VZCZCXYZ0000
OO RUEHWEB

DE RUCNDT #0609/01 1710200
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 200200Z JUN 09
FM USMISSION USUN NEW YORK
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 6749
INFO RUEHGG/UN SECURITY COUNCIL COLLECTIVE IMMEDIATE
RUEHRL/AMEMBASSY BERLIN IMMEDIATE 1096
RUEHBR/AMEMBASSY BRASILIA IMMEDIATE 1144
RUEHIL/AMEMBASSY ISLAMABAD IMMEDIATE 2375
RUEHMD/AMEMBASSY MADRID IMMEDIATE 6412
RUEHNE/AMEMBASSY NEW DELHI IMMEDIATE 2675
RUEHRO/AMEMBASSY ROME IMMEDIATE 1117
RUEHUL/AMEMBASSY SEOUL IMMEDIATE 1137
RUEHKO/AMEMBASSY TOKYO IMMEDIATE 8755

UNCLAS USUN NEW YORK 000609 
 
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: SECOND ROUND OF 
INTERGOVERNMENTAL NEGOTIATIONS FOCUS ON COMPOSITION ISSUES 
OF SIZE, CATEGORIES OF MEMBERSHIP, AND REGIONAL 
REPRESENTATION 
 
REF: USUN NEW YORK 553 
 
¶1.  (SBU) Summary: The informal plenary of the General 
Assembly met on June 11 and 12 for the second meeting of the 
second round of intergovernmental negotiations (IGN) on 
Security Council reform, focusing on the three clustered 
issues of composition: size, categories of membership and 
regional representation.  India and the African Group 
continued to focus on permanent seats with veto rights. 
There was a growing convergence on an expanded Council size 
in the mid-twenties.  Germany, a Group of Four (G4) member, 
suggested a discussion of the intermediate option in the 
third round.  The rest of the G4, India, Brazil and Japan, 
stayed on their group's core message in favor of expansion in 
both permanent and non-permanent categories, an expanded 
Council size of 25, and an interpretation of regional 
representation to mean equitable geographical distribution. 
France said the intermediate option could lead to new 
permanent seats - heretofore an unmentioned possibility.  The 
U.S. reiterated its support for an expansion that will 
neither diminish the Council's effectiveness nor its 
efficiency.  End summary. 
 
¶2.  (SBU) Comment: The process continues to proceed with 
little forward movement; more time is focused on rehashing 
well-known national positions.  The Chair attempted in his 
overview paper before the start of the second round to focus 
the membership on those proposals with the greatest chance of 
garnering wide support but this effort met with widespread 
disagreement and complaints about the Chair's selectivity. 
During this meeting, the Uniting for Consensus bloc (UFC) 
members repeatedly suggested that the addition of permanent 
members did not enjoy broad support and therefore should be 
discarded, while G4 members (Brazil, India and Japan) and 
their supporters slung similar accusations about the UFC 
position.  End comment. 
 
¶3.  (SBU) The informal plenary of the General Assembly met on 
June 11 and 12 for the second meeting of the second round of 
intergovernmental negotiations (IGN) on Security Council 
reform, focusing on the three clustered issues of 
composition: size, categories of membership and regional 
representation.  82 delegations spoke during this two-day 
exchange with nine interventions occurring during the 
interactive portion of the final day.  The negotiations 
continue to be chaired by the Afghan Ambassador Zahir Tanin. 
 
Size 
---- 
 
¶4.  (SBU) There was overwhelming focus on 25-27 as the size 
of an enlarged Council.  The Philippines exceptionally 
proposed 31. Only eight states expressly proposed a size in 
the low-twenties - Australia, Belarus, Bosnia and 
Herzegovina, Cyprus, the Netherlands, Slovakia, Switzerland 
and Russia.  Ambassador DiCarlo reiterated the U.S. position 
that an expanded Council sized in the mid-twenties would be 
unwieldy and inefficient.  (Comment: Many African states 
unconvincingly tried to dismiss the notion that an increase 
in size would lead to ineffectiveness, arguing that an 
improvement in Council working methods would ensure 
effectiveness.  Noticeably, only one delegation outside the 
African Group (Malta) echoed this view. End Comment.) 
 
Categories of membership: 
G4 and UFC clash 
------------------------- 
 
¶5.  (SBU) The G4 again reiterated that it seeks additional 
seats in both categories of membership: permanent and 
non-permanent.  India remains the most vocal supporter for 
the G4 position, as it continues its campaign for a permanent 
seat with veto rights.  The Uniting for Consensus (UFC) bloc, 
on the other hand, advocates an expansion of non-permanent 
seats only, in the hopes of shifting power away from the P5 
to the elected members.  They said this is in line with "the 
sovereign equality of member states." 
 
 
 
 
Germany more open to 
discussing intermediate option 
------------------------------ 
 
¶6.  (SBU) Germany was the only member of the G4 to signal a 
willingness to explore different variations of the 
intermediate option.  The German Perm Rep called for further 
discussion in the third round of the negotiations on the 
intermediate option which he described as "a multi-faceted 
creature that seems to exist in many shapes and forms, some 
of which appear close to the permanent model."  (Comment: 
Germany's openness should not be seen as a major policy 
change, merely an articulation of their readiness to move the 
negotiation discussion forward.  End comment.)  The rest of 
the G4, India, Brazil and Japan, stayed on their group's core 
message of expansion in both permanent and non-permanent 
categories, an expanded Council size of 25, and an 
interpretation of regional representation to mean equitable 
geographical distribution.  UFC members, including Colombia 
and Italy, stressed that their intermediate option proposal 
focused solely on longer-term elected seats. Italy, like 
Germany, proposed devoting a full session to a discussion of 
the "intermediate option."   Several other delegations 
(mostly UFC) seconded this.  Most African States repeated the 
AU message and rejected the intermediate option, but Nigeria 
refrained from flatly rejecting it, saying it was open to 
examining other viewpoints. 
 
Regional representation: really means 
more equitable geographical distribution 
---------------------------------------- 
 
¶7. (SBU) There appeared to be growing agreement that regional 
representation is better termed to mean more "equitable 
geographical distribution" as per Article 23(1) of the UN 
Charter. Brazil wanted to scrap the use of the term "regional 
representation" altogether and "work on the basis of the 
well-established notion of equitable geographical 
distribution."  The Netherlands, Singapore, the Czech 
Republic and Germany explicitly addressed the inherent 
problems and confusion with the term saying, inter alia, that 
the phrase is not used in the UN Charter. 
 
¶8.  (SBU) Most African states repeated the AU position that 
the "AU is responsible for Africa's representation in the 
Council".  Curiously, Namibia broke from this position and 
spoke at lengths about the benefits of a regional seat. 
 
¶9.  (SBU) Many delegations recognized the need for small 
island developing states would have a chance to serve on an 
expanded Council, however there was no agreement whether or 
not this would include a new seat specifically designated for 
small island developing states or if it would be handled 
within existing regional groups. 
 
Philippines proposal - out in left field 
---------------------------------------- 
 
¶10.  (SBU)  The Philippines Perm Rep read and circulated with 
his prepared statement a draft resolution amending Article 23 
of the Charter to consist of 31 members - considerably larger 
than any arrangement widely discussed.  According to the 
draft, regional groups would choose longer-term members to 
eventually become permanent members.  (Comment: This would 
cross the USG redline that permanent members must be defined 
by name in any Security Council expansion proposal.  End 
comment.)  No other delegations took the time to comment on 
it, though he was the sixth speaker. 
 
P5 Statements: France, U.K. and Russia willing 
to explore intermediate option 
------------------------------ 
 
¶11. (SBU) During the interactive portion of the debate, 
France for the first time described the intermediate option 
as a "transition period," which could lead to permanent 
seats.  The U.K. only said that it was ready to consider the 
"intermediate model," that it supports a modest expansion 
 
 
 
 
balancing representation and effectiveness and that it would 
accept "extended seats."  Russia joined France and the U.K in 
an explicit reference to looking further into what it called 
the "interim model." China's statement did not elucidate a 
position beyond the general platitudes about representation 
for developing countries, although it did say it supported 
giving priority to Africa. 
 
U.S. statement 
-------------- 
 
¶12.  (SBU) Ambassador DiCarlo reiterated U.S. support for an 
expansion that will neither diminish the Council's 
effectiveness nor its efficiency.  She stressed that the U.S. 
is open in principle to limited expansion of both permanent 
and non-permanent members, but believes that a Council in the 
mid-twenties would be unwieldy and diminish its effectiveness 
and efficiency.  She underscored that the U.S. believes 
expansion in permanent membership must be country-specific in 
nature and based on contributions to the maintenance of 
international peace and security, and other purposes of the 
UN.  While the U.S. is supportive of the role that regional 
organizations and regional representation play in the 
selection of elected members, viewing their role as providing 
de facto permanent regional representation, she noted that 
under Article 24(1) of the Charter, members of the Council 
act on behalf of the entire membership of the UN.  She noted 
that the U.S. also remains committed to Article 23(1) in the 
election of non-permanent members with due regard to 
contributions to the maintenance of international peace and 
security and to other purposes of the organization and to 
equitable geographical distribution.  She underscored that 
the U.S. also remains fully supportive of Article 18(2) which 
specifically defines the election of non-permanent members as 
an important question that requires a 2/3 majority of the 
entire membership, at least those present and voting.  She 
added that whatever formula emerges, it must factor in 
Charter requirements for ratification.  Ambassador DiCarlo 
closed by saying that the U.S. remains committed to a 
serious, deliberate effort, working with other member states, 
to find a way forward that enhances the ability of the 
Security Council to carry out its mandate and effectively 
meet the challenges of the new century. 
 
Next meeting 
------------ 
 
¶13.  (SBU) The third meeting of the second round is scheduled 
for June 22.  It will cover relations between General 
Assembly and Security Council, the veto, and the Security 
Council's working methods. 
RICE