A/77/PV.86 General Assembly

In accordance with the provisions of Article 12, paragraph 2, of the Charter of the United Nations and with the consent of the Security Council, the Secretary-General notifies the General Assembly of matters relative to the maintenance of international peace and security that are being dealt with by the Council, and of the matters with which the Council has ceased to deal. In that connection, the General Assembly has before it a note by the Secretary-General circulated in document A/77/300. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to take note of the note by the Secretary-General contained in document A/77/300? It was so decided (decision 77/560).

May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 115?

I thank all present for joining today’s debate on the annual report of the Security Council (A/77/2). Let us dive straight into the heart of the matter. Outside of Turtle Bay, there is only one United Nations. To the world, to our 8 billion constituents, in the field of peace and security, we serve one basic purpose: to spare them and their communities from the scourge of war. (spoke in French) Indeed, outside this Chamber there is not much of a difference in the way in which the 193 Member States organize themselves. There is either security or danger, peace or war. What matters to people are not the subtleties of our deliberations but their outcome. Bearing that in mind, let us ask ourselves what the objective of today’s meeting is. (spoke in English) We are meeting because the Security Council and the General Assembly are complementary bodies, meant to work together. It is often said that successful organizations build cultures of constantly improving efficiency and never lose sight of their purpose. We must ask ourselves: where are we succeeding? Where are we failing? Our meeting today should be an honest exercise in self-examination, an exercise in accountability. The report before us depicts a year fraught with crises, violent conflicts and wars. (spoke in Arabic) The Council’s ability to restore and maintain peace is once again put to the test this year. Many are asking: why do we need a Security Council if its members are unable or unwilling to put an end to wars and conflicts? Such criticism is being heard very often. (spoke in English) But let us also acknowledge that the Security Council serves as the bedrock of our collective efforts to maintain peace across the globe. On many critical issues, the Council did come together, and it acted. First, it successfully renewed all United Nations peacekeeping and special political mission mandates  — an accomplishment that may not make global headlines but provides life-saving support and stability for millions of vulnerable people around the globe. On behalf of all those who rely on the United Nations to promote international peace and security, I express my thanks. The Council also made other significant strides this year. It established a humanitarian carve-out to United Nations sanctions regimes, providing sustainable aid to millions of people in need. It adopted the first Council resolution  — resolution 2669 (2022)  — on Myanmar, shedding light on a truly desperate situation. In addition, we saw many more women briefers than in previous years. I would ask all Member States to please continue that positive trend. As can be seen, there are peaks, but there are valleys, too — unfulfilled mandates and lost opportunities. (spoke in Russian) There are failures that give rise to serious doubts and that put us in a very difficult situation. Let me cite the thorniest of those, on which the General Assembly has already adopted six resolutions. Although 491 days have passed since the Russian Federation invaded Ukraine, the Council has to date not adopted even a single one of the resolutions expected by the world about that blatant violation of the Charter of the United Nations and international law. Therefore, I would like to open this morning’s deliberations by asking the members of the General Assembly a few leading questions. Do they consider that the main problems that we have faced during the past year are accurately reflected in this report of the Security Council? (spoke in English) Should such reports be more analytical? Should they delve deeper into the actions taken, or the actions not taken? What about emerging issues? We know that crises of unprecedented complexity are undermining the stability of many Member States and regions. I invite members to consider those questions and to touch upon them in their interventions. Remember — the Security Council and the General Assembly are two parts of one whole. While the General Assembly needs to make further progress on its own reform process, it has on many occasions played an important role in the maintenance of peace and security. Usually it matters how we get there, but what is most important is that we deliver on our promise of a free, safer, more peaceful and more just world for all — even though, at the end of the day, delivery largely depends on our national efforts. The submission of the annual report is the only explicit obligation that the Council has to the General Assembly under the Charter. But preparing the report and having the debate should not be pro forma, box- checking exercises. They should serve a purpose. Today’s debate is meant to help us in the United Nations do better. It must be a critical part of the assessment of our work as an institution. I ask members to please keep that front and centre in our discussions today. I now give the floor to the President of the Security Council, Her Excellency Lana Zaki Nusseibeh, to introduce the report of the Security Council. Mrs. Nusseibeh (United Arab Emirates), President of the Security Council: I thank you, Mr. President, on behalf of all Security Council members for having convened this meeting and for your leadership during this session of the General Assembly. In the United Arab Emirates’ capacity as President of the Security Council this month, I have the honour of introducing the annual report of the Security Council (A/77/2) covering the period from 1 January to 31 December 2022. I would like to thank Brazil for drafting the introduction and leading the negotiations within the Security Council towards consensus on the report and all Security Council members for their contributions. We are grateful to the Secretariat for having produced the report and for the inclusion of comprehensive data on the work of the Council in 2022. The report was adopted by the Security Council on 30 May, in accordance with the timeline set out in presidential note S/2019/997, for the third year in a row. This exercise is more than a routine, mandated reporting requirement. It is a welcome opportunity to further strengthen the relationship between the General Assembly and the Security Council. It is also a tool for transparency and demonstrates the accountability of the Council to the wider United Nations membership. The Charter of the United Nations lays out the parameters of the relationship between the Security Council and the General Assembly, a relationship that has been built upon over the years. The General Assembly, as the main deliberative organ of the United Nations, has the task of considering the annual report of the Security Council. Another important example of the relationship between these two main organs is the holding of Security Council elections in the General Assembly, as we saw earlier this month. I will now briefly summarize some key aspects of the Security Council’s work last year. Indeed, 2022 marked a return to pre-pandemic working methods in the Council. In total, in 2022 the Council held 292 formal meetings, 276 of which were public meetings and 16 of which were private meetings. It held 127 closed consultations and five informal interactive dialogues. There was also an increase in the number of unscheduled meetings, from 34 in 2021 to 85 in 2022, which represents a 150 per cent increase. In 2022, the Council adopted 54 resolutions and seven presidential statements, and members of the Council issued 67 statements to the press. Last year, in the General Assembly, we saw the adoption of resolution 76/262, which decided that the President of the General Assembly shall convene a formal meeting within 10 working days of the casting of a veto by one or more permanent members of the Council, to hold a debate on the situation on which the veto was cast. Under that new process, the Security Council submitted three special reports on relevant occasions to the General Assembly, as requested by that resolution. Also last year, by a procedural vote of 11 in favour, one against and three abstentions, the Council adopted resolution 2623 (2022), calling for the eleventh emergency special session of the General Assembly on the conflict in Ukraine. The trend of increased participation by women briefers in Security Council meetings continued, with 46 per cent of briefings delivered by women in 2022, while in 2021 and 2020 the percentages were 44 per cent and 34 per cent, respectively. Of the 88 civil-society representatives invited to brief the Council last year, 63 were women, which is approximately 72 per cent. Thematic and cross-cutting issues remained high on the agenda, including women and peace and security; climate, peace and security; technology and security; the nexus between conflict and food insecurity; the mental health and psychosocial support of United Nations peace operations personnel; general issues relating to sanctions; and children and armed conflict. We look forward to this morning’s discussion of the Security Council’s 2022 annual report and to hearing feedback and comments from the members of the General Assembly.

We welcome the convening of this meeting to debate the annual report of the Security Council to the General Assembly for the year 2022 (A/77/2). We thank the representative of the United Arab Emirates for introducing the report. The recent discussions in the framework of negotiations on a draft resolution on the revitalization of the work of the General Assembly reaffirmed the importance that Member States attach to the timely presentation of and debate on the annual reports of the Security Council. We reiterate our call for such documents to cease being descriptive, formal and uncritical. The report once again is limited to presenting the list of meetings, activities and resolutions of the Security Council, despite the multiple long-standing requests from the majority of Member States that the reports of that organ be exhaustive and analytical and make it easier to analyse the reasons for and implications of the decisions taken by the Security Council and to contribute to ensuring its accountability to the General Assembly. For example, once again we note the omission of any analysis of Israel’s violations of the Security Council’s own resolutions, particularly resolution 2334 (2016), of 2016, even as the Security Council remains unable to stop one of the worst violations to be committed against a people in the past century. It continues with impunity to expand illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories and to carry out punitive demolitions, forced displacements of hundreds of civilians, the blockade of the Gaza Strip and threats of annexation of Jordan Valley territories and other parts of the West Bank and East Jerusalem. We need a comprehensive reform of the Security Council, including its working methods, in order to ensure that it is a transparent, democratic and representative body. It is imperative that the Security Council adopt its rules of procedure in order to put an end to the provisional nature of those rules, which have been in place since that organ was created. That is vital in order to ensure transparency and the necessary accountability to all States Members of the United Nations, on whose behalf the Security Council must act, in accordance with Article 24 of the Charter. We must also ensure the transparency of informal consultations, and minutes should be produced thereof. Informal closed-door meetings should be the exception, not the rule. We have seen an increase, to some extent, in the number of public meetings of the Security Council in recent years, including open debates and the holding of informative sessions by the presidency on the programme of work at the beginning and the end of each month. Nevertheless, we deplore the fact that there is a continuing trend in the Security Council to work in a closed format and, every year, to provide the rest of the membership with only basic, descriptive information on its activities, to take decisions without addressing the concerns of non-members of the Council and to force action on draft resolutions when significant differences exist with regard to their content and scope. Resolution 76/262 establishes a mechanism for an explanation of the veto. However, there should be no restrictive, selective approaches to the Charter, as they stand in the way of a thoroughgoing reform of the Security Council and its working methods. The lack of special reports from the Security Council to the General Assembly on measures to maintain international peace and security, as requested by Articles 15 and 24 of the Charter of the United Nations, is yet another shortcoming that must be overcome. Once again, we call for the Security Council to adhere to its mandate and to cease usurping the functions of other organs of the United Nations. The Council must stop broadening the scope of the definition of international peace and security to the detriment of the functions and responsibilities of the General Assembly. We must also put an end to the selective manipulation of the methods and practices of the Security Council as a tool for bringing pressure to bear on sovereign States, based on political and domination-related agendas. Such strategies undermine the role of that organ in maintaining international peace and security and contribute to exacerbating conflict and divisions. The Security Council must represent the interests of all States Members of the United Nations in order to preserve multilateralism and the credibility of the Organization.

I am pleased to take the floor on behalf of the 27 members of the Accountability, Coherence and Transparency (ACT) Group. We welcome the timely adoption of the annual report of the Security Council to the General Assembly (A/77/2), under the Swiss presidency of the Security Council, on 30 May, which we thank for facilitating its smooth adoption. We thank you also, Mr. President, for having convened today’s meeting and the United Arab Emirates, as President of the Council for the month of June, for the presentation of the report. The ACT Group aims to promote a more transparent, effective and efficient United Nations. In that regard, we advocate for the improvement of the Council’s working methods as well as other ways to promote meaningful interaction between the Security Council and the General Assembly. To be better prepared, we should continue taking concrete steps in accordance with the letter sent by the outgoing members of the Council on lessons learned on the working methods of the Council during the pandemic, as recognized in the report. The ACT Group would like to address once again the process and the substance of the annual report of the Security Council. First, the ACT Group welcomes the adoption of the report by the Security Council on the deadline of 30 May and commends Brazil for its dedication in steering this process and coordinating the report’s introduction. The ACT Group considers that there is scope to improve the process of the preparation of the report. An open debate could be organized in preparation for the annual report in January, in line with note S/2017/507, to assess the work of the Council ahead of the drafting of the introduction of the report. We also note that while the report was adopted on time, it was not possible to meet other important milestones set by the Council, such as reaching agreement on its introduction by the end of January in the interest of facilitating an earlier consideration of the report by the General Assembly. We call for the setting of a fixed timeline for the General Assembly’s discussions on the annual report, as an internal deadline has been set for the Council itself in note S/2017/507. We believe that this would enhance transparency and predictability and encourage the Council to continue to improve its efforts in that regard. Secondly, the report provides a valuable and factual overview of the work of the Security Council during 2022, as the Council returned to its usual conduct of business in terms of working methods after the restrictions imposed by the coronavirus disease pandemic. We welcome the inclusion of statistics in the introduction, notably the comparison of the number of unscheduled meetings held at the request of Council members, which increased from 34 in 2021 to 85 in 2022, reflecting the dynamics of the Council. We also appreciate the inclusion of disaggregated data on the participation of women. We commend, for example, the fact that the number of women briefers increased in 2022, with 46 per cent of women briefers in the Council in contrast with 44 per cent in 2021 and only 34 per cent in 2020. We also welcome the inclusion in the introduction to the report of relevant information on the number of occasions on which a veto was cast. We believe that it is important to include information in the report on instances where the Council has been unable to act despite an obvious need and a mandate. We acknowledge the reference to the submission of three special reports in accordance with resolution 76/262 and the information included on the adoption of a resolution in line with the “Uniting for peace” resolution. The ACT Group also welcomes those paragraphs of the report that address substantive issues or trends, notably the references to the discussions on a range of emerging issues, including the nexus between conflict and food insecurity, technology and security, or relevant information, as was the establishment of a sanctions regime for Haiti. At the same time, we note in the body of the report the factual account of the work of the Security Council, and we encourage the Council once again to provide a more complete, substantive and analytical account of its work to the General Assembly, including further details on those draft resolutions that failed to be adopted by the Council, such as a brief description of the drafts’ purposes and main provisions, and an indication of the grounds for rejection. The body of the Council’s annual report should include a chapter on the veto along with the cases in which it has been exercised; statements of explanation by the Member States that exercised the veto; and statistics on the number of times it has been exercised in the past. Indeed, we note that the word “veto” is used for the first time in the report’s introduction, which represents an element of welcome clarity, and we commend all members of the Council, notably its elected members, on that decision. Furthermore, while we commend the references and links to the special reports in the body of the annual report, we consider that in the light of Article 24, paragraph 3, of the Charter of the United Nations, a standalone chapter should also be included on the special reports, whether they result from the implementation of resolution 76/262 or not. That could also be achieved by bringing the process of adoption by the Council of special reports in line with the same procedure as that of the annual report itself. In addition, information could also be included on the implementation of Security Council resolutions and decisions, with an indication of the constraints and reasons behind any lack of implementation. The ACT Group also wishes to encourage the timely compilation and use of the monthly assessments by Council presidencies, which constitute important reference documents reflecting the views of members on the work of the Council. As such assessments do not represent the views of the Council as a whole but, rather, the views of the presidency of the month, its substance should not be reduced to the lowest common denominator. We would also like to commend the efforts made to increase transparency by holding wrap-in and wrap-up sessions, and we recall the ACT’s non-paper circulated in June 2021, with a view to improving interactive exchanges. It is also worth mentioning the important work of the Security Council Affairs Division in preparing, as a complementary document, the repertoire of the practice of the Security Council as the only official and comprehensive coverage of the Security Council’s interpretation and application of the Charter and provisional rules since 1946. We encourage all Member States to provide voluntary contributions to ensure the preservation of institutional memory through that important tool. Thirdly, we suggest that the annual report should highlight relevant information regarding the Council’s closed consultations and discussions held under the item “Any other business” in order to promote further transparency and help the wider membership understand the full range of issues and situations with which the Council is engaged. The ACT Group also encourages the President of the General Assembly to assess today’s debate and resume the practice of preparing and transmitting a summary of the recommendations expressed by delegations to Member States and to the President of the Security Council for the subsequent consideration of the Informal Working Group of the Security Council on Documentation and Other Procedural Questions, as note S/2017/507 encourages the Council President to report back on the suggestions and observations of the general membership. Finally, the ACT Group looks forward to engaging with the United Kingdom, which will lead the drafting process of the 2023 annual report, and all Council members throughout this process. Allow me now some very brief additional remarks in my national capacity. Portugal commends Brazil on the introduction of the report, which is the result of an inclusive, constructive and timely drafting exercise. It is clear under the Charter of the United Nations that the Security Council carries out its duties on behalf of all Member States. That is why the Charter also sets out the need for the Security Council to submit at least one annual report for the General Assembly’s consideration. The important powers held by the Security Council are bestowed upon it by Member States, which, for that reason, are entitled to hold it to account in the General Assembly. It is therefore crucial that the annual report be informative, substantive, comprehensive and thorough. Otherwise, the duty of accountability established by the Charter is not properly or satisfactorily fulfilled. Recent times have shown that Member States and the international community in the broader sense increasingly believe that it is necessary to scrutinize the Council’s action or inaction. The most evident symbol of that newfound vitality and rigour of the General Assembly was the approval by consensus of the veto initiative. Furthermore, since 2022 eight more Member States have subscribed to the ACT Code of Conduct, bringing the total to 129. In that context, it would have been better if the report had, as the ACT Group has been calling for, more detailed references to the use of the veto. Finally, we note that the Security Council’s annual report for 2020 and 2021 included several paragraphs on climate and security, under the chapter on the maintenance of international peace and security. That was a welcome addition that the 2022 report should have continued. Although this time there is a paragraph on climate and security in Africa, it would have been better to see a more comprehensive review of the discussions in the Council regarding the consequences of climate change for peace and security.

I deliver this statement on behalf of the Nordic countries: Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Sweden and Norway. We thank you, Mr. President, for having convened this meeting today. This debate is an important opportunity for all States Members of the United Nations to have their say and to reflect on the Council’s implementation in 2022 of its mandate for the maintenance of international peace and security  — a duty bestowed on it on our behalf. Indeed, the annual report (A/77/2) is a Charter obligation of the Council to the General Assembly, creating this key moment for dialogue. We call on the Security Council, together with the President of the General Assembly, to explore ways of strengthening this important process, with a view to a more substantive interaction between the two bodies. On the report itself, we echo much of what was just presented by the representative of Portugal on behalf of the Accountability, Coherence and Transparency (ACT) group. As set out by my ACT colleagues, we also welcome the timely adoption of the report. We must, however, underscore the importance of the Council in future meeting all the timelines it has set for itself in the production of the report. That would ensure that the General Assembly is able to have a more predictable discussion on the report in June, if not before, when the content is more recent and relevant. We would also echo the well-worn calls from the Assembly for the Council to submit a more complete, substantive and analytical account of its work. In the absence of that, we continue to underline the importance of monthly assessments being completed by each presidency. They are a valuable way to provide a more analytical look at the Council’s work and an opportunity to mark important procedural aspects throughout the year. While they are circulated among all Council members for comment, let me underscore that monthly assessments do not have to be agreed by consensus. Greater recognition of that fact may help assessments to be completed sooner and, ultimately, be submitted by the end of the calendar year to inform the annual report. The year 2022 was indeed a complex and challenging one for the work of the Council. Accordingly, we would have expected a more thorough reflection of that fact in the report at hand, both in substance and in process. A significant shift in the practice of the Council took place following the adoption of resolution 76/262, and the Council faithfully produced a special report for the General Assembly each time a veto was cast. Yet, even though special reports are equally mandated in Article 24, paragraph 3, of the Charter, we regret the fact that they are not reflected in a standalone, easy-to- reference section within the annual report. We would encourage the Council to bring the method of their adoption in line with that of the annual report itself to ensure their appropriate reflection in future annual reports of the Council. Finally, let me welcome the inclusion of the first annual report of the Informal Working Group of the Security Council on Documentation and Other Procedural Questions in the Council’s annual report. That is an important step forward towards the accountability and transparency of the Informal Working Group, bringing it in line with other subsidiary bodies of the Council. We highlight in particular the annex containing indicators of progress in the implementation of note S/2017/507. We see that as a useful tool for the broader membership to assess the efforts of the Council and comment on where improvements could be made in implementing its own commitments. We hope that it will particularly help smaller missions to access data on the Council’s work and to inform their reflections on those efforts, both for this debate and in the Council’s annual open debate on working methods, ultimately with the aim of strengthening the relationship and dialogue between the Security Council and the General Assembly.

Costa Rica would like to thank the representative of the United Arab Emirates for introducing the annual report of the Security Council (A/77/2), as well as Brazil for having coordinated the drafting of the introduction Costa Rica aligns itself with the statement made by the representative of Portugal on behalf of the Accountability, Coherence and Transparency (ACT) group. The introduction of the Security Council’s annual report to the General Assembly is, and should be, a momentous formal occasion, not just a rhetorical exercise or a mere report. A true consideration of the report requires an analytical and critical approach to the actions of the Council during the period under consideration, respecting, of course, its mandate and its organic relationship with the Assembly, in accordance with the Charter. We commend the authorization of peacekeeping or stabilization missions in the Central African Republic and South Sudan, the resolutions condemning the Taliban in Afghanistan and the increased support for reforms in Iraq, as well as the complex correlation between conflict and food insecurity, and the establishment of the Security Council Committee established pursuant to resolution 2653 (2022) concerning Haiti, along with an arms embargo, among others. It is also notable that five open debates on women and peace and security were held during the presidencies of Albania, Gabon, Norway, the United Arab Emirates and the United Kingdom. Such open debates contribute to making headway in discussions on the key role of women in the pursuit of sustainable peace. However, how relevant can those open debates be if the diverse viewpoints of and specific proposals from Member States are not included in the report? The Council should explicitly incorporate into its report a range of opinions and recommendations from the States participating in such debates. We note also that the report we have just received is somewhat limited and, in our view, maintains a descriptive approach that does not succeed in lifting the veil of opacity that in most cases shrouds the actions of the Council. For example, in the case of the first-ever resolution on Myanmar — resolution 2699 (2022) — we are keen to understand why it was adopted only in December 2022, even though the military coup took place in February of 2021? In this and many other cases, we would appreciate it if the Council could provide us with an analysis of its decision-making process, in particular on points of divergences and convergence, as well as a comprehensive analysis of the discussions held, members’ views and the challenges faced. Furthermore, it would be appropriate to include a frank evaluation of the obstacles faced in adopting various documents, from presidential statements to formal resolutions, including elaborating on the circumstances under which the Council decided whether or not to adopt them. “How”, “why” and “why not” are key aspects of this type of report. It is clear that in the case of military coups, the Security Council’s response has been insufficient, selective and minimally effective. It has dealt with less than one quarter of the cases that have occurred since the end of the cold war, and, even when it has acted, its response has taken the form of statements of concern and calls for action from other actors rather than more forceful action. Costa Rica believes that the Council could play a more useful role by keeping a closer eye on signs of possible coups and using its platform for public diplomacy in connection with such crises. Expressing concern and putting pressure on other actors such as regional organizations could create momentum towards more concrete action. While it is unlikely that the Council will systematically and effectively respond in future, it remains an essential forum in which we States can advocate for respect for the norm against coups d’état. In this annual report, as in its predecessors, there is no mention whatsoever of the Council’s unwillingness or inability to fulfil one current mandate that is still pending fulfilment: the one arising from Article 26 of the Charter. Of all the Articles of the Charter of the United Nations, including the 32 that are directly related to the Council, Article 26 has had one characteristic over the years: it has remained a dead letter. Despite the Security Council’s obligation to address situations that pose a threat to international peace and security, it has remained silent by not exercising the powers that it is obligated to in the area of the regulation and reduction of armaments, in keeping with Article 26. That obligation has gone unmet at a time when global military spending grew for the eighth consecutive year to an all-time high of $2.24 trillion in 2022, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. Such non-compliance with Article 26 represents non-compliance with a mandate that is central to the very foundation of the Organization, and we deem that dereliction of duty. Given that the Council continues to focus on superficial results and symbolic actions, as reflected in its emphasis on the issuing of statements and resolutions that often translate into diplomatic posturing and quibbling over language instead of substantial actions, Costa Rica urges it to overcome its divisions, prioritize meaningful action over symbolism and adapt its strategies in order to effectively confront the complex challenges that humankind faces today.

Ecuador wishes to endorse the statement of the Accountability, Coherence and Transparency (ACT) group, delivered by the Permanent Representative of Portugal, with whom we had the honour of coordinating the contribution of the group on this item. In my national capacity. I would like to highlight that over the past two years, we have made significant progress in the strengthening of both the role and the authority of the General Assembly, as well as in the relationship between the General Assembly and the Security Council. That progress, driven by the process of revitalization of the General Assembly, must continue, with the aim of achieving an Organization that is more effective and modern. I also acknowledge the leadership of the President of the Assembly in that regard. Two years ago, in the debate on this same item, Ecuador announced its candidacy for a seat as an elected member of the Security Council. Last year, the meeting on this item was held together with that on Council elections. At that time, Ecuador assured members that with their valuable support, it would continue to make every effort to strengthen the relationship between the two principal organs, with the ongoing aim of overcoming the most urgent challenges facing humankind in the area of peace and security. To that end, we also offered to continue to support progress on the Security Council’s working methods and on a greater awareness of those tools that involve synergistic work with the Assembly. That is why, on 12 May, along with Portugal and with the support of United Nations Institute for Training and Research and the Office of the President of the General Assembly, we organized the first workshop on the relationship between the Security Council and the General Assembly, at which we promoted various initiatives and efforts aimed at deepening that relationship. That workshop, which we proposed as part of the revitalization of the General Assembly, was an additional opportunity to increase the awareness of delegations with regard to the annual report of the Security Council, which brings us together today. I would highlight that the report of the relevant working group, on which we have agreed and which will be adopted next week, will provide a digital repository or tool containing the most relevant recommendations of the General Assembly in the area of peace and security. I would like to stress also certain improvements in the annual report of the Security Council for the year 2022. That is the case with the inclusion of the reference to food insecurity in the introduction, as well as the reference to the Security Council Committee established pursuant to resolution 2653 (2022) concerning Haiti. I would underline also the references to the three special reports that were presented in accordance with resolution 76/262; the first reference to the use of the veto; and a reference to resolution 377 A (V), known as the “Uniting for Peace” resolution. under which it was possible to adopt resolution 2623 (2022), under which the Council called an emergency special session on Ukraine. All those elements were proposed by my delegation. We welcome the inclusion of statistics that reflect the dynamics of the work of the Security Council. We join in the general call for a more substantive, analytical and materially oriented report. We would like to stress in particular the work of the elected members and the legacy of those that served on the Council until December 2022: Norway, Mexico, India, Ireland and Kenya. Although the structure of the body of report and the way in which it is prepared are not conducive to its improvement, the introduction could and must be broader in scope. We call for a rethinking of the format of the report, and in any event, we appreciate the invaluable work of the Security Council Affairs Division. We also call for the annual report to include the monthly assessments of the Security Council. We would also request that the summary that will be circulated by the President of the Assembly include the proposals made during this debate and that they be provided to the Chair of the Informal Working Group of the Security Council on Documentation and Other Procedural Questions. Ecuador will continue to work to bring about a report that is functional and useful report within and outside of the Security Council. In conclusion, I would recall that both principal organs share the desire for a future free of the scourge of war. Such a future is possible, but in order to achieve it we must work as one single body.

I would first like to thank the President of the General Assembly for having convened this meeting. I also thank our Brazilian colleagues for coordinating the introduction of the annual report (A/77/2), the Swiss presidency for the month of May for guaranteeing its timely adoption in the Council, and the United Arab Emirates, as the President of the Council, for introducing the report today. Estonia fully aligns itself with the statement of the Accountability, Coherence and Transparency (ACT) group, made earlier. First, I commend the Council for the timely adoption of the report and call for the setting of a fixed timeline for the General Assembly discussion on the annual report, as an internal deadline has been set for the Council itself in S/2017/507. That could be linked to its adoption in the Security Council — my first preference — or it could simply be agreed that the debate would have to take place no later than 30 June. We strongly believe that that small step would enhance the transparency and predictability of the process, not to mention benefit smaller delegations in their preparations. Secondly, it is obvious that a lot of the Council’s work takes place behind closed doors, including the most pressing discussions under “Any other business”, and in the subsidiary bodies. That lack of transparency is problematic, as the wider United Nations membership is the constituent of the Council members. Estonia’s experience in the Security Council was that our efforts to move towards further transparency, either through proposals to publish the valuable reports of expert panels or the drafting of monthly assessments, were met with a certain resistance. We call upon all members of the Council, both permanent and elected, to strive for further transparency, including by properly reflecting the discussions held under “Any other business” in the annual report. Thirdly, we believe that it is crucial to include information in the report on instances in which the Council was unable to act despite a clear need and a mandate. In 2022, a permanent member of the Security Council initiated a war of aggression against its peaceful neighbour. That is only one example of the many wars taking place in the world, but the scale of that aggression is something that we have not seen since the Second World War. The report states that the Council met 46 times last year to discuss matters related to Ukraine. It is brave to admit that four draft resolutions on Ukraine were not adopted by the Council. At the same time, it is a shame that only one presidential statement as a Council product was adopted, in addition to the emergency special session resolutions. That proves once again that one Permanent Five member was able to effectively paralyse the work of the Council in the most critical instances. Another example would be the issue of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, on which numerous draft proposals were submitted but never made it any farther. The veto initiative, which recently celebrated its first anniversary, is a big step forward in that regard. However, we call upon members to refrain from abusing their veto right. In cases involving mass atrocities, including the crime of aggression, the veto should not be used at all. Fourthly, I would like to point out that only 23 States made statements in the General Assembly debate on the Council’s annual report last year (see A/76/PV.79). We encourage States to take full advantage of this opportunity, as it is both our privilege and our obligation to contribute to the enhancement of transparency and effectiveness in the work of the Council. Last but not least, as we are already approaching the end of June, I would like to express the hope that the lack of monthly assessments in 2023 means only that they will be published soon and in a thorough and analytical manner. Monthly assessments are an excellent tool for shedding light on Council dynamics, which often get watered down during the drafting of the official report. We call on all Council members to take advantage of that tool.

I thank you, Mr. President, for convening the meeting today. I also thank the Permanent Representative of the United Arab Emirates, President of the Security Council for the month of June, for introducing the Council’s report for 2022 (A/77/2) and congratulate her on a successful presidency of the Security Council this month. Thailand welcomes the report, which was adopted by the deadline of 30 May in line with presidential note S/2019/997 for the third consecutive year, enabling its timely debate and consideration by the General Assembly. We hope that practice will be continued in the future. Thailand wishes to share a few reflections on the Council’s annual report and its work during the past year. First, effective interaction between the General Assembly and Security Council is critical to an effective United Nations and multilateralism, which should be the shared aspiration of all Member States. As the Council acts on behalf of the wider membership of the United Nations, the report is not only an obligation under Articles 15 and 24 of the Charter of the United Nations but also serves to provide transparency and accountability to the General Assembly. While Thailand welcomes the record and statistics provided in the report, we believe that it should be enhanced so that the wider membership can be well informed of the substantive work of the Security Council, which is of great interest to the wider United Nations membership. In that regard, we join others in requesting a substantive and analytical report of the Council, which would allow all Member States to be kept abreast of the work of the Council and contribute to inclusive, representative and effective multilateralism. Producing such a report should not be something that stokes fears and concerns but rather should generate greater understanding and grass-roots support for the good work of the Council. We also note that the Council’s discussions under “Any other business” often serve as a venue for promptly reacting to unexpected conflict situations, emergencies and crises. At times, those meetings under “Any other business” are also a forum for substantive discussion, which should be reflected in the annual report. In addition, we trust that the report not only keeps track of the Council’s actions but also reflects cases in which the Council has been unable to act. That is because inaction can often have a debilitating effect on international peace and security. Secondly, as the report noted the return to the normal conduct of business throughout 2022, we commend the Security Council for continuing its work despite the challenges of the pandemic. That dedication and perseverance are to be commended, growing out of a sense of unity of purpose in discharging the mandate of the Council  — but that unity of purpose does not extend to all issues. Indeed, the report exhibits a worrisome trend. Out of 54 resolutions adopted last year, only two thirds were adopted unanimously, representing a drastic decrease compared to the 84 per cent of resolutions adopted unanimously in 2021. It suggests that the Council is becoming more and more divided, at a time when the international community needs to be more and more united. We therefore encourage the Council to move towards unity, reinforce the instruments of peaceful means, nurture the culture of peace, support the United Nations in addressing differences and divergence among parties to conflict, and foster trust and confidence among States. After all, the pacific settlement of disputes is one of the primary mandates of the United Nations, while the unity of the Council, the collective efforts of all Member States and a sense of responsibility for the welfare of humankind as a whole are the tripod on which rest the steady policy instruments to help generate and maintain international peace, security and stability. Thirdly, we observe that the Council has engaged more frequently on enhancing and reforming multilateralism, which will be of increasing importance to us in the coming years, as the world and our planet face both old and new challenges  — ranging from political to economic and from social to technological challenges. Thailand reaffirms its view that enhancing multilateralism must rest on a renewed commitment to the principles contained in the United Nations Charter and international law, as well as the inherent strength of global solidarity through consensus and mutual respect, based on shared trust and benefits. The principles of sovereign equality, the peaceful settlement of disputes, the non-use of force, territorial integrity, political independence and non-intervention must be universally and equally applied and respected. And the building of global consensus, based on shared values, mutual trust and convergent interests, should be the norm rather than the exception. Moreover, in the maintenance of international peace and security, the Council should better engage regional and subregional organizations and take into account their roles and contributions. Among other things, regional and subregional organizations can be guardians of the interests of those who matter most — namely, the people of the region, the first responders to emerging challenges, and trusted mediators and facilitators for the peaceful settlement of disputes. In conclusion, we certainly also hope that the Council recognizes that for peace to be sustainable, sustainable development and human security need to be promoted across the peace continuum  — from prevention and peacemaking to peacekeeping and peacebuilding. That is even more critical as we encounter security, food and energy, financial and humanitarian crises across the globe. As we seek to secure peace for the current generation, we should not lose sight of the need to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development as an investment in peace and human security for current and future generations. We should keep in our peripheral vision the Summit of the Future, to be held in 2024, as a complementary guarantor of peace, human security and sustainable development that endures across boundaries and across generations. We therefore look forward to the SDG Summit, to be held in September, to turbocharge our collective efforts towards attaining the SDGs and bringing us back on track, ensuring that no one is left behind, and to the success of the Summit of the Future to be held next year.

We thank the United Arab Emirates for introducing the report of the Security Council for 2022 (A/77/2), which is on time and in due form for the third consecutive year. We also thank Brazil for drafting the introduction. We agree with the points made on behalf of the Accountability, Coherence and Transparency group. In 2022, the year covered by the report, Mexico participated as an elected member of the Security Council. We were therefore able to witness first-hand the increase in the number and intensity of conflicts and the Council’s limitations, especially as the result of vetoes by one or more of its permanent members. Vetoes were recorded four times last year, three more than the previous year, thereby preventing the Council from taking action in urgent situations. I would say that trend is deplorable and unacceptable. Each veto leads to the failure of the international community to end or prevent conflict. Each veto prevents a timely response to a threat to international peace and security. The use of the veto must now be restricted in a responsible and united manner. The French-Mexican initiative, which already has 106 signatories, was conceived and designed with that purpose in mind. I reiterate our invitation to those who have not done so to review the initiative and — if they believe it is time to finally curb the excessive power of a few in critical situations of mass atrocities — to join it so that we can make it effective. We must also explore, with equal urgency, ways to enforce Article 27, paragraph 3, of the Charter of the United Nations in order to ensure that a party to a dispute abstains from voting. Finally, in order to strengthen the link between the Assembly and the Council, we reiterate our proposal that at the end of each calendar year, the President of the General Assembly should convene a mid-term dialogue to discuss the activities and resolutions of the Security Council — without prejudice, of course, to the annual debate on the Council’s report such as today’s debate. The General Assembly and the Security Council need more frequent, more transparent and more efficient channels of communication.

I thank you, Mr. President, for convening this important annual debate. I also thank you for the very comprehensive and detailed statement you made at the outset. I thank the President of the Security Council for the month of June, the Permanent Representative of the United Arab Emirates, Her Excellency Mrs. Lana Nusseibeh, for introducing the report of the Security Council (A/77/2) on behalf of all members of the Council. I also acknowledge the role played by Brazil, the delegation coordinating the preparation of the report. This annual debate is an important exercise in transparency and accountability. The Security Council acts on behalf of all 193 States Members of the United Nations. Article 24 of the Charter of the United Nations makes it clear that Member States confer on the Security Council the primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. That act of conferring establishes the responsibility of the Security Council to send a report to the members of the General Assembly. Furthermore, Article 15 of the Charter establishes the responsibility of the General Assembly to receive and consider the report of the Security Council, which is precisely what we are doing today in the General Assembly. The relationship established by the sending and receiving of reports, as defined by the Charter, is fundamentally an exercise in transparency and accountability. To put it differently, the members of the General Assembly have the responsibility to hold to account the members of the Security Council for their actions as well as for their inaction. Today’s debate is therefore fundamental to the functioning of both the Security Council and the General Assembly. I am heartened to see that so many delegations have asked to speak at this important annual debate. The debate today also provides all members with an opportunity to review the performance of the work of the Security Council and offer their views on how the Council could improve its work and effectiveness in discharging its responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. My remarks today should therefore not be taken as criticism of the Council or its members but rather as a constructive contribution made in the spirit of improving or attempting to improve the effective functioning of the Security Council. Before turning to the substance of the report, I would first like to say a few words on process. We welcome the fact that the Council met its commitment, as set out in presidential note S/2019/997, to adopt its report by 30 May in time for its consideration by the General Assembly immediately thereafter. However, we note that the annual debate this year is being held three weeks later than last year (see A/76/PV.79), when it was held on 9 June. We therefore call on the Security Council to adopt its annual report well before the deadline of 30 May so that the General Assembly can consider it in early June. The General Assembly will adopt its most recent draft resolution on the revitalization of the work of the General Assembly in a few weeks’ time. In that draft resolution, too, there is a paragraph that reiterates the importance of the Security Council continuing its efforts to provide its annual report to the General Assembly on time, before June. It is therefore important that the members of the Security Council take that commitment seriously. My next point concerns the Council’s monthly assessment reports. Here, I would like to draw members’ attention to paragraph 9 of the annual report of the Security Council, which states that: “Further information on the work of the Council and more detailed reports of its meetings can be found in the monthly assessments of its work.” The annual report therefore makes an explicit reference to the monthly assessment reports and asks us to refer to those assessment reports for further details. However, the unfortunate situation is that only eight members submitted their monthly reports in 2022. In other words, four monthly assessment reports are missing, namely those for the months of February, May, October and November 2022. How are we to assess the work of the Council when monthly reports are missing? How are we to obtain the details necessary if the monthly reports are incomplete? In 2021, only seven members submitted their monthly reports. In 2022, there was a slight improvement — eight members submitted their monthly reports. But what is clear is the trend of Council members not preparing or finalizing their monthly assessment reports. It is not clear to me what exactly is causing that difficulty in preparing and submitting the monthly assessment reports. We propose and would like to request that the President of the Council take up the issue with the members of the Council. We also propose and request that the President of the Council, in preparing the report for next year, address that issue explicitly in the next annual report, to be submitted in 2023. To put it bluntly, as members of the Assembly we have the right and the responsibility to ask all Council members to submit their monthly assessment report, because those reports are useful to the wider membership, especially the smaller States and smaller missions, as a way of following the work of the Council. They form an important and regular means of providing transparency and accountability to the work of the Council. We note that of the four monthly reports not submitted last year, two corresponded to months in which the Council was under the presidency of a permanent member of the Council. In other words, two permanent members did not submit their monthly assessment reports. In both those months — February and May 2022 — vetoes were cast on important issues that would have merited at least a mention in the annual report and it would have been useful to obtain the monthly assessment reports. We do not understand why the permanent members, with all the resources and personnel at their disposal, are unable to prepare and finalize their monthly reports. Let me add that in the five years since 2018, one particular permanent member of the Council has consistently not submitted its monthly reports. I find it deeply disappointing that some permanent members do not show any sense of responsibility with regard to submitting those reports. Let me take this opportunity to note that during today’s very important annual debate, which is held once a year and is important for all the members of the Assembly as an exercise in accountability and transparency, not all the delegations of the permanent members are even present in the Hall. I think it is a sign of deep disrespect towards members of the Assembly that when the annual report of the Council is being discussed, they do not even find it fitting to grace us with their permanent presence. Let me therefore say that permanent members should not take their privilege for granted. I urge all Council members — permanent and elected members alike — to submit their monthly reports in a timely fashion before the end of the calendar year. With regard to the monthly assessment reports, let me also echo the view expressed by the Permanent Representative of Norway, who noted earlier that the monthly assessment reports need not be adopted by consensus. They can be taken as representing the views of the President of the Council for that month and therefore we do not see how and why it would be difficult to prepare them. We would also like to underline the need to have all the monthly assessment reports submitted on time, and we would like to see all of them being prepared and finalized when we consider the report next year. I have belaboured this point because it is one that my delegation has raised consistently year after year, but we have not seen significant progress being made. There is therefore a structural problem or perhaps even a political problem that we need to address, and I call on the President of the Security Council to address that issue with seriousness and urgency and not to treat it as a box-ticking exercise, as stated by the President of the General Assembly in his opening remarks this morning. Turning to the substance of the report, let me start by commending the Council for its key achievements in 2022. Notably, the Council adopted the important resolution 2664 (2022), which created humanitarian carve-outs for sanctions. Given the current backdrop of global food insecurity and rising prices, those carve-outs are essential for ensuring that ordinary people are not affected by sanctions measures. I also want to commend Albania for its work as the current Chair of the Informal Working Group of the Security Council on Documentation and Other Procedural Questions, in particular for examining how the Council might better engage with non-Council members and other bodies of the United Nations. In that regard, there has been some progress and some good work done, and I want to acknowledge that as well. The Informal Working Group contributes to improving the transparency and accountability of the Council under the chairpersonship of Albania. I also want to commend Japan, as the previous Chair of the Informal Working Group and its current Vice-Chair, for its efforts to develop a web-based interactive handbook of the Council’s working methods. I note that the launch of that product is being held today and will be co-hosted by the Chairs of the Informal Working Group, both past and present, and I wish to thank all of them for the work that they have done over the years to bridge the gap between the Council and other Member States. I hope that the future Chairs of the Informal Working Group will continue the good work done in that regard. For several years now, Member States asked the Council to produce a more analytical report that goes beyond a mere description of the number of meetings and the number of decisions adopted. Many other speakers before me also echoed the same point. In my view, the annual report has once again failed to produce any assessment or analysis, and therefore the Council has once again failed to live up to the expectations of the members of the Assembly. It is therefore important that we here in the Assembly provide that assessment and analysis, because it is missing and is probably not going to be forthcoming from the Council. In particular, I would like to share some of my own thoughts and assessments as a contribution to today’s debate. I want to address the issue of Council disunity. It is a reality that the Council has been increasingly unable to find consensus, particularly on issues of concern for the maintenance of peace and security. And the best example of Council disunity is on the issue of Ukraine. On 27 February 2022, the Council adopted resolution 2623 (2022), which called for an emergency special session of the General Assembly under the “Uniting for peace” procedure. It was the first time a resolution had been adopted that way in the previous 40 years. That was a significant development that should have been acknowledged in the report, at least in a factual manner. Alas, it was absent. In addition, the very fact that the Council has been unable to adopt a single resolution on the invasion of Ukraine is a significant example of Council disunity. Yet we find no assessment in the annual report of the situation and the geopolitical dynamics that led to paralysis within the Council, in particular on the issue of Ukraine. If we analyse the use of the veto in 2022, we can again see the same trend of increasing Council disunity. In 2021, there was only one veto. However, the Council considered four draft resolutions that were vetoed last year. Several of the vetoes cast last year were on issues that concerned the international peace and security of Member States around the world, including provocative launches of ballistic missiles by one Member State and the full-scale invasion of one Member State by no less than a permanent member of the Council. Another veto led to a delay in the provision of critical humanitarian aid, but we note that the annual report (A/77/2) focused on the subsequent successful adoption of Security Council resolution 2642 (2022) without mention of the fact that the mandate had been allowed to expire before a solution was found. In all those areas of critical importance, the Council in some ways failed to provide the international community with direction and solutions in line with international law and the Charter of the United Nations. Yet the annual report mentioned those vetoes only in a cursory and statistical fashion, without any analysis of what led to the Security Council’s failure to find consensus. The reality is that discussions of draft resolutions are conducted in closed meetings, which contributes to the perception of a lack of transparency surrounding the Council’s work. In that situation, the veto initiative initiated and led by Liechtenstein and several other delegations has been a life-saver and has become a very vital tool for providing greater transparency and accountability from the permanent members to the General Assembly each time a veto is cast. The lack of unity within the Council, especially among the permanent members, is of course a reflection of the deep geopolitical divide that confronts the world today. The division and polarization cannot be wished away — they are geopolitical realities and facts that we have to deal with. But I want to point out that regrettably, the permanent members are usually able to achieve unity when it comes to protecting their own privileges. Let me give you a recent example. Just last Friday, General Assembly members concluded informal negotiations on the text of a biennial draft resolution entitled “Revitalization of the work of the General Assembly”. In those negotiations, my delegation had put forward a proposal to outline and describe the process for the selection of the Secretary- General of the United Nations. It was a simple proposal that was intended to capture and summarize the existing procedures relating to the selection of the Secretary-General. Equally importantly, our proposal was intended to introduce greater transparency into the process of selecting the Secretary-General. Not surprisingly, the five permanent members blocked the proposal, ostensibly because they saw it as a threat to their privilege of making decisions behind closed doors, with no transparency and no accountability. The clear trend is that permanent members always demonstrate great unity when it comes to protecting their own privileges. My message to the five permanent members is a simple one: we would like greater unity from them, not in protecting their privileges but in protecting the interests of all Member States. I think that it is also time for the annual report to provide deeper analysis into the issue of sanctions. The current report notes that sanctions regimes remained an important tool for the Council, and that 10 sanctions regimes were renewed last year and a new one was established. However, in reporting on the renewal of those sanctions regimes, the annual report by and large failed to note the emerging patterns of abstentions on the renewal of sanctions, a trend that is worth monitoring and highlighting. If we study where the abstentions are coming from, it appears that they come from Council members from the same region as the sanctioned countries, and in their statements some Council members have explained that they do not believe sanctions to be effective in those cases and that they could even be harmful. Those are important trends that warrant an analysis or at least a factual assessment in the annual report in order to help the wider membership to understand the full context of developments in the Council with regard to sanctions. I am not making a judgment at this point on each decision pertaining to sanctions, but I am using the case of sanctions as yet another example of how selective reporting and a lack of analysis in the annual report could lead to misleading conclusions. It is very important that the introduction of the annual report provide an overview of key developments, trends and significant outcomes. In that regard, I would like to propose that the Council members drafting the annual report should consult the wider United Nations membership. We call for an interactive dialogue and discussion with the wider membership, in particular on the drafting of the introduction. Such an interactive dialogue with the wider membership will help to improve the quality of the assessment and analysis of the annual report. Let me also say that the proposal I am making is not a far-fetched one. In making the proposal, I would like to draw the attention of members of the General Assembly to paragraph 129 of the relevant note by the President of the Security Council (S/2017/507), which reads as follows: “While drafting the introduction to the report, the member of the Council preparing the introduction is encouraged to consult for reference the monthly assessments”. And the next sentence reads as follows: “it may also consider organizing, where appropriate, interactive informal exchanges of views with the wider membership”. My proposal is therefore rooted in paragraph 129 of the note by the President, which calls on the member preparing the annual report to consider organizing informal exchanges of views with the wider membership. I would therefore like to put it to Council members and the President of the Council to give serious consideration to that proposal, which emanates from paragraph 129 of the note, and to find a way of organizing an interactive exchange with the wider membership on the introduction to the annual report. I am happy that the Council recorded an increase in the number of public meetings held in 2022. That trend is good because it will allow the wider membership as well to contribute to the work of the Security Council. But at the same time, I think that the scope of discussions on emerging issues appears to have shrunk a little. At a time when the General Assembly is considering the future of the United Nations, including at the Summit of the Future, the Council needs to ensure that it maintains its relevance and credibility by discussing issues related to the maintenance of peace and security from a multidimensional perspective. For instance, discussion on the nexus between climate change and peace and security dwindled in 2022, with only one Council debate on the topic (see S/PV.9150), compared to three high-level meetings in 2021. And that is despite calls from many Member States, particularly the small States and the small island developing States, for the Council to act on this issue of climate, climate change and climate-related security issues, which affect issues of peace and security. It is encouraging that we have made an improvement since the start of 2023, with Malta organizing an event on sea level rise in February (see S/PV.9260) and the United Arab Emirates organizing an event on climate change earlier this month (see S/PV.9345). Those are relevant topics which enhance the relevance of the work of the Security Council and contribute to strengthening the multilateral system. I want to take this opportunity to thank elected members for bringing topics of relevance to the table and encouraging the Council to step out of its comfort zone by considering the traditional issues of peace and security. That brings me to my next point. I would like to stress once again the importance of analysing the role played by elected members in the Council in the annual report, because, after all, members are elected in the General Assembly in order to serve in the Security Council, and it is only fair and reasonable that we also look at the work of elected members in the Council. It seems clear to me that elected members have by and large made a positive contribution. It is elected members that have been responsible for injecting fresh ideas into the Council by drawing links between emerging issues of peace and security and other emerging issues. If we look at resolution 1325 (2000) which first put the women and peace and security agenda on the Coun­ cil’s agenda, it was an elected member — Namibia — that took the initiative. That also applies to more recent ini­ tiatives, such as those addressing climate-related secu­ rity risks. We are encouraged by the fact that elected members have contributed to increasing the relevance of the Council or at least they have contributed to push­ ing the boundaries of discussions within the Security Council. I hope that their contributions can be more systematically reflected in the annual report. At the same time, elected members are often prevented from leading on key issues owing to the infamous penholdership system in which some permanent members monopolize the penholdership on key issues. It would be useful for the annual report to provide more details on discussions on the distribution of penholdership, including a chart showing the distribution of penholdership for that year, so that we, as non-members of the Security Council, can monitor trends over time. For Singapore’s part, we would certainly like to see elected members be penholders on more issues and on key issues, in particular on issues related to their respective regions. Let me conclude by reiterating that the timely submission of the annual report of the Security Council and its consideration by the General Assembly is a critical exercise in transparency and accountability. We hope the areas where the Council did well in 2022 will become entrenched and will become regular practice. At the same time, we look forward to the Council members — both permanent and elected — continuing to push the boundaries to improve the Council’s working methods, the quality of its discussions and the quality of the annual report, because ultimately the work of the Council and its members is critical for the maintenance of peace and security on our planet.

I would like to extend my special thanks to Her Excellency Lana Nusseibeh, Permanent Representative of the United Arab Emirates and President of the Security Council for this month, for presenting the annual report of the Security Council for 2022 (A/77/2). After having heard our colleague from Singapore, I can afford to be short. The presentation of this annual report is an extremely important obligation, stipulated in Articles 15 and 24 of the Charter of the United Nations, and it is designed to ensure the Security Council’s accountability to the wider United Nations membership on whose behalf it acts. Unfortunately, the presentation of this report has become a mere ritual. The report is an unedifying enumeration of the meetings and activities of the Council. It contains no content on the substance of its deliberations and decisions. My delegation, like others, has consistently called for a comprehensive annual report that provides a substantive and analytical account of the Council’s work, highlights the existing and emerging threats to international peace and security, identifies their root causes and indicates the endeavours of the Council to settle disputes and prevent conflict. While the Council does hold public meetings and open debates, the substantive discussions and decisions take place in closed meetings. Those are not even envisaged in the Council’s provisional rules of procedure. This practice erodes transparency and accountability and negates the Charter’s requirement that the Council act on behalf of all United Nations Member States. As the Uniting for Consensus group has explained, to become more democratic, transparent, accountable and representative, the Security Council’s membership should be increased by adding 10 or 11 non-permanent members to ensure the equitable representation of the United Nations current 193 Member States and the representation of underrepresented regions and groups. Adding new permanent members would heighten the Council’s involvement in great Power politics and exacerbate the Council’s paralysis. And I think the extensive remarks made by our colleague from Singapore would attest to that assertion. The Council’s working methods also require reform, including the adoption of its rules of procedure, the record- keeping of informal consultations and the convening of closed-door meetings as the exception rather than the rule. Such changes should encompass the Council’s subsidiary bodies, including the Counter-Terrorism Committee and the Security Council Committee established pursuant to resolution 1540 (2004), and the Sanctions Committees. The Council’s counter-terrorism architecture must become more comprehensive and equitable. It should address the new and emerging terrorist threats, such as the right-wing, fascist and Hindutva-inspired terrorism, rather than limiting the scope of counter-terrorism to Muslim groups only. It is also essential to distinguish terrorism from the legitimate struggles for the right of self-determination and national liberation. Indeed, among the Security Council’s greatest failures has been its inability to secure the implementation of its own resolutions on Palestine and Jammu and Kashmir, two of the oldest items on the agenda of the Security Council, and its consistent failure to enable those peoples  — the peoples of Palestine and Jammu and Kashmir — the right to exercise self- determination and national liberation. Despite the Security Council’s unequivocal resolutions calling for a United Nations-supervised plebiscite in Jammu and Kashmir, India continues its occupation of the state through a reign of terror imposed by an occupying army of over 900,000 troops  — one soldier for every eight Kashmiri man, woman and child. The massive human rights violations that are taking place in Indian-occupied Jammu and Kashmir, when the leaders who are responsible for this near-genocide are entertained in the halls of the champions of human rights, are a blot on the conscience of humanity. India must be held accountable for its war crimes and crimes against humanity in occupied Jammu and Kashmir. The festering dispute over Jammu and Kashmir continues to pose an ever-present threat of another conflict between Pakistan and India. The Security Council’s failure to secure implementation of its own resolutions to end the Indian occupation and enable the people of Jammu and Kashmir to exercise their right to self-determination is a manifest challenge to the Council’s credibility and legitimacy.

Indonesia wishes to convey its appreciation to the President of the Security Council for the month of June, the Permanent Representative of the United Arab Emirates, for presenting the annual report of the Council (A/77/2) on behalf of its members and took note on the various issues presented therein. The report shows the delicate efforts made to manage the challenges to international peace and security, which are more dynamic than ever. As one of the major police- and troop-contributing countries, Indonesia has benefited from the regular meetings on the development of situations affecting relevant peacekeeping operations. Indonesia also welcomes the fact that the Council has been able to improve women’s representation in the role of briefers throughout the year, as we believe women’s perspectives are important towards finding sustainable and durable solutions for ending conflict. Nevertheless, we see that despite input from numerous States Members of the United Nations, the presentation of the annual report still follows the same methods as those used in previous years. The report should not be a mere compilation or a record for institutional memory, but should have an analytical component and act as an informative document to track progress and note challenges to the Council’s work. We believe improvements could be taken further, in terms of both the format and the mechanisms of the report, to enhance transparency and effective interaction with the wider membership. In this regard, we could look into the possibility for a midterm report or informal dialogue session, which could provide more substantial interaction beyond a routine annual discussion. These interactions are also important for providing a sense of accountability, especially on certain issues where the Security Council is unable to effectively implement its own resolutions or when a veto is cast. In that regard, we hope that the General Assembly resolution on the use of the veto (resolution 76/262) could serve as a tool to build more transparency and effectiveness in the work of the Security Council. The Security Council must show its constituents that it is acting consistently on all issues and not practicing double standards. Furthermore, with respect to the Security Council’s work, Indonesia reiterates the need for the Council to engage more meaningfully and effectively with regional and subregional organizations, especially in pursuing prevention measures and devising a comprehensive approach to addressing challenges to international peace and security. A reform of the Security Council, which can start with its working methods, is indeed needed to preserve and strengthen multilateralism for the betterment of all.

Chile appreciates the convening of today’s meeting to discuss the 2022 annual report of the Security Council (A/77/2) and thanks the Permanent Representative of the United Arab Emirates, President of the Security Council this month, for presenting it. Chile aligns itself with the statement delivered by the Permanent Representative of Portugal on behalf of the Accountability, Coherence and Transparency group. Like other delegations, we wish to emphasize that the members of the Security Council and the Council’s respective presidencies and facilitators have met the deadlines set so that the annual report could be discussed in the General Assembly today. There is no doubt that last year saw events that had a deep effect on international peace and security, and the world looked to the Security Council for its reaction and action. Proof of this is the sharp increase in the number of unscheduled meetings  — 85 last year, as compared to 34 in 2021. We take note of what is set forth in the introduction to the annual report, namely, that the 15 members of the Council achieved important results and put the need to cooperate before their individual interests. However, we are surprised that the unanimous adoption of draft resolutions declined from 81.4 per cent in 2021 to 66 per cent in 2022. Along those lines, only 7 presidential statements were made last year, as compared to 24 in 2021. Naturally, we recognize the achievement of greater participation of women as briefers in the Council’s various meetings. We value today’s meeting precisely because it is an opportunity to take up the many issues in the field of international peace and security that need to be resolved. In this regard, we draw attention to the situation in Haiti, a country in our region, where the Security Council has been asked to take urgent measures. But apart from adopting what was the only new sanctions regime established last year (Security Council resolution 2653 (2022), the Security Council was unable to take any further action to address the suffering of its inhabitants. In the light of the foregoing, we would have liked the annual report not only to be factual, but also to incorporate a more analytical, reflective, forward- looking, evaluative and reasoned approach to its decisions  — as well as self-criticism  — so that we would have a good source of valuable elements for making improvements to the Security Council. And this would ensure that Security Council transparency and adequate accountability to determine whether its responses are appropriate, effective and consistent. We cannot fail to raise our concern and disappointment at the use of the veto on four occasions last year by one or more of the permanent five members of the Council last year, which blocked the adoption of the proposed draft resolutions. We therefore believe the adoption of resolution 76/262, on the permanent mandate of the General Assembly to hold a debate when the right to veto is exercised in the Security Council and the Council’s responsibility to submit special reports to the Assembly in such cases, is very appropriate. We underline our position that the veto should be limited and that this prerogative of its permanent members is a special responsibility that must be fulfilled — excuse the redundancy — responsibly. Finally, we cannot fail to mention that a reform of the Security Council is necessary. Indeed, the annual report provides us with inputs to improve working methods, practices and substance. We therefore call on the Security Council to be attentive to the incorporation of concrete measures in its field at the Summit of the Future.

I would like to echo the statement of the Permanent Representative of Portugal, who took the floor on behalf of the Accountability, Coherence and Transparency group — of which we are a member — earlier this morning. We welcome the submission of the Security Council’s annual report (A/77/2), in accordance with its obligation under Article 24, paragraph 3, of the Charter of the United Nations. We thank the President for convening today’s debate in a timely fashion. As Article 24, paragraph 1 sets out, the Council carries out its duties on behalf of all of us. Today’s debate is therefore an important exercise in accountability and makes a meaningful contribution to the mutually reinforcing relationship between these two principal organs, as envisaged in the Charter. Just as the Council demonstrated accountability to the General Assembly through the submission of its annual report, we hope that the President, on our behalf, will continue the practice of sending a summary of General Assembly meetings on this agenda item to the Security Council for its consideration in response. Events in 2022 demonstrated the importance of a dynamic and complementary relationship between the Council and the Assembly — perhaps more clearly than ever. Deadlocked by the use of the veto with regard to the aggression against Ukraine, the Council — for the first time in four decades — decided to delegate the primary responsibility conferred on it for the maintenance of peace and security back to the General Assembly, who proceeded to pass five resolutions in an emergency special session format. The Ukraine file provides the latest example of a complementary relationship between our two organs. That has been illustrated in previous years, including on the Myanmar and Syria files. This complementary role of the General Assembly is essential, as the Security Council continues to struggle to take the “prompt and effective action” envisaged in Article 24 due to the lack of political cohesion, in particular among the permanent members. In Syria, we anxiously await an extension of life-saving cross-border aid, which has been cut to the bare minimum. In Myanmar, we appreciate the adoption of resolution 2669 (2022), but are concerned about its lack of implementation. We also welcome the adoption of resolution 75/287 by the General Assembly 18 months prior, particularly with respect to the prevention of the flow of arms. In other discussions, notably on the Sudan today, action by the Council seems barely commensurate with the scale of the catastrophe on the ground. On thematic issues, notably climate, the Council has been unable to take action, while the General Assembly has stepped up in declaring a healthy environment a human right in 2022 and this year in its request for an advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice. It also did so through the agreement on the text of the International legally binding instrument under United Nations Convention of Law of the Sea for the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity beyond national jurisdiction, reached during an intergovernmental conference convened by the Assembly. A defining moment for the relationship between the General Assembly and the Security Council was the adoption of the veto initiative in 2022 (resolution 76/262), which again resonated strongly in the membership in today’s debate. As a result, a permanent member or permanent members vetoing a draft Security Council resolution will no longer have the last word. Instead, the Assembly is empowered to take action within the parameters of its own considerable legal authority under the Charter. We are confident — and have already seen — that the prospect of accountability in front of the wider membership leads to more Council action and fewer vetoes cast. We commend the Council for producing special reports, in accordance with Article 24, paragraph 3, of the Charter on each of the three occasions when it has been invited to do so, under the terms of the veto initiative, and welcome that as an established practice for the future. We also encourage the Council, building on the first mention of the word “veto” in this year’s report, to organize the texts of its special reports as a separate annex in future annual reports, as was done with respect to other special reports in the past. All of these developments point to the need of a dynamic role for the Assembly on matters of maintenance of peace and security, in line with Article 11 of the United Nations Charter. Accordingly, we encourage the members of the Assembly to consider when and how products it adopts can enhance the maintenance of peace and security. That can happen through stimulating Security Council action, but also through standalone decisions in the General Assembly. The automatic convening of the Assembly under the terms of the veto initiative provides the necessary platform to that end, thus making an essential contribution to restoring the balance envisaged in the relationship between the General Assembly and the Security Council under the United Nations Charter. Other initiatives are needed to reduce the overpowering and disproportionate presence of the veto in the work of the United Nations. We welcome the ongoing discussions on the proper application of Article 27, paragraph 3, of the United Nations Charter, in particular as echoed by others this morning, and we also commend the Accountability, Coherence and Transparency group’s code of conduct, which now has 129 signatories, to all States that have not yet joined it. We will continue to prioritize advocacy for improved working methods in the Security Council. We will do so in the framework of the Accountability, Coherence and Transparency group and otherwise on issues such as co-penholdership, equitable burden- sharing and the implementation of presidential note 507, on the Council’s working methods (S/2017/507, annex), including through participation in the open debate in the Security Council later this year. We commend to everybody in this room participation in the wrap-up meetings of the Security Council, an important platform for exchange and accountability. There is a meeting taking place this afternoon, at 3 p.m. We thank this month’s presidency for convening it. We also continue to seek a high level of interactivity in those discussions. As a complement to the wrap-up, we encourage all Council Members — as other speakers did before me — to submit timely monthly assessments of their presidency. We emphasize in particular that those assessments do not, in themselves, require unanimity among Council members and therefore offer a rare and important opportunity for analysis of the work in the Council.

Malaysia joins others in congratulating Algeria, Guyana, the Republic of Korea, Sierra Leone and Slovenia on their elections as members of the Security Council for the period 2024–2025. Malaysia expresses its appreciation to the President of the General Assembly for convening this meeting to consider the report of the Security Council for 2022 (A/77/2). Malaysia also thanks the representative of the United Arab Emirates for introducing the report. Article 24, paragraph 3, of the Charter of the United Nations stipulates that the Security Council shall submit annual reports to the General Assembly. While the Security Council has been consistent in fulfilling that responsibility, we regret to note that the submission of the annual report has become a ritual exercise over the years, providing a mere calendar of events and a compilation of the activities of the Council during the year. Our delegation expresses its disappointment that this year’s report, like previous reports, does not offer any critical assessment or incisive analysis on important issues of peace and security. The inability of the Council to reach consensus on long-standing conflicts is a reflection of the deep geopolitical division within the Council. Malaysia expresses its regret that despite being deliberated at the Council on a monthly basis, the question of Palestine remains in a deadlock, with no concrete action taken by the Council. Malaysia believes that such a failure to act needs to be incorporated in the annual report, with clear explanations of positions. It is further concerning to learn that only 8 of the 12 presidencies submitted their assessments for 2022. In that connection, we continue to call on all Council members to make their monthly assessments available to the broader United Nations membership in a timely manner. While noting the challenges posed by the unanimity requirement, we continue to encourage Council members to pursue innovative approaches in presenting their presidency assessments. On a positive note, Malaysia commends the monthly presidency briefings and the increasing number of open debates and Arria formula meetings. We acknowledge the gender parity in briefings at the Council. Similarly, Malaysia encourages other efforts by the President of the General Assembly and other Member States with a view to improving the working relationship between the General Assembly and the Security Council. We appreciate the consistent engagement between the President of the General Assembly and the rotating Council Presidents. We welcome the convening of the General Assembly’s first formal debate on the use of the veto (see A/77/PV.68 and A/77/PV.69). The workshop on the relationship between the General Assembly and the Security Council, which was organized by the United Nations Institute for Training and Research, Ecuador and Portugal, should also continue to be supported. Let me conclude by stressing that at a time when the ability of the Security Council to protect the world’s peace and security is being scrutinized, it is vital for that organ to strive to ensure accountability, transparency and coherence with the larger membership of the United Nations.

First of all, I would like to thank the President of the Security Council for introducing its annual report (A/77/2). Austria fully aligns itself with the statement made on behalf of the Accountability, Coherence and Transparency Group, and I would like to make the following points in my national capacity. First, we welcome the fact that the report on the Security Council’s activities in 2022 has been adopted in a timely manner for the third year in a row, followed by today’s debate in the General Assembly. That enables a timely discussion of the report. It also demonstrates that both those principal United Nations organs acknowledge the importance of engaging at eye level. That is very positive and crucial for a fruitful cooperation. In that regard, I would also like to highlight the small improvements achieved by the adoption of resolution 75/325 on the revitalization of the work of the General Assembly, including the setting of a deadline for holding this debate. Secondly, as my Ambassador, Mr. Marschik, had the honour of being a co-Chair of the intergovernmental negotiations on Security Council reform at the current session of the General Assembly, let me also underline that during the negotiations held earlier this year, many Member States clearly underscored the importance of the Council’s annual report, which is one of the key elements of collaboration between the two organs and  — even more crucially  — the central tool for transparency and accountability vis-à-vis us, the wider membership. And many Member States rightly expressed the need for further improvements of that tool in the future. For example, a more complete, substantive and analytical account of the Security Council’s work, including further details on the draft resolutions that it failed to adopt, would be crucial for the General Assembly to be able to better grasp the processes within the Security Council. But let me highlight that including such reflections may also be valuable to the members of the Security Council themselves, as it would allow them to better evaluate their work ex post. Thirdly, in the light of the many crises that challenge us around the world, especially in Africa, the Middle East and Ukraine, it remains deplorable that owing to both the politicization of debates and the misuse of the veto, the Security Council cannot react to some crises with the clarity that would be necessary — or as in the case of Ukraine, does not act at all. As already addressed on many occasions before, yet still not stressed enough, that stalemate is unacceptable. Consequently, we welcome, among other things, that the report clearly states that four draft resolutions related to that act of aggression by the Russian Federation were not adopted by the Council. In that regard, we would like to reiterate once again our call for the full implementation of Article 27, paragraph 3, of the Charter of the United Nations. We would also like to encourage the Security Council to include in future reports a chapter on vetoes cast during the reporting period. Fourthly, concerning the working methods of the Security Council, let me briefly touch on the monthly wrap-in and wrap-up sessions. Austria would like to highlight that we commend each and every presidency for holding those meetings. We regularly participate in those interactive sessions to get an even deeper understanding of the Security Council’s deliberations and to share our ideas on different files. We encourage all Member States to leverage that opportunity in order to create a rich discourse between the wider membership and the Security Council. Even though that tool may still be improved, we firmly believe that those meetings are vital for further increasing transparency and enhancing the Security Council’s legitimacy through open and frank dialogue with the wider membership. It is of the utmost importance that those countries that have been tasked to act on behalf of all of us enjoy the trust of the wider membership. And let me be clear — engaging with each other on an equal footing is the basis for such a relationship. As a candidate for the Security Council for the period 2027–2028, Austria is already committed to that principle. Our commitment to today’s format further underlines the significance we attribute to direct and open exchange with all members of the Organization.

Slovenia welcomes the submission of the Security Council’s annual report (A/77/2) and the convening of this important debate, which in our opinion contributes significantly to the accountability, transparency and coherence of the work of the Security Council. We remain committed to those noble goals, including through our membership of the Accountability, Coherence and Transparency Group. We align ourselves with the statement delivered by the representative of Portugal on behalf of the Accountability, Coherence and Transparency Group, and we would like to add some remarks in our national capacity. We join others in welcoming the timely adoption of this year’s report and the inclusion of various disaggregated data, including on the participation of women. We are impressed by the significant increase in the number of women briefers, which is also a result of the innovative women and peace and security pledging initiative launched in 2021 by the presidency trio of Ireland, Kenya and Mexico. We would also like to emphasize the important focus that the Security Council paid to key thematic issues in 2022, including the protection of civilians, conflict prevention and sustaining peace, children and armed conflict, as well as cooperation with regional organizations. At the same time, it is important to also continue tackling the drivers of conflict in a broader sense. That can be done by focusing discussions on horizontal topics as well, such as the link between climate change and security or food security, or by mainstreaming such issues across individual country situations. Both approaches are important and should be pursued more ambitiously. We commend the five outgoing Security Council members for the letter sent at the end of 2022 on the challenges and lessons learned during the coronavirus disease pandemic, and especially for their concrete recommendations, including with respect to the consideration of virtual meetings as formal meetings, applying provisional rules to virtual meetings and using real-time voting. Significant room for improvement in the proceedings of the Council remains, especially when it comes to greater transparency. Different online tools, such as an interactive and regularly updated programme of work, would be a step in the right direction. While I have alluded to some of the more difficult topics, let me stress the importance that we attribute to the spirit of compromise. Despite the dramatic drop in the number of resolutions adopted by consensus, we take note of the fact that almost 90 per cent of the votes taken on resolutions in 2022 were concluded positively. We hope that fact demonstrates that a certain level of trust remains in multilateralism and multilateral approaches. Slovenia will join the Security Council as a non-permanent member in January 2024. As we already pledged during our campaign, we are committed to doing our part in efforts to improve the Council’s working methods. That will be done in close collaboration with other delegations.

We are grateful that this meeting is dedicated specifically to the annual report of the Security Council for 2022 (A/77/2), thereby enabling us to focus fully on the important and  — as the President of the General Assembly said earlier — complementary institutional link between that organ and the General Assembly. In 2022, having just been elected to the Security Council, we expressed our gratitude to all members for the trust placed in us. Today, it is with humility that we take the measure of that responsibility, as reflected in the work of our predecessors in 2022 through this annual report. We would like to thank the United Arab Emirates for introducing the report and Brazil for drafting its introduction. Our thanks also go to all the members of the Council and the Secretariat for their work. In that regard, we would like to reiterate the importance of the Council’s transparency, inclusiveness and accountability, which are at the heart of the Accountability, Coherence and Transparency (ACT) Group. For the past 10 years, the group has been committed to taking a more analytical approach to the Council’s report, as we attribute considerable importance to it, particularly in terms of accountability. We therefore associate ourselves with the statement made by the representative of Portugal on behalf of the ACT Group, and I would like to make three additional points. First, the 200 pages of the annual report only imperfectly convey the impact of the year’s major political upheavals, such as Russia’s aggression against Ukraine and the escalation of violence in a large number of countries. Those events are reflected in the twofold increase in the number of meetings organized at the request of Council members. We deplore the use of the veto on four occasions in 2022 and the ensuing deadlocks in the cases of Ukraine and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. The General Assembly took action each time, whether as part of the emergency special session at which it adopted its own resolution on Ukraine (resolution ES-11/1) or at newly convened sessions in the other contexts. We welcome the fact that in the case of Syria, the Council was able to adopt resolution 2642 (2022) on renewing the mandate for cross-border aid on its second attempt in July 2022. This year, we are again working hard on a renewal of the mandate, based on the humanitarian imperative, in order to ensure that aid reaches the populations in need. Secondly, the Council’s work has  — despite the major disagreements and difficulties mentioned — also resulted in some progress. Security Council resolution 2653 (2022), which targeted criminal gangs in Haiti, created the first sanctions regime in five years, which must now be applied to protect the civilian population. The pioneering resolution 2664 (2022) created a permanent humanitarian exemption to the application of United Nations sanctions regimes, which represents an important step in the evolution of its sanctions system. It is now up to all Member States to implement that resolution in order to facilitate the delivery of humanitarian aid to all those in need. In resolution 2669 (2022) on Myanmar, the Council — for the first time in its history — condemned the violence and called for dialogue, the maintenance of democratic institutions and respect for human rights. However, beyond that important signal, more effective action is still urgently needed. Thirdly, I would like to focus on the Council’s working methods. For years, we have been calling for improvements. Over the past six months, we have been able to assess their importance directly. In 2022, the Council returned to a post-pandemic mode of operation. It should demonstrate greater transparency, for example by regularly agreeing on providing information to the press following closed consultations, as we managed to do with respect to the Sudan on 23 June. Then, if the Council is struggling to find adequate responses to the many simultaneous crises and conflicts, it is time to consider a more holistic, long-term approach. Without resorting to a revision of the Charter of the United Nations, the New Agenda for Peace and closer collaboration with the Peacebuilding Commission both offer opportunities to improve the Council’s work. We must seize them. A good opportunity for all members of the General Assembly to push for improved working methods in one of the most important areas for prevention is offered by the code of conduct proposed by the ACT Group and currently supported by two thirds of the Assembly. By committing not to vote against a draft resolution aimed at preventing genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes, effective Council action can be encouraged. We call on all those who have not yet subscribed to the code to do so. Switzerland is aware of its responsibility towards all members of the Assembly. We are committed to ensuring that the work of the Council respects international law, in particular international humanitarian law and international human rights law. We are committed to ensuring a more inclusive participation, particularly of women, and accountability, notably in the application of sanctions. We hope we can count on the support of the members of the Assembly.

Let me thank the President of the General Assembly for convening today’s important meeting. I also thank the United Arab Emirates, as President of the Security Council in June, for introducing its report for 2022 (A/77/2), as well as Brazil for coordinating the drafting of its introduction. Today’s debate provides an occasion to reflect on the current situation in the Security Council. We find it important to join this annual debate and underline that the workings of the Security Council are vital to the United Nations system. However, public opinion worldwide finds it difficult to understand why the Security Council is too often unable to fulfil its primary mandate of maintaining global peace and security. That has been especially visible since 24 February 2022, when a permanent member of the Security Council, the Russian Federation, blatantly violated the Charter of the United Nations and launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. The apparent weakness of the mechanisms established to protect peace and security deepens the doubt with regard to the meaning of multilateralism, which has increased in recent years. However, with regard to that challenge, we are of the view that the reinforcement of the United Nations system is the answer. We need predictability and clearly defined guidelines. The United Nations Charter, which ensures equality among all States and nations, must remain our fundamental reference point. We must strive to build the broadest possible coalition of countries aligned with those values. It is imperative to support the enhancement of multilateral diplomacy, including the improvement of the Security Council’s operations to make it more efficient, transparent, representative and accountable. While the Security Council has not been able to take appropriate action in the face of the terrible atrocities of the ongoing war, we need to underline the role played by the General Assembly. The adoption of six resolutions (resolutions ES-11/1, ES-11/2, ES- 11/3, ES-11/4, ES-11/5 and ES-11/6) condemning Russia’s aggression against Ukraine serves as a clear indication that United Nations Member States do not condone that war and are genuinely concerned about its multifaceted consequences. Poland believes that in situations requiring swift and decisive action, the abuse of veto power by the permanent members of the Security Council is particularly detrimental. In that regard, we especially welcome the veto initiative, and we believe that it should be reflected in the content of the report. That initiative contributed to the strengthening of the role of the General Assembly and increasing the transparency of the decision-making process. We firmly believe that a close link between the two organs should be fostered in order to enhance the overall effectiveness of the United Nations system. We need additional actions and initiatives aimed at improving the functioning of the Council, which must adapt to the evolving nature of the global security landscape. Its geographical representation should be increased and efforts to improve its working methods reinforced. In that context, that could include ensuring earlier Security Council elections and providing incoming members of the Council with more time to observe the proceedings. We believe that all Council members, including the elected members, should have the possibility of engaging in the drafting process. Consequently, we call for further adjustments to facilitate a more equitable distribution of penholdership responsibility. We are also convinced that the elected members can play a pivotal role in the Council’s decision-making process. With their active engagement, the organ gains in legitimacy. Therefore, we continuously advocate for strengthening the position of the 10 elected members of the Council. Moreover, we commend Council presidencies for enabling the in-person participation of non-Council Member States in relevant meetings. The active involvement of non-Council United Nations Member States not only reinforces the legitimacy of the Council but also safeguards the fundamental principles of multilateralism. We also recognize the value of Arria formula meetings and propose including information about them in future annual reports. With regret, we note the regular attempts by Russia to exploit the Security Council, both as a platform for disinformation and deliberate propaganda and also to tire the international community of addressing its aggression against Ukraine. Russia’s war against Ukraine, which is a stark example of blatant disregard for the United Nations Charter, should remain high on the Security Council’s agenda, as should broad topics such as the targeting of civilians and civilian infrastructure, food security, nuclear safety, cybersecurity, the women and peace and security agenda, environmental deterioration and man-made disasters. The recent cases of the destruction of the Dnieper dam in Nova Kakhovka and the instrumentalization of nuclear safety, as exemplified by Russian threats surrounding the Zaporizhzhya nuclear power plant, serve as unfortunate and deplorable reminders of the relevance of the Security Council’s work in those fields. Even in times of crisis, we firmly believe that the Charter of the United Nations is the right guide for the future. Our commitment to multilateralism, with the United Nations at its core, should remain a shared value. The fact that in given circumstances the Council remains idle or unable to perform its duties effectively should not discourage us, as the wider membership of the United Nations, but rather should serve as an additional impetus to resolutely defend the United Nations Charter, including through active participation in the Security Council’s work and efforts to enhance its performance.

We would like to thank the President of the General Assembly for providing United Nations Member States with an opportunity to once again consider the annual report of the Security Council covering the period of 2022 (A/77/2). South Africa believes that the report as provided is in accordance with the obligation under Article 24, paragraph 3, of the Charter of the United Nations, with the understanding that the Council acts on behalf of and is accountable to the broader membership of the United Nations. It is that understanding that the General Assembly has demonstrated when electing the non-permanent members of the Security Council. Therefore, allow me to make the following key points. First, while we welcome the extensive report provided, we believe that it serves merely as a record of the activities of the Council during the reporting period. In that regard, South Africa joins others in requesting the provision of a more analytical report, which would allow for a more complete understanding of the Council’s efforts to execute its mandate for the maintenance of international peace and security. We would like to emphasize the utmost importance of the Council’s unity in fulfilling its mandate of maintaining international peace and security, and we are concerned at the declining trend of unanimous decision-making on the adoption of Council resolutions. Secondly, South Africa remains concerned that during the reporting period, the Council was not able to make progress on important and long-standing matters such as the question of Palestine, which illustrates the failure of the Security Council to act decisively during the recent Palestinian crises and provides a further reason for urgent reform. South Africa believes firmly that the United Nations must reflect contemporary realities in order to ensure that it is equipped to address all challenges to international peace and security. Therefore, we believe that genuine text-based negotiations on Security Council reform should commence, as that is the only way to achieve the commitments made in the 2005 World Summit Outcome almost 18 years ago. Thirdly, South Africa believes that the elected members of the Council can have a more vital role to play, as demonstrated in the dynamism shown in addressing fundamental issues related to the maintenance of international peace and security, such as the women and peace and security agenda. The elected members have also made strides in the codification and clarification of the working methods of the Council, marking tangible gains in increasing the effectiveness, transparency and accountability of the Security Council. Fourthly, South Africa notes that Africa continues to occupy an important place in the work of the Council, accounting for the largest share of all country- specific meetings. We believe that the Council’s efforts should reinforce close cooperation with the African Union, such as through annual consultations between the members of the Security Council and the members of the Peace and Security Council of the African Union, as per the presidential statement adopted during South Africa’s presidency of the Council in December 2020 (S/PRST/2020/11) and subsequent decisions in that regard. Finally, at the conclusion of the consultations of the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Revitalization of the Work of the General Assembly on its biannual draft resolution, we welcome all the efforts to emphasize the role and responsibility of the General Assembly, in particular the recognition of the functions, powers and roles of the General Assembly related to matters of maintaining international peace and security, consistent with the United Nations Charter. We must, however, promote more immediate and effective action in accordance with the Council’s mandate and make reforming the Council our top priority to allow for it to respond to the needs of a changing world by being more representative and accountable.

First of all, we thank the presidency of the United Arab Emirates for introducing the report of the Security Council for 2022 (A/77/2), and we commend Brazil for its work in coordinating its preparation. As we see in the report, 2022 was marked by many crises and conflicts around the world that required immediate action from the Council. However, we note with regret that the Council was divided and unable to respond, thereby failing to fulfil its mandate to maintain international peace and security, with devastating consequences and untold human suffering. In 2022, the number of those who died in armed conflict increased by 96 per cent, reaching the alarming number of more than 200,000. The presentation and consideration of the annual report of the Security Council is a responsibility under the Charter of the United Nations. Today’s discussion is critical, because it allows the entire membership to take stock of the work the Council is doing on its behalf. It also gives us an opportunity to hold the Council accountable for its actions  — and more importantly, for the times it fails to act. We are pleased that the members of the Security Council have once again submitted the annual report in a timely manner. That is a positive step towards improving the transparency and accountability of the Council. We hope that practice will continue in order to ensure greater predictability and therefore a more thorough consideration of the report by the General Assembly. Although the Security Council report preserves institutional memory, its content is largely factual, which has turned its preparation and consideration into a mere ritual exercise. Therefore, we want to encourage Council members to review that practice. It would be helpful if the report provided a more analytical account of the Council’s work, including additional details on the draft resolutions that were not adopted, the reasons for their rejection and the use of the veto — which sadly was used four times in the reporting period. It would also be useful to have information on the main deliberations of the Council during its closed sessions, as that would provide more transparency and efficiency. In addition, the report should analyse the status of each conflict and the impact of the Council’s actions, while evaluating the implementation of its resolutions and compliance with them. The report should provide an assessment of the Council’s performance in fulfilling its mandate, while highlighting issues that put international peace and security at risk and that could not be addressed because the veto was used. On the other hand and as highlighted on other occasions, there has been a surprising increase in the consideration by the Security Council of issues that are not always related to the maintenance of international peace and security. We support the strengthening of the relationship between the Assembly and the Council on matters related to the maintenance of international peace and security, and we highlight as a positive step in that direction the adoption of General Assembly resolution 76/262, which gives a permanent mandate for the Assembly to hold a debate each time a veto is issued in the Council. For millions of people around the world, the Security Council is the face and the embodiment of the United Nations. Its success or failure in fulfilling its mandate is considered the success or failure of the United Nations. In that sense, it is crucial that its efforts be efficient and effective and in line with the purposes of the Charter. For my delegation, transparency is one of the central principles that should guide the Council’s activities. For that reason, we highlight that in 2022, successive presidencies maintained the practice of holding briefing sessions for the entire membership at the beginning and at the end of their terms. By the same token, we also encourage Council presidencies to carry out their monthly evaluations. In conclusion, my delegation reiterates its commitment to achieve Security Council reform, with the aim of establishing a more accountable, more democratic, more transparent, more inclusive and more representative organ.

I thank the President of the General Assembly for ensuring the timely holding of this debate. Let me also thank the United Arab Emirates presidency of the Security Council, as well as Switzerland and Brazil, for their contributions to the very detailed report of the Security Council for 2022 (A/77/2). Today’s topic is an important one. The Security Council’s reporting obligation towards the General Assembly is enshrined in Article 24, paragraph 3, of the Charter of the United Nations. Why is such a technical point a part of the most important document of the United Nations? The answer is clear — it is about accountability. It is pivotal that the Security Council and its members, whether elected by the General Assembly or entrusted with a permanent membership, be accountable towards the General Assembly. The report reflects very well that the Security Council took important decisions in 2022, such as adopting resolution 2664 (2022) on the humanitarian carve-out, resolution 2653 (2022) on the new sanctions regime for Haiti, and resolution 2669 (2022) — the first ever — on Myanmar. Even though the Council continues to be divided on far too many pressing issues, it has retained the basic ability to act. However, much trust has been lost in the Council’s work in recent years. Its credibility has been shattered first and foremost because of the misuse of the veto by one of its permanent members, the Russian Federation. Unfortunately, some decisive pieces of information are missing from the report, for example on the use of the veto or the voting behaviour of Council members. Moreover, the lack of infographics and tables does not help to make the report more palatable. In that regard, I would like to commend the monthly presidencies for compiling separate monthly assessments and the United Nations Secretariat for providing some very helpful and user-friendly statistics on the highlights of Security Council practice and the Council’s work at the beginning of each year. We therefore encourage the Security Council to include more substantive information in its next annual report, to make the report more analytical and to present it in a more user-friendly way. However, brushing up the annual report must not be seen as a stand-alone exercise. Germany has been very outspoken about the need to open the Council’s windows to the outside world as widely as possible, for example by inviting speakers from civil society, webcasting the majority of discussions and improving access to its documents and decision-making procedures. Further steps in that direction need to be undertaken. We all know that the reputation and credibility of the Council and the entire United Nations are at stake. An institution tasked with safeguarding peace and security in the world should not be perceived as opaque or even as trying to deprive the global public of relevant information. Otherwise, trust in its work will further wane. Germany stands ready to work on the Council’s transparency as part of our wider endeavours aimed at reinvigorating the United Nations with a reformed, transparent and fully accountable Security Council at its heart.

I thank the President of the General Assembly for giving Member States the opportunity to discuss the annual report of the Security Council for 2022 (A/77/2). I also thank the Permanent Representative of the United Arab Emirates, Council President for the month of June, for introducing the report. The General Assembly’s consideration of the Security Council’s annual report holds significant importance, as it fosters transparency in the work of the Council, thereby enhancing the credibility of its decisions. That practice also serves as a practical means to enhance accountability for the Council and its members. The primary responsibility of the Security Council, as dictated by the Charter of the United Nations, is to maintain international peace and security. Over the past decades, the Security Council has indeed been key to numerous achievements in that regard. Many of its decisions and interventions have contributed to preventing regional conflicts from escalating into global crises, brokering ceasefires and facilitating peace agreements. The Council has also been at the forefront of peacekeeping operations across the globe through authorizing the deployment of United Nations missions, protecting civilians and assisting political processes. Moreover, the Council plays an essential role in addressing non-traditional security threats, such as terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. It must be acknowledged that in the face of multiple challenges in 2022, the Security Council continued to exhibit commendable resolve. With 54 resolutions, 7 presidential statements and 64 press statements adopted, the Council succeeded in reaching agreements on important matters, ranging from thematic issues to regional affairs and the timely renewal of peacekeeping and special political missions. Council members also agreed on important new initiatives, such as the humanitarian mechanism established by resolution 2664 (2022). In that respect, I would like to emphasize the contribution of non-permanent members in particular, which is invaluable to the functioning of the Council. The elected members add diversity within the Council by bringing regional perspectives and insights into the decision-making process, ensuring that a broad range of interests and issues are considered and addressed. They also serve as a bridge between the permanent members and the wider United Nations membership. I believe that their contributions should be better reflected in the annual reports of the Security Council. On the other hand, it is worth noting that the Security Council did not succeed in finding or agreeing upon effective solutions to various long-standing or emerging conflicts and hotspots in different regions and failed to prevent the return of violence in some parts of the world. Several profiles on the Council’s agenda suffered setbacks in 2022, while some others remained largely undernoticed and underdiscussed. To contribute to further enhancing the effectiveness of the Council in the future, I would like to make the following proposals. First, international law and the United Nations Charter should continue to guide all actions of the Security Council and its members. Secondly, greater solidarity and unity among the members of the Council is essential to improving its effectiveness, especially on matters vital to global peace and security. Thirdly, we urge the Security Council to pay more attention to emerging issues, especially non-traditional security challenges, including climate change and its impact on peace and security. Fourthly, we call for a more inclusive and transparent approach to the Security Council’s working methods. The Council should strengthen consultations with relevant organizations and countries, in particular those related to the Council’s agenda and those contributing military and police personnel to United Nations peacekeeping missions. Fifthly, the ongoing challenges and imbalances also highlight the urgent need for reform within the Security Council. Viet Nam therefore consistently supports a comprehensive reform of the Council’s membership and working methods.

My delegation would like to thank the President of the General Assembly for convening today’s debate on the report of the Security Council (A/77/2) on the progress of its work in 2022. We wish to also thank the United Arab Emirates for introducing the report and Brazil for its coordination. While appreciating the progress made on enhancing transparency and consultation with non-members and noting the issues contained in the report, my delegation would like to echo some viewpoints that have already been raised by previous speakers. First, in addition to the summary of the Council’s activities and actions, we would like to see the Council’s annual report formulated into a more analytical and substantive progress report that highlights its achievements, challenges, recommendations, solutions, up-to-date assessments and ways forward on important issues. Secondly, given the fragile state of the world, with intensifying threats to international peace and security and fast-changing situations, it is crucial for the Council to explore ways to further enhance its mandates, accountability and transparency. In that light, my delegation appeals to the Council members to work together in good faith to address major concerns and avoid the dead-end situation of veto casting. Thirdly, we would like the Council to consider increasing the number of open meetings, which allows more opportunities for all Member States to share their views and propose solutions to the complex issues that affect us all. My delegation believes that it is the duty of all United Nations Member States to ensure that United Nations organs, in particular the Security Council, are a true global commons serving the common good. In conclusion, my delegation hopes that the Council can put more emphasis on issues relating to the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals, while working to enhance efforts to prevent conflicts and addressing risks to international peace and security.

We have heard the last speaker on this agenda item for this meeting. We will hear the remaining speakers this afternoon at 3 p.m. in this Hall. The details of the programme will be announced in The Journal of the United Nations. The Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 27.