NEW YORK: Pakistan on Monday made a strong case for creating more non-permanent seats in a restructured UN Security Council, saying such a course would address the present regional imbalance in the 15-member body’s composition.
Speaking in the UN General Assembly’s panel on reforming the Security Council, Ambassador Maleeha Lodhi said the “best way” to accommodate the legitimate regional and political aspirations of member states was to enlarge it in the non-permanent category.
“If the Council has more elected members, its transparency, working methods and engagement with the wider membership will improve commensurately,” the Pakistani envoy said in her remarks at a meeting of the stalled Inter-governmental Negotiations (IGN) aimed at making the Security Council more representative and effective.
Additional permanent members, the Pakistani envoy cautioned, would have an opposite effect. Over the years, the so-called Group of Four — India, Brazil, Germany and Japan — has been pushing for the Council’s permanent membership, a move vigorously opposed by the Italy/Pakistan-led Uniting for Consensus (UfC) group, which seeks expansion in the non-permanent category. Pakistan also support an Italy-Columbia proposal that would create a new category of members — not permanent members — with longer duration and a possibility to get re-elected.
The Security Council is currently composed of five permanent members — Britain, France, Russia and the United States, and has 10 non-permanent members that are elected in groups of five to two-year terms on the Council.
“More permanent and unaccountable members, will diminish, not enhance, the Council’s effectiveness,” Ambassador Lodhi said.In contrast, she said more elected members were likely to enhance transparency and widen consultations, thus increasing the Council’s efficiency and legitimacy.
“The argument that new permanent members will counter the dominance of the existing permanent members is baseless,” the Pakistani envoy told the panel. Without a system of accountability, she said, virtue could easily degenerate into impiety, adding that UN member states were equal so long as they afford equal opportunity to each other.
“Additional electable seats, on the basis of periodic elections and fixed rotation, will allow equal, fair and increased opportunity to all States to aspire for the Council’s membership,” the Pakistani envoy said. It would also allow larger regions, such as Asia and Africa, to accommodate cross-regional and political groups, including the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), the Arab League, the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) and the Small Island Developing States (SIDS).
“We understand and empathize with the aspirations of regional groups who seek adequate representation…”, Ambassador Lodhi said. “A consensus based regional demand is fundamentally different from the demand for individual membership by a few whose national ambitions have in fact divided their regions and thwarted reform for so long.
She said the principle of sovereign equality of states demands equal opportunity for all States to seek Council’s membership, noting that it was the bedrock of Pakistan’s past and present ideas on Security Council reform.
Among the geographical regional groups, she noted the African Group was the only one that unanimously sought stronger representation on the Council on behalf of a geographical region so that those representing Africa will be guided by common positions, emanating from the African Union.”There are other cross-regional groups, such as the OIC and Arab league that seek adequate representation in the Council”
“It is clear that regional representation is the first and foremost victim of the flawed idea of additional permanent seats in the Council, unless the occupants of such seats are representing a region and are accountable to the Member States of that region. The African demand apparently falls in this exclusive area.”
Stressing the need for moving forward on reforming the Council, ambassador Lodhi said, “We have wasted precious years, in fact decades, on this debate. The Council can be reformed. It will be reformed —- the day the collective interest of all member states prevail over the narrow self-interest of individual countries.”
