S/PV.5335 Security Council

The Security Council will now begin its consideration of the item on its agenda. The Council is meeting in accordance with the understanding reached in its prior consultations. Members of the Council have before them documents S/2005/803 and S/2005/806, which contain the texts of two draft resolutions submitted by Denmark and the United Republic of Tanzania. It is my understanding that the Council is ready to proceed to the vote on the two draft resolutions before it. Unless I hear any objection, I shall put the two draft resolutions to the vote now, one after the other. There being no objection, it is so decided. I shall first put to the vote the draft resolution contained in document S/2005/803.

There were 15 votes in favour. The draft resolution has been adopted unanimously as resolution 1645 (2005). I shall now put to the vote the draft resolution contained in document S/2005/806.

There were 13 votes in favour, with two abstentions. The draft resolution has been adopted as resolution 1646 (2005). I shall now give the floor to those representatives wishing to speak.

Brazil firmly supports the establishment of the Peacebuilding Commission to fill the institutional gap between action to keep peace and the activities required to consolidate and sustain peace. During our two-year term in the Security Council, my delegation has consistently called attention to the need for action in the economic and social spheres in post-conflict situations to run parallel to peacekeeping efforts. We remain committed to that view. Brazil believes that resolution 1645 (2005) contains an imbalance in the interaction between the Peacebuilding Commission and the main organs of the United Nations. There can be no doubt that, in accordance with the Charter, the primary responsibility in questions pertaining to international peace and security lies with the Security Council. However, when peacebuilding activities come into play, a greater role for the Economic and Social Council should have been provided for in the resolution, especially given the reformed and active Economic and Social Council we are striving for. In our view, the Peacebuilding Commission should be able to determine its own agenda and to provide recommendations and advice to any body as it deems necessary. It must not be understood to be a subsidiary organ of the Security Council, and it should not operate as such. We understand subparagraph (e) of operative paragraph 4 to be a balancing category aimed at correcting geographical imbalances, thereby allowing for great representativeness and legitimacy. The composition of the Peacebuilding Commission should be subject to rotation, and no permanent membership should be established. Despite the concerns I have expressed, Brazil voted in favour of resolution 1645 (2005), in support of the aspirations of developing countries in post-conflict situations. They will benefit from greater coordination and from the availability of resources in peacebuilding activities. We reaffirm our commitment to the Peacebuilding Commission. Brazil abstained in the voting on resolution 1646 (2005) because it departs from the principles agreed upon concurrently by the General Assembly and the Security Council in resolution 1645 (2005), on the establishment of the Peacebuilding Commission.

My delegation was very constructive throughout the entire negotiating process on the establishment of the Commission, which we have just approved. In that connection, my delegation reiterates its support for the Commission. We trust that it will be a positive body that will be able to resolve post-conflict problems. Nevertheless, the inclusion of members of the Security Council in the composition of the Peacebuilding Commission as established in resolution 1646 (2005) was something we could not support, given that my country, Argentina, has since the establishment of the Organization defended the hallmark principle of the legal equality of States and has opposed the creation of privileges.

My delegation voted in favour of both resolutions because we believe that the Peacebuilding Commission is a necessity in the Organization and that it will play a crucial role in assisting countries emerging from conflict to restore peace and stability. With regard specifically to the second resolution adopted, 1646 (2005), my delegation voted in favour, after much hesitation. Very simply, the text put before us was hardly in line with the first resolution, 1645 (2005), especially as regards the representation of members of the Security Council in the Peacebuilding Commission.

I should like to inform members of the Council that in another place, as we would say in the United Kingdom, a decision has been taken by consensus: in the General Assembly. Having been constituted by both bodies, there is now formally a Peacebuilding Commission.

Benin voted in favour of resolution 1645 (2005), on the Peacebuilding Commission. We did so because we support that body and that resolution in both spirit and letter. However, we deem it inappropriate for the resolution to have been submitted under the current agenda item title. My delegation believes that the peacebuilding commission is designed both to prevent conflicts and to address post-conflict issues. We therefore feel that the title of this agenda item may prejudice the implementation of paragraph 12 (c) of the resolution.

I just want to note that we will be circulating an explanation of our vote as a document of the Council.

The Security Council has thus concluded the present stage of its consideration of the item on the agenda.