|
|
Madam Chair,
Thank you for convening today’s debate to discuss the relationship between the Assembly and the Council and size and working methods. In doing so, we have before us the non-paper entitled “Elements of convergence” on these two key issues, circulated by you on 17 May 2016.
My delegation aligns itself with the statement delivered on behalf of the Uniting for Consensus by Ambassador Cardi of Italy.
Madam Chair,
Our substantive engagement today on these two key issues is notwithstanding the fact that we have always cautioned against a piecemeal approach to Security Council reform. Indeed all five key issues are intricately and inextricably linked and we have noted that the non-paper you circulated reinforces these linkages at many places.
Let me share with you our views on the non-paper circulated on 17 May.
On the key issue of “relationship between the General Assembly and the Security Council”, it is very clear that the elements of convergence reflect the membership’s desire for greater participation in Council’s work, as well as enhanced transparency and accountability of the Council. The desire for increased and meaningful communication, open meetings and briefings, consultation with the TCCs, submission of analytical reports by the Council to the General Assembly – all point to the shared desire for participation, accountability and transparency.
Madam Chair,
If we all truly share these ideals, we must be able to justify our positions in other key areas of reform on the same principles. One cannot claim to seek a more democratic, accountable, transparent, effective and representative Council in one key area of reform and then propose ideas in other areas that undercut the same principles. This is where, Madam Chair, we believe the true value of this exercise lies.
Another important element that has been reinforced in this section is the desire for all, and let me repeat ALL Member States to participate in and be informed about the Security Council’s work. Member States do not view the Council as the preserve of a few ostensibly powerful States. This is why Pakistan has always stressed expansion of the Council’s membership that serves the interest of ALL Member States.
Additional permanent seats will usurp the equal opportunity rights of other Member States of the General Assembly to serve in the Council. How can justice, fair play, transparency and accountability be promoted by such an unfair expansion of the Council?
Madam Chair,
Let me now turn to the size of the Council.
We do not see any particular convergence among the membership in this section. You have rightly pointed out that the exact size is contingent upon discussion in at least two other key areas of reform; categories of membership and regional representation.
Here, too, you have identified that the size of the Council needs to be balanced with the Council’s representativeness and its effectiveness. We agree.
However, the questions we ask today are the questions we have asked in almost every IGN meeting this year. Can someone explain to us the concept of “representativeness” in the permanent category? To date, we have not heard any cogent much less persuasive answer to this question. How can additional permanent members, with or without veto, enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of the Council?
Therefore, Madam Chair, we do not think that the size of the Council can be a good starting point for convergence. Though extremely important, the outcome in this section is, in mathematical terms, a dependent variable. We cannot possibly decide the size of the Council before the need, merit and nature of each additional seat is agreed on. We will examine how every seat in the Council will add to the Council’s democratic and representative credentials, its accountability, transparency, efficiency and effectiveness.
Madam Chair,
On the elements identified under Working Methods of the Council, we agree that the question of decision-making is intricately linked to three other key areas of reform; categories of membership, regional representation and veto. This section also places emphasis on transparency, efficiency, effectiveness and accountability in the work of the Security Council.
The memberships’ stress on ensuring participation of ALL Council’s members in the Council’s work is an interesting one. This desire relates to a particular manner in which the P-5 tend to conduct business. How then can additional permanent members ensure participation of non-permanent members. In fact, if 45 percent of the Council comprised of permanent members, as some have proposed, the non-permanent seats would become completely inconsequential. We, therefore, believe that this element, like most other elements in the paper, is linked to discussions on other key issues of reform.
Similarly, the fate of the rules of procedure of the Security Council is also dependent on the composition of the Council (categories of membership). Over the years, the Council is indebted to its non-permanent members for gradual improvement in its working methods. It is therefore safe to assume that more such members will further improve its working methods.
Madam Chair,
Taking a broader view of the non-paper, we see that in tangible areas - ones that especially require Charter amendment - for example, the size of the Council or the decision-making - there are sharp divergences among Member States, as reflected in the other key areas of reform closely linked to these areas.
Most bullet points identified as convergence point to certain guiding principles. Some elements of convergence, such as continuing ongoing practices or strengthening existing ones, do not add up to imperatives for reform.
Therefore, the only convergences we see emerging from the paper are the principles that all membership seems to espouse – a more democratic, accountable, efficient, effective and transparent Security Council. We say “seems to espouse” because our discussions on the other interlinked and key areas will make it clear whether our convergence on these principles is true or an artificial one.
Before I conclude, Madam Chair, let me say we look forward to your comments on the status of the non-paper of 17 May in the IGN process. We remain convinced that the IGN process should be member state driven and aim to achieve comprehensive reform of the Security Council with the widest possible political acceptance.
I thank you, Madam Chair.