VZCZCXYZ0004
OO RUEHWEB

DE RUCNDT #0432/01 1142044
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 242044Z APR 09
FM USMISSION USUN NEW YORK
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 6416
INFO RUEHGG/UN SECURITY COUNCIL COLLECTIVE IMMEDIATE
RUEHRL/AMEMBASSY BERLIN IMMEDIATE 1044
RUEHBR/AMEMBASSY BRASILIA IMMEDIATE 1094
RUEHIL/AMEMBASSY ISLAMABAD IMMEDIATE 2273
RUEHMD/AMEMBASSY MADRID IMMEDIATE 6364
RUEHNE/AMEMBASSY NEW DELHI IMMEDIATE 2573
RUEHRO/AMEMBASSY ROME IMMEDIATE 1076
RUEHUL/AMEMBASSY SEOUL IMMEDIATE 1072
RUEHKO/AMEMBASSY TOKYO IMMEDIATE 8699

UNCLAS USUN NEW YORK 000432 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPARTMENT FOR USUN/W AND IO/UNP; NSC FOR POWER 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PREL KUNR UNGA UNSC GE JA BR IN
SUBJECT: UNGA: UNSC REFORM: INTERGOVERNMENTAL NEGOTIATIONS 
ON THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE COUNCIL AND THE GENERAL 
ASSEMBLY 
 
REF: A. USUN NEW YORK 388 
     ¶B. USUN NEW YORK 345 
     ¶C. USUN NEW YORK 289 
     ¶D. USUN NEW YORK 230 
 
¶1.  (SBU) Summary: The informal plenary of the General 
Assembly met on April 20 for intergovernmental negotiations 
on Security Council expansion focusing on the relationship 
between the Security Council (SC) and the General Assembly 
(GA).  This meeting, during which 52 delegations spoke, 
marked the last session of the first round of 
intergovernmental negotiations.  Delegation statements either 
focused on the SC and GA as equal principal organs with the 
SC accountable to the membership or interpreted the Charter 
to imply that the Council is subordinate to the GA as it is 
the organ with universal representation.  There were calls 
for greater coordination between the two organs, especially 
between their Presidents, and for an end to SC encroachment 
on the GA and other bodies' jurisdiction.  The U.S. statement 
emphasized the fundamental constitutional nature of the issue 
and that Article 7 of the UN Charter is clear that the SC and 
the GA are co-equal principal organs and that the GA may only 
make recommendations to the Council.  As during the last 
negotiation, a large number of delegations commented on 
Council working methods as a way to improve the Council's 
relationship with the membership.  Delegations also referred 
to the Council's annual report to the GA, calling for a more 
substantive and analytical report while others recognized the 
progress made in the 2008 report. 
 
¶2.  (SBU Summary continued: Uniting for Consensus (UFC) bloc 
members Colombia and Italy put forward a new proposal at the 
end of the session focused on all five issues, including 
additional longer-term renewable seats and additional 
two-year non-renewable seats.  The Group of Four (G4) and its 
supporters continued their call for the Chair to draft a 
composite paper before the next round and G4 members Japan 
and Germany suggested specific categories/clusters for focus 
during the next round.  The Chair confirmed he would 
distribute another letter well before the second round 
commences.  He told Ambassador Wolff privately that he would 
use the second round to try to narrow the debate and focus it 
on issues where progress can be achieved -- size, categories 
of membership, and regional representation in an expanded 
Council and expressed appreciation to the United States for 
helping identify issues where deadlock could persist.  He 
also said he would announce that a third round would be held 
to deflect potential negative pressure in the second round. 
End summary. 
 
¶3. (SBU) Comment: Russian and U.S. statements were the most 
firm of the P-5 statements in delineating the relationship 
between the SC and the GA; the Chinese, French and UK 
statements were less so.  The latter simply highlighted the 
Council's primary responsibility for maintaining 
international peace and security while the General Assembly 
has universal representation.  The tabling of a new proposal 
by UFC members Colombia and Italy that reflects the 
intermediate option is a significant demonstration of some 
flexibility by those states, as was the German Perm Rep's 
statement earlier in the round voicing interest for 
longer-term seats of 12-15 years under the intermediate 
option.  Japan and Brazil also appear to be showing some 
flexibility towards an intermediate option, therefore leaving 
only India and the African Group as the main stalwarts 
insisting on additional permanent seats with veto.  With 
Indian Perm Rep Sen's departure, we will have to wait for his 
successor's arrival in order to see if India decides to show 
any flexibility or maintain its present course.  India could 
be the linchpin in determining how quickly or slowly this 
process moves forward.  If India continues to insist on 
additional permanent seats, then negotiations will move 
slowly because the African Group will not be compelled to 
adjust the Ezulwini Consensus; however if India shows some 
interest in the intermediate option, negotiations could 
quickly accelerate.  End comment. 
 
¶4.  (SBU)  The final meeting of the first round of 
intergovernmental negotiations on Security Council expansion 
 
 
 
took place April 20 on the fifth and last of the five key 
issues -- "the relationship between the Council and the 
General Assembly (GA)."  52 delegations spoke at least once 
during the one-day discussion of the informal plenary and 
only one state (South Africa) took the floor a second time 
during the interactive portion at the end of the session. 
Afghan Perm Rep and Chairman of the Intergovernmental 
Negotiations Zahir Tanin circulated a letter to the 
membership on April 16, as he did before the four previous 
issue-based negotiations (see reftels).  (Note: USUN e-mailed 
a copy of the letter to IO/UNP.  End note.) 
 
Equal principal organs v. 
Council subordinate to Assembly 
------------------------------- 
 
¶5.  (SBU) Unlike previous meetings, there was not a 
fundamental split between the Group of Four (G4) and Uniting 
for Consensus (UFC) bloc positions on the main topic. 
Rather, the split was between those countries that recognize 
the Council as a principal organ under the UN Charter and 
accountable only to the membership and those countries, 
generally more developing states, who interpret the Charter 
to imply the Council should take a more subordinate position 
with respect to the GA.  The Philippines Perm Rep said he 
interpreted Article 24 of the UN Charter to mean that the 
Council is "for all legal intents and purposes, an agent of 
the General Assembly as it merely exercises a delegated 
authority or a part of the sovereignty of each Member 
State..."  He said, "We should never allow the principal -- 
the General Assembly -- to be held hostage by the delegate or 
agent." 
 
¶6.  (SBU) The Philippines Perm Rep suggested several 
proposals for Charter amendments to ensure the dominance of 
the Assembly over the Council.  He said the GA should be 
given full power to appoint the Secretary-General and not 
just appoint one "upon the recommendation of the Security 
Council," as Article 97 currently states.  The Nicaraguan 
Perm Rep later seconded the Filipino proposal, saying the 
process by which the Secretary-General is elected should be 
considered.  The Russian Perm Rep responded that Russia 
favors the current wording of Article 97.  The Philippines 
Perm Rep took issue with Council members having two votes 
(one in the GA and one in the Security Council) for elections 
of judges to the International Court of Justice.  Both the 
Philippines Perm Rep and the Nicaraguan Perm Rep urged that 
the GA should be able to override a veto exercised in the 
Security Council (SC) by a permanent member.  The Sierra 
Leone Perm Rep, speaking on behalf of the African Group, said 
that when the "Security Council cannot and will not act, 
there is need to strike a compromise by devising ways and 
means of empowering the General Assembly to promote the aims 
of the Charter." 
 
¶7.  (SBU) The Egyptian Perm Rep commented that there is a 
direct link between Council reform and the "revitalization of 
the General Assembly," another GA agenda topic.  He said that 
when the GA is active and revitalized it will be able to act. 
 He noted the links between the UN Department of Public 
Affairs and the SC and that those links are missing with the 
GA.  A number of states in the second category suggested that 
the Council's mandate has become too expansive and has 
encroached on other bodies' jurisdiction.  The Iranian 
representative, for example, cited technical bodies, like the 
IAEA, as the victims of the Council's increasing 
encroachment.  He called for that encroachment to be "checked 
and reversed." 
 
¶8.  (SBU) The Singapore Perm Rep said the "principle of 
accountability is the key that underpins the symbiotic 
relationship between the two principal organs."  The Council 
decisions are binding on Member states and Member States 
share the "attendant burdens" of increases in the budgets of 
peacekeeping and special political missions which are 
mandated by the Council.  He said that since the General 
Assembly elects the ten non-permanent members of the Council, 
it provides the legitimacy that ensures international 
compliance with Council decisions, so each body needs the 
 
 
 
other. 
Calls for greater coordination 
between both bodies 
------------------------------ 
 
¶9.  (SBU) The Russian Perm Rep in his remarks urged the 
membership to not engage in a "tug of war" between the two 
principal organs.  Instead, he noted the current challenges 
of peacemaking and peacebuilding and suggested that the GA 
could make significant contributions on those subjects.  The 
French Deputy Perm Rep highlighted the strengthening of 
Council and Assembly interaction through the convening of the 
Peacebuilding Commission and the Counterterrorism Committee. 
The Indonesian Perm Rep said that more interaction was 
actually needed between the GA and the Security Council, as 
founders of the Peacebuilding Commission.  A number of 
states, including the African Group and Liechtenstein, called 
for regular meetings between the President of the Security 
Council and the President of the General Assembly (PGA) in 
order to increase information sharing across the two organs 
and to consult on work plans. 
 
U.S. statement: relationship 
is a fundamental 
constitutional issue 
---------------------------- 
 
¶10.  (SBU) Given that a number of states were interpreting 
the Charter as providing for a subordinate role for the 
Council vis a vis the Assembly, USUN judged it necessary to 
speak.  In the U.S. remarks, Ambassador Wolff stressed that 
the topic of the session involves a fundamental 
constitutional issue for the United Nations.  He said Article 
7 of the UN Charter is clear that the Security Council and 
the General Assembly are co-equal principal organs of the 
United Nations, a fact reaffirmed in an early Advisory 
Opinion of the International Court of Justice which states 
that both bodies are principal organs of the United Nations 
and the Charter does not place the Council in a subordinate 
position.  He underscored that Article 24 of the Charter 
states that the Council acts on behalf of the members of the 
United Nations, not on behalf of the General Assembly, and 
Articles 10 and 11 also make clear that the GA may only make 
recommendations to the Council. 
 
¶11.  (SBU) Ambassador Wolff referred to other delegations' 
comments during the meeting and in previous sessions that the 
Council's annual report to the GA somehow suggests a 
subordinate reporting relationship and said this is an 
erroneous conclusion since the purpose of the report is to 
bring matters to the attention of the Assembly for its 
consideration and to facilitate the exchange of information 
and enhance cooperation among two principal organs.  He 
stressed that, given that the topic is a fundamental 
constitutional issue, belaboring discussion is unlikely to be 
productive and will only serve to delay progress towards the 
main objective of most members, namely, Council expansion. 
 
Focus on working methods 
to enhance relationship 
------------------------- 
 
¶12.  (SBU) A number of countries highlighted in their 
interventions that there is a link between Council working 
methods, which improve the membership's access to the 
Council, and relations between the Council and the General 
Assembly.  As a result, some interventions were very similar 
to those given during the April 7 and 8 meetings on working 
methods of the Security Council (ref A) and continued calls, 
for example, for more open debate and more consultations with 
troop and financial contributors. 
 
Council's annual 
report to the GA 
---------------- 
 
¶13.  (SBU) A number of states focused on Articles 15 and 24 
of the Charter which discuss the Council's annual report to 
the Assembly and called for more substantive and analytical 
 
 
 
reports.  Portugal, France, and a few other states did 
recognize that there had been positive steps, especially by 
July 2008 Council President Vietnam who prepared the 62nd 
session's annual report, to improve the report's substance. 
The Indonesian Perm Rep urged that the report include a 
section on the status of the implementation of Council 
decisions.  The South African representative said that the 
Council is "duty-bound to provide analytical reports, explain 
the use of the veto, and why it might not have taken action." 
 The Mexican Perm Rep suggested looking at the ICJ report to 
the General Assembly which has useful analysis as a possible 
model for further revisions to the Council's annual report. 
The Singapore Perm Rep, questioning whether it was possible 
to truly have an analytical annual report from the Council, 
advocated for a "free-flowing annual debate for Member States 
to take stock and to share feedback on the role of the 
Council over the past year which could be jointly chaired by 
the Security Council President and the President of the 
General Assembly (PGA). 
 
Colombia/Italy put forward new 
intermediate proposal 
------------------------------ 
 
¶14.  (SBU) At the end of the session, the Colombian Perm Rep 
introduced a new Colombian-Italian reform proposal that 
covers the five key issues.  The Italian Perm Rep 
characterized the proposal as based on comprehensive reform, 
equality among all states, accountability, and unity of the 
organization.  While the proposal states that the exact 
number of seats will depend on the total size of the 
expansion, it suggests approximately five additional 
longer-term seats distributed as follows: Africa, Asia, 
Asia/Africa (on a rotational basis), GRULAC, and WEOG/EEG (on 
a rotational basis).  It suggests two possible alternatives 
for these longer-term seats: (1) three to five year terms 
without the possibility of immediate re-election or (2) 
two-year terms with the possibility of up to two immediate 
re-elections but afterwards a member state would have to take 
a break equivalent to the number of consecutive years served 
on the Council.  The proposal also suggests approximately six 
additional two-year, non-renewable seats distributed as 
follows: small states (population under 1 million); 
medium-size states (population between one and ten million); 
Africa, Asia, GRULAC, and EEG. 
 
¶15.  (SBU) The proposal suggests continuing the present ratio 
of 3/5 or 60 percent for adoption of substantive decisions in 
the enlarged Council.  It also suggests either the abolition 
of the veto or the limitation of the scope of the veto to 
only Chapter VII matters.  The proposal suggests a number of 
working method and procedural reforms, none of which would 
require a Charter amendment.  It also presses for enhanced 
accountability of the Council to the general membership, the 
submission of more substantive and analytical reports and 
special reports by the Council to the General Assembly, and 
urges a strengthening of the relationship between the Council 
and the other UN principal organs.  Lastly, the proposal 
calls for a review after 10-12 years or 15-16 years, 
depending upon the term of the seats, and a comprehensive 
reassessment, including the composition and working methods 
of the Council.  Since the proposal was only shared with the 
membership at the end of the session, no delegations 
commented on it, aside from the South African representative 
who noted that it was "at odds with the African position." 
 
Calls for a composite 
paper before next round 
----------------------- 
 
¶16.  (SBU) As they have at previous meetings, a number of G4 
countries and their supporters from the African Group and 
elsewhere called on the Chair to draft a composite paper 
before the next round of negotiations.  The Japanese Perm Rep 
suggested an overview paper with a summary and list of viable 
options based on member states' suggestions.  He said the 
paper should concentrate on categories of membership, the 
veto, regional representation, and the size of an enlarged 
Council.  The German Perm Rep said a composite paper would 
 
 
 
help narrow down the options and suggested two clusters of 
focus: (1) categories of membership, size of an enlargement, 
and regional representation and (2) the veto, working 
methods, and the relationship between the Council and the 
General Assembly.  (Comment: The second cluster could 
presumably be ignored if there continues to be widespread 
disagreement on it.  End comment.) 
 
Chair's plans for the second round 
--------------------------------- 
 
¶17.  (SBU) During the April 20 meeting, Ambassador Tanin did 
not share with the membership his plans for the next round of 
intergovernmental negotiations, aside from noting that he 
would be sending out another letter well before the second 
round commences and that the "second act is always better." 
A number of countries highlighted, as the Portuguese Perm Rep 
did, that the first round provided the membership with "an 
idea of what won't fly" in future negotiations. 
 
¶18.  (SBU) In an April 22 bilateral meeting, Ambassador Tanin 
told Ambassador Wolff that he was pleased that the U.S. 
interventions during the first round had highlighted the 
issues which were irreconcilable and which could only serve 
to block progress if the membership insisted on dwelling upon 
them.  He said it was important for the membership to hear 
this message.  Tanin said he would use the second round to 
narrow the debate and focus the membership on those issues 
where progress can be achieved -- size, categories of 
membership, and regional representation in an expanded 
Council.  He also said there are lingering questions that 
remain unaddressed that the membership should address, such 
as the role of a review conference.  A third round could then 
be used to focus on how to move the process forward into the 
64th General Assembly session.  Ambassador Wolff agreed that 
announcing a third round could help deflect possible negative 
action during the second round. 
Rice