EU meeting generated a common wish but not a common position

European Union group is another regional group that gathered this week and discussed posible outcomes of last General Assembly session after two working papers about Security Council were established. They discussed their own positions and attitude of each EU country towards the ideas expressed in the content of working papers. Meeting was attended by the delegations of United Kingdom, Sweden, France, Spain and Italy, only delegation of Czech Republic and Germany were unable to attend. As expected they did not find the common position because EU member states do not have the same status in the hierarchy of Security Council and they are not members of the same interest groups.

However, they agreed that Security Council needs to be reformed since "it does not reflect the realities of the 21st century." They believe that Council should reflect better transparency, higher level of democracy and improved legitimacy in order to achieve better effectiveness to tackle actual security issues. They were unable to identify the common position, but they found lowest common denominator and expressed it in a common wish. This wish is 'improved working methods of the Security Council and expanded number of seats for states that possess the willingness to assume such a responsibility.'

They concluded a statement in a very diplomatic way as they called for closer cooperation between Security Council and General Assembly. They also expressed a hope (sincere or not) that tomorrow's session will bring concrete solutions with broad support.

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

Video Interview with the delegate of United Kingdom

Due to some technical issues were are publishing the video interview with the delegate of United Kingdom, Ms. Iva Petković with a short delay. This interview was taken at the end of the last week before the preparation of working papers. In a videoclip you can found out more about United Kingdom position towards increasing number of permanent and non-permanent seats in Security Council, reforming the veto structure, its cooperation in different working groups and finally, its expectations before thursday's session.

Luka Kavčič

Read More

USA and UK disappointed after not being included in the negotiation process on SC reform

The editorial of UN Herald received joint statement made and sent by the permanent representatives of United Kingdom and United States of America to the United Nations yesterday. Ms. Iva Petković and Ms. Urška Učakar expressed observations, praises and some complaints about the ongoing negotiation process between states' representations regarding the SC reform. In the last part of statement they shared their own position about the adoption of any potential draft resolution that might be written in these days. They made it clear that they will support only such resolutions that are predicting efficient and effective Security Council.

The delegations of UK and USA are very pleased with all the effort and time that some states are investing in finding the acceptable solution for new Security Council reform. According to UK and USA Security Council reform is a topic of great importance and is needed. Assuming that two of the current permanent members and other countries are recognizing the need for reform and are expressing will to discuss this topic, we can only expect that SC reform will move from the dead-point in which it is stuck from previous negotiations.

However, in joint statement there are some other very important ideas that UK and USA wanted to express. First is that they were disappointed about not being included in the negotiation process and construction of working papers or draft resolution. As we reported African Union and G4 are preparing working paper and also Uniting for Consensus is very active on this field. Nevertheless, according to the statement they were not approached by those countries during the negotiations. Today, we discovered that African Union group have sent the working paper to UK and USA, who had submitted their comments on it. We also found out that delegations of African Union countries have already invited UK delegate to a meeting that will take place next week. We can hope that cooperation and communication between the P5 and other states is improving.

Second idea expressed by USA and UK can be understood as a warning, because it is sending clear signal that some states should not make plans without discussing to current P5 countries. "A strategy that leaves out members of P5 is perilous, because it will be particularly hard to coordinate some opposing and diverging positions in the short space of time before the actual debate," was pointed out in the statement. UK and USA delegations go on saying that: "We will not be supporting any proposal for Security Council reform simply because it enjoys the most support in the General Assembly or is preferable to all other proposals." In their opinion, SC reform is one of the most delicate and risky project that has be dealt with a lot of patience and prudence. "Its efficiency and effectiveness must be at the forefront of all proposals," they concluded.

Luka Kavčič

Bellow you can  read whole joint statement:

Joint Statement by the Delegations of the

United States of America and

United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

The Governments of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and United States of America wish to express their joint recognition for the need to reform the Security Council, as well as their support for efforts of some State representatives in finding a viable solution.

The two Governments would however also like to express their disappointment that the coalitions developing working papers did not include UK and USA in the negotiation process that has been unfolding for the past weeks. We are very pleased the African Union States sent us their working paper, which is still in draft form and we have submitted our comments.

A strategy that leaves out members of P5 is perilous, because it will be particularly hard to coordinate some opposing and diverging positions in the short space of time before the actual debate. We hope that in the next few days, the UK and USA delegations, and other P5 delegations will not only be kept informed of the development of negotiations and working papers, but continuously consulted on any and all changes to working papers. This is particularly essential for those groups of States that have not approached us with their ideas and we have consequentially only speculated what their plans may be. We also expect State representatives to take into account our concerns and find ways of incorporating our suggestions into their proposals.

The Governments of USA and UK have come to an agreement that we will not be supporting any proposal for Security Council reform simply because it enjoys the most support in the General Assembly or is preferable to all other proposals. The reform of the Security Council, although necessary, is one of the most delicate, but also risky projects to be undertaken by the international community. Since the Security Council is the principal organ in the UN system charged with addressing threats to international peace and security, its efficiency and effectiveness must be at the forefront of all proposals. The PR teams of the two delegations have made it clear that Security Council reform is not about compromise, but inspired ideas.

Last, but not least, the two delegations would like to emphasize our commitment to the P5 statement on the veto structure. The delegation of the UK has pointed out on numerous occasions to some delegations, such as South Africa, who is one of our closest partners, that we would be willing to consider extending veto to new permanent members, if a pragmatic intermediate solution would included in the proposal, whereby a new category of seats with a longer mandate would be established and accepted as permanent seats after the completion of this intermediate period and a review process. Since it has been made clear to delegation of the UK that despite growing support for this idea in the UN over the past 3 years, it would not be incorporated into a proposal, the UK delegation will continue to support the current veto structure.   

Iva Petković

Permanent Representative of United Kingdom to the United Nations

Urška Učakar

Permanent Representative of the United States of America to the United Nations

Read More

WP on minorities submitted - The rest is up to You

We are only three days away from the day, when UN member states will determine the fate one of the most vulnerable groups of our society - ethnic minorities. Yesterday the three co-sponsors including, UK, South Africa and India, submitted the Working Paper on 'inter-ethnic issues involving minorities'. 

We are sure  that you remember previous interviews regarding this WP, where it was agreed what will be the basic orientation and essential parts of the working paper regarding the rights of minorities.  In previous week co-sponsoring states finalized the text of the WP and at this occasion shared the information with UN Herald on the latest changes of the WP. 

More precisely co-sponsors added the clause where they "condemn terrorist and extremist actions that are motivated by religious, ethnic, racial or any other hatred", besides they also asked the Human Rights Council to "extend the mandate of independent expert on minorities to also be in charge of this resolution". Moreover the will to strengthen regional cooperation stays as well and according to our co-speakers special attention in the WP is given to religious minorities. They also kept some of the most 'disputable' clauses, because as Ms. Petković said "we believe that it is a good thing to be ambitious and see how the states will respond during the debate." We were also interested whether they have introduced any clauses of 'affirmative actions', but they replied that these were not explicitly included, however the three states are encouraging the member states to propose the amendments, subject of which would be a positive discrimination. Speaking of amendments, UK mentioned the amendment regarding the pluralism of media, which in our opinion could be contentious for some states.

In order to reach more effective implementation of the minorities rights UK, South Africa and India would like to encourage the states to make more efforts in order to establish some kind of  intra-state controlling mechanisms which would pay attention on the violation of minorities rights and  on relations majority-minority.

Last but not least they have said that they are very pleasantly surprised that eleven states showed the support for the WP.

Since the delegate of India Ms. Maša Tiselj was not available for the interview today, she send us written comment on the WP: 

"India is very satisfied with the working paper, we are very glad that a clause that deplores ethnically, religiously and racially motivated acts of terrorism and extremism was added, since such acts not only produce individual casualties (which is horrifying by itself) but they also undermine good relations among diverse communities and they pose a threat to the spirit of unity and brotherhood among them. The final version of this working paper also touches another issue which we believe is important and too often neglected - the issue of (under)development and its role in escalation of inter-ethnic conflicts (we would like to thank the representative of Ethiopia who wrote a clause on it). There were also talks about inclusion of affirmative action in the working paper (India even wrote a clause on it) but at the end we (the co-sponsors) agreed that so far we will not include it since it may be too controversial for some countries. However as representatives of South Africa and United Kingdom already said, we encourage other states to propose amendments on this topic as well as on any other topics that they believe are important but missing in our working paper."

For more details watch the video below:

Read More