nations reform was reform of the Security Council.  The membership of the Organization had increased in the past decades, particularly with addition of developing countries.  The Council had an important role to maintain peace and security and should, therefore, keep pace with the times and implement the necessary reforms.  The under-representation of developing countries in that body must be prioritised. There must also be further improvements to the Council’s working methods and its transparency.  In that light, the proposal to hold regular meetings with the Presidents of the Council, the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council had been received positively.

The Assembly had been debating the issue of Security Council reform for over 10 years now, he noted.  The issue now needed to be given a sense of urgency.  It was important to demonstrate the requisite political will and compromise to achieve the broadest possible consensus.  A vote on the issue might provoke confrontation among Member States and be detrimental to the work of the Council, he warned.  China would play an active part in the relevant discussions and work with other parties to push reform of the Council forward.

ELADIO LOIZAGA (Paraguay) said that, while the two items on the agenda were introduced independently, they were closely related.  Both affected the hopes of the international community to see a more democratic and transparent Security Council, which could respond rapidly to new challenges and requirements in the maintenance of peace and security, in accordance with the Charter.  The presentation of the Council’s report was limited to compliance with procedural requirements and the structure did not allow for an analysis or a substantive assessment.  Such an assessment was necessary so that the Assembly’s debate could help the Security Council draw conclusions to move forward on their report to make it more analytical, instead of merely a historical summary.  Consideration of the report by Member States should not be a mere formality.

Member States, he continued, had the right and the duty to be informed and properly analyze the work of the Security Council, since the Council acted on their behalf and since its decisions affected the entire membership.  Therefore, he agreed with other members that the Council’s report should include a more interactive component with the Assembly.  He would support and encourage public meetings of the Council, which should be the rule and not the exception, so that Member States could express their viewpoints and those views could be borne in mind by Council members before the adoption of resolutions.

Member States agreed on the need to reform the Security Council and to increase its membership, but did not agree on the way forward.  He favoured an increase in the membership of the Council, bearing in mind today’s political reality, as well as the increase in the number of Member States in the Organization, in order to build a more democratic and representative Council.  Both permanent and non-permanent categories should be increased, and include developed and developing countries, taking into account that developing countries had been underrepresented in the body.  The question of the veto also needed to be considered, and its use limited with a view to its eventual elimination.  The first step was to limit its use to questions under Chapter VII of the Charter.  No reform in the United Nations, he added, would have the effect that all States desired if the long-waited reform of the Council did not happen.

LE LUONG MINH (Viet Nam) said the current structure and composition of the Security Council’s membership did not reflect today’s realities and limited its ability to effectively carry out its mandate.  In 1963, when that membership was enlarged to 15, the total membership of the United Nations was 112.  The Council’s members, therefore, represented 13 per cent of the Organization’s overall membership.  Today, with 191 Member States in the United Nations, Council membership only represented 7.85 per cent of the Organization’s members.  For that very reason, and for the manner in which the Council’s resolutions and negotiations were carried out, the legitimacy of the Council’s resolutions and decisions had been constantly questioned.  Reform of that body was urgent and inevitable, and must be carried out in a way that would make it more representative and more democratic.

His country shared the view of the majority of Member States that reform of the Council must include expansion of the Council’s membership, with due attention to the need to ensure more adequate representation by developing countries and improvement to its decision-making process.  He supported an increase in both categories of membership, as well as measures aimed at ensuring broader participation, more democracy, accountability and transparency in the Council’s work.  He also supported the aspirations of India, Japan and Germany for permanent membership and believed that other developing countries from different continents should also be able to join that category as well.  He also proposed that his country be considered as a candidate for a non-permanent seat on the Council in the near term.

VANU GOPALA MENON (Singapore) expressed concern that the vying for new permanent membership in the Security Council could foreshadow a fierce fight, something that small States like his would not support.  The world had changed since 1945 but the Charter and the composition of the Council, especially with regard to its permanent membership, remained essentially unchanged.  Currently, one nation wielded power far in excess of the power of all the other permanent members and all aspirants combined.  In order for the Council to be credible, it needed to be representative.  Some States had pointed to the trend of the increasing legislative role of the Council to argue that urgent expansion was needed.  However, what guarantee could small States have that an expanded Council would become more, and not less, open to consultation and taking into account the view of non-Council members?

Singapore was not against an expansion of the Security Council, he said.  On the other hand, what were necessary were clarity and agreement on the objectives of such an exercise and how to best go about expansion.  Unfortunately, that was not the case after 11 years of discussions in the Open-Ended Working Group.  If the aim was to be more credible, it was necessary to reform the Council in all aspects, including its working methods.  What mattered most to small nations was the Council’s effectiveness, transparency, and involvement of non-members when issues of interest were considered.  As such, there was no better way to induce good performance than a measure of transparency and accountability.  Regrettably, the Council, until lately, had moved in the opposite direction.  In conclusion, he said Singapore supported Japan and Germany as two candidates for permanent membership, adding that any expansion should feature both developed and developing nations, and be accompanied by an appropriate increase in non-permanent seats to maintain the current ratio of permanent to non-permanent seats.

JEAN-MARC DE LA SABLIÈRE, (France), affirmed his country’s intention to carefully study the recommendations of the Secretary-General’s High Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change in an open, sound and constructive manner.  Its decision would be based on consideration of the intended goals of strengthening the Security Council’s effectiveness as well as of ensuring equitable representation on the Council.

In that regard, France he noted had already expressed its full support for not only the expansion of the Security Council in both categories, but also backed the candidatures of Germany, Japan, India, Brazil and a representative from Africa to Security Council membership.  Further, he reaffirmed that his country would continue to give its fullest support to those efforts that aimed at improving the working methods of the Council and thus fulfilling the aspirations of the broader membership of the Organization.

FERMIN TORO JIMENEZ (Venezuela) said Venezuela fully agreed with the attention given to questions of threats to international peace and security, such as the situations in Iraq, the Middle East and Haiti, as well as the situation in Africa in general.  Those situations had not only marked the work of the United Nations this year, but had also highlighted the extreme importance of multilateralism and the urgent need to strengthen the role of the Organization.  He underscored the importance of the Security Council keeping its priorities defined and limiting itself to the functions and responsibilities granted to it under the United Nations Charter.  The Council should focus its actions on those situations that represented a clear threat to international peace and security, and avoid deliberations and decisions that might involve intervention in the internal affairs of States.

His country condemned terrorism in all its forms and manifestations, but he said it could not be vanquished by unleashing more terror.  It was necessary to go back to the causes of acts that were seen as terrorist, such as poverty and exploitation, which the majority of the world’s population continued to be subjected to.

On the question of equitable representation in the Security Council and the increase in membership, he reiterated that Venezuela believed that a reform of the Security Council must be seen through profound and structural change, which necessarily required the elimination of the right to veto.  Only in that way would there be true and positive meaning to multilateralism in its truest sense, as well as through an increase in membership.

JEEM S. LIPPWE (Federated States of Micronesia) said he was concerned that once again, the Assembly found itself discussing the question of equitable representation in the Security Council.  The topic had been on the agenda for years, but there had been no movement.  He joined others in calling for steps forward in that regard, as well as action towards wider United Nations reform.  He called on all Member States to give fresh consideration to the Council’s composition in light of present day realities, particularly in light of the body’s expanding role on the international scene.  With that in mind, an expanded, more balanced and representative Security Council would make its work and decisions more acceptable within the wider global community and also meet the expectations of the people of the world.

At the same time, the Council’s increase in membership should not hamper its effectiveness, he said.  But, in any expansion scenario, the developing world -- which had found itself marginalized in the current set up -- must hold an equitable number of seats.  Particular consideration must also be given to Japan, one of the largest contributors to the United Nations budget and a major participant in peacekeeping operations.  Any reform of the Council would be incomplete unless Japan was made a permanent member, he declared, adding that Germany and India deserved inclusion as permanent members of a reformed Council. He went on to say that discussion of wider United Nations reform should also be included giving due attention to removing obsolete provisions of the Charter.  In that regard, the time had come to remove “enemy state” clauses and designations.

VALERIY KUCHINSKY (Ukraine) said that the Security Council’s report to the General Assembly combined analytical components and profound factual material, adding to the promising tendency of the last several years of improving the quality of the annual guide to the Council’s activities.  During the period under review, from August 2003 through July 2004, the international community continued to face numerous daunting challenges, which directly related to the Security Council’s main sphere of responsibility, namely the maintenance of international peace and security.  The Council should continue to use its unique potential in mobilizing the international community to fight terrorism.  He noted that it had managed to overcome past differences over the Iraqi issue.  The Council, however, could do more than just hold monthly briefings and rare open debates in dealing with the crisis in the Middle East.

Commending the Council’s efforts in Afghanistan, he said the international community could not turn a blind eye to the lack of progress in the settlement of conflicts in the new independent states that emerged after the collapse of the Soviet Union.  He considered the Council reform as a process of exceptional international significance, and attached primary importance to the allocation of an additional non-permanent seat to the group of Eastern European States.  The interests of all regional groups should be taken into account in the process of the enlargement of the Council, he said, adding that he supported the increased representation in the Council of developing countries from Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean.

NURBEK JEENBAEV (Kyrgyzstan) said new measures were required so that the work of the Security Council could receive a breath of fresh air and it could react appropriately to new global realities.  Any organization could become outdated, and helping old parts to regenerate would help improve its ability to respond.  His country was ready to support the proposals to bring the United Nations in line with the new realities of the world.

He highlighted the position of Germany and Japan in the realm of international affairs, as well as their financial contribution to world issues.  On the occasion of its sixtieth anniversary, the United Nations should decide to include those two countries as permanent members of the Council.  His country also advocated expanding the Council’s membership to 25.  The Security Council should address issues of a global nature and avoid the lobbying of regional groups.

JOSE LUIS GUTERRES (Timor-Leste) said the peacekeeping mission in his country would be terminated next May.  He reiterated, however, that there was a continued need for the United Nations presence there to support the justice, finance and public sectors.  He went on to say that, on the eve of the sixtieth anniversary of the Organization, it had to be recognized that the world and its people had not experienced a massive global war.  But internal conflicts had ravaged many countries and millions of human beings had died while millions of others were still suffering.  The world had changed and there were new challenges and threats.  As such, the need for the Organization to adapt was well recognized.

He supported the Franco-German paper that proposed expanding the Council to 24 members.  Countries such as Japan and Germany from the developed world, as well as Brazil, Indonesia and India from the developing countries, should be allocated permanent seats on the Security Council.  He also supported the allocation of two more permanent seats to Africa.  As for the majority of medium-to-small countries –- non-candidates for permanent seats –- there was a need to continue the exchange of views to find ways to have the rights of those nations and their people represented and protected.

CHOISUREN BAATAR (Mongolia) said the Security Council needed a thorough reform if it was to continue in its role as the principal organ for effective multilateralism and deal with existing and emerging threats and challenges.  The Council should better reflect current world realities.  He stressed that enlargement was not a goal in itself.  There should be an increase in the number of both permanent and elected seats, while ensuring the representation of developing and developed nations.  It was hard to understand why Africa and Latin America did not have any permanent seats on the Council.  Likewise, he did not think it was just that Asia, with more than half of the world population, had only one permanent seat.  In addition, why should Japan, whose contribution to the United Nations budget exceeded that of four current permanent members combined, be denied permanent membership?

He supported the legitimate aspirations of nations such as Japan, Germany and India, who were willing and able to shoulder great responsibility in the pursuit of international peace, security and development.  The composition of the Council should be small enough to work effectively and large enough to duly represent the present membership.  If the general membership were rightly represented in the Council, its decisions would bear more legitimacy and credibility.  The veto power had been used more often for the defence of national interests of the permanent members rather than for the sake of a common cause, thus becoming an impediment to the effectiveness of the Council’s work. A comprehensive review of the veto power should, therefore, be one of the first priorities, and limiting its use to matters under Chapter VII deserved close attention.  He added that reform of the Council, and its empowerment, should be parallel, not in detriment to, the increased authority and role of the Assembly as the chief deliberative, policy-making body of the United Nations.

U WIN MRA (Myanmar) welcomed improvements in the Council’s working methods to promote transparency and accountability to the wider membership.  The increased use of public meetings; monthly meetings between the Presidents of the Assembly and the Council; consultations between the Council President and regional groups; and regular briefings by the Council’s Presidency for non-members had been cited among the improvements.  Recent consultations between some Council members and members of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) on the non-proliferation of weapons, and the participation of non-members in a meeting of the Council’s Working Group on Peacekeeping, were also considered positive developments.  Still, the report itself should be more comprehensive, substantive and analytical for better understanding of the Council’s work.

He welcomed the growing tendency to engage in thematic debates in the Council, which allowed for greater participation by Member States in discussions. However, thematic discussions carried out by the Council, especially on issues that did not fall within its mandate to maintain international peace and security, could be counterproductive.  With regard to Council reform, progress achieved in consideration of the Cluster II issues dealing with the Council’s working methods was an encouraging development.  He believed that the Council should be expanded in both the permanent and non-permanent categories to be more representative and reflective of contemporary political and economic realities.  The veto was considered to be anachronistic, discriminatory and undemocratic, he said, and its use should be curtailed with a view to its complete elimination.

CÉSAR MAYORAL (Argentina) said it was urgent to reform the Council, the main body entrusted with the preservation of international peace and security.  Given the many new and major challenges the world faced, it was clear that the Council, in its present form, was not well-adapted for the needs of today.  Thus, there could be no doubt about the necessity to reform that organ if the United Nations was to remain at the centre of the maintenance of global peace.  While reform proposals focused mainly on increasing the number of members in both categories of the Council’s membership, there was also a need for reforming the body’s working methods.  Such reforms would bring about more transparency and broader participation.

It was also urgent to make the Council more democratic, he continued.  While it was impossible to eliminate the veto completely, it was within the realm of possibility to limit its use under the Charter.  He stressed that any reform had to be in conformity with the goal of preserving international peace and security and, in that regard, he eagerly awaited the findings of the High-level Panel.  He also stressed the importance of having the Assembly play its rightful role in overseeing any proposed reforms.  The objective of Council reform was to ensure compliance with the Organization’s overall interest of collective security, thereby fulfilling the aspirations of the broader membership.  He urged the Organization to carry out the necessary reforms. 

Mr. BECK (Palau) urged the Assembly to reform the Security Council to reflect the realities of the international community in the twenty-first century. Palau believed that countries that consistently played a major role in the maintenance of international peace and security should participate in the decision-making processes of the Council.  The Council should be expanded to include developing and developed countries as new members.

While several countries, based on their active world leadership, large populations and geographic positions, were appropriate candidates for permanent membership in a reformed Security Council, he specifically wished to endorse Japan.  Japan’s record of contribution to the United Nations and its leadership in international initiatives for many years, he added, was a solid and undeniable basis for its assumption of permanent membership in the Council.

GUNTER PLEUGER (Germany) called for “bold and comprehensive” United Nations reform, which he believed should include, strengthening the Assembly; making use of the ECOSOC as the central decision-making organ on economic and social issues and as a partner with the Security Council in peace-building and peacekeeping; and opening the peacekeeping arena to a wider group of interested Member States. Reform of the Security Council was particularly important, as its responsibilities and competencies had increased.  The number of conflicts requiring the Council’s attention was also increasing, and in the coming years, the body would want to place even more emphasis on crisis prevention and peace-building.  That would require additional resources, as well as closer cooperation among Member States and between the United Nations organs.

At the same time, the Council had to deal with new threats and challenges such as failing States, terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.  The responsibility to protect, the legality of pre-emptive military action, the question of preventing impunity in cases of gross violations of human rights were also some of the issues that needed to be effectively addressed.  In that regard, he looked forward to the early December release of the High-level Panel’s report.  It was against that backdrop that the Council’s “1940’s era” structure needed to be changed, particularly towards enhancing its legislative legitimacy, and permanently including major resource providers and major regional players.  With that in mind, the Council’s composition should reflect the growth in the wider United Nations membership, by increasing the number of its permanent and non-permanent seats.

Decolonization and the end of the cold war, as well as the increase in Member States, should be reflected in the Council’s composition and working procedures.  Further, all regions of the South should be represented by permanent members, further enhancing the voice of the developing world.  Germany did not agree with those wishing to deny permanent seats to developing countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America because giving them non-permanent seats would only cement the Council’s outdated 1945 structure.  “Therefore, countries willing and able to make a particularly meaningful contribution to maintaining world peace should become permanent members”, he said.  That applied to major resource providers in the developed world, as well as major players from the South.  For all those reasons, Germany had decided to take on the responsibilities of permanent Council membership and supported the readiness of Brazil, India and Japan to do likewise. Finally, he stressed that it was particularly important that Africa would be adequately represented among the new permanent members.

PAUL BADJI (Senegal) said the quality of the current Council report more than expressed the wishes of the Member States for rapid reform of that body, both in terms of its composition and functioning.  The increase in the United Nations membership since the sixties coupled with a changing world called for turning the Council into a truly representative organ.  But the Council was a body frozen in time and procedure while international realities had undergone great changes.  Africa, with its 52 States, had already indicated its firm determination to play its part in a restructured Security Council.  In the Harare Declaration of June 1997, African States had advocated expanding Security Council membership to 26 -- with two permanent seats for Africa and five rotating non-permanent seats for the continent, based on criteria prescribed by those same African States.

The veto was discriminatory and anachronistic, he said.  Its use needed to be limited, if not eliminated under Chapter VII of the Charter.  An in depth debate should be taken up with the permanent members of the Council on that matter.  Another issue was the criteria to be met in order to become a member of the Security Council.  There were two issues:  one was the ability to contribute to peace and international security; the other was respect for regional and territorial representation.  Although Senegal had been a major provider of troops for peacekeeping missions, that in itself was a narrow criteria.  One also had to take into account other factors, such as the rule of law in countries.  Commenting on the relations between the Security Council and the Assembly, he said there was a worrying trend.  More and more, the Council, whose mandate was for peace and security, was becoming involved with issues that did not conform to its mandate. There was a need for a rebalancing exercise to determine the items that should be before the Council and those that should be before the Assembly.  He was determined to support all initiatives to meet the challenges of Council reform.

MARCELLO SPATAFORA (Italy) said that Member States had a vision, good suggestions and a sense of direction regarding the report of the Security Council.  There had definitely been an improvement as far as transparency, inclusiveness and accountability were concerned.  The High-level Panel would surely offer a meaningful contribution on Council reform.  Concerning equitable representation on the Council, he believed six principles were crucial for successful reform.  First, there should be broad consensus, meaning that any reform should not be divisive, so as to avoid disaffection and disengagement.  It was also necessary to address the current imbalance in the North/South presence in the Council.

He also urged comprehensiveness, in terms of a “package approach”, to not only strengthen the United Nations in the field of peace and security, but also to give priority to development.  Those two areas had to be addressed together within the framework of the Millennium Development Goals.  The principles of inclusiveness and accountability were also essential for successful reform.  The proposal to add new permanent members, even without veto power, entailed serious drawbacks, as it would be highly divisive among members and would establish a new layer of hierarchy in the Council.

Any proposal for reform, he continued, should focus on regional and geopolitical factors, and not on national interests.  Within a flexible approach, due consideration must be given to the concept of rotation among elected members on a given seat, not excluding the possibility of a longer duration and/or a more frequent presence in the Council than the one currently foreseen by the Charter.  Italy was also working to find ways and means to allow the European Union to speak in the Council with a single, more influential voice.  “To accommodate all the principles, values and needs, we will have to be flexible, with non-entrenched positions, with our minds open to new and bold scenarios of reform”, he added.

CHEICK SIDI DIARRA (Mali) said the vital issue of equitable representation on the Council was one of most difficult faced by the Organization.  Statistics indicated that the Council had often taken decisions that were detrimental to the other main organs of the United Nations, particularly the Assembly.  That was due to the historic imbalance in the Council’s membership.  Faced with such realities, it was important to keep the debate open.  Representation on the Council needed to be addressed as a matter of urgency. 

He supported proposals to enlarge the Council’s current composition in both categories, and believed that Africa, like other under-represented regions, needed to be adequately represented.  He cited the Harare Declaration, adopted by African leaders at their summit in 1997, which stated that the continent needed to be better represented, and required at least two permanent seats on the Council.  He felt that efforts to restructure the Council should be sustained, but not constricted by time constraints.  He added that the veto should only be used if it served the common interests of all Member States, and was done with the agreement of the Assembly.

SAR SAMBATH (Cambodia) said that it was inconceivable for the Council to function effectively and efficiently without changing its current composition, and increasing the number of permanent and non-permanent seats.  For the Council to maintain its relevance and credibility, it needed to evolve to complement the ever-changing world surrounding it.  Collective efforts should be focused to ensure that the Council was representative of the United Nations membership, and all Member States were able to voice their concerns and aspirations in matters related to world peace and security.

More balanced and comprehensive representation would lead to a better sense of ownership of the Council for all States, he continued.  That could be achieved by expanding the membership in both permanent and non-permanent categories.  He supported the candidacy of Japan, India and Germany as permanent members.  Now was the right time, he added, to propose the setting up of a mechanism of consultation among Member States to figure out the modality, criteria and guidelines for expanding the Council.

ADAMANTIOS VASSILAKIS (Greece) said he had been pleased to see the recent improvements in the Council’s working methods, including its readiness to be more open and to cooperate more closely with other parts of the United Nations system and with regional partners.  All that, along with improvements in the consultation process with the wider United Nations membership, had translated into, among other things, more open meetings and briefings, which allowed important exchanges of information between Council members and Member States.  He hoped such efforts would continue and lead to more transparency, as well as increase in the involvement of everyone in the Council’s daily work.

He said that Council reform was critical, particularly because that body had become more active and its decisions had such far-reaching consequences. Restructuring the Council was a vital part of overall the United Nations reform, he said, stressing, however, that no clear consensus had emerged on just how that would be done.  The Council could be strengthened, and could become more legitimate and accountable as well, by increasing both categories of membership, with an eye on the current international political environment.  Enlarging both the Council’s permanent and non-permanent membership should guarantee equitable geographical distribution and an enhanced voice for the developing world.

VLADIMIR DROBNJAK (Croatia) said that, through its actions, the Council was further strengthening its relevance in the field of international security and in legislative areas.  The latter was of increased interest as it went beyond the issue of Council membership, and should be comprehensively debated.  The Austrian initiative, therefore, to convene a panel on the question, “The Security Council as world legislator”, was particularly welcome.  He went on to say that the role of the Council required more transparent relations between that body and the Assembly, and called for a wide-ranging debate among the United Nations membership about reform of the Council and its strategic position in the years to come.

He supported enlarging the Council in both categories, and the formula for an additional nine seats seemed to be the most appropriate one.  Croatia strongly advocated an additional seat in the enlarged Council for countries from the Eastern European Group.  He was also open to other proposals on enlargement, providing they enjoyed support among Member States and respected the interests of the Eastern European Group.  He was fully aware of the legitimate interests of the biggest countries but, at the same time, emphasized the need to take into account the positions of the small countries, especially those who never had the privilege of serving on the Council.  They should be given priority in filling non-permanent seats in the future.

FRANCIS BUTAGIRA (Uganda) said that the Assembly’s current debate had turned into an annual ritual and, despite a decade-old resolution, establishing the Open-ended Working Group on equitable representation on the Security Council, the only achievement had been for the Assembly to “remain seized of the matter”.  It was now time for delegations to act, and hopefully come up with recommendations on the size of an expanded Council during the current Assembly session.  The victors of the Second World War had created a privileged, five-member, veto-wielding club of their own, and it would take strong political will, particularly on the part of the permanent Council members, to effect the necessary changes.

Regarding the emergence of possible candidates for seats on an expanded Council, he rejected the “uncomfortable” notion of perhaps creating another class of privileged Council Members -- this time based on economic might.  He urged delegations to be logical and practical when considering the restructuring of the Council.  He favoured creating a category of permanent members without a veto, along with an increase in non-permanent membership.  For the former category, Africa should be entitled to at least two seats.  Other developing countries should also be represented.  With regard to the veto, for pragmatic reasons, the status quo should be maintained.  Delegations could begin expanding the Council along those lines next year, while at the same time closely examining how the veto could be better used in the service of world peace and security.  The final step in the overall process would be considering the removal of the right of veto at the appropriate time.

PHILIP SEALY (Trinidad and Tobago) said the report of the Open-Ended Working Group reflected in a very substantive way the extent of the exchanges of the view among delegations on the six points that were systematically addressed.  Those exchanges revealed, however, the complex nature of the subject matter under discussion, as well as the wide divergence of opinion that continued to exist among Member States on almost every aspect of those topics.  It was necessary to manage the process of ensuring further progress toward a conclusion of the discussions on key issues.  It was also necessary for the Council to regain the confidence of States and world public opinion.  Trinidad and Tobago believed that what the international community had to seek to achieve in any reform of the Council was the multilateralism of the international security policies of states and the avoidance of the marginalization of the Council in matters relating to threats to international peace and security.

In undertaking Council reform, he continued, the international community would need to address the composition of the Council, its decision-making and its working methods.  While some progress had been made with respect to the latter, the other two areas still presented difficult choices.  Any Council reform must, result in a change in its composition so as to reflect more adequately not only the current global geopolitical realities and so the Council could become more representative of the vast majority of Member States.  Furthermore, any reform of the veto power would firstly require an honest analysis by the permanent five of the use to which that veto power had been put, and whether such use had contributed to or further endangered the maintenance of international peace and security.

ROBLE OLHAYE (Djibouti) said that the transparency of the Council’s work had been on the rise over the past few years.  However, it needed to be encouraged to do more, as the wider membership still found the consultation process quite sketchy.  If the world was to act collectively against dangers, perhaps the only existing mechanism available to nations, and which conferred legitimacy, was the United Nations.  Where action needed to be taken in conflict situations, it usually was done so through the Security Council.  As presently constituted, however, the Council was not a representative body and continued to be a legacy of the Second World War.  There had been little or no change, since its inception, in its structure or power base, particularly on such issues as permanent membership or the veto.

There was obviously an urgent need, he said, for an inclusive Council that seriously took into consideration the interests of both developed and developing States.  The Council’s powers, membership and composition must better reflect the reality of today’s demographic, economic and political world, if it was to slow the erosion of legitimacy it had suffered from the vast numbers of excluded States.  The Council also needed to have greater sensitivity toward poor countries that were embroiled in brutal conflicts, and which required urgent attention in the area of peacemaking and peacekeeping.

ALOUNKEO KITTIKHOUN (Lao People’s Democratic Republic) said that it had been 12 years since the Working Group on equitable representation had been created, and far too much time had passed without any real forward movement on substantive issues.  Many delegations were becoming concerned, and in light of the Security Council’s increasing workload and expanding reach, it was incumbent upon all States to ensure that efforts to reform the body moved ahead apace.  He favoured an increase in the Council’s permanent and non-permanent members, in accordance with the principle of equitable geographical distribution, and supported the formula by which Japan, Germany and India would become members in an expanded Council.

He went on to say that overall reform should also include measures that would make the Council’s working methods and decision-making processes more transparent.  That would not only boost the confidence of Member States, but also allow everyone to better understand, and support, the Council’s decisions.  He stressed that the right of veto retained by the Council’s permanent members, was being increasingly abused.  It had become an anti-democratic and discriminatory tool.  Owing to the sensitivity of the subject, he hoped that Member States could together work out a solution to the veto question.  Much had changed since 1945 and the Council should adapt to those changes.  Tireless efforts and compromise would make the body more effective and legitimate.

RASTAM MOHD ISA (Malaysia) said the Council’s report had shown a significant improvement in that body’s methods of work.  However, it continued to lack a substantive and analytical account of the Council’s work.  The incorporation of more details and analyses, beyond a factual account of the Council’s work, would certainly help the wider United Nations membership appreciate the circumstances that had influenced the decisions of the Council on a particular issue.  That would also enable a greater appreciation of the achievements made or difficulties faced by the Council on all questions under its consideration, and would allow non-Council members to offer suggestions on possible measures to further improve the Council’s work.

He urged the Council to respect the wishes of Member States to express their views publicly in the Council, particularly on issues of wider concern to all, such as international terrorism and weapons of mass destruction.  On the important questions related to international peace and security, everyone was a stakeholder, he said, and that was especially so in the case of the Council’s work concerning the fight against international terrorism.  As the number of Member States, and with it the proportion of developing countries, had increased dramatically, the representation of the Council needed to be enhanced.  He believed that the exercise of the veto by the permanent members should be regulated, so as to prohibit the use of that power unjustly to overrule the wish of the majority.

GONCALO DE SANTA CLARA GOMES (Portugal) said that the need to reform the United Nations had become imperative.  Welcoming some recent improvements in the Council’s working methods, he said the world needed a Council that was representative, effective and transparent.  The international community, on whose behalf the Council acted, needed to feel it was a part of its deliberations.  The Council’s membership had to reflect today’s international realities, which differed significantly from the context in which the Organization was created nearly 60 years ago.

Portugal had already expressed its supported for the presence of Brazil, Germany and Japan in the Council, and believed that Africa deserved a permanent presence.  The enlargement of the Council’s permanent membership had to be accompanied by a revision of the voting procedures, contained in article 27, regarding the veto.  Retaining that power, as it was, would be detrimental to the effectiveness and legitimacy that everyone sought to increase with a wider representation.

The United Nations reform had to include more effective mechanisms and practises in the area of conflict prevention, which was also a major responsibility of the Council, he said.  In that regard, Portugal had proposed the establishment of a Peace and Development Commission, whose aim was to address conflict prevention in a more effective and comprehensive way, especially regarding countries emerging from conflict and with weak institutions.  The Charter had defined conflict prevention as one of the main goals of the United Nations.  Thus, he believed Portugal’s proposal would significantly contribute to reinforcing the central and crucial role the Organization had to play in international affairs.

ENRIQUILLO DEL ROSARIO CEBALLOS (Dominican Republic) said the United Nations, forged nearly 60 years ago in the ashes of war and remained the ideal instrument for the international community to prevent conflict or to restore peace.  Believing wholeheartedly in the real value of this august body, he joined others in their call for ensuring that the Organization was able to better address modern realities.  That would require the determination to shepherd in an era of real change, which should begin with the expansion in both categories of membership in the Security Council.  As that body’s workload increased, it was necessary to ensure that it became more representative of the wider international community.  That included allocating seats to the Asian, African and Latin American regions.  It was time to ensure that this most active United Nations organ was more democratic and brought on board all those parties that were active in and dedicated to the maintenance of international peace and security.

ALI’IOAIGA FETURI ELISAIA (Samoa) said that while some previous speakers had lamented the absence of an analytic assessment in the Council’s report, he believed that the real and significant value of the report was the opportunity it afforded the United Nations membership to gain an insight into the Council’s work and deliberations.  The workload of the Council was steadily on the increase, and that was partly attributable to the trend of the Council to deal with thematic topics that more appropriately fell under the purview of the Assembly.  There was a pressing need to demarcate the division of responsibilities between the Council, the General Assembly and other organs of the United Nations, such as the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), to eliminate conflicting mandates, duplication of efforts and the wasting of limited resources.

Urging that there be a more structured approach to allow Member States to contribute in an effective manner to the decision-making process, he said that was necessary to encourage wider ownership of decisions taken and to facilitate their timely implementation.  Samoa continued to actively support the enlargement of the Council in both the permanent and non-permanent categories.  The expansion of the Council was both necessary and desirable to mirror present day realities and to enhance its effectiveness and legitimacy.  He also continued to support the inclusion of Japan and Germany as permanent members, because of their invaluable contribution to the international community.  The almost four-fold increase in the Organization’s membership over its 59-year history, he added, made it imperative that the expansion of the Council’s permanent membership included representatives from the regions of Asia, Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean.

AMARE TEKLE (Eritrea) said it was not difficult to conceive of situations in which the security of a State’s citizens might actually be threatened by their living conditions.  Security must be viewed as going beyond military threats and include socio-economic, environmental and political dimensions, as well as the links between them.  Human beings must be the critical core of concern.  It was evident that the Security Council had not been prepared to cope with new threats to international peace and security.  While the Council had contributed to the conclusion of the Iran/Iraq war, Namibian independence and conflict resolution in Central America, Afghanistan and Cambodia, it was having difficulties in meeting the challenges of terrorism, transnational crime and intra-State conflicts.  And when the United Nations had found it expedient to involve itself in such conflicts, new questions arose related to the criteria for intervention and the reluctance of major powers, particularly the Council’s permanent members, to subordinate their interests to the wider interests of peace and security.

He was convinced that for any reform to be effective, the Council must benefit from the trust and confidence of Member States by representing all; ensure that its decisions were anchored in the rule of law, the Charter and other international instruments; honour treaty agreements to which the United Nations was party; ensure that its members, particularly the permanent ones, overcame the restrictive effects of their national interests and faithfully executed the collective responsibility of guarding international peace and security in all parts of the world without fear or favour; and benefit from the contributions of non-members in such matters as conflict preventions, peace-making, peacekeeping and post–conflict confidence building.  He supported the position of the Non-Aligned Movement on the expansion of permanent and non-permanent categories, as well as on the progressive elimination of the veto, which had been a bane on the Council’s effectiveness.  The process to eliminate the veto must begin, so that there could be progressive adjustment to its inevitable elimination.

HYNEK KMONICEK (CzechRepublic) said that more than 11 years had passed and the Open-ended Working Group had been unable to come up with a realistic, politically acceptable solution to strengthen the role and functioning of the Security Council.  He advocated the enlargement of the Council in both categories, with five additional permanent seats and four to five additional non-permanent seats.  The criteria for selecting new permanent members should reflect the overall influence of candidates on world affairs.  His nation supported the aspirations of Germany and Japan for permanent seats, as well as the allocation of three new permanent seats for Africa, Asia and Latin America.  There was no doubt that new permanent members from among the developing countries would help to increase the credibility of the Council.  With regard to the veto, he favoured a reduction in areas where the veto could be applied, possibly through voluntary commitments by permanent members.  He concluded by saying the Council should be adjusted to reflect the current state of affairs.

JUAN A. YÁÑEZ-BARNUEVO (Spain) said that the Council’s report contained elements of great interest for the members of the Organization, which would enable them to better evaluate the Council’s work.  However, he was aware, as other delegations had noted, of the fact that the report should be an even more substantive and analytical instrument, which promoted a debate on how to improve the Council in the future.  The Council had progressed notably on the transparency of its working methods and a closer exchange with other members of the Organization, but more should be done about public meetings of the Council with the effective participation of the greatest number of interested parties.  Spain would support efforts to advance the revitalization of the Assembly, and believed it was necessary to think in depth about reforming the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) and the Security Council, as well as about adjusting the entire United Nations system, in line with new challenges.

Reforming the Security Council was of particular importance, he continued, but it should not be the overall broader reform that the Organization required, and that broader reform should not be held hostage.  Spain would like reform to be brought about with the broadest possible consensus of Member States.  His delegation would support an increase in the non-permanent category, thus making the Council more democratic.  Spain was not in favour of increasing the number of permanent members, with or without veto power, but it was prepared to consider formulas that might make it a possibility in some circumstances to enable a country to remain longer at the Council table.

His country also supported the possibility of limiting the veto of the permanent members to prevent any single country from blocking the work of the Council.  Another possibility would be restricting the veto to decisions that fall under Chapter VII of the Charter, or to have it imposed by at least two members to prevail.  Spain was also in favour of enhancing the relationship and exchange of information between the Assembly, the Security Council and the ECOSOC, and supported an enhanced dialogue between the Council and a broader society.

LUIS GALLEGOS CHIRIBOGA (Ecuador) said that the world had changed dramatically since the United Nations and its Security Council had been created. The world was facing new threats and challenges of a transnational nature, which made international cooperation essential.  Reforming the Council involved reforming the Charter, he continued.  Increasing the number of Council members was a step in the right direction but it was not enough.  Member States must work to ensure the type of comprehensive reforms that would not only make the Council more representative, but also ensure that its decisions were respected.  Reform must also seek out a new definition of the right of veto.  He believed that such power should not exist in an Organization that had been founded on the principle of democracy.  He added that the threat of the use of the veto was essentially a threat to the equality of States and must be removed.  The Council must also avoid drifting into legislative exercises that were not in its purview.

ROBERT GUBA AISI (Papua New Guinea) said that while the issue of increased representation on the Council was not a new one, the matter had been elevated and the international community had been made aware of the importance of instituting reforms.  While no world wars had been experienced since the last one that led to the birth of the United Nations, many trouble spots and conflicts that had arisen since then had highlighted the need for shared responsibility among the international community to meet new challenges successfully.

The Council needed to be more representative of today’s realities, he continued.  In addition, all regions needed to be fairly represented.  Asia, Africa, Latin America and Eastern Europe each deserved seats on the Council, in both categories.  Otherwise, every MemberState would not have the chance to become a member of the Council, as witnessed over the last 50 years.

BRUNO STAGNO UGARTE (Costa Rica) urged the Security Council to ensure that its annual report was a more concise and analytical document.  On the work of the major organs of the United Nations, he stressed that it was the Assembly that had the ability and duty to express the firm and definitive opinion of all the countries in the world.  While Costa Rica approved in general terms the important work undertaken by the Council last year, it would have hoped that body would have acted more decisively on matters related to the ongoing violence in the Middle East, and that it would have consulted with regional organizations on the situation in Haiti before decisions had been made.

He also urged the Council to heed the appeal of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and enshrine fundamental rights as the cornerstone of the international fight against terrorism, particularly the principles of due process and non-refoulement.  And while he welcomed the important work being done in the Council’s Counter-Terrorism Committee (CTC), he believed that entity deserved to become a permanent part of the United Nations system, handled by a professional independent body.  Costa Rica also reiterated its call for the creation for the establishment of a United Nations high commissioner against terrorism.

He went on to say that Council reform meant fully implementing the principles already enshrined in the Charter, such as sovereign equality among all States and equitable geographical distribution and representation.  No one could deny the abiding imbalance in the Council’s current membership.  The reform process had bogged down on matters related to the creation of new permanent seats -– based on contribution to the budget, participation in peacekeeping, and economic development.  But when those criteria were weighed equally, several dozen nations would quite legitimately deserve to be permanent Council members.  He supported increasing the number of elected members, and would call for the prompt creation of 10 new non-permanent seats, three of which would be allocated to Africa, with another three allocated to Asia, one for Eastern Europe, one for the Western European Group and two for Latin America.  States should consider, in the future, the creation of more permanent seats.

IGOR DZUNDEV (The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) welcomed the increased holding of open meetings by the Council, which improved the quality and transparency of its work and would contribute to its decision-making process.  He stressed the importance of the Council having early consultations with Member States before taking decisions that affected them.  That practice not only contributed to the better understanding of the Council’s work but also contributed to greater compliance by members with its decisions.

The practice of open meetings was evidence of changes in the Council’s working methods, he said.  The fact that the world was changing and that the Organization was faced with new challenges justified reforming the Council to become more credible and representative.  The Council had to be reformed through increasing its membership from both developing and developed countries, to ensure not just better geographical representation but also to strengthen it in substance.  He cautioned that the expanded role and membership of the Council should not take away from the Assembly’s important role and make it less visible.  Therefore, the role of the Assembly itself needed to be strengthened, as did that of the Economic and Social Council.

SEAN MCDONALD (Ireland) said whatever the size and composition of the Security Council, the obligation of Member States to comply with the decisions of that body vis-à-vis the maintenance of international peace and security was still a bedrock of the collective security system.  That system needed to be strengthened through more substantial and meaningful cooperation between the United Nations membership, the General Assembly and the Security Council.  Although the current report of the Council was a useful route to be pursued, it lacked the elements of a more political and analytical focus which would contribute to a more informative and meaningful debate.  The need for such substantive deliberation was all the greater given that the Council interpretation of international peace and security had broadened and moved into semi-legislative areas.

“As we move further unto this more complex field, which has implications for the citizens of the Member States… we have greater need for a methodology that enables each Member States to explain clearly the whys and wherefores of decisions made in New York in a manner which our electorates can comprehend”, he continued. In that respect, the annual debate in the Assembly should afford the membership the opportunity to have the necessary discussions on the strategic direction of the Council.  It was even more the case that there was a need to foster a broader sense of both ownership and responsibility which could be shared by all members of the United Nations.  Realistically, that could only be brought about by a year-round effort by the Council to involve all Member States in its ongoing work.  His delegation was ready to support practical steps which might be taken to better engage all the membership in all aspects of the work of the Organization.

MURARI RAJ SHARMA (Nepal) said Nepal commended the improvements included in the report of the Security Council, and encouraged the Council to redouble its efforts to make its reporting richer in substance and more user friendly in approach.  The report, however, remained a far cry from the reasonable expectations of non-Council members that it should provide deeper, analytical insight into the workings of the Council.  The Council should not rest on its laurels, because there was still a profound need to improve transparency, efficiency and effectiveness in the work of the Council.  The Council could not fulfil its objectives by itself and had to rely on goodwill, support and compliance from the broader international community to do its job well, and should therefore reach out to all members and let them participate in the decision-making process at different stages.

Peacekeeping operations were a case in point, he continued.  It was a matter of serious concern that, of late, members of the Security Council, particularly permanent members, had little or no troops deployed in peacekeeping missions, though they enjoyed the permanent membership and veto power on the presumption that they would be the kingpins in maintaining international peace and security. Nepal urged the permanent members of the Council to make sizeable troop contributions to the United Nations peacekeeping operations.  He said Nepal believed that Member States must agree on all six areas the working group had identified –- size of the Council, regional representation, criteria, relationship between the General Assembly and the Council, accountability, and use of the veto -– to arrive at a viable consensus for the Council’s reform.  Small States should be able to contribute to the work of the Council, and in an expanded Council that must be ensured.

ANDERS LIDÉN, (Sweden), declaring his country a strong supporter of Security Council reform, said he believed that as the world changed, so should the Council.  It had to manage that change in order to stay relevant, representative and efficient.  Its composition had to be adapted to mirror today’s world and address the current global challenges.  Noting that the debate on Council reform had been going on for over a decade, he said that with the Organization’s sixtieth anniversary approaching, it was time the world body reached some agreement, failure to do could mean failure for a long time to come.

Fortunately, he said, some progress had been recorded in the debate, because to the establishment of the High Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Changes.  He was hopeful that the Panel’s recommendations in December would be concrete, creative and bold.  Those recommendations needed to provide members with the impetus to build consensus on the main reform of the Council, and to pave the way for a formal decision at the next session of the General Assembly.

MARTIN BELINGA-EBOUTOU (Cameroon) stressed that the Security Council’s work should reflect the discussions that had taken place in the General Assembly on important international issues.  He proposed that when the Assembly’s debate on Security Council reform came to an end, the General Committee should summarize the statements and discussions -- for the Council’s benefit and subsequently for discussion during a Council meeting.

On the Council’s overall work during the past year, he noted that Africa remained its number one concern.  With the exception of a few countries, Africa was now enjoying relative political stability, and, he welcomed the work undertaken by regional organizations and the African Union.

Turning to Security Council reform, he said the issue had been on the Assembly’s agenda for more than ten years, and the people of the world were eagerly waiting to see if they would ever see the light of day.  Member States were duty bound to act.  Cameroon supported the increase in both levels of Council membership; it also looked forward to the recommendations of the High-level Panel to lend substance to the debate.  Reform must also take into account the legitimate desire of all states -- rich and poor, large and small -- to serve the cause of peace.

He said he had heard that some doubted that an expanded Council could make decisions quickly and resolutely.  He believed that view was one of the excuses used to sidestep, or put off, reforming the Council.  It was not speed that always counted most, he said.  It was more the efficacy of the decision.  At any rate, that assumption would suggest that the Council, in its current make-up, had always made its decisions quickly and promptly.  Cameroon stood ready to work with all States seeking to make the Council, as well as the wider United Nations, more equitable and representative.

CRISPIN GREY-JOHNSON (Gambia) said the report of the Security Council showed how fully engaged the Council had remained with all of the key issues.  He urged the Council to act with urgency and more aggressively to bring the situation regarding the Israeli-Palestinian question under control, because there was no doubt that that issue was what inspired and drove a number of other conflict situations elsewhere.  He also noted with satisfaction the ending of the occupation of Iraq, and the Council’s achievements in Africa.  An area of concern, he said, had to do with the need to realign militaries in post-conflict situations to the peacetime needs of their countries.  Countries emerging out of conflict should be assisted to restructure their armed forces and scale them down to fit the needs of a country at peace, and the Council should pay urgent attention to that issue.

There was a general agreement among all Member States, he continued, that the present composition of the Security Council did not mirror current global realities, or even the present pattern of membership of the United Nations.  He reiterated, once more, the position of the African Union, that Africa must be represented in the permanent category and have its representation in the non-permanent category increased.  Countries such as Japan, with important contributions to the operations of the Organization, must also be considered for a permanent seat in the Council, he added.

NEBOJSA KALUDJEROVIC (Serbia and Montenegro) said the world had changed to the point where reform was necessary in the United Nations, in particular the Security Council.  That implied a more equitable representation and a more balanced participation among developed and developing countries.  It was necessary to take into account those nations that made the greatest contribution to the Organization, especially in the area of peacekeeping operations.  At the same time, it should also be considered that an overwhelming majority of nations, including the newly-established ones, should be adequately represented, so as to avoid exclusiveness in the decision-making process.  He strongly believed that the Group of Eastern European States should be granted one more non-permanent seat on the Council.  Transparency in the Council’s work was highly relevant to the strengthening of international solidarity, as well as to creating a more efficient system of collective security, in accordance with the Charter.

CRISTIÁN MAQUIEIRA (Chile) said that as the President of Chile had said during the general debate, if Member States wanted to strengthen multilateralism, United Nations reform was increasingly necessary.  A more representative Security Council, on which Member States could rely, as well as a more efficient and effective one, was needed in order for the Council to be more democratic.  Also necessary, however, was a thorough reform of the Organization, and statements from other delegations confirmed that such a reform was timely from the political perspective.  The reform of the Council should not serve as a pretext to distract Member States from the rest of the reforms required to strengthen multilateralism within the Organization.  The Organization must reflect political realities.  The Council and the other main bodies of the system all needed to be adjusted to be more functional, he said, and their agendas had to be streamlined.

Similarly, he continued, the relationship between the Council and the other principal organs should be examined, and it was important to consider the relationship between the global and the regional as covered by Chapter VIII of the Charter.  Member States had to look at the functioning of the Council in sensitive areas, such as in its responsibilities to protect and in terms of preventive action.  Those aspects must be regulated and guidelines must be provided to ensure the Council’s effectiveness.  Chile supported an expansion in both permanent and non-permanent categories in order to facilitate the greatest possible participation of developing countries.  Chile also supported limiting the veto, as well as deepening the transparency in the relationship between the Council and other bodies in the system.  Reforming the Council, he added, could not be reduced to mere numbers of members, and as an expansion was pondered, diversity, the veto, and the powers of the different types of members had to be considered.

BROWN CHIMPHAMBA (Malawi) said that, under the Charter, the Security Council contributed to the resolution of conflicts and to the creation of conditions for sustainable peace, in particular through the establishment of peacekeeping operations.  But as the Organization approached its sixtieth anniversary, some of the principles and norms of the Charter reflected the realities of a specific historical moment, not the radically changed international environment of today. So the necessity for change was more than apparent for Member States and everyone must now consider how to initiate such change and build consensus.

Today, the United Nations was almost four times larger than when it had been created.  The Organization had now become truly global.  But with that change, the current make-up of the Security Council had come under scrutiny and had been criticized as not being representative of the Organization’s universal character. It had been said that the Council did not reflect the current distribution of power on the international scene.  Thus, the majority of Member States believed that the legitimacy of the body’s decisions had been weakened because of questionable representation.  There was also a strong belief that the Council should be expanded, and Malawi believed that that body, as one of the principle organs of the United Nations, was long overdue for such reform and expansion.

AHMED OWN (Libya) criticized the Council’s report for not providing detailed information about the recommendations regarding its decision-making process.  Before that body initiated consultations, there needed to be discussions with the Assembly, which represented all the Member States.  In addition, the Council should promote cooperation with all States by expanding its relations with regional organizations.

Further, he urged both the Council and the Assembly to work together on matters that were under their consideration, and called on the Council to move away from the practice of double standards.  The Council should also shift away from the practice of appearing to carry out only the wishes of those who wanted to use it.  No single State or group of States should be given the authority of decision-making at the expense of the rest of the membership.  Such a trend only increased the cynicism towards the United Nations as a whole.

Regarding expanding the Council’s membership, he said there was no need to have permanent members if their position was merely to advance the interests of a few.  That could have only one result, which was that the stronger and the richer would continue to have their way in the decision-making.  Africa, though representing one-third of the Organization’s membership, did not have a permanent seat on the Council.  That imbalance had to be corrected urgently, as it contradicted the principles of the Charter and undermined the tenets of democracy. It was also necessary to at least limit the use of the veto, applying it only after the approval of the Assembly.  Any attempt to reform the Organization would not succeed without the comprehensive reform of the Council, which could only happen with the cooperation of all Member States.

ALPHA IBRAHIMA SOW (Guinea) said that the preparations for the Organization’s sixtieth anniversary provided an opportunity to ensure that its main bodies, particularly the Security Council, were more effective and had greater legitimacy.  As the revitalization debate moved forward, Guinea would encourage Member States to continue the discussions on Security Council reform, in order to dispel the image of a body that was opaque and not acting in the best interest of the wider international community.  Overall, Guinea supported the proposal that Africa be allotted two permanent seats and five-non permanent seats in an expanded Security Council.

He noted that the initial steps towards reform would involve all Member States agreeing on the value of, and the need for, equitable geographical representation in all United Nations bodies.  Among other things, States would then need to decide on how long newly-elected members would serve and then agree on conditions for the exercise of the veto.  All those changes would make the Council better able to address modern threats and challenges.  He urged Member States to put aside their special interests in order to ensure a better and more effective Council.

JUDITH MBULA BAHEMUKA (Kenya) said that the time had come for a realistic approach to be adopted in dealing with issues related to the reconfiguration of the Security Council to enable it to meet new and evolving global challenges.  Over the past two decades, the Council’s reaction to conflict flare-ups in various parts of the world had been slow.  More often than not, the Council had stood by as the world witnessed massive killings and untold human suffering, as occurred in Rwanda and Yugoslavia.  At times, the Council had been reduced to the status of an observer with the less honorable task of counting the dead before timidly taking action.  Her delegation was trying to envisage a Security Council that would be able to forestall conflicts by effectively establishing a tangible early warning mechanism, a system that would be dynamic and foolproof at the same time.

She said that care should be taken to avoid Council expansion for the sake of expansion.  Much thought should be put into how an expanded Council could most effectively and efficiently face the challenges brought about in a rapidly changing world.  She supported the position of the African Union and its request for two permanent, and five non-permanent, seats in the Council.  A more transparent, accountable and democratized Council with a universal approach to issues of international peace and security, she added, would be more effective despite prevailing circumstances.

* *** *