A/75/PV.79 General Assembly

El Salvador takes note of the 2020 report of the Security Council (A/75/2) and thanks the Estonian presidency for its presentation and the delegation of the Niger for its preparation of the introduction. I would like to clarify that the full version of this statement will be sent to the presidency of Estonia so it can be incorporated into the compilation of this debate. We acknowledge the progress made in terms of the preparation and presentation of the report of the Security Council to the General Assembly. We maintain our call to the Security Council to take the necessary measures in order to comply with the deadline agreed upon in presidential note S/2017/507, of 30 August 2017. In that regard, my delegation encourages the presentation of reports from the Security Council to the General Assembly with more comprehensive, substantive and analytical accounts of its work, in accordance with the relevant General Assembly resolutions. Moreover, we reiterate our position on the holding of open consultations prior to and during the preparation of the report. Such efforts would allow for greater democratization of the processes of the Security Council. It would also represent an interest in taking into account the concerns and views of the entire membership of the Organization. We deem it important to highlight the fact that the report should include an analysis of the decision-making processes within the Security Council, as well as elements that provide greater clarity as to the motivations that lead its permanent members to use their right of the veto, as other delegations have already said. We started the year 2020 with the aim of reflecting on the future that we want and the United Nations that we need within the framework of preparations for the celebration of the seventy-fifth anniversary of the United Nations. However, the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic greatly redefined our agenda, and its multidimensional consequences highlighted the need to address global threats through strengthened multilateralism, based on international solidarity and cooperation. As to the work of the Security Council, it has opened a space for reflection on how to ensure strict compliance with Article 24 of the Charter of the United Nations, in particular how to provide rapid, effective actions of collective responsibility in order to maintain international peace and security. For El Salvador, the capacity and the will to act in favour of international peace and security must be in line with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations. We should never forget that a failure in that area not only weakens the credibility of the Organization and the multilateral system but also puts the lives of millions of people around the world at risk. It is essential to update the working methods of the Security Council with a view to giving that organ greater effectiveness, transparency and inclusivity in its activities. Since the outbreak of COVID-19 we have seen how the Security Council, as circumstances allowed, has been able to adapt and continue its work through a decision-making process that involved the silence procedure, virtual meetings and a hybrid format. We believe, once conditions improve, that in-person participation must be resumed for the 178 remaining delegations of the General Assembly that have been unable to intervene in open debates or to participate in the various deliberations on substantive items and other matters addressed in the Security Council. El Salvador is pleased that, despite the challenges of the years 2020 and 2021, the Security Council has managed to monitor and guarantee the renewal of the mandates of the residual mechanisms, the different peacekeeping operations and special political missions. The latter is a mechanism that my country recognizes for its role in achieving peace, security and stability in different countries and regions throughout the world. We believe the Council should focus particular attention in its future work on formulating political strategy as a central element in the formation of and changes to the mandates of peacekeeping operations. It is a process that could benefit from the views of all parties, such as the troop- and police-contributing members of the General Assembly, and particularly those of the host country. That will allow for robust, effective mandates that have the greatest possible political support, while guaranteeing their financing. Members of the Security Council will reach additional practical proposals by including the views of each of the parties involved. El Salvador appreciates the fact that the members of the Security Council, in coordination with the monthly presidencies, are holding Arria Formula meetings, as they provide a space for dialogue with actors directly involved in various situations that threaten international peace, security and stability. However, those meetings cannot replace official Council meetings, as we have seen occur in recent months. And neither should the format be used as a tool for political promotion, undermining its consultative nature, which in the past has made it possible to achieve significant progress on different items on the Security Council agenda. We also call attention to the decrease in the number of official documents approved within the Security Council year after year. That could be attributed to the difficulty that organ faces in reaching consensus. Resolutions, presidential statements and press statements are important mechanisms for the fulfilment of the Council’s primary responsibility to maintain international peace and security, as conferred through the Charter of the United Nations. El Salvador therefore calls upon Member States to ensure that a constructive spirit prevails and, above all, a will to comply with the mandate to present timely responses to imminent threats to international peace and security, prioritizing them over particular interests. It is time for each of the actors to demonstrate their political will in the adoption of effective measures in order to face traditional challenges as well as additional threats to international peace and security. In terms of transparency, El Salvador highlights the efforts of the monthly Council presidencies to strengthen inclusion participation and accountability vis-à-vis States that are not part of that organ by issuing their monthly programmes of work and through monthly wrap-up sessions. We therefore call for the continued issuance, in a timely manner, of activity reports by each monthly Council presidency. They should include, above all and in addition to a summary of documents, a situational analysis that includes threats to international peace and security. Likewise, we request that reports of the Secretary- General to the Security Council in the six official languages be issued well in advance of debates and meetings on the various peacekeeping operations, special political missions and open debates. They are highly relevant inputs that guarantee the active and constructive participation of the members of the General Assembly. Finally, El Salvador encourages the members of the Security Council, including those that were recently elected, and the United Nations in general, to continue working under the principle of cooperation and international solidarity. The pandemic cannot be an excuse to retreat. On the contrary, it opens up a space for reflection for a new era of the Organization, with a preference for an approach that strengthens multilateralism, transparency and inclusiveness. I would like to recall that, in our statement on the seventy-fifth anniversary of the United Nations, we recognized that, among other things, our challenges are interconnected and can be addressed only through revitalized multilateralism. Building, maintaining and sustaining peace is one of the main responsibilities of the United Nations today, and it is also our responsibility.

At the outset, I wish to thank the President of the Security Council for the month of June, Ambassador Jürgenson, for presenting the report of the Council (A/75/2) and for its timely submission, which allows us to discuss it two months earlier than we did last year. We would like to see this trend continue so that our future discussions of the report can take place as soon as possible following the reporting period. We are cognizant of the amount of time and labour that goes into preparing the report, constraining its early issuance. That is why we suggest accompanying its presentation before the General Assembly with an update, under the responsibility of the Council’s President, on the Council’s work covering the period that has elapsed. The format of the report remains unchanged, notwithstanding the discussions within the Council to adapt it to the expectations of the broader membership. We continue to believe that the report of the Council should provide a more strategic overview of the fulfilment of its mandate to maintain international peace and security, as well as more insight related to trends and indicators of conflict. Above all, however, the report should adopt a more cooperative approach towards the General Assembly. While the membership has entrusted the Council with its Charter-mandated role, the work of the Council concerns us all. There should be no question of hierarchy or antagonism, but transparency and synergy are needed in order to achieve the United Nations overarching purpose. There also needs to be more accountability regarding the compliance of Member States with the decisions of the Council. Implementation cannot be absent from the Council’s report. In addition to improving the synergy between the Council and the General Assembly, the Council must improve how it relates to the Member States directly concerned by the items on its agenda and Member States hosting United Nations peacekeeping operations. One of the conflicts that has been on the Council’s agenda the longest — the Cyprus Question — remains unresolved because the numerous resolutions adopted by the Council not only remain unimplemented but an effort is under way to try to void them. The campaign to deconstruct the acquis that has formed through the plethora of Security Council’s resolutions on Cyprus is aided and compounded by a corresponding campaign on the ground to create enough faits accomplis to render those resolutions non-implementable. Those are developments that the Council should prevent, both by enforcing its own resolutions and by hold those in breach accountable. The most immediate action required by the Council on the Cyprus conflict in particular is the implementation of its decisions on Varosha without any further delay. At the core of the United Nations existence is the mitigation of power to ensure a level playing field for all Member States irrespective of their size, economy and military capabilities. The Council must embody the concept of equality among the Member States in order to succeed in fair and sustainable peacemaking that responds to the endeavours of affected populations and not to the interests of outside Powers. To begin with, the Council needs more robust action to uphold the prohibition on the threat or use of force. Before concluding, I wish to single out some of the practices that merit heightened attention by the Council, including the transfer of terrorist fighters from one conflict to another, long-term displacement, demographic engineering in conflict situations and impunity for atrocity crimes. The cycle of violence and non-accountability could be broken through referring all situations before the Council by default to the International Criminal Court.

The delegation of Ukraine would like to thank you, Madam, for convening this important meeting. We would like to start by noting the efforts of the Permanent Missions of the Niger and China in preparing the report of the Security Council (A/75/2). We also thank the Permanent Representative of Estonia, Mr. Sven Jürgenson, as President of the Council, for presenting the report to the General Assembly. We would like to use this opportunity to commend him for the outstanding job Estonia is doing steering the Council’s work in the month of June. The consideration of the Council’s report to the General Assembly, along with the election of the non-permanent members of the Council, remains one of the most visible aspects of interaction between these two United Nations organs. Much has been said before on the need to enhance the analytical perspective of the reports and to go beyond their compilatory nature in order to get a much broader insight into the substantive nature of the Council’s work. We agree that it is useful to have a compilation of the documents that were sent to and from the Council, as well as records of its meetings throughout the year, all compiled in one source. Yet we remain convinced that adding conclusions and, even more so, strategic perspectives would contribute positively to the report’s relevance and practical value. It would be beneficial if the report gave at least an idea of what is happening on the ground, if it provided the context as to why a specific issue is brought to the attention of the Council or explanations as to why a particular document is adopted or rejected. We know that the report contains references to resolutions that were not adopted unanimously. However, it would be more useful to have a short exposé as to which specific aspects of the proposed documents were viewed differently by Council members. Then there is the issue of draft resolutions that were not adopted due to a negative vote of a permanent member or due to a failure to obtain nine votes in favour. Such cases deserve more attention than just a mere mention of voting outcomes without any substantial details. For instance, the report before us refers to a draft resolution on women and peace and security (S/2020/1054) that was not adopted in October last year. Given the twentieth anniversary of landmark resolution 1325 (2000), the October draft resolution was widely anticipated at the United Nations. Why the proposed substance of the draft resolution did not result in its adoption is an interesting and very practical question worth being addressed in detail. In previous years, the delegation of Ukraine expressed our disappointment over the inadequate presentation in the report’s introduction of the consideration by the Council of the issue of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, which formally falls under two agenda items. I reiterate that it is of the utmost importance to avoid gaps in the reporting about the substance of the discussions on this major matter before the Council over the course of the year. What is equally important is to ensure that the language used in the report in relation to the Russian- Ukrainian conflict is proper and adequate. By that we mean, first and foremost, the reference in the report before us to the briefing by Mr. Edi Rama, the Chairperson-in-Office of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) in 2020 (see S/PV.8714), on, as interpreted in the report, “the priorities of his work, including the mediation of the crisis in eastern Ukraine” (A/75/2, para. 142). That is far from an acceptable way of interpreting the actual situation on the ground in two Ukrainian regions and contributes to a false narrative by Russia about the so-called internal nature of the international Russian- Ukrainian conflict. The narrative promoted by the aggressor is an attempt to obscure its role and to escape responsibility as a party to conflict — a role that was recently emphasized by a number of States Members of the United Nations, including Council members, who added their voices to the joint statement on the occasion of the seventh anniversary of the adoption of the historic resolution 68/262, entitled “Territorial Integrity of Ukraine.” Moreover, the text of the statement by the OSCE Chairperson-in-Office referred to in the report of the Security Council, which can be found in meeting record S/PV.8714, does not contain that particular term at all. We are particularly disappointed that it is the doctored wording I mentioned that was used in the report, instead of the real language from the actual statement by the OSCE Chairperson-in-Office. We underscore that accurate, faithful reflection in the reports of the Security Council of facts and substance, which are at the core of the relevant discussions in the Council, is critical for the report’s credibility. In that regard, we encourage Council members to keep exploring new ways and approaches to further improve preparation of the annual reports to the Assembly as well as to double down on upgrading its overall working methods.

I would like to thank the President of the General Assembly for convening this meeting. I also thank the Permanent Representative of Estonia, current President of the Security Council, for his presentation of the Council’s report (A/75/2). I also extend thanks to the members of the Council, particularly to the Niger’s delegation, for the efforts made to prepare the introduction of the report. I also thank the Secretariat for preparing the text of the report. We take this opportunity to congratulate the five States that were elected this morning as members of the Council for the 2022-2023 term. We took note of the Security Council’s report on its activities in 2020. There is no doubt that was an exceptional period during which most of the Council’s work was carried out without in-person meetings due to the coronavirus disease pandemic. In that context, we congratulate the members of the Council, particularly those that presided over it since March 2020, for having ensured the continuity of its daily business despite logistical obstacles. The Council’s working methods have been flexible and innovative, including holding video-teleconferences and adopting resolutions in writing. The global health crisis is one of the emerging, diverse and interconnected challenges facing international peace and security. That requires a flexible, swift and innovative response from the Security Council. We appreciate the great efforts made by the members of the Security Council to shoulder their heavy burdens with a view to addressing the increasing threats to international peace and security. At the same time, we stress the importance of striking a balance between transparency, on the one hand, and effectiveness and efficiency, on the other, so that the Council can fulfil its mandate. The State of Qatar stresses the importance of adopting effective working methods in order to ensure the Council’s success. In terms of preparing and presenting the Security Council’s report to the General Assembly, we appreciate the great efforts made for the report to be inclusive. In addition, it would be useful to strengthen the analytical and substantive aspects of the report, with a view to realizing more practical benefit envisaged from it. The presentation of the Council’s report is not just a matter of procedure; it is done pursuant to the Charter of the United Nations and to the responsibilities of the Security Council vis-à-vis the General Assembly and all Member States where the Council carries out its tasks on their behalf. We also welcome the progress made in swiftly presenting and adopting the draft report in addition to considering it by the General Assembly. We would welcome the fact that the successive Council Presidents have held wrap-up sessions at the end of each of their monthly presidencies in order to keep all Member States more informed. The open debates are also a means that allow all Member States to express their views on important issues under the Council’s consideration. The State of Qatar always participates actively in those debates and in Arria Formula meetings. Consequently, my country has welcomed the meetings held during the reporting period with the participation of non-Council members through written statements. We look forward to the resumption of in-person meetings when circumstances allow. In conclusion, during the intergovernmental meetings of 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 saw that, despite a divergence of opinions on some aspects of the reform, there has been consensus on the need for it. That is the case given the pivotal role played by the Security Council and the importance of strengthening its credibility, legitimacy and effectiveness as one of the principal organs of this international Organization.

First of all, we thank the delegation of Estonia for presenting the report of the Security Council for 2020 (A/75/2). We also commend the efforts of the Niger in coordinating its drafting. The coronavirus disease pandemic had an impact on the work of all the organs of the United Nations. From mid-March 2020, the Security Council adapted its working methods to the new circumstances. During the first months of the pandemic, all Council meetings were held via video-teleconference. From July 2020, some meetings were held in person again, but virtual meetings remained the rule throughout the rest of the year. The new working methods allowed the Security Council to continue its work and to fulfil its mandate, but at the same time, they affected the efficiency of implementation and decision-making among the members of the Council. Those working methods also had an impact on transparency and inclusivity. In that regard, those most affected were the non-members of the Council, whose delegations could participate in open debates only through the submission of written statements. The pandemic has shown the need for and value of in-person diplomacy. That is why we are advocating for the Security Council to resume its normal functioning. Given the growing improvement in the health situation in the city of New York, we believe it is now time for the Security Council to resume in-person meetings, while recognizing the need to be careful and to take the necessary precautions. For my delegation, transparency is one of the central principles that should guide the work of the Council. We therefore highlight the fact that, during 2020, the practice of holding briefings for the entire membership at the beginning and end of their mandate has been maintained by successive Council presidencies. We encourage the presidencies of the Council to provide their monthly assessments in a timely manner with the seriousness that exercise deserves. We regret that the annual report of the Security Council continues to be merely a general account of meetings and documents of the Security Council and subsidiary bodies without any analytical development that would allow the entire membership to undertake a proper assessment of the Council’s activity. We therefore wish to encourage the members of the Council to review that practice. In conclusion, my delegation reiterates its commitment to achieving a reform of the Security Council with the aim of having a more democratic, transparent and inclusive organ that represents all regions.

I thank you, Madam Vice-President, for convening this debate, which is one of the most valuable opportunities for the wider membership to consider the work of the Security Council. I also thank the President of the Security Council, Ambassador Sven Jürgenson, for his presentation of the Council’s annual report (A/75/2). We commend the efforts undertaken by the Security Council over the past year to improve its working methods and to promote more transparency in its activities. In that regard, it is important to note that in 2020 the Security Council showed flexibility and a capacity to adapt to challenging circumstances by adopting provisional measures allowing it to continue to fulfil its mandate. Even though, in some instances, the level of opacity of its activities increased, we believe that the very fact that the Council was operational is, in itself, an important achievement. The Charter of the United Nations clearly prescribes that the Security Council should maintain regular coordination, cooperation and interaction with the other principal organs of the United Nations. For that reason, the consideration of the annual report must not be seen as the only occasion on which the Security Council is accountable to the General Assembly. Regular coordination between those two organs is essential to avoid overlapping and duplication of work, as well as to create synergies that would make the work of both organs more efficient. Article 24, paragraph 3, of the Charter also states, “The Security Council shall submit annual and, when necessary, special reports to the General Assembly for its consideration.” We continue to believe that that resource could be used more often as a way of keeping the membership abreast of important issues that are being considered by the Council. We also reiterate our expectation of a more analytical annual report, with at least a certain level of assessment of the Council’s work. However, the document we have before us remains mostly descriptive and factual. It could certainly be enriched by more in-depth analysis of the challenges faced by the Council in its daily activities, as well as by a comprehensive consideration of the Council’s working methods. Even though the Council faced exceptional challenges posed by the coronavirus disease pandemic in 2020, there is scarce cross-cutting analysis of that topic, or of its bearing on international peace and security. It is important that the annual report be not only a compilation of information on meetings held but also an indication of key issues and trends in the field of peace and security that would require special attention by the wider membership. Some options for improving the interaction of the Security Council with the General Assembly are already contained in presidential note S/2017/507, and could be used more often. One important case in point is the possibility of holding interactive informal exchanges of views with the wider membership in order to help the Council in the drafting of the report’s introduction. The annual report could also rely more heavily on the monthly assessments of each presidency. Finally, presidential note S/2017/507 also encourages efforts to include more substantive information in the annual report presented to the General Assembly. We are convinced that those measures would contribute to a more interesting, useful and forward-looking document. We also take this opportunity to suggest that in the next reporting cycle more analytical attention be given to topics such as the Council’s working methods, the dialogue with troop- and police-contributing countries, the interaction with the Peace Building Commission and the activities of the subsidiary bodies, given the relevance of those topics to the wider membership. Lastly, allow me to underscore once again our belief that only a comprehensive reform of the Security Council, with the creation of new seats in both categories, will make the Council more representative, accountable, transparent and effective.

Allow me to begin by thanking the President of the Security Council, Ambassador Sven Jürgenson, on his introductory statement, as well as the delegation of the Niger for preparing the introductory part of the annual report (A/75/2). We welcome the timely issuance of the report, well ahead of the closing of the seventy-fifth session of the General Assembly. We hope that this practice can be maintained and further improved. Indonesia would like to underline the following points. First, on transparency and accountability, this report does not just serve as an information document; above all, it is a vital instrument of accountability and transparency in the work of the Security Council. It provides an indispensable opportunity for the Council to collaborate with the General Assembly for the benefit of the United Nations as a whole. As an elected member of the Security Council during this reporting period, we made sure that Indonesia was accessible to any Member State from any regional group that had an interest in the activities of the Council. After all, the Security Council and its members serve the United Nations system as a whole in exercising its mandate. Indonesia believes that maintaining the integrity of this principle is crucial to further enhancing the legitimacy of the Council. Secondly, on adaptability in the work of the Council, facing a fast-changing global environment, the Council needs to continue to adapt to challenges and opportunities. We note the unprecedented challenges in 2020 in ensuring business continuity in the Council’s work during a global pandemic. The flexible and constructive approaches of all Council members were key to enabling the Council exercise its mandate and remain operational in the midst of the pandemic. Adaptability is also important in the context of addressing the current challenges to the delivery of its mandate. As a major troop- and police-contributing country, we welcome the adoption of two Security Council resolutions on peace keeping in 2020. We are pleased to have been involved in and to co-sponsor resolution 2518 (2020), on the safety and security of peacekeepers, who have come under serious threat in recent years. Indonesia is especially pleased to see the unity of the Council members in supporting the very first resolution on women in peacekeeping operations  — resolution 2538 (2020)  — which was initiated by Indonesia in August 2020. We trust that, in facing increasingly complex and multidimensional peacekeeping mandates, the increased participation of women in peacekeeping missions will be part of the solution. My delegation hopes that such approaches can be maintained by the Security Council in its future work. Thirdly, on increased engagement with the General Assembly and relevant stakeholders, at the celebration of the seventy-fifth anniversary of the United Nations, we heard numerous calls to bring the work of the United Nations closer to the people. That is especially critical for people in conflict areas whose lives will be impacted by any decision or indecision of the Security Council. To that end, all United Nations bodies need to effectively and efficiently exercise their respective mandates. Indonesia calls for stronger interaction as well as harmonious coordination between the Council and the General Assembly in exercising their distinctly separate mandates. Furthermore, we also put special emphasis on strengthening the cooperation between the Council and the relevant stakeholders in conflict situations. Indonesia is of the view that the participation of regional organizations and troop- and police-contributing countries should be increased. To conclude, allow me to once again thank our fellow members of the Security Council serving in 2020 as well as members of the Secretariat for their service and cooperation. We would also like to thank all United Nations States Members for their support in the work of the Security Council during this reporting period. Indonesia remains committed to working together with current Council members towards a more democratic, effective and efficient Security Council in exercising its mandate.

First, I would like to thank you, Madam Vice-President, for organizing this important and timely meeting. Italy is pleased to have this opportunity to comment on the report of the Security Council to the General Assembly for 2020 (A/75/2) and to reflect briefly on how the relationship between the Security Council and the General Assembly might be enhanced. Italy appreciates that this report was presented in a timely manner, earlier than in previous years. Such positive developments are in keeping with the requests raised by several Member States, and with the proposals made by Kuwait and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines as Chairs of the Informal Working Group on Documentation and Other Procedural Questions. At the same time, we notice that this annual report, like the previous ones, lacks the analytical content that many delegations, including ours, have consistently asked for in the past years. In fact, while it is true that the current report details all the activities undertaken by the Council in 2020, which undoubtedly was a very peculiar year, to say the least, it does not, unfortunately, focus on the different reasons that the Council found itself unable to deliver and to achieve progress on many critical outstanding issues. As stated on previous occasions, we believe that the inaction — or, in some cases, the paralysis — of the Council is closely linked to the so-called power of the veto, regardless of whether it is actually used or simply threatened. In that respect, we view with interest initiatives aimed at restricting the use of the veto, such as the French-Mexican initiative, the code of conduct put forward by the Accountability, Coherence and Transparency group and the proposal by Liechtenstein to hold a debate in the General Assembly every time a veto is cast in the Security Council. Italy reaffirms the need for the Council to be held accountable to the General Assembly. We should never forget that, pursuant to Article 24 of the Charter of the United Nations, the Security Council acts on behalf of the Member States. Improved accountability and higher transparency would definitely enhance the quality of the interactions between the Security Council and the General Assembly. It would provide the Council with additional information and insights to inform its work. Conversely, when the opinions of Member States in the General Assembly are heard on matters of international peace and security that affect them, the transparency, accountability and legitimacy of the Council are strengthened. In turn, those elements help the Council better face its responsibilities on a number of issues. In sum, Italy believes that, to improve the overall performance of the Security Council, what is needed is a more accountable, more democratic, more representative and more transparent organ. As part of the Uniting for Consensus group, we have been consistently advocating that understanding within the intergovernmental negotiations process. Last year’s outbreak of the coronavirus disease pandemic and the Council’s slow response to the crisis confirm once again that only an enlargement in the category of elected non-permanent members of the Security Council would make it more accountable and effective for the sake of international peace and stability.

We thank you, Madam Vice-President, for convening this meeting to analyse the annual report of the Security Council to the General Assembly for 2020 (A/75/2). The relevance of the Security Council, as the organ mandated by the Charter of the United Nations with the maintenance of international peace and security, requires that the presentation of its annual reports cease to be a formal and uncritical exercise. It is regrettable that, year after year, the calls go ignored that are made by the majority of the Member States of the Organization for these reports to be exhaustive and analytical, in order for them to contribute to a true exercise of accountability before the General Assembly. Such is the case with the report we are considering today, which is limited to a description of the list of meetings, activities and resolutions of the Council and does not facilitate an assessment of the causes and implications of the decisions of that organ. For example, this report does not assess the impact of the temporary and extraordinary working methods used by the Council since the middle of March 2020 on the fulfilment of its functions. Although those methods attest to the efforts made to try to guarantee the work of the Council in the exceptional circumstances imposed by the coronavirus disease pandemic, they were not sufficient to ensure the full participation of the States Members of the United Nations in open debates via video-teleconferences, and they limited the participation of non-members of the Council in closed consultations on issues that affected them in particular, as provided for by rule 37 of the provisional rules of procedure of that organ. It is also regrettable that the report omits violations of the Council’s own resolutions, in particular resolution 2334 (2016). Israel continues to expand its illegal settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories with impunity and threatens to annex territories in the Jordan Valley and elsewhere in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. It is regrettable that the failure to act on the Palestinian question and the prolongation of the suffering of its people are not reflected in the report. Even though the number of public meetings of the Security Council, including open debates, has increased, the Security Council continues to work primarily in closed formats, to take decisions without heeding the concerns of Member States and to force decisions on draft resolutions even when there are significant differences over their content. Greater transparency in the work of the Security Council will facilitate its effective action on behalf of all Member States, pursuant to Article 24 of the Charter of the United Nations. The Council must represent the interests of all United Nations Member States in order to preserve multilateralism and the credibility of the Organization. In that regard, we urge that the Council’s informal consultations be the exception, not the rule, that a record of consultations should be issued and that the rules of procedure of that organ, which to date remain provisional, be adopted. We oppose the selective manipulation of the Council’s methods and practices as a tool to exert pressure against sovereign States, as well as its taking up issues beyond its remit, in particular those that fall under the mandate of the General Assembly. We reiterate our support for a comprehensive reform of the Security Council, including its working methods, in order to make it a transparent, democratic and representative organ, in keeping with the evolution of the membership of the United Nations.

Bangladesh welcomes the holding of today’s plenary meeting to consider the annual report of the Security Council for 2021 (A/75/2). I thank the Permanent Representative of Estonia for the presentation of the annual report (see A/75/PV.78). It is absolutely critical that there be regular interaction between the two most important organs of the United Nations. Such interactions are mutually beneficial, and an inclusive process of interaction and reporting will contribute to strengthening the multilateral system. Reporting is also a crucial mechanism to ensure accountability and transparency. We call on the Council to be more transparent, inclusive, innovative and accountable in its work so that it can address the integrated nature of today’s varied and multifaceted security threats. In that regard, we would like to see more frequent exchanges among members and non-members of the Security Council. We would particularly like to see more opportunities for affected countries to participate in the Council’s deliberations and for the Security Council and the General Assembly work together and support one another, recognizing that the latter is the only United Nations organ with universal representation and has the primary responsibility, scope and ability to achieve our common vision for peace, development and stability around the world. We appreciate the fact that the report is being presented earlier this year, despite the limitations imposed by the coronavirus disease pandemic. Yet we note with regret that the present report continues to lack in constructive analyses. It contains merely a statistical compilation of events and a listing of meetings and outcome documents. The report does not provide the kind of insightful analysis that is expected on critical issues before the Council that are of equal importance to the larger membership. This should be an exercise not just of mere formality, but of substance. There should be genuine interaction between the most representative organ of the United Nations and the most empowered organ — the Security Council. We underscore the importance of full disclosure in the report on how the views of the non-members are incorporated into the work of the Security Council. In fact, it is imperative to ensure the participation of affected countries and debates on issues that concern them in the Council’s meetings. We propose that the annual report should give a summary of the votes cast throughout the year and the use of the veto for the same year. The power of the veto is a special privilege and it must be exercised with special responsibilities, including accountability and judicious application. Aside from the use of the veto, we also propose that the report should contain an analysis of non-consensual decisions and decisions that failed to be adopted. We are encouraged to see the increased efforts of the Security Council on key thematic issues, including women and peace and security, the protection of civilians, conflict prevention, sustaining peace and drivers of conflicts, such as hunger, climate and the scarceness of natural resources. However, mainstreaming those thematic priorities across individual countries and situations remains a work in progress. The annual report of the Security Council is an important contribution to ensuring the credibility and legitimacy of the Council. We look forward to a report with high-quality information on the activities of the Council that will help advance its transparency and effectiveness. Mr. Agyeman (Ghana) Ghana thanks the Permanent Representative of Estonia for his presentation (see A/75/ PV.78) of the 2020 annual report of the Security Council (A/75/2). We also associate ourselves with the statement delivered by the representative of Portugal on behalf of the Accountability, Coherence and Transparency group (see A/75/PV.78), as well as the comments of previous speakers on the need for a more analytical report with a strategical orientation. We also join previous speakers in thanking the President for convening this very important debate on the 2020 annual report. The presentation of the report to the General Assembly for its consideration, in accordance with Article 24, paragraph 3, of the Charter of the United Nations, demonstrates our collective commitment to maintaining accountability for the decisions and actions of the Council and improving transparency in the important work that the Council carries out on behalf of all Member States. My delegation is happy to note that, despite the difficulties that have been occasioned by the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, the Council has demonstrated adaptability in its working methods. We know that, in total for the year 2020, the Council held 81 in-person meetings and 269 video conferences, adopted 57 resolutions and issued 13 presidential statements, as well as 46 press statements. That outcome compares favourably with that of 2019. We therefore welcome the proactive measures that have been taken by the Council to continue its work through remote participation in addressing global security challenges. The Council’s adoption of resolution 2532 (2020) on 1 July 2020 — concerning the immediate cessation of hostilities in support of the call of the Secretary- General for a global ceasefire to assist efforts in combating COVID-19-vulnerable countries  — was commendable, although its sanctity was broken on many occasions. Ghana takes note of the breadth of the Council’s activities for 2020, which covered, inter alia, the peace and security situation in the Middle East, Europe, Latin America, some parts of Asia and several countries in Africa. We also welcome the work of the Council on thematic questions, such as women and peace and security, civilians in armed conflict and children in armed conflict. Regrettably, the files on Africa continue to take up a sizeable portion of the Council’s agenda. Despite efforts to address the crises on the continent, challenges remain. The worsening situation of refugees and displaced persons during the pandemic, as well as the deterioration of the security and humanitarian situation in some parts of West Africa, the Sahel and the Lake Chad basin, are of major concern. The recent attacks by unknown militants in the village of Sohan in Burkina Faso, leading to the killing of 165 people, show the fragility of the security situation in some countries on the continent and the need for further engagement in support of the fight against extremists and radicalized groups. Ghana therefore welcomes the ongoing partnership between the Council and the African Union in addressing the crises on the continent and looks forward to a deepening of the relationship of the Peace and Security Council of the African Union, as was the case during the annual informal joint meeting held by video-teleconference in September 2020. We note with appreciation the Council’s concern about the situation in the Sahel region and welcome its strong support for the mediation efforts of the Economic Community of West African States in addressing the crisis in the region. I believe that there is scope to deepen engagement with regional arrangements through greater burden-sharing in support of regional peace operations and missions. As one of the top troop- and police-contributing countries, Ghana remains worried about the volatile operational environment in which peacekeepers are deployed. We therefore welcome the Council’s adoption of resolution 2518 (2020) on 30 March 2020. Additionally, we believe that the Council’s deliberations on integrating child protection into peace processes, the inclusion of human rights components in peacekeeping mandates and its support for strengthening the collective efforts of stakeholders towards the meaningful participation of women in peacekeeping operations are relevant and appropriate and should be encouraged. Ghana also calls on the Council to be more committed politically to strengthening the capacity of States in need, especially those of Africa. On countering terrorism and violent extremism, the current situation makes it imperative that unimpeded humanitarian access to displaced persons and refugees, in accordance with international humanitarian law, should be supported as a matter of urgency. In conclusion, let me thank Member States for the very strong support for our candidature to the Security Council, as exhibited through the voting this morning (see A/75/PV.78). As Ghana looks forward to taking its seat on the Council on 1 January 2022, it is our fervent hope that we will be able to cooperate with all Member States and indeed the entire United Nations system in enhancing global peace and security for sustainable and inclusive development. Finally, let me congratulate Gabon, the United Arab Emirates, Albania and Brazil for their respective elections. We look forward to working with them on the Council.

We align ourselves with the comments made by several delegations during this meeting about the contents of the report (A/75/2). We paid special attention to the comment made by the Ambassador and representative of Canada with regard to the particular role of the Peacebuilding Commission, which we have the privilege of chairing, and the important role it continues to play. Canada has been an exceptionally supportive and highly effective partner in that regard. We welcome this opportunity to comment on the report of the Security Council to the General Assembly. We believe that this interaction should be strengthened, considering that the General Assembly is the only United Nations organ with universal representation. As stipulated in Article 24 of the Charter of the United Nations, “the Security Council acts on behalf of the general membership”. It remains essential therefore to have the Council accountable to that wider membership. We appreciate the detailed and comprehensive nature of the report in covering various activities of the Security Council in 2020. However, it is lacking the aspired analytical content of the megatrends endangering our world’s peace and security. It should capture the most important moments in the year under review, assess the Council’s ability to deal with problems at hand and signal difficulties and areas where improvements could be made, as well as elaborate recommendations on how to adjust the work of the Security Council to better react to those challenges. We took note of the relative early submission of the report, in comparison to the previous session. However, it is to be recalled that the Council should finalize the draft by the end of January. We therefore reiterate our call for the timely submission of the report in order to allow more meaningful discussions among Member States. In the intergovernmental negotiations on the reform of the Security Council, the nature of the report is the subject of much discussion. There is convergence among Member States on the need to strengthen cooperation and communication between the Security Council and the General Assembly, in particular through the submission of the Security Council annual report, of a more analytical nature, as well as special reports, if required by the General Assembly. These suggestions aim to achieve a more effective Security Council through establishing a system of checks and balances by holding the Security Council accountable to the General Assembly, as required and mandated by the Charter. We have to acknowledge the overwhelming burden put on the shoulders of Security Council members. Preserving peace and security in our troubled world is a daunting task indeed. At the same time, to put things in their proper conceptual context, aligned with the spirit of the Charter, Security Council members are the few acting in certain matters on behalf of the whole. It is not Security Council against General Assembly, but rather Security Council with General Assembly, working together in tandem, with complementarity and mutual empowerment. As the gravity of peace and security challenges in our world are increasing, more action, including by the Security Council, is needed, as is compliance with the Council’s decisions. Unfortunately, in many cases, robust action by the Council is lacking and compliance with decisions continues to lag. It is compelling now more than ever to overcome our divisions and to bypass polarization. A healthy world will need a healthy United Nations, a healthy United Nations will need a healthy Security Council and a healthy Security Council cannot exist without a healthy General Assembly  — all together in a single holistic approach, as intended. This was made abundantly clear during the coronavirus disease pandemic and the coping mechanisms put in place to ensure effective business continuity and how synergy between the General Assembly and the Security Council was necessary and instrumental to coordinate our collective way forward. We must build on that and learn from it, for it is we the people who will pay the price of failure and it is we the people who will reap the fruits of success. In conclusion, we extend our congratulations to the five newly elected Security Council members  — Albania, Brazil, Gabon, Ghana and the United Arab Emirates — and wish them all success as we assure them and all Council members of our continued support. We similarly extend our appreciation to the Secretariat for the important role that they continue to play.

We welcome the opportunity to participate in the debate on the report of the Security Council. Being in our sixth month of this term on the Security Council, we are encouraged by the fact that the report was presented well on time before the deadline of 31 May. We would like to commend the delegation of the Niger for taking the lead in the preparation of this report. We would also like to thank Belgium, the Dominican Republic, Germany, Indonesia and South Africa for their contributions to the report and to the functioning of the Security Council during their tenure in the Council. We look forward to a productive relationship with the new members on the Council next year: Albania, Brazil, Gabon, Ghana and the United Arab Emirates. The General Assembly debates on the report of the Security Council time and again have sought more in-depth analysis by the Council of its work in the annual reports. Unfortunately, that request has not been heeded by the Council, whose functioning is still based on working methods that are centred around the principle of decision-making by consensus. This principle affects mostly the elected members, who, ironically, hold the majority voice in the Council. We do believe that it is important for the Security Council to pay more attention to its report to the General Assembly, rather than view it as a mere formality. The General Assembly is indeed the most representative organ of the United Nations. The fact that there is a separate provision in the United Nations Charter mandating such a report by the Security Council itself shows the importance with which that report is viewed. Hence, the annual report of the Security Council must inform, highlight and analyse the measures that it has decided upon or taken to maintain international peace and security during the reporting period. Among other things, my delegation reiterates the need for analysis of the United Nations peacekeeping operations — the flagship tool for the maintenance of international peace and security. The General Assembly needs to have more information on how peacekeeping operations are run, the problems they face, why certain mandates are set or changed, or on when and why they are strengthened, scaled down or ended. As most peacekeepers are contributed by non-Council members that put the lives of their troops at risk to serve the cause of international peace, a better partnership between the Security Council and the troop-contributing countries is needed. I would also like to respond to a certain delegation that sought to exploit this forum and, once again, raised matters internal to my country. It is rather unfortunate that Pakistan continued to indulge in theatrics not befitting this forum. It is clear that the international community is no longer fooled by this delegation. The decision taken by the Parliament of India regarding the Union Territories of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh are matters internal to India. India desires normal, neighbourly relations with all countries, including Pakistan. Our consistent position is that if there are any issues between India and Pakistan, they should be resolved bilaterally and peacefully in an atmosphere free of terror, hostility and violence. The onus is therefore on Pakistan to create such a conducive atmosphere, including by taking credible, verifiable action not to allow any territory under its control to be used for cross-border terrorism against India in any manner. Finally, as a member of the Security Council, we will continue our efforts, working together with other elected members of the Council, to pursue reforms in the working methods and in favour of better reporting to the General Assembly.

The exercise of the right of reply has been requested. May I remind members that statements in the exercise of the right of reply are limited to 10 minutes for the first intervention and five minutes for the second intervention and should be made by delegations from their seats. I call on the representative of Pakistan.

My delegation has requested the floor in response to the statement that has just been made by the representative of India. Let me set the record straight. Jammu and Kashmir is not a part of India. It never was, and it never will be. India has no claim to Jammu and Kashmir, other than that of a military occupier. Like all oppressors, India continues to believe that it can subdue the legitimate Kashmiri resistance through brute force. Like all occupiers of the past, India will fail in its strategy to subdue and suppress the Kashmiri people. Kashmir will be free one day. This is not only a lesson of history; it is also an imperative of justice. The Kashmiri struggle for self-determination seeks to realize implementation of resolutions of the Security Council — in exercise of their inalienable right to self- determination. No amount of empty rhetoric or dubious grandstanding by India can deprive the Kashmiris of this fundamental right or do away with the binding resolutions of the Security Council. Perhaps the Indian representative needs reminding that these are the resolutions of the very same organ whose permanent membership India covets with such drooling ambition. Instead of tilting at windmills, India would be better served to put its own house in order and strive for regional peace based on equality, mutual respect and a peaceful settlement of all disputes.

We have heard the last speaker in the debate on this item for this meeting. May I take it that the General Assembly takes note of the report of the Security Council contained in document A/75/2? It was so decided (decision 75/568).

The Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 30.