By Maria Luiza Ribeiro Viotti
Mr. Chairman,
Thank you for yet another opportunity to state my delegation's position concerning this important issue before us.
We can certainly heed your call for us to imagine a better world. And not only to imagine it, but to implement our vision, and to move towards a higher level of concreteness.
Brazil strongly believes that multilateral organizations must be updated to reflect today's geopolitical realities. There is an ongoing movement towards change in the structures of global governance, which has already become a reality in economic and financial matters.
Such change is even more critical for the United Nations. Enlarging the Security Council to adapt it to the twenty-first century is a task long overdue. The Security Council we need must be in line with the broader composition and interests of the international community, so that it is adequately equipped to meet contemporary challenges in the maintenance of international peace and security.
New permanent and non-permanent members will make the Council more legitimate and representative, efficient and effective. In other words, better representation means greater legitimacy, and greater legitimacy increases the efficiency and effectiveness of the Council's work.
Our ultimate objective here is to negotiate and produce tangible results. We expect a concrete outcome arising from the intergovernmental negotiations, sooner rather than later, with the widest possible political support of the UN membership.
We cannot miss this momentum. By acting together, with focus and resolve, we will be able to generate genuine movement towards reform.
Mr. Chairman,
In your letter dated 16 November 2009, you envisaged a fourth round that would revolve around all the positions and proposals by Member States on the table, followed by a second exchange on areas of convergence.
As you correctly noted, Mr. Chairman, Member States have already looked at the five key issues from virtually all possible different angles.
It is our view - and I am sure that many delegations share this assessment - that after three rounds of negotiations we have a clear understanding of all the options available for a meaningful reform. It seems rather a sterile exercise to reiterate each other's positions, which at this juncture are very well known.
Any fair and impartial appraisal of positions and proposals put forward so far would lead to three major conclusions.
Firstly, the vast majority of Member States supports expansion in both categories. This comes as no surprise to us. It is a widespread recognition of the need for a truly comprehensive reform, rather than a cosmetic makeover, which would not address the core political imbalance of the Security Council.
Secondly, the so-called intermediate model lacks clarity and does not seem to give us a sense of purpose or direction.
And thirdly, negotiations cannot move forward in the absence of a negotiating text.
In this regard, Brazil would very much welcome a working paper that would lay down the options that have been put forward. Individual delegations or groups of delegations could certainly do that, as it amounts to a rather mechanical exercise. Yet, such proposals might not be considered neutral. In turn, if an options paper is introduced by you, Mr. Chairman, we would certainly avoid that risk.
I would like to join a large number of Member States that have been expressing the same idea and making similar requests for a negotiating text introduced by you. In a negotiating process, it is only natural that the facilitator be entrusted with such responsibility when he enjoys the confidence of the house, which is certainly your case.
By doing so, Mr. Chairman, we should be in a position to get down to business and begin serious negotiations on all aspects of Security Council reform.
Thank you.
