Global Policy Forum

It is not without some trepidation that I appear before you today to speak on the question of the reform and restructuring of the Security Council--or as it is more specifically stated by Resolution 48/26--on "the question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council." These issues are still under active discussion by member states of the United Nations and, consequently, it would be inappropriate for me, as President of the General Assembly and as Chairman of the Working Group which has been mandated to address the subject, to comment publicly in any great detail on our ongoing examination.

Notwithstanding these inhibitions--which I am sure you will appreciate, I believe I can usefully provide you with some information which will satisfy your interest in the topic and provide a basis for its further consideration at your session this afternoon.

As you are undoubtedly aware, the Open-ended Working Group to which I have referred was established by General Assembly resolution 48/26 which was adopted without a vote on 3 December 1993 "to consider all aspects of the question of increase in the membership of the Security Council and other matters related to the Security Council." This is obviously a wide mandate, allowing for treatment of all aspects of the Council's work.

In chairing the Working Group, I am assisted by two Vice- Chairmen--Ambassador Wilhelm Breitenstein of Finland and Ambassador Chew Tai Soo of Singapore--both of whom are known and respected for their diplomatic skills. Together we work to ensure that the mandate of Res. 48/26 is scrupulously discharged.

A brief world may serve to explain how the Working Group decided to approach its discussions. In the early part of the year I held a number of consultations with Representative Groups on how the program of work could best be structured. It quickly became clear that there was general agreement on the principle of the interlinkage of issues relating to both the question of the increase of the Council and other matters. The challenge was how to structure discussions to allow for this interlinkage without assigning priority to one issue, over and above other equally important areas.

A format was finally devised which I think has worked very well. Issues were divided into six clusters as follows:

A total of 12 meetings was assigned for a first round of discussion under these rubrics. The Working Group completed its deliberations on the last cluster on the seventeenth of May. Despite the press of other duties, conflicting meetings, preparatory committees and even major conferences, delegations have accorded this item great importance. Participation in the Group's work has been constantly at a high level. I am very gratified and I must admit even slightly astonished, at the progress we have made in identifying areas of convergence as well as pinpointing fairly accurately those areas on which considerably more discussion will be needed.

Indeed, as I have said to my two Vice-Chairmen in jest, overall contributions have been so precise--so targeted--that it might be possible to feed them into a computer and generate a broad picture of what a model Security Council might look like. Obviously, however, the task is not as simple as that and much work needs to be done to reconcile the many variables which have emerged.

The initial consideration of the first cluster of issues-- those relating to the question of equitable representation and increase in the membership of the Security Council--has revealed broad agreement that the present size and composition of that body is not representative of the membership of the UN as it stands today and do not adequately take into account the changes which have taken place in the international community since 1945. It appears further agreed that the overall number of seats must be increased to achieve more balanced representation. This "ideal" number seems to oscillate somewhere in the twenties and will be settled, I imagine, after more concentrated discussion. The argument has been advanced that while there may be no direct correlation between size and efficiency, this latter criterion must be kept in mind as we seek to define the future membership of the Council.

We are therefore not into a "numbers game" pure and simple. Into the pot have been thrown various suggestions regarding categories of membership, criteria for selection and equally important, attendant rights, privileges and obligations. Underlying and clearly linked to this aspect of the discussion are questions related to decision-making, such as the use or non-use of the veto. Needless to say, these matters, some of which are fairly new and novel, will require close attention and I would therefore not wish to allude to them further in this presentation. Suffice it to say that they represent imaginative ways of configuring the council to make it more suited to the circumstances of the post Cold War era.

Under the rubric of "Other Matters," the Working Group has begun to evaluate such issues as the relationship of the Council with the General Assembly, other bodies and organizations and reform by the Council of its own working methods and procedures. This is being done with an eye to enhancing both the effectiveness and transparency of the Council's work. Since some of these proposals have already been translated into operation, I do not think I will be accused of telling tales out of school by citing a few.

These include:

These measures, many of which have been undertaken by the Council itself, constitute a first step in the direction of securing greater credibility for the organ's role in maintaining international peace and security. They will of course be tested for their utility and as appropriate may be later institutionalized. This should be an easy process since by and large they do not require any amendments of the Charter. On the other hand, the more fundamental questions dealing with the size and composition of the Council may fall within the ambit of Articles 108 and 109 and since all issues are interlinked, it remains to be seen how each will be dealt with.

Having made in this first round a rapid tour d'horizon of all issues relevant to the structure and functioning of the Security Council, we will now proceed to the second stage. The next round will be divided into two broad areas identified in 48/26--that is, the issues of increase of the Council and other matters related to the Council. The two areas will be discussed alternately, so that at each of its meetings the Working Group will discuss either how to achieve the increase or alternatively how to make the Council more efficient and effective. It is my intention to see now if the Working Group can further explore how to narrow its differences on many of the issues. To assist this process, I have, with the assistance of my Vice-Chairmen, identified a number of questions which I hope will help delegations focus on these issues which need to be resolved. For instance, on the question of the increase of the Council, a possible range of 20 to 25 has been identified. I am not unhopeful that perhaps we could narrow that down further. It is probably too optimistic, however, to think we can settle the question of the allocation of seats within that range at this stage of our deliberations. Nonetheless, I am determined to explore the outer limits of agreement as far as possible.

Let me now turn--albeit briefly--to a matter which I know is of concern to you all, namely, the participation of non- governmental organizations in the process. As I have already pointed out, the mandate of Res. 48/26 is specifically addressed to member states and as such the Working Group's deliberations are closed to the public. This is not to say, however, that there is not a contribution to be made by those NGO's which have a direct interest and are actively engaged in the discussion of a reform and restructuring of the Security Council. For this reason, at the very outset of the Working Group's deliberations, I sought to ascertain the kind of role which you might play. It was agreed, if I rightly recall, that NGO's such as yourselves could make written submissions for due consideration by the group. I would invite you so to do. And, as our task progresses and with the consent of members, it may be possible to arrange a special forum at which your views may be heard by the Group. This is a matter--I reiterate--on which the Working Group will have to decide.

Clearly, the issues of the reform and restructuring of the Security Council is important and requires all the enlightened thinking that we can bring to bear on it. I myself am not so naive as to believe that the task can be rapidly completed. Nevertheless, I am encouraged by the political will shown in this first round of discussion to state that a more democratic and efficient Council is even now within our grasp. We have made a good beginning. We must now strive to ensure that the process remains on track and is brought to a successful conclusion as expeditiously as possible. As the Secretary-General is reported to have said, a reformed and restructured Council could be a welcome gift to the Organization as it celebrates in 1995 the 50th Anniversary of its founding.