VZCZCXYZ0000
OO RUEHWEB

DE RUCNDT #0388/01 1011540
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 111540Z APR 09
FM USMISSION USUN NEW YORK
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 6322
INFO RUEHGG/UN SECURITY COUNCIL COLLECTIVE IMMEDIATE
RUEHRL/AMEMBASSY BERLIN IMMEDIATE 1036
RUEHBR/AMEMBASSY BRASILIA IMMEDIATE 1086
RUEHIL/AMEMBASSY ISLAMABAD IMMEDIATE 2244
RUEHMD/AMEMBASSY MADRID IMMEDIATE 6356
RUEHNE/AMEMBASSY NEW DELHI IMMEDIATE 2544
RUEHRO/AMEMBASSY ROME IMMEDIATE 1068
RUEHUL/AMEMBASSY SEOUL IMMEDIATE 1041
RUEHKO/AMEMBASSY TOKYO IMMEDIATE 8685

UNCLAS USUN NEW YORK 000388 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPARTMENT FOR USUN/W AND IO/UNP; NSC FOR POWER 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PREL KUNR UNGA UNSC JA BR
SUBJECT: UNGA: UNSC REFORM: INTERGOVERNMENTAL NEGOTIATIONS 
ON SIZE OF AN ENLARGED COUNCIL AND UNSC WORKING METHODS 
 
REF: A. USUN NEW YORK 345 
     ¶B. USUN NEW YORK 289 
     ¶C. USUN NEW YORK 230 
 
¶1.  (SBU) Summary: The informal plenary of the General 
Assembly met April 7 and 8 for intergovernmental negotiations 
on Security Council expansion focusing on the size of an 
enlarged Council and the Council's working methods.  81 
delegations spoke with growing agreement across the three 
major blocs on an enlarged Council of 25 to 27 members.  The 
U.S. statement voiced concern that a Council of that size 
would diminish its effectiveness and efficiency.  A number of 
delegations challenged the idea that a Council of 26 would 
affect efficiency, and suggested that working methods reform 
was the best guarantee to ensure continued efficiency and 
effectiveness.  There was a near unanimous call for further 
reform of Council working methods with many recognizing 
progress made to date.  The Small Five States (S-5) continued 
to lead on this issue and introduced a paper with new 
"elements for consideration."  Most delegations acknowledge 
that Council working methods reform must be done in tandem 
with the Council and little progress can be made alone in the 
General Assembly.  However, the Philippines argued for 
specific Charter amendments on working methods.  The U.S. 
statement noted our openness to a constant review of working 
methods but underscored that Council working methods are a 
matter for the Council to determine, given its status as a 
principle organ under the UN Charter and its Charter mandate 
to adopt its own rules of procedure.  End summary. 
 
¶2.  (SBU) Comment: While the proposals for enlargement of the 
Council differ significantly, there was a growing chorus 
among the major blocs on the approximate size of an enlarged 
Council.  As a result, USUN judged that we had to respond and 
note our concern that a Council of 25-27 would diminish its 
effectiveness and efficiency.  The next intergovernmental 
negotiating session will be April 20 on the "relationship 
between the Council and the General Assembly."  It will 
provide another opportunity to underscore that the Council 
and the Assembly are both principle organs of the UN. 
Afterwards, the chair will decide how to set up the next 
round of intergovernmental negotiations.  Several delegations 
continued their call for the Chair to provide a "composite 
text" for the next round.  According to the President of the 
General Assembly's Security Council reform expert, when those 
delegations are pressed to define a "composite text," they 
are unable to clarify what exactly they are seeking.  USUN 
has suggested privately that the Chair offer a summary text 
that does not draw conclusions but which could highlight the 
critical areas of division for focus during the next round. 
End comment. 
 
¶3.  (SBU)  Intergovernmental negotiations on Security Council 
expansion continued on April 7 and 8 with meetings of the 
informal plenary on the fourth of five key issues -- "size of 
an enlarged Council and working methods of the Security 
Council."  (Note: While several delegations had called for 
the two topics to be handled in separate meetings, they 
remained combined per UNGA Decision 62/557.  End note.)  81 
delegations spoke at least once during the two-day 
discussion, and six spoke again on the topic during the 
interactive portion in the final session.  Afghan Perm Rep 
and Chairman of the Intergovernmental Negotiations Zahir 
Tanin circulated a letter to the membership on April 3, as he 
did before debate on the three previous issues (see reftels). 
 (Note: USUN e-mailed a copy of the letter to IO/UNP.  End 
note.) 
 
Size of an enlarged Council: 
focus on 25-27 members 
---------------------------- 
 
¶4.  (SBU)  A number of speakers drew attention to the fact 
that the enlargement proposals of the three main groups all 
focus on a Council of 25 to 27 members.  The Group of Four 
(G4) members proposed an expanded Council of 25 with 10 new 
members -- six permanent members (India, Germany, Brazil, 
Japan, and two African members) plus four non-permanent 
members (one each for Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe, and Latin 
America/Caribbean).  The Japanese Perm Rep, while in 
 
 
agreement with 25, did stress the need for a "relatively 
compact" Council with a balance between "representativeness 
and effectiveness."  Most Uniting for Consensus (UFC) members 
called for an expanded Council of 25 to 27 members with 10-12 
new non-permanent members.  Canada stated that an expanded 
Council of more than 25 members would not be effective.  The 
African Group called for an expanded Council of 26 members 
with 11 new members -- essentially the G4 proposal with an 
additional non-permanent seat for an African state.  A few 
African states, like Egypt, even suggested a larger Council 
to respond to the needs of small island and developing 
states. 
 
¶5.  (SBU) The Slovenian Perm Rep reiterated her proposal to 
expand the Council to 25 seats with six new permanent 
members, a group of 12 non-permanent members who would have 
more frequent rotation (only six of which would be on the 
Council at any one time), plus eight regular non-permanent 
members.  The Czech Republic Perm Rep voiced support for a 
Council of 25 with six new permanent members (G4 proposal) 
and four non-permanent members (including one for Eastern 
Europe).  The Cuban Perm Rep called for an expanded Council 
of no less than 25 to 26 members with six new permanent 
members, including two from Africa and two from Latin 
America/Caribbean.  The Philippines Perm Rep called for an 
expanded Council of 31 seats with 16 new members (eight new 
permanent and eight new non-permanent members with both 
categories having the same distribution: two seats each for 
Africa, Asia, and Latin America/Caribbean, and one seat each 
for Eastern Europe and Western Europe).  Many of the CARICOM 
countries voiced support for an expanded Council in the 25-26 
member range. 
 
African states argue there is no reason 
why efficiency should be impeded at 26 
--------------------------------------- 
 
¶6.  (SBU) In line with their robust participation at previous 
meetings, 17 African states took the floor to strongly 
advocate for an expanded Council of 26 members, particularly 
to correct "the historic injustice of Africa's 
under-representation."  A number of delegations justified an 
expansion to 26 by citing that it would return the 
proportionality ratio of Council members to the general 
membership to the 1965 ratio when the Council was last 
expanded.  The Sierra Leone Perm Rep, again spoke on behalf 
of the African Group, and said that there is no evidence that 
a Security Council of 21 would be more efficient and 
effective than a Council of 26.  The Zambian Perm Rep argued, 
"Size per se is, therefore, not a sine qua non for 
efficiency."  Many argued that reform of working methods 
would be a better guarantee of future efficiency and 
effectiveness.  The South African representative said that 
expansion in only the non-permanent category will not address 
the needed redistribution of balance of power for which 
fundamental reform calls. 
 
U.S. voices concern that Council 
of that size would be "unwieldy" 
-------------------------------- 
 
¶7.  (SBU) In all, about 48 countries signaled a strong 
preference for an expanded Council of 25 to 27 members.  In 
response, Pol MinCouns noted in the U.S. statement, which was 
delivered at the end of the session, that the numbers for the 
size of an enlarged Council that had been proposed by many 
delegations "would result in an unwieldy Council that would 
diminish its effectiveness and efficiency."  He also noted 
the need to bear in mind the Charter requirements for 
ratification when considering a formula for Council 
expansion. 
 
¶8.  (SBU) The St. Vincent and the Grenadines Perm Rep 
responded to the U.S. statement in the interactive portion. 
He said there were "two red herrings" being suggested -- 
efficiency and ratification -- and the real issue is Council 
legitimacy.  He suggested that non-Council members chose not 
to attend Council public meetings because they question the 
Council's current legitimacy and there needs to be "greater 
buy-in."  He also said that the reform process should be led 
 
 
 
by the by the membership and not by the P-5. 
 
Several other delegations also suggest 
caution at Council larger than low 20s 
-------------------------------------- 
 
¶9.  (SBU) The Belgian Perm Rep, citing Belgium's recent 
Security Council participation, said Belgium is in favor of a 
more representative Council but enlargement should be limited 
to approximately 20 members.  Russia said that any 
enlargement should not exceed the low twenties.  The 
Australian Perm Rep advocated an expansion in the range of 21 
to 25 but expressed a strong preference for the lower end of 
that range and added that an odd number of members is 
preferable.  The Guatemalan representative suggested either a 
minimum expansion of one per regional group (five additional 
members) or a maximum of nine additional members, if both 
categories are expanded. 
 
¶10.  (SBU) Both France and the UK voiced support for an 
expansion of both categories and for the G-4's permanent seat 
aspirations, implying an increase closer to the mid-twenties 
than the low-twenties.  China commented that the size of an 
enlarged Security Council should be "large enough to redress 
under-representation, especially for Africa, and accommodate 
the concerns of small countries.  The Republic of Korea Perm 
Rep took a slightly different position from many of his UFC 
colleagues and said that the size of an enlarged Council 
cannot be determined at random and in advance.  As 
intergovernmental negotiations proceed, he said, the best 
size would be determined. 
 
Working Methods: near unanimous 
call for further reform 
------------------------------- 
 
¶11.  (SBU) Delegations devoted approximately 75 percent of 
their remarks to Security Council working methods.  (Note: 
Only seven out of 81 delegations did not comment on working 
methods.  End note.)  The Swiss Perm Rep, speaking first for 
the Small Five States (S-5 includes Switzerland, Costa Rica, 
Jordan, Liechtenstein, and Singapore), said that while only a 
few countries would directly benefit from an enlargement of 
the Security Council, all member states, particularly small 
states, would profit from improved working methods.  He said 
the S-5 would continue to engage on substantive working 
methods improvements and would press for inclusion of strong 
language on working methods in a comprehensive resolution on 
Council reform.  The Costa Rican representative, also an S-5 
member, later noted that reform on working methods should be 
independent of progress on other areas of Council reform. 
The German Perm Rep, while encouraging working methods 
reform, said it should not be at the expense of Council 
enlargement.  The Belgian Perm Rep said that working methods 
reform should be independent of Security Council reform since 
they do not need to involve Charter amendments. 
 
S-5 continue to lead on 
revision of working methods 
--------------------------- 
 
¶12.  (SBU) The S-5 have historically led the UN membership in 
advocating for the reform of Council working methods.  The 
Swiss Perm Rep introduced an S-5 paper with new "elements for 
consideration ... complimentary to previous efforts."  He 
referred to the S-5's draft resolution A/60/L.49 of 2006 on 
improving Council working methods which the Security Council 
responded to with the adoption of its Presidential Note 
S/2006/507 but said the implementation and application of the 
measures contained in this document had been "selective and 
inconsistent."  He highlighted the Council's Open Debate on 
working methods in August 2008 as a "milestone for our 
interaction with the Council," but said further engagement is 
necessary.  The S-5 paper provides specific recommendations 
under each of the following topics: (1) transparency and 
access; (2) efficiency and implementation; (3) rule of law; 
(4) use of the veto; (5) peacekeeping operations; (6) 
accountability and relationship with the GA; and (7) 
relationship with regional arrangements and agencies.  (Note: 
USUN e-mailed the S-5 paper to IO/UNP.  End note.) 
 
 
 
¶13.  (SBU) While 18 non-S-5 delegations specifically cited 
the S-5's work and voiced support for their past and current 
proposals, there were steady refrains from delegations for 
increased transparency, efficiency, and effectiveness in the 
Council's working methods.  Many called for greater 
"institutionalization" of the improvements proposed in 
Security Council Presidential Note S/2006/507.  For example, 
a broad swath of the membership (Germany, Japan, the Czech 
Republic, Morocco, Canada, India, the Republic of Korea, St. 
Lucia, Croatia, Mongolia, Australia, Ukraine, Indonesia) 
called for the Council to include concerned member states and 
troop and police contributing countries in Council sessions 
on changes to the mandates of peacekeeping operations.  There 
were also calls for greater access by non-members to Council 
subsidiary bodies.  Recent elected member Indonesia called 
for direct access to the Council for sanctioned states. 
Belarus suggested a new meeting format that would be closed 
to the press and NGOs but open to member states.  (Comment: 
Both the Indonesian and Belarus proposals are already in 
practice by the Council.  End comment.) 
 
¶14.  (SBU) While a large number of countries recognized the 
progress made to date by the Council on working methods, 
especially the increased number of open meetings, a number of 
countries still called for even more public meetings. 
Current elected Council member Turkey, for example, called 
for more public meetings; increased consultations with 
non-Council members and regional organizations; and greater 
interactions with all concerned parties, per Article 31 and 
32 of the UN Charter.  Japan, also currently serving on the 
Council, called for greater participation in public meetings; 
better sharing of information with concerned parties; more 
frequent and timely meetings; better communication between 
the Council and the GA, ECOSOC and regional bodies; and a 
more substantive reports to the General Assembly. 
 
Philippines argues for Charter 
amendments on working methods 
------------------------------ 
 
¶15.  (SBU) While the S-5 and most delegations acknowledged 
the need to work with the Security Council to improve its 
working methods and that such reform required neither a 
resolution nor a Charter amendment, several delegations, 
including the Philippines and Nigeria, suggested the need to 
revise the Charter.  The Philippines Perm Rep called for 
amendments to Articles 31 and 37 to make it mandatory for the 
Council to invite a member state which is not a member of the 
Council to participate, without a vote, in the discussions of 
any question brought before it whenever the interests of that 
member are especially and directly affected.  In comparison, 
other delegations, including Brazil, called on the Council to 
implement Articles 31 and 32 and did not advocate for Charter 
amendments. 
 
¶16.  (SBU) The Philippines Perm Rep also suggested an 
amendment to Article 24 of the UN Charter requiring that the 
annual report of the Security Council to the General Assembly 
be in a format "that provides faithful substantive 
information" on the proceedings of the Council.  (Note: 
Verbatim records of open Council meetings are available on 
the web-site, usually within 24 hours of the meeting.  End 
note.)  He also urged that Article 27 be amended to require 
that the negative vote of a permanent member be explained and 
communicated to the full membership of the UN.  (Note: In the 
last five years, three permanent members have exercised their 
veto (U.S., Russia, and China), and all three have always 
provided an explanation of vote.  Since voting is conducted 
in public meetings, verbatim records are available on the 
web-site.  End comment.) 
 
U.S. comments on Council working 
methods: open to constant review 
-------------------------------- 
 
¶17.  (SBU) In the U.S. statement, Pol MinCouns noted that the 
Council has shown the ability to respond and improve its 
working methods, such as through more open meetings, greater 
use of its web-site, and reviews of its mandate and seizures 
 
 
list, and that the U.S. remains open to constant review of 
Council working methods.  He suggested that the Council has 
one of the best track records of all of the UN's principal 
organs for showing the most flexibility reforming its working 
methods.  He underlined that the Council's working methods 
are a matter for decision by the Council itself, not the 
General Assembly, as the Council is a principle organ under 
the UN Charter and takes seriously its Charter mandate in 
Article 30 to adopt its own rules of procedure.  He replied 
to a number of comments by other delegations that the 
Council's rules of procedure are still labeled "provisional" 
after 63 years by noting that such a label has no negative 
impact on their legal standing and the U.S. considers them to 
be the "Council's prevailing and fully transparent rules of 
procedure." 
Rice