A/77/PV.38 General Assembly

Even before this year’s brutal attack on Ukraine, the international system of global governance had been experiencing serious challenges. Now, when the world is facing the interlocking crises of security, climate change, health, development and human rights, compounded by the aggression stemming from one of the permanent members of the Security Council, it is even more urgent to act in defence of and to reform the multilateral system. The global challenges we are facing require a firm, universal and coordinated response. Unfortunately, Russia, with its invasion of Ukraine, has violated the most important norms and values of the Charter of the United Nations. Instead of dialogue and cooperation aimed at maintaining international peace and security, we are witnessing Russia abusing its veto power and violating the principles it vowed to protect as a permanent member of the Security Council. This time of crisis only confirms the overwhelming need for a more ambitious and stronger cooperation on peace and security at every level of the United Nations system and a Security Council that is efficient, inclusive and effective. For that reason, we welcome the adoption of the veto initiative resolution 76/262, which calls for the General Assembly to meet and hold a debate on the vetoed subject whenever a veto is cast in the Security Council. Poland, being a member of the core group that prepared the document, was a strong supporter of that initiative since its inception. We believe that the mechanism contributes to the improvement of the United Nations system and translates into strengthened transparency of the Security Council proceedings. We recognize that the normative character of the decisions taken by the General Assembly is different from those taken by the Security Council. However, allowing the general United Nations membership to weigh in on matters pertaining to international peace and security after they have become hostage to a veto cast in the Security Council is a step in the right direction. In that vein, Poland fully supports efforts to implement a reform agenda aimed at improving the efficiency of the United Nations. The crucial aspect of that agenda is comprehensive Security Council reform. We are open for discussion on the number and distribution of seats in the enlarged Council so that it better reflects current geopolitical realities. Poland shares the conviction that reform of the three principal organs of the United Nations, including the Security Council, is necessary, as postulated in the report of the Secretary-General in Our Common Agenda (A/75/982), as well as in the declaration on the commemoration of the seventy-fifth anniversary of the United Nations (resolution 75/1). We subscribe to the view that it is only through interactive, member- driven discussion and exchange of opinions in the spirit of transparency and inclusivity will progress in the intergovernmental negotiations on Security Council reform be possible. In that regard, we appreciate the work conducted under the stewardship of the Permanent Representatives of Denmark and Qatar. We now take this opportunity to congratulate the Permanent Representatives of Slovakia and Kuwait on their appointment as the co-Chairs of the upcoming session of intergovernmental negotiations and assure them of Poland’s full support in the task with which they have been entrusted. We also see the need to work towards the development of a single consolidated text as a final document of the intergovernmental negotiations. Poland and Qatar made such an attempt in the first half of 2021, having presented a project entitled “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”. While we know that the process is not an easy one, we hope that those two postulates will contribute to gradual narrowing of differences among the Member States and groups of States. The credibility of the Security Council depends crucially on its ability to fulfil its most fundamental responsibility of maintaining international peace and security. This year, Russia’s actions have led to deadlock in the Security Council, thus seriously wounding the ability of the United Nations to act. Poland believes that political means and peaceful methods are key to resolving conflicts and responding to threats to international peace and security. If that is to be a reality, we need an efficient and effective Security Council able to respond to global crises. Poland stands ready to consider all possible avenues towards Security Council reform and looks forward to fulfilling this commitment.

The process of Security Council reform enjoys the attention of the Syrian Arab Republic. We were among the first countries to encourage and call for the reform process. We have actively participated in that process since the first meeting 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, which has sought to ensure that the Security Council has kept abreast of developments in the United Nations since its establishment and reflects current international relations, while addressing the increased challenges that our world is facing today. In that context, my delegation reiterates its support for the efforts of the Working Group and expresses its appreciation for the progress made within the framework of the intergovernmental negotiations aimed at creating a Security Council that is more democratic, representative and effective as it undertakes its role in maintaining international peace and security. The five pillars of Security Council reform are intrinsically linked. For that reason, we all need to engage in in-depth and meticulous negotiations on them that must also be balanced and concomitant. One pillar cannot take priority over another or discussed at the expense of ignoring another. The success of Security Council reform hinges on the broadest possible acceptance of opinions among Member States. That, in turn, requires a commitment on our part to demonstrating a collective sense of responsibility for the reform process. We must refrain from imposing non-consensual texts or setting unrealistic deadlines as a basis for any negotiation process. We also need to refrain from engaging in negotiations on detailed texts when conditions are not yet ripe, as that could widen divisions among Member States and move us further away from the desired reform. My delegation underscores the importance of decision 62/557 as the basis for negotiations. We believe that intergovernmental negotiations are the sole and main platform for ensuring the smooth conduct of the negotiation process, while enabling all Member States to participate constructively and transparently in the discussions on the reform process with a view to bringing positions closer and thereby achieving a more balanced and more representative Security Council that will be accepted by all Member States. That should be done without undermining the basic principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations. We also should confuse Security Council mandates and powers with those of the General Assembly, or manipulate the Council’s working methods or use them as a cover or tool to interfere in the domestic affairs of States. The Security Council reform process must be genuine, comprehensive, transparent, integral and balanced. The process must be underpinned by the ownership and leadership of Member States, as well as by multilateral diplomacy and the principles of justice and equity. It must guarantee appropriate and equitable representation of developing countries on the Security Council so that they can make their voices heard and exercise their sovereign right equally with others. My delegation is determined to take an active part in the intergovernmental negotiations. We would therefore encourage thorough and in-depth negotiations on the five pillars of the reform process. We need to garner the widest possible consensus to ensure that the Security Council becomes more equitable and capable of discharging its mandate to safeguard the purposes and principles enshrined in the United Nations Charter. That will ensure security, stability and prosperity for all of our peoples, shielded from hostile policies, exclusion and double standards. We need to prevent certain countries from continuing to use their political and economic influence in order to transform the Council and the international Organization into tools to implement their personal agendas.

We are responsible for creating the conditions for peace and an international order that serve the objectives of the United Nations. That is why here, at this very rostrum, the President of the French Republic, Mr. Emmanuel Macron, called for the reform of the Security Council to finally take place, by expanding it to include two new permanent members (see A/77/PV.4). He also wanted the use of the veto to be regulated in the event of mass atrocities. Our authorities called on us, in the declaration adopted on the occasion of the seventy- fifth anniversary of the United Nations (resolution 75/1), to breathe new life into that imperative. The Secretary-General has supported this commitment in his report on Our Common Agenda (A/75/982). In a context where so many upheavals are shaking the world, many of us have taken the floor this year to stress the importance of reforming the Security Council. Such reform is essential to strengthening its authority and representativeness, while preserving its executive and decision-making nature. This new round of intergovernmental negotiations must therefore lead to concrete and substantial results. As the international community faces the exceptionally serious violation of the Charter of the United Nations by the Russian aggression against Ukraine, the need to consolidate our collective security system is well established. If there is to be meaningful progress in the negotiation process, we need to set up a framework. In that regard, we would first like to welcome the early appointment of the co-Chairs. We congratulate Ambassadors Mlynár and Albanai on their appointment as co-Chairs of the intergovernmental negotiations. The crucial role entrusted to them will be key. Like the President of the General Assembly, we encourage them to start the new session of negotiations as soon as possible. We agree with a large majority of delegations that the start of negotiations should be based on a draft text. That familiar process is used consistently across our Organization. It seems to us that we can no longer continue the endless repetition of standard speeches. We recognize that the task is difficult, but we are not starting from scratch. The successive co-Chairs have indeed redoubled their efforts to enable the adoption of useful documents and the objective now is to arrive at a single document. France’s position is consistent and well known. We want the Council to be more representative of today’s world, in a way that reinforces its authority and effectiveness. We must indeed take into account the emergence of new Powers that have the will and the capacity to assume the responsibility of a permanent presence on the Security Council. In order to preserve its executive and operational nature, an enlarged Council could have up to 25 members. France supports the candidatures of Germany, Brazil, India and Japan as permanent members. We also want a stronger presence of African countries, including among the permanent members. The remaining seats should be allocated in such a way as to achieve balanced geographical representation. With regard to the eminently sensitive question of the veto, it seems to us that it is up to the States requesting the granting of a permanent seat to decide on the subject. Against that backdrop, the objective must remain twofold: to strengthen the legitimacy of the Security Council and to strengthen its capacity to fully assume its responsibilities in the maintenance of international peace and security. It is in that spirit that France proposed in 2013 that the five permanent members of the Council voluntarily and collectively suspend the use of the veto in the event of mass atrocities. That voluntary approach does not require a revision of the Charter, but rather a political commitment on the part of the permanent members. Today we know that this joint initiative with Mexico is supported by 106 countries. We call on all Member States that have not yet done so, in particular the other permanent members of the Security Council, to join the initiative. In that regard, we note with great interest the commitment of the United States to restricting its use of the veto to rare and exceptional situations, and we of course wish to combine our efforts for a responsible use of the veto. Finally, with regard to the working methods of the Security Council, France reaffirms the Council’s competence to define them and highlights the commitment of Council members, including France, in favour of greater transparency, openness and efficiency. As many speakers have reaffirmed today, such developments are not only desirable but absolutely necessary. In the Security Council, as in the General Assembly and the other organs, those developments must be in line with strict respect for the responsibilities delegated by the Charter to each of the organs and for the fundamental values of the Organization, especially multilingualism.

At the outset, my delegation wishes to thank the President for convening this plenary meeting to address once again the reform of the Security Council, a topic to which my delegation attaches particular importance. We welcome the appointment of the Ambassadors of Slovakia and Kuwait as co-Chairs of the upcoming session of intergovernmental negotiations, and we offer them our best wishes in their efforts to forge the broad consensus necessary to make progress on this important issue. The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela is firmly committed to Security Council reform efforts. We therefore remain convinced of the crucial role of the intergovernmental negotiations as the central forum within which to reach a consensus on that important issue. Discussions within the framework of the intergovernmental negotiating group that are based on an inclusive, transparent dialogue and enjoy the participation and consensus of all parties can facilitate a comprehensive solution that enjoys the shared support of the States Members of our Organization, leading to more equitable representation in the Security Council and an increase in the number of members. We reaffirm the principles of inclusion and judicial equality of States as essential elements of multilateralism, while insisting that such principles should always guide the negotiating process and the results on the issue of equitable representation and increase in the membership of the Security Council. In that regard, we recall that, in accordance with decision 62/557, the positions and proposals of the Member States form the basis for discussion in the intergovernmental negotiations forum. We therefore consider that the revised elements paper on convergences and divergences, presented by the Ambassadors of Denmark and Qatar in their capacity as co-Chairs, and whose efforts we commend, is a personal summary of the debate on the five key issues of Security Council reform and the current state of the intergovernmental negotiations process. The contents of said paper should in no way be considered as the basis for starting future negotiations, including text-based negotiations. Despite the efforts made in a complex debate that requires shared efforts and a spirit of compromise, we note that there is still no general or consensual agreement on the part of the entire membership of the Organization, which is needed to move towards the discussion of more specific issues or to work from a specific textual proposal. We are therefore of the view that forcing the course of action towards a negotiation based on a text or using artificial deadlines could be counterproductive and even affect the progress achieved so far in this matter. The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela joins in the legitimate aspiration of the brotherly African countries to obtain adequate representation in the Security Council. Africa constitutes more than a quarter of the States Members of the United Nations and, over the years, has been the subject of at least 70 per cent of the Council’s work. In that context, we must remember that African countries tend to be most affected by the conflicts addressed within the framework of that organ charged with maintaining international peace and security. We are therefore convinced that African countries should be adequately represented among the members. Discussions in the intergovernmental negotiations forum have demonstrated broad support for the African Common Position. We must therefore redouble our efforts to translate that support into a real increase in the presence of Africa in the Security Council, correct the historical imbalances inherited from colonialism, which unfortunately persist to this day, and also guarantee that the aspirations to justice of an entire continent are finally realized. In conclusion, we remain convinced of the need to fully and effectively move the work of the intergovernmental negotiations process forward in order to endow the Security Council with greater representation and renew its capacity to respond to the complex challenges emerging within the international community in matters of international peace and security. We reiterate the full willingness of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela to participate actively and constructively to achieve that goal within the framework of an intergovernmental process that must enjoy the widest possible participation and political acceptance, as established in decision 62/557.

At the outset let me express my appreciation for the convening of this important debate. I would also like to welcome the early appointment of the co-Chairs of the intergovernmental negotiations on Security Council reform, His Excellency Mr. Michal Mlynár, Permanent Representative of Slovakia, and His Excellency Mr. Tareq Albanai, Permanent Representative of the State of Kuwait. I would like to wish them success and assure them of my delegation’s full support and cooperation. At the same time, I would like to express our appreciation to the previous co-Chairs of the intergovernmental negotiations, Her Excellency Ms. Alya Ahmed Saif Al-Thani, Permanent Representative of the State of Qatar, and His Excellency Mr. Martin Bille Hermann, Permanent Representative of Denmark, for their excellent work and tireless efforts in guiding the intergovernmental negotiations process during the seventy-sixth session. The unfolding events throughout the year have made it clear that Security Council reform is more important than ever as the Council fails to live up to its raison d’être  — the maintenance of international peace and security. Reform of the Security Council is particularly urgent when it comes to the use of veto power. The failed attempts to adopt Security Council resolutions to stop Russia’s aggression against Ukraine are a clear attestation to that. We believe that the veto right should be restricted when a decision of the Security Council is aimed at preventing crimes against humanity, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and genocide. Therefore, we fully support the political statement on the suspension of the veto in case of mass atrocities, which was presented by France and Mexico during the seventieth session of the General Assembly, and the code of conduct regarding Security Council action against genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes by the Accountability, Coherence and Transparency group. We also firmly believe that the veto right should not be abused by a member that is involved in the conflict under consideration and, therefore, cannot exercise its right impartially. That is already enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations, namely in Article 27, which states that in a series of specific important decisions, a party to a dispute shall abstain from voting. The principles of the United Nations Charter must be upheld. We also believe that the accountability of the Security Council to the General Assembly should be increased. In that regard, we welcome the adoption on 26 April 2022 of resolution 76/262, on a standing mandate for a General Assembly debate when a veto is cast in the Security Council. There is a shared agreement that the Security Council needs to be enlarged in order to be more representative of the current membership and reflective of the realities of the contemporary world. Georgia has always supported Security Council reform in terms of its equitable representation and enlargement. In particular, we have been supporting the expansion of both the permanent and non-permanent categories of membership, which would increase the legitimacy, authority and credibility of the Council. Our particular priority has been the allocation of additional seats to the Group of Eastern European States so that we have better regional representation and parity in the Security Council. At the same time, we have been supporting the allocation of additional seats for the Group of African States, in line with the Ezulwini Consensus and the Sirte Declaration. We remain strong advocates for the inclusion of small States in decision-making in order for the basic international law principle of sovereign equality to be reflected more explicitly at the core of the international security architecture. In conclusion, let me reiterate our readiness to stay engaged to make significant progress in reforming the Security Council. It is now up to us to start producing results and the only way to do that is to start text- based negotiations.

My delegation aligns itself with the statements delivered yesterday (see A/77/PV.36) by the Permanent Representative of the Bahamas, on behalf of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), and the Permanent Representative of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines on behalf of the L.69 group, and we would like to offer brief comments in our national capacity. We commend the efforts to advance the process of the modernization of the functioning of the Security Council and welcome the opportunity to engage in this annual debate. We thank the Permanent Representatives of Qatar and Denmark for their stewardship during the seventy-sixth session and echo the congratulations extended by other delegations to the Permanent Representatives of the Slovak Republic and the State of Kuwait. We assure them of Saint Lucia’s support as they lead the latest chapter of our continuing efforts within the framework of the intergovernmental negotiations on Security Council reform. In 2005, the outcome document of the World Summit (resolution 60/1) reflected the will of our Heads of State and Government to work towards a more inclusive, responsive and participatory international governance architecture, and captured their call for early reform of the Security Council. We arrive at today’s debate against the backdrop of the numerous urgent calls for Security Council reform made by our leaders during September’s general debate for us to advance our work to not only restore faith in effective multilateralism, but to deliver solutions for the urgent and evolving challenges of our time. Saint Lucia therefore looks forward to the commencement of this session’s intergovernmental negotiations process in early 2023. We remain committed. Our position has been consistent. We have endorsed the broadening of the membership of the Security Council in both the permanent and non-permanent categories, with the inclusion of representation from small island developing States. It is imperative that a reformed and effective Security Council better reflect contemporary United Nations membership. Most, if not all Members of the United Nations agree that the Security Council needs urgent reform. However, we have not arrived at a consensus on how to move ahead with that work meaningfully. The intergovernmental negotiations process has long been hampered by the lack of a negotiating text, despite the willingness of an overwhelming majority of Member States to engage constructively in text-based negotiations. We cannot continue to engage in the exercise of spinning a top in mud. We can no longer engage in a repetition of process in the upcoming round of the intergovernmental negotiations. In order for us to meet the demands of our times, we must move beyond the status quo. It is therefore the considered view of my delegation that a chairman’s text be submitted to serve as a basis for further negotiations, consistent with the standard practices of negotiations in all other intergovernmental processes. That way forward would allow discussions to take place with the aim of achieving convergence with reform-oriented Member States on a text that would garner the required majority, ideally for adoption sooner rather than later. We Member States are charged with adapting the United Nations to contemporary world realities and ensuring the integrity of our multilateral structures, in order to deliver on the purposes, principles and promises of the Charter of the United Nations. We will not succeed in that end in the absence of urgent and comprehensive reform of the Security Council. Saint Lucia affirms our commitment to the efforts to make tangible progress on this reform and will participate diligently to advance a re-energized intergovernmental negotiations process.

I wish to thank the President for his important role in the Security Council reform process, and I congratulate His Excellency Mr. Tareq Albanai of Kuwait and His Excellency Mr. Michal Mlynár of the Slovak Republic on their appointment as co-Chairs of the intergovernmental negotiations during the seventy-seventh session of the General Assembly. The Philippine delegation conveys our support to them as they take on this important task. Continuing the efforts of their predecessors will not only place a spotlight on the importance of Security Council reform, but will also enhance the odds of making tangible reforms in the Security Council. The Philippines maintains its support for equitable representation and the expansion of membership in the non-permanent category of the Security Council, and we are open to discussion on the size of the category of permanent membership. We will do our part to facilitate a more transparent, effective and efficient functioning of the Security Council as a whole. The Philippines has actively engaged in every session of the intergovernmental negotiations and different initiatives of past co-Chairs of the process, including the framework document of 2015, the elements and convergence paper of 2016, the elements of commonality and issues for further consideration of 2017, the revised elements of commonality and issues for further consideration of 2018, and the elements paper on convergences and divergences of 2021. From its inaugural round on 19 February 2009, over 12 years ago, the intergovernmental negotiations have mainly been a forum for groups and Member States to reiterate well-known positions that have been expressed year after year. None of the intergovernmental negotiations documents produced in the past six years has led to real and actual progress towards Security Council reforms That situation prompts us to entertain the idea of improving how we approach the attribution aspect of our work. Through attribution, hopefully in the near future, we might be able to gauge to a better extent the convergence and divergence on certain issues. In a previous session, we addressed in some detail the question of how we might build on the areas of convergence in the working methods. They do not require Charter amendments. The language that we have on the working methods is of a very general nature. We emphasize that there is a need to move from generalities to specificities by being more specific on the measures that could be recommended to the Council. It would, in the end and if adopted, lead to greater transparency and predictability. In our intervention, we cited specific examples on the following aspects. First is the relationship between the General Assembly and the Security Council as institutions and the relationship between the Council and non-members of the Council. Second is the issuance of the annual report of the Security Council. Third is the need to improve access of non-members to the Council’s decision-making process and the preference to move beyond the Arria Formula. Fourth and last is interaction between the non-members and the subsidiary groups. In essence, we need to move beyond the general language we have in the co-Chair’s document in order to create more predictability and transparency in the working methods of the Council. The Philippines remains committed to the intergovernmental negotiations process and we look forward to its upcoming session and to achieving concrete results. I would like to stress that we need a Council that is not only capable of responding to a dynamic and fast-changing world but that does so in a manner that fully represents and takes into account the views and concerns of the wider membership of the United Nations.

At the outset, I would like to commend the President of the General Assembly for the importance he attaches to the issue of Security Council reform. That interest was reflected in the appointment of His Excellency Mr. Tareq Albanai of the State of Kuwait and His Excellency Mr. Michal Mlynár of Slovakia as co-Chairs of the intergovernmental negotiations on this question at the seventy-seventh session. My delegation associates itself with the statements made previously on behalf of the Group of African States and the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries (see A/77/PV.36), and wishes to make the following observations in its national capacity. Côte d’Ivoire welcomes the development of a framework document and the revised elements paper on convergences and divergences at previous sessions of intergovernmental negotiations. Those reference documents are all the more pertinent for my country as they reflect the Common African Position and the positions of the majority of States whose delegations have duly participated in the negotiations on Security Council reform. My country particularly welcomes the convergence of views on the categories of Security Council membership, enlargement of the Council and the improvement of its working methods, the question of the veto and regional representation. However, it must be noted that since the adoption of decision 62/557 14 years ago, the dividends expected from the various sessions of the intergovernmental negotiations on Security Council reform remain below our expectations overall. Indeed, our common aspiration to a more democratic and more representative Security Council as a guarantor of greater efficiency is struggling to materialize because of the reluctance of certain actors who approach intergovernmental negotiations through the prism of their strategic interests. Despite the obstacles that burden each session of intergovernmental negotiations, the need for Security Council reform, in line with the founding principles of the United Nations, appears now more than ever to be an absolute necessity. We must indeed take stock of the profound transformations that the world has experienced since the creation of the United Nations and favour an inclusive approach in the search for efficient solutions to the challenges related to the maintenance of international peace and security. The transformation of the Security Council into an inclusive, credible body in the exercise of its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security is imperative. Its voice must be a composite of the richly diverse voices of United Nations Member States. In that respect, the requirement of regional representation must be a priority. Côte d’Ivoire welcomes the clarity and growing support for the Common African Position, espoused through the Ezulwini Consensus and the Sirte Declaration because Africa remains, unjustly, the only continent not to have a seat in the category of permanent members of the Security Council. I would therefore echo the urgent calls for the allocation of two permanent member seats to Africa, with the attendant prerogatives, including the right of veto. Our legitimate request also concerns the allocation of two additional non-permanent member seats on the Security Council so that the African continent can enjoy representation that is commensurate with its current contribution to the maintenance of international peace and security. My country is particularly interested in the concept of geographical representation, as well as that of equitable geographical distribution, both of which would make the Council more democratic, more inclusive and therefore more effective. That means taking all voices, in particular those of developing countries and small island developing States, into account. Côte d’Ivoire hopes that the next session of intergovernmental negotiations will allow us to take a decisive step towards areas of agreement acceptable to all, with a view to achieving genuine reform of the Security Council, commensurate with the current challenges to peace and security in the world.

Let me begin by expressing our gratitude to the President for convening this timely meeting. I wish to congratulate Ambassador Michal Mlynár, Permanent Representative of the Slovak Republic, and Ambassador Tareq Albanai, Permanent Representative of the State of Kuwait, for their appointment as co-Chairs of the intergovernmental negotiations. I also commend their predecessors, who led us during the seventy-sixth session of the General Assembly. My delegation associates itself with the statement delivered by the Permanent Representative of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines on behalf of the L.69 group (see A/77/PV.36). I wish to take this opportunity to add a few remarks in our national capacity. Mongolia continues to attach great importance to multilateralism, including the early reform of the Security Council. We have no doubt that multilateralism will continue to play a pivotal role in addressing global challenges. Multilateralism, particularly at the United Nations, is essential to small and developing countries. That is why Mongolia always strives to be a responsible Member of the United Nations, an Organization founded on the belief in peace, cooperation, mutual understanding and support. The realities of the world in the twenty-first century, in particular recent events, urge us to expedite the process of reforming and expanding the Security Council. As the Secretary-General has said, the world is facing the highest number of violent conflicts since 1945. Thus, the world needs the United Nations and its Security Council fit for purpose. We all know that the question of equitable representation on the Security Council was added to the agenda of the General Assembly in 1979. Forty-three years have passed since then. It has been too long and too wasteful. Therefore, we must take steps to promote results-oriented intergovernmental negotiations to create a more equitable and representative Security Council. To that end, Mongolia affirms the need for a formal negotiation process guided by the decision-making modalities and working methods laid out in the Charter of the United Nations and in line with the rules and procedures of the General Assembly. Mongolia’s long-standing principled position on the question of equitable representation and increase in membership is well known. We are in favour of the expansion of Security Council membership in both the permanent and the non-permanent categories. We continue to attach great importance to the criterion of equitable geographical distribution through an emphasis on the non-represented and underrepresented groups. In conclusion, my delegation reiterates its position on the need for the immediate reform of the Security Council, in a way that reflects current realities.

Ghana aligns itself with the statement delivered by the Permanent Representative of Sierra Leone on behalf of the Group of African States (see A/77/PV.36), and makes the following additional remarks in its national capacity. Present global developments, especially as they relate to peace and security, have further reinforced the sense of urgency required in reforming the Security Council, the body placed in trust by all of us to help us maintain global peace and security. The reform of the Security Council is past due and, on that matter, we believe that recent developments not only in Ukraine, but also elsewhere around the world, where the Council has not been able to effectively help in maintaining peace and security, demonstrate the unanimity of views on the need for reform. Our leaders told us as much when they came in for the high-level week of the seventy-seventh session. As stated by the President of Ghana, His Excellency Mr. Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo, at the Council meeting, there is a need to: “revisit the vexed issue of the reform of the United Nations system, particularly the Security Council, and to do so on the basis of the African Common Position on United Nations reform, as expressed in the Ezulwini Consensus, if the authority of the Council which, in recent times, appears to have been devalued because of its anachronistic structure, is to be restored”. (S/PV.9188, p. 10) The nature of the reform we seek may be a more difficult question for some because of the entrenched interest provided through the privilege of permanent membership, but the question that we should ask is whether we would want to retain a narrow privilege over a broken system or to aspire to an enduring influence over an effective instrument of global peace. We are clear in our minds that the veto does not serve our collective interest if we genuinely want the Council to be more responsive in addressing the complex security challenges of our time. Ghana and, indeed, the African Group continue to hold the view that the veto power is anachronistic and counterproductive to the effective workings of our modern arrangements for maintaining global peace and security. The veto must go, but if it exists it must be constrained by rules in its application. We know that some argue that the veto is important to ensure that there is no direct confrontation among the major Powers. That may have well been a realistic assumption during the drafting of the Charter, but as we know also, the proxy wars that were fought on our lands in avoiding a direct confrontation were equally as devastating to most of our countries as any of the major wars. There is therefore a need to question such arguments and to refocus our commitment on the principles of peace as a basis for being a guardian of international peace and security, rather than a Member State’s capacity to unleash unimaginable harm and untold suffering. In respect of the expansion of the Security Council, Ghana reaffirms its conviction that the Common African Position on the reform of the Security Council, which advocates support for the expansion of both the permanent and the non-permanent categories of membership, within a formula that fully accommodates Africa’s expressed desire for two permanent and five non-permanent seats, consistent with the Ezulwini Consensus and Sirte Declaration, is the right way to go. Almost all African countries contributed troops to the Allied Forces, and the denial to the continent of its permanent place on the Security Council belies the argument that is sometimes made that permanent membership was granted in recognition of the contributions of the victors of the Second World War. What of the African colonies of the time? The historical injustice must end. We believe that an enlarged Council should not have fewer than 26 seats. With the momentum on the reform of the Security Council that has been generated by the high-level week, we hope that during the upcoming intergovernmental negotiations process the co-Chairs will be able to guide us to build on the progress made in the co-Chairs’ elements paper during the intergovernmental negotiations at the seventy-sixth session by reconciling our differences on reform in a way that is devoid of ambiguity. During the seventy-seventh session, we must get closer to the long-awaited comprehensive reform of the Security Council.

I wish to thank the President for convening this relevant debate, which is even more important at the seventy-seventh session due to the current situation that the world is facing. The General Assembly has reaffirmed its central role on the question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council and other matters related to the Security Council. Guatemala wishes to congratulate His Excellency Mr. Michal Mlynár, Permanent Representative of the Slovak Republic, and His Excellency Mr. Tareq Albanai, Permanent Representative of the State of Kuwait, for their appointment as co-Chairs of the negotiations on this important intergovernmental process. Pursuant to the Charter of the United Nations, Member States entrust the Security Council with the primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, recognizing that the Council acts on behalf of the membership as a whole and that it must conduct itself in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter. Indeed, under Article 25 of the Charter, we have agreed to accept and abide by the decisions of the Security Council. Accordingly, the decisions and resolutions it adopts, as well as its representation and actions, give it a high level of responsibility to all Member States. At previous sessions of the intergovernmental negotiations on this matter, Guatemala has highlighted the need to strengthen and improve the work of the Security Council according to the following guidelines. First, the Security Council must become a more representative body. Secondly, we must reconcile the criterion of representativeness with that of adaptability, which implies a modest increase in the number of members. Thirdly, we must seek greater rapprochement between the work of the Security Council and that of the General Assembly, the Economic and Social Council, the Human Rights Council and the Peacebuilding Commission. Fourthly, the work of the Security Council must become more transparent through its working methods. In addition, we have supported expansion in the number of members in both categories. That expansion could be up to five permanent members and five additional elected members, which would lead to a Security Council of 10 permanent members and 15 elected members. Our delegation does not insist that the new permanent members enjoy all the prerogatives of the current permanent members, in particular the right to veto. At the same time, we do not insist that the five current permanent members give up their prerogatives under the United Nations Charter. We believe it is important that Africa and Latin America have permanent representation on the Security Council, in accordance with current times. Guatemala was a non-permanent member of the Security Council in the 2012–2013 biennium. Our experience on the Security Council allowed us to contribute to strengthening one of the most noble tasks of the Organization: peacekeeping. Since then, taking into account our experience, as well as the delicate responsibility that comes with being a member of the Security Council  — either permanent or non-permanent  — we have tried to strengthen other General Assembly bodies, such as the Special Committee on Peacekeeping Operations (C-34), and to increase triangular interaction and cooperation between members of the Security Council, the C-34, and troop- contributing countries. It is particularly important to maintain transparency in the peacekeeping processes and working methods of the Security Council, with the aim of making the Council more effective in hostile environments, ensuring effective peacekeeping and strengthening peace within the framework of the concept of sustainable peace. Turning to the right of veto, it is necessary to reiterate the call for the Security Council to act consistently with its functions, including a responsible use of the veto right in order to avoid aggravating international crises. In that vein, Guatemala reiterates its support for the Franco-Mexican initiative to limit the use of the veto in the case of mass atrocities, based on the normative-political premise of the responsibility to protect. Therefore, it is of singular importance that we pursue efforts to achieve the reform of the Security Council and of its relationship to the referral of cases to the International Criminal Court. Furthermore, the Security Council plays an indisputably important role in the strengthening of the disarmament and non-proliferation regime, in accordance with resolution 1540 (2004). Whatever the outcome of the current session of intergovernmental negotiations on this question, it should be the exclusive responsibility of Member States of the General Assembly. In that sense, we do not object to the co-Chairs proposing a text that allows direct negotiations to begin based on shared elements that we have presented in previous years. We reiterate our appreciation to the co-Chairs. They can count on our full support during this process so that we can make progress on this issue, the importance and singular relevance of which pertain not only to our Organization, but also to the States we represent. We therefore join the call of the President of the General Assembly, expressed yesterday in this Hall (see A/77/ PV.36), to move to action instead of continuing to repeat familiar positions. As expressed by the President of the Republic of Guatemala, Mr. Alejandro Giammattei Falla, in the high-level debate of the seventy-seventh session (see A/77/PV.5), it is now or never.

The Security Council must respond to the challenges of the day and act in keeping with the growing diversity of international relations. That is a requirement of our contemporary world and critical to the United Nations effective work in maintaining international peace and security. It is an undisputed fact. Belarus wholeheartedly supports the need to adapt the Security Council to changing realities. And of course, we welcome the efforts deployed by Member States geared towards broad-based dialogue, with a view to finding ways to reform the Council. Our discussion on how to broaden the Council’s membership is a member-owned and member-driven process. Equally important is the fact that this process affects the interests of all countries without exception. It is for that very reason that, as we inch closer to reform, we need to afford due regard to the requests of each and every State. The process must be inclusive and based on dialogue and a common understanding of our common objective. We believe that it is unacceptable to overlook the principles of transparency, openness and non-discrimination in this process. Today we see that the individualism and ambitions of certain States are prevailing over the foundations of multilateralism. Unfortunately, populist rhetoric within the process is increasingly drowning out constructive proposals. The Republic of Belarus has been steadfast in its calls for a sustained, calibrated dialogue. Without a doubt, discussions on Security Council reform are not without their shortcomings. However, this is the only universal and inclusive mechanism at our disposal. It is the only platform where we can listen and actually hear one another. Efforts to break with this format and established practices of negotiation could destroy that very fragile process, which is moving towards consensus, although perhaps not as swiftly as we would like. What we also cannot accept is the so-called majority formula according to which decisions concerning the negotiating process must be taken not unanimously but rather on the basis of calculations of the number of proponents of a given initiative. Today as we discuss the parameters for how to modify the Security Council and its working methods, it seems that we should prioritize a balanced membership of the Security Council. Security Council reform should help us to solve the problem of the structural imbalance in its membership between developed and developing countries. We should prioritize broadening the representation and membership of developing countries on the Council and afford smaller and medium-sized countries greater opportunities to participate in the work of that organ. Such an approach would also help us to uphold the principle of equitable regional representation. We would welcome broadening the make-up of the main international organ tasked with upholding international peace and security by granting one additional seat to the Group of Eastern Europe States. In keeping with decision 62/557, the five pillars of Security Council reform are inextricably linked and must be considered as a whole. We reject all phased or fragmented approaches. We call for all reform issues to be discussed in consultations held solely in the context of the intergovernmental negotiations, which are the only legitimate instrument set forth in General Assembly decisions. The intergovernmental negotiations forum is the only legitimate platform for discussing reform based on the positions and proposals of all Member States. All proposals to take the dialogue outside that platform, which has been recognized by all  — especially proposals to do so by setting up narrow groups of countries in support of contradictory initiatives — are counterproductive. We are compelled to note that, while at this stage there are gaping differences in opinion among participants in the discussion, including with regard to common principles and the overall direction of reform, a number of other Member States share our position, including the People’s Republic of China, to which we offer our solidarity and support. On that note, we would like once again to draw attention to the fact that given that intergovernmental negotiations outcomes are not yet ripe, it is premature to start so-called text-based negotiations. We believe that in order to achieve results on Security Council reform, which is in fact and quite literally absolutely critical to our planet, we need incremental, respectful dialogue that takes the interests of all States into account, without exception.

I thank the President for convening this meeting on a long-standing issue of critical importance to the long-term relevance of the Organization  — the question of Security Council reform. For Ireland, like so many others in the Hall today, the fundamental problem has been clear for many years. The Security Council no longer adequately reflects the make-up of the United Nations or the realities of the world around us. The longer that unacceptable situation persists, the greater the threat to the legitimacy and authority of the Council and its vital role in maintaining international peace and security. Since we last held this debate, the legitimacy of the Council and indeed the Charter of the United Nations has faced one of its gravest challenges  — Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine. That flagrant violation of international law by the Russian Federation and its use of its veto to block Security Council action have directed a spotlight onto the wider need for Security Council reform. We would like to emphasize three areas where Ireland believes we must advance to ensure that the legitimacy and authority of the Council can be saved. First, I would like to emphasize that the unjust historical underrepresentation of countries from Africa is particularly egregious. African countries point to their lack of a permanent seat as evidence of an unfair and unjust allocation. We need to act now to bring about a fair and equitable African say in Council decisions. At the same time, we need to ensure that the voices of the most vulnerable are heard. That means that smaller nations, including small island developing States, for example, must be able to play a role on the Council that reflects the seriousness and urgency of the situations they face. Secondly, we must focus on instilling new life in the process to progress long overdue reform. The adoption of the veto initiative (resolution 76/262), which Ireland was proud to co-sponsor, has been used to give impetus to call meetings on Ukraine, Syria and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. That has shown us here and in the world outside that the General Assembly is increasingly stepping up when the Council refuses to act or is prevented from acting. We hope that this momentum will inspire the intergovernmental negotiations forum to heed widespread calls and make meaningful change at this session. It is our view, and indeed the past 20 years have shown it to be the case, that progress will occur only when we begin to engage in substantive, text-based negotiations. It is a tried and tested method that we must move to with all urgency. With goodwill and flexibility, we can achieve the necessary and overdue reform and, we hope, one that commands the widest possible support. Sticking rigidly to positions for 20 years has not achieved success. We therefore appeal to all countries that support reform to consider how change can be achieved. For our part, Ireland is willing to support any model of reform that is fair and capable of commanding sufficient consensus. Thirdly, we must focus on areas where immediate progress can be made, noting the particular avenues available to enhance the accountability and transparency of the Council, particularly regarding its working methods and how we link up with the wider system more effectively. Ireland’s experience as a Council member over the past two years has taught us that reform, big and small, is needed now, more than ever.

My delegation aligns itself with the statement made by the representative of Sierra Leone, Coordinator of the African Union Committee of Ten on Security Council reform, on behalf of the Group of African States (see A/77/PV.36). Once again, we are meeting to discuss one of the fundamental aspects of United Nations system reform, which we all strongly wish for. In an international context marked by multifaceted and interlinked crises, the Security Council cannot remain trapped in the past. Its reform is therefore necessary to creating an organ that is more democratic, effective and capable of taking a concerted and more legitimate approach to crisis management. In that regard, my delegation remains convinced that the intergovernmental negotiations forum is the ideal forum for achieving our shared goal in a spirit of consensus. Senegal therefore welcomes the appointment of Mr. Michal Mlynár, Permanent Representative of Slovakia, and Mr. Tareq Albanai, Permanent Representative of Kuwait, as co-Chairs of the process at the seventy-seventh session. They can count on the constructive support of my delegation. My delegation would also like to thank the outgoing co-Chairs, Ms. Alya Ahmed Saif Al-Thani, Permanent Representative of Qatar, and Mr. Martin Bille Hermann, Permanent Representative of Denmark, for their significant contributions to the advancement of our work. Prior to the discussions that we will have this session, our delegation would like to share a few remarks, as follows. First, my delegation welcomes the growing support for the Common African Position, as seen in the document of the outgoing co-Chairs, but also urges the States and groups concerned to offer increased, more tangible support. Africa’s absence in the permanent category and its underrepresentation in the non-permanent category must be corrected to repair a historical injustice. In addition to two additional seats in the non-permanent category, the continent must receive two permanent seats. Secondly, my delegation remains committed to the principle of equitable geographic distribution and regional representation. However, those principles, which are inherent to the Common African Position, cannot be incompatible with the right of Africa to choose its own representatives based on its own selection criteria. Thirdly, Security Council reform cannot lead to the creation of an intermediary, hybrid or transitional category of membership, including on the question of the veto. As long as the question of the veto exists, the new permanent members must enjoy all the privileges and prerogatives associated with a permanent seat. Fourthly, Security Council reform must include improved working methods and a stronger relationship between that organ and the General Assembly, while respecting their shared and respective spheres of competence. As noted by Mr. Csaba Kőrösi, President of the General Assembly, during the debate on the revitalization of the work of the General Assembly, the Assembly must remain the “main vehicle for multilateral diplomacy” (A/77/PV.30, p.1), given that it is the primary organ for deliberations, democratic representation and the establishment of policies and standards. In that regard, the adoption of resolution 76/262, on the standing mandate for a General Assembly debate when a veto is cast in the Security Council, demonstrates that international peace and security remains of concern to us all and a shared responsibility. Fifthly, an agreement on the principles and criteria for negotiations is a prerequisite. It is therefore important to support efforts aimed at better establishing the positions of the diverse stakeholders. In that regard, the 2015 framework document is an excellent reference document, which we should better use to support our discussions. Finally, the five pillars of reform should be discussed together and in a decompartmentalized manner. In that way, we will certainly be able to consolidate our convergences while undoubtedly reducing our divergences.

I thank the President for convening this meeting. We reiterate our support for Security Council reform. Security Council reform is based on the assumption that the Security Council has failed to keep up with global developments. It is a well-known fact that the current structure of the Council does not reflect the realities of the international community. That is why most Member States have persistently urged for comprehensive reform of the Council and why the Council’s current inefficiencies and existing inequalities must be properly addressed if it is to serve and protect the international community. Unfortunately, the Security Council’s practices demonstrate the fact that the Council’s authority and power have been repeatedly abused by certain Member States that regard it as the preferred tool for exerting pressure on developing countries, in pursuit of their own illegitimate political objectives. Against that backdrop, I would like to emphasize the following points. The objective of the reform process must be to restructure the Security Council into a truly representative, effective and, above all, rules-based and accountable body serving the common interests of the Organization’s entire membership. Iran supports the Council’s enlargement as a means of rectifying existing inequalities in regional representation. Geopolitically, the Council is now dominated mostly by Western countries, three of which have veto power. So far, one-third of the United Nations Members have never had the opportunity to serve on the Council, despite the fact that 20 countries have each served on the Council for 10 to 22 years. That injustice must be rectified, among other means, by restricting opportunities for those that have served more and instead giving more opportunities to those that have never served on the Council or have served fewer times. That is critical to ensuring an equitable opportunity for all Member States to become Council members, as well as to preventing the dominance of a particular regional or geopolitical group or groups over the Council. The vast majority of Member States have constantly criticized the veto. The veto is not a right; rather, it is a privilege guaranteed unfairly to certain Member States that is inconsistent with the purposes and principles of the Charter, particularly the principle of sovereign equality of States on which the United Nations is established. Therefore, this issue should not continue to be a key topic of discussions. Justice and international law, as governing principles of the Council’s decisions, have been ignored or are lacking in the Council’s decisions. We have important examples in our region, ranging from the oldest crisis — the illegal and illegitimate occupation of Palestine — to the most recent crisis, the illegal and illegitimate occupation of parts of Syrian territory. Iran values revision of the Council’s working methods to ensure that it acts strictly in line with international law, in particularly the Charter of the United Nations. The Security Council’s decisions must not be ultra vires and the Council’s Chapter VII powers must not be used disproportionately, prematurely, excessively or hastily. The process must remain inclusive and transparent, with the members taking the lead. We support the continuation of deliberations within the intergovernmental negotiations framework, which must remain open, transparent, inclusive and membership- driven. Taking hasty decisions or setting artificial deadlines for its work will be counterproductive and must be avoided. Any possible decision, procedural or substantive, at any stage must be adopted only by consensus. We do not support text-based negotiations at this stage. Attempts to change the rules or format of the process or its informal nature seem to be unconstructive and must therefore be avoided.

The delegation of Ukraine expresses its gratitude for the convening of today’s debate and commends the common determination to ensure progress in the process of Security Council reform. Its urgency is now clearer than ever. Our own example speaks volumes in that regard. The Security Council has addressed the Russian invasion of Ukraine literally since its first seconds. Unfortunately, over nine months of invasion, 14 members of the Security Council have not translated their dedication into practical decisions under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, entitled “Action with respect to threats to the peace, breaches of the peace, and acts of aggression”. There is a quite simple explanation for that — the violator breaching the peace and committing acts of aggression blocks any attempt by the Security Council to act. That country makes full use, or rather misuse, of its presence in the seat of a permanent member of the Security Council. That seat, by the way, is still assigned, as per the United Nations Charter, to the Soviet Union, a now defunct entity. The remedy against the deliberate practice of immobilizing the Council is closely related, although not limited to the issue of the veto. Resolving the problem of veto misuse by the violator remains an indispensable element if Security Council reform is to be completed. It is absolutely inappropriate that the country in the permanent seat has the privilege to exercise a veto right during consideration of a situation in which that member is directly involved as a party to conflict and, moreover, an instigator of that conflict. The delegation of Ukraine therefore strongly supports all initiatives aimed at limiting the use of veto. We are convinced that the legitimate reasons for restricting the use of the veto by a permanent member of the Security Council should include cases of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes, and conflicts and situations wherein a permanent member is involved and cannot vote impartially due to a conflict of interests. Progress on that threat is long overdue, and we encourage Member States to focus on that issue in the course of the next cycle of intergovernmental negotiations. It is a welcome development that understanding of the damaging nature of attempts to defend an outdated status quo is gaining a foothold among the permanent members of the Council. There are also a number of other issues that my delegation considers important for moving the process of intergovernmental negotiations forward. First, we will not be able to bridge our divergences if our plans are limited to another cycle of year-to-year repetitions of our positions. We could open new avenues for progress if we agreed on text-based negotiations. That step would re-energize the process and strengthen its result-oriented nature. Secondly, we consider that a text intended to serve as a basis for negotiation should properly reflect the entire scope of positions and proposals, as well as acknowledge unchallenged proposals as commonalities. Among the unchallenged proposals is strengthened representation on the Council of the Group of Eastern European States. It is a matter of principle for Ukraine that at least one additional seat be allocated to the Eastern European Group in the category of elected members. In conclusion, I would like to reiterate that the delegation of Ukraine will be ready to engage constructively throughout all clusters of negotiations. We remain committed to contributing to our common goal of reforming the Security Council in order to make that organ fully operational and capable of effectively implementing its primary responsibility to maintain international peace and security.

I thank the President for convening today’s debate and express our sincere gratitude to the Permanent Representatives of Slovakia and Kuwait for leading, as co-Chairs, the intergovernmental negotiations on Security Council reform. We pledge Latvia’s full support for their efforts. Today the Security Council remains a principal organ for maintaining international peace and security. Its actions have implications with respect to international law, but there is a significant gap between its mandate and execution. That can be attributed to the long-overdue reform of the Council. Years have passed, and yet we do not find ourselves even a step closer to the finish line. In that context, Latvia would like to reiterate its call to start text-based negotiations without further delay. Let us recall that under the Charter of the United Nations, we  — the United Nations Member States —have conferred on the Security Council primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. In carrying out its duties, the Security Council acts on our behalf. Giving that credit to the Security Council, we believe that the Council would better represent the interests of the United Nations membership by increasing its accountability, legitimacy and transparency. Today the fact that the Council has not lived up to its responsibility is directly linked to the use or even the mere threat of use of the veto. Veto use should not be seen as a privilege. Currently, we are witnessing the paralysis of the Security Council because one of its members is abusing its veto power while committing mass atrocities in Ukraine. Russia’s aggression proves that the reform of the Security Council is needed now more than ever. People all over the globe see the failures of the Security Council to act decisively as the failures of the United Nations. That cannot be allowed. We cannot expect faith in the United Nations system to last if the Security Council’s hands are tied. Latvia commends the call of France and Mexico for the permanent members of the Security Council to voluntarily and collectively pledge not to use the veto in cases of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes on a large scale. We believe that the aforementioned initiative provides the necessary impulse for change in the Council’s working methods and output. We call on all United Nations Member States to join that pledge. We strongly supported the recently adopted veto initiative (resolution 76/262), which empowers the General Assembly to address pressing issues of international peace and security. As a member of the Accountability, Coherence and Transparency group, Latvia is of the view that it is necessary to maximize the Security Council’s efficiency, effectiveness, transparency and accountability, in particular regarding its working methods. The Security Council plays an indispensable role in maintaining international peace and security. The expectations of the majority of the United Nations membership to have the Security Council more representative of the twenty-first century are summarized in the report of the Secretary-General on Our Common Agenda (A/75/982). Latvia continues to advocate for equitable regional representation of African, Latin American and small island developing States on the Council. Likewise, we see merit in the allocation of additional elected membership to the Group of Eastern European States. Furthermore, Latvia strongly believes that no matter the size, all countries can have an impact in the Security Council. Latvia is strongly committed to further proving that the Baltic States can constructively contribute to the resolution of global issues. Therefore, in 2025 Latvia will run for a seat on the Security Council as a non-permanent member, which reflects our responsibility to contribute to international peace and security, protect the rules-based international order and advance effective multilateralism. In conclusion, we trust in the leadership of the co-Chairs in facilitating substantive results on the reform of the Security Council in a text-based format that would trigger progress in the negotiations. We believe that a consolidated text of positions of the Member States following this session would benefit in taking the next step.

I thank the President for convening this plenary meeting on Security Council reform. Let me begin by congratulating Ambassador Michal Mlynár of the Slovak Republic and Ambassador Tareq Albanai of the State of Kuwait on their appointment as co-Chairs of the intergovernmental negotiations process. My delegation would also like to congratulate and express its appreciation to the previous co-Chairs for their contribution to the process. I am confident that the newly appointed co-Chairs will be able to guide our intergovernmental negotiations process towards substantive progress on Security Council reform within the new round of negotiations. Cambodia reassures the co-Chairs of its full support and cooperation. The rise of geopolitical tensions, ongoing war, armed conflicts, weapons proliferation, the coronavirus disease pandemic and climate change has exacerbated global uncertainties. It is therefore imperative that the Council be capable of responding to the current challenges that we are facing. We all wish to have a Council that is more representative, effective and accountable to deliver on its mandates concerning the maintenance of international peace and security. However, the reform should move in a direction that will bring all Member States together and accommodate their interests and positions, big and small alike. Our view is that Member States’ positions in all clusters remain far apart, which will require more intensified efforts and negotiations to bridge the gaps. We should also be clear on fundamental principles and scopes of the reform upon which we will be able to ultimately achieve our objective, so that progress can be built upon accordingly. I wish to emphasize that moving towards text-based negotiations requires the agreement of all Member States, based on the principle of consensus, in order to ensure sustained progress and satisfactory outcomes acceptable to all. Forcing a text-based negotiation without a secured consensus would risk undermining the intergovernmental negotiations process. Let me reiterate that Cambodia supports the expansion of both categories of Security Council membership, permanent and non-permanent seats, with an increase of representation of developing States and small States. In conclusion, my delegation will continue to actively engage in the intergovernmental negotiations process and to work closely with Member States on Council reform, in accordance with decision 62/557.

At the outset, we should like to thank the Permanent Representative of Qatar, Ms. Alya Ahmed Saif Al-Thani, and the Permanent Representative of Denmark, Mr. Martin Bille Hermann, for steering the negotiations process during the seventy-sixth session. We would also like to congratulate the Permanent Representatives of Slovakia, Mr. Michal Mlynár, and Kuwait, Mr. Tareq Albanai, on their appointment as co-Chairs of the intergovernmental negotiations process on Security Council reform. We trust that their work will be based on the principles of impartiality, with maximum regard for the opinions of all Member States participating in the process. Security Council reform is not only one of the most important issues on the agenda of our world Organization, but also one of the thorniest. That is because the Council, in keeping with the Charter of the United Nations, bears the primary responsibility for maintaining international peace and security. Without a doubt, Security Council reform is long overdue. The negotiations under way have revealed the genuine desire of the overwhelming majority of Member States to come up with the optimal model for reforming the Council. Nonetheless, it is clear that, for the time being, a universal solution that would satisfy all or even almost all Member States is lacking. The approaches espoused by the main players on the reform pitch remain vastly divergent and, at times, diametrically opposed. Against that backdrop, we see no alternative to proceeding patiently, step by step, at this session as we work to bring negotiation positions closer together. Our position is well known. Russia, as a permanent member of the Security Council, considers it necessary to make that organ more representative by including developing countries of Africa, Asia and Latin America. We are in favour of righting a historical wrong committed against Africa. Africa’s representation on the Council at present matches neither the total number of States on the continent nor the role it now plays in international affairs. Moreover, we see India and Brazil as worthy candidates for permanent seats on the Security Council, but only on the condition that there is an agreed reform model that involves increasing the membership of the Security Council in both membership categories. In that regard, we underscore that the model of increasing Security Council membership only in the category of elected members is broadly acceptable to us. Enlarging the Council should not affect its ability to effectively and swiftly respond to new challenges as they emerge. Against that backdrop, we are in favour of keeping Security Council membership compact. The optimal number of members should not exceed the low 20s. We do not support ideas that would curtail the prerogatives of current permanent members of the Security Council, including the veto. We must remember that the veto is a key factor that incentivizes Council members to seek balanced solutions, not those that have been imposed on them. We are counting on the efforts deployed by the President of the General Assembly and the co-Chairs being aimed at providing maximum assistance to the negotiations on the understanding that the ownership of the process rests squarely with Member States. Progress on Security Council reform cannot be achieved by imposing negotiating documents or other initiatives on Member States, especially ones that have not been agreed by all participants. At previous sessions of the General Assembly, we saw just how vain and dangerous it is to attempt to push through decisions on reform without any concern for winning the broad support of Member States. Our commitment to attaining results in the existing discussion format remains unchanged. The intergovernmental negotiations are both singular and universally legitimate for the entire gamut of reform issues. If we stray from that process, the entire negotiations architecture will fall apart, setting the process back many years. At a time when swift changes are afoot in the system of international relations and a new multipolar world order is forging a new path for itself, it is important for the intergovernmental negotiations not to create new or deepen existing dividing lines between Member States. Rather, they should remain a platform for constructive and balanced discussions and decisions.

Barbados aligns itself with the statement made by the representative of the Bahamas on behalf of the 14 States members of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) and with the statement made by the representative of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines on behalf of the L.69 group (see A/77/PV.36). We welcome the ambition for this process embodied in the remarks of our President at the opening of the seventy-seventh session (see A/77/PV.1), as well as in his early appointment of the co-Chairs of the intergovernmental negotiations process, our colleagues from Slovakia and the State of Kuwait, to whom Barbados pledges its support in their important work. I also take this opportunity to express my thanks to our colleagues from Denmark and the State of Qatar, who helped get us this far. Next year in December, we will be marking 60 years since the last time the Security Council was reformed. I think it is fair to say that a fair bit has happened since then. Many of our countries —certainly mine and the majority of the Caribbean Community  — were not Members of the Organization when we last reformed the Council. The international order was fundamentally different in 1963 than it is today, including in the ways that colleagues have pointed out in this debate. The President of the General Assembly made that clear yesterday in his remarks opening this debate when he said that we are “facing a set of interlocking crises that have placed the entire multilateral system under pressure... Countries are struggling due to conflicts and wars, climate change, food and energy crises, unsustainable debts and health emergencies” (A/77/PV.36, p.1). Another failure to address that juxtaposition of an antiquated but central mechanism with a much changed and fragile contemporary international order would constitute, as my colleague from Saint Vincent and the Grenadines said, speaking on behalf of the L.69 group, a clear dereliction of our responsibilities. The substance of Barbados’ position has been eloquently expressed in the CARICOM and L.69 statements in this debate and over the years. I will not rehearse them here. But beyond the substance of the many different views on this important topic, we are facing today something of a test. Seen from outside of these premises, the test seems fairly simple. First, can we begin negotiations on the basis of a text? The arguments for a text-based negotiation are clear. Secondly, can we create a meaningful record-keeping mechanism, including webcasting, to ensure that all delegations, large and small, have the opportunity to participate meaningfully in a substantive manner? Let us not fail those simple tests while the world watches.

I thank the President for convening this important annual debate on the reform of the Security Council. I take this opportunity to congratulate the Permanent Representatives of the State of Kuwait and the Slovak Republic on being appointed co-Chairs of the intergovernmental negotiations process for the seventy-seventh session. I wish to assure the co-Chairs of Zimbabwe’s full support during their tenure. My delegation aligns itself with the statement delivered by the Permanent Representative of Sierra Leone on behalf of the Group of African States (see A/77/PV.36). I wish to make the following remarks in my national capacity. The Charter of the United Nations underscores the sovereign equality and independence of States, without any prejudice regarding their size, economic might or any other qualification. Likewise, the organ that serves our collective interests on international peace and security, the Security Council, should not reflect such prejudices, but must be reformed to make it more representative, democratic, accountable and transparent. Furthermore, the multiple crises that the world faces today can no longer be addressed by the same methods of yesteryear. Therefore, there is urgent need to reform the United Nations, particularly the Security Council, to make it fit for purpose. The fact that Africa, a major geographic region, remains underrepresented in the non-permanent and unrepresented in the permanent category of Security Council membership is unjustified. Africa must be fairly represented in all the decision-making organs of the United Nations, including the Security Council. Its quest for two permanent seats and five non-permanent seats, as elaborated in the Ezulwini Consensus and the Sirte Declaration, is a matter of natural justice. Zimbabwe therefore reaffirms its strong commitment to Africa’s position on the reform of the Security Council and underlines that the reform should be based on consensus, taking into consideration the interests of all Members, in accordance with resolution 53/30. Zimbabwe remains committed to a fair, just and effective United Nations anchored in multilateralism, inclusivity and transparency.

My delegation thanks the President for organizing this meeting and warmly welcomes the appointment of His Excellency Mr. Tareq Albanai, Permanent Representative of the State of Kuwait, and His Excellency Mr. Michal Mlynár, Permanent Representative of Slovakia, as co-Chairs of the intergovernmental negotiations at the seventy-seventh session. We also take this opportunity to commend their predecessors, the Permanent Representatives of Denmark and Qatar, on the manner in which they conducted the negotiations at the seventy-sixth session. My delegation fully aligns itself with the statement made by His Excellency Mr. Alhaji Fanday Turay, Permanent Representative of Sierra Leone, on behalf of the Group of African States (see A/77/PV.36), and would like to make a few comments in its national capacity. First, the Common African Position, as adopted in the Ezulwini Consensus and the Sirte Declaration, is the only viable option to redress the historic injustice done to the African continent. Africa calls for the expansion of the Security Council in the permanent and non-permanent categories, with Africa being allocated no fewer than two permanent seats with all the rights, prerogatives and privileges of current members, and two additional non-permanent seats. Africa calls for the abolition of the right of veto. However, as long as the veto exists, it should be extended to new permanent members, with all its attributes. Secondly, the five main clusters of the reform process are interlinked and cannot be discussed or negotiated in isolation. We reiterate our call for comprehensive reform that recognizes those connections. We reject any piecemeal approach. Thirdly, decision 62/557 dictates that the intergovernmental negotiations forum is the only legitimate platform to discuss reform. The forum is member-driven and based on the positions and suggestions of all Member States. Fourthly, the Summit of Heads of State and Government of the African Union, held in February, wisely advised that, given the divergent views and positions of the respective groups, engaging in a text-based negotiation at this stage, without agreeing on principles, would be not only premature but counterproductive.

I thank the President for taking the initiative to convene this meeting to consider agenda item 125, “Question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council and other matters related to the Security Council”. On behalf of my delegation, allow me to extend my hearty congratulations to the co-Chairs of the new round of negotiations, His Excellency Mr. Michal Mlynár, Permanent Representative of Slovakia, and His Excellency Mr. Tareq Albanai, Permanent Representative of the State of Kuwait. We also commend the efforts made during the previous cycle by Her Excellency Ms. Alya Ahmed Saif Al-Thani, Permanent Representative of the State of Qatar, and Mr. Martin Bille Hermann, Permanent Representative of Denmark. My delegation endorses the statement made by the representative of Sierra Leone on behalf of the Group of African States (see A/77/PV.36) and would like to make a few remarks in its national capacity. Security Council reform remains an ongoing concern for United Nations Member States, as does their legitimate concern to see that important organ of the Organization adapt to the realities of the twenty-first century. States want a Council that meets the criteria of efficiency, consistency, representativeness, justice and transparency. However, all those criteria, which would lead to a virtuous Council, are far from being achieved and will remain so as long as the five pillars defined by decision 62/557 are not approved by the States and groups of States taking part in the intergovernmental negotiations. Fortunately, that does not erode the commitment of the Member States that, despite the long duration of the negotiations, are persevering in the search for consensus, despite the apparent reluctance on the part of some stakeholders, which indicates a flagrant lack of will to move forward. A reading of the documents produced by the co-Chairs, in particular since the sixty-ninth session, proves that unequivocally. The points of convergence and divergence, and those reviewed repeatedly, remain largely the same. I take this opportunity to reiterate that the position of my delegation remains that of the African Common Position, as expressed in the Sirte Declaration and consensus reached at Ezulwini. African States require the following for the Council to be representative. Two African States must sit on the Security Council as permanent members, with all attendant privileges. Two more African States must sit on the Council as non-permanent members. It cannot be stressed enough that the aforementioned requirements arise from the need to find just compensation for the historical injustice done to Africa. Africa represents almost one-third of the Members of the Organization and therefore should occupy its rightful place within the Security Council. That solution would undoubtedly help shift the United Nations into a more dynamic role that takes into account today’s realities. The stumbling block to increasing the number of permanent Council members is, without question, the veto. If the United Nations is a guarantor of justice, it is incomprehensible that we could have a category of members that neither enjoy the same privileges nor participate in the same way in decision-making. That is why the recognition of the veto for new permanent members is a legitimate claim. If that poses a real problem in the functioning of the Council, the proposal for the outright abolition of that instrument, the use of which has often proved controversial in major decisions, remains the only and best solution. However, the most ardent wish is for concrete and lasting collaboration between the Council and the General Assembly, and for the improvement of the image of the Organization through the implementation of the mechanisms provided for in the Charter of the United Nations to that end. My delegation’s wish for the new round of intergovernmental negotiations is to see States and groups of States commit themselves in a resolute and more dynamic manner to the advancement and completion of the reform of the Council, discarding any unconstructive, preconceived ideas in order to achieve the emergence of the more balanced, equitable, democratic, effective and efficient Security Council that we all yearn for. The delegation of the Congo reaffirms its attachment to the intergovernmental negotiations process and takes this opportunity to assure the appointed co-Chairs of its support as they undertake that noble but complex task.

First and foremost, I wish to offer our congratulations to Ambassador Michal Mlynár, Permanent Representative of Slovakia, and Ambassador Tareq Albanai, Permanent Representative of the State of Kuwait, on their appointment as co-Chairs of the intergovernmental negotiations process. Zambia assures them of our support as they oversee the process. I wish to further pay tribute to the former co-Chairs, Ambassador Martin Hermann, Permanent Representative of Denmark, and Ambassador Alya Ahmed Saif Al-Thani, Permanent Representative of the State of Qatar, for the commendable manner in which they handled deliberations during the seventy- sixth session. Zambia aligns itself with the statement delivered by the Permanent Representative of Sierra Leone, Coordinator of the African Union Committee of Ten on Security Council reform, on behalf of the Group of African States (see A/77/PV.36). I will now issue a statement in my national capacity. The call for reform of the Security Council is not a contemporary debate. Indeed, it is decades long. As many speakers have emphasized, the current structure of the Security Council is indicative of an era that is long gone. It is severely outdated and no longer reflects the realities of the current global era. What is worse is that, without any change, the Security Council will not be positioned to respond to future challenges, many of which are expected to be even more complex going forward. It is therefore imperative that the General Assembly do what is required of it, which is to press ahead with the intergovernmental negotiations, with all parties committing to do what is right for the common good of this world, rather than what is good for one or two countries, and what will be true and lasting reform for the good of humankind. Zambia therefore encourages all parties to show flexibility, understanding and a willingness to practice forbearance for the global good. As we continue with that important effort, we must always remind ourselves that our goal in reforming the Security Council is to enhance its legitimacy and effectiveness as the primary organ responsible for the maintenance of international peace and security. Much has been said about the historical injustice against Africa. It is gratifying to note that the call for Africa to be represented in the permanent category of the Security Council has been overwhelmingly supported by the majority of speakers and regional groupings in this debate. Indeed, if this is an area where there seems to be wide political agreement, then we must take the necessary steps to move forward. Africa demands to have two permanent seats, with all the privileges attached thereto, as long as the institution of permanent membership remains in force. We also demand additional seats in the non-permanent category, in accordance with the Ezulwini Consensus and the Sirte Declaration. We must ask ourselves how long can Africa wait. Why must we maintain a position of injustice when we are all in agreement that there is an issue here? To make meaningful progress, we must overcome the remaining differences and make progress going forward. We must move the process forward. We need to streamline our discussions to come up with workable decisions so as to take decisive action towards meaningful reform. As stated already, the endless debate on the reform of the Security Council for decades now is another form of injustice against Africa. Zambia reaffirms its commitment to making tangible progress and supports the call to action that was circulated earlier this week. Specifically, we support the call to commence a formal process of negotiations, guided by the decision-making modalities and working methods laid out in the Charter of the United Nations and in line with the rules and procedures of the General Assembly. It is now incumbent upon us to redouble our joint efforts to reach agreements on a package of reforms. Let us move forward.

Indonesia joins others in welcoming the appointment of the Permanent Representatives of the Slovak Republic and Kuwait as co-Chairs of the intergovernmental negotiations. Indonesia firmly believes that the intergovernmental negotiations remain the inclusive avenue for all United Nations Member States to work together towards a democratic, effective, efficient, transparent and representative Security Council. At the beginning of this debate, the President asked members of the Assembly to start from a position of “yes”, to listen to each other, to build on shared interests and to find commonalities (see A/77/PV.36). Statement after statement, we heard a loud “yes” vibrating within the walls of the Hall. All of us here agree on the importance of moving forward the transformation of the Security Council. All of us here are mindful of the complex security challenges the world is facing. At the same time, we are confronted by multidimensional crises, from food, health and energy to finance. In this difficult situation, we have but one option — to strengthen cooperation and collaboration. The paradigm of cooperation must be the DNA for relations among nations. It must guide our work here in the United Nations. We must put forward inclusive and meaningful engagement. The voice of big and small, developed and developing countries must be equally heard. As my Foreign Minister underlined during her statement at the general debate (see A/77/PV.14), this is the basis for a strong and reformed United Nations, including the Security Council. This is the basis for renewed multilateralism that is fit for purpose and fit for its time. Indonesia believes that in our endeavour for Council reform, we must also put forward the paradigm of collaboration. There will always be differences of opinion on how to best reform the Security Council. What we should work on is strengthening constructive dialogue to bridge the differences. We should also pursue practical ways to grasp the low-hanging fruit of the process. Despite the differences, there are also many convergences on various issues, such as an intermediate approach on membership categories, with a clear review mechanism, as well as expansion of non-permanent membership. Those are issues that can have less disagreement and are likely to produce concrete outcomes and will enable the Council to perform its work effectively. Indonesia observes that several Members are showing flexibility in progressing the intergovernmental negotiations, and we believe that this is a crucial stepping stone for a negotiation process. The negotiation process itself must be inclusive and accommodate the interests of all relevant parties. In that regard, Indonesia is of the view that the voices of all regions need to be amplified in the Council. That is especially critical in increasing the role played by emerging nations, which are proving their strength in democracy, peace and security, and sustainable development. Our endeavour to ensure better representation should contribute to the improvement of the Council’s effectiveness and efficiency in exercising its mandate. Lastly, on working methods, reform is a must. In responding to impending future challenges, which will only become even more difficult, the Council must adapt and be flexible in its working methods. In that context, we encourage the Security Council Informal Working Group on Documentation and Other Procedural Questions to continue its work in suggesting necessary changes to the Council’s working methods in order to enable the Council to fulfil its mandate. In conclusion, allow me to reaffirm Indonesia’s commitment to continuing to contribute to efforts for a meaningful and comprehensive Security Council reform that enjoys the widest political acceptance.

I thank the President for convening this annual debate on the question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council and other matters related to the Security Council. I would also like to congratulate His Excellency Mr. Michal Mlynár, Permanent Representative of Slovakia, and His Excellency Mr. Tareq Albanai, Permanent Representative of Kuwait, on their appointment as co-Chairs of the intergovernmental negotiations process. We assure them of Morocco’s full support as they discharge their duties. I also take this opportunity to commend the outstanding work done by Her Excellency Ms. Alya Ahmed Saif Al-Thani, Permanent Representative of Qatar, and His Excellency Mr. Martin Bille Hermann, Permanent Representative of Denmark, who co-chaired the previous session of the intergovernmental negotiations process. My delegation aligns itself with the statement delivered by the representative of Sierra Leone on behalf of the Group of African States and by the representative of Bahrain on behalf of the Group of Arab States (see A/77/PV.36). We would like to make the following comments in our national capacity. Security Council reform is part of the United Nations reform process aimed at revitalizing the Organization. That reform calls for an increase in membership in the two categories set out in the Charter of the United Nation  — namely, permanent and non-permanent members — in a way that reflects the United Nations membership in the twenty-first century. In keeping with the framework set forth in decision 62/557, Security Council reform needs to be comprehensive rather than gradual, and should take into account the five pillars in an exhaustive and comprehensive fashion. It should also take into account the links between the five clusters of issues so as to direct the reform process. We reiterate our position in favour of greater strengthening and modernization of the United Nations via Security Council reform, making it more representative while bolstering its effectiveness, efficiency and accountability. The United Nations Charter designates the Security Council as the principal organ tasked with the maintenance of international peace and security. Its mandate is clear and unambiguous. In order to increase Security Council membership to reflect the contemporary makeup of the United Nations, Morocco remains convinced that we need to continue working in the same intergovernmental format. It is unacceptable and unthinkable that Africa is the only continent that is not represented among the Council’s permanent members and underrepresented among its non-permanent members. Those historical injustices against Africa are a concern to us all and we urge their correction through ensuring increased representation of Africa on a reformed Security Council. Africa’s demand for equitable, geographical representation on the Security Council is just, legitimate and necessary. Africa plays a major role in the maintenance of international peace and security. As one example, of the 20 major United Nations troop- and police-contributing countries, 13 are African, including Morocco. African countries make direct, substantive and human contributions to peacekeeping efforts the world over. In that regard, I reiterate that Morocco endorses the Common African Position, the Ezulwini Consensus and the Sirte Declaration. We are in favour of fair and equitable representation for Africa across both categories of membership on the Council, with at least two permanent seats and five non-permanent seats to ensure that we do justice to our continent. It will be up to Africa to decide who represents it on the reformed Security Council. Like the African Group, the Group of Arab States also deserves greater representation on an enlarged Security Council. The absence of a permanent seat for Arab States, who are strongly affected by the issues discussed within the Security Council, is highly regrettably. A permanent seat for the Arab Group with all the associated prerogatives, as well as adequate representation in the category of non-permanent membership, would address the legitimate demands of the Arab Group. Regarding the veto right, we are of the view that so long as it still exists, and in the interests of justice, it should be available to all permanent members of the Security Council. We look forward to receiving the guidance of the President of the General Assembly at this session of intergovernmental negotiations. My delegation reiterates its support to the two co-Chairs of the process. I also reiterate the resolve of my delegation to continue to participate in a constructive and positive manner in this cycle of intergovernmental negotiations. We stand ready to exchange with all Member States in a spirit of constructive and transparent cooperation, with a view to achieving comprehensive, genuine reform of the Security Council.

The Kenya delegation reaffirms its commitment to Security Council reforms. We align ourselves with the statement delivered by the representative of Sierra Leone on behalf of the Group of African States (see A/77/PV.36), which set out our position and expectations in comprehensive detail. We join others in expressing our sincere congratulations to His Excellency Mr. Tareq Albanai, Permanent Representative of the State of Kuwait, and His Excellency Mr. Michal Mlynár, Permanent Representative of Slovakia, on their appointment as co-Chairs of the intergovernmental negotiations, and we assure them of our support. We also thank the former co-Chairs, His Excellency Mr. Martin Bille Hermann, Permanent Representative of Denmark, and Her Excellency Ms. Alya Ahmed Saif Al-Thani, Permanent Representative of the State of Qatar, for their leadership of the intergovernmental negotiations process at the seventy-sixth session. Africa’s goal remains to be fully represented in all the decision-making organs of the United Nations, particularly the Security Council. Africa is also seeking a Security Council that adapts to the geopolitical realities of the twenty-first century by becoming more representative of the current membership of the United Nations in order to improve its legitimacy, credibility, effectiveness and increase the transparency of its decisions. The Security Council is the centrepiece of the international security architecture, and it first requires the necessary authority and legitimacy that come with being representative. The President of Kenya, His Excellency Mr. William Samoei Ruto, in his national statement to the General Assembly at its seventy- seventh general debate, called for comprehensive reforms of the Security Council. He observed that “[a] just and inclusive world order cannot be spearheaded by a Security Council that persistently and unjustly fails the inclusivity criterion. Similarly, threats to democracy will not be credibly resolved by an undemocratic and unrepresentative Security Council. It is vitally important for that critical institution to reflect the values it is entrusted to protect, defend and uphold on behalf of humankind” (A/77/PV.6, p.47). While divergent opinions remain, we are fully convinced that all five clusters of reform of the intergovernmental process under consideration are interlinked and mutually reinforcing. The comprehensive reform of the Security Council is informed by those interlinkages, as outlined in decision 62/557. Kenya joins Member States that have highlighted the need to improve the working methods of the Security Council to make it more accountable to the Member States. The reforms should include better access to the work of the Council and far more transparency in the decision-making process. As we take note of the overwhelming and increasing support that the Common African Position enjoys in this intergovernmental plenary, we believe that it is important that the intergovernmental negotiations documents properly reflect that support. We are hopeful that the intergovernmental negotiations deliberations will eventually produce a broad consensus to enable the process to move forward and achieve the desired reforms. As we commend the progress made thus far, we reiterate the importance of ensuring that all positions are accurately compiled and reflected. The proper reflection of positions will ensure not only that the concerns of all groups of Member States are taken note of, but also that as we carry on our discussions in the next session, we can continue to build upon the progress made thus far. We look forward to engaging further on this during the intergovernmental negotiations and assure the co-Chairs of our commitment and support.

At the outset, my delegation would like to express its sincere appreciation to the President for convening this important meeting on the question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council and other matters related to the Security Council. We would also like to thank the co-Chairs of the previous round of intergovernmental negotiations on Security Council reform for their tireless efforts to move the intergovernmental negotiations process forward. We congratulate His Excellency Mr. Michal Mlynár, Permanent Representative of the Slovak Republic, and His Excellency Mr. Tareq Albanai, Permanent Representative of the State of Kuwait, co-Chairs of the intergovernmental negotiations process during the seventy-seventh session. The Lao People’s Democratic Republic reaffirms its full support for the reform of the Security Council through the intergovernmental negotiations process, as the most appropriate platform to pursue the ultimate objective. We believe that this Member State-driven process should remain the main mechanism for the discussion in order to achieve our common objective of making the Security Council a more representative, transparent and effective body in maintaining international peace and security, as stipulated in the 2005 World Summit outcome document (resolution 60/1). My delegation is of the view that throughout this process, we must take into consideration the interests of developing and developed Member States alike, with equitable geographical representation, in order to lay a solid foundation for adopting a common and more suitable formula that would ultimately help Member States to reach an outcome that reflects the concerns and interests of all groups of countries. We therefore reiterate that all five clusters are strongly interlinked, and negotiations should be conducted in a comprehensive manner. To effectively enlarge the Council, we are of the view that an appropriate and equitable increase in both the permanent and non-permanent membership categories remains crucial. In conclusion, it is our fervent hope that the deliberations during the seventy-seventh session will produce more tangible outcomes and progress. My delegation extends our full support to the President and wishes our co-Chairs great success in moving the reform process forward, in accordance with the shared aspirations of all Member States.

I thank the President for organizing this debate on agenda item 125, “Question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council and other matters related to the Security Council”. Nigeria aligns itself with the statements delivered by the Permanent Representative of Sierra Leone, on behalf of the Group of African States, and the Permanent Representative of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines on behalf of the L.69 group (see A/77/ PV.36). We would like to make the following statement in our national capacity. We congratulate His Excellency Mr. Tareq Albanai, Permanent Representative of the State of Kuwait, and His Excellency Mr. Michal Mlynár, Permanent Representative of the Slovak Republic, on co-chairing the intergovernmental negotiations. Nigeria lauds Member States for the overwhelming support displayed, as always, for the Common African Position, though we believe that more needs to be done to ensure a proper reflection of the Position, as espoused in the Ezulwini Consensus. African States have offered a coherent, practical and persuasive blueprint for Council reform. Our common position is to assert the right of our continent, which has long been marginalized. We also recognize the legitimate aspiration of other regions to be fully represented on the Council. We wish to underscore the overriding need to ensure that the interests of Africa continue to be put forward and safeguarded. Our original aspiration, which seeks the expansion of both the permanent and the non-permanent categories of Security Council membership, requires the allocation of not less than two permanent seats, with all the prerogatives and privileges of Member States, including the right to veto, and two additional non-permanent seats. The United Nations comprises Member States drawn from the other groupings of the world and the equitable representation of those regions would enhance the transparency and accountability of the Security Council, as well as the effectiveness and legitimacy of its decisions. That would bring much-needed value to the Security Council and generally contribute to the promotion of international peace and security. We are hopeful that the cluster of regional representation and its interlinkages with other clusters will propel Member States and interest groups to review the process and reinforce the imperative need to rectify the historical injustice done to the African continent. In that sense, the in-depth decisions of the regional representation cluster will ensure that African demands are justifiable. In order for the key areas of concern to be addressed to bring about an open, inclusive and transparent process, an agreeable means to properly document how far we have come needs to be found. There are differing views and approaches to that, but it is worth careful consideration. In addition, we advocate the full utilization of the entire calendar for the meetings. That can be achieved if we could work to address other clusters in one meeting. By so doing we, would have covered the five clusters of the Security Council in three meetings and have enough time for fine-tuning the element papers. A good summary of the discussions after each meeting is highly recommended. That should serve as a reminder to us all and reduce the need to keep coming back to the same issues. We are fully mindful of the importance of making good progress on this subject. In addition, we advocate for a single consolidated text, preferably with attributions. That is the best way to get through real negotiations. In conclusion, my delegation looks forward to an increase in the pace for more open debate. There is a need to generate necessary political support for the much-needed reform of the Security Council so that it can better reflect current realities. Nigeria advocates for a comprehensive Council that supports Africa’s legitimate right to fair and equitable representation, taking into account the principles, objectives and ideals of the Charter of the United Nations for a fairer world based on universalism, equitable and regional balance within the United Nations system.

We have heard the last speaker in the debate on this item. The General Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 125.