Statement By Ambassador Inam ul Haque of Pakistan
Pakistani Mission to the UN
December 20, 1999
1. Discussions on the question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council and related matters are in their seventh year. It would, therefore, be useful to take stock.
2. Our deliberations over all these years have established beyond any shadow of doubt that there are myriad and deep differences among the membership on a host of issues, including the issues of permanent membership, the use of veto and the total membership of the Security Council.
3. There are many issues that I would have liked to take up today, but due to the constraints of time I will confine myself to recapitulating briefly our perceptions on only a few aspects of this complex subject.
4. Pakistan believes that the reform of the Security Council is a cardinal issue of major political and strategic significance for the international community. We are of the view that the membership of the United Nations, which works to promote democracy, participation, transparency and accountability in the world must be animated by the same principles in deciding upon the issues relating to the membership and the work of the Security Council. Our objective must be the evolution of a transparent, democratic and effective Security Council that enjoys the support and confidence of the membership of the United Nations.
5. There are a few countries which appear to believe that the only yardstick by which progress on this issue can be measured is the achievement of their ambition to become a permanent member of the Council. It is from this perspective alone that they would like to judge the outcome of this whole exercise. If they are not anointed as permanent members, then, in their view, progress has not been and cannot be made. Their desire to seek a permanent status on the Security Council is not motivated by altruistic or noble sentiments. It is an undisguised grab for power and privilege.
6. That, Mr. President, is the crux of the problem. The international community is being asked to embrace the so-called "New Realities". And on the coat-tails of these new realities ride other aspirants, who hope to slip into the permanent category of the membership of the Council through the genuflection to be made to the principle of equitable geographical distribution.
7. Countries which aspire to the permanent membership of the Security Council, perhaps believe that they are in some way superior to the vast majority of the membership of the United Nations that they must have a distinctive, different and elevated position. We would like to disabuse them of this notion. The United Nations was created on the basis of sovereign equality of states. In the new millennium, the General Assembly cannot be expected to bestow special privileges on some while denying them to the vast majority of nations.
8. Pakistan firmly believes that the expansion and reform of the Security Council must be based on the principle of the greater good of the entire membership of the United Nations and that all of us must work to eliminate the discriminatory and anti-democratic features of the Security Council instead of strengthening them.
9. We cannot accept the creation of new and additional centers of power and privilege in the Security Council to the exclusion of the overwhelming majority of the membership of the organization. In our view the concept of permanent membership is inherently discriminatory and against the principle of sovereign equality of all UN member states. We must not repeat the mistake made at the time of the establishment of the UN when the victorious allied powers secured permanent seats on the Council. The addition of more permanent members would neither make the Council more democratic or representative nor more transparent or efficient. It would make it more undemocratic, unrepresentative and unresponsive to the concerns of the vast majority.
10. To put it simply, Pakistan is against any increase in the category of permanent members. Such an increase would serve only to accommodate the interests and ambitions of a few countries, and would restrict the participation of the overwhelming majority of the members of the United Nations in the work of the Security Council. Allow me to note that it is the small and medium sized countries who constitute the overwhelming majority of the General Assembly. It is they who must be given greater representation in the decision-making processes of the Security Council and not those few, who seek pelf, prestige, privilege and power to promote their own agendas.
11. Pakistan is against the creation of a new oligarchy designed to protect and promote the interests of a small number of powerful states. It is ironic that countries which preach democratic values, equality, transparency and full participation in decision-making at the national level reverse themselves and became very vocal in defence of anti-democratic formulas, when it comes to promoting their own parochial interests at the United Nations.
12. The vast majority of the membership has expressed support for the idea that the veto should be eliminated or that at the very least, the use of veto should be limited to decisions under Chapter VII of the Charter. We share the position of the Non-Aligned Movement calling for the eventual elimination of the veto. However, any curtailment of the veto power continues to be opposed by those who enjoy or those who wish to acquire this power.
13. The issue of veto is, therefore, intrinsically linked to the reform and expansion of the Security Council. Pakistan believes that the veto power is undemocratic and archaic. It was acquired by a few member states, at the time of the framing of the Charter, when they were basking in the glory of a great victory. However, history is witness that veto has invariably been used to protect the political or strategic interests of the veto wielding powers. Permanent members have used or threatened to use the veto to block the decisions of the Security Council on innumerable occasions. Veto has never been used and by its very nature can never be used to promote a solution to problems.
14. In today's world, no country, howsoever strong or powerful, should be allowed to arrogate to itself the right to veto decisions, which it finds unpalatable. While it may not be possible to eliminate the veto, because of the provisions written into the Charter, the General Assembly, after witnessing, for more than half a century, initiatives for peace and security stifled time and again by the use of veto, cannot be expected to create additional obstacles to the effective functioning of the Security Council for the maintenance of international peace and security by adding to the number of veto wielding countries.
15. I should note that substantial progress has also been recorded over the last few years. For instance, there is general agreement on an increase in the category of non-permanent members of the Security Council. In this connection, I would like to recall the eminently reasonable position of the Non-Aligned Movement that, in the event there can be no agreement on other categories, there should be expansion only in the non-permanent membership of the Council for the time being. That, in our view, is the only viable option, which would also be in keeping with the principle of sovereign equality of all states and would meet the requirements of equitable geographical distribution.
16. An increase in the non-permanent category would help remove the major grievance of the general membership at the lack of opportunity to participate in and contribute to the work of the Council. The membership of the UN has risen enormously while the size of the Council remains frozen since 1965. I may mention that in the Asian group candidatures for non-permanent seats in the Council have already been announced upto the year 2018-19. This is reflective not merely of the desire of Member States to serve as a member of the Council. It underlines the fact that they rarely get an opportunity to do so. This desire, shared by the vast majority of countries, is being held hostage to the selfish and unfair demands of those few who are determined to push for permanent seats on the Council for themselves.
17. Consensus also largely exists on the need to make the working methods and practices of the Council transparent, democratic and participatory. There is considerable scope for making progress in this area.
18. Over the past few years we have witnessed efforts by those who were eager to win glory for themselves, to find some "quick fix" formulae for the expansion of the Security Council. These led at times to the unfortunate practice of conducting negotiations and discussions among a select few to the exclusion of a large majority of delegations. As a result we have witnessed many acrimonious exchanges. Our future consideration of the issues related to the reform and expansion of the Security Council must, therefore, continue to be based on an open and transparent discussion in the Open-ended Working Group established by the General Assembly. There can be no "quick fixes" or partial solutions to meet self-imposed or artificial deadlines. This subject is vital to all of us, collectively as well as individually.
19. We are all your friends. We are all ready to help you. We count on you to ensure that all member states participate in the process on an equal footing and that small groups meetings are not organized under the patronage of the Presidency in informal settings to evolve decisions. Such attempts have failed in the past and, if revived, are bound to fail again.
20. Pakistan will continue to engage actively in the deliberations of the Open-ended Working Group when it meets next year. We favour the holding of a general debate in the Working Group which would enable delegations, including mine, to elaborate their views at greater length on many of the issues that have not been touched upon here.
21. The task ahead of you, Mr. President, is both complex and difficult. However, we are confident that with your wisdom, tact, and diplomatic skills you would be able to steer our work clear of past pitfalls. We must move collectively towards the goal of equitable representation and increase in the membership of the Security Council, in a manner which is acceptable to and serves the interests of all member states, particularly the weak and the vulnerable countries, which form the vast majority of the membership and for whom the United Nations is the court of last appeal.
Thank you, President.
