Draft Resolution 2 enjoys the support of G4, P5 and African group

Last night we talked to permanent representative of Egypt to the United Nations, Ms. Tamara Čakić. We discussed about the meaning of meeting that took place this week between all groups that are most involved in the negotiation process regarding Security Council reform - G4, P5, Uniting for Consensus and finally African group. As Egypt is one of the co-sponsors of the Draft Resolution 2, Ms. Čakić was answering in the name of all four sponsors. Two of the sponsors are from African group (South Africa, Egypt) and two of them are from G4 group (India, Germany). According to interview, P5 countries are also more in favor of Draft Resolution 2, however Uniting for Consensus countries are still insisting on their own positions.

Yesterday there was a meeting between delegates of G4, P5, African group and Uniting for Consensus group. Have you reached any compromise as we know that you have different positions towards SC reform?

The Tuesday's meeting was a scheduled meeting of G4 and African states with the P5 members of the Security Council in order to bring closer our positions and finally adopt a resolution that will enable the members of the UN to implement the changes to the current SC membership and working methods. After discussing possible common points with the P5 members the Representative of Italy and Spain (in the name of the UfC) joined us in the final attempt to negotiate our proposals in order to gather broadest support in the GA. However, positions of the G4 and African states differ from the position of the UfC in the most essential points and that is the reason we did not succeed in forming a common draft resolution. However, we have very similar positions regarding the working methods, which is also an important perspective of the reform and we will definitely aim at furthering our cooperation in this field. The result of negotiations with the P5 group is reflected in the proposed G4-African draft resolution and the support we gained among the P5 states.

What are your expectations for tomorrow's session? Which draft resolution is most likely to pass?

We of course firmly believe that Draft Resolution 2 sponsored by South Africa, Egypt, India and Germany is the best possible way to start reforming the SC. If we would not believe in the possibility of success of our proposal there would not be any sense in discussing and representing the draft at tomorrow's GA Session. We do expect a heated debate in the GA and at the same time hope that it will prove itself to be a fruitful one too.

Did African group achieve any supporters?

African group has the support of the G4 and of course vice versa. In addition, support for the candidacy of the G4 as well as for the permanent seat for Africa was expressed by the two P5 states; UK and France. The other states that expressed interest in our proposal are named as signatories of the Draft Resolution 2. However, at the session, as well as we already did before, we will join our efforts in retaining the support of signatories as well as with arguments of our proposal convincing other states to support the Draft Resolution 2 and thus finally reforming the SC.

Luka Kavčič

Read More

UfC make a official response to the UK and USA joint statement regarding SC reform

The delegates of United Kingdom and United States of America made an official statement this sunday, where they expressed disappointment about not being included enough in the negotiation process. First group of countries that recognized themselves in this statement was G4 and African group, who made official response yesterday. Second group that was really involved in the process of creating potential draft resolution was Uniting for Consensus group, however they did not respond to the statement till last night when our editorial received their answer.

In their official response they emphasized that their intention was not to exclude other countries from process of creating working paper, but to establish and consolidate their own common position first. They explained that their fair and open intentions can be noticed since they 'immediately invited all distinguished representatives of permanent members of the Security Council to discuss our working paper, after it was accepted.'

Uniting for Consensus group explained further that they already included some of the previously discussed positions in the current working paper. "We did not strictly follow our initial positions, but adapted our new proposal to the suggestions of other states," they wanted to make it clear.

In the second part, they wanted to make sure that other delegations understand their readiness for cooperation and compromise. Since they are the only group that does not support the idea of new permanent members, they introduced a new category of long-term non-permanent members of Security Council. According to UfC this shows their clear intentions to reach a compromise.

Lastly, they wanted to express regret because some of the countries are not sharing such flexibility of positions and are not as open to negotiations as they are. However, UfC did not want to mention to any names of these countries. They share the position of P5 group that any reform should be adopted with consensus. In this light, it looks like that Security Council is still far from being accepted because some countries are not willing to modify their positions and some of them will only accept the proposals with total support in the General Assembly.

Luka Kavčič

Bellow  you can read the whole official response by UfC:

OFFICIAL RESPONSE OF THE UNITING FOR CONSENSUS GROUP TO THE US AND UK STATEMENT ON SECURITY COUNCIL REFORM NEGOTIATIONS

Uniting for Consensus group would like to respond to the statement made by the United States and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland regarding the negotiations on the Security Council reform. 

We definitely did not try to exclude permanent members of the Security Council from negotiations. Our purpose was to firstly form our official position and turn it into working paper. After our working paper was accepted, we immediately invited all distinguished representatives of permanent members of the Security Council to discuss our working paper. Furthermore, some of the positions were already previously included in the document. We have shown our flexibility again - we did not strictly follow our initial positions, but adapted our new proposal to the suggestions of other states. Our official position is well known, we are the only group that is opposing any expansion of permanent membership, and group that supports adding new non-permanent members with two-year mandate. With introduction of new category of long-term seats (five-year mandate with possibility of one immediate reelection) we wanted to make a compromise with all those states, who want to increase number of permanent seats in order to gain more influence and make the Security Council more representative. We are very disappointed that some states are not prepared to negotiate or change their positions. Last but not least, we believe a legitimate reform should be adopted with consensus. A reform, which will be adopted by less than consensus, is not an appropriate reform. Uniting for Consensus is calling for a consensus before any decision is reached on the form and size of the Security Council.

Read More

G4 and African group respond to joint statement of UK and USA

Two days ago we published joint statement made by United Kingdom and USA, that can be found here. They publicly shared a disappointment because they claimed that they were not included in the negotiation process regarding Security Council reform. We later found out and reported that there were two major working groups that were preparing working paper, Uniting for Consensus and G4+African group. Each of them have different ambitions and plans for the outcome of thursday's GA session, however only the latter commented the statement of United Kingdom and USA and recognized the importance not to ignore their position. They are completely aware that Security Council reform needs strong cooperation and broadest support possible.


G4 and African group explained that they wanted to 'coordinate and establish common position' before creating a draft working paper and talking to other delegations. It looks like that African countries are very committed to achieve greater representation in the Security Council and they are aware that only complete consensus inside the group can bring them success. G4 group is another group that knows the importance of close cooperation since India and Germany are supporting each other's ambitions for permanent seat. After the draft working paper was created, they contacted the delegates of UK and USA in order to collect standings from P5 group.

"Certain positions and suggestions were considered and incorporated even before," they continued and explained that they did not ignore the common position of P5 group. For example, in a working paper they did not include the demand to abolish a veto. They concluded the statement by recognition of accepting large cooperation while negotiating in General Assembly. It seems that they are sticking to this since their representatives were seen on the meeting with Uniting for Consensus and P5 delegates today. We will report what was the outcome of this meeting soon.

Luka Kavčič

Bellow you can read official respond to UK and USA statement:

OFFICIAL RESPONSE OF THE AFRICAN-G4 GROUP TO THE STATEMENT ON SECURITY COUNCIL REFORM NEGOTIATIONS

Group of African states and the G4 would like to respond to the statement of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America published in the UN Herald.

We would like to stress that our group decided to first coordinate and establish a common position on the Security Council reform and form it into a draft working paper. As soon as our draft document was prepared we contacted the UK and USA and sent them our document in order to hear their opinion and discuss the comments provided by respective Representatives.

Furthermore, certain positions and suggestions of the permanent member states were considered and incorporated in our proposal even before, while African and G4 states were preparing the draft on the Security Council reform, when the group of African states already made concessions and eliminated its demand for the abolition of veto.

We strongly believe that in order to retain Security Council’s accountability, efficiency and legitimacy and in order to reflect the nowadays reality of the international community, it needs to be reformed. However, such reform requires strong cooperation and the broadest support possible and this is why African and G4 states approached variety of member states and proposed a meeting with the permanent members of the Security Council.

Read More

African group has a unified position, Asia-Pacific group states will search for partners individually

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.

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

Read More

African Group and The G4 are calling for broad cooperation regarding SC reform

Yesterday, on 7th May 2013 delegates of two different groups met at the Faculty of Social Sciences in Ljubljana, Slovenia. Geopolitical regional group of African states was represented by the delegates of Nigeria, Egypt, South Africa and Ethiopia. G4 group consisting of Germany, India, Brazil and Japan that was established with the sole purpose of achieving more permanent seats in the Security Council was represented by the delegates of Germany and India.

The main goal of the meeting was to compare the expectations and ambitions of both interest groups, as well as to discuss the possible common position regarding the Security Council reform. It looks like that delegates from both groups found many similar standpoints from where they will be able to cooperate. Moreover, in there common statement they expressed the clear intention to establish 'a common position that will be reflected in a working paper.'

In fact, they stated they are really satisfied 'with the quick development and achievement of strong common position.' At same time they are calling for 'broadest cooperation possible' regarding this topic and expect that other states will share their ideas and suggestions. They are open to discuss and cooperate to everyone who share the ideas of legitimacy, transparency and inclusiveness regarding Security Council reform.

However, in the common statement African Group and The G4 countries were also very clear about not tolerating any 'destructive suggestions or actions'. It looks like that both groups are willing to talk and cooperate with everyone that does not oppose to enlarging the number of permanent seats. According to events in the history we can assume that their common position will include the preposition of five new permanent Security Council members consisting of Brazil, Germany, India, Japan and African representative.

Luka Kavčič

Bellow you can read the whole common statement made by African Group and The G4:

The representatives of the African Group (Nigeria, Egypt, South Africa, Ethiopia) and the G-4 coalition (India, Germany) met today at 11 am at the Faculty of Social Sciences to establish a common position, that will be reflected in a working paper on the reform of the Security Council.

We are happy with the quick development and achievement of strong common position. We are open to suggestions of other states and call them to share their ideas and positions so that we can reach the broadest cooperation possible. However, we would like to emphasise that we will not tolerate destructive suggestions and actions that go against our common position and endanger the whole idea of inclusiveness, legitimacy and transparency of the reform of the Security Council. 

Read More