A/74/PV.34 General Assembly

I would like to start by thanking the Chairs of the intergovernmental negotiation process at the seventy-third session of the General Assembly, Ambassadors Lana Nusseibeh and Christian Braun, of the United Arab Emirates and of Luxembourg, respectively, for their leadership of the process. During the general debate at the seventy-fourth session of the General Assembly, almost all our leaders spoke eloquently about the need to strengthen multilateralism and the United Nations. A strong rules-based multilateral system requires an effective, efficient and responsive United Nations. Reform will be critical if the United Nations is to respond effectively to the complex challenges of the twenty-first century. In particular, reform of the Security Council is necessary to make the United Nations effective, efficient and responsive. The international community needs a Security Council that is able to act swiftly and decisively when confronted with global crises. Our discussions on Security Council reform are therefore a very important part of strengthening the multilateral rules-based system. The intergovernmental negotiation process is important and essential to strengthening the Security Council and the multilateral system. Singapore has reiterated its position on Security Council reform many times in the General Assembly. In our view, reform of the Security Council is necessary to ensure that the Council is accountable and credible and enjoys legitimacy. In order to enhance the credibility and legitimacy of the Council, its composition must reflect contemporary realities and the current diversity of Member States. There must be greater geographical representation and inclusiveness in the Council, especially from such underrepresented regions as Africa. Singapore has consistently supported the expansion in membership in both the permanent and non-permanent categories. In addition, we support the need to enhance opportunities for the representation of small States and small island developing States in the Council. In any reform exercise, small States should not be disadvantaged or further marginalized. The intergovernmental negotiation process cannot be an exercise in accommodating only the interests of larger and medium-sized countries; we also have to take into account the interests of small States and small island developing States. We will soon begin the twelfth year of discussions on Security Council reform under the intergovernmental negotiation process. My delegation hopes that this is the year where we will see some tangible progress. I have often raised these issues at the General Assembly. Is the intergovernmental negotiation process a vehicle for reform or is it a vehicle to maintain the status quo? Does the process help or hinder the process of Security Council reform? If the process is to be taken seriously, it has to deliver tangible progress. We in the General Assembly have to inject greater urgency in our work in order to ensure that the process delivers concrete progress this year. My delegation has always taken a pragmatic approach to the issue of Security Council reform. In this regard, please allow me to make a few points. First, Member States must acknowledge and build on the work done and progress made over the past few years. We have to expand the areas that enjoy convergence and find solutions to areas where there are differences. We believe that the revised elements of commonality and issues for further consideration are a good basis for our work this year. We have to listen to all views and ensure that all options remain on the table. Singapore’s long-standing view has been that if the intergovernmental negotiation process is to deliver some progress, then there has to come a point in the process where Member States engage in text-based negotiations. We believe that text-based negotiations can help both to identify differences and to find ways to bridge those differences and build convergence. Secondly, we must build confidence and increase the level of trust in the way delegations engage with each other on this issue, whether it is through the intergovernmental negotiation process or through more informal discussions. Any reform of the Security Council will require a strong foundation of trust, understanding and convergence if it is to be successful. Ultimately, our goal is to strengthen the multilateral system. I would encourage the President of the General Assembly to convene informal discussions among the key delegations as a way of building understanding on the crucial outstanding issues. As we prepare for another year of the intergovernmental negotiation process, my delegation hopes that all Member States, in particular the permanent members of the Security Council, will seriously reflect on their role and responsibility with regard to the reform of the Council. By virtue of their privileged position, the permanent members have a special responsibility to provide leadership in the reform process. Ultimately, any reform of the Council will enhance its legitimacy and thereby the legitimacy of the permanent members as well. Thirdly, there has been some progress on Security Council working methods, and this effort needs to be intensified. We welcome steps taken to improve the Council’s transparency, efficiency and engagement with non-members. We also commend the work done by the Informal Working Group on Documentation and Other Procedural Questions to address the working methods of the Council in the past several years, most recently under the chairpersonship of Kuwait. We look forward to seeing sustained momentum on this issue by the Informal Working Group next year. In addition, Council members must make serious efforts to implement presidential note 507 (S/2017/507), including with regard to the timely submission of the annual report of the Security Council to the General Assembly and of the monthly assessment reports of Council presidencies. These reports are an important part of ensuring the transparency, accountability and legitimacy of the Security Council and should be taken seriously by all Council members. Let me conclude by saying that Singapore looks forward to working actively with all delegations in the intergovernmental negotiation process.

First of all, as today is the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women, we would like to “orange the world” to draw the its attention to this heinous crime. We therefore ask the General Assembly to join us in our activism and lend its support to this cause. Orange is the colour of our activism. With respect to the agenda item 122, I would like to thank the President of the General Assembly for convening this important and timely debate, which is taking place when we are already a year into the implementation phase of the many ground-breaking reforms related to the Organization, as well as on the eve of the seventy-fifth anniversary of the United Nations. This remarkable anniversary provides us with more than just momentum; it confers upon us a duty to finally tackle what is perhaps the most difficult reform of all — that of the Security Council. Hungary firmly believes that the United Nations reform process will not be complete until its main executive organ is adapted to today’s challenges. The President of the General Assembly has inherited a complicated task, in which he can count on Hungary as a long-term supporter of Security Council reform. Let me now thank the Chairs of the previous session of the intergovernmental negotiations — the Ambassadors of the United Arab Emirates and of Luxembourg — for their tireless work in moving the process forward. The close and transparent consultations with Member States and the schedule planned well in advance were practices that should be continued this year. We are looking forward to the timely appointment of new Chairs of the process and are ready to examine all proposals aimed at a more extended and formalized intergovernmental negotiations process. Hungary believes that we need a reasonably ambitious, but realistic, agenda, with comprehensive, results-oriented and practical discussions on the five key issues set out in decision 62/557 of 15 September 2008  — the date of which demonstrates the long overdue nature of completing the task before us. We should not get caught in the loop of repeating the same intergovernmental negotiations session over and over again. In our view, all the important documents agreed during previous sessions should be taken into account, which will allow us to build on the progress already achieved. Exploring red lines and possible limits of political will on the part of the most influential stakeholders remains essential. Let me now briefly underline the main points of the Hungarian position on Security Council reform. With regard to the size and configuration of the Security Council, Hungary continues to support the enlargement of the Council in both permanent and non-permanent categories. Enlargement must be based on equitable geographical representation. We call for a second non-permanent seat for the Group of Eastern European States  — a request that stands under any enlargement model and which perhaps received the most universal support, together with the need for greater representation of the African countries, which we, of course, also support. During the previous intergovernmental negotiations, we heard a lot on that subject. We also recognize and respect the aspirations of other regional and cross-regional groups. Enlargement will necessarily mandate an overhaul of the Security Council’s working methods. We witnessed positive developments in this area, and we believe that they should be continued. With regard to the relationship between the Security Council and the General Assembly, more needs to be done to achieve clearer and more detailed rules on the Council’s coordination and cooperation with the main organs of the United Nations, Member States and other stakeholders. As we work on comprehensive reform, Council members could — and should — continue to work on further gradual improvements of the Council’s working methods. We believe that those two processes are not mutually exclusive; rather, they could create virtuous cycles. We recognize that the issue of the use of the veto remains the biggest stumbling block to further progress. Nevertheless, we are encouraged by the growing support of States Members for the code of conduct of the Accountability, Coherence and Transparency group to prevent or stop atrocity crimes, as well as for the French-Mexican proposal on voluntary restraint in the use of the veto power. These initiatives have the potential to lead to a longer term solution on these matters. We look forward to the guidance of the President of the General Assembly throughout the process and assure him of Hungary’s constructive participation.

At the outset, I would like to join previous speakers in celebrating the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women. We underscore the importance of this occasion and its important goal. My delegation aligns itself with the statements delivered by the representatives of Sierra Leone and Kuwait on behalf of the Group of African States and the Group of Arab States, respectively (see A/74/PV.33). I would like to add the following points in my national capacity. First, we wholeheartedly thank the President of the General Assembly for convening today's meeting on this crucial topic, namely, the question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council and other matters related to the Security Council. We also thank him for the particular importance he attaches to the expansion of the Security Council and its reform, which was made clear in the statement delivered on his behalf by the representative of Croatia earlier today (see A/74/PV.33). We welcome the efforts of the Chairs of the intergovernmental negotiations, in particular Mrs. Lana Nusseibeh, Permanent Representative of the United Arab Emirates, and Mr. Christian Braun, Permanent Representative of Luxembourg, during the seventy-third session of the General Assembly. We look forward to the appointment of new Chairs of the intergovernmental negotiations during the current session. Today’s opening remarks on agenda item 122 on behalf of the President of the General Assembly reflect his strong sense of the need to build the widest possible consensus within the framework of negotiations process and to strengthen trust among all States Members in the process. In this vein, the new Chairs will benefit from Egypt’s full support once they are appointed, as we trust that they will be able to build consensus among all States and Groups. We wish them every success in striving to fulfil that objective. Egypt is convinced that achieving genuine and comprehensive reform of the Security Council is a cornerstone of the reform of the United Nations system towards the realization of the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and in the operationalization of the multilateral system in general. Such reform will make it possible for contemporary challenges to be addressed and for the aspirations of developing countries, particularly those on the African continent, to be fulfilled. To those ends, efforts in the intergovernmental negotiations process will have to be transparent, inclusive and fully owned by all Member States if a consensus-based solution that enjoys the widest possible political backing and which addresses all five interconnected core issues of negotiations set out in decision 62/557 is to be found. We trust that the clear parameters will constitute the basis for the work of the incoming co-chairs of the intergovernmental negotiations process. On the basis of our previous experience as an elected member of the Security Council, we firmly believe that no genuine reform of the Security Council is possible without addressing the structural irregularities inherent in that organ, in particular the fact that only the five permanent members have the power of veto. That demonstrates the validity of the Common African Position, which calls, in principle, for an end to the right of veto. If it is not abolished, all new permanent members must enjoy the prerogatives and privileges of the existing permanent members, including the right to veto. That is necessary in order to ensure equitable representation and that the reform process is effective. In that context, I would like to emphasize that, for our part, partial reform that increases the number of permanent members of the Security Council while failing to address the question of the right to veto is meaningless, since merely increasing the number of permanent members of the Security Council would not allow us to achieve genuine and just reform, but would entrench the existing imbalance and structural inequalities in the Security Council. I reiterate Egypt’s strong commitment to the Common African Position, as contained in the Ezulwini Consensus and the Sirte Declaration. It is the only position that has been repeatedly confirmed by the African Summits. They provide for a comprehensive vision of Security Council reform based around the five interconnected core issues, as stipulated in decision 62/557. As far as Africa is concerned, the only way to reverse the historic injustice that the African continent has suffered is through the full implementation of provisions of the Ezulwini Consensus and the Sirte Declaration. Members of the General Assembly have increasingly supported the Common African Position, which is a clear acknowledgment of their growing recognition of the importance of putting an end to the historic injustice suffered by the African continent, which is still underrepresented in the Security Council, as recognized by all. Moreover, African countries do not have enough non-permanent representation in the Security Council to enable the African continent to put forward its own vision on the work of the Security Council in general, and on African questions in particular, given that such issues represent the majority of items on the agenda of the Security Council. We reject the attempts of some to exploit the African position for their own purposes, without the genuine will to support all of its elements. In conclusion, after several attempts at previous sessions to produce various documents as vehicles for the reform process, we hope that efforts at the current session will focus on creating a common resolve to make genuine progress and on building consensus among all States and Groups in order to reach the most widely accepted solution. We believe that achieving an agreement on the principles and parameters of the reform process is an essential and decisive step that must be taken before taking ill-considered steps whose outcome may further widen differences and lead to unwanted and counterproductive consequences. I would like to draw attention to the fact that the most recent African Summit, held in February, did not request the Group of African States in New York to begin text-based negotiations in the current phase. I would like also to reiterate that my country stands ready to work with all Member States to bring about a comprehensive reform that results in a more transparent, more credible and more equitable Security Council so that it can effectively discharge its mandate to maintain international peace and security.

At present, Security Council reform is one of the core elements of the reform of the United Nations with the aim of enabling the Council to better carry out its mission to ensure peace and security in the world. The Security Council is one of the major organs of the United Nations. It has a fundamental mandate to safeguard world peace and security and plays an important role in building a peaceful and stable world. However, nowadays the principles of respect for sovereignty, equality and non-intervention are openly disregarded in the Security Council, and interference in internal affairs, pressure and infringement on the independence of sovereign States continue unabated. Article 24 of the Charter of the United Nations stipulates that the Security Council should act strictly in accordance with the purposes and principles of the United Nations in discharging its mandate. However, in the Security Council, the internationally agreed and recognized fundamental principles are openly disregarded due to the arbitrariness and high- handedness of specific countries. Nevertheless, more than 70 years since the foundation of the United Nations, the Security Council is still used as a political tool by a particular country to pursue its own specific interests. In order to properly discharge its mandate, the Security Council should firmly ensure international justice and impartiality for the benefit of all Member States, not only for the strategic benefit of a specific country. The delegation of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea would hereby like to clarify its principled position with regard to the Security Council reform. First, Security Council reform should be carried out based on the principle of ensuring international justice, impartiality and democracy. We should no longer allow any particular country to disregard the United Nations Charter. Secondly, Security Council reform should be carried out on the principle of ensuring the full representation of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries and other developing countries, which make up the majority of Member States. Therefore, providing those countries with full and equal representation is an urgent necessity for building a democratically strengthened Security Council. While it is acknowledged that the intergovernmental negotiations on Security Council reform have been ongoing for more than 10 years, nevertheless, there are still severely differing views with regard to increasing the number of permanent seats on the Security Council. In that context, the most feasible way to solve the problem is to proceed by increasing the number of non-permanent seats ahead of all other reforms. We regard that as one of the ways to help correct the uneven composition of the Security Council. Thirdly, the criteria for States to become permanent members should be reviewed carefully if the composition of the Security Council were be expanded. Security Council member States should by nature be peace-loving countries that can consistently contribute to maintaining peace and security in the world and deserve the trust of the international community. A country, such as Japan, which justifies the war of aggression to Asian countries through embellishment, as well as crimes against humanity, is never eligible to be a member of the Security Council. The delegation of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea further hopes that the sincere efforts of all Member States for Security Council reform will achieve success and meet the high expectations of the international community.

I take the floor to join colleagues in expressing our appreciation to the President for convening this meeting on agenda item 122 on the question of equitable representation on the increase in the membership of the Security Council and other matters related to the Council ahead of the forthcoming intergovernmental negotiations. My delegation also joins those others who have already expressed their recognition of the commemoration of the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women, as this is a cause that Namibia fully supports. I align my statement to that delivered by the Permanent Representative of Sierra Leone on behalf of the Group of African States (see A/74/PV.33) and would like to add the following remarks in my national capacity. Many colleagues who have spoken here this morning have eloquently contrasted the United Nations of today with the United Nations that was established nearly 75 years ago. The undeniable reality is that the world we live in today is vastly different in virtually every respect from what it was 75 years ago. So much has changed and so many developments have taken place. The global population has nearly tripled in size since the 1950s, bringing with it the need to exploit and utilize, thereby ultimately putting so much more strain on, so many more of the planet’s resources. Following the end of colonialism, the world saw the end of the Cold War and the birth of new and independent nations, save for a few last unresolved cases where struggles to exercise inalienable rights to self-determination and independence are still ongoing. Global political power balances have shifted. Science and technology have evolved by leaps and bounds, and with that evolution, innovation, communication and people-to-people interaction and contact move today at near-supersonic speeds. As the Greek philosopher Heraclitus so aptly reminded us in the words famously attributed to him, “change is the only constant in life”. Change has indeed taken and continues to take place every day of our lives. And over all this time and despite all these developments, the unavoidable change that is required to bring the Security Council of yesteryear into step with modern-day realities and demands has remained elusive. In order for us to realize this long-overdue objective, we need determination and commitment on the part of each and every member of this assembly of nations to act in the collective interest of us all. We have witnessed winds of change in our lifetime and we know that the aspirations of people cannot be suppressed indefinitely. That is how and why youth movements, together with the use and impact of social media, have become such powerful agents of change. Let us not contribute nor give credence to the image and impression out there that we are all talk and no action, or as some young people say, “no action, talk only”. It is true that we have been talking now for more than 40 years about the need to reform the Security Council, and yet we have little to show for all the talking we have done thus far. In his statement before the General Assembly three months ago today, in this very Hall, the President of Namibia stated that the seventy-fifth anniversary of the United Nations next year will present an opportunity for concluding the reform of the Security Council, and that in order to reposition the Council to effectively address the new and emerging challenges of international peace and security, we need to conclude the intergovernmental negotiation process (see A/74/PV.6). In this respect, Namibia reiterates the Common African Position on Security Council reform, as articulated in the Ezulwini Consensus and the Sirte Declaration, and extends appreciation to those Member States that have embraced the Common African Position. Namibia continues to call for greater African representation in a reformed Security Council, as espoused in the Common African Position, which continues to enjoy increasingly broad support from the majority of the States Members. As we have repeatedly stated, the support for Africa should be based on the Ezulwini Consensus and the Sirte Declaration, as adopted by the African Union. This position calls for no less than two permanent seats with all the prerogatives and privileges of permanent membership, including the right of veto, and five non-permanent seats. In that regard, even though Africa is opposed in principle to the veto, it is of the view that so long as it exists, and as a matter of common justice, that power should be made available to all permanent members of the Security Council. In that regard, my delegation welcomes with great delight and appreciation the unequivocal support for the Common African Position contained in the Ezulwini Consensus and Sirte Declaration made on the record this morning by the Permanent Representatives of the Federal Republic of Germany and of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines on behalf of the Group of Four countries and the L.69 group of 42 countries, respectively (see A/74/PV.33). We also welcome the support for and recent adoption of the Common African Position by the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries, which encompasses 125 members and 25 observers, at its summit held in Azerbaijan. Namibia also welcomes the decision of the 15-member Summit of the Heads of State and Government of the Caribbean Community to support the Common African Position, as reflected in the Ezulwini Consensus and Sirte Declaration. That being said, we are cognizant that support for Africa’s representation in the permanent member category of the Security Council still remains ill-defined among a few Member States. We believe that the seventy-fifth anniversary of the United Nations next year will be a golden opportunity for all of us to reflect and take concrete steps towards ensuring the establishment of a reformed Security Council that reflects the realities of the twenty-first century. We therefore hope to see considerable progress through the intergovernmental negotiations process in 2020. I further call on all of us to redouble our efforts, work to ensure meaningful progress and deliver tangible results that will be to the benefit of all. Namibia wishes to reaffirm that the rollover decision of this session should be based on the 2015 framework document and the outcome paper of the seventy-third session. As already stated by the Permanent Representative of Sierra Leone speaking on behalf of Group of African States, the African Group regards the framework document produced at the sixty- ninth session as the main reference document of the intergovernmental negotiations (see A/74/PV.33). A total of 120 States Members supported that document. It accurately reflects the entirety of the Common African Position on all five clusters, and, importantly, it is not a document based on the understanding or interpretation of any individual or any group of Member States. In conclusion, Namibia is committed to a comprehensive reform that will ensure that the historical injustice against Africa is rectified. While we note the exception of a very small number of Member States that have yet to express their full support for the Common African position, my delegation is confident that it can be done with the broadest possible support from the larger membership of the United Nations. We hope that the President will soon appoint the new Chairs to lead the intergovernmental negotiation process in 2020. Namibia stands ready to bring its full support and cooperation to them.

At the outset, I would like to thank you, Mr. President, for convening this meeting on agenda item 122, “Question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council and other matters related to the Security Council”. We are confident that you will succeed in this endeavour. We also thank all those who contributed to the previous rounds of negotiations: delegations, co-Chairs and Secretariat staff. We align ourselves with the statements delivered by the representatives of Sierra Leone and Kuwait, conveying the Common African Position and the position of the Group of Arab States, respectively (see A/74/PV.33). We hope to begin serious negotiations that will achieve the desired goal of the intergovernmental negotiation process to effectuate unprecedented reform in the work of the Council. It is a matter of urgency and would help us achieve the noble goals of the Organization. The United Nations, as the chief international institution, seeks to regulate relations among States. Furthermore, it works through the Security Council to prevent crises, wars and catastrophes caused by the behaviour of States and to curb such behaviour through international laws and deterrent and preventive diplomacy, which is mainly dependent on our collective will to work in good faith and in keeping with the principles of the United Nations. Since the establishment of the Organization in 1945, the world has witnessed many developments that differ from those of the two decades that followed the establishment of the Organization: the 1940s and 1950s. Those major developments compel us to take necessary and important measures to address new challenges, including by reforming the most important organ of the United Nations tasked with the maintenance of international peace and security, that is, the Security Council. These reforms should be holistic and focused on the five key issues, including equitable geographic representation. There are entire continents and regions, including the African continent, that are not fairly represented in the Council. The African continent comprises 54 States Members of the United Nations and more than 70 per cent of the items on the Council’s agenda are African issues, yet the continent is not fairly represented in the Council. My delegation stresses the need for all States Members of the Organization to understand that it is time to redress the historic injustice done to the continent and to recognize its demands as legitimate, realistic and applicable. In their statements, all delegations and groups have agreed on supporting the right of the African continent. That view is also clearly expressed in the Ezulwini Consensus and the Sirte Declaration, which request two permanent seats on the Council with all prerogatives, including the veto, and two additional non-permanent seats. My delegation welcomes decision 73/554, adopted on 25 June (see A/73/PV.92), whereby the members of the General Assembly decided to resume the intergovernmental negotiation process on the equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council and other matters related to the Security Council and to include the item in the agenda of the seventy-fourth session. We must continue to try to understand each other so that we can make headway in achieving the process’s desired goals and overcome obstacles through an approach leading to a convergence, rather than divergence, of opinions with a view to avoiding the failure of negotiations. We are confident that we can reach an agreement, especially since there were many commonalities in previous rounds, chief among which was our agreement on the importance of reform. My delegation stresses the importance of working in a more serious way to make the negotiations a success, taking into consideration the urgent need to reform the Council and develop its working methods in a transparent and democratic manner, enabling it to successfully maintain international peace and security. The Security Council reform process compels us to consider all aspects of reform in a comprehensive and serious manner in order to speed up the process. That will be possible only through our collective will to act in good faith to enhance the effectiveness and transparency of the work of the Council and to address its unjust regional representation. The same applies to its working methods, which many have described as undemocratic. Many countries that have served as non-permanent members of the Council in the past have complained about the control imposed by the permanent members and about that fact that two years are not enough for non-permanent members to leave their mark. We stress the need to strengthen the relationship between the Council and the General Assembly, which represents the entire membership, so as to achieve harmony in the work of the two organs and remove overlap so that they are not seen as two entities working in two different organizations. My delegation also stresses the need to respect the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations governing the work and prerogatives of the various organs of the United Nations. In conclusion, my delegation stands ready to take part in the new round of the intergovernmental negotiation process on the reform of the Council, and we express our hope that the coming round will mark the beginning of a reinvigorated process that includes new ideas so that we can break the impasse and achieve the other noble goals we are all seeking to meet through the negotiations.

We thank you, Madam, for convening this plenary debate, which addresses a topic of great interest to many delegations. We would like to express our sincere appreciation to the co-chairs of the intergovernmental negotiation process at the seventy- third session, Ambassador Lana Zaki Nusseibeh of the United Arab Emirates and Ambassador Christian Braun of Luxembourg, for their dedication and hard work. We are also looking forward to working with the co-chairs of the process to be appointed at the current session. International cooperation, understanding and genuine dialogue are needed more than ever to meet contemporary global challenges. A United Nations system that is fit for purpose is, in turn, indispensable to support that cooperation. All Member States seem to agree in principle on the fundamental idea of reforming the United Nations to make the world body stronger and more responsive to the people it serves. Security Council reform is an essential part of the comprehensive reform of the United Nations, and Slovakia remains committed to achieving a good outcome in the process of making the Council more representative, efficient and transparent. I wish to note that it has been 40 years since the substantial reform of the Security Council was put on the agenda of the General Assembly. Therefore, my delegation joins other countries in calling for the start of text-based negotiations that would give the intergovernmental negotiations substantive meaning and accelerate the process. In that respect, the five key reform issues outlined in decision 62/557 remain the guiding principles of our work in the intergovernmental negotiations. The position of my delegation on a possible review of the membership of the Security Council is consistent and well documented. My country supports the expansion of both categories of membership and calls for an increase to no more than 25 members, while respecting geographical balance. The new members of the Council should, as a matter of principle, have the same responsibilities and obligations as the current members. I wish to underscore that the reformed Council should include one additional non-permanent seat for the Group of Eastern European States. A lot can also be achieved by enhancing the transparency and efficiency of the Council’s work. For that reason, we encourage the full implementation of presidential note S/2017/507. We also welcome positive movement towards improving the Council’s relationships with other United Nations organs, such as the General Assembly and the Secretariat, and the Peacebuilding Commission, as well as its interaction and dialogue with regional and subregional organizations, especially the African Union, the European Union, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and others. My delegation looks forward to engaging in open, transparent, inclusive and results-oriented negotiations with a view to moving the process forward at the current session of the General Assembly.

I thank the President for convening today’s annual General Assembly debate on the important issue of Security Council reform. I warmly welcome the prospective appointments of the two co-facilitators of the forthcoming intergovernmental negotiations. I look forward to closely cooperating with them, and I can assure the Assembly that the Korean Government will continue to support their work. My delegation aligns itself with the statement made by the Permanent Representative of Italy on behalf of the Uniting for Consensus group (see A/74/PV.33). I would now like to make the following points in my national capacity. Next year we will commemorate the landmark seventy-fifth anniversary of the United Nations, and I am of the view that the occasion should refocus our attention on the great need for Security Council reform. I look forward to constructively working together through the intergovernmental negotiations, which is the sole legitimate negotiating platform endorsed by Member States, through decision 62/557, of 2008. As we move forward in our collective endeavours to achieve a reformed Security Council, we need to be wary of the temptation to try a quick fix. Let us recall that the most recent and only reform of the Council took place in 1965. Once we finally reach an agreement on how to reform the Security Council this time around, the fact of the matter will remain that nobody will know when we will be afforded the next chance to do so again. In that connection, it is imperative that we seize this once-in-a-generation opportunity and work towards a durable reform that guarantees a more representative, efficient, transparent, accountable and democratic Security Council to the best possible extent based on the consensus of Member States, rather than a mere temporary fix. Against that backdrop, my delegation wishes to briefly emphasize the following key points. First, Security Council reform must be pursued with a long-term perspective in mind. If we advance with formulations of the Council that are based on the geopolitical reality of a specific moment in time, those formulations will remain static, unable to adapt to our ever-changing world and will hinder the essential work of the Council. Therefore, the composition of any reformed Council must be as flexible as possible in order to reflect the changing nature of the international geopolitical order. In that sense, an increase in permanent Council members will only complicate our common efforts to solve the challenges that the Security Council is faced with today, as well as the crises of tomorrow. Secondly, the will of the Member States needs to be reflected in a democratic manner consistent with the guiding ideals of the Organization. My delegation therefore believes that increasing the number of non-permanent seats, regularly elected at the General Assembly, as well as granting some of them opportunities to serve longer terms would provide the most realistic way forward to render the Security Council more democratic and more accountable. Thirdly, any reform should fundamentally help the Security Council deliver better results. Impediments to more effective and transparent Council operations will have to be redressed. In that vein, the veto power, which has been criticized for understandable reasons over the years, should not be expanded. Fourthly, groups that have not been duly represented since the Security Council was created must be provided with an opportunity to play legitimate leadership roles in the reformed Council. As the Permanent Representative of Italy emphasized, the Uniting for Consensus group has made many adjustments over the years in response to feedback from all negotiating groups. We will continue to work alongside other Member States and groups to seek the best possible way forward. Korea has had very close ties with the Security Council since the inception of the United Nations. Indeed, we believe that the security and development of Korea largely transpired as a result of Security Council support. As such, we feel a driving sense of duty to actively contribute to a reform that will further improve the Council. The Republic of Korea, alongside the Uniting for Consensus group, reaffirms our strong commitment to work with the President and all other groups and States to achieve our common goal of reforming the Security Council.

First, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela appreciates the convening of this plenary meeting to discuss the issue of equitable representation, the increase in membership and the long-awaited process of Security Council reform. Next year will mark the seventy-fifth anniversary of our Organization. We therefore believe that it will be a crucial moment to reaffirm the principles of inclusion, democratization and the legal equality of States as essential elements of multilateralism. That should be reflected in the process not only by way of the results, but also in the manner in which the necessary agreements are developed to achieve them. Our country remains convinced of the imperative need to make full and effective progress within the framework of the intergovernmental negotiating group as an essential element in ensuring the democratization of the highest organ and in guaranteeing greater representativeness and a renewed capacity to respond to the challenges facing the international community today in the areas of peace and security. We believe that the discussions held within the framework of the intergovernmental negotiating group have brought us closer to the recognition of quasi-universal principles, which undoubtedly offer an unquestionable opportunity for progress. That has enabled us to agree on the need to increase the representation of developing countries, especially African countries and small and medium- sized countries, as well as on the need to improve the working methods of the Security Council in order to ensure greater transparency. In that regard, we must redouble our efforts to correct the historical imbalances that persist to date and increase the presence of African, Latin American and Caribbean countries, as well as Asian and Pacific countries, in both the permanent and non-permanent categories of membership. Developing countries are the countries that are most often affected by conflicts and whose issues are most frequently addressed within the framework of the Security Council. For that reason, they should have adequate representation in the highest organ. Any struggle for the building of a more democratic and peaceful international system requires the assertion of those historical aspirations, thereby consolidating multipolarity and multicentrism and promoting truly inclusive multilateralism. We must strengthen the transparency, flexibility and political will of all States in the ongoing negotiation process on Security Council reform by promoting the prevalence of a constructive atmosphere of consultation and avoiding confrontation and the imposition of regional or national geopolitical interests over the collective and inclusive spirit. All States must feel that they are part of the process and be satisfied with it in order to ensure the necessary political legitimacy and acceptance. In that regard, we are concerned about the effort to impose artificial deadlines that could undermine the progress achieved so far. A decision made on the basis of pressure will lead only to greater inequality and conflict. For that reason, we must prioritize the process of thorough and democratic consultations that guarantee a comprehensive solution, with the common support of the Member States, before it is proposed to move on to negotiations based on texts on which we do not yet have clear principles, approach or methodology for doing so. In conclusion, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela reaffirms its commitment to achieving significant progress within the framework of the work of the intergovernmental negotiating group in order to guarantee equitable representation and an increase in the membership of the Security Council, as well as its comprehensive reform, as has historically been my country’s principled position. That is to be achieved under terms and conditions, of course, that will allow us to guarantee the unquestionable nature of the process and the highest level of acceptance on the part of our Organization’s membership.

Allow me to begin by thanking the previous co-facilitators, Ambassadors Christian Braun of Luxembourg and Lana Zaki Nusseibeh of the United Arab Emirates, for their hard work and dedication during the previous session of intergovernmental negotiations on Security Council reform. I also especially wish to highlight the continuous leadership of Ambassador Nusseibeh at the forefront of the process during the previous two-year period. Ecuador of course agrees and considers that continuity should be given to reform process precisely in order to accelerate it. Ecuador advocates for urgent Security Council reform. We need a more democratic, representative, transparent and effective Council — one that conforms to the realities of the modern world and the membership of the Organization. In order for the Council to be more democratic and representative, we must achieve a broader and more participatory Council for the Member States. We must put an end to the underrepresentation of developing countries from some regions, such as Africa and Latin America and the Caribbean. We must provide fair representation for the various transregional groups of developing countries, such as small island States. Increased representation goes beyond composition alone, it also involves more solid mechanisms for coordination, feedback and information for the Member States. We must give special attention to promoting the true modernization of working methods in order to achieve a more transparent Council. We must prioritize public Council meetings and leave closed-door diplomacy behind. We cannot keep making decisions without debate or discussion, and often without reference to the broader membership Council, such as the non-permanent members. We must put an end to the dual-door Council, with the first one closed to non-members of the Council and the second one closed to elected members. The current configuration of the Security Council is not only the result of the absence of consensus within the General Assembly, but also the tendency of the Council to uphold and perpetuate an unjust and inequitable international order. The reform that we seek must put an end to the hierarchical nature of its membership, one in which the power of the veto plays a negative role. Security Council privileges resulted from geopolitical scenarios that no longer exist and that correspond to both realities and imaginary concepts of the past century. It was first requested 40 years ago that this item be included in the debate on the agenda of the General Assembly. The intergovernmental negotiation process is 11 years old. In 2020 we will commemorate the seventy-fifth anniversary of this Organization. What better way to do so than by crafting a stronger Organization with a more credible and results-oriented reform of the Security Council? That reform, if it is to last, must be comprehensive and come as a result of broad and meaningful membership support. Whatever the outcome, it will impact the United Nations system and, therefore, multilateralism itself. For that reason, we have a responsibility to our peoples. We recognize the urgent need for reform and at the same time we recognize that it requires the consolidation of a broad consensus that will make it both substantive and sustainable. To that end, we must carry out the process in a spirit of flexibility and mutual respect so as to facilitate the greatest possible convergence of support. That is why we call for sufficient time to be set aside for the intergovernmental negotiation process, which at this session must begin as quickly as possible. To conclude, I would like to reiterate the priority that Ecuador attaches to the work of the Security Council. We participated in the open debates held in October on the situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question (see S/PV.8648), and on women and peace and security (see S/PV.8649). In that regard, I would like to pay tribute to the victims of violence on this the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women. This past week, Ecuador also participated in the Council’s debate on the role of reconciliation in the maintenance of international peace and security (see S/PV.8668). On that occasion I reiterated, and I do so once more, my delegation’s firm rejection of acts of extreme violence that took place in my country at the beginning of this past October and that failed in their objective of destabilizing the Government of Ecuador. Such acts of violence included, but were not limited to, terrorist attacks. The challenges facing the modern world demand that we can rely on a United Nations system that drives the culture of peace and is able to promote and guarantee human rights, thereby requiring that every one of the principal organs function in a coordinated, cooperative and effective manner.

The United States would like to join others in recognizing the co-Chairs of the intergovernmental negotiations for the seventy-third session of the General Assembly, Ambassadors Nusseibeh and Braun, whose work this past year laid a strong foundation for our current discussion. The United States continues to believe that the intergovernmental negotiations remain the most appropriate forum in which to discuss any changes to Security Council permanent membership. We remain open to any form of negotiations within the intergovernmental negotiations framework, as long as the format allows for broad consensus. Wide agreement across the intergovernmental negotiations is the only way reform will ultimately succeed. As we have previously stated, the United States remains open, in principle, to a modest expansion of the Security Council for both permanent and non-permanent members. We believe that that must be pursued in a way that will not diminish the Security Council’s effectiveness or its efficiency and that will not alter or expand the use of the veto. We recommend carefully considering the ability and willingness of any potential Council member to contribute to the maintenance of international peace and security. A Member State’s capacity to shoulder the considerable responsibility that comes with sitting on the Security Council should be taken into account. The Security Council is an important tool to address today’s most pressing threats to international peace and security, but it occasionally falls short. A well-executed expansion of the Council could help modernize the organ to better reflect twenty-first century global realities and increase its effectiveness. We remain firm, however, that any alteration of the current structure must be agreed to by consensus.

The Organization was founded mainly to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, and the important function of shouldering the responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security has been conferred upon the Security Council. However, a brief overview of the Council’s performance in the past and present reveals that, by any measure, it is not meeting our expectations. Its actions have not been consistently in conformity with the Charter of the United Nations. It is not truly presentative, democratic, transparent, accountable or rules-based. In many cases, it has been inactive and ineffective. In certain cases, its actions have been ultra vires, and it has been seriously exploited by certain permanent members. As a result, the Council is currently facing a legitimacy and credibility crisis, as well as a serious trust and confidence deficit and is not keeping pace with the significant changes of our time. The only gold standard for appraising the Council’s performance is the principles of justice and international law, which is stipulated in the Charter. Applying that criteria, for instance to assess the Council’s performance concerning situations in our region, clearly indicates that justice and the law are the main missing elements in almost all cases, from the oldest crisis of our region  — the illegal and illegitimate occupation of Palestine and parts of Syria and Lebanon — to Saddam Al-Hussein’s aggression against Iran, to the United States aggression against Iraq, to the continued inhumane blockade of the Gaza strip and to the creation of the world’s worst humanitarian crisis in Yemen. Therefore, in order to ensure justice and the rule of law and preserve and promote multilateralism, the Council’s reform is neither an option or an optional choice; it is the only solution. Nevertheless, none of the five core issues — namely, membership categories, the use of the veto, regional representation, the size of an enlarged Council and the Council’s working methods — which are interlinked, and therefore need to be discussed comprehensively within a package, should be considered less important than others. While developing countries must be more fairly represented in the Council, its reform should not be reduced to or be equated solely with its enlargement. For us enlargement is not an end in and of itself, but a means to an end. The Council’s enlargement will be useful only if it can fulfil our ultimate goal in reforming the Council, namely, to transform it into a truly democratic, representative, transparent, efficient, effective and, above all, rules-based and accountable body. In other words, if the performance of an expanded Council will be the same as it is now at its current size, why should we be engaged in such an exercise? Let us be crystal clear. We do not wish to rule out the Council’s enlargement. That, however, must be only one of our multiple objectives, not our sole objective. In any case, the composition of an expanded Council must be balanced, both geopolitically and geographically. Currently, geopolitically, the Council is dominated mostly by Western countries, three of which enjoy the right of the veto, and, geographically, while the Group of Western European and other States is overrepresented, the main regions are poorly represented in terms of number and enjoy fewer rights and privileges in terms of the use of the veto and permanent membership. Likewise, to date, one third of United Nations Members have never had a chance to become Council members, while 20 countries have each served from 10 to 22 years in that organ. That disproportionality and injustice must be addressed and rectified, including by limiting the chances of those that have served more and, instead, providing more opportunities to those that have never served in the Council or served fewer times. That is essential to ensuring equal opportunities for all States to become a Council member, as well as in preventing the domination of a certain regional or geopolitical group over the Council. As a result of Council reform, it should be ensured that its members make decisions based not on their own national interests, but on the common interests of the entire United Nations membership. Likewise, we must not neglect such important issues as the Council’s working methods, as they cannot be addressed only through enlarging the Council. In that context, transparency, strict adherence to the Charter and accountability by both the Council and its members with regard to their performance are extremely crucial. In certain cases, unfortunately, the Council has made politically motivated decisions with serious long-term negative implications for a nation and its socioeconomic development. Accordingly, modifying its working methods will prevent it from making such decisions. It should also prevent the Council from considering situations that do not constitute a threat to international peace and security, or issues that are related to the internal matters of States, the interference in which is explicitly prohibited by the Charter. The Council must also stop increasingly and expeditiously resorting to its Chapter VII functions. For instance, it has imposed sanctions in situations where no action was even necessary. As a result, the sovereign rights of a nation have been seriously violated. Chapter VII must be invoked as a measure of last resort, if necessary. In addition, the Council must remain accountable to all States, on behalf of which it acts. That is indeed the raison d’être of Article 24 of the Charter in making it compulsory for the Council to submit annual reports to the Assembly, in which all Member States are represented. In that context, in order to promote the legitimacy of the Council’s decisions, transforming it into a rules-based and accountable organ should be at the forefront of our efforts. We also share the view that the encroachment of the Council on the functions and powers of other United Nations organs, in particular the General Assembly, must be seriously prevented. In reiterating our long-standing principled position on the use of the veto, we stress that it should continue to be one of the main elements of our deliberations. The Council’s reform should be done by taking into account the lessons learned and the realities of our time. For example, if we cannot ensure that Council members are accountable for their action, or inaction, in discharging their duties in future, we will certainly face the same problems that we want to address now. With regard to procedure, our preference is to continue our deliberations within the intergovernmental negotiations, which should remain inclusive, truly membership-driven and conducted based on the highest level of transparency. In moving forward, there should be neither any undue delay in the process nor any hasty decisions or setting of artificial deadlines. While the elements of communality and issues for further consideration should include the views of all countries, at this stage, pushing for text-based negotiations seems to be premature. Any possible substantive decision on the subject at any stage must be adopted only by consensus. Finally, if we want our world to be governed by law and not ruled by power, making the Council and its members accountable is imperative. Of course, that is possible only through a State-driven process on the comprehensive and meaningful reform of the Security Council.

At the outset, we thank the President for convening us today. We welcome this important annual debate on Security Council reform. We look forward to the next round of intergovernmental negotiations. Canada is a member of the Uniting for Consensus group. As such, I fully endorse the statement made earlier today by my Italian colleague, Ambassador, Ms. Maria Angela Zappia (see A/74/PV.33). She explained very clearly how our group is committed to a reform process based on consensus, transparency and inclusivity. Similarly, we are committed to listening fully to other Member States, and to careful reflection, flexibility and working together. (spoke in French) Certainly, the Uniting for Consensus proposals have evolved over time. We have considered the positions of other Member States and groups through many negotiation cycles. Canada will continue to do its best to achieve the broadest possible consensus, as Security Council reform is of the utmost importance. It is necessary and will require a sustained effort. The aspirations and legitimate expectations of many Member States are at the heart of the issue, as are national interests and fundamental principles to ensure that the Security Council is representative, responsible, democratic, transparent and effective. (spoke in English) Canada will work together with Member States from Africa, from Small-Island Developing States, small States and from all developing countries, as well as cross-regional groups, to expand their representation on the Security Council. Historic wrongs need to be corrected. The Security Council needs to be adapted to reflect the world of today and tomorrow. It should not be frozen in the world of the last century. That is my commitment to the President, to my colleagues here today and to the facilitators of the intergovernmental negotiations process. They can count on Canada.

Let me join previous speakers in conveying our solidarity in connection with today’s commemoration of the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women. I am pleased to join this annual debate on the question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council and other matters related to the Security Council. On behalf of the delegation of the Federated States of Micronesia, I wish to commend the President for his leadership and commitment to the reform process and assure him of our full support. As a small island developing State, our prosperity and our security is interlinked with the reform of the Security Council. As we approach the seventy-fifth anniversary of the Charter of the United Nations next year, we must ensure that this milestone shapes a Council that is reflective of the global challenges before it and a membership reflective of today’s world. I align my statement with the statement made by Her Excellency Ms. Inga Rhonda King, Permanent Representative of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, on behalf of the L.69 group (see A/74/PV.33). I would like to make a few points in my national capacity. We look forward to the immediate appointment of the co-facilitators of the intergovernmental negotiations process so that the organizational tasks of the negotiations can proceed as soon as possible. Advance notice of the calendar of the meetings for the intergovernmental negotiations will assist small delegations to plan effectively. And for such an enterprise of importance to succeed, the intergovernmental negotiations meetings must take us well into the month of July to allow thorough discussions and negotiations. We also agree fully with those calls made that, in the case of the intergovernmental negotiations process, we cannot simply sweep aside the idea and need for documentation and attribution. If we are to build on the work of previous years, we must be able to identify and know the level of support for each proposal. The credibility of the meetings of the intergovernmental negotiations process must be transparent and inclusive. Although we realize that the Assembly will continue to debate the need for official records of the process, we fear even more strongly that, with each passing session of intergovernmental negotiations without such records and transparency, we will fail in our pursuit of our objectives. There is no better guarantee of transparency than availing our intergovernmental negotiations meetings of live webcasts.

I would like to thank the President of the General Assembly for convening today’s debate, as well as to clearly express our commitment to support the process of Security Council reform. The active engagement of the President of the General Assembly is vital for the overall success of its endeavour. The debate we are holding today is expected to provide a framework, set the stage and produce an outline for the negotiations that delegations will conduct during the current session of the General Assembly, in line with the roll-over decision 73/554, adopted here in the Hall on 25 June (see A/73/PV.92). It is highly unfortunate that delegations have yet to be informed as to when the intergovernmental negotiations on the Security Council reform will actually start, even though the General Assembly clearly stated in that decision that the process should be continued immediately. Exactly five months have passed since its adoption, the General Assembly session has been well under way for over two months, yet there is no clarity who will Chair the intergovernmental negotiations, when they will start, what the schedule will be, how the process will be organized and so forth. Nevertheless, I hope that we will soon learn about the appointment of the co-Chairs of the intergovernmental negotiations. More than enough time has been wasted already during numerous discussions on Security Council reform. There is a shared acknowledgement that reform is needed, as the world has changed dramatically since the inception of the United Nations, and the Council has to change accordingly to follow the tides of time. At the same time, to our deep regret, there is a small, but not insignificant, minority of States that, instead of supporting the idea of Council reform, are very happy indeed to preserve the status quo. Ukraine applauds the efforts of the Council itself and, first and foremost, its elected members to transform the work of this United Nations organ from within. Especially significant progress has been made in the area of improving its working methods. However, without addressing such fundamental matters such as its composition and exercise of decision-making power, the Council will remain woefully inadequate to respond to the challenges of the twenty-first century. Before the United Nations family starts a new round of discussions on Council reform during the current General Assembly session, I feel compelled to outline Ukraine’s approach to the negotiations process itself and key aspects of the reform. First, we support a results-oriented process, which means that we should aim for something bigger than a subsequent roll-over decision. It also means that, if a comprehensive consensus document remains an elusive target, it may well be worth exploring the possibility of reaching agreement on some aspect of the reform and then maybe fixing it in a draft resolution for the record. In such a fashion, we might be able to lay, brick by brick, the foundation for concrete action on Council reform by the General Assembly in future. Secondly, with regard to the substantive part of the reform process, there are two issues that I would like to stress, namely, the representation of the Group of Eastern European States in the Council and the matter of the veto. We categorically insist that at least one additional seat must be given to the Group of Eastern European States in the category of elected members. It is worth underlining that our Group is one of the least represented among non-permanent members of the Council. We have just one seat for 22 Member States. As for the question of the veto, we are convinced that no reform will be complete without serious reconsideration of the role of the veto in the work of the Security Council. We are in favour of phasing out the right of veto and strongly support all initiatives aimed at limiting its use. As stated in the joint letter of Georgia and Ukraine dated 23 May and addressed to the co-Chairs of the intergovernmental negotiations on Security Council reform, “the ‘veto’ right should also be restricted when a permanent member is involved in a conflict or a situation under consideration and, therefore, cannot exercise its voting rights impartially, owing to a conflict of interest. It is our common strong position that the issue of limiting in the aforementioned relevant situations the ability of a party to a conflict to exercise its ‘veto’ right has to be considered in the course of the intergovernmental negotiations and implemented as an integral part of the Security Council reform.” (A/73/910, annex) In conclusion, I want to stress my delegation’s readiness to engage constructively and actively in efforts to move forward the issue of Council reform at this session of the General Assembly.

Allow me to join previous speakers in thanking the President for convening this inaugural meeting to resume intergovernmental negotiations on the question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council and other matters related to the Security Council at the seventy-fourth session of the General Assembly. The Congolese delegation aligns itself with the statement made by the Permanent Representative of Sierra Leone on behalf of the Group of African States (see A/74/PV.33). The General Assembly launched intergovernmental negotiations on this topic in 2009. Ten years later, despite the framework laid out in decision 62/557, stakeholders, States, regional groups and interest groups are struggling to reach consensus on Security Council reform. Since then, from one General Assembly meeting on the subject that brings us together today to another, from one round of negotiations to another, we can conclude only, unfortunately, that there has been no progress. In the face of the stalemate, which contributes to the perpetuation of the status quo, the Congo can only express once again Africa’s frustrations, recognized by everyone, regarding its underrepresentation in the Security Council. Not only that, it must be acknowledged that Africa is the victim of a historical injustice that warrants reparation. Although the positions of all stakeholders are well known to all, the Congo wishes to reaffirm its commitment to the African Common Position. In response to the five key issues identified in decision 62/557, on which the negotiations are based, the African Common Position demands two permanent seats with full rights and privileges, including the veto, and two additional non-permanent seats. It goes without saying that, if the veto remains, it must be extended to the new permanent members because the Ezulwini Consensus advocates first and foremost for the outright abolition of the veto for all. The veto issue is also emblematic of the category issue. The African Common Position argues that the two existing categories of Council membership are sufficient to ensure the functionality of the organ. Indeed, a Security Council with an asymmetrical category of permanent members would be completely unbalanced, while a category of non-permanent members with ambiguous mandates and subdivisions would complexify the Council and render it ineffective. All interest groups that support the African Common Position should rest assured of our gratitude, especially those who understand the position in the spirit of the terms of the Ezulwini Consensus and the Sirte Declaration. Any expansion of the Council must take into account regional representation, as stipulated in Article 23 of the Charter of the United Nations. Similarly, that matter is inherent in the size of the Council. Africa supports an expanded and balanced Council of 25 members. In addition, my delegation encourages the improvement of the Council’s working methods and of the relationship between the Security Council and the General Assembly, as recommended by the Heads of State and Government at the 2005 United Nations World Summit. In accordance with those recommendations, these two important organs of the Organization must establish cooperation and coordinate their efforts to ensure the Organization’s effectiveness. The Council should avoid encroaching on the prerogatives of the General Assembly, the most representative and democratic body. Articles 10 to 20 and 24 of the Charter set the linkages between the two organs, their obligations and the limits to be respected in order to ensure good cooperation between them. In that connection, I welcome the progress made in the relationship between the General Assembly and the Security Council, including the holding of briefings for Member States in the Council and of meetings between the Presidents of the two organs. Nevertheless, further efforts are still needed, such as the holding of meetings with countries that contribute troops to peacekeeping operations. We must breathe new impetus into the intergovernmental negotiations process and demonstrate genuine political will to move towards the reform of an important organ that is the cornerstone of the United Nations structure. That is why we call on the co-Chairs to put forward a document that genuinely reflects the positions expressed by all parties to the negotiations. To that end, the co-Chairs to be appointed for this session could use the framework document circulated in 2015, while of course drawing from the other documents produced since the sixty-ninth session. I trust that, under the President’s leadership, renewed momentum will be injected into the negotiations so as to bring them to a successful conclusion. We hope to see the Security Council reform process move forward and assure the co-Chairs of my delegation’s support and assistance in the fulfilment of their noble and inspiring responsibility.

My delegation expresses its appreciation to the President of the General Assembly for convening today’s debate. At the outset, Uganda aligns itself with the statement made by His Excellency Ambassador Alie Kabba, Permanent Representative of Sierra Leone, on behalf of the Group of African States (see A/74/PV.33). We wish to make several additional remarks in our national capacity. We underscore the need for the comprehensive reform of the Security Council, taking into account the interconnectedness of the five clusters under consideration. Uganda, therefore, is opposed to any piecemeal or selective approach that contradicts the spirit of the comprehensive reform that we all aspire to. Uganda reiterates the Common African Position as encapsulated in the Ezulwini Consensus of 2005 and the Sirte Declaration. The full representation of Africa on the Security Council means, ”no less than two permanent seats with the prerogatives and privileges of permanent membership, including the right of the veto, and five non-permanent seats”. In that respect, Uganda underscores the need for the expansion of both the permanent and non-permanent categories of the Security Council and rejects any suggestions aimed at creating other categories of membership of the Council, which clearly undermines Africa’s quest for representation in the permanent category. We consider any such suggestions as an attempt to perpetuate the current injustice against Africa. Any reform of the Security Council that does not address that inherent blemish on the conscience of humankind cannot be accepted by Africa. My delegation also appreciates the strong and broad support that the Common African Position enjoys from the majority of the United Nations membership. Uganda reiterates its strong commitment to the intergovernmental negotiations process and reaffirms that the negotiations established by decision 62/557 remain the legitimate and appropriate mechanism for deliberations on the reform of the Security Council. Before achieving such a consensus on substance, we cannot support any procedural shortcut like text- based negotiations. Uganda also remains committed to extending its full support for the co-Chairs and to engage with all Member States in moving the process forward.

In my country, Syria, the famous poet Nizar Qabbani, known as the poet of the fatherland and of the woman, writes in one of his poems, “As a woman, you must know that you are half of all life; That you are the colour white in our world; That you are the spring and the rain that comes to quench the arid soil.” On the occasion of the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women, allow me to express from this rostrum my profound respect and gratitude to all the women of the world, including my mother and all my female colleagues at the United Nations. With regard to today’s agenda item, my delegation underscores its continued support for the Open- ended Working Group on the Question of Equitable Representation on and Increase in the Membership of the Security Council and Other Matters related to the Security Council. We appreciate the progress made within the intergovernmental negotiations process to achieve equitable and balanced representation on the Security Council. Such equitable representation constitutes a means of achieving the principal objective of the entire process, namely, to improve the working methods of the Security Council, support its role in maintaining international peace and security and ensure the integrity, transparency, effectiveness and balance of its work in accordance with the true — not artificial  — purpose of preventive and multilateral diplomacy, based on the goals of justice, equality, self- determination and the right of countries to decide their own national policies without external interference, so as to guarantee security, prosperity and development for all peoples of the world without discrimination, distinction or double standards. Our recent experience has shown sincere and constructive discussions in the framework of the intergovernmental negotiations. Although their outcome has yet to meet the ambition needed to address the five core issues, such discussions have helped us to understand the positions of Member States. They have even seen important achievements related to our universal recognition of the right of developing and small and medium-sized countries to enjoy equal representation on the Security Council. In that context, my delegation affirms its full and unconditional support for the Group of African States in its right to enjoy equitable representation on the Security Council in both the permanent and non-permanent categories. Let me speak frankly today so as not to lose sight of the purpose of this important process. Seventy-five years after the founding of the United Nations, we are discussing the best and most consensual means for making the Security Council more democratic and representative. We are today debating and reflecting on the best practices that would help the Security Council carry out its principal mandate, namely, the maintenance of international peace and security, in addition to preventing new wars and atrocities after the devastation caused by the First and Second World Wars. At the same time, we are all aware that we are living in a world that is today dominated by new paradigms of conflict and war. We are living in a world that is dominated by the tendency to use or threaten the use of military force. We are living in a world that is dominated by political trends steered by Governments that enjoy political and economic influence to impose coercive unilateral economic measures against States whose policies and positions they disagree with. Everyone present and not present in the Assembly today knows that our world is experiencing a terrifying arms race, including their manufacture and trade, instead of reducing levels in their manufacture and proliferation. The world must instead focus on achieving the Sustainable Development Goals to leave no one behind by 2030. In other words, attempts to ensure equitable representation in the Security Council will continue to encounter serious obstacles as long as others continue to close their eyes to the real nature of international relations, which are becoming increasingly complex and tense owing to the practices of political and economic military polarization by some Governments — whether within the United Nations or the framework of international relations, be it bilateral or collective. The approach towards taking action within the Security Council has always depended on the critical interests of all States Members of the United Nations. A genuine reform process therefore requires consensus on goals, ways and mechanisms that ensure real reform and in accordance with the Charter and the rules of procedure, while bearing in mind the nature of international relations, with all their advantages and disadvantages, disagreements and differences. On the basis of the aforementioned, my delegation calls for continued in-depth, comprehensive and democratic consultations in order to reach solutions and understandings that address the concerns and interests of all parties, without prejudice to the principles enshrined in the Charter, namely, freedom, equality, justice, the right of peoples to self-determination, non-interference in internal affairs, and the prevention of the misuse of the Security Council to justify military aggression against any Member State. My country, Syria, continues to believe that the existing intergovernmental negotiations are the only platform for discussing the reform process, as it allows for transparent and challenging negotiations that address the proposals and positions of all Member States. At the same time, my country believes that moving the intergovernmental negotiations away from the excluding approach requires us to work to achieve the possible consensus on the objectives, trends and principles of reform, and to conduct a balanced process that that the five core issues are addressed in a balanced and parallel way. We must not impose on Member States texts that are not agreed as a basis for any form of negotiation process. We must refrain from imposing artificial deadlines that are unrealistic. In the past, our experience has proved that imposing a unilateral approach on any process to negotiate documents and legal instruments within the United Nations only exacerbates division, increases confrontations and leads to lack of trust among parties and deadlocks. This morning, we heard positions based on exclusion in the statements of some Member States (see A/74/PV.33). That bears witness to what has been said in my statement and statements by a number of Member States, including assessments reflecting that we are truly experiencing significant divisions, showing that some people do believe in Security Council reform not as a means but rather as an objective in itself. We regret the fact that the Permanent Representative of Liechtenstein attempted in his statement to distract today's meeting from its thematic content by attempting to use the situation in my country, Syria, to influence two of the five core issues. That is a well-known position of his country and of others that wish to focus only on the right to veto and what they consider to be an unbalanced relationship between the General Assembly and the Security Council. However, decision 62/557 clearly indicates that we are considering five core issues in a balanced and parallel way. The Permanent Representative of Liechtenstein also insisted on addressing the issue of the so-called International, Impartial and Independent Mechanism to Assist in the Investigation and Prosecution of Those Responsible for the Most Serious Crimes under International Law Committed in the Syrian Arab Republic since March 2011 (IIIM), detracting from the thematic content of the meeting. Our colleague from Liechtenstein appears to take every opportunity in any meeting, especially in the General Assembly, to promote the so-called IIIM. He raises this issue throughout the United Nations, calling for the Organization to fund this illegal Mechanism. We reaffirm from this rostrum that the Syrian Arab Republic — that is, the country concerned — does not and will not recognize the so- called IIIM. We reaffirm from this rostrum that no one in the world, not even the United Nations itself, can impose the so-called IIIM on the Syrian people. We inform the representative of Liechtenstein that if he wishes to secure funding for the so-called IIIM, which is an illegal Mechanism, he should request the Governments of his country and of those that support the Mechanism to ask their taxpayers to fund the Mechanism themselves. The essence of what I want to say is that the Government of the Syrian Arab Republic has proved the following in official documents. The representative of Liechtenstein talks about the relationship between the General Assembly and the Security Council. The essence of the discussion today is that the General Assembly has impinged on the prerogatives of the Security Council by establishing the so-called IIIM. We have proved that with official documents, and we defy anyone to prove otherwise. We are fully ready and our doors are open to discuss the issue of the IIIM with Member States. We will prove to them through international law and based on the Charter of the United Nations that the General Assembly is the organ that has encroached on the prerogatives of the Security Council by establishing the so-called IIIM. Our doors are open, and we call on Member States not to pay attention to the content of the statement of the representative of Liechtenstein and not to recognize the so-called IIIM. We call on Member States to confront the efforts made today in the Fifth Committee to fund the illegal Mechanism, particularly given that the United Nations is today experiencing one of the most serious financial crises of its existence. I apologize for having spoken for so long, but I could not refrain from responding to the statement made by our colleague, the representative of Liechtenstein.

Allow me to thank the President for convening today’s debate on a subject matter of ongoing importance. The issue of equitable representation in the Security Council has been continuously discussed since the establishment of the United Nations in 1945. The few great advancements in the process happened in 1963, when the General Assembly decided to increase the number of Security Council members from 11 to 15 and to distribute seats based on geographic regions. As we know, nothing similar has been able to be agreed upon since then. The main goal of the Security Council reform endeavours should be a strengthened United Nations, an increased ownership of the Security Council’s work by countries and the accountability of the Council to the United Nations membership. The peoples of the United Nations need the Security Council to adequately respond to all challenges in the world and to better live up to its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. Our common aim should be an increased membership of the Security Council based upon equitable representation. I would like to take this opportunity to highlight another important issue for Estonia in the Security Council reform process. That is the fact that we have had to witness on many occasions that some members of the Council use or threaten to use the veto, rendering the Council paralysed and unable to react to the situations where action is needed the most. It is our clear position that the permanent members of the Security Council should voluntarily and collectively commit themselves to not using the veto to block Council action aimed at preventing or ending situations involving mass atrocity crimes. In the same vein, as supporters of the code of conduct, we urge all Council members to refrain from voting against resolutions aimed at preventing or ending genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. Furthermore, we support efforts designed to improve the Council’s working methods in order to increase its transparency and inclusiveness. Finally, I would like to reiterate Estonia’s full commitment, as an incoming member of the Security Council for the next two years, to continuing to engage constructively in the process of advancing reform, in order ultimately to benefit people on the ground, many of whom lack security and justice.

As we approach the seventy-fifth anniversaries of the creation of the United Nations in 1945 and the first meetings of both the Security Council and the General Assembly in London in early 1946, the United Kingdom takes particular pride and interest in contributing to the debate on reform of the Security Council. While many structures of the United Nations have evolved positively in the decades since their creation, it is clear that the Security Council has lagged behind. There has been some progress. The original Council of 11 members has grown to the current 15. But in the 54 years since that expansion, the world has continued to evolve, and indeed the pace of change has increased. The United Kingdom’s position on Security Council reform is well known. We are strong supporters of reform that would enable the Council to better reflect the realities of the twenty-first century, become more representative and retain its ability to respond quickly and decisively to challenges to international peace and security. To that end, the United Kingdom supports a modest expansion of the Security Council in both the permanent and non-permanent categories. We support the creation of new permanent seats for India, Germany, Japan and Brazil, as well as permanent African representation on the Council. We support the expansion of the non-permanent category of membership to enable broader participation from around the globe on a rotating basis. It is vital to ensure that the Council benefits from the perspectives of as wide a range of Member States as possible if we are to address challenges to international peace and security effectively and equitably. Such modest expansion would bring the Security Council’s membership to somewhere in the mid-20s. An expanded Security Council would have to retain a strong degree of efficiency and nimbleness in tackling what are often complex and fast- moving debates. That means we would need to think carefully about what an expanded Security Council would mean for working methods. Where the veto is concerned, we do not believe that disagreement in this area should prevent progress in other areas. For its part, the United Kingdom has not used the veto since 1989, three decades ago. We also support the code of conduct of the Accountability, Coherence and Transparency group regarding Security Council action against genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes, and we call on all States, including the other permanent members of the Security Council, to do likewise. Looking forward, we continue to believe that the intergovernmental negotiation process is a valuable mechanism for Member States to advance the discussion on Security Council reform. We thank and pay tribute Ambassadors Nusseibeh of the United Arab Emirates and Braun of Luxembourg for their stewardship of the process during the last session. However, we are sympathetic to the views of Member States that have shared their frustration at the lack of progress. We are mindful of the need for the President of the General Assembly to appoint the new co-facilitators soon, and we are also open to Member States’ suggestions on formalizing and increasing the number of intergovernmental negotiation meetings, capturing the various positions of the membership and moving towards text-based negotiations so that our efforts can bear fruit. For our part, the United Kingdom will continue to work in the spirit of multilateralism for an outcome that is satisfactory to us all.

At the outset, the delegation of Burundi would like to thank the President of the General Assembly for convening this first meeting of the General Assembly at its seventy-fourth session on agenda item 122, concerning the intergovernmental negotiations 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 would also like to thank and especially to commend the co-facilitators of the process during the Assembly’s seventy-third session, our fellow Ambassadors Lana Zaki Nusseibeh of the United Arab Emirates and Christian Braun of Luxembourg, for their impressive work. While aligning itself fully with the statement made by the representative of Sierra Leone on behalf of the Group of African States, the delegation of Burundi would like to add a few remarks in its national capacity. At the outset, my delegation continues to believe that the intergovernmental negotiations mandated by the General Assembly are the only legitimate mechanism for negotiating reform of the Security Council. As we are all aware, this issue has been on the table for discussion at the United Nations for more than a quarter of a century. For that entire time the intergovernmental negotiations on this fundamental issue have been treading water, with no significant progress on either substance or form. While the process keeps turning in circles like an endless conveyor belt, Africa, with its 1.2 billion people — the only continent not represented among the Council’s permanent members and underrepresented in the non-permanent category — continues to suffer the historic injustice of exclusion from this vitally important body, whose task is to deal with matters of global peace and security. In the light of this shocking and undisputed injustice, the delegation of Burundi would like to once again reiterate its unwavering commitment to the Common African Position on the issue of Security Council reform outlined in the Ezulwini Consensus and the Sirte Declaration. We are all familiar with the main components of the Common African Position, which enjoy the support of an increasing number of Member States. Africa has a legitimate claim to at least two permanent seats with all the privileges and prerogatives of permanent membership, including the right to veto, and five non-permanent seats. While Africa is opposed to the veto right in principle, our position is that while that mechanism exists, it is only fair that it be available to all permanent members of the Security Council, existing and new alike. The delegation of Burundi would like to recall that when the United Nations was created in 1945, most African States were not represented, and when the Council was first reformed, in 1963, Africa was represented but was not in a very strong position to influence the debate. The delegation of Burundi believes that Africa can now influence the ongoing United Nations reform by maintaining its constructive participation and unified position in discussions on Security Council reform. The goal of Africa’s legitimate demands is to be fully represented in all United Nations decision-making bodies, particularly in the Security Council, which is the most powerful principal decision-making body of the United Nations on matters related to international peace and security. We wish to see a Security Council adapted to the contemporary political and diplomatic world that is more democratic, representative, transparent and effective in addressing global issues in the interest of the peoples we represent and in strict compliance with the Charter of the United Nations. Africa’s overall position on the five pillars of the reform, as set out in decision 62/557, is clearly reflected in the text and its annex issued on 31 July 2015 by the President of the General Assembly at its sixty- ninth session. It should be noted and recalled that the Group of African States believes that the framework document developed at the sixty-ninth session as the main reference document of the intergovernmental negotiations process fully and faithfully reflects the entire African common position on the five issues under negotiation. It is not a document based on the understanding and interpretation of an individual or a group of Member States. We also believe that the five issues under negotiation are closely interrelated and must therefore be addressed without too much fragmentation. In addition, as far as the procedure is concerned, we are of the opinion that all Member States, in consultation with the President and the co-Chairs, soon to be appointed, should agree on the number of meetings ahead of the intergovernmental negotiations session, the kind of outcome and the timing of the publication of documents in order to avoid differences on these three elements. In conclusion, my delegation acknowledges that the ongoing negotiation process on Security Council reform is complex but, at the same time, we strongly believe that it is the peoples who will benefit from its successful outcome or lose everything if we fail. We sincerely hope that during this session and the subsequent ones, in which my country intends to actively participate, Member States will strengthen their political commitment, flexibility and adaptability to ensure that Security Council reform becomes a reality to be passed on to future generations.

Allow me first of all to thank the President of the General Assembly for his active engagement in the process of Security Council reform. I would also like to thank the co-Chairs of the intergovernmental negotiations at the previous session, Ambassadors Nusseibeh and Braun, Permanent Representatives of the United Arab Emirates and Luxembourg, respectively, for their stewardship of the process during the seventy-third session. We expect and hope that the new co-Chairs to be appointed will achieve substantial progress on this issue of utmost importance to the Group of African States. As we have previously stated, Africa is convinced of the need for a comprehensive reform of the United Nations system that upholds the principles, objectives and ideals of the Charter of the United Nations for a fairer world based on universalism, equity and regional balance. To that end, we remain true to decision 62/557 as well as the text and its annex circulated on 31 July 2015 by the President of the General Assembly at its sixty-ninth session and commonly referred to as the framework document. We highlight the need for a comprehensive reform of the Security Council that encompasses the five main clusters and takes into account their interconnectedness, as agreed upon by the Assembly. We therefore believe that we should avoid any piecemeal or selective approach, as that contradict and violates the spirit of á comprehensive reform. Despite having the largest number of States Members of the United Nations and representing three-quarters of the Security Council agenda, our continent continues to be undermined without any representation in the permanent category, the core decision-making unit of the Council. Africa considers that a historical injustice and therefore demands its rightful place in the maintenance of peace and security as the continent that has unqualified attributes to play a more meaningful role in this area. We have a unique opportunity to keep the international system on the track of a dynamic and effective democratic multilateralism that can assure the role of the United Nations as the centre of global governance. We cannot afford to remain indifferent to the realities of our rapidly changing global circumstances. Africa will continue to advocate for a meaningful reform that will make the Security Council more relevant and responsive to the present and emerging global challenges, as well as to promote the core principles of the Charter of the United Nations. In that regard, we call on the co-Chairs to reflect the views of Member States, as expressed in the Assembly, in any document that they produce at the end of the session in order to enhance the trust and credibility of the process and to encourage more Member States to participate in the discussions. In addition, given the low turnout of Member States at the intergovernmental negotiation meetings in the previous session, we encourage more Member States to participate in those meetings. In that regard, we welcome the use of the good offices of the President of the General Assembly to appeal to Member States to own the process by actively participating in the debates. In terms of procedure, we are of the view that Member States, in conjunction with the President of the General Assembly and the co-Chairs, should agree at the start of the intergovernmental negotiation session on the number of meetings, the type of outcome and the timing of the release of documents. In conclusion, my delegation emphasizes that we need to build on the progress made so far and accelerate the pace to fulfil the vision of our leaders at the 2005 World Summit, that is, to make the Security Council more broadly representative, democratic, effective and accessible. As a member of the Committee of Ten, my delegation stands ready to work with the President of the General Assembly and the general membership within the intergovernmental negotiations for a comprehensive reform, as stipulated in decision 62/557. My delegation aligns itself with the statement of the Committee of Ten delivered by the Permanent Representative of Sierra Leone on behalf of the States members of the African Union, as well as with the statement delivered by the representative of Kuwait on behalf of the Group of Arab States (see A/74/PV.33).

The Security Council must meet the current requirements and reflect the increasing diversity in international relations. Today’s world requires that and it is necessary for the effective work of the United Nations in maintaining international peace and security. Belarus fully supports the need to adapt the Security Council to the new realities. We welcome the efforts made by States Members of the United Nations for comprehensive dialogue to develop ways to reform the Security Council. Discussing the issue of expanding the membership of the Council is a member-owned and member-driven process. And what is just as important is that the issue affects the interests of all countries, without exception. The efforts for reform should therefore take into account the needs of each State, and should be inclusive and based on dialogue and mutual understanding of a single goal. We consider it unacceptable to disregard the principles of transparency, openness and non-discrimination in this process. We support the idea that the delegation of Ukraine proposed here earlier with regard to expanding the category of non-permanent members of the Security Council by at least one seat for the Group of Eastern European States, which in our view is underrepresented on the Council. Unfortunately, today we are seeing the individualism and ambition of certain States starting to prevail over the fundamentals of multilateralism. Very regrettably, populist rhetoric during the negotiation process is increasingly stifling constructive appeals. However, from our point of view, it is important to be realistic. The main differences in States’ approaches to the parameters of reform are as sharp as ever. So far not a single proposed configuration has received tangible, dominant support. In that connection, Belarus has always advocated for maintaining a careful, gradual and balanced dialogue. Yes, the process for discussing Security Council reform has shortcomings. It has been going on for decades. And yes, we are seeing some criticism with regard to the existing format for the intergovernmental negotiations. But, from our point of view, it is the only universal and inclusive mechanism at our disposal and the only place where we can hear and listen to one another, or at least try to. Any attempts to break the format and the established practice of negotiations could destroy this vulnerable and very fragile process, which is at least moving, if slowly, towards some kind of compromise. We call for all reform issues to remain the subject of consultations exclusively within the framework of the intergovernmental negotiations, the only legitimate instrument enshrined in the decisions of the General Assembly. In our view, any proposals to move the dialogue outside that universally recognized platform, especially by creating narrow groups of countries supporting contradictory initiatives, are counterproductive. Nor do we accept the application of a majority formula whereby the decisions of the negotiation process are not arrived at unanimously but are rather based on an arithmetic calculation of the number of supporters of one initiative or another. I reiterate that reform is our shared task and is based on equality and mutual trust. I would once again like to draw the Assembly’s attention to the fact that in our view, as long as the results of the negotiation process on Security Council reform are not yet final, it would be premature to start talking about so-called text- based negotiations. We are all responsible for our common future, and we believe that we are capable of achieving tangible results on an issue as crucial as Security Council reform. That can be achieved only if the dialogue is built on a gradual, mutually respectful basis and if the interests of every single State are taken into account.

At the outset, I would like to thank the Permanent Representatives of the United Arab Emirates and Luxembourg for their leadership during the latest round of intergovernmental negotiations on Security Council reform. Fourteen years ago, on the occasion of the sixtieth anniversary of the United Nations, our Heads of State and Government adopted the 2005 World Summit Outcome (resolution 60/1), in which they expressly supported early reform of the Security Council, recognizing that it was an essential element in the overall efforts to reform the United Nations. Next year we are to commemorate another anniversary, the seventy-fifth of the Organization’s founding, and we can use that occasion to acknowledge the efforts that have been invested in its reform and welcome the results that have been achieved. I wonder, however, how we will reflect on the desire to see reform of the Security Council. Unfortunately, the reality is nothing much of substance has been achieved over the past 15 years. That reform is indeed long overdue. Bulgaria appreciates the commitment of the President of the General Assembly to reinvigorating the process of Security Council reform, and in that regard we call for focused, transparent and results-oriented negotiations to start in earnest. To briefly reiterate the main aspects of Bulgaria’s position on reform of the Security Council, we share the view that the reform of the United Nations as a whole will not be complete until the composition, size and working methods of the Council reflect today’s geopolitical realities. We continue to believe that both categories of membership should be expanded to that end. The new permanent members should be selected from among States that have proved their commitment and their ability to make a serious contribution to the maintenance of international peace and security and the other purposes of the Organization. Among other things, the expansion of the non-permanent category should take into account the need for a more accurate representation of underrepresented regional groups on the Council. In conclusion, I would like to stress once again that the increase in non-permanent seats should also provide for the fair representation of the Group of Eastern European States, whose membership has more than doubled in the past three decades.

Colombia is grateful for the convening of this plenary meeting of the General Assembly on the annual debate on the process of reform of the Security Council, which is an extremely important issue for the entire membership. In that regard, my delegation aligns itself with the statement made by Ambassador Zappia of Italy on behalf of the countries of the Uniting for Consensus group. Colombia believes that this dialogue should be part of a constructive process that takes into account the voices of all Member States, with the aim of defining a common path towards reform. Only through consensus can we make progress in the reform of the Security Council, for which we reiterate our support, with a view to achieving positive results today in the face of the concerns that Member States share about achieving a more representative, democratic, transparent and effective Council that has clear accountability mechanisms. We need to seek agreements based on fundamental values that will enable us to agree on concrete mechanisms to fill the gaps. We believe that the methodology that we have been using in our informal consultations with Governments is suitable because it fits those criteria. We believe that the most appropriate way to achieve constructive and comprehensive reform of the Security Council is to create new, longer-term non-permanent seats to which members can be re-elected immediately and to increase the number of two-year-term non-permanent seats. The proposal for longer-term seats is in line with the legitimate interest that certain States Members have to contribute more significantly to the work of the Council and at the same time promote a fairer rotation system. The expansion of the category of permanent members of the Council would not constitute reform in concrete terms because it would exacerbate the imbalances and difficulties that the Council has faced thus far. Extending privileges and differentiated capabilities to new members, which would violate the principle of the sovereign equality of States, is precisely the opposite of the reform that Colombia is promoting. That is one of the paths of reform that has seen progress in the framework of the intergovernmental negotiations. We think that it would be worthwhile to revisit that element in order to construct proposals that fulfil the goal of permanently reflecting our fundamental values and principles. Colombia opposes the idea of expanding the veto to other States, since we do not see how the expansion of that prerogative could increase the transparency of the working methods of the Security Council. Today, as we seek to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals, facing such challenges as climate change and the emergence of information and communication technologies and other realities such as artificial intelligence, we cannot ignore the fact that the regime of global governance that we intend to reform is based on the strengthening of the capacities of the United Nations as a whole. For that reason, the Security Council cannot simply remain a setting that is anchored in the past, fomenting selective competing interests among its members the same way it has over the past seven decades. It must serve as an epicentre of cooperation that is highly attuned to the challenges facing international peace and security today. With regard to the working methods of the Security Council, I would like to reiterate the clear importance of ensuring that each State Member of the United Nations has a better chance to become a member of the Council, which would reinforce the principles of democracy and representativeness and ensure an equitable regional balance, which must remain an essential working point during the next round of intergovernmental negotiations. The reform of the Council must be based on the need to ensure the balance, representativeness and effectiveness of this important body. It is therefore time to review the structures of the past and, above all, to dream and build the United Nations of the future. Our responsibility is to respond to today’s challenges and needs and build a better future for succeeding generations.

I would like to express our appreciation to the President of the General Assembly for convening this important meeting to consider the question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council and other matters related to the Council, under agenda item 122. My delegation aligns itself with the Common African Position set forth in the statement delivered by the Permanent Representative of Sierra Leone on behalf of the Group of African States (see A/74/PV.33). The Charter of the United Nations places the responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security squarely in the hands of the Security Council. That body must therefore discharge its functions with firmness and resist the temptation to view questions of international peace and security through lenses of national fears and preoccupations. If it is paralysed by parochial interests, the temptation for unilateral action increases. There appears to be a moral dilemma that the United Nations faces when the Security Council is unable to act, due to lack of consensus, when confronted with the most heinous human rights violations. In those circumstances, and while conflicts continue unabated in different parts of the world, the capacity of the international conflict-resolution machinery is put to a severe test. In this regard, we reiterate our call for the reform of the Security Council with a view to making the Council more representative, transparent and indeed accountable. In our view, the true reform of the Security Council should be modelled along the lines of the Common African Position enshrined in the Ezulwini Consensus and the Sirte Declaration. That is the only way the historical injustice perpetrated against Africa can be reversed. Intergovernmental negotiations on this important subject must therefore take shape during the current session. Discussions on Security Council reform have emphasized the organ’s composition and size, in particular with regard to the possibility of admitting new permanent members. The Council is an organ that we believe cannot be left to the interests of a few. We are hopeful that in the end, we will have a comprehensively reformed Council to better serve humankind. It is of paramount importance that Security Council reform should comprise a comprehensive package that would include changes in the working methods of the Council towards greater transparency and participation by the membership as a whole. As I conclude, allow me to underscore the fact that peace and security will remain elusive if we do not implement the necessary reform of the principal organ for the maintenance of international peace and security, the Security Council. We are discussing this important subject at a critical time and juncture in human history; indeed, this is the time for a true reflection on the role of the Council in the twenty-first century. Finally, I wish to state that Lesotho continues to be a proponent of the maintenance of international peace and security. We remain convinced that the United Nations is the only universal institution that can safeguard world peace and ensure the survival of all and sundry. But in order for it to do so, the reform of the Security Council must proceed without further delay. A Council that is transparent and representative of all regions will go a long way towards fulfilling the ideals upon which the United Nations was formed.

I thank the President for organizing this annual meeting on Security Council reform. I would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge the outstanding work done by the previous Chairs of the intergovernmental negotiating process on the question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council and other matters related to the Council, Her Excellency Mrs. Lana Nusseibeh, Permanent Representative of the United Arab Emirates, and His Excellency Mr. Christian Braun, Permanent Representative of Luxembourg. My delegation endorses the statements made by the representatives of Sierra Leone and Kuwait on behalf of the Group of African States and the Group of Arab States, respectively (see A/74/PV.33), and wishes to highlight the following elements in its national capacity. The Charter of the United Nations designates the Security Council as the principal organ responsible for maintaining peace and security in the world. Its mandate is clear and unambiguous. In this regard, we reaffirm the importance for each principal organ of the United Nations to adhere to its mandate and powers as assigned to it in the Charter. We reiterate our position that it is time for a swift reform of the Security Council in order for it to show greater representativeness and transparency. The reform must be comprehensive rather than gradual and must take into account the five clusters without exclusion or distinction in keeping with the framework set out in decision 62/557. The Security Council should be made more representative, while ensuring its effectiveness, efficiency and accountability. In Morocco’s view, the need to expand the Council is based on the importance of its being contemporary and reflective of the changing composition of the United Nations since 1945. The historical injustices against Africa should challenge us all and compel us to rectify them by ensuring greater representation of Africa in the reformed Security Council. In this regard, I would like to reiterate that Morocco reaffirms and strongly supports the Common African Position, set forth in the Ezulwini Consensus, which provides that Africa must have no less than two permanent seats with all their prerogatives and privileges, including the veto, if it continues to exist, and five non-permanent seats. Indeed, a fair and equitable representation of Africa in both categories of seats, as described before, is central for doing our continent justice. It will then be up to Africa to decide on its representatives in the reformed Security Council. We welcome the almost unanimous support expressed for the Ezulwini Consensus and thank the delegations and groups that have continued to express strong support for this Common African Position. As with the case of Africa, the absence of permanent representation of Arab countries, despite the great relevance to them of issues being dealt with in the Security Council, is highly regrettable. In this regard, a permanent Arab seat, with all its prerogatives, as well as adequate representation in the non-permanent category, will enable the legitimate needs of the Group of Arab States to be met.
In conclusion, I would like to express my delegation’s hope that this session of the intergovernmental negotiation process will be a genuine platform for dialogue and constructive exchanges enabling differences of opinion to be resolved and positions to be brought closer together with the aim of achieving the Security Council reform that we all want.

My delegation would like to thank the President of the General Assembly for convening this plenary meeting on the question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council and other matters related to the Council and for his leadership in facilitating and continuing the discussion on the Security Council reform process. Let me also take the opportunity of this International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women to recognize that nothing can be achieved without putting an end to violence against women and girls. My delegation aligns itself with the statement made by the representative of Sierra Leone on behalf of the Group of African States (see A/74/PV.33) and wishes to make the following remarks in our national capacity. Ethiopia firmly supports the reform of the Security Council as it is the core component of the overall reform of the United Nations system. We have no doubt that efforts to make the Security Council a more democratic, representative, inclusive and transparent organ of the United Nations will ultimately be successful. In this context, we remain committed to decision 62/577 and other relevant resolutions on Security Council reform. Our position in the discussions within the intergovernmental negotiation process has been based firmly and explicitly on the Common African Position laid out in the Ezulwini Consensus and the Sirte Declaration, including the African Group position on the framework document produced under the African presidency of the General Assembly at its sixty-ninth session, which considers it to be the main reference document for the intergovernmental negotiation process. The Common African Position is clear with respect to all five clusters and the negotiations as a whole, and Ethiopia continues to stand in defence of this common position. Nothing short of correcting this historical injustice against Africa in terms of its representation in the Security Council can be considered a true reform, and we continue to advocate the need to have no less than two permanent seats with all the prerogatives and privileges of permanent membership, including the right of veto, and five non-permanent seats, as clearly set forth in the Common African Position. We believe that Africa’s representation in the Security Council is not a luxury but a necessity, as the continent’s security issues dominate the Council’s agenda. Council decisions greatly affect our continent on a daily basis, and the reform must take this reality into consideration and, above all, make it a cornerstone of its work. In this regard, we support the inclusion of the Common African Position, which has continued to gain momentum and support over previous sessions, in the commonalities section of the document entitled “Revised Elements of Commonality and Issues for Further Consideration”, rather than in the section on issues for further consideration. Based on the central element of the African Union consensus, the question of the criteria for the selection of African members of the Security Council should be a matter to be determined by the Assembly of Heads of State and Government of the African Union. My country believes that the relationship between the Security Council and the General Assembly should be mutually reinforcing and complementary in full respect of their respective functions, authority, powers and competencies as enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations. In conclusion, it is important that the Security Council reform process is owned by all Member States and that the fundamental divergence on the direction of reform be addressed through consensus.

As many of my colleagues have already pointed out, next year marks the seventy-fifth anniversary of the United Nations. This important milestone will give us an opportunity to reflect on the Organization’s results, achievements and goals, as well as on its shortcomings, limitations and imperfections. It will also give us an opportunity to further discuss and examine how to improve our Organization so as to make it more democratic and efficient. Our discussions on Security Council reform will therefore have special relevance as we mark this significant anniversary. These discussions should be frank and open with the aim of closing the gaps between the various positions. It is Serbia’s long-standing position that Security Council reform should be based on the broadest possible consensus among the Member States. We all agree that today’s world map looks very different from how it looked when our Organization was founded in 1945. Despite drastic geopolitical changes in the past 75 years, the Security Council has changed very little. That is why, for many years, we have been engaged in sometimes heated debate on its reform. Some may argue that there has been a lack of progress in the process, given the amount of time that has passed since the beginning of our discussions. However, the issues related to Security Council reform are not easily addressed, and there are still great divergences between the Member States on some of the key issues. At the same time, we all want successful and meaningful reform. So why rush it? My delegation is of the view that setting deadlines while consensus is still pending on many important issues would be harmful to the process. We believe that the reform should make the Security Council more democratic and representative. Bearing in mind that the majority of United Nations members today are small and medium-sized countries, like mine, the reform should provide increased opportunities for those countries to serve on the Council and contribute to its work. Let us remind ourselves of the principles of decision 62/557, according to which the intergovernmental negotiations it established should be based on proposals by Member States in good faith, with mutual respect and in an open, inclusive and transparent manner. The decision also provides that negotiations should be a member-driven process. My delegation is of the view that the intergovernmental negotiation process is still relevant and the only legitimate format for discussing the reform. Past sessions have brought progress on some of the issues, such as working methods and the relationship between the Council and the General Assembly. To achieve concrete results, we all need to demonstrate the will to discuss, compromise and negotiate. Last but not least, Serbia will continue to advocate an additional non-permanent seat for the Group of Eastern European States in the reformed Council.

At the outset, my delegation would like to commend the President for his commitment to the process of Security Council reform. We also commend the Permanent Representatives of Luxembourg and the United Arab Emirates for co-chairing the process at the last session. On the important issue of Security Council reform, we are of the view that the role of the United Nations remains more vital than ever in addressing global challenges that threaten regional and global peace, stability and development. As the global situation has evolved and become more complex and unpredictable, we need a more robust and effective United Nations. Against this backdrop, the United Nations needs to be reformed to better fulfil its mandates and functions. Security Council reform is a crucial and sensitive issue. In this context, the reform of the Security Council should be conducted in a comprehensive, transparent, inclusive and balanced manner in order to maintain unity and solidarity among Member States and serve the interests of all them. We believe that, in order to ensure equitable representation in the United Nations and the Organization’s effectiveness and relevance, we need to expand the number of both permanent and non-permanent seats in the Security Council, taking into account the interests of both developing and developed Member States. My delegation also believes that all the positions and proposals of every Member State should be carefully considered and that the way forward for the intergovernmental negotiation process should be based on the relevant General Assembly decisions so as to achieve a consensus outcome that is acceptable to the entire membership of the United Nations. We therefore believe that intergovernmental negotiations should remain the core of the process.

We have heard the last speaker in the debate on this item for this meeting. We shall hear the remaining speakers tomorrow morning. The representative of Japan has asked to speak in exercise of the right of reply.

It is regrettable that a groundless statement referring to Japan was made this afternoon. The statement was irrelevant to the topic of Security Council reform.