press conference by nigeria’s foreign minister

The African States would be willing to negotiate possible changes to their draft proposal on Security Council expansion with ministers of the Group of 4 (G-4), Nigerian Foreign Minister Oluyemi Adeniji said at a Headquarters press conference this afternoon.

Responding to a correspondent’s question, the Minister, whose country holds the African Union Chair, added that one did not submit a draft to 191 Member States on a take-it-or-leave-it basis, because that was a prescription for killing the proposal.

Regarding the Algerian Permanent Representative’s apparent rejection of a compromise with the G-4 in the General Assembly, he said that while Algeria was currently a member of the Security Council, it chaired neither the African Union nor the African Group.  The Permanent Representative of Mauritius, as Chair of the African Group, was its authoritative voice in New York, and by extension that of the African Union, and he had not mentioned such negotiations in his address to the Assembly.  Any other delegation had spoken on its own behalf.

Asked by another journalist if the African Union was absolutely committed to the veto or whether that question was up for negotiation, Mr. Adeniji said everything in the African draft resolution was the result of a consensus position agreed upon in March and more recently at last week’s African Union Summit in Sirte, Libya.  Though the draft had been submitted to the Secretariat, the African Group had to listen to others, which was why negotiations were being conducted with other groups.  Africa could not take an a priori position until it had heard the concerns and observations of others, as well as their feedback and advice.  It lacked the weight to carry a resolution by itself.

Did Nigeria see its large Muslim and Christian populations as an asset or a liability in terms of its candidacy for a permanent Security Council seat? another correspondent asked.

The Minister, pointed out that Nigeria was basically a secular State and that religion was a personal matter.  Some Nigerian families had Muslim as well as Christian members, while those of an older generation adhered to traditional beliefs.  Religion was really a non-issue that should not be emphasized.

He added that the African Union had indicated a clear wish to designate two candidates for permanent seats.  Uppermost in the minds of the Heads of State would have been which two countries would best promote the totality of Africa’s interests, rather than just a single issue.

How could the G-4 or any other negotiating partner be certain that the African Union would stay united behind one position, given the different attitudes of some ambassadors? another journalist asked.

Mr. Adeniji said that one had to speak to those with the mandate to talk for Africa, but listening to an individual country’s position as espoused by its representative was sure to sow confusion.

In response to another question, he reiterated that in negotiations one could not rule anything out.  However, some core elements were not negotiable, such as the number of seats designated for Africa.  Security Council reform was a universal matter rather than a regional one.  After all, the first informal proposal by the G-4 had asked for the right of veto, but that demand had been dropped, perhaps as a result of consultations.

He added that Africa’s initial position was that the veto had become anachronistic and undemocratic, especially since the United Nations preached democracy and equality of States.  However, if one MemberState had the right to use the veto against the wishes of others, then others should have a counter-balancing right.

Was there a risk of serious divisions once the number of permanent seats was agreed, and how would the African Union choose which countries would occupy them? another correspondent asked.  The Minister said it was assumed that agreement would be reached on the number of seats and it was up to the Heads of State to decide the best two countries.

The Minister told another questioner that the African Union agreed with the Secretary-General on the importance of reaching a decision on the Security Council before the September Summit.  Ideally there should be some agreement before the Heads of State came to New York.

Asked why the G-4 proposal did not satisfy African concerns, he replied that the major differences involved the veto and an additional non-permanent seat for Africa.  He told another questioner he did not anticipate any difficulties in selecting a candidate, in the event that Africa got only one permanent seat.

* *** *