UNITED NATIONS: Security Council Reform Faces New Hurdle

By Thalif Deen Reprint | | Print |

Thalif Deen

UNITED NATIONS, Oct 29 1997 (IPS) - A move by more than 20 countries to defer any vote on the proposed expansion of the Security Council has drawn loud protests from Japan and Germany, the two nations that have lobbied the hardest for inclusion as permanent Council members.

Both the Japanese and German governments contend that an attempt to drag the current expansion discussions into next year would kill the momentum generated so far to revamp the Council, the currently 15-nation executive body of the United Nations.

Both countries, which have been knocking at the Security Council door for more than three years now, want the current session of the 185-nation General Assembly to take a decision on expanding membership before the end of this year.

“The General Assembly is not in need of any new obstacles preventing it from taking a decision,” Ambassador Tono Eitel of Germany wrote in a letter submitted this week to the other U.N. member states. “It should instead be encouraged to take an early decision.”

Eitel warns that the move to stall the discussions “would do serious damage to the United Nations and its capability to reform various and vital areas of the organisation. In addition, it would reinforce the view held in some quarters that we at the United Nations shun taking decisions.”

Nevertheless, several other nations are pushing just as strongly for a delay. A draft resolution being co-sponsored by more than 20 countries at present seeks to defer any consideration of Council expansion until next year’s Assembly session because of “important differences” that continue to exist among U.N. member states.

“The Security Council reform is of such importance that it cannot be subject to any imposed time-frame, and therefore recognises the need to allow member states adequate time to reflect further on the question,” the draft text says.

One Third World diplomat, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told IPS that “if this resolution gets through, both Japan and Germany can kiss their chances goodbye — at least for the moment.”

The resolution, he argued, is an attempt to wreck the expansion process by countries that either cannot win permanent seats in a revamped Council for themselves or oppose the inclusion of some of the front-runners for such seats, he said. “If you look carefully at some of the co-sponsors, you will have the obvious answer” behind the resolution’s support, he said.

The initial 10 co-sponsors of the resolution were Canada, Egypt, Guatemala, Italy, Lebanon, Mexico, Pakistan, Qatar, Syria and Turkey.

Currently, the Council has five permanent members with veto powers — the United States, Britain, France, China and Russia — and 10 non-permanent members, which are elected for two-year terms by geographical rotation.

There has been general agreement that the Council should be expanded to include at least five new permanent members: Germany and Japan, along with one each from the developing countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America.

The discussion on the expansion — conducted over the past three years mostly through the 185-member Working Group on Security Council Reform — has been stalled in part because the developing nations have failed to agree on their candidates.

In Asia, India’s claim for a seat is being opposed by Pakistan, while Indonesia says the Asian continent should have not one, but two permanent seats. Jakarta has indicated its desire to seek a permanent seat if Asia is bestowed two new ones. In Africa, South Africa, Nigeria and Egypt are vying for a seat, while Brazil’s claims in the Latin American region are being challenged by Argentina and Mexico.

The Organisation of African Unity (OAU) already has decided to seek two permanent seats for the African continent, while Argentina is also pushing for two seats for Latin America and the Caribbean.

In their letters, both Japan and Germany have asked member states not to co-sponsor or support the deferral of Council expansion in any way. Eitel says that the countries that have already lent their names as co-sponsors “do not reflect the mainstream view among member states.” Germany has also warned that it will introduce amendments to the resolution in an attempt either to dilute it or kill it altogether.

The success of the original resolution or an amended one will depend on the extent of arm-twisting during the next few weeks. Both Japan and Germany are reaching out to governments for support against the draft resolution.

Ambassador Hisashi Owada of Japan wrote in a recent letter to other member states that he was taken “by surprise and dismay” at the draft resolution. “The submission of such a draft resolution at this juncture would create a serious setback for the genuine and sincere efforts undertaken by member states in strengthening the Security Council,” the letter says.

“This draft resolution is unbalanced, and can only do harm to the creative efforts and the spirit of cooperation shown by most of the member states,” Owada adds. He urged the other member states not to support the measure.