|
Canada's position paper on Security Council Reform Background Fifty-seven years have passed since the United Nations was established, during these years, the United Nations, especially the Security Council has consistently played an indispensable role in the international peace and security. However, with the expansion of the United Nations, there are many aspects should be improved to adapt to the new and changed situation. As for this point, the reform of the Security Council is outstanding and unavoidable. There are three distinct but related areas: the expansion of the Security Council, the use of the Veto and the improvement of the working methods that should to be reformed comprehensively. I. The Expansion of the Security Council On the issue of the Security Council expansion, we have been guided by one essential principle: the requirements of the United Nations and its member states. As the vast majority of members now agree, we believe that any expansion of the Security Council should be based primarily, but not exclusively, on the long-overlooked necessity of creating a Security Council which better reflects and represents the composition of the Assembly in accordance with the spirit of Article 23 of the Charter. Canada's position has been, and will continue to be, to promote, as quickly as possible, general agreement in the Working Group on the shape of a Security Council which best serve the international community's needs. To achieve this, we will continue to oppose any proposals which don't put the needs of the United Nations and its member States first and also can't attract general agreement, as to do otherwise would certainly lead to the deep divisions which would lead to a standstill all movement towards serious negotiations. In the light of these statement, we oppose the aspirations of a few member states to permanent membership-free from the inconvenience of elections -exclusively on the basis that such a decision would stand against so much of what the United Nations has come to stand for: democracy, openness, accountability and responsibility. By the same token, we will continue to pursue, with vigor, all solutions aimed at enhancing the representation, the credibility, and thus the effectiveness of a reformed Security Council. It is difficult to point to tangible progress on the matter of expansion of permanent membership. None of us will be surprised by that. The stakes are very high: they involve nothing short of how we select those who will make binding decisions on our behalf on vitally important questions impacting, often very directly, on our individual national security, as well as our collective security. Even so, we maintain that increasing the member of elected and non-permanent members of the Security Council is not only a basic necessity, but also, for the moment, the only way of making real progress on this issue. With the growing enlargement of the member states, it is obvious that the increase in the membership of the Security Council is crucial for the foundational principles of the United Nations. We continually prefer to look at the entire range of contributions member states make to the Organization as the foremost criteria for the Council membership, much as was intended in Article 23. In this light, we would like to mention the notion of rotationality among regionally selected states for a "regional council seat". In addition, some member states would be elected from a group of countries that have made a significant contribution to the values and work, of the Organization for periodic terms on the Council, thereby allowing them to rotate in and out of the Council on a regular and predictable basis. II. The Veto Canada strongly believes that the issue related to the discussion of the size and increase in membership of the Security Council cannot be separated from the question of the veto, and its current and future application. Regarding the veto, Canada opposes any extension of the veto and supports limiting the scope and application of the current veto under Chapter VII of the UN Charter. First, just as Canada sees no justification to extend the category of permanent members, we see no reason to extend the veto privilege. Any extension of the veto would exacerbate current problems, make decision-making more difficult, and potentially exclude more conflicts from the Council's purview. In sum, extending the veto would neither improve the efficiency of the Council nor enhance its democratic nature. Furthermore, it would work against the effectiveness of the Council in its effort to maintain international peace and security. Second, Canada sees that from Bosnia to Somalia to Rwanda to Kosovo, to name only a few instances, the veto or the threat of the veto has played a role in the Council's making of poor decisions. The credibility and authority of the Security Council, and of the United Nations suffered as a result, just when it was needed most in these regions. In our view, the use of the veto unfortunately is often guided by concerns other than for the maintenance of international peace and security. Therefore, Canada considers it necessary to limit the scope and application of the veto so as to avoid the inappropriate use of the veto. To this end, Canada does not suggest that those who hold the veto renounce it, for it is unrealistic. But we suggest that a voluntary code of conduct on the use of the veto, which was proposed by one member of the P5 several years ago, would be a good reform. Such a code of conduct could make it clear to the membership under what circumstances veto-holding members consider the use of the veto legitimate. It would introduce accountability to this instrument. As part of a voluntary code of conduct, the permanent members could agree to meet with the broader membership to explain whenever the veto is employed, what the justification and reasons for its use were. Canada will actively participate in a constructive discussion of these issues with other States. III. Working Methods and Transparency Regarding the working methods of the Security Council, Canada has been part of the majority of membership supporting the implementation of XVIII. Canada believes that in order to make the Security Council consistently play its indispensable role in the peace and security of the whole world, it's necessary for us to first better the working methods. To this point, transparency has been the term of art applied to the more frequent resource to public meetings we have seen over years. As to this, Canada has continued to take an active part in the debates of open-ended Working Group since its inception with a single purpose in mind: to make the Security Council a more legitimate, efficient and effective body. As we look at possible solutions, there are various means to enhance the Council's transparency: I. The opening of Council meetings of an informative nature to non-members or the establishment of mechanisms such as the Groups of Friends of the Security-General. II. Holding public meetings after decisions have been made on a topic, and resolution or presidential statements drafted of the Security Council permits all members States to have access to the briefing information provided by the Secretariat. It allows member States to hear how the Council is treating issues on its agenda, and it can at times permit non-Council members States into the decision-making progress. III. Delegations should ideally intervene to ask questions to communicate ideas on how, corporately, the Council or the Secretariat might handle an issue differently, or better. IV. With respect to peace keeping missions and cooperation with troop-contributing countries, it would be an effective way to hold meetings to ensure that troop contributors participate fully in discussions and decisions germane to the missions in question, have access to the Secretariat as missions are planned, as well as access to the information and intelligence available to the Secretariat as missions unfold. All these methods should be utilized, even at the cost of convenience. At the same time the Council needs to guard against the temptation to hold public meetings that have more to do with theatre than with the policy. While much more can and will be done, these first, constructive steps towards real transparency in the Council's methods of work is a product of our ongoing work on the Security Council reform, and Canada is firmly convinced that there will exist general agreement among all the members in un about the solutions of the working methods and transparency. In sum, Canada will also oppose any proposal which has the effect of marginalizing countries like our own, not the biggest, the most populous, the most powerful or the rich and famous, but countries which through their effort, commitment and contribution are here to make the United Nations work; not only for themselves, but also for the collective benefit of all the Member States. Canada's objective has been, and will continue to be, to make great efforts towards our common goal, a general agreement as soon as possible. The Capital University of Economics and Business Mission of Canada to Model UN, Beijing, 2002 Wang lan Guo ying Tao yinghong Email: wldexinxiang@hotmail.com
|
