VZCZCXYZ0002
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUCNDT #0511/01 0742144
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
R 152144Z MAR 06
FM USMISSION USUN NEW YORK
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 8327
INFO RUEHGG/UN SECURITY COUNCIL COLLECTIVE
RUEHSW/AMEMBASSY BERN 0214
RUEHSJ/AMEMBASSY SAN JOSE 0138
RUEHAM/AMEMBASSY AMMAN 0231
RUEHGP/AMEMBASSY SINGAPORE 1888

C O N F I D E N T I A L USUN NEW YORK 000511 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
BERN ALSO FOR LIECHTENSTEIN 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/09/2011 
TAGS: PREL KUNR UNSC UNGA
SUBJECT: UNSC WORKING METHODS: "SWISS-FIVE" PROPOSAL STILL 
ALIVE 
 
REF: 2005 USUN 2433 
 
Classified By: Ambassador Jackie Sanders for reasons 1.4 b,d. 
 
¶1. (C) Summary.  Switzerland has begun the process of 
re-circulating a revised draft of its proposed General 
Assembly resolution on Security Council working methods, 
which was originally shared with member states last fall 
(reftel).  The Swiss have told the French that they and their 
four co-drafters will share the text widely by the end of 
March and seek action in the General Assembly before 
September.  We remain fundamentally opposed to the concept of 
a GA resolution on this issue, as an attempt to alter the 
relationship between principal bodies of the UN contrary to 
the language of the Charter.  The new text is only slightly 
changed from the previous version, and not in a good way. 
End Summary. 
 
S5 text to be circulated in March? 
---------------------------------- 
 
¶2. (C) The French have shared with the P5 the latest version 
of the proposed "Swiss-Five" General Assembly resolution on 
Security Council working methods.  (USUN has emailed the text 
to IO/UNP.)  According to the French, the Swiss passed the 
text in Paris and noted interest in circulating it among UN 
member states before the end of March, once negotiations on 
the Human Rights Council have been completed.  The timing is 
also tied to the beginning of the latest session of the Open 
Ended Working Group (OEWG) on UNSC Reform (expected in 
March).  Supporters of the draft do not want discussion of 
Council working methods limited to the OEWG, which operates 
on the basis of consensus.  It is not clear if the Swiss 
intend to formally table the draft resolution at this time, 
but they indicated to the French that they and the co-authors 
(Costa Rica, Singapore, Liechtenstein, and Jordan) would seek 
GA action before the end of the 60th Session (in September). 
 
¶3. (C) Our position has not changed.  We believe the draft 
resolution reflects an inappropriate view of the relationship 
between two principal bodies of the United Nations.  Per 
Article 30 of the UN Charter, the Security Council "shall 
adopt its own rules of procedure."  Among the P5, the 
Russians share our views, and have been unwilling to 
negotiate the substance of the draft recommendations with the 
authors.  The French and UK are less categorical and have 
indicated a willingness to engage in a discussion on the 
specific recommendations.  The French told us they do not yet 
have an official position, but have a particular problem with 
the draft's language related to the use of the veto and the 
call for the Council to "report" on its implementation of the 
recommendations to the GA.  The Chinese position remains 
ambiguous. 
 
Changes only make a bad text worse 
---------------------------------- 
 
¶4. (C) We maintain that any discussion of the specific 
recommendations in the text will only serve to legitimize an 
effort that has no basis in the Charter.  The new text 
reflects minor changes to the version circulated to member 
states in November.  The changes only make a bad text worse. 
The new draft: 
 
-- Includes a new preambular paragraph 3 that selectively 
references Article 10 of the Charter to imply unlimited 
ability for the GA to examine issues and make recommendations 
to the Security Council.  The proposed text conveniently 
drops Article 10's reference to the explicit limitations on 
the GA's authority as spelled out by Article 12. 
 
-- In preambular paragraph 7, adds the concept of enhancing 
the Council's "legitimacy" through working methods reform. 
This concept is also emphasized through the reworking of the 
first operative paragraph. 
 
-- Reworks preambular paragraph 9 to make the call for 
expansion of the Council more explicit.  (This was edited to 
respond to concerns that the S-5 effort would dilute support 
for the expansion effort). 
 
In the annex: 
 
-- New language in paragraph 5 calls on the Security Council 
to make its tentative program of work available to member 
states as soon as it is available to the Council. 
 
 
 
-- Paragraph 6 now explicitly calls on the Security Council 
to "seek the views" of member states when Council decisions 
are going to require implementation by member states. 
 
-- Language relating to use of the veto is reworked to 
recommend that a Council member exercising its veto right 
should "explain the reason for doing so" at the time of the 
vote and circulate the explanation to all member states as an 
official document of the Council. 
 
-- New paragraph 17 calls on the Council to "enhance its 
cooperation and consultations" with regional organizations. 
 
Comment 
------- 
 
¶5. (C) The Swiss-Five proposal serves as a backdrop to the 
Council's own discussion of documentation and procedures, now 
"re-energized" under the leadership of Japanese PR Oshima. 
The Russians and we maintain a sharp distinction between the 
two issues that is not shared by the other members of the 
Council, who often cite the Outcome Document's recommendation 
that the Council adapt its working methods to increase the 
involvement of non-member States, "enhance its 
accountability" to the membership, and increase the 
transparency of its work. 
BOLTON