Arguing on the basis of UN Charters provisions, Pakistan on Wednesday strongly opposed any move to add more permanent members to the Security Council as the intergovernmental negotiations on reforming the 15-member body gathered pace.
"Pakistan supports an increase in the non-permanent members only," Ambassador Abdullah Hussain Haroon said as he firmly laid down his countrys stand in a forthright speech to the General Assembly where the negotiations on ways and means to make the council more representative and more effective are taking place since February 19.
"Permanent membership is contrary to the principle of sovereign equality of states," the Pakistan ambassador said while participating in a debate on the question of categories of membership, the most difficult and divisive issue in the Security Council reform process. The councils reform, which got underway some 16 years ago, was backed by the 2005 world summit held at UN Headquarters in New York.
But the process remained stalled in the 192-member assemblys working group where the decisions had to be made by consensus. Now the matter has been moved to the assemblys plenary where voting is an option. There is widespread support for revamping the UNs most powerful organ to reflect the current global realities rather than the international power structure after World War II when the United Nations was created.
But all previous attempts, starting in 1979, have failed because rivalries between countries and regions blocked agreement on how to expand the council. The Security Council, which is responsible for maintaining international peace and security, has 15 seats.
It includes 10 non-permanent members elected for two-year terms that come from all regions of the world, and there are five permanent members with veto power whose support is essential for any reform to be adopted, the US, Russia, China, Britain and France. Despite the general agreement on enlarging the council, member states remain sharply divided over the details.
In July 2005, the so-called Group of Four, India, Germany, Japan and Brazil, aspired to permanent seats without veto rights on a 25-member council, with six new permanent seats without veto power, including two for the African region, and four additional non-permanent seats. The Italy/Pakistan-led "Uniting for Consensus" (UfC) group opposed any expansion of the permanent members on the Security Council.
It sought enlargement of the council to 25 seats, with 10 new non-permanent members who would be elected for two-year terms, with the possibility of immediate re-election. The African Unions called for the Council to be enlarged to 26 seats, one more permanent seat than the G-4 proposal. Its proposal for six new permanent seats was the same as the G-4s, except that it would give the new members veto power.
Dealing with the thorny issue of categories, Ambassador Haroon said, "(Its) divisive aspect, it seems, is more due to a selfish and non-democratic demand of a handful of countries (An obvious reference to G-4s push for permanent membership) that are seeking special status than an honest analysis of this issue vis-a -vis the main objectives of reform." "Under the Charter there is only one clear category that is non-permanent members," he pointed out. "There are five permanent members. It is not a category.
The permanent members are mentioned by name and their prerogatives and powers spelt out. The non-permanent members are elected by the General Assembly. They have term of 2 years and there is a bar on immediate re-election. For non-permanent members, the Charter outlines criteria for election. There is no criterion for election of permanent members. They are just there. The aspirants, as we know, also just want to be there. But that may be their idea of reform. We have a different approach, which is based on principles".
Elaborating Pakistans opposition to add new permanent members to the council, Ambassador Haroon said, "Many of the problems that we want to address through reform are attributed to the permanent members. Enlarging the oligarchy will increase these problems. It will make the Council less democratic, less representative, less transparent, less effective and less accountable".
An Increase in national permanent membership is unrealisable," the Pakistan envoy said, adding the five permanent members had rejected the extension of veto. "Some of the aspirants are prepared to become permanent members without veto (like India) thus contradicting their claims of counter-balancing the P-5 (the five permanent members).
Adding new permanent members will continue to be difficult. This is where a genuine compromise was required. "Caution must be exercised in referring to a broad and generic category of permanent membership," he added. In terms of representation, he said, each permanent seat added on a national basis will be a permanent blow to the chances for the rest of the membership to become member of the Council.
On the other hand regional representation ensures broader participation, Ambassador Haroon went on to say. The African position, which is the result of consensus, is a position taken for and on behalf of the region, and is thus different from those who seek seats for themselves. "That is why we have expressed our understanding and respect for the African common position and we are ready to explore how this regional approach can be a basis for similar arrangements in other regions."
"There are other positions which we also support such as the Arab demand for permanent representation of which the essential element is the sharing of the seat by the members of the group through "rotation". The (Organisation of the Islamic Conference) demand, also on behalf of the group, is for adequate representation in any expansion of the Security Council. It is not a demand for any individual country. Seats allocated to the OIC will be available for all members through a system of rotation".
The proposals for expansion in the non-permanent member category are to increase the number of regular 2-year non-permanent seats. As a demonstration of flexibility, Ambassador Haroon said Pakistan and other members of the Uniting for Consensus are open to considering these possibilities to work for feasible and equitable options.
"Having considered the views of many countries in particular the concerns expressed by small states, we think that it will be prudent to leave the 10 current non-permanent seats untouched. Options for re-election and longer term could be considered on some of the new non-permanent seats to provide for fair rotation and opportunities for representation for all. The remaining should be regular 2 year seats".