A/70/PV.44 General Assembly

We wish to thank the President for convening this debate, and we support his efforts to advance the negotiations on the reform of the Security Council. We congratulate the Ambassador of Luxembourg, Ms. Sylvie Lucas, on her appointment to lead the intergovernmental negotiations group and assure her of the support of my delegation. The General Assembly has debated the issue before us for more than 20 years. The discussion has been important and indispensable in bringing out the positions of countries on the issue and in encouraging better understanding of the urgency of Security Council reform. It is difficult to sustain the status quo nearly seven decades after the founding of the United Nations, without bearing in mind the profound political, social and economic evolution that human history has experienced during that time. Cuba reiterates the need to convert the Security Council into a democratic, transparent and representative institution, where the 193 Member States really feel represented and can recognize the full legitimacy of *1534312* 15-34312 (E) the provision of Article 24 of the Charter of the United Nations that confers on the Council the responsibility to act on their behalf. That requires the Security Council to comply fully with the mandate conferred by the General Assembly through various decisions, including the most recent, decision 69/560, of 17 September, on the question of equitable representation in the Security Council and an increase in the number of its members and related matters. We are grateful for the efforts in that regard by the former President of the General Assembly and the Permanent Representative of Jamaica, the outgoing Chair of the intergovernmental negotiations group. We congratulate both for the results achieved. The rounds of discussions held to date and the compilations of positions that they have produced confirm, in our opinion, that the immense majority of Member States support, at the minimum, expansion of the Security Council in its two categories of members, permanent and non-permanent, the elimination of the right of the veto, fundamental reform of the Council’s working methods, approval of the Council’s rules of procedure so that they cease to be provisional, and respect for the respective mandates of the General Assembly and the Security Council, as set out in the Charter of the United Nations. Cuba is prepared to embark without further delay on the negotiations that the process requires. We agree with the majority of delegations that all of the proposals formulated during the deliberations of the intergovernmental negotiations group must be taken into account. The process must be inclusive and transparent. While the positions of Cuba on the issue are well known, I should like to reiterate them for the benefit of the new cycle of discussions. We are in favour of a substantial increase in the membership of the Security Council, to approximately 25 or 26 States. That expansion must take place in both categories of members and basically, the increase should be in members from the developing countries. The fundamental goal must be to overcome the unjustifiable lack of representation of the developing countries in the Security Council. The new members of an expanded Council, both permanent and non-permanent, should have the same duties and prerogatives that current members enjoy, including the veto, if that cannot be eliminated. Cuba would not be opposed to the possibility of the immediate re-election of the non-permanent members. Cuba is not in favour of the creation of new categories of members, because that could further deepen existing differences and encourage division in the body. With regard to the veto, Cuba’s views are well known. That antidemocratic and anachronistic privilege should, in our firm belief, be eliminated. The reform of the Council must include, as a priority, reform of its working methods. We advocate a transparent Security Council, where closed-door consultations would be the exception rather than the rule. We aspire to a Council that deals with themes within its purview and does not encroach on the other principal bodies of the United Nations. We want a Council that really takes into account the opinions of the States Members of the Organization before adopting decisions and that guarantees a real level of access to States that are not members of the organ. I reiterate that Cuba does not insist on achieving an immediate agreement. We understand perfectly the complexities and sensitivities of the process, which will take time, effort and especially, a spirit of flexibility in the negotiations. However, to pretend that we accept as valid the structure and procedures of the Security Council, which were designed in 1945 for a world order that no longer exists, when facing challenges and threats unimaginable at the time that the Organization was established would be to obstinately fail to realize the dramatic evolution of international relations and of the United Nations over the past 70 years. Reform of the Security Council in the twenty-first century will be a triumph of multilateralism, peace and maturity, building on the experience of seven decades, and not of the distribution of power resulting from a global military confrontation. Cuba stands ready to meet that challenge successfully.

At the outset, I would like to congratulate Ambassador Sylvie Lucas and welcome her as the new Chair for the intergovernmental negotiations. We are convinced that under her leadership we will be able to make progress in reaching consensus on this important issue. My delegation reiterates its commitment to continuing to work on the Security Council reform process, which should be exhaustive, transparent and equitable. From our viewpoint, institutions cannot remain static, nor can they stagnate in an historic time frame. They must be equipped for change so as to respond effectively to the circumstances in which they work. That vision is not different from what we expect in the framework of Security Council reform. It is unquestionable that the political and economic world reality of 1945 is not comparable to what we are seeing today. That is why we must review the structure and function of that body. We believe that the Council must be dynamic, representative and transparent. We must ensure that it can respond appropriately to any threat to international peace and security in the twenty-first century, while at the same time ensuring its efficiency and effectiveness. Given the prevailing paralysis and inertia, the Council is being exposed to a progressive loss of relevance, which causes even greater tension in the prevailing order. That paralysis has, for instance, been increasing with the use or the threat of the use of the veto by the permanent members of Security Council. Rather than encouraging collective defence with arguments that could ensure consensus, the veto has obstructed and diverted common interests and caused division among its members. Furthermore, with the passage of time, we have proven that the concerns with regard to the veto expressed by the majority of delegations during the San Francisco Conference in 1945 remain fully valid, which further justifies a review of the issue. Guatemala wonders whether or not the veto should be allowed, and in particular whether it would be desirable for other States to have the same right within the framework of Council reform. A first step, which we welcome, consists of the initiatives of France and Mexico to restrict the use of the veto and the proposed code of conduct regarding Security Council action against genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. We have supported those initiatives and await their implementation. We know that any change is difficult, and in that regard we believe that the process of intergovernmental negotiations must serve to gradually advance the substantive reform of the Security Council. Differences of opinion can be overcome only through the commitment and will of all Member States rather than through imposition. After more than two decades of discussion, the repetition of various positions has come at a high cost in terms of time, effort and resources. Our collective focus must be fixed on achieving a real agreement, through an inclusive process in which we are all prepared to be flexible and constructive. At the same time, it is also important to recognize the role that the members of the Security Council play in advancing that process. Regular discussions on the Council’s working methods would allow us to take important steps to improve its effectiveness and transparency. Annual open debates on the issue in the Security Council also contribute to achieving that commitment. In that respect, we are encouraged that this morning the Council adopted presidential statement S/PRST/2015/19, on the working methods of the Security Council, which was the result of the open debate held last week (see S/PV.7539). We consider it a valuable contribution. Lastly, my delegation believes that the process of reforming the Security Council can and must be strengthened alongside the process of revitalizing the General Assembly. There is an undeniable connection between the work of the two bodies that must be improved. The adoption of resolution 69/321 is a clear example of the possibility of achieving change and reaching consensus. We hope to continue to examine all pending issues in that regard, and my delegation is prepared to work to that end.

Hungary warmly welcomes the decision of the President of the General Assembly to organize this meeting and to appoint Ambassador Sylvie Lucas, Permanent Representative of Luxembourg, as Chair of the intergovernmental negotiations on Security Council reform. At the same time, we wish to express our sincere gratitude to Ambassador Courtenay Rattray, Permanent Representative of Jamaica, and his team for their commitment and for the progress achieved. We also express our appreciation for the fact that the negotiation process was made Member State-driven, which allowed for real engagement on the part of all delegations that so wished, in an inclusive and transparent manner. The best way to honour the work done by the outgoing Chair is to maintain the momentum generated during the sixty-ninth session of the General Assembly. There is no need to go back to square one, and the new Chair should be able to build on the progress achieved. As the President of the General Assembly himself pointed out this morning (see A/70/PV.43), there are different and legitimate national views when it comes to Security Council reform. The only way to take those interests into account, while working to agree on the much-needed reform, is through meaningful negotiations. Hungary, not being a member of any of the negotiation groups, is ready to move forward with substantive negotiations without preconditions. We call on others to follow suit. In our assessment, for substantive negotiations we will need a text on the basis of which we can start negotiations. Furthermore, we will need to have a work programme and meetings at regular intervals, aimed at producing new drafts, narrowing down differences and reducing the number of outstanding issues, because this type of negotiations does not differ from others. While we work on comprehensive reform, the Council and United Nations Member States should continue to work on the gradual improvement of the Council’s working methods and activities. The two processes do not exclude each other. On the contrary, they may create virtuous cycles. Recent examples of such an approach include resolution 69/321 on the revitalization of the General Assembly, with new elements concerning the selection of the Secretary- General. Since that resolution was also mentioned as a positive example today, may I point out that it was also achieved through text-based negotiations. Two other examples include the Franco-Mexican proposals on the use of the veto and the proposed code of conduct on Security Council action, promulgated by the Accountability, Coherence and Transparency group, which is already supported by 106 countries, including nine members of the Security Council. That is already a tangible result. As we know, the Council needs nine affirmative votes to adopt a resolution. We call on the other members of the Security Council to follow suit. The three well-coordinated review processes on peacekeeping, peacebuilding, and women and peace and security will also give the Council an opportunity to move out of its self-imposed silos. The Council should also make effective and efficient use of the windfall of new peacekeeping capacities generated by the Peacekeeping Summit. Finally, world leaders have also agreed recently that peace and security are clear prerequisites for sustainable development, which, in turn, is the basis for lasting international peace and security. That understanding will have to be translated into new types of improved interaction between the Council and other United Nations bodies. We warmly welcome, therefore, the open debate on the subject in the Security Council to be organized by the United Kingdom presidency in November.

My delegation aligns itself with the statement delivered by the Permanent Representative of Sierra Leone and Coordinator of the Committee of Ten on behalf of the African Union member States (see A/70/PV.43). At the outset, I avail myself of the opportunity to commend the President for convening this timely debate to discuss the question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council and related matters. With profound appreciation, I also thank the President’s predecessor, Mr. Sam Kutesa, President of the General Assembly at its sixty-ninth session, for identifying Security Council reform as one of his key priorities during his tenure. The momentum galvanized by the recent adoption of the substantive Assembly decision 69/560 on the subject, termed the Kutesa consensus, on 14 September, set an abiding stage for negotiations. I wish to congratulate Ambassador Sylvie Lucas, Permanent Representative of Luxembourg, on her appointment as Chair of the intergovernmental negotiations and to express our deepest gratitude to Ambassador Courtenay Rattray, Permanent Representative of Jamaica and Chair of the intergovernmental negotiations during the sixty- ninth session, for his valuable contribution and skilled leadership in stewarding the work of the intergovernmental negotiations in an open, transparent and consultative manner. Today’s world faces challenges that would have been difficult to comprehend just after the Second World War. The global body that was established in 1945 to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war has, however, not lived up to people’s expectations seventy years later and runs the risk, therefore, of losing relevance if it does not adapt to the realities of today. The commemoration of the seventieth anniversary of the founding of the United Nations should serve to enhance the momentum for a Security Council reform that reflects the changes of the times and achieves success in that task. Uganda firmly believes that the United Nations, and the Security Council in particular, must become more democratic, inclusive and representative of our world. It should address a historical injustice by giving a voice to Africa. Tasked with the responsibility of maintaining international peace and security, the Security Council has been an integral organ of the United Nations since its establishment in 1945. However, changing geopolitical realities, coupled with an increase in the United Nations membership, has brought into question the Council’s effectiveness and legitimacy, emphasized by its inability to address recent conflicts and humanitarian crises around the globe. Indeed, changing geopolitical realities are cogent enough to galvanize momentum and obtain political leverage so as to spur intergovernmental negotiations and move forward. There is a need to ensure credible negotiations and not be satisfied with the mere repetition of national and group statements that have characterized the intergovernmental negotiation process and resulted in no progress being made. As we all are aware, the journey towards reform of the Security Council has thus far been a long and tedious one. Several decades after the world summit that prioritized the need for Security Council reform, we are still reminded that this topic is by no means a new initiative. The challenges we face have become more complex, given the wide range of new and emerging threats to international peace and security. We therefore need to reform the Security Council to make it more representative, effective and efficient. In his keynote address in May this year, during the high-level thematic debate on strengthening cooperation between the United Nations and regional and subregional organizations, the President of Uganda stated: “It is very presumptuous for the five permanent members to claim that they are responsible for global security. Out of the global human population, which is now 7 billion people, the five permanent members represent only about 1.9 billion people. How and why should they monopolize the responsibility for global security? This is a structural deficiency in the architecture for global security.” The increase in the membership of and equitable and geographical representation on the Security Council have become imperative because of the need to democratize the Council and make it more efficient and transparent. The democracy of which Member States are constantly reminded should prevail in the international system. It is imperative to review the composition and the decision-making process of the Council in line with the aforementioned principles. The non-implementation of these ideals puts to the test those who preach them. It is important to bear in mind the need for equitable geographical representation, with the emphasis on an increase in the permanent membership for the benefit of the African continent, which has remained unrepresented in the permanent category and underrepresented in the non-permanent category, as reflected in the Ezulwini Consensus and the Sirte Declaration. The African Common Position garners the broad support of the wider membership of this body, and Uganda commends those Member States that have frequently expressed their support for the African Common Position. The work done during the previous session, and in particular the text that was circulated by the President of the General Assembly at its sixty-ninth session in his letter dated 31 July, remain the only basis for negotiations. We are grateful that in his letter appointing the new Chair of the intergovernmental negotiations, President Lykketoft emphasized the text and its annex as per decision 69/560. This resonates with the theme of the seventieth session, “The United Nations at 70: a new commitment to action”. I wish to stress that commitment to reform should be reflected in a willingness to demonstrate a commitment in the intergovernmental negotiations process by making progress in that context. The task ahead is to commence negotiations in a spirit of compromise and flexibility, based on the same text as per established practice in this body. It is my hope that today’s debate will serve as a useful foundation for reform discussions and galvanize productive negotiations over the coming months. Rest assured of Uganda’s commitment to supporting the new Chair of the intergovernmental negotiations in moving this process forward. Let us preserve and promote the noble ideals for which the United Nations was established.

I would like at the outset to thank the President of the General Assembly for having convened this annual plenary meeting on the question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council and other matters related to the Security Council. I wish in this connection to express my appreciation to the Permanent Representative of Jamaica, Ambassador Courtenay Rattray, for his hard work and dedication as Chair of the intergovernmental negotiations during the sixty-ninth session of the General Assembly. We are confident that his inspiring enthusiasm and principled dedication to the cause of reform will remain as vital an asset in his current capacity as a vocal representative of a Member State as it was during his presence at the helm of the intergovernmental negotiations process. In the same vein, I extend my sincere congratulations to Ambassador Sylvie Lucas on her appointment as Chair of the intergovernmental negotiations. I am confident that with her wisdom and devotion, she will be able to bring us closer to our desired destination of a reformed Security Council and a stronger United Nations. She may rest assured of my delegation’s full support and cooperation. Egypt associates itself with the statements delivered on behalf of the Group of African States and the Group of Arab States (see A/70/PV.43). Egypt holds the firm belief that a more representative, credible and democratic Security Council is an integral element of the reform of the United Nations to enable it to effectively undertake its responsibilities as enshrined in the Charter. These goals can be achieved only through an intergovernmental process that is transparent, fully inclusive and State-owned and driven, seeking a comprehensive solution that can garner the widest agreement by Member States and that addresses the five key issues stipulated in decision 62/557. That decision, which was adopted by consensus by the entire membership, established the foundation of the current intergovernmental negotiations process, and staying faithful to its provisions is the key to moving the process forward. The new chairmanship of this process provides a much-needed opportunity to focus the process of negotiations on its set goal, which is to reform the Security Council by making it more representative, credible and effective while preserving the founding values of the Organization, which is based on the concept of united nations. The Organization can be more representative, effective and credibly only when it remains united. The widest political agreement is hence the key to a comprehensive reform of the Council as projected by decision 62/557. For that reason, the process of negotiations can best advance with reassurance on and further elaboration of the principles and criteria underpinning the negotiations. This is not new; it has been stated over and over. The time is now ripe for full implementation so as to preserve the unity of the general membership by reaching an agreed vision for the future of the process and how to move it forward. A piecemeal approach that is driven by the desire of a few for expansion rather than by a commitment to general reform will not lead to a more representative, credible or effective Council. The Council has suffered for too long from paralysis and selectivity on many occasions. Only comprehensive reform, not a cosmetic adjustment in its membership or working methods, can address the current structural imbalances. In that context, we are reminded of the historical injustice suffered by Africa, which remains the only continent absent from the permanent membership of the Council, despite the fact that the Council agenda remains substantially focused on issues related to peace and security on the continent. That further attests to the unique relevance and distinctive, comprehensive nature of the Common African Position.

At the outset, I wish to thank the President for convening this timely and important debate. On behalf of my delegation, I take this opportunity to thank Ambassador Courtenay Rattray, Permanent Representative of Jamaica, for his tireless efforts in steering the work of the previous intergovernmental negotiations on Security Council reform. I also wish to congratulate Ambassador Sylvie Lucas, Permanent Representative of Luxemburg, on her appointment as the new Chair of the intergovernmental negotiations and to affirm Malaysia’s commitment to working closely and constructively with her. As a current non-permanent member of the Security Council, Malaysia remains steadfast in its determination to see a more representative, democratic, legitimate, transparent and, ultimately, a more efficient and effective Security Council. However, for the past seven years, despite the best efforts, there has been no official document that could provide a sound basis for negotiations on Security Council reform. Against that background, my delegation welcomes and fully supports the decisions contained in decision 69/560 of 14 September, which was adopted under the Kutesa consensus. We share the assessment that that decision represents a historic milestone and game-changer. Malaysia looks forward to making further progress on all the issues being dealt with in the negotiations process during the current General Assembly session. We believe that text-based negotiations are the right way forward. Malaysia has been consistent in reiterating its position on the core issues of Council reform. We continue to believe that there is a need to expand the Council’s membership so as to include developing countries in both the permanent and the non-permanent categories and to ensure equitable geographical representation. Such expansion would strengthen the Council’s role and provide for more inclusiveness in its decision-making process. On the question of the veto power held by the five permanent members, Malaysia supports the call for the abolishment of the use of the veto in conformity with the principle of sovereign equality as enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations. We also fully support the call for restraint in the use of the veto power, especially in cases of international crimes of the most serious nature, such as genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. For those reasons, we are pleased to have joined the two recent initiatives introduced by a group of like-minded countries to regulate the use of the veto. Malaysia strongly supports the view that, overall, the work of the Security Council should be enhanced and improved. Working within the context of the Security Council, we have consistently supported efforts to enhance and improve the annual reports of the Security Council to the General Assembly. We also see value in the practice of regular consultations between the President of the General Assembly and the President of the Security Council. In addition, we strongly believe that there should be more structured interaction and regular consultations between the Council and the Peacebuilding Commission. With regard to the Council’s working methods, Malaysia, along with other Council members, both permanent and non-permanent, will continue to work to enhance the transparency and inclusiveness of the various aspects of the Council’s work. In that regard, we are pleased to note that the Council was able to agree on presidential statement S/PRST/2015/19, which was adopted earlier today. A working draft document on Council reform, encompassing all the various proposals submitted by Member States, would enable us to clearly identify areas where differences can be bridged. More importantly, negotiations should continue to be conducted in an inclusive and transparent manner. It is worth recalling that in 2005, our leaders committed to a reform of the Security Council. Indeed, the reform of the Council is long overdue. The need for an effective Security Council capable of responding to the emerging threats to international peace and security cannot be overstated. Therefore, a reformed Security Council that is more democratic, efficient and transparent is paramount in order to better reflect the geopolitical realities of the twenty-first century. For all of us to make meaningful progress in the reform of the Security Council, all Member States must demonstrate the necessary political will and the willingness to compromise and show considerable flexibility. That will require that all stakeholders approach the upcoming negotiations with an open mind and move away from entrenched national and group positions. In conclusion, I wish to assure the President of the Assembly and all Member States of my delegation’s full support and cooperation in moving the process forward.

Zambia aligns itself with the statement delivered by the Permanent Representative of Sierra Leone on behalf of the Group of African States (see A/70/PV.43). I wish to echo the sentiments expressed by delegations that have spoken before me to congratulate the President of the General Assembly at its seventieth session. He may rest assured of my delegation’s total support. With his expertise and guidance, we are confident that the General Assembly will make tremendous strides on the various issues of interest to the States Members of the United Nations. I also wish to applaud the efforts of his predecessor, Mr. Sam Kutesa, who placed the issue of Security Council reform among his priorities during his tenure as President of the General Assembly at its previous session. I also wish to congratulate Ambassador Sylvie Lucas, Permanent Representative of Luxemburg, on her appointment as facilitator for the intergovernmental negotiations on Security Council reform. As stated by the representative of Sierra Leone, Zambia, which worked as part of the Committee of Ten of the African Group and provided full support, has every confidence in Ambassador Lucas’ abilities to move the negotiations process forward. I also want to pay special tribute to her predecessor, Ambassador Courtenay Rattray, Permanent Representative of Jamaica, for the traction that he gave to the intergovernmental negotiations during the sixty-ninth session. Zambia believes in the key tenets and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, which promote the equality of nations and individuals. It is for that reason that Zambia, through the united efforts of the African Group, has been promoting the just cause for inclusiveness, equitable representation, transparency and full accountability of the Security Council through the process of reforms. It is an undeniable fact that, in the past 70 years, the geopolitical landscape has been transformed in a manner that requires us to make profound adjustments to our approach to decision-making on issues of international peace and security. It is our humble expectation that this session will build on the progress achieved so far and advance towards realizing the aspirations of Africa, which remains the only continent underrepresented in the non-permanent category and not represented in the permanent category. Zambia, as part of the African Group, reiterates its position for the full and comprehensive reform of the Security Council. In conclusion, we reaffirm our commitment to the reform process and therefore ask the United Nations membership to address Africa’s historical injustice as a continent that has been denied its rightful place in the house of nations. Seventy years after the establishment of the United Nations, let us not have another 70 years premised on the practice of such an imbalance.

I would like to begin by thanking the former President of the General Assembly, Mr. Sam Kutesa, and Ambassador Courtenay Rattray for their efforts during the sixty-ninth session. I also wish to welcome Ambassador Sylvie Lucas in her new capacity as facilitator of this essential negotiating process for our Organization. With her insider’s knowledge gained as a member of the Security Council for the past two years, I am sure that we can count on Ambassador Lucas as someone who understands the difficulties of a Council that is constrained by its structure, working methods and composition, which can, on occasion, endanger its effective and democratic functioning. As Ambassador Sebastiano Cardi, Permanent Representative of Italy, said in his role as coordinator of the Uniting for Consensus group (see A/70/PV.43), which my delegation endorses, Security Council reform must respond to a process guided by the Member States of the Organization, pursuant to decision 62/557. Any other method of proceeding would hinder the necessary reform. To be able to advance, it is necessary that during the course of intergovernmental negotiations, we change the dynamic so that it is not stagnant and so that in each subsequent cycle, we do not have to begin from zero with a clear waste of resources and time, achieving a result that, at the end of the day, is not in everyone’s interest. Colombia’s traditional position of rejecting, inter alia, the expansion of the privileges established on matters such as the veto, remains as valid as ever, as we see the difficulties it causes in the Council when the Council must confront current crises. Guided by the principles of democracy, transparency and inclusion, we must find a way to overcome the very difficult problems confronting humankind. Other efforts have been made to strengthen the work of the United Nations and to ensure that the system works in a more coordinated and coherent way when it seeks to achieve a sustainable peace, which is one of its primary objectives. That is why much of the reviews of peacekeeping operations, and the new architecture for peacebuilding are aimed at dealing comprehensively with conflict, from its genesis to its evolution to its later stages. That vision will require a United Nations system that can count on the capacities and necessary tools to be able to meet those challenges. My delegation welcomes this process and values the efforts of the President in conducting this exercise on a subject that summons, without doubt, the interests and commitment of all Member States in an open, inclusive and transparent way that will allow for everyone’s participation, without exception, as we build a Security Council that is representative of the new realities of the twenty-first century.

As we take one more step in the intergovernmental negotiations process, Mexico welcomes this meeting and the appointment of Ambassador Sylvie Lucas as the new facilitator of the deliberations on Security Council reform. We give her all our support and willingness to work towards a common objective and a result that will be acceptable tor all. I also take this opportunity to thank Ambassador Courtenay Rattray for the long hours he invested in this exercise. The sixty-ninth session has a record full of contrasts. The participation of Member States in the process revealed without a doubt our ongoing interest in changing the status quo. But at the same time, contributions to the debate revealed that we still have deep divisions on the form and substance of Security Council reform. For more than two decades, we have discussed various reform models under a number of modalities, none of which has been able to garner the necessary support for enactment. The meeting to discuss Security Council reform held in Rome in May clearly demonstrated the inclination of many countries, including the permanent members of the Security Council, to explore alternative approaches, such as the one that Mexico and the Uniting for Consensus group have been promoting. We are offering a compromise solution, one that could be endorsed by the greatest number of Member States without trying to impose a formula with a predetermined outcome in terms of seats. We cannot advocate and encourage democratic processes around the world collectively and at the same time support broadening the privileges for some in the executive body of our Organization. Mexico and the Uniting for Consensus group are fighting for a reform formula that will bring to 26 the number of members of the Council, with five additional seats for two years and six seats that, based on the principle of equitable geographical distribution, are to be occupied with longer mandates and the possibility of immediate re-election. That formula would allow for a decision-making process that would be more democratic and efficient and would reconcile the aspirations of everyone, thereby adjusting the composition of the Council to the new regional realities and ensuring States wanting to serve more frequently in the Council a larger presence than usual. As Latin Americans, we perfectly understand the aspirations of the Group of African States for equitable representation, which would allow them to play the role in the Council that should be theirs. We understand their legitimate claim as an expression of the strength that unity and consensus grant them, and not as an individual aspiration for power and privilege. Security Council reform is a process that can be guided solely by all of the States Members of the United Nations and not just by some. If the practice persists of granting privileges in perpetuity to some States in order to satisfy national ambitions to the detriment of the collective interests, we will not achieve our objective. The lack of transparency and of uniform consultations with all stakeholders in the process that we witnessed during the previous session did not help in smoothing over our differences, and it generated an environment of mistrust and secrecy, such as we already see in the dynamics between the permanent members of the Council and the rest. Over the course of years of intergovernmental negotiations, we have noted that the most important quality of a facilitator is to know how to listen to the positions of all Member States with impartiality, transparency and objectivity and, on that basis, to determine the path that will allow us to generate agreements toward a solution that will have the broadest possible support. In that spirit, we would respectfully ask the facilitator that whatever document or schedule is used to guide our deliberations during this session, it be discussed ahead of time with the major negotiating groups with absolute transparency and under equal conditions. Only in that way can we start with common positions and understandings. We trust that, in full awareness of the divergent positions on the topic, the able leadership of the facilitator and of the President of the General Assembly will lead us to a compromise solution that we will all welcome.

At the outset, the delegation of Kazakhstan expresses its gratitude for the hard work and enthusiasm of Ambassador Courtenay Rattray, Permanent Representative of Jamaica, and his team for coordinating and providing momentum to the intergovernmental negotiations on Security Council reform. We also take this opportunity to congratulate Ambassador Sylvie Lucas of Luxembourg on her appointment as Chair of this session’s intergovernmental negotiations on the topic and assure her of our full support. The reform of the Security Council is an important part of the overall process of reform of the United Nations aimed at enhancing its response capabilities to deal with current complex and multidimensional issues. That process should be implemented on the basis of consensus in accordance with the goals and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and in a way reflecting the views of all Member States. We note with satisfaction that, despite the various points of view, there is a common understanding that, whatever the new configuration of the Security Council might be, it must function actively and effectively to maintain international peace and security. We support a comprehensive approach to Security Council reform that seeks to address all key issues, such as expanding the Security Council membership, first of all, including permanent and non-permanent seats for the Group of African States, improving its working methods and addressing the questions of the veto and the Council’s relationship with the General Assembly. The issue of sanctions is also a very important part of the work of the Council. As the President of Kazakhstan stated in the Assembly’s general debate last month: “It is crucial to prevent the arbitrary imposition of sanctions, which contradicts both the Charter and international law. I am convinced that the right to impose international sanctions, which can adversely affect the well-being of millions of people, should remain the exclusive prerogative of the Security Council.” (A/70/PV.13, p. 47) Given the major responsibilities of the Council and the Assembly, improved cooperation between those two principle organs is absolutely essential. That could be achieved through regular consultations between the Presidents of the main bodies and by increasing the frequency of the qualitative reports and evaluations of the Council’s work to the General Assembly on an ongoing basis and by improving the Council’s annual report. The establishment of arbitrary deadlines for reform should be avoided. Any solution needs to be mature and carefully considered. However, unnecessary delays might be equally dangerous and harmful. To move the negotiations forward demands a new understanding aimed at breaching the divergences in views among the vast number of Member States and their political orientations and national interests. We therefore call for a spirit of compromise and inclusiveness, so as to gain the widest possible common ground. The proposals with regard to the veto power, with all its implications, should be carefully studied, and a viable and mutually acceptable solution must be found soon. We believe that a change in working methods does not require an amendment to the Charter of the United Nations, nor a two-thirds favourable majority of Members to be adopted. Kazakhstan is also of the view that an improvement in the working methods will not limit the power of the Council or subordinate it to the General Assembly, but will rather strengthen the Security Council to make it more efficient. The Charter specifies that the General Assembly and the Security Council are equal bodies. Therefore greater dialogue and collaboration between the two will enhance the effectiveness of both entities, especially the Council, as it gains new perspectives from the Assembly’s wider membership. At the same time, many countries that have little or no power in the Council see the General Assembly as their only avenue for influencing the United Nations. Since the most important decision that the Council will make in 2016 is the election of the next Secretary-General, we believe that the slate of candidates should be shared with the General Assembly, so that it can have a greater say in the selection for that highest office, which should be based on merit of the highest order. What is most needed is not just reforms, but changed attitudes. The national interests of Member States must be balanced with greater objectivity and global perspectives. We believe that the Council would also benefit from greater dialogue with the United Nations system, regional organizations and specialized security entities, as well as with specialized institutions and civil society, which often play a key role in maintaining peace and security. In conclusion, I reiterate Kazakhstan’s commitment to engage in the intergovernmental negotiations and work in a spirit of compromise and cooperation to swiftly finalize the reform of the Security Council.

We align ourselves with the statement delivered by the Permanent Representative of Italy on behalf of the Uniting for Consensus group (see A/70/PV.43). The following are some additional points presented in my national capacity. Our appreciation goes to Ambassador Rattray for his contributions to our deliberations last year, and we welcome and congratulate Ambassador Lucas on her appointment. We look forward to working closely with her. We are starting a new round of negotiations on one of the most critical matters on the agenda of our Organization. Almost all of us agree that reform is needed and, indeed, that it is urgent. The statements today on the need for reform are not mere rhetorical expressions. With every single day we spend on this matter, we bear the responsibility for the sufferings of millions stemming from the structural shortcomings of the current system. That is a disturbing reality, which recalls the moral obligations the we all bear to champion equality and accountability on every front. Reform is a forward-looking concept that seeks to make changes for improvement. It is not a static concept. Therefore, if a change is to be called reform, it must address the shortcomings, rather than consolidate existing problems. That is the basic but critical aspect on which our proposals for reform differ. Obviously, it is the permanent membership issue and the question of the veto that cause many of the problems today. We still do not have an answer to the simple question of what the added value will be if we increase the number of the defective elements in the system. With that understanding, we are for a meaningful and principled reform that would bring about a more democratic, representative, effective, transparent and accountable Council. We think that that can be achieved by increasing only the number of elected members of the Council. For those aspiring to longer service in the maintenance of international peace and security, we are proposing a longer-term seat with the possibility of re-election. Ideally, the veto should be abolished. We welcome the initiatives to limit the use of negative votes in cases of mass atrocities. More equitable representation of regional groups, including enhanced opportunities for those that are more vulnerable, is a must for a reformed Council. The Council’s working methods and relationship with the General Assembly are no less important, since they define the daily dynamics of the system. In that regard, only a comprehensive approach can be successful if we are to address the whole package of interrelated aspects of this issue. It is natural to have different views about the solutions to a problem. However, in order to be able to proceed with negotiations, we must be on the same page, working for the same goal. Needless to say, an issue that has a direct impact on the lives of today’s generations and those of the future requires a general spirit of compromise and a process of consensus.

I would like to take this opportunity to clarify the views and positions of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea on the issue of Security Council reform. On the occasion of the seventieth anniversary of the founding of the United Nations, it is very important to reflect on its essential mission and role in the context of reform of the Security Council. Born out of the demise of fascism and militarism, the United Nations saw the maintenance of peace and security as the motive for its establishment, as well as the purpose of its existence and its fundamental principle. The first sentence of the Preamble to the Charter of the United Nations, “We the peoples of the United Nations, determined to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind”, tells us the very meaning of the purpose of founding the United Nations. The role of the Security Council is crucial to fulfilling the Organization’s mission of maintaining international peace and security, because the Council, along with the General Assembly, has the special function of maintaining international peace and security, as provided for in the Charter. However, when we raise the question as to whether the Security Council is truly fulfilling its responsibility and role as stipulated in the Charter and in accordance with the demands of the international community, the answer is far from what we should expect, based on today’s reality. History continues to advance, and the expectations and demands for peace and security of the States Members of the United Nations and the peoples of the world are greater than ever. And yet the Security Council’s attitude, particularly to international and regional issues, is still mired in the Cold War era. The most disappointing and even dangerous fact is that some members of the Council with permanent vested interests use issues concerning international affairs and the sovereignty of United Nations Member States to recklessly pursue their own interests, based on their individual purposes and views. The Security Council’s misconduct in dealing with issues relating to the Korean peninsula is a typical example. Every year the United States of America conducts a number of large-scale military exercises in South Korea and beyond, mobilizing massive armed forces and all kinds of strategic nuclear strike equipment in what are in fact nuclear war games against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. This year, facing such military threats from the world’s largest nuclear-weapon State, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea has repeatedly requested that the Security Council include the United States joint military exercises as an item on its agenda. The exercises, which include every means required for a nuclear strike, are serious military provocations, aimed at igniting a second Korean War and with the purpose of occupying Pyongyang, the capital of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. That is why the problem is no longer confined to relations between the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and the United States or between the two Koreas. It is an international issue that threatens peace and security in North-East Asia and beyond. The Security Council has nevertheless ignored the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’s reasonable requests, which are directly related to international peace and security. Indeed, on the contrary, it has oppressed the sovereign rights of an independent State by making an issue of its legitimate right to explore outer space for a peaceful purpose and terming it a so- called human rights issue by linking it indissolubly to matters of peace and security. The Security Council has shown its true colours as it has become a political tool of certain countries and given up its primary mission of maintaining genuine peace and security. That is why, more than ever, there is a continuing demand and necessity for Security Council reform. The situation today testifies to the fact that international peace and security can never be maintained unless we reform the anachronistic structure, double standards and working methods of the Security Council. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is of the view that Security Council reform should be guided in a direction that will ensure that the old system is restructured and that the new system is able to fully guarantee the sovereignty and right to development, peace and security of all Member States in an equal and impartial manner, based on the principle of respect for their sovereign equality. First, in reforming the Security Council, the principles of impartiality, objectivity and democracy, as well as of the full representation of all Member States and of consensus, should be fully applied and guaranteed. The Council should consistently reject certain countries’ high-handedness and pursuit of their own purposes, as well as arbitrariness and double standards. A strict mechanism should be introduced into the Council’s new structure designed to ensure that Council resolutions and decisions related to sanctions or the use of force that could seriously affect international peace and security can go into effect only after final authorization by the General Assembly, which represents the full membership of the United Nations. Secondly, the composition of the Council should be based on the principle of ensuring the full representation of member States of the Non-Aligned Movement and other developing countries. Since such States form the majority of the membership of the United Nations, it cannot be a matter for debate that they should be represented accordingly in the Security Council. As we have seen during the intergovernmental negotiation process on Security Council reform, the prospects for enlarging the Council’s permanent membership are not good, owing to the seriously divided views of Member States. Under those circumstances, therefore, and in view of the urgent need for reform, a preferable and viable solution for redressing the Council’s unbalanced and unreasonable structure would be to begin by enlarging the category of its non-permanent members. Thirdly, reform of the Security Council should be instituted neither for its own sake nor in order to serve the purposes and interests of a few particular countries. It should be true reform that can enable the Council to make a genuine contribution to maintaining lasting international peace and security, responding to the common interests and demands of the overwhelming majority of Member States, in accordance with changed realities. In that regard, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is seriously concerned about the behaviour of Japan, which is itself unusually eager for Security Council reform. Although 70 years have passed since the establishment of the United Nations, based on its determination to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, the wounds and misfortunes of that war are yet to be fully healed. They still fester deeply in the hearts of the victims and other peoples who suffered in that war. That is because Japan, which provoked that war and committed terrible, inhumane crimes during the war, has not only failed to liquidate its shameful past but also has no intention to do so. On the contrary, Japan, which should be taking the road of peace, is taking the road of reviving militarism in the very year that marks the seventieth anniversary of the defeat of Japanese militarism. In its statement issued in August, on the seventieth anniversary of the defeat of imperial Japan, the Japanese Government openly revealed that it will no longer settle its past war crimes against the Asian nations. To make matters worse, it is turning Japan into a country that can make war by revising its Constitution. Japanese militarism is once again on the rise. By disguising its pursuit of militarism with a rhetorical contribution to peacekeeping and by seeking to be included in the expanded permanent membership of the Security Council, Japan is attempting to erase its shameful past and inhumane war crimes. That is why Japan is so interested in Security Council reform. Japan is the one and only country that committed State-sponsored crimes of military sexual slavery against hundreds of thousands of Korean women and women of other nations during the Second World War. But it is still refusing to make a sincere apology and to offer compensation to the victims. Japan, which denies its crimes of sexual slavery, has no right to take a seat on a Security Council that attaches great importance to women and peace and security. We need to look back in history and look ahead to the future. We should be prudent enough to realize that if Japan’s attempt to become a new permanent member of the Security Council is allowed, there will be disastrous consequences for current and future generations. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea hopes that Security Council reform will be guided in the right direction. We will continue to actively engage in the intergovernmental negotiations on Security Council reform.

For Ecuador, as for the great majority of Members of the United Nations, reform of the Security Council is urgently needed in order to make this body more democratic, transparent and effective and to bring it into line with the realities of today’s world and the membership of the Organization. To be lasting, such reform must be comprehensive and must avoid creating a static configuration of the Council that would be outdated in a few decades, as is the case now, when this body reflects the geopolitical realities of 70 years ago. We should be able to design a Security Council that will not require further discussions on new reforms in 20, 30 or 40 years’ time. For Ecuador, the reform process must continue to be guided by the five principal themes set out in decision 62/557, of 15 September 2008: categories of membership; the question of the veto; regional representation; the size of the Security Council and its working methods; and the relationship between the Council and the General Assembly. On that last point, I must repeat that my country rejects attempts by the Council to assume tasks that the Charter expressly assigned to the General Assembly and its subsidiary bodies or to the Economic and Social Council. Reform, in the end, needs to be comprehensive and must advance those five themes to be effective. My delegation takes note of the consensual adoption, on 14 September, of decision 69/560. We consider that, without prejudging the final form that eventual reform might take, it is important that the intergovernmental negotiating process be conducted and continue on the basis of consensus. We believe that the best way to ensure the greatest possible convergence of positions is that the process itself should proceed on a consensual basis that takes into account the positions and opinions of all Member States in a spirit of mutual respect. A possible and effective reform of the Security Council should be the outcome of the convergence of all opinions that have been expressed on this fundamental topic. In that regard, we must always bear in mind the requirements of the Charter for its own reform, including approval in the Assembly and the number of ratifications required. While we acknowledge the usefulness of the restatement of the positions of some Member States contained in the letter and its annexes circulated on 31 July by His Excellency Mr. Sam Kutesa, President of the Assembly at the sixty-ninth session, we must bear in mind that that compiliation does not reflect the criteria of all Member States and therefore cannot be considered the definitive or final expression of the membership of the United Nations. Finally, as we express our appreciation for the work by the Permanent Representative of Jamaica, Mr. Courtenay Rattray, who chaired the intergovernmental negotiations during the sixty-ninth session, we also wish to welcome the appointment of the Permanent Representative of Luxembourg, Ambassador Sylvie Lucas, to guide that process during the current session. We offer her our support and cooperation.

Somalia associates itself with the statement made by His Excellency Mr. Vandi Minah of Sierra Leone on behalf of the Group of African States (see A/70/PV.43). Over the past decade, the Security Council has been of great assistance in Somalia’s steady progress into peace, which the Somali people deeply appreciate. Somalia commends the Council for its critical work in discharging its responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. The Security Council’s efforts in working closely with the Federal Government of Somalia contributed to our trajectory as we moved from State failure to State-building. The Security Council’s ability to adequately address the challenges to international peace and security directly affects the lives of millions of people around the world. We must measure the effectiveness of the Council through the outcomes that it obtains in terms of both conflict prevention and conflict resolution. We believe that there is no limit to perfection and that there is always room for improving the working methods of any organization. There is a requirement to reform the Security Council, its working methods and its collaboration with other United Nations organs to enable it to better react to contemporary realities. We welcome the appointment of Ambassador Sylvie Lucas of Luxembourg as Chair of the intergovernmental negotiations, and we also sincerely thank the outgoing Chair, Ambassador Courtenay Rattray, for his tremendous work. We are pleased that last month the General Assembly was able to adopt by consensus decision 69/560, which formally recognizes the text and its annex circulated on 31 July as the basis for the intergovernmental negotiations. We welcome the improved cooperation between the United Nations and the regional and subregional organizations. That cooperation should be an ongoing and dynamic process, so that its advantages can be reflected in the maintenance of international peace and security. We encourage closer cooperation between the African Union Peace and Security Council and the Security Council under the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations, with a view to delivering and implementing more effective, strategic decisions. Today, 8 out of the 18 United Nations peacekeeping missions are deployed in Africa. Therefore, it is obvious that Africa, with its 54 Member States, cannot remain the only continent that has neither a permanent seat nor the veto power. The legitimacy and credibility of the Security Council and the effectiveness of its action will depend on its ability to evolve and adapt to modern changes and representation. The current underrepresentation of Africa is clear evidence of the absence of impartiality in the Security Council. Moreover, we consider it unacceptable that in the twenty-first century, the United Nations allows the use of the veto in situations involving crimes against humanity, war crimes or genocide. Owing to such circumstances, we support a comprehensive reform that will reflect the current geographical realities.

I would like to thank the President for his leadership in the reform process and for convening this debate ahead of the new cycle of the intergovernmental negotiations on Security Council reform. Allow me also to use this opportunity to congratulate warmly Ambassador Sylvie Lucas, Permanent Representative of Luxembourg, on her appointment as Chair of the intergovernmental negotiations and to sincerely thank her predecessor, Ambassador Courtenay Rattray, Permanent Representative of Jamaica, for his able chairmanship and professional competence, thanks to which we accomplished outstanding work under his leadership. Croatia shares the views of the majority of Member States that the present structure and functioning of the Council do not properly reflect the geopolitical realities of the contemporary world or the make-up of the United Nations membership in the twenty-first century. Therefore, in order to maintain the Council’s authority, relevance and indispensability in maintaining global peace and security, we cannot afford to further postpone its reform. It has been said many times, but it is worth repeating, that it took only 18 years from the foundation of the United Nations for the General Assembly to adopt resolution 1991 (XVIII), on the Security Council’s first — and to date, last — enlargement, in 1963. On 1 January 2016, we shall mark the fiftieth anniversary of the beginning of the 15-member Council. That fact alone speaks volumes about our effectiveness and ability to embrace and implement reform. Furthermore, some of the provisions of resolution 1991 (XVIII) are as relevant today as they were 52 years ago, on. 17 December 1963, in that “the present composition of the Security Council is inequitable and unbalanced”, and that it is “necessary to enlarge the membership of the Security Council, thus ... making it a more effective organ for carrying out its functions under the Charter of the United Nations”. With respect to the substance of our debate, Croatia is of the view that the time has come to move forward. Our position on Security Council reform is well known. We support the Council’s enlargement in both permanent and non-permanent categories of membership. We believe that the Group of Eastern European States should be awarded an additional seat in the non-permanent category of membership of the reformed Council, since the membership of the Group has more than doubled in the past 50 years, from 10 to 23 countries. We also advocate greater African representation in the enlarged Council. The working methods of the enlarged Council should be such as to facilitate more efficient, effective and accountable functioning. Croatia supports more frequent interaction by the members of the Council with wider United Nations membership, through greater transparency, openness in decision-making and inclusiveness. On the question of the use of the veto, Croatia welcomes the initiatives on restraining the use of the veto in situations of war crimes, mass atrocities and genocide. Regarding the inter-institutional relations between the General Assembly and the Security Council, Croatia would like to see regular consultations taking place between the Presidents of these two pivotal bodies. We fully understand that the widest support possible of Member States is essential for such a momentous reform as that of Security Council enlargement. Nevertheless, our continuous efforts to broaden that support should not mean that consensus, no matter how desirable it is in all United Nations reform processes, is a necessary precondition for further advancement in Security Council reform. Therefore, we should follow the practice that, when consensus is apparently not possible, the position of a convincing majority should be used as a way forward. We extend our full support to the President of the General Assembly and the new Chair of the intergovernmental negotiations. We are confident that under their able leadership, that process will bring us closer to our common goal of a reformed and improved Security Council.

My delegation would like to welcome the appointment of Ambassador Sylvie Lucas, Permanent Representative of Luxembourg, as the new Chair of the intergovernmental negotiations. We have every confidence in her ability to facilitate that difficult process with the high degree of fairness and transparency that she has displayed in many other of her United Nations functions. My delegation aligns itself with the statement made by the Permanent Representative of Italy on behalf of the Uniting for Consensus group (see A/70/PV.43). For its part, the Republic of Korea has consistently called for the reform of the Security Council as an important and urgent matter. The Council must be reformed in a way that will allow it to better address the international peace and security challenges of today. We believe that such reform cannot be accomplished until we do away with the outdated concepts of permanency and veto. To put it simply, in this fast-changing world, nothing should be unchangeable. What we need is a modern, democratic and flexible mechanism, a mechanism that can reflect dynamic international realities in a timely manner. Increasing non-permanent seats through periodic elections is the only logical solution to achieve that goal. Expanding the number of elected members will bring a better balance to the membership of the Security Council, thereby improving its work. Permanency does not allow the Council to adapt to changes in the world and to effectively address global challenges. In that regard, we support the French-Mexican political statement on the suspension of the use of the veto in cases of mass atrocities and the code of conduct regarding Security Council action against genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. At the same time, we do recognize the aspirations of some Member States to make a more prominent contribution to the maintenance of international peace and security. To accommodate such aspirations, we support the creation of longer-term, re-electable seats to allow those Member States to sit on the Council longer and more often. But of course, their continued dedication and performance should be ensured through periodic elections. With regard to the way forward, an important lesson that should be drawn from previous rounds of negotiations is that any reform formula must receive the wide support of Member States. We need to strive for consensus, as stipulated in Assembly decision 62/557, to address this critical matter. We also need to engage on the broader issue of improving the effectiveness and credibility of the Security Council. My delegation stands ready to work with others to formulate an innovative and pragmatic solution that can garner the support and understanding of the entire membership.

Allow me at the outset to express our gratitude for the convening of this meeting. Argentina aligns itself with the statement made by the representative of Italy on behalf of the Uniting for Consensus group (see A/70/PV.43). I wish to take this opportunity to thank Ambassador Courtenay Rattray, facilitator of the intergovernmental negotiations during the previous session. We do not doubt his good intentions in taking a heterodox approach to carrying out our work. We congratulate Ambassador Sylvie Lucas on her appointment as facilitator for the current session. She can count on the full cooperation of my delegation in working constructively on the issue before us. As we have done throughout this process, today we are once again tackling our work in awareness of the need for a spirit of flexibility and agreement and a strong multilateral approach, as that is the only guarantee of success. Argentina trusts that all delegations will do the same, because it is only through a multilateral approach that is based on concrete actions and leadership, taking into account the interests of all nations, that we will be able to achieve a Security Council that is more democratic, truly inclusive and efficient, and one that can properly discharge the heavy responsibilities conferred on it by the Charter. It is clear that as a democratic institution, the United Nations constantly faces the need to build legitimacy and representativity in its organs. This task falls to the Member States and thus cannot and should not be delegated. Therefore it is only in the framework of intergovernmental negotiations undertaken by Member States in good faith, on the basis of mutual respect and in an open, inclusive and transparent manner, as established by the General Assembly in resolutions 48/26 and 53/30 and decision 62/557, that we will be able to find a solution that will find the broadest possible political acceptance. Based on the lessons learned during this negotiating process, Argentina continues, in a spirit of great willingness, to devise innovative and consistent formulas that will ensure a more democratic presence, a more effective rotation process for non-permanent members and a reformulation of its working methods, so that the Council can truly become more transparent, interactive and inclusive. The Charter stipulates in Article 24 that: “In order to ensure prompt and effective action by the United Nations, its Members confer on the Security Council primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, and agree that in carrying out its duties under this responsibility the Security Council acts on their behalf.” The victors in the Second World War arrogated this responsibility to themselves on a permanent basis. However, all States that recognize that peace is an essential element for their development wish to actively undertake out this responsibility. Argentina is in favour of an increase in the number of non-permanent members only, because perpetuity is intrinsically antagonistic to the notion of representativity in a democratic context, where such representativity must periodically be legitimized by the will of those represented. It is well known that elections form the basis of all legitimate democratic and representative systems. The improvement of the working methods has been and remains of the greatest importance to Argentina. When we held the chairmanship of the Security Council’s Informal Working Group on Documentation and Other Procedural Questions, we took every opportunity to promote transparency and openness in the work of that Group, as well as its accountability for its actions to the Organization as a whole. To conclude, Argentina reiterates its intention to consider with an open mind all proposals that, respecting the principles agreed upon by the General Assembly, bring together the positions in order to make concrete the necessary democratic reform of the Security Council.

Venezuela deeply appreciates the efforts by Ambassador Courtenay Rattray, Permanent Representative of Jamaica and Chair of the intergovernmental negotiations on reform of the Security Council during the sixty-ninth session of the General Assembly. We welcome Ambassador Sylvie Lucas, Permanent Representative of Luxembourg, as the new Chair and wish her every success. After more than two decades of debate on reform of the Security Council, the United Nations could see its credibility affected if the prolonged standstill in the negotiating process continues. My country believes that it is time to move to a substantive process based on a draft negotiating text in order to achieve tangible results. We believe that expansion of the membership of the Security Council, the reform of its working methods and the review of the decision-making mechanism, including the issue of the veto, should lead to a more democratic, representative, transparent and effective Council. With regard to the composition of the Council, we are in favour of its expansion. We are convinced that the process of reform must ensure the inclusion of developing countries in the regions of Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean, and Asia. An expanded Security Council should include different geographical, political and cultural realities, mainly those of the developing world, taking into account the need to correct the power asymmetry in that body and adapt it to the multipolar world that is emerging, making it a more democratic and representative organ. The developing countries have a right to longer-term participation in the Security Council, as well as to the re-election of its non-permanent members, using the experience of other organs of the United Nations systemas a basis. In this context, we must address the legitimate aspirations of the African continent, which is composed of 54 countries, in order to rectify the historical injustice with respect to its representation on the Council. African countries make up more than a quarter of the Members of the Organization, and thef conflict situations under consideration by the Council that affect the continent comprise more than two thirds of the Council’s agenda. With respect to working methods, our delegation would like to express its deepest concern at the perpetual provisional status of the Security Council’s rules of procedure. It is unacceptable that, 70 years after its founding, it does not have a definitive set of rules. It is clear that the purpose of the arrangement has been to favour a small group of permanent members that, under the guise of a supposedly rules-based practice, does, or does not do, as it wishes. My delegation condemns the practice whereby the permanent members of the Security Council often hold negotiations behind closed doors, thus excluding non-permanent members of the Council from its decision-making process. Similarly, disproportionate power is enjoyed by a few permanent members, the so-called penholders, which gives them a monopoly on the scope and wording of the resolutions. The sanctions committees should have no other aim than to contribute to the paramount goal of reaching political solutions to conflicts. Unfortunately, in practice, some permanent members perceive sanctions regimes as ends in themselves and under that premise seek to keep expanding their mandates and scope into new areas in an undefined manner, without even consulting, listening to or taking into account the views of the countries affected, thereby undermining any purpose or policy objective that the sanctions may have had when they were first conceived. Venezuela calls for a substantial increase in open meetings. Closed meetings, including consultations, must be an exception to the requirement of public meetings, as set out in rule 48 of the Council’s provisional rules of procedure. We cannot allow the continuation of the practice of holding meetings for which there is no record, no verbatim report, no minutes. Nor can we continue to allow the exclusion of the countries affected and the relevant regional organizations from participating in discussions on the agenda items that affect them, which happened last April when the Council refused to let the High Representative of the African Union participate in the briefing on the question of Western Sahara, or last May when the African Union’s Permanent Observer was excluded from the briefing on the situation of migrants in the Mediterranean. Open meetings of the Council help to promote transparency and inclusiveness and give the entire United Nations membership the opportunity to contribute to the Council’s work. It is mainly through such meetings that the Council obtains information about the position of countries on the items on its agenda. With respect to the Security Council’s decision­ making mechanisms, Venezuela believes that the issue of the veto should be the subject of a thorough discussion. In the case of such topics or issues as the election of the Secretary-General or the admission of new Member States, where the General Assembly is also an important participant, the permanent members should refrain from using the veto. Unfortunately, in this regard, the Council’s Committee on the Admission of New Members has been unable to give a positive recommendation for the admission of the State of Palestine as a full Member of the Organization, owing to the denial of one of its permanent members. Venezuela rejects the continued efforts of the Security Council to use the thematic debates as a way to expand its mandate into areas that do not represent a threat to international peace and security. The role of the Assembly as the main forum for the discussion and formulation of United Nations policies and legislation must be respected in terms of both spirit and purpose. We wish to reaffirm the need for the Security Council report to the General Assembly to be more explanatory and analytical in describing its work. To conclude, we must emphasize that the reform of the Security Council represents just one element of a necessary, broader and more comprehensive reform of the United Nations, which includes, among other organs, the Secretariat. In this connection, we emphasize the need for appointments to high posts in the Organization to be handled fairly and equitably in terms of geographical distribution, so that all countries, particularly those in the developing world, have appropriate opportunities to participate in the organs that prepare the reports and documents that are submitted to the Security Council for consideration.

I thank the President for convening this debate. We believe that making the necessary arrangements for a successful debate and fruitfully conducting the upcoming negotiations on the sensitive and important issue of Security Council reform require extensive consultations with all Member States. We welcome and congratulate Ambassador Sylvie Lucas of Luxembourg as the new Chair of intergovernmental negotiations and assure her of our support. With its current, extremely outdated composition and working methods, the Security Council has been unable to fulfil its crucial responsibility of maintaining international peace and security. The entire membership supports the goal of having a more representative, effective, democratic, accountable and transparent Council. The question is how do we reach that goal. At the sixty-second session of the General Assembly, the United Nations membership embarked on the process of intergovernmental negotiations, pursuant to decision 62/557. The decision directs the Assembly to achieve holistic reform on five key issues: categories of membership, the veto, size and working methods, regional representation, and the relationship between the Security Council and the General Assembly and other important bodies. The Council’s expansion is one of the elements of the overall reform but must not diminish the importance of the other four elements; all five are linked. We believe that no Council reform can succeed unless all five interrelated issues are appropriately, comprehensively and inclusively addressed. There have been many initiatives to change the composition or improve the working methods or decision-making processes of the Council. But so far all of them have failed, and nothing significant has been done to restore trust in this important organ. We believe that any attempt at genuine Security Council reform should be based on a general agreement among all Member States on the substance and process, and that this is the most important prerequisite for restoring lost trust. If such an agreement is to emerge, we need genuine political will. Despite the lack of progress on the main issues, we still believe that the process of Security Council reform should not be subject to any predetermined or arbitrary timetable. Any ill-considered or careless decision would run the risk of harming that very delicate process, which is of vital importance and great interest to the whole membership of the Organization and will have far-reaching impacts for the whole world. We therefore believe that every effort must be made to reach the broadest possible agreement among Member States. While text-based negotiations are certainly an efficient way of proceeding, we need to agree on a text. I wish to reiterate that Iran considers intergovernmental negotiations to be the only appropriate and irreplaceable format. The intergovernmental negotiations must continue to be Member-State-driven and to function in a fully comprehensive and transparent manner. My delegation welcomes the continued efforts in that regard and is willing to actively participate in the process.

My delegation welcomes the appointment of Ms. Sylvie Lucas, Permanent Representative of Luxembourg, as the new facilitator for the intergovernmental negotiations. We also express our deep appreciation to Ambassador Courtenay Rattray of Jamaica for the work he has done. We reiterate our commitment to continuing to work wholeheartedly in this process, which must accord with the fundamental principles of the Organization and which, above all, must strengthen multilateralism. For that reason, Costa Rica shares the concerns and suggestions set out by the representative of Italy on behalf of the Uniting for Consensus group (see A/70/ PV.43). In all the intergovernmental negotiation rounds, Costa Rica has explained why it is firmly opposed to the creation of new permanent seats and to any expansion of the veto or any other privilege in the Security Council. For Costa Rica, reform of the Security Council cannot be effective, legitimate or democratic if it consists simply of expanding the privileges that some enjoy and adding permanent seats for others. My country has explained why it believes that a gradual expansion of the non-permanent seats, with the possibility that some representatives might remain for more than two consecutive terms, is the only way for us to have a more legitimate and representative body, where the voices and innovative ideas of Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean can be heard. Their readiness to play a more active role in the issues currently on the Council’s programme of work will at the same time help to guarantee improvement of the Council’s accountability. That enhanced geographic representativity would also make possible to substantially increase the possibility of election to the Council, benefitting in particular the small countries that are the majority of the Organization. It is a question of expanding the real possibilities of the entire membership, not of limiting them further. It is a question of consolidating the United Nations at the epicentre of global governance and of ensuring that the Security Council complies with its responsibilities in the maintenance of international peace and security, taking into account considerations of human rights and improving its work in conflict prevention. Those real possibilities would also result in a profound improvement in the working methods, which would not only facilitate the internal work of the Security Council but would also strengthen the relationships between the Security Council, the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council. We are well aware that an enlarged Council would require clearer, more predictable, more systematic and more transparent procedures. In that regard, Costa Rica has expressed its support for the suggestion of France aimed at restricting the use of the veto in cases of mass atrocities, support that dates from our participation in the Small Five group and in the efforts led by Liechtenstein in the Accountability, Coherence and Transparency group in favour of a code of conduct that would ban the use of the veto in cases of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. We need to act decisively in such situations. We cannot continue to allow the opinion of a single permanent member to carry more weight than the need to save lives. The veto betrays the trust that millions of people place in the United Nations as their ultimate hope. The work of the non-permanent members of the Security Council in recent years has been noteworthy. They have been innovative, exploratory, proactive and independent. They have also demonstrated that they are able, as non-permanent members, to make substantive contributions to the work of this body. Their status as non-permanent members has in no way prevented them from making important proposals and suggesting solutions. For that reason, we should abide by the provisions of decision 62/557 and negotiate a comprehensive reform of the Security Council that addresses the five primary themes and builds on the proposals of each and every Member State in good faith, in an open, transparent spirit and without artificial deadlines, so that we can achieve the broadest possible political agreement. We share a common goal: to obtain a reform of the Security Council for all, not just a few. Costa Rica reiterates its full readiness to participate in any consultations that the presidency considers necessary and to contribute in a constructive and forward-looking spirit to designing a process that will allow us to move ahead in this defining moment for our Organization.

Let me start by expressing our deep appreciation to the President for his letter of 23 October, informing Member States about the concrete modalities for implementing the core provision of decision 69/560, adopted by the General Assembly on 14 September, to immediately continue the intergovernmental negotiations on Security Council reform. We support that approach, which is aimed at sustainably building on the accomplishments of the 11 rounds of intergovernmental negotiations and in particular on the positions and proposals advanced by Member States, as reflected in the text and its annex circulated by the former President of the General Assembly in his letter of 31 July. Romania was one of the countries that called for text-based negotiations. Allow me, therefore, to take this opportunity to convey our sincere gratitude to Ambassador Courtenay Rattray, Permanent Representative of Jamaica, for his dedicated, transparent and accountable work during the previous Assembly session. It is now up to Member States to make full use of the highly structured document he provided, which was based on the inputs from a large number of countries, including my own. At the same time, I would like to congratulate Ambassador Sylvie Lucas, Permanent Representative of Luxembourg, for assusming the very challenging mandate of chairing the negotiation process to resolve the question of equitable representation on the Security Council, an increase in its membership and other related matters. We are convinced that, in addition to her well-known personal and diplomatic qualities, Ambassador Lucas will advance our work by drawing on the experience accumulated during Luxembourg’s recent term on the Security Council. I wish to assure her of my delegation’s full availability to work towards fruitful and timely concrete results. I believe that the matter of concrete results should be part of the review and adaptation process of United Nations bodies so that the entire system becomes truly fit for purpose and committed to action, in accordance with the recently adopted 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (resolution 70/1). There is another point to be made with respect to the results of our work under this agenda item. Let me recall that, in its statement of 8 November 2013, Romania said it was of the view that we should be “realistically ambitious” (A/68/PV.48, p. 21). That is why, in our view, the five key issues under consideration should be approached independently, each at its own pace. We are well aware that others believe that all five aspects are interrelated and should be viewed as a single package. But in the absence of substantial progress in the intergovernmental negotiations process, we need to recognize that pressing topics have emerged outside that process and have evolved significantly. I refer here in particular to the two complementary initiatives on the use of the veto. I am pleased to underline that, in his address in the general debate at the Assembly’s current session (see A/70/PV.16), His Excellency Mr. Klaus Iohannis, President of Romania, reiterated our support for the initiative of France and Mexico regarding a collective, voluntary agreement among the permanent members of the Security Council on the non-use of the veto when action is needed to prevent or bring to an end situations of mass atrocities and large-scale war crimes. At the same time, Romania is one of the 106 countries that have fully endorsed the draft code of conduct regarding Security Council action with respect to genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes, submitted on 23 October by the Accountability, Coherence and Transparency group, which is so competently led by Mr. Christian Wenaweser, Permanent Representative of Liechtenstein. The working methods of the Security Council represent an area in which progress has been achieved, but there is still room for improvement. That assertion was confirmed during the Spanish presidency of the Council. In fact, we would like to congratulate Spain on its excellent organization of the Council’s work during the current month, especially in terms of the innovative practice of delivering common statements or presenting briefings by grouping several countries together. The number and quality of the open debates demonstrated that the Security Council can indeed function effectively. I would like to conclude by saying that progress is within our reach, and that we have the duty to advance Security Council reform, including with respect to its membership, so that it reflects the new geopolitical realities. Romania stands firmly for the increased representation of the Group of Eastern European States and believes that at least one additional non-permanent seat should be allocated to that Group in the future architecture of the Security Council.

Allow me at the outset to extend my wholehearted thanks to Ambassador Courtenay Rattray, representative of Jamaica, for his efforts during his leadership of the intergovernmental negotiations on the expansion and reform of the Security Council. I would also like to congratulate Ambassador Sylvie Lucas, representative of Luxembourg, on her appointment as the new facilitator of the negotiations. We hope that real progress will be achieved in the negotiations and that we will be able to reach some sort of consensus. Libya reaffirms its support for and aligns itself with the statements made by the representative of Sierra Leone on behalf of the Group of African States and by the representative of Kuwait on behalf of the Group of Arab States (see A/70/PV.43). As an African country, Libya affirms that one of the most important elements of Security Council reform is to rectify the historical injustice suffered by the African continent, which has not been represented as a permanent member of the Council. We reiterate the need to recognize that right as an inalienable, non-negotiable right, especially inasmuch as more than two thirds of the situations brought before the Council concern the African continent. Such an injustice can be eliminated only by giving the African continent two permanent seats on the Council, with all the prerogatives of the current permanent members, including the veto. Furthermore, the African continent should be granted two additional non-permanent seats, as stipulated in the Common African Position, the Ezulwini Consensus and the Sirte Declaration. Libya further affirms that any expansion of the membership of the Security Council should include the Arab countries. They should also be accorded a permanent seat on the Council, based on the resolution adopted at the Arab Summit in Sirte in 2010. Reform of the Security Council should not stop at increasing the number of seats in the permanent and non-permanent categories, but should also extend to its working methods and its relationship with other United Nations bodies. In that regard, Libya reiterates the need to introduce reforms in the working methods of the Council to ensure transparency and openness in its work as well as in its activities and procedures. The meetings of the Security Council should be public, and closed or in camera consultations should be limited as soon as possible. Moreover, using the right to the veto should be limited in cases of war crimes, crimes against humanity and foreign occupation, as a first step towards the total abolition of the veto. Libya also calls for enhancing the participation of non-member States in the work of the Security Council, in particular by countries directly affected by the situations currently under its consideration. We also reiterate that it is crucial for the Council to have established procedures and rules that govern its relationship with other United Nations bodies. That matter requires review in order to ensure that the Security Council does not encroach on the competence of other bodies, in particular the General Assembly, and to facilitate consultations between the Council and other key United Nations bodies. In the meantime, the mandate assigned to each body by the Charter of the United Nations should be duly respected. In that regard, we reaffirm the need for consultative meetings between key bodies and for more public debates and briefings, as well as more frequent periodic reports by the Council to the Assembly. Those reports should be inclusive, transparent and duly supported by fact, evidence and analysis. In conclusion, I reiterate Libya’s willingness to be positively and effectively involved in all efforts to reach a consensus that would eventually reform the Security Council and enable our international Organization to be more democratic and transparent.

I thank the President for organizing this debate on the question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council and other matter matters related to the Security Council. We must follow up on our decision 69/560 of 14 September and maintain the momentum of the debate that took place in the intergovernmental negotiations this year. I take this opportunity to thank Ambassador Courtenay Rattray for his commitment to his work as Chair of that group and for the significant progress that he was able to achieve. Belgium welcomes the appointment of the Permanent Representative of Luxemburg, Ambassador Sylvie Lucas, as Chair of the intergovernmental negotiations on Security Council reform. We assure Ambassador Lucas of our full support and cooperation. Our positions are well reflected in the text attached to the letter from the President of the General Assembly, dated 31 July, which should serve as the basis for our follow-up work. Our challenge today lies in debating the elements of the text in an open and constructive spirit so that we can further develop practical options and reach a compromise. We are ready to participate in consultations in various formats, as needed, under the authority of the President and the Chair of the intergovernmental negotiations. Our work must be focused more on substance than on questions of procedure.

First of all, South Africa would like to thank Ambassador Courtenay Rattray for his robust chairing of the intergovernmental negotiations in the previous session, and we join others in congratulating the new Chair of the negotiating process, Ambassador Sylvie Lucas, Permanent Representative of Luxembourg. We align ourselves with the statement delivered by the Ambassador of Sierra Leone on behalf of the Group of African States, as well as the statement made by the Ambassador of Saint Lucia on behalf of the L.69 group (see A/70/PV.43). Since 2013, South Africa’s President, Mr. Jacob Zuma, has called for the United Nations not to celebrate its seventieth anniversary without a reformed Security Council. South Africa has been joined in this call by a vast majority of the States Members of the Organization. Yet, here we are at the seventieth session, having just last week celebrated the seventieth anniversary of the entry into force of the Charter, and we cannot record any substantive movement on a matter that the vast majority of the United Nations membership views as urgent and critical. Over the past few years in which we have been engaged in discussions, it has become clear that nearly all Member States, including the permanent members of the Security Council, agree to some extent that the Council must be reformed. In fact, 10 years ago we, as Member States, took a unanimous decision at the level of Heads of State and Government that the Security Council needed urgent reform, and yet we cannot report a single substantive achievement. South Africa is of the view that the main obstacle to achieving any movement in our ceaseless discussions is that the process itself is flawed. In spite of their name, the intergovernmental negotiations are not negotiations but rather debates comprising endless repetition of decades-old positions from groupings and States. That is why South Africa and so many other Member States have called for the start of text-based negotiations. We are therefore especially pleased that Ambassador Rattray’s efforts have finally resulted in the Assembly adopting decision 69/560, endorsing the Chair’s text that was circulated on 31 July as the framework document for text-based negotiations, which we expect to start in earnest before the end of the year. In his statement in the general debate in September (see A/70/PV.14), President Zuma urged us to focus our efforts this year on developing a road map for the reform of the Security Council, and that the road map must be accompanied with clear, implementable time frames. South Africa therefore proposes that the intergovernmental negotiations adopt a different format this year to replace the debate format that has become our routine, and that they vigorously engage on the framework document. We believe that the process will benefit from block meetings. We therefore propose that the Chair schedule a few consecutive days per element to allow for interactive exchange and negotiations among Member States. In the past few years, we have seen that one-day meetings result only in general statements, repeated ad nauseam, thereby threatening to make the process an endless working group on no reform. South Africa does not believe that adopting such a practical process would undermine the principles of all-inclusivity and transparency to which we are fully committed. However, we should also guard against illogical attempts to delay the process through fear-mongering by those Member States that falsely argue that text-based negotiations are exclusive and not transparent. My delegation wishes to reiterate its support for the President of the General Assembly and the newly appointed Chair. We will continue our active engagement with all Member States to find areas of agreement and to operationalize the call from our President. We are committed to seeing the historic injustice against developing countries, as reflected in the composition and working of the Security Council, corrected. South Africa believes that the world needs a strong and effective Security Council. We believe in the principles of the Charter of the United Nations that envision a world at peace. However, we are concerned that the inherent flaws in the structure and functioning of the Security Council have debilitated it. That is why we remain fully committed to seeing the expansion and reform of the Security Council within our lifetime. In conclusion, South Africa wishes to propose the following recommendations for consideration by the new Chair of the intergovernmental negotiations, with the aim of guiding text-based negotiations. First, a schedule of meetings per element, outlining the negotiating process for the present session, should be circulated as soon as possible. That is normal United Nations practice when embarking on a negotiating process, as we saw last year with the schedule that guided the negotiations for the adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (resolution 70/1). Secondly, the schedule should make it clear that interactive negotiations will be the working method used to move the process forward, and that such negotiations should be steered away from the debate format. Thirdly, the negotiations should be focused on adopting a road map with time frames that will guide the process beyond the seventieth session. Fourthly, the Chair should explore informal bilateral meetings between divergent groupings to promote the formation of consensus. None of these proposals is new or innovative for the United Nations; in fact, we propose them in order to bring our discussions in the intergovernmental negotiations in line with the manner in which the United Nations works to reach agreement on all issues on its agenda.

We would like to thank the President for convening this important meeting on the issues of equitable representation on the Security Council and increasing the number of its members. We congratulate Ambassador Sylvie Lucas on her appointment as Chair of the intergovernmental negotiations. We are confident that her presidency will maintain the negotiating group’s momentum and impetus. We are also grateful to Ambassador Courtenay Rattray for his leadership as Chair of the negotiations during the Assembly’s sixty-ninth session. Nicaragua aligns itself with the statement delivered by Ambassador Menissa Rambally, Permanent Representative of Saint Lucia, on behalf of the L.69 group (see A/70/PV.43). We hope that this discussion will get to the true centre of our debate, which is how to achieve thorough reform of the Security Council, particularly as we celebrate the seventieth anniversary of the United Nations. We are now 193 Member States; the Organization of which we are a part, particularly the Security Council, is functioning in a completely different world, and it must change. The Security Council urgently needs comprehensive reform so that it can respond to the realities of the twenty-first century and expand both membership categories, permanent and non-permanent. We live on a planet whose population has grown and that is threatened by multiple highly complex challenges. Our Organization should respond to the challenges of our times with measures and actions that reflect its highest priority, our peoples’ interests. After the many years devoted to these negotiations, on 31 July we arrived at a consensus agreement on a text and should therefore proceed immediately to negotiations, for which we are ready. It is time for concrete results. It is essential that we set a timetable for our meetings until we reach a final negotiated text and complete this stage of the reforms. If for some unfortunate reason the process ends in a stalemate and we fail to arrive at a final text, there are other options that we can resort to. We hope that will not be the case. Nicaragua is committed to any initiative that can enable us to recreate, reinvent and re-establish the United Nations, meeting the growing demand for a democratic Organization that will serve in the highest interest of soveregin security, justice, and peace in the world. Nicaragua will continue to support all efforts to reform the Security Council, and we are always ready for constructive discussion of any subject that can help to improve the work of our Organization. We reiterate the Nicaraguan people’s hope that in this seventieth anniversary year our commitment will result in a serious and open process of reflection on the essential transformation, reinvention and democratization of the United Nations.

It is an honour for the Republic of Maldives to take part in the Assembly’s debate on this important agenda item. We take this opportunity to thank Mr. Courtenay Rattray of Jamaica for his able stewardship of the intergovernmental negotiations on Security Council reform. My delegation also welcomes the appointment of Ms. Sylvie Lucas, the Permanent Representative of Luxembourg, as the new Chair of the intergovernmental process. Seventy years ago, 50 countries embarked on a journey with a promise to change the world for the better. The Organization was born out of the ashes and bloodshed of a global war, bringing hope and reassurance for the possibility of achieving progress and prosperity as well as creating a safe and secure world. The task of fulfilling that solemn promise to maintain international peace and security was assigned primarily to the Security Council. For the better part of the 70 years of the United Nations we have dwelled on the issue of reforming the Council. We have spent hours, days, months and years deliberating on a possible outcome, one that could enable the Council to better execute its functions and use its powers as enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations, and in the spirit of the principle that this organ is all-inclusive and encompasses the global community. While there is general consensus on the need for reform, my delegation remains deeply concerned about the General Assembly’s persistent inability to ignite this conversation so that it results in a tangible outcome. Time and again, we have come before the Assembly calling for equitable representation on the Security Council and an increase in its membership. We have deliberated on the answers to these questions far too long, and it is high time that we moved forward and came to grips with the difficult choices to be made. As a small State committed to strict adherence to the rule of law, nationally and internationally, the Maldives has always maintained that the Council’s credibility and legitimacy must be ensured through broader and more equitable representation of Member States in its composition. As it is now, the Security Council membership reflects a flawed representation of the world in which its smaller members are left behind. We, the small island developing States (SIDS), have shown ourselves to be integral members of the international community, taking on important responsibilities in promoting peace and security on the international stage. As a group, we currently provide peacekeepers to missions around the world in numbers disproportionate to our populations. Yet our voice on the Council remains vastly underrepresented. Over the past quarter-century, only six SIDS have served on the Council, out of the 125 members elected during that period. SIDS continue to face growing security concerns that range from transnational organized crime to piracy and the effects of climate change. The Maldives raised those issues at the Security Council’s Arria Formula meeting on the security dimensions of climate change in 2013 and in its open debate on the security concerns of small island developing States in July (see S/PV.7499). While we welcome such initiatives as useful, productive and essential to recognition of the vast array of security concerns that Member States face, we must ensure that the momentum they generate is not lost. We must ensure that concrete steps are taken, including the designation of a SIDS-specific seat. An expanded membership must reflect the diverse nature of the Member States that make up the Organization. It is precisely because the Security Council lacks diverse perspectives that it is unable to meet the diverse needs of the international community. A diverse membership of this principal organ of the United Nations will be achieved only when we give paramount importance to the principles of equality and representation. That is especially true when it comes to Security Council election campaign finances. In recent years, the Assembly has seen Council seats reduced to trophies, bought at exorbitant costs by those privileged enough to have the financial ability to do so. A discussion on membership should appropriately address the fact that Member States do not compete on an equal footing, because when it comes to membership in that privileged organ, we have been unwillingly relegated to a caste and class system that is in desperate need of overhaul. We stand at a pivotal moment in world affairs. The challenges that humankind faces are grave and pressing. It is clear that the world today is distinctively different from that inhabited by our predecessors 70 years ago. Its problems are becoming increasingly interdependent and interconnected owing to globalization. In countering the threats of the twenty-first century, the role of the Security Council cannot be overemphasized. To achieve the noble principles of the Charter of the United Nations, which join the members of the international community  — individually and collectively — it is imperative that the Council embody the diversity of the global community and become more accountable, coherent and transparent. The Council’s functioning and working methods must become more efficient and genuinely represent the will and interests of the larger United Nations membership. The Maldives calls upon the Council’s members to ensure the relevance of the Security Council and that its ability to tackle the world’s most pressing issues is increased. At the beginning of the seventieth session, the Assembly adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (resolution 70/1). It is an Agenda that gives hope for the hopeless, an Agenda that has the potential to truly transform our world. Paramount in the Agenda is the call that no one should be left behind. Throughout the past decades of the intergovernmental negotiations on Security Council reform, there has been a general consensus on the need to reform the Council. Paramount in the vast majority of statements was the concern that the Council be transformed to ensure greater representation and equality among the membership. Most of all, the arguments were premised on the basis that everyone should be truly represented and that no one should be left behind.

I would like to express our gratitude to the President for having convened this meeting on this important agenda item. I would like to thank Mr. Sam Kutesa, President of the General Assembly at its sixty-ninth session, for his leadership, which provided much-needed momentum for the process of Security Council reform. My thanks also go to Ambassador Courtenay Rattray, Permanent Representative of Jamaica, for his tireless efforts and valuable contribution to the work of the intergovernmental negotiations. I wish also to welcome the appointment of Ambassador Sylvie Lucas, Permanent Representative of Luxembourg, as the Chair of the intergovernmental negotiations. We fully believe that her experience will allow her to steer the process of Security Council reform to a meaningful advancement. Viet Nam has consistently supported efforts to reform the Security Council in order to enable it to effectively perform its functions as the primary organ for maintaining international peace and security, especially in the context of the unprecedented challenges of today. We are of the view that the Council needs to be expanded in both membership categories so as to ensure that it truly represents all United Nations Members, as stipulated in the Charter of the United Nations, with equitable regional representation and adequate representation of developing countries. At the same time, we stress the need to further improve the Council’s working methods to ensure its increased democracy, transparency and effectiveness. We look forward to the Council continuing the practice of holding open debates and public briefings, as well as strengthening the coordination and collaboration between the Council and the General Assembly. With regard to the way forward, we believe that further substantive negotiations should be based on decision 69/560 of 14 September 2015 and on the momentum and progress made during the sixty-ninth session. We would like to highlight the importance of the continued engagement of every Member State to ensure that the intergovernmental negotiations continue to be conducted in good faith, with mutual respect and in an open, inclusive and transparent manner. To conclude, I assure members of our full support and readiness to work closely with the President of the General Assembly and the Chair of the intergovernmental negotiations to move the reform process forward.

I thank the President for having convened this important meeting. My delegation associates itself with the statement made on behalf of the L.69 group by Ambassador Menissa Rambally, Permanent Representative of Saint Lucia (see A/70/PV.43). We are confident that we will make meaningful progress on the important subject of Security Council reform under the President’s able leadership and guidance. Bhutan welcomes the appointment of Ambassador Sylvie Lucas, Permanent Representative of Luxembourg, as Chair of the intergovernmental negotiations. We have no doubt that the intergovernmental negotiations will receive renewed impetus and momentum during the seventieth session. We look forward to working closely with Ambassador Lucas and assure her of our full support and cooperation. I also wish to place on record our deep appreciation of the former President, His Excellency Mr. Sam Kutesa, for his leadership and commitment to advancing the work of the intergovernmental negotiations during the Assembly’s sixty-ninth session. Likewise, my delegation would also like to commend the previous Chair of the intergovernmental negotiations, Ambassador Courtenay Rattray, Permanent Representative of Jamaica, for his steadfast commitment and for the excellent manner in which he steered the deliberations of the eleventh round of the intergovernmental negotiations. The imperative to make the Security Council more representative, transparent and accountable has been recognized since 1993. In 2005, our leaders called for the early reform of the Security Council as an essential element of our overall effort to reform the United Nations and to make it more broadly representative, efficient and transparent so as to further enhance its effectiveness and legitimacy. Bhutan agrees on the need to reform the Security Council to make it more representative, transparent and accountable, in keeping with contemporary realities. The expansion of the Security Council in both the permanent and non-permanent categories of membership and improvement in its working methods are necessary to further strengthen and enhance the legitimacy and functioning of the Council. For over 20 years, beginning with the Open-ended Working Group and thereafter in the intergovernmental negotiations, we have engaged extensively on all issues set out in decision 62/557. However, the lack of a negotiating text has inhibited meaningful progress. The seventieth anniversary of the United Nations presents an opportune occasion to make concrete progress on a subject that has remained on our agenda for over two decades. We must build on the progress made during the sixty-ninth session and make the intergovernmental negotiations results-oriented by commencing text-based negotiations. In that context, decision 69/560, which was adopted by consensus, is a noteworthy development and an important milestone. It also provides a sound basis on which to advance the work of the intergovernmental negotiations during the seventieth session. We therefore look to the leadership of the President and the Chair of the intergovernmental negotiations to take the process forward so that concrete results are attained. My delegation looks forward to engaging constructively with all delegations in that endeavour.

I thank the President for convening this important meeting on Security Council reform, which is taking place in the wake of the celebration of the seventieth anniversary of the United Nations last week. This is a good opportunity to prepare and engage in practical, meaningful and results-oriented negotiations. Allow me to share the position of Suriname with regard to Security Council reform. First, we wish to thank Ambassador Courtenay Rattray, Permanent Representative of Jamaica, for his hard work and dedication throughout the most recent round of the intergovernmental negotiations. We also welcome the appointment of Ambassador Sylvie Lucas, Permanent Representative of Luxembourg, as the new Chair of the intergovernmental negotiations on Security Council reform, and wish her success in that significant responsibility. The Republic of Suriname supports Security Council reform in light of the new realities and changed circumstances directing global affairs and inter-State relations in today’s world. Suriname wishes to reiterate its commitment to that reform process, which must be inclusive, balanced and consensus-based and must take into account the interests of developing and developed States Members of the United Nations alike in order to further promote, preserve and strengthen international peace and security. Suriname is of the view that, while decision 69/560 is a base document, it cannot and should not be considered to be an exclusive guide to the negotiating process. The negotiating process must remain open to additional perspectives and not be constrained by unrealistic timelines for completing its work. Consequently, we also welcome the Council’s organization of open debates on this subject and engagement in informative discussions that allow the parties involved to be heard and to contribute. To achieve a more accountable, representative and transparent Security Council, contemporary regional and international realities must be reflected in any new structure that we may establish. Seventy years after the original composition and structure of the Security Council were established, it is obvious that improving its representation and the working methods is not only necessary is but essential to the existence of the Organization and to the belief and trust that the world community — made up of States large and small, developed and developing States, coastal, island and landlocked States, States from the North and the South — has placed in our Organization. It is in that spirit that the Republic of Suriname will participate in the new round of the intergovernmental negotiations.

My delegation welcomes the convening of this meeting. If anything has emerged clearly from the statements made today, it is Members’ great agreement that there is an urgent need to adapt the structure of our Organization so as to allow it to adequately reflect the changed international scene. In that regard, Peru reiterates that there is a need to advance towards the goals of achieving a renewed, reformed, expanded, more democratic and representative Security Council that is also effective and efficient and whose methods of work are more transparent. My delegation wishes to acknowledge the efforts and valuable work done by the Permanent Representative of Jamaica, Ambassador Courtenay Rattray, as facilitator of the intergovernmental negotiations on Security Council reform, who carried out his delicate functions with transparency and the substantive participation of the Member States. I would also like to congratulate the Ambassador Sylvie Lucas of Luxembourg on her appointment to head that important process at this session. I take this opportunity to tell her that she can count on the support of my delegation. In accordance with the content of decision 69/560, my delegation values the work done in the intergovernmental negotiations process during the past session. Nevertheless, we are aware that we need a document that covers all the positions of all delegations involved, because Security Council reform will be feasible only if it enjoys the broadest possible political support of the membership. I reaffirm the full willingness of my country to continue to participate constructively in the process of intergovernmental negotiations on the question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council and related matters. I will not expand on Peru’s position on the points contained in decision 62/557. I will simply mention that we support the inclusion of new members, permanent and non-permanent alike, in order to promote a just and equitable regional representation. My delegation believes that such an expansion should be sufficient to increase the Council’s representativeness, but not so great as to render it less effective. With regard to the issue of the veto, Peru has consistently maintained a principled position in favour of its eventual abolition. Aware of the inherent difficulties of such a move, my delegation supports a compromise limiting the use of the veto and eliminating the possibility of its use in cases of genocide, crimes against humanity or successive flagrant violations of human rights or international humanitarian law. We welcome the policy statement issued by France and Mexico in that regard, and participated in the drafting of the code of conduct recently launched by the Accountability, Coherence and Transparency group, of which we are members. With regard to working methods, we need practical reform to increase the Council’s legitimacy and transparency and the efficiency and effectiveness of its work. Having discussed Security Council reform for more than two decades, we can make progress only if we show flexibility and willingness to make mutual concessions. Reaffirming our national positions does nothing but postpone a decision that we all consider to be of the greatest importance, because if we wish to reform the Security Council, we must turn that wish into concrete commitments.

My delegation thanks the President for convening this important meeting. We stress our commitment to Security Council reform. I extend our welcome and recognition to the Permanent Representative of Luxembourg, Ambassador Sylvie Lucas, on her appointment as Chair of the intergovernmental negotiating process. We offer her our support. At the same time, we reiterate our gratitude to the former President of the General Assembly, Mr. Sam Kutesa, and Ambassador Courtenay Rattray, Permanent Representative of Jamaica, for their work during the sixty-ninth session. Decision 69/560, adopted by consensus, should serve as the basis for our work on a subject of the greatest importance for the Organization. We must be able to make progress towards creating a Security Council that responds to new geopolitical realities and whose working methods are guided by transparency, effectiveness and efficiency. As we have stated in the past, my country supports the expansion of Security Council membership in the permanent and non-permanent categories alike. In that respect, we support the inclusion of Brazil, Germany, Japan and India. At the same time, we support the African aspiration, which we believe to be absolutely indispensable and appropriate. With regard to the use of the veto, my country has expressed its position in regard to the extension of that privilege. As a consequence of its position, Chile, alongisde 155 other Member States, supports the code of conduct to limit its use, as well as the French- Mexican initiative along those lines. I shall not elaborate on our national position on other aspects of this issue, but my delegation wishes to reiterate its commitment to a constructive and flexible approach to Security Council reform. We appeal to all Member States to demonstrate the same flexibility to advance our common aim.

Today we are addressing the complex and important issue of Security Council reform, following 20 years of discussion. In that regard, we commend the efforts made over the years to facilitate this discussion, and express our thanks and gratitude to Ambassador Courtenay Rattray, Permanent Representative of Jamaica, for his leadership during the sixty-ninth session. We welcome the appointment of Ambassador Sylvie Lucas of Luxembourg as the new Chair of intergovernmental negotiations. We also congratulate the newly elected non-permanent members of the Security Council for the biennium 2016-2017. The State of Kuwait welcomes the Security Council’s adoption this morning of presidential statement S/PRST/2015/19, related to the improvement of the working methods of the Security Council. The statement reaffirms the complementarity among the principal organs of the United Nations. We hope that it signals another step towards strengthening reform and attaining our goals. Over the years, we have witnessed many international and regional initiatives addressing the five elements of reform pursuant to decision 62/557. We wish to stress once again that the intergovernmental negotiations are the only forum to reach consensus in regard to the expansion and reform of the Security Council pursuant to that decision, which lays the foundation for the negotiations and their ownership by the Member States. The State of Kuwait has endorsed the code of conduct put forward by the Accountability Coherence and Transparency group in regard to the improvement of the working methods of the Security Council, including the restriction of the right of veto in cases of crimes against humanity. In that regard, we welcome the French initiative calling on the five permanent members of the Security Council to voluntarily refrain from its use in such instances. The position of the State of Kuwait remains unchanged. We feel that all proposals to reform the Security Council should be aimed at empowering it to become more representative and to reflect the new international reality that has emerged since the establishment of the United Nations 70 years ago. This will require the political resolve to bring points of view closer together in order to overcome differences and find common ground regarding the future of the reform process. We are confident that Ambassador Lucas will help us to achieve such consensus through her able leadership of the intergovernmental negotiations. The State of Kuwait believes that reform should be holistic; it should be an ongoing process leading to the evolution of all United Nations organs. It should make them more complementary and add greater balance to the work of the Organization. We must focus on developing the relationship of the Security Council with other United Nations organs. The Security Council should not encroach on the competencies and mandates of other organs, such as the Economic and Social Council and the General Assembly. It should restrict its role to discharging its mandate to maintain international peace and security. We must pursue our work to improve the working methods of the Security Council by ensuring greater transparency and clarity and the adoption of permanent rules of procedure. Any expansion of the Council’s membership should give smaller countries access to membership so that they can contribute to its work. We should also take into consideration the right of Arab and Muslim countries to be fairly represented, in line with their number and importance and in defence of the principles of the Charter of the United Nations. The State of Kuwait feels that achieving any reform will require cool heads and flexibility. We must impose no measure that could undermine the unity and credibility of the Organization.

I welcome this opportunity to make a few comments at the end of this very informative debate. The large number of Member States and groups whose representatives have spoken today demonstrates the importance of Security Council reform. I wish first to thank the President of the General Assembly for having entrusted me with chairing the intergovernmental negotiations on Security Council reform at the seventieth session. I am very honoured by the confidence that President Lykketoft has placed in me. I am also mindful of the responsibility that goes with this appointment. Members may rest assured that I will do my utmost to show myself worthy of it. Secondly, I wish to pay tribute to my colleague Ambassador Courtenay Rattray, who preceded me as Chair of the intergovernmental negotiations. I welcome his tremendous commitment to the United Nations. Alongside his team and the support of Member States, Ambassador Rattray unquestionably succeeded in giving new impetus to the reform process. I will do my best to continue along the trail blazed at the sixty-ninth session and to advance the negotiations on Council reform. Thirdly, I thank my colleagues for their congratulations, expressions of support, words of encouragement and even their advice for the work ahead. It is my conviction that we will be able to make progress in Security Council reform only if Member States commit, in good faith, to respecting one another in an open, inclusive and transparent manner. I am committed to working independently and impartially to promote an environment conducive to such constructive and collective engagement. The framework for my work is clear, as outlined in the substantive decision 69/560, adopted on 14 September by the General Assembly. It is through that decision and others adopted from 2008 to 2014  — beginning with decision 62/557 — that the Assembly has mandated the intergovernmental negotiations. The framework of my mission is also set by the letter of appointment by the President of the General Assembly, dated 23 October. In the same spirit that President Lykketoft conveyed in his letter and in his statement from this rostrum this morning (see A/70/PV.43), I encourage all Member States to maintain the momentum generated at the last session to advance the reform process on the basis of decision 69/650, and in particular the positions and proposals of Member States as laid out in the decision’s text and annex and distributed to the General Assembly in the President’s letter of 31 July. For the first time, we have a text referenced in a decision of the General Assembly, which will allow Member States to engage in substantive negotiations on reform. I encourage everyone to seize this opportunity. I am mindful that reform of the Security Council is one of the most difficult reforms to make in the context of the United Nations. The stakes are high, but the difficulty of the task must not cause us to shrink from it. It is in that spirit that I look forward to working with all during this anniversary session of our Organization. With the support of the President of the General Assembly and the commitment of all stakeholders, I am convinced that we will be able to continue to move ahead on Security Council reform and contribute to the strong United Nations for a better world that our Heads of State and Government vehemently called for a month ago in this very Hall.

The General Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 121.