UN Herald editorial interviewed two permanent representatives of
different regional and working groups this weekend. Ms. Tonja Avsenik
representing the delegation of Ethiopia, which is a member of African group,
and Ms. Katarina Mulec representing the delegation of Australia, who is a part
of Asia-Pacific group, answered questions about their standing on Security
Council reform topic, improvement made on working papers and their
possible cooperation with other countries outside their traditional coalitions.
What is your
official position towards increasing of number of permanent seats, increasing
of number of non-permanent seats and reforming of veto structure?
Ms. Avsenik:
Ethiopia stands behind African common position on Security Council reform,
believing, that the reform is urgent to create a more representative,
transparent and inclusive Security Council and to overcome the current state of
underrepresentation of Africa, Asia and Latin America. African common position
advocates that Security Council needs to be enlarged in both permanent and
non-permanent category to reflect the changing world realities. In the light of
our position we believe that new permanent members should be granted the same
privileges as current permanent members, including right of
veto. Nevertheless, Ethiopia is of opinion that the use of veto
should be reserved.
Ms. Mulec: In this General Assembly, Australia will
support "compromise enlargement model". We know that there is many
different thoughts on the enlargement of the seats, but some sort of compromise
will have to be made if we really want to make a change. Australia will support
that compromise (unless it is completely against our believes for SC reform).
Of course, we would like our region to be represented more, and in this case,
we support India to get a permanent seat.
As far as veto goes, explanation of veto, when used, should be made. We also encourage the P5 not to use veto in cases of genocide, crimes against humanity and grave breaches of international law.
As far as veto goes, explanation of veto, when used, should be made. We also encourage the P5 not to use veto in cases of genocide, crimes against humanity and grave breaches of international law.
Does Ethiopia
accept any other possible outcome that is different from one expressed in
African group statements?
Ms. Avsenik: As
regards the Security Council reform, African group has a unified position,
which Ethiopia will strongly support and follow. It`s time for Africa!
Are you planning
to deepen the cooperation with African group or Asia-Pacific group or any other
group before the last session? Are you preparing any meetings or even draft
resolutions within these forums?
Ms. Avsenik: As
has already been published in The UN Herald, last Tuesday African states and G4
met to establish a common position. The common perspective of African Group and
G4 is reflected in the working paper addressing the reform of the Security
Council. The working paper is prepared, as all of the provisions have been
discussed among several states, which have shared their ideas and suggestions.
As it has been stressed in our common statement, African Group and G4 are open
for proposals in the light of reaching a broad consensus. Let’s keep the
content itself a mystery for now, however we can reveal that the final draft
will be ambitious and will include some significant changes.
Ms. Mulec: Asia-Pacific group is constantly
connected. However, countries in this GA have very different opinions when it
comes to SC reform, this is why you shouldn't expect a WP from our region. If
any other news, appropriate for general public emerges, we will, of course, let
you know. Australia is currently a non-permanent member of SC. We are content
with the fact that we have a chance now for our voice to be heard. We will
cooperate with those states, whose WP will resemble the most to our views on SC
reform.
Luka Kavčič
