A/76/PV.94 General Assembly

Before we take up the item on our agenda for today, I would like to honour the memory of the former President of Angola, His Excellency Mr. José Eduardo dos Santos, and the former Prime Minister of Japan, His Excellency Mr. Shinzo Abe, both of whom passed away on Friday, 8 July. On behalf of the General Assembly, I request the representatives of Angola and Japan to convey our condolences to the Government and the people of Angola and Japan and to Mr. Dos Santos’s and Mr. Abe’s bereaved families. I now invite representatives to stand and observe a minute of silence in tribute to the memory of President José Eduardo dos Santos and Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.

Members will recall that pursuant to General Assembly decision 75/569 of 22 June 2021, the Assembly continued the intergovernmental negotiations on Security Council reform in informal plenary meetings during the current session. In a letter dated 7 July 2022, I circulated a draft oral decision on that issue that includes the following terms. “First, the General Assembly decides to reaffirm its central role concerning the question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council and other matters related to the Security Council, and the commitment of Heads of State and Government representing the peoples of the world to instilling new life in the discussions on the reform of the Council. “Secondly, it decides to immediately continue intergovernmental negotiations on Security Council reform in informal plenary meetings of the General Assembly at its seventy-seventh session, as mandated by Assembly decisions 62/557 of 15 September 2008, 63/565 B of 14 September 2009, 64/568 of 13 September 2010, 65/554 of 12 September 2011, 66/566 of 13 September 2012, 67/561 of 29 August 2013, 68/557 of 8 September 2014, 69/560 of 14 September 2015, 70/559 of 27 July 2016, 71/553 of 19 July 2017, 72/557 of 29 June 2018, 73/554 of 25 June 2019, 74/569 of 31 August 2020 and 75/569 of June 2021, building on the informal meetings held during its seventy-sixth session, as reflected in the letter dated 16 May 2022 from the co-Chairs, and on the co-Chairs’ revised elements paper on convergences and divergences on the question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council and related matters, circulated on 19 May 2022, as well as the positions of and proposals made by Member States, reflected in the text and its annex circulated on 31 July 2015, in order to help to inform its future work. “Thirdly, it welcomes the active engagement, initiatives and intensive efforts of the President of the General Assembly, and notes with appreciation the active role and concrete efforts of the co-Chairs undertaken in a consultative manner with a view to an early comprehensive reform of the Security Council. “Fourthly, it decides to convene 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 during the seventy-seventh session of the General Assembly, if Member States so decide. “Fifthly, it also decides to include in the agenda of the seventy-seventh session of the General Assembly the item entitled ‘Question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council and other matters related to the Security Council’.” I would like to thank everyone for attending today’s plenary meeting. I would also like to express my deep appreciation to Ms. Alya Ahmed Saif Al-Thani, Permanent Representative of the State of Qatar, and Mr. Martin Bille Hermann, Permanent Representative of Denmark, for their efforts in facilitating the intergovernmental negotiations process during the seventy-sixth session. Thanks to their tireless work, leadership and innovative approach of unformal engagement with the Member States, progress has been made in expanding the areas of convergence and narrowing down the areas of divergence. The success of the intergovernmental negotiations is entirely contingent on the active and ambitious involvement of Member States. I commend everyone for their active involvement, as well as their in-depth, constructive and candid discussions throughout the seventy-sixth session. While we all agree that we have diverse views on each of the five clusters, we also agree that reform of the Security Council is warranted and long overdue. It has been 57 years since the last increase in the membership of the Council, when the total membership of the United Nations numbered 117. Today our Organization has 193 Member States, but the Council remains frozen at 15 members, with no permanent representation for the entire African continent. As for the intergovernmental negotiations process, we are in the fourteenth year since it began, and we therefore have a collective responsibility to demonstrate that the process is working and ensure that it does not become a Sisyphean exercise. It is for that reason that the Declaration on the Commemoration of the Seventy-fifth Anniversary of the United Nations, adopted by our leaders, calls for instilling new life into the discussions on reform of the Council. In that context, I would like to recognize the work of the co-Chairs. We all understand that the intergovernmental negotiations process is complex and political. Despite that, the co-Chairs persisted with their new approach, and I am glad to say that despite some initial scepticism and hesitation, the Member States have embraced it. Apart from the unformal conversations and substantial increase in the areas of convergence, I would like to highlight some specifics. They are the co-Chairs’ use of oral reflections following some of the more substantive discussions; the vigorous use of guiding questions for the interactive discussions; the discussions on the revised elements paper during the intergovernmental negotiations process itself, leading to the final version circulated to Member States; the practice of adjourning meetings only after the speakers’ lists were exhausted; and further elaboration on and a more comprehensive reference to the Common African Position. Global developments have made it imperative that we deliver a United Nations, including a Security Council, that is fit for purpose, representative and able to deliver for those we serve. The challenges we face in securing and sustaining peace have underscored the importance of reforming the Council. Around the world, our leaders and constituents are once again rightly asking themselves and one another why the United Nations cannot do more. They expect change, and we have a choice to make. We can dither and delay any dialogue because of our differences, or we can seize the moment in time, bridge our differences and reach for a common goal that is long, long overdue. It is clear that we have made progress this year, but not all delegations will agree. And that is understandable. While the pace is slow, our goal remains the same. We must fully utilize the intergovernmental negotiations process lest we be left without one. The choice is in the hands of the Member States. Going forward, I would encourage all delegations to work tirelessly to further reduce the divergences and gradually move the process towards text-based negotiations, using the co-Chairs’ elements paper and the framework document. I hope that the constructive spirit demonstrated during this year’s negotiations will guide the General Assembly’s decision on the draft oral decision on Security Council reform. While it is not perfect, the draft decision, if adopted by consensus, will demonstrate commitment and solidarity and provide a robust basis for further progress in the upcoming session. In an uncertain world, a stronger, more reliable and more dependable United Nations is essential. The efforts to make the Security Council efficient, effective, representative and accountable are not only welcome but desperately needed. Only after achieving those conditions can we deliver peace and security as well as stability and pathways to prosperity. Let us therefore take those steps forward. Let us demonstrate that we are listening and acting as required, and that we will continue to do so. We shall now proceed to consider the draft oral decision. Before giving the floor for explanations of vote or position before the voting, I would like to remind delegations that explanations are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats.

I would like to thank you, Mr. President, for giving me the floor. I am delivering this statement on behalf of the L.69 group, a diverse, pro-reform group of 29 cross- regional developing countries in favour of justice, sovereignty and equity in reform of the Security Council, both in the process and the outcome. Before I reflect on this year’s intergovernmental negotiations and comment on the draft rollover decision, I would like to express the L.69 group’s appreciation to you, Mr. President, as well as the co-Chairs, for your unwavering leadership and focused efforts to advance this agenda. We recognize the formidable challenges that exist in reconciling the opposing views of Member States and reaffirm our support to the process and to working constructively for Security Council reform. The rollover decision is the only formal outcome that captures the progression of the intergovernmental negotiations, and should therefore not be reduced to a mere technical rollover. It functions as a fundamental aspect in setting the trajectory of the intergovernmental negotiations for each session. In that regard, we regret that there were no further amendments to reflect, for example, the broad support for the Common African Position and the legitimate aspiration of African countries to an increased presence on the Council in both membership categories. That position, as espoused in the Ezulwini Consensus and the Sirte Declaration, was supported so widely in the intergovernmental negotiations that the elements paper was updated to reflect it. There is therefore no legitimate reason for omitting it from the rollover decision. This year’s negotiations also demonstrated that there is agreement on the need for greater representation of countries, including small island developing States (SIDS), on the Council, and we believe that should also have been reflected in the outcome. By virtue of decision 62/557, the General Assembly committed to commencing the intergovernmental negotiations in informal plenary in good faith, with mutual respect and in an open, inclusive and transparent manner, in order to achieve a solution that can garner the widest possible political acceptance. In that context, we regret that this year’s rollover decision failed to reflect the consistent appeal that was made for improving the working methods of the intergovernmental negotiations. Some Member States, particularly SIDS, continue to operate with smaller missions. Many of our States have legitimate capacity constraints that make it difficult to sufficiently balance competing demands, directly affecting the extent to which their Permanent Representatives can follow the intergovernmental negotiations, keep abreast of what happens in them and participate meaningfully in discussions. We firmly believe that a commitment to improving the working methods of the intergovernmental negotiations is in the interests of all Member States and in line with decision 62/557. That is neither an onerous nor unreasonable request, merely one that seeks to afford every Member State an opportunity to participate in the intergovernmental negotiations on an equal footing. This year’s intergovernmental negotiations unfolded against the backdrop of a series of compounding global crises that further exposed the Council’s inability to provide effective solutions to today’s challenges. That should have been a catalyst for making concrete progress during this year’s session, including on substantive issues, but instead we remain trapped in the years-long cycle of repetition. While the different sessions permitted us to focus on each of the clusters in turn, the lack of record-keeping and documentation kept us in a loop of repeated statements voicing already articulated and entrenched positions. We welcome the fact that the letter dated 7 July 2022 recognized the need to move towards text-based negotiations using the elements paper, along with the framework document. The call for that is growing louder and cannot be dismissed. The current format of the intergovernmental negotiations is not conducive to tangible progress on reform if it does not provide adequate scope to work on narrowing divergences and expanding areas of convergence through engagement on nuanced positions. The negotiations must therefore evolve and move towards substantive negotiations based on a text with clearly attributed positions. The co-Chairs clearly recommended, in line with what many Member States expressed during the session, that with the necessary adjustments the revised elements paper can be used as that basis. As we close this year’s session, the L.69 group reaffirms its commitment to the vital cause of instilling new life into the process and pledges to continue advocating for real progress to finally achieve comprehensive Security Council reform. I would like to thank the Assembly on behalf of the L.69 group.

I have the honour to speak on behalf of the 14 States members of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM). CARICOM would like to thank you, Mr. President, for convening today’s plenary meeting to consider the draft oral decision on Security Council reform. We also commend the co-Chairs of the intergovernmental negotiations, Ambassadors Alya Ahmed Saif Al-Thani and Martin Bille Hermann, the Permanent Representatives of Qatar and Denmark, for their excellent stewardship of the intergovernmental negotiations during the seventy-sixth session and for working so diligently to deliver on the call to instil new life into the discussions. For the member States of CARICOM, instilling new life into the process means engaging in a manner that enables progress to be made towards the goal of Council reform. It also means being deliberate about what we would like to achieve in these meetings and holding ourselves accountable for their outcomes. CARICOM would like to thank the co-Chairs for their valuable work in preparing their revised elements paper on convergences and divergences and looks forward to building further on those updates in the next session. Turning our attention to the draft oral decision before us, CARICOM would like to reiterate its commitment to advancing the important issue of reform of the Security Council. We remain firm in our belief that reform must be achieved based on expansion in both the permanent and non-permanent categories of membership and with a guaranteed presence on the Council for small island developing States. In that regard, we support the adoption of the rollover decision and the opportunity to continue our consideration of this important item during the next session. We sincerely hope that Member States will consolidate their commitment to achieving reform of the Council as soon as possible and to instilling new life into the intergovernmental negotiations process by demonstrating the necessary political will and flexibility. In conclusion, Mr. President, let me once again reiterate our appreciation to you, and to the co-Chairs you appointed, for your intensive and inclusive efforts to bring about progress in the work of this session’s intergovernmental negotiations. We look forward to resuming our work on the long-pending issue of Security Council reform during the seventy-seventh session.

China would like to thank you for convening today’s meeting, Mr. President. Thanks to the joint efforts by you and the co-Chairs of the intergovernmental negotiations on Security Council reform, Ambassadors Al-Thani and Hermann, the Permanent Representatives of Qatar and Denmark, this session’s intergovernmental negotiations have been successfully completed with positive results. China highly appreciates the President’s important leadership role and is sincerely grateful to the co-Chairs of the negotiation mechanism for their excellent work and contributions. In accordance with the usual practice, the draft oral decision on the intergovernmental negotiations circulated by the President aims to ensure the technical rollover of the negotiation process to the next session of the General Assembly. China supports the draft oral decision with a view to maintaining the momentum and continuity of the negotiation process and hopes that the Assembly will adopt it by consensus, an expectation that we believe all the parties share. The intergovernmental negotiations are the only legitimate platform for discussing the reform of the Council. During this year’s negotiations, considering the latest developments in the international situation, Member States reflected thoroughly on major issues such as the goals and direction of Council reform and carried out frank, in-depth and thorough discussions on how it can reflect the realities of international politics by effectively correcting the Council’s inequitable composition, power imbalance and inadequate representativeness. The common ground and convergences of views among the parties are expanding and the divergences are narrowing. China welcomes the positive progress made in this year’s negotiations and hopes that the momentum will be maintained at the Assembly’s next session. Our current priority is to encourage the Assembly to adopt a decision mandating the technical rollover of the negotiation process to its next session, in accordance with its usual practice. The substantive and contentious issues in the negotiations, including divergences among the parties, should be taken up for further discussion during the Assembly’s next session. The intergovernmental negotiations process is driven by Member States. The mode and pace of negotiations, as well as their direction, depend on the will of Member States, and decisions should be made by consensus. It appears that there are still major differences among the parties on the issue of launching text-based negotiations. In his letter circulating today’s draft oral decision, the President encouraged a gradual transition to text-based negotiations. In China’s view, that reflects only the President’s personal goodwill and has no direct relevance to the rollover of the intergovernmental negotiations. Many Member States, including China, do not support attempts through such means as procedural letters to set the future modality and guide the direction of the negotiations. We are also against using them to overinterpret the rollover decision that we are about to adopt. According to the Assembly’s decision 62/557, Member States should use the intergovernmental negotiations to seek the broadest possible political consensus on reform of the Council. Since the negotiation process began, the Assembly has always adopted the President’s proposed oral decisions on rolling over the negotiations by consensus. We hope that the Assembly will maintain that tradition and the unity of Member States during this session, something that is particularly important and valuable in our current circumstances. Any deliberate attempt to block the Assembly’s consensus adoption of the draft decision on the technical rollover of the negotiations could undermine the consensus among Member States, create division and confrontation or even end the negotiation process. That is not in anyone’s interests. We firmly oppose such an approach and do not believe that Member States would support it either. Security Council reform is a process of building consensus. China has always believed that its core objective is to effectively increase the representation and voices of developing countries, especially African countries, on the Council, and to expand the opportunities for small and medium-sized countries to participate in the Council’s work. Its outcome should benefit all Member States as much as possible and the reform process should help to strengthen their unity. China is ready to work together with all parties during the intergovernmental negotiations at the Assembly’s next session in order to promote reform that yields the broadest consensus possible, reflects Member States’ common interests and is in line with the long-term development of the United Nations.

We are grateful to you, Mr. President, for guiding the complex process of the intergovernmental negotiations and transmitting to the General Assembly the draft oral decision that is before us for adoption. The draft decision conforms largely to historical precedent and the agreement within the membership for a technical rollover of the intergovernmental negotiations process. The progress that we will mark through the adoption of today’s decision and the evolution of the revised common elements paper will be an important component of the success of your presidency of hope, Mr. President. We also want to pay warm tribute to the co-Chairs of the intergovernmental negotiations, Ambassadors Alya Al-Thani and Martin Hermann, the Permanent Representatives of Qatar and Denmark, for their able and active guidance of the intergovernmental negotiations process during the current session of the Assembly. The negotiations have produced constructive discussions on the five interlinked clusters of the main issues of Security Council reform. The revised common elements paper submitted by the co-Chairs on 16 May reflects their understanding of the status of the areas of convergence and divergence. We agree that the areas of convergence have been broadened and the divergences further reduced through this year’s intergovernmental negotiations process. The co-Chairs’ letter of 16 May addressed to you, Mr. President, states that “[w]e encourage Member States to continue moving the process forward in the next session of the General Assembly by identifying further convergences and moving closer to a common understanding of the principles of Security Council reform”. That reflects the general sentiment of Member States. However, Mr. President, the reference in your letter forwarding the draft decision to the Assembly that encourages Member States to move gradually towards text-based negotiations does not reflect the general consensus. At least three groups  — Uniting for Consensus (UFC), the Group of Arab States and the Group of African States — have said that they are not yet ready for so-called text-based negotiations. Your advice is a break with past practice, in which the decisions for a rollover were conveyed by successive Presidents without any additional suggestions or proposals. We see it as an expression of your personal view, Mr. President, which has no bearing on the future work of the intergovernmental negotiations. As the UFC group has stated previously, it will only be when we have reached agreement on the principles of reform in all five clusters — the principles referred to by the co-Chairs  — that we will be able to begin formulating a text on Security Council reform. Any precipitate move to so-called text-based negotiations will lock in positions, accentuate differences and freeze, if not reverse, the progress we have made in expanding our areas of convergence. Indeed, it is the very informality of the common elements paper that enables the co-Chairs to reflect progress. Any attempt to formalize that as a basis for negotiations or to start attributing the positions of various Member States to various positions would destroy that informality. The UFC group’s reluctance to formalize the intergovernmental negotiations process through text- based negotiations, record-keeping or the application of rules of procedure is not due to any aversion to negotiations but rather arises from our belief that such formalization will lead to a deadlock in the negotiations process. In any event, the slow pace of progress in Council reform is due not to any deficiency in the procedure or process but to the inflexible positions taken by a few individual States that have come into these negotiations with the predetermined goal of fulfilling their ambition to become new permanent members of the Council, regardless of the principles of sovereign equality or the equitable distribution of representation on it. In contrast, the UFC group has demonstrated the greatest possible flexibility in those negotiations and exhibited a willingness to explore imaginative ways to reconcile divergent positions. We look forward to continuing our constructive participation in the intergovernmental negotiation process during the next session. We will continue to work with the intergovernmental negotiations, the co-Chairs and the next President of the Assembly in order to further broaden the areas of convergence and narrow the areas of divergence. We hope that all Member States and groups will demonstrate similar flexibility. That can enable us to reach a positive outcome on Council reform in the near future, with the widest possible agreement among Member States.

I would like to thank you, Mr. President, for the draft oral decision on the technical rollover of the intergovernmental negotiations on Security Council reform that you have proposed to the General Assembly for its seventy-seventh session. In our view, it is an adequate reflection of the content of this year’s discussions on Council reform. The two documents, the revised co-Chairs’ elements paper and the framework document, to be rolled over to the Assembly at its next session, meet the expectations of a majority of Council members, and we are in favour of adopting them as submitted. We believe that this year’s session of the negotiations has introduced some new elements that are important to understanding the eventual outlines of the reforms. The discussions we have had have made it possible to highlight issues where a further convergence of positions is very possible. However, there are still fundamental divergences on many aspects between Member States, and that seems to be the root of the problems encountered in the intergovernmental negotiations. Given the enormous political significance of the issue of Security Council reform, it is clearly necessary to continue seeking a solution that would attract far greater support from Member States than the formally required two-thirds majority, and ideally one that would win consensus. Previous sessions of the Assembly have amply demonstrated the futility and danger of attempting to reach a solution without taking into account the whole range of positions. In conclusion, I would like to thank the Ambassadors of Qatar and Denmark, Ms. Alya Al-Thani and Mr. Martin Bille Hermann, for their work.

I would like to begin by thanking you, Mr. President, for your commitment and support to the Security Council reform process and your letter of 7 July circulating to Member States the draft oral decision on the issue of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council and other matters related to the Security Council, which we expect the Member States to adopt by consensus today. I would also like to thank you for organizing today’s important meeting and for your presidency of hope. The countries of our region hold on to that hope for reforming the Security Council and for making it more representative, viable, credible and effective. My thanks also go to the co-Chairs of the intergovernmental negotiations, Ms. Alya Ahmed Saif Al-Thani and Mr. Martin Bille Hermann, the Permanent Representatives of Qatar and Denmark, for their leadership throughout the deliberations and sessions and the wisdom with which they conducted the negotiations. Equatorial Guinea fully associates itself with the statement to be delivered by the representative of Sierra Leone as coordinator of the Group of African States. We reiterate Africa’s position, which has not changed since the intergovernmental negotiations on Security Council reform began, that Africa should be granted two additional non-permanent seats and no fewer than two permanent seats on the Council, with all the prerogatives and privileges that entails, including the right of veto, as reflected in the Ezulwini Consensus and the Sirte Declaration. We welcome the draft oral decision and all the terms in the document, whose positions are consistent with oral decision 75/569, adopted by the Assembly at its seventy-fifth session, and reflected in the framework document and its annex to be circulated by the President at the next session, as well as the co-Chairs’ elements paper on convergences and divergences on the question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council and related matters, to be rolled over to the Assembly’s seventy- seventh session. We are also very pleased to see the restoration of reference to the Common African Position through the elements paper’s reflection of the Ezulwini Consensus and the Sirte Declaration, for which we are very grateful. We are well aware that we are deep into a Member State-driven process that requires finding a way to build a consensus that will take us in the right direction — the direction we seek, which is a path to Security Council reform. In that regard, I would like to once again thank all countries for the growing support and recognition they have shown for our continent’s claim and its Common Position. However, we need to consolidate that support and recognition through effective reform of the Council so that it can be a platform enabling us to express our just and legitimate aspirations. We therefore hope to see a further strengthening of the consensus on that process during the Assembly’s upcoming seventy-seventh session, and that by the end of the next session, next year, we will have achieved more tangible results. Finally, we urge the consensus adoption of the principled draft oral decision before us.

Belarus continues to emphasize the importance of finding a comprehensive consensus solution through the intergovernmental negotiations. We have consistently advocated that all proposals on Security Council reform should be considered as closely interrelated. We believe firmly that mutual agreement is possible only through a comprehensive approach to the key aspects of reform. In our discussions today on reforming the Council and its working methods, we believe that we should give priority to achieving a balanced composition of the Council. We are in favour of increasing the presence of developing countries on the Council, which would undoubtedly help to realize the principle of equitable regional representation. We would welcome expanding the international organ that is primarily responsible for the maintenance of international peace and security by adding a seat for the Group of Eastern European States. However, it is also important not to overload the Council with superfluous and irrelevant work by moving certain issues onto its agenda that would duplicate the work of the General Assembly or other bodies. Nor should we introduce matters into the Assembly that are exclusively in the Council’s purview. The Council’s working methods should be entirely subordinate to its area of competence in effectively fulfilling its responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, as outlined in the Charter of the United Nations. Rushing to draft a text when the negotiation process has not yet matured could be counterproductive and divisive. We will continue supporting the broadest possible efforts in every area of Security Council reform while taking account of the views of every State.

We have all acknowledged that reform of the Security Council, whose primary mission is the maintenance of international peace and security, is a pressing task that must be undertaken without further delay. Current global realities show that reforming the Council is extremely urgent, and the entire international community wants to see the Council reformed so that it can become an organ of the United Nations that can genuinely contribute to successfully promoting international peace and security. All Member States should take practical steps, backed by strong political will, to reform the Council as soon as possible. However, since there are still serious divergences between the parties on the overall direction and basic principles of Security Council reform, it would be premature to rush to reach a hasty outcome or any kind of text-based document for the intergovernmental negotiations, which could lead to confusion and confrontation among Member States and jeopardize the entire negotiation process. Security Council reform is intertwined with the important interests of every Member State and should be dealt with in a responsible, proper and consensus-based manner. I would therefore like to clarify that my delegation supports the draft oral decision of the General Assembly to include the intergovernmental negotiations on Council reform in the informal plenary of the Assembly at its seventy-seventh session, as mandated by the relevant decisions of the Assembly, and to include the relevant item on the agenda of the seventy-seventh session. We call on all Member States to agree to the draft oral decision by consensus, as requested.

Today the General Assembly is continuing its consideration of a very important item on its agenda, which would not have been possible without the cooperation of Member States and your efforts, Mr. President. We also appreciate the important role played by the two co-Chairs in that regard. My delegation underscores its support to the oral draft decision you have submitted, Mr. President. Among other things it contains a proposal for a rollover of the intergovernmental negotiations to the Assembly’s seventy-seventh session. We join the President in encouraging Member States to adopt the oral draft decision by consensus, in a show of our unity and willingness to cooperate with one another. In that regard, we want to emphasize that the intergovernmental negotiations constitute the only legitimate forum for discussing Security Council reform, and we hope that we can continue the same momentum during the Assembly’s next session. My delegation’s support for the draft oral decision before us is basically linked to the intergovernmental negotiations process. We join the large number of Member States that categorically reject replacing the intergovernmental negotiations with any other negotiation forum, including the references in the revised elements paper submitted by the two co-Chairs that reflect their personal views. We reiterate our position on the revised elements paper, which we reject for the purposes of negotiations. The references noted in the oral draft decision should not be misinterpreted in any way. In conclusion, my delegation affirms its full readiness to engage in the intergovernmental negotiations process during the Assembly’s next session. We hope to see real reform that guarantees consensus, satisfaction and balance among all Member States on a basis of decision 62/557.

At the outset, I would like to express my sincere appreciation to you, Mr. President, for your unwavering commitment to reforming the Security Council and for organizing today’s plenary meeting of the General Assembly dedicated to adopting the draft oral decision on Council reform. My delegation is also grateful to the co-Chairs of the intergovernmental negotiations during the seventy- sixth session, Ambassadors Alya Ahmed Saif Al-Thani and Martin Bille Hermann, of Qatar and Denmark, for their leadership and for providing the co-Chairs’ revised elements paper on convergences and divergences on the question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council and related matters. As a strong supporter of multilateralism and the rules-based system, Cambodia reaffirms that the intergovernmental negotiations process is the sole primary legal platform for pursuing reform of the Council in accordance with decision 62/557, which states that the intergovernmental negotiations process on Council reform must commence in informal plenary of the General Assembly. My delegation’s opinion is that consensus is a fundamental principle for promoting multilateralism and negotiating Security Council reform with a view to ensuring that it can achieve its objectives. We therefore strongly urge Member States to adopt today’s oral draft decision by consensus, as has been done every year without amendment. Cambodia will not support any proposed amendments to the draft decision, which could result in its being put to a vote and would therefore put the current legitimate platform of the intergovernmental negotiations at risk. Finally, my delegation endorses the draft rollover decision to enable the continuation of the intergovernmental negotiations process at the Assembly’s seventy-seventh session in the hope that we, the Member States, will be able to bridge our differences on all the clusters and make concrete progress during the next cycle of the negotiations.

The delegation of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela would like to thank you for convening today’s meeting, Mr. President. Like others, Venezuela attaches great importance to the intergovernmental negotiations on equitable representation on the Security Council, considering it the appropriate forum for finding the balance needed to ensure consensus on the issue of Security Council reform. Our delegation believes that inclusive, transparent and consensus-based dialogue among all the parties can facilitate a holistic solution that enjoys the concerted support of Member States. That was the spirit that propelled our last round of deliberations, and we hope it will be the case in the future. Venezuela commends the co-Chairs’ efforts in guiding the negotiation process and has taken note of their elements paper on convergences and divergences. It is a reference document that as an account of the co-Chairs’ personal views should not be considered as a basis for future negotiations. In that regard, it is worth drawing attention to General Assembly decision 62/557, which assigns a central and irreplaceable role to the positions and proposals of the Member States in 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. Lastly, Venezuela supports the draft oral decision circulated by the President and advocates the consensus adoption of the text, since in our opinion it is a balanced reflection of the debates and outcomes of the intergovernmental negotiations.

At the outset, my delegation would like to thank the co-Chairs of the intergovernmental negotiations, the Permanent Representatives of Denmark and Qatar, for their valuable contribution in facilitating the discussions of Security Council reform, and we congratulate them on completing their tasks. We would also like to express our appreciation to you, Mr. President, for your letter and the draft oral decision being considered today. We observed both diverging and converging views from the various groups and individual members in the five main clusters of our discussions during this year’s informal meetings of the intergovernmental negotiations. Despite the differences, we believe that throughout this year’s session we have witnessed constructive efforts towards advancing reform of the Council. At this important juncture, we must continue to maintain our comprehensive, transparent, inclusive and balanced approach. In that regard, my delegation remains consistent in its view that the intergovernmental negotiations process should be maintained as the central mechanism driving forward our endeavour to strengthen and increase the effectiveness of the Security Council, based on the relevant decisions, including decision 62/557, with the aim of ensuring its legitimacy, inclusivity, democracy, accountability and transparency. My delegation therefore expresses its strong support for the President’s proposed draft rollover decision on Council reform and will join the consensus on the matter. Finally, Mr. President, we want to thank you once again for your unwavering support to the intergovernmental negotiations process throughout the seventy-sixth session. We look forward to more productive and objective discussions during the next round of intergovernmental negotiations.

My delegation supports the draft oral decision as drafted, and I would like to highlight the following points in that regard. We reaffirm our commitment to reforming the Security Council. We continue to believe that the intergovernmental negotiations are an appropriate forum and that their informal nature makes them an ideal platform for the members to continue their discussions. The mandate for the intergovernmental negotiations, as well as their informal nature, must be respected, and all decisions on the subject at any time should be strictly based on consensus. We would like to remind the Assembly that the relevant decisions give the co-Chairs no mandate to prepare a draft negotiating text. We reiterate our view that the co-Chairs’ elements paper is not a text for the negotiations, and the references to the paper made in the draft oral decision should not be misinterpreted. My delegation would like to reiterate that we do not support text-based discussions, as we believe that for now they are both impractical and premature.

We have heard the last speaker in explanation of vote or position before the vote. The Assembly will now take action on the draft oral decision. May I take it that the Assembly decides to adopt the draft oral decision? The draft oral decision was adopted (decision 76/572). Before giving the floor for explanations of position after adoption, I would like to remind delegations that explanations are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by representatives from their seats.

I would first like to express my heartfelt gratitude to you, Mr. President, for your warm words of condolence, and to all who observed today’s moment of silence in tribute to the memory of our former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. I will convey all of that to my capital and to Mr. Abe’s family members. I would like to speak on behalf of the Group of Four (G-4) — Brazil, Germany, India and my own country, Japan — to explain our position. First of all, I would like to thank you, Mr. President, as well as the co-Chairs, for your tireless efforts to advance the discussions in this session’s intergovernmental negotiations. However, I have to say that we are extremely disappointed that the General Assembly’s decision on the discussion of Security Council reform is once again just a technical rollover. I would like to raise that point to the delegations that are in favour of moving forward with Council reform. Despite the five rounds of meetings of the intergovernmental negotiations, covering 10 days in total, and the repeated discussions on the issues, the discussions are not duly reflected in the Assembly’s decision, and specifically, and most importantly, the recommendation made that we should focus on the elements paper as the basis for discussions in this and future sessions. During this year’s session, we also had two days of informal meetings where the substance of the issue was actively discussed. Many points of convergence were found in the co-Chairs’ elements paper. In the co-Chairs’ letter dated 16 May, they clearly recommended that the work of the intergovernmental negotiations this session be rolled over to the next session and based on their revised elements paper. We would also like to thank the President of the General Assembly for his efforts to introduce that point into the rollover decision during the process. Nonetheless, it was unfortunate that the co-Chairs’ recommendation and the President’s efforts were once again blocked by those who do not want to let this urgent process move forward. In that regard, Mr. President, we clearly acknowledge that in your letter dated 7 July 2022, you encouraged Member States to move the process towards text-based negotiations, and the G-4 agrees strongly with that. As far as we understand, in the letter from the President of the General Assembly dated 10 November 2014, the President of the Assembly at its sixty-ninth session, Mr. Sam Kutesa of Uganda, also encouraged Member States to move the process to text-based negotiations. The 2015 framework document was created as a result of that. The urgency of Security Council reform is now increasingly evident, especially as recent events have posed profound challenges to its legitimacy. It is unacceptable to roll the decision over as if nothing has happened and start from scratch again in the next session without reflecting the actual discussion in the intergovernmental negotiations in the document and its record. In fact, during this session of the negotiations, the co-Chairs raised the issue of discussing the reflection of voluntary attribution. Many countries expressed their support for that and said that they would like the document to accurately reflect the positions, by attribution, that they had been expressing throughout the session. Many countries are already tired of the repetition of the same discussions without any progress being reflected in the document. In that regard, we, the G-4, strongly expect the urgent discussions to be based on a single document, and first by appending attributions to the co-Chairs’ elements paper in preparation for text- based negotiations in the next session. We would once again like to raise the following questions to those in favour of moving forward with the discussions of Council reform. Are they willing to go back to the starting point of the same argument all over again next year and in subsequent years? Can they ignore the fact that they cannot even attribute their countries’ positions in a document — even if they want to — due to the pressure of a very few factions that do not want to proceed with reform? Is that a healthy form of negotiation in the United Nations? Is the current negotiation process, without attribution or a text, a true Member State-driven process? I will conclude by expressing my sincere hope that my enunciation of the issues will reach the many Member States that have not yet raised their voices but are aware of the issue at hand.

Uniting for Consensus (UFC) joined the consensus adoption of the draft decision that you submitted to the General Assembly, Mr. President, as we believe it adequately reflects the discussions in this year’s intergovernmental negotiations. First of all, Mr. President, I would like to thank you for your stewardship and the two co-Chairs for guiding the negotiating process proactively during this session. Our group has always favoured a consensus approach, and we welcome the fact that the Assembly was able to rally around that once again. Any departure from it on an issue as complex and delicate as Security Council reform could lead only to deadlock and confrontation, further jeopardizing progress towards our common objective. At the same time, we want to point out that the President’s words of encouragement contained in his cover letter to the draft decision regarding moving the intergovernmental negotiations process towards the text-based negotiations, reflects his personal view and is not endorsed — as is also acknowledged in the co-Chair’s elements paper  — by negotiating groups such as UFC and individual Member States that prioritize general agreement among the membership on the fundamental principles and contents of the reform. As such, your encouragement can have no bearing whatever on the future work of the intergovernmental negotiations, which will continue to be guided by the Assembly’s decisions. On another note, we regret that some delegations are once again using this opportunity to question the working methods of the intergovernmental negotiations. As we have repeatedly emphasized, the obstacle to achieving reform is not the modus operandi of the intergovernmental negotiations but rather the persistent differences on substance issues. No text- based discussion can fix or short-circuit what currently divides the membership on the main content of reform. At the same time, we believe firmly that if the necessary political will and flexibility on substance is there, the membership can rapidly progress towards a consensus and sustainable reform. In that spirit, we look forward to resuming the discussions on Security Council reform in the context of the next intergovernmental negotiations. Rest assured, Mr. President, that the UFC group will continue to be a positive, constructive and fully engaged actor.

I have the honour to speak on behalf of the member States of the African Union. I would like to thank you, Mr. President, for convening today’s plenary meeting of the General Assembly dedicated to adopting decision 76/572, on agenda item 123, entitled “Question of equitable representation or an increase in the membership of the Security Council and other matters related to the Security Council”. We take note of your introductory remarks, Mr. President, and commend you for your exemplary leadership of the Assembly at its seventy- sixth session and for your support and commitment to instilling new life into the intergovernmental negotiations process. Africa is deeply committed to advancing Security Council reform to better reflect the current geopolitical realities and correct the acknowledged injustice that Africa continues to suffer. We therefore remain steadfastly devoted to comprehensive and meaningful reform of the Council. In that regard, we commend the stewardship and dedication of the co-Chairs, Ambassadors Alya Ahmed Saif Al-Thani and Martin Bille Hermann, the Permanent Representatives of Qatar and Denmark, in facilitating the reform process and providing us with their revised elements paper on convergences and divergences on the question of equitable representation or an increase in the membership of Security Council and related matters. Our views on the co-Chairs’ revised elements paper are reflected in our statement delivered during this session’s fifth round of intergovernmental negotiations. At today’s meeting, we would like to reiterate our sincere gratitude to the co-Chairs for their retention, in the section on general convergences of the revised elements paper, of paragraph 7, which states that “There is a wider recognition and broader support by Member States for the legitimate aspiration of the African countries to play their rightful role on the global stage, including through an increased presence in the Security Council, as reflected in the Ezulwini Consensus and the Sirte Declaration, adopted by the African Union in 2005. Addressing the historical injustice against Africa is viewed as a priority.” We equally commend the full and accurate reference to the two instruments espousing the Common African Position  — the Ezulwini Consensus and the Sirte Declaration — in the co-Chairs’ revised elements paper. It is fundamentally crucial for Africa that instruments espousing the Common African Position always be fully and accurately described and reflected in the intergovernmental negotiations process. Moving forward, the Group of African States looks forward to further constructively engaging with all Member States and interest groups, as well as building during the Assembly’s seventy-seventh session on the gains made during this year’s session of intergovernmental negotiations, with a view to expanding the convergences and narrowing down the divergences that still exist. We acknowledge with appreciation the co-Chairs’ indication in their revised elements paper of the broad support from a significant number of Member States for expanding both the permanent and non-permanent categories of the Security Council, as well as the paper’s recognition of the wide and broad support the Common African Position continues to garner in those deliberations. Additionally, we are pleased to see the recognition of the widest possible consensus emerging from the intergovernmental negotiations process that Africa should be represented in the permanent category, since the region is not represented in that category at all, as well as the need to address Africa’s underrepresentation in the non-permanent category. We therefore look forward to seeing the wide and broad support to the Common African Position to be taken into consideration in the next session of the intergovernmental negotiations, especially with respect to the allocation of seats in both the permanent and non-permanent categories of the Council. As my delegation said last year, expanding the Council in both categories will make it “more broadly representative, efficient and transparent, [thereby enhancing] its effectiveness and the legitimacy and implementation of its decisions”. (A/75/PV.84, p.5) Let me also seize this opportunity to commend you, Mr. President, for circulating the draft oral decision, now adopted as decision 76/572, with the text consistent with the oral decision adopted by consensus by the General Assembly at its seventy-fifth session (decision 75/569), indicating the positions of and proposals made by Member States, as reflected in the 2015 framework document and its annex, circulated by the President of the sixty-ninth session, and in the co-Chairs’ revised elements paper on convergences and divergences, and to be rolled over to the seventy-seventh session of the General Assembly. The African Group remains committed to comprehensive reform of the Council on the basis of all five of the clusters outlined in decision 62/557, and will continue to engage in the intergovernmental negotiations process in order to build a consensus in the spirit of that decision. We hope that the document rollover to the Assembly’s seventy-seventh session will be built on in good faith and a transparent manner through a membership-driven process. At this juncture, we would like to express our gratitude to all the Member States and interest groups that have continued to unequivocally support the Common African Position, as espoused in the Ezulwini Consensus and the Sirte Declaration. We look forward to working with one and all to collectively and cooperatively build on the gains made in favour of the Common African Position and we hope that the Member States and interest groups will join us in support of redressing the historical injustice done to the African continent and its people. Let me end by acknowledging with deep appreciation the efforts of all Member States in our collective commitment to an inclusive and transparent process leading to a decision adopted by consensus. The African Union Committee of Ten Heads of State and Government on the Reform of the United Nations Security Council and the Group of African States have joined the consensus in a spirit of safeguarding unity and mutual trust among the membership and advancing Security Council reform in conformity with the principles and purposes of the Charter of the United Nations, as well as the intention of the 2005 World Summit Outcome and the principles outlined in decision 62/557.

The United Kingdom is grateful for your efforts, Mr. President, in encouraging Member States to reach a mutually acceptable decision today. Let me also express our gratitude to Ambassadors Al-Thani and Hermann for their tireless and innovative stewardship of the intergovernmental negotiations this year, including in producing the revised co-Chairs’ elements paper. The United Kingdom has consistently affirmed that we remain steadfast supporters of Security Council reform. We remain committed to the intergovernmental negotiations, and we welcome your encouragement, Mr. President, to move forward to text-based negotiations. We hope that we will be able to do so in future sessions of the intergovernmental negotiations, thereby capturing the momentum for reform and moving beyond a technical rollover.

My delegation is taking the floor to reaffirm its position with regard to Security Council reform and its process. We thank the Permanent Representatives of Qatar and Denmark for their leadership in the intergovernmental negotiations process this year. At a time when the Council is under increased scrutiny, it is vital that both the Council and its individual members keep striving for greater transparency, efficiency, effectiveness and accountability. That includes exploring pragmatic approaches aimed at moving the reform process forward, particularly in areas where there are still significant differences. In that connection, Malaysia continues to call for text- based negotiations to advance the process. Member States may also recall that decision 62/557 mandated the commencement of intergovernmental negotiations in the informal plenary of the Assembly, based on proposals by Member States in good faith, with mutual respect and in an open, inclusive, and transparent manner that can garner the widest possible political acceptance by Member States. We continue to call on Member States to be guided by that decision in navigating our intergovernmental negotiations in future. While we support the adoption of today’s draft oral decision, we hope that Member States can work together to move the reform process forward and instil new life into the discussion on Security Council reform, as agreed by our leaders in 2020.

It is a pleasure to take the floor one last time during this year’s intergovernmental negotiations on the occasion of the adoption of decision 76/572, rolling over the process to the seventy-seventh session of the General Assembly. First of all, on behalf of my fellow co-Chair and myself, I want to sincerely thank you, Mr. President, for your decision to entrust us, Denmark and Qatar, with chairing this year’s intergovernmental negotiations process, and for your guidance and support throughout the process. In your opening remarks in February, you said, “In an interconnected world of evolving complexities, we cannot be static. We ourselves must be able to evolve”. Looking back at those words today, I am glad to know that we have not remained static this year. And with decision 62/557 as a starting point, we have collectively moved the needle forward on Security Council reform. Together we have expanded the areas of convergence and narrowed the areas of divergence. That has been clear from the constructive and sometimes heated discussions between Member States during this year’s intergovernmental negotiations meetings and is reflected in what we as co-Chairs think are tangible improvements made to this year’s elements paper. As co-Chairs, we are also glad and honoured to have been given the opportunity to introduce a few new initiatives this year  — such as the informals and the co-Chairs’ oral reflections that the President mentioned earlier — and we thank Member States for embracing them in good faith. Through our shared efforts with Member States, we are genuinely convinced that we have jointly been able to instil new and further life into the intergovernmental negotiations process and thereby continue to improve our common understanding of the principles of Security Council reform as well. That will provide a good foundation to build on in the intergovernmental negotiations process and, I might add, in other discussions on reform of the United Nations during the seventy-seventh session of the General Assembly. Secondly, on behalf of Ambassador Al-Thani and myself, we want to thank Member States warmly and expressly for the high level of participation and active engagement they have shown throughout this year’s intergovernmental negotiations process. That constructive and spirited engagement has been essential to the progress made this year. As co-Chairs, we have had the chance to speak extensively with a wide range of Member States and groups of States, and all of those meetings have been characterized, without exception, by a strong spirit of goodwill and mutual respect — a genuine willingness, as we see it, to try to find a way forward. We are deeply grateful for the extensive collaboration with so many Member States here today and for the trust and confidence that they have placed in us as co-Chairs. It has truly been an honour to work so closely with Member States on a subject as important and of such critical interest to so many of them as Security Council reform. Today is an occasion to both look back at this year’s intergovernmental negotiations process and ahead to next year’s. What is being discussed in the intergovernmental negotiations process is of concern to every Member State, and I think it bears reminding ourselves that it has the potential to affect the lives of people everywhere. Even though the intergovernmental negotiations process takes place in an informal plenary session, closed to the outside, there can be no doubt that the eyes of the world are on us as we engage in the discussions on how to reform the Security Council and on the future of multilateralism. In our position as co-Chairs, we have truly felt the weight of that responsibility. It is also clear that co-Chairs find themselves in a somewhat unique position as they try to manage and if not steer, then gently nudge the process to meet Member States’ expectations. And as they do so, they naturally learn, reflect and perhaps begin to ponder possible avenues forward on new approaches that could be tried on paths that should be explored. For now, we are happy to hand over the floor and pass on the word, and we encourage all Member States to continue their constructive engagement in next year’s intergovernmental negotiations process in order to seek common ground and further build on the progress made in this year’s session. That will require some flexibility, a decent amount of goodwill and a bit of ingenuity. It is to be continued.

I thank the representative of Denmark for the sentiments that he has expressed on behalf of the co-Chairs. It has indeed been an honour to be assisted by such an able co-Chair, and I am grateful.

Germany fully aligns itself with the statement delivered by Japan on behalf of the Group of Four, and I should like to add some comments in my national capacity. A few weeks ago, a major German weekly published an article entitled “Why Germany should leave the United Nations”. I want to assure everyone that we have no intention of doing so. On the contrary, we will continue to try to strengthen the United Nations wherever and whenever possible. However, in view of the increasing amount of criticism directed at the Organization, we cannot remain indifferent. It is not only the Security Council’s inability to tackle threats and breaches of peace and security that undermines the credibility of the United Nations. It is also the inability of the United Nations to reform itself, which leads to increasingly negative perceptions of it. Yet there is some light, maybe not at the end of the tunnel but inside it. We commend all efforts to reform the United Nations and make it more functional and accountable. We would like to thank you, Mr. President, for including the reference to text-based negotiations in your letter and mentioning it in your statement. We call on your successor to start from that point. We also want to thank Denmark and Qatar for being excellent co-Chairs of the intergovernmental negotiations and for organizing the so-called unformal meetings. The productive spirit encountered in those events, as well as the readiness to think and speak out of the box, was refreshing and encouraging. All of that brought a very positive note to our discussions. That makes it all the more regrettable that it fell short of being translated into concrete steps forward. The productive spirit of the meetings should prevail, and we hope to catch up very soon. We commend Liechtenstein for bringing on track its veto initiative, which has been filled with life. We are grateful that France and Mexico, as well as the Accountability, Coherence and Transparency group, have presented their proposals on how to limit the use of the veto in the Security Council. Any organization lacking legitimacy and credibility will sooner or later outlive its usefulness and eventually cease to exist. It is therefore imperative to aim for more equitable representation of the Member States on the Security Council. That logic strongly applies to the African States, whose efforts for reform Germany strongly supports. History has shown that we must not take multilateralism for granted. If we fail to adapt our Organization to new realities, the support for a community of States sharing common rules will dwindle. We would pay a high price for that and should avoid it at all costs. We should rather show a greater readiness to compromise, leaving behind narrow national interests.

My delegation fully aligns itself with the statement made on behalf of Uniting for Consensus by the Permanent Representative of Italy. We would like to underscore the following in our national capacity. First of all, we are grateful to the Permanent Representatives of Qatar and Denmark for their dedicated efforts as the co-Chairs of the intergovernmental negotiations process. It is very important that the draft oral decision was adopted by consensus (decision 76/572). It is only in a spirit of seeking after consensus that the process of Security Council reform can move forward. We firmly believe that it will be possible to find convergences around the issues that unite us — we just need to be constructive. Finally, we consider the reference in the President’s cover letter to text-based negotiations to be a personal opinion and wish. The intergovernmental negotiations process is membership-driven, and the idea of text- based negotiations does not have the full support of the entire membership, as was clearly stated in the co-Chairs’ revised elements paper. We will continue to actively engage with the membership during the next session of the Assembly in order to further forge consensus on issues that unite us.

The Republic of Korea aligns itself with the statement made by the representative of Italy on behalf of the Uniting for Consensus group. In our national capacity, my delegation and I welcome the adoption of decision 76/572 as a fair and balanced reflection of the discussions we have had so far. As was rightly emphasized this morning, a consensus approach is vital to reaching any tenable solution, especially at this stage of building trust in order to make progress. My delegation therefore welcomes the consensus reached on the draft decision. We believe that only consensus and unity can get us where we want to be. My delegation believes that text-based negotiations would still be premature. The approach would be more divisive rather than integrating and would lead to deadlock unless we first agreed on and built some workable principles. Any reference at this stage to text- based negotiations does not seem necessary, let alone based on consensus. Some delegations might argue that the process is slow and therefore in need of tangible progress. My delegation still believes that we should have more convergences on the kind of reform we want. This year we have witnessed weakness and paralysis in the Security Council. I hope that all those lessons will enable us to see more clearly the kind of direction we should be headed for on reform, instead of merely arguing for its urgent necessity. The Republic of Korea once again reaffirms its commitment to engaging with all other Member States constructively during next year’s intergovernmental negotiations.

I take the floor to explain our position on the adoption of decision 76/572, which rolls over the intergovernmental negotiations on Security Council reform to the seventy-seventh session of the General Assembly. India fully aligns itself with the statements delivered by the representatives of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, on behalf of the L.69 group, and Japan, on behalf of the Group of Four. In addition, I would like to make the following points in my national capacity. First, Mr. President, we would like to put on record our appreciation for your efforts to steer this year’s intergovernmental negotiations towards some progress. We also appreciate the innovative and proactive approach of the co-Chairs, which has resulted in some improvements in the elements paper as compared to last year, including a greater number of convergences and some additional attributions. We have participated constructively throughout the process and shared our suggestions for improvement in the elements paper, even though that approach was not followed by all groups and delegations. The process has culminated in the co-Chairs clearly recommending that we continue our work in the next session on the basis of the latest iteration of the elements paper, to which we have all had a chance to contribute. Secondly, we have been consistent in our position that the rollover decision of the intergovernmental negotiations simply cannot be reduced to a mindless technical exercise. As the only formal General Assembly outcome emerging from this process every year, it must also evolve and reflect the progress achieved during our deliberations. We were therefore encouraged by your efforts, Mr. President, to introduce into the oral decision a small reflection of that evolution, based on your wide-ranging consultations and the recommendation of the co-Chairs. We were equally dismayed at the vehement opposition to even such a minuscule change. I must say, however, that we were not surprised. As we saw last year as well, it is clearly in the interest of those who seek to maintain the status quo to keep the process frozen in repetitive cycles. Thirdly and finally, we see the technical rollover decision as yet another wasted opportunity to breathe some life into a process that has shown no signs of life or growth for more than four decades. We joined in the consensus on the adoption of decision 76/572 only to acknowledge your personal efforts, Mr. President. Moreover, it is now apparent to us that in its current form and modalities — that is, without the application of the Assembly’s rules of procedure, any official record of proceedings or a single negotiating text — the intergovernmental negotiations could well go on for yet another 75 years without any progress whatsoever in the direction of genuine reform. As a responsible and constructive member of the United Nations, we will of course continue to engage in that process alongside our reform-minded partners and persist with our efforts to move from repetitive speeches to text-based negotiations. However, for those of us who truly wish to fulfil our leaders’ commitment to speedy and comprehensive reform of the Security Council, we may need to look beyond the intergovernmental negotiations to find the only viable pathway.

We appreciate your efforts, Mr. President, to facilitate the intergovernmental negotiations for the oral decision we just adopted (decision 76/572). We would also like to thank the co-Chairs, the Permanent Representatives of Denmark and Qatar, for their commendable year-long efforts in facilitating the discussions of the intergovernmental negotiations. Under the co-Chairs’ facilitation, all the sessions helped create a productive, consultative process for all the clusters of issues outlined in decision 62/557. Ethiopia aligns itself with the statement delivered by the representative of Sierra Leone on behalf of the Group of African States, and I would like to make the following brief remarks in my national capacity. The common denominator of the positions of all groups with regard to reform of the Security Council has to do with the need to enfranchise Africa in the global security system. We remain the only regional security complex without a permanent seat and decisive power in the Council. That absence of agency has resulted in concrete harm to the representation of the interests of Africans in the work of the Council. It is in that light that we commend all groups in the intergovernmental negotiations process for recognizing that unacceptable reality and showing a determination to change it. Ethiopia steadfastly upholds Africa’s position, as espoused in the Ezulwini Consensus and the Sirte Declaration. We reiterate that Africa must have at least two permanent seats with all the customary prerogatives, including the veto as long as we retain the veto system. Africa should also have two additional non-permanent seats. When it comes to the format and progress of work of the intergovernmental negotiations, we recognize that the informal negotiation process, without texts, takes time. However, we believe that the time taken is necessary to narrow our divergences. That being said, our quest for consensus and more time should not in any way be taken as an intention to consent to the continuation of the untenable status quo. We therefore appreciate the initiatives of your Office, Mr. President, and those of Member States to nudge the process forward. Nevertheless, we believe that any change to the format of the work of the intergovernmental negotiations should receive the due support of all Member States. Proceeding to the next step of text-based negotiations should be preceded by a decision here, in this Member State-led platform. That would give the process the required transparency and Member State-ownership and provide Member States and groups with the necessary time for proper organization. In the meantime, we should continue forging consensus on the common denominators and find solutions to the most outstanding issues.

I am delivering this statement in my national capacity. At the outset, I would like to thank you, Mr. President, for convening this meeting. My country welcomed the adoption earlier this morning of oral decision 76/572. We would also like to express our appreciation to the co-Chairs, Ambassadors Alya Al-Thani and Martin Hermann, for their leadership of the intergovernmental negotiations process over the course of the current session, and we applaud their efforts. Today’s consensus adoption will ensure a smooth transition to the next session and enable Member States to continue working collectively during the next session. We must aim to reach a common understanding that lays the necessary groundwork for just and comprehensive Security Council reform garnering the widest possible political acceptance by Member States, as stipulated in decision 62/557, and led by Member States. In conclusion, let me reaffirm Kuwait’s alignment with the position of the Group of Arab States, which demands permanent Arab representation, with full powers, in the category of permanent seats in the event of a future expansion of the Council. In addition, ensuring fair representation would also require proportional Arab representation in the non-permanent category in an expanded Security Council.

We have heard the last speaker in explanation of position on adoption. I would like to once again express my sincere appreciation to Her Excellency Ms. Alya Ahmed Saif Al-Thani, Permanent Representative of Qatar, and His Excellency Mr. Martin Bille Hermann, Permanent Representative of Denmark, who ably and patiently conducted the discussions and complex negotiations on this issue during this session. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 123?