General Assembly Session 51 meeting 45

Mr. Kittikhoun (Laos)

First, I would like to thank the representatives of Finland and of Thailand for their outstanding efforts in organizing so well the work of the Open-ended Working Group on the reform of the Security Council. With much skill and with great integrity, they have conducted the work in a generally satisfactory manner. I wish them good luck and every success in the long and difficult task ahead.

The Lao delegation would like today to reaffirm its well-known position, which has been stated repeatedly both here in plenary meeting and in the Open-ended Working Group. We believe that there is a need to enhance the effectiveness of the Security Council by increasing its membership so as to better reflect the new global political realities and in particular -- I repeat, in particular -- to improve the representation of the developing countries. Like many other delegations, we continue to believe that the number of both permanent and non-permanent members should increase. Indeed, the Lao delegation believes that an increase in the number of permanent members, from both developed and developing countries, would strengthen the United Nations and its legitimacy because the Organization would thus better reflect the new international political configuration. An increase in the non-permanent members is no less important. Such an increase would allow more States to hold seats on and participate in the work of the Council, thus increasing its credibility.

As for the criteria for selecting new permanent and non-permanent members, my delegation takes note of the observations and proposals that have been made, and we hope that a formula acceptable to all will soon be found. We believe that -- because of their importance and their political and economic influence -- countries such as Germany, Japan and India should be become permanent members of a newly expanded Security Council.

After more than three years of lengthy, difficult discussions, we have arrived at a point where, we believe, we should assess the situation. It is important to know whether we are at an impasse. If we are not, let us continue and let us make greater efforts and work with renewed vigour towards our common goal: the strengthening of the effectiveness of the Security Council. If, on the other hand, we are at an impasse, we must have the courage to ask the following questions: What can we do? Why has this come about? And how can we work together to find a realistic solution to this problem? This is what my delegation wishes to tell the Assembly at the crucial stage of our debate. Our delegation is prepared to consider any new, realistic approach which would help to advance the work of the Open-ended Working Group.

We commend certain measures that the Security Council has already taken to improve its practices and working methods so as to make them more transparent. We are on the right path, and we should continue in this direction. However, much still remains to be done. Accordingly, we still are of the view that the Council must inform and consult non-members of the Council that are affected by its decisions. Even more important, those countries should have the right to state their positions to the Council publicly, before the Council embarks on informal consultations, and they should also be able to be present as observers in informal consultations of the whole on the item relating to them. This practice can only be beneficial, because the Council, by hearing from these countries, would understand them better and would therefore be in a better position to contribute to a solution to the conflict in question.

The question of the reform of the Council is neither simple nor easy. It is of unprecedented complexity. We are neither too optimistic nor too pessimistic. Let us work together with patience and perseverance but, in particular, with greater vigour. With collaboration and consultation among all, we very sincerely believe that we can go forward.