By Maria Luiza Ribeiro Viotti
Mr. Chairman,
Thank you for your letter of 24th November and for convening this first exchange of the sixth round of intergovernamental negotiations. We must keep focused on our common goal of a successful reform of the Security Council without further delay.
Brazil supports the statement made by Permanent Representative of Jamaica on behalf of the L.69 group. We appreciate the engagement of Member States that have been actively involved in this exercise. As the G-4 Foreign Ministers made it clear in their meeting last September, in New York, we are ready to reach out to other countries and work in close cooperation with them, with a view to achieving concrete results during the current Session of the General Assembly.
The negotiating text provides a good starting point. We hope our exchanges during this sixth round will help us move forward. Delegations have on the table the latest revision of the negotiation text, including the organizational add-on with proposals, structured in bullets, to further reduce obvious overlaps in many paragraphs. As the next logic step forward, we need a more concise version of the paper. At this stage, we should seek ways to make it more operational, workable and user-friendly, perhaps with the benefit of a brief summary of the key points currently on negotiation, which could reflect the level of support of positions and proposals on the five key issues identified by the General Assembly in resolution 62/557.
Mr. Chairman,
Brazil would like to entrust you with the preparation of a short text – ideally with one page, but no more than two 2 pages – with elements that spell out the majority positions among Member States. Having this sort of summing-up document available by January would enable delegations to start real negotiations in the beginning of next year. To help you in this process, Mr. Chairman, and in support of the elements proposed by the Permanent Representative of Jamaica, allow me to make some general remarks on the possible contents of this text.
1- Categories of membership: Our debates have shown that there is overwhelming support for expansion in both the permanent and non-permanent categories. Overall, developing countries must be better represented in the two categories of membership. The so-called intermediate solution has also been mentioned by some Member States. However, this model lacks clarity as regards the content and scope of an intermediate reform. It does not seem that expansion only in the traditional non-permanent category is seen as a feasible option.
2- The question of the veto: Positions range from total abolition to extension of the veto to new permanent members. Some delegations have taken the position that new permanent members should have the same prerogatives as current members, while entertaining the possibility of a waiver on the use of the veto until further discussion during a review of the reform. Others call, inter alia, for limitations to be adopted, for instance, in the event of genocide, crimes against humanity and serious violations of international humanitarian law.
3- Regional representation: There seems to be overwhelming support to the concept that new members should be selected on the basis of criteria already enshrined in the UN Charter. It is worth recalling, for instance, contribution to the maintenance of international peace and security and to the other purposes of the Organization, and equitable geographical distribution. Besides, enlargement of the Council must address the lack of representation of African, Latin American and Caribbean countries as permanent members, as well as the need for adequate representation of Asian countries and major contributors.
4- Size of an enlarged Security Council and working methods: Proposals on size range from low to the mid-twenties. On working methods, there is a clear sense that they must be improved in order to make the Council more transparent and accountable, including by promoting enhanced access and participation of non-Council members. I believe there is no need to enumerate here, once again, all the concrete proposals that have consistently been made by Member States concerning working methods, many of them incorporated in the revised Security Council Presidential Note 507 earlier this year.
5- Relationship between the Security Council and the General Assembly: The general view is that the relationship between these two principal organs of the Organization has to be improved and each other’s distinct roles must be respected in accordance with the provisions of the Charter.
By highlighting these elements, I had no intention to be exhaustive. A fair summary of the key issues and options, prepared by you, could provide us with a more operational negotiating text to guide our endeavours.
Mr. Chairman,
A comprehensive reform of the Security Council is urgently and critically needed. I commend the leadership of the President of the General Assembly in this regard. Mr. Joseph Deiss demonstrated his personal commitment when he decided to choose global governance as the theme for the 65th Session General Debate.
There is growing commonality on how an enlarged Council should look like in the near future. Momentum is rising and we are now in a position to pave the way for early action in 2011, towards a solution that allows for meaningful reform and one that will garner the widest possible political acceptance by Member States. My delegation will continue to work with the G-4 and other like-minded countries, such as members of the L.69 group and African countries, with a view to accomplishing significant progress in our negotiations.
Thank you.
