1. Ukraine is convinced that the outcome of the work of the Open-ended Working Group is of great importance to the future of the United Nations. A revitalized and reformed United Nations is impossible without a more representative and open Council will enable it to function in a more transparent and democratic manner. Delays in resolving this matter impair the United Nations ability to respond adequately to the challenges of the times and do nothing to enhance the Organization's prestige. The lack of tangible progress in the work of the Group also has an adverse effect on the negotiations on all other aspects of the Organization's future activities. The work of the General Assembly working groups on the financial situation of the Organization, on the strengthening of the role of the Organization, on an agenda for peace and on an agenda for development has for all intents and purposes been blocked.
2. The reform of the Security Council should be carried out in strict observance of the purposes and principles and other basic provisions of the Charter of the United Nations.
3. At present, in the opinion of Ukraine, there is a real opportunity to reach an agreement in principle on a number of matters that have been under consideration by the Open-ended Working Group since its establishment. The reaching of an agreement will have extremely important political and practical consequences for the work of our Group. First and foremost, such an agreement would signify that, in their work, delegations had progressed from the stage of explanation of their positions to the stage of practical negotiations.
4. The Open-ended Working Group's two previous reports reflected the agreement by all States Members of the United Nations that the membership of the Security Council must be increased. Unfortunately, it was not possible to reach an agreement on the parameters and configuration of such an increase. At the same time, there was a significant convergence of views among delegations in the Working Group regarding the future size of the Security Council. An absolute majority of delegations were in favor of expanding the Council to 23 to 25 members.
5. In this regard, Ukraine considers that, at the current stage, the Working Group could recommend that the General Assembly consider the question of increasing the membership of the Security Council to 25 members, which would provide a framework for future negotiations in the working Group. Such a decision would not predetermine the outcome of negotiations on whether or not the number of Council members in both categories—permanent and non-permanent—should be increased and, if so, in what proportion.
6. Ukraine believes that consideration should first be given to increasing the number of seats of the non-permanent members of the Security council, bearing in mind the principle of equitable geographical distribution as set forth in Article 23, paragraph 1, of the Charter.
7. While it is not in principle opposed to an increase in the number of permanent members of the Security Council, Ukraine considers that the number of Council members in this category could be increased by including those States that make an exceptional contribution to the work of the United Nations and the implementation of the Organization's functions, in accordance with universally recognized criteria. In this regard, Ukraine supports the desire of Germany and Japan to become permanent members of the Security Council, while retaining the principle of equitable geographical representation of States in the Council as a whole.
8. Ukraine considers that, if 2 additional seats for permanent members of the Security Council are created, the number of non-permanent members should be increased by 8, which would make a total of 18 non-permanent members. The additional seats for non-permanent members could be distributed as follows:
¨ four (4) seats for Asian and African countries;
¨ two (2) seats for the regional group of Latin American and Caribbean countries;
¨ one (1) seat for the regional group of Western European and other countries;
¨ one (1) seat for the regional group of East European countries.
Thus, the Ukrainian proposal may be expressed by the formula "2 + 8".
9. Ukraine believes that the creation of eight non-permanent seats, each of which would rotate among three or four States (for a total of 24 to 32 States) would enable countries that make a substantial contribution to United Nations peace-keeping activities and the financing of the Organization, and countries that represent the majority of the world's population, to assume greater responsibility in the implementation of the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations. Of course, the precise criteria and the mechanism for selecting these 24 to 32 States must be agreed by Member States and adopted by the General Assembly. On the whole, Ukraine's conceptual approach to this question is similar to the approaches adopted in the Open-ended Working Group by the delegations of Italy, Spain and Mexico.
10. At the same time, the States claiming the 8 new seats with more frequent rotation would not seek to occupy the 10 seats currently allocated to non-permanent members of the Security council. In our view, this would make it possible for small Member States to be elected to the Council on a more frequent basis.
11. In order to ensure that greater account is taken of the interests of small countries, Ukraine proposes that the regional groups should be given the right to determine themselves how many of the non-permanent seats in the Security Council available to the countries of a given region would be subject to the rule of more frequent rotation.
12. The implementation of Ukraine's proposal would make it possible to increase the representation of the developing countries in the security Council to 13.
13. If the current decision-making procedure is retained, the approval of a decision in an enlarged Security council would require 15 votes in favor, provided that none of the permanent members voted against that decision. With 13 votes, the developing countries would have an effective group veto, without leaving the veto as the prerogative of any one State.
14. The end of ideological rivalry between East and West and the establishment of relations of partnership among the permanent members of the Security Council makes the veto historically obsolete. Recognizing that only the permanent members of the Council themselves can abolish the veto, Ukraine believes that the international community has an ‘opportunity to limit the permanent members' use of the veto, especially by increasing the number of non-permanent members in the Council. Thus, it may be assumed that the speedy solution of the question of enlarging the Security Council will contribute to the voluntary limitation of the use of the veto by the permanent members.
15. Ukraine shares the view that the modernization of the Security Council is impossible if the only matters considered are its size and composition.
16. Ukraine is deeply convinced that the problems relating to decision-making in the Security Council, including its working methods and procedures, should not be held hostage to the main issue of enlarging the council and depend on how that issue is resolved. The issues contained in cluster II should be considered independently of the outcome of the discussion on the enlargement of the Council.
17. On the whole, Ukraine supports the measure – the implementation of which should lead to the modernization of the Security Council – contained in the working paper submitted by the delegations of Argentina and New Zealand (A/AC.247/1996/CRP.8).
18. In addition, Ukraine believes that it is necessary to consider the advisability of preparing summary records for each informal meeting of the Security Council; informing States Members of the United Nations of the holding of emergency consultations; and publishing thematic monthly reviews containing the positions of each Council member on the diverse matters considered by the Council during the month.
