Intervention by H.E. Katalin Annamária Bogyay, Permanent Representative of Hungary at the Inter-governmental negotiations on the question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council and related matters, 1 June 2016.
Madam Chair,
I have the honour to present the following remarks on behalf of Poland and Hungary.
We thank you for the new document on the first two key topics. The logic and structure of the document brings us to a new level of abstraction, which provides the next step for the process.
The document also proves the power of dialogue that we used to unpack national proposals and cross-reference them with others, in order to find convergences.
We are ready to have meaningful discussions on the first two key topics, while we are waiting for receiving similar document and have similar discussions on the last three topics.
Turning to the two topics for today, we believe that the convergences that you have identified represent a strong basis for our discussions. It gives Member States ample opportunity to agree on important elements, or refine it, if need be.
We stand firmly behind the elements of convergence in the “relationship” chapter. They are complementary to the discussions on the working methods reform taking place in the Security Council.
We support the calls for coordination and cooperation with the main organs of the UN, Member States and other stakeholders. Several Member States have mentioned that clear and detailed rules on the Council’s cooperation with others should be promulgated. We wonder, whether that proposal commands consensus, so it could be reflected in the text. Such element can be included in the Working Methods subchapter of the second chapter.
Some of the recommendations have been implemented - as in the case of the cooperation between the Presidents of the Security Council and of the General Assembly on the issue of election of the new Secretary General. This is the one area where we can soon achieve meaningful progress.
Turning to the size of the Council in the second chapter, the text represents the basic convergence of ideas. We note that their implementation is closely related to the remaining more divisive key issues, not discussed today.
As a minimum, there is consensus that enlargement is timely and warranted, in a way, that reflects the political, and socio-economic changes of the last 70 years.
However, we could have ventured further, by explaining alternatives/options and explaining the consequences for the different alternatives, as far as size of the Council is considered.
For example, we note convergence in supporting enlargement in the non-permanent seats. Furthermore, there were clear ramifications with regard to size, as far as different enlargement options for permanent and intermediate categories were considered.
We are not late, as we can wait for the next document and the next debate on the three outstanding key topics, including on forms of membership.
However, that document, to be meaningful, will have to contain the different options/alternatives in a consolidated manner. As those issues remain to be debated, sticking to convergences will not carry the day.
Finally, on working methods. There is convergence that enlargement will necessarily mandate a complete overhaul of the Council’s working methods.
Already at this stage we would like to voice our support for the 60% threshold (as proposed in the elements paper) for decision making.
We also fully support the proposed elements in the second bullet point in the subchapter, but also hope that the field of convergence can be further enlarged.
We felt that better division of labor within the Council; stronger involvement of non-permanent Members; and proposals aimed at strong cooperation with the main organs of the UN, Member States and other stakeholders, including regional arrangements, also received strong support.
Finally, we appreciate that there is now a clear emergence of division of labor in the text with three hypothetical baskets emerging: One for Charter amendments; and one for recommendations that the General Assembly should make in a form of a GA resolution. The third is for the list issues that the new Council will have to decide, or work on.
We subscribe to this approach, as it gives us a better drafting basis then working in silos, along the lines of the five key elements. It is also based on the fields of authority, as set forth by the Charter, giving us the opportunity to create clear differentiation in the roles of different stakeholders and to sequence the necessary activities.
I thank you, Madam Chair!
