Points at the informal plenary on the
Intergovernmental Negotiations on the
Security Council reform, 7 April 2009
- We acknowledge overall agreement
of MS on enlargement of the Security Council since nobody opposes it.
- We are open to new and creative
ideas on the size of the enlarged SC. Any abstract number should not be an
obstacle to our negotiations.
- My delegation views that with
necessary flexibility we could reconcile our divergent views on today’s
subject of negotiations. The flexibility and middle ground need to take
into account many factors, including the followings.
- Since the proposed figures most
commonly range between 20-26 we need to balance between limited
expansion and considerable enlargement.
- We need to understand underlying
interests of those who advocate low 20s and high 20s. Advocates
for high number emphasize improving legitimacy and representativeness of
the SC, while proponents for limited expansion stress effectiveness and
efficiency of the SC.
- The heads of state and
governments directed us in 2005 from the World Summit to reform the SC in
order to make it more broadly representative and efficient.
- A number of issues and concerns
(criteria: representation, effectiveness, contribution and etc.) have
been outlined in determining the size of an expanded SC.
- Mongolia prefers the size of the enlarged
SC to be at the range of 24-25.
- The size at 24-25 improves
the ratio of the membership of the SC against the general
membership of the UN. In 1945 the ratio was 1:5 and today it went down to
1:13. Expanded SC with 24 would bring back the ratio to the level of 1965,
which was 1:8. Preferably, in accordance with the original ratio the
number of the SC would have been 38 (1:5 -> 192:5=38.4). But it is
perfectly understood that such a high number will risk efficiency and
effectiveness of the Council.
- Setting the ratio at 1:8 will reconcile
concerns of MS that advocate efficiency and agility of SC as well
as those MS that worry about remedy of the underrepresentation of
developing countries in the SC.
- The ratio at 1:8 is feasible.
It was maintained in 1965 and could be repeated.
- On the question of the working methods we do sense
again convergence of the views. Our common interest, whether it
is inside or outside of the SC, lies in improving the working methods of
the SC in order to “make it more broadly representative, efficient and
transparent and thus to further enhance its effectiveness and the
legitimacy and implementation of its decisions.”
- We recognize that in past years, many informal
improvements have been made to the transparency and accountability
of the Security Council’s deliberative and decision-making procedures as
well as addressing concerns of participation of non-Council members, including
troop contributors. Role and contribution of non-permanent
members have been significant. We particularly commend work done
by Japan as a chair of Council’s Informal Working Group on Working Methods
- Unfortunately, the above incremental improvements have
been mainly ad hoc and not fully formalized. We believe that the sheer
fact that the rules of procedure of the SC remain provisional makes
obscurity and lack of transparency inherent in the Council’s work. At some
point, it may be advisable for the SC to formalize its provisional rules
- As the workload increased rapidly, nowadays the SC,
which for decades met only infrequently and mainly in public, became
virtually continuously in session with many consultations in the form of “informal,”
“Arria-formula” or “expert meetings.” These kind of private and closed
consultations maybe productive but they lead to less visibility of the SC
work and further raise problems of openness and transparency. (For
example, non-Council members are not permitted to participate in “informal
consultations of the Security Council as a whole.”)
- Mongolia’s stance on the question on the table is
that we need to further democratize the working method of the SC through
increased transparency and openness of the Council’s work.
- We support the S-5 proposal as a good start to enhancing
the accountability, transparency and inclusiveness of the Council work
with a view to further enhancing its legitimacy and effectiveness. We look
forward that the S5 will further elaborate in their proposal the subject
of improving access of non-Council members into the work of the SC.
- Better access of non-Council members to the work of
the Council is of essential importance. Because it touches interests of
over 90% at the current structure of the SC and nearly 80% of membership
of the UN in case of the SC expansion. We welcome efforts of past and
current non-permanent members of SC in improving access of non-Council
members through various means including information-sharing, consultation
and cooperation. We would also like to commend the innovative efforts by
the Permanent Mission of Vietnam last year in interacting with non-members
before finalizing the report of the SC to the GA. We hope that briefing by
Vietnam and Japan on the SC work in the Asian Group earlier this year
would be continued.
- Mongolia being one of the fifty largest
troop-contributing Member States
to peacekeeping operations, attaches particular importance in further
improving opportunity and participation of TCC (troop contributing
countries) in relevant decision-making of the SC at an early stage. Because
any decision affects issue of life and death of our military personnel we
urge the SC to improve its working method in this regard and move beyond
merely ritual involvement and commit to more interactiveness with TCC.
- We understand that members of the SC are
increasingly overloaded with wide ranging issues of the international
peace and security and they want efficiency and effectiveness in their
work. Thus, we strongly believe that if we could make the SC’s working
method more democratic, transparent and open it would be beneficial to all
and especially members of the SC.