General Assembly Session 61 meeting 75

Mr. Towpik (Poland)

I believe that this debate on reform of the Security Council is taking place in new and more favourable circumstances. Let me stress the following points in particular.

First, our efforts in reforming the United Nations have led to important results. The establishment of the Human Rights Council and the Peacebuilding Commission and the changes made in the Economic and Social Council all prove that progress is feasible, even on complex and sensitive issues. It is clearly an encouraging sign as concerns efforts related to Security Council reform.

Secondly, our thinking on Security Council reform has become deeper and, I would say, more mature. Several drafts of a solution have been presented. Their advantages and disadvantages have been extensively considered. The discussions have become more comprehensive. We have been debating not only the expansion of the membership of the working methods. Such changes are intended, inter alia, to expand the involvement of non-members and regional organizations in the work of the Council and to increase the transparency of its work and enhance its effectiveness.

Thirdly, during the previous session of the General Assembly we had good, rich and useful exchanges of views on this issue, in the framework of both the Open-ended Working Group on the question of Security Council reform and in the General Assembly. In particular, we noted with satisfaction the broad scope of the discussion and its constructive spirit, which dominated the July debate in the General Assembly.

The debate also seemed to indicate that the various proposals that had been previously put forward were not necessarily mutually incompatible. Those who presented drafts were encouraged to enter into consultations among themselves.

Fourthly, both during the July debate and in later declarations, a new approach to the problem emerged. It was suggested that, given both the complexity of the problem and the urgent need for progress, we could also explore the idea of intermediate or transitional steps which could gradually lead us to a resolution of the problem.

Thus in recent years we have seen a proliferation of various initiatives on the question of Security Council reform. Today, the dominant feeling seems rather to be the need to bring together those initiatives and to try to find a solution that may be acceptable to the majority of the Members of the United Nations.

In that spirit, I would like to offer a few comments relating to how my delegation sees the purpose of this debate and its possible follow-up.

First, we see this debate as the resumption of a dialogue on a difficult but unavoidable and important part of United Nations reform. At the beginning of the debate, the President of the Assembly stressed that "we should be prepared to look at this matter with fresh and open minds" (see A/61/PV.72). And, indeed, we hope that the debate will be resumed with goodwill and with the determination to find an acceptable solution.

We also believe that the reform of the Security Council should cover both its composition and its working methods. The two processes -- Security Council expansion and the improvement and development of its methods of work -- even if they are dealt with on separate tracks, are mutually complementary. Each can facilitate the finding of a solution for the other and help move forward the reform of the Security Council as a whole.

The changes in the methods of work of the Security Council should lead to closer cooperation on the part of the members of the Security Council with non-members and regional organizations, to greater transparency in its activities, and, in the end, to greater accountability on the part of Security Council members.

We welcomed the July results of the Security Council's Informal Working Group on Documentation and Other Procedural Questions (see S/2006/507). We also noted with appreciation the work and the draft of the so-called group of five small nations - the "Small Five" (S-5). Their ideas and proposals undoubtedly inspired the discussions in the Security Council Working Group and remain an important guideline for further endeavours in this direction.

When approaching the problem of the two categories of membership of the Council, we should first of all base ourselves on the philosophy underlying the provisions of the Charter relating to the Security Council. That philosophy, which is still valid, is that the presence in the Council of the major world actors and contributors to the United Nations and their cooperation are not only desirable but necessary if the Council is to discharge its responsibilities effectively.

At the same time, we believe that the membership of the Council should better reflect the broader membership of the whole United Nations and that it should represent all regions. This relates to both the effectiveness and the legitimacy of the Security Council. In this process of adjustment of the membership, no regional group should be a loser. This applies in particular to the Eastern European Group, whose membership has doubled in recent years.

The idea of reviewing -- after a defined period of time -- solutions that can be agreed upon now has already found a broad level of approval. The commitment to such a review will ensure that we do not create a kind of eternal structure. To the contrary, we envisage possible changes of circumstances and the possible adaptation of today's decisions to unpredictable future developments. The non-extension of the veto power to new members of the Council would guarantee that we do not create new obstacles on the way to such adaptation.

Allow me to conclude with the following observations. We strongly believe that, while dealing with an old problem, we are at a new and more promising stage of the debate. We have not yet overcome all of our difficulties, but a kind of middle ground in our thinking about the problem is gradually expanding, and new ideas have emerged which require our careful consideration. All of this allows us to take a step forward. The only question I have is, "After this discussion, what then?"

I believe that we should not lose the momentum that we have gained in this debate. Thus, it would be helpful if the President of the Assembly would encourage and organize further informal and limited discussion on this issue and request the Co-Chairmen of the Working Group on Security Council reform to undertake such consultations and, as promptly as possible, report back to the General Assembly.

Mr. Salgueiro (Portugal)

I would like first and foremost to thank the President for having convened this joint debate and for her words of encouragement regarding Security Council reform expressed at the beginning of our deliberations. I also wish to thank the Permanent Representative of Qatar, the current President of the Security Council, Ambassador Nassir Abdulaziz Al-Nasser, for his introduction of the report of the Security Council for the period 1 August 2005 to 31 July 2006 (A/61/2).

I will focus my statement on the two agenda items that are before us today. Under the report of the Security Council, I would like to highlight the issue of Timor-Leste. During the period covered by the report, Timor-Leste experienced a serious deterioration in its political and security situation. The international community reacted promptly, acknowledging that its sustained support was paramount to ensuring that Timor-Leste would continue to progress on the path of the consolidation of its sovereign institutions.

Portugal, along with other partners and with the support of the Security Council, responded to the request for emergency assistance in the security field formulated by the Timorese authorities. At the same time, the Secretary-General and the Security Council undertook a comprehensive assessment of the situation on the ground and a review of the international approach to Timor-Leste. This process led to a strengthened engagement by the United Nations, through the adoption of Security Council resolution 1704 (2006) and the establishment of the United Nations Mission Integrated Mission in Timor-Leste (UNMIT).

Major tasks lie ahead in the fields of national reconciliation and dialogue, security sector reform, economic recovery and institution-building in key areas such as justice, rule of law and human rights. Priority attention must also be paid to the preparation of the forthcoming 2007 elections.

Portugal will continue to lend its full support and contribution to United Nations efforts. We welcome the recent appointment of Mr. Atul Khare as the new Special Representative of the Secretary-General and we look forward to the full deployment of UNMIT and to sustained support from the United Nations to Timor-Leste. Also, and as the major bilateral donor to Timor-Leste, Portugal will continue to pursue its cherished partnership with this young but promising country.

Allow me now to say a few words on Security Council reform. I would like to begin by commending the work and efforts of the two Vice-Chairpersons of the Open-ended Working Group on the Question of Equitable Representation on and Increase in the Membership of the Security Council and Other Matters Related to the Security Council, Ambassador Paulette Bethel of the Bahamas and Ambassador Frank Majoor of the Netherlands.

Since the 2005 World Summit, several important measures and decisions have been adopted in the reform process for our Organization. Much has been done, but one major issue remains to be addressed, namely, Security Council reform. We must not lose sight of the mandate entrusted to us by our leaders in September 2005 when they agreed to "support early reform of the Security Council -- an essential element of our overall effort to reform the United Nations" (resolution 60/1, para. 153).

Although momentum on this issue is not at its greatest, statements by delegations yesterday and today prove that belief in the need for Security Council reform is shared by almost all Members of this Assembly. And just last week, the Secretary-General urged us, once again, not to delay action on Security Council reform. This demonstrates that maintaining the status quo is not an option that would serve this Organization and that the more the reform process advances the more a sense of lack of accomplishment regarding Security Council reform becomes apparent.

The Portuguese positions on Security Council reform are on record and were reiterated before this Assembly in the debate that took place in July. At this stage, I would just like to recall one point, namely, that according to Article 24 of the Charter of the United Nations, the Security Council acts on behalf of the Organization's Members.

There are a number of consequences that derive from this assertion. As for membership, I would stress that the legitimate aspirations for accession to the Security Council by medium-sized and small countries, which comprise the vast majority of the United Nations membership, must be taken into account. Therefore, we remain wary of proposals that would make it almost impossible for medium-sized and small countries to serve in the Security Council.

We believe that, at this stage, we should reflect on how to proceed and move the issue forward. We need to engage on a path that would set the conditions for substantial progress during the current session of the General Assembly. As we all know, the task is difficult, but difficulty must not be an excuse to postpone issues that are vital for the credibility and efficiency of the Organization.

Portugal continues to believe that transparent and inclusive negotiations based on principles, values and criteria are susceptible to making Security Council reform a reality. Strong political input and commitment by our leaders, incentives by the President of the Assembly and support from the Secretary-General would significantly raise the chances of a successful outcome. Portugal stands ready to contribute to such a process.

Mr. Chem (Cambodia)

A problem occurred in a Python script. Here is the sequence of function calls leading up to the error, in the order they occurred.

<type 'exceptions.UnicodeEncodeError'>: 'ascii' codec can't encode character u'\xed' in position 824: ordinal not in range(128)
      args = ('ascii', u'\n\t<p id="pg004-bk01-pa01">I would like to expres...mprehensive, transparent and balanced manner.</p>', 824, 825, 'ordinal not in range(128)')
      encoding = 'ascii'
      end = 825
      message = ''
      object = u'\n\t<p id="pg004-bk01-pa01">I would like to expres...mprehensive, transparent and balanced manner.</p>'
      reason = 'ordinal not in range(128)'
      start = 824