Statement by Turkey at the Intergovernmental Negotiations on the Question of Security Council Reform
I would like to begin by thanking you for convening this meeting and for all the efforts you have exerted until now. We believe that we had a very useful exchange of views at the first round of the intergovernmental negotiations and we hope that the second round will carry our discussion forward on the Security Council reform.
We would also like to thank you for preparing an "overview" of the first round of the intergovernmental negotiations. Although the "overview" paper contains various interesting elements, we by and large share the reservations expressed by the delegations about various aspects of the paper at the previous session of the intergovernmental negotiations on 22 May. Let me elaborate on some of these points:
First, we believe that the "overview" does not sufficiently reflect the nature of the discussion that took place during the first round of the negotiations. We feel that some of the language used in the paper may prejudge or preclude the positions of some Member States and Groups. In this regard, we concur with the African states that the position of the African Group is not fully reflected in the "overview".
Secondly, there is no acknowledgement in the paper of the concrete proposals made by the Member States during the first round. The Delegations of Columbia and Italy, for example, presented a very useful and comprehensive proposal at the last session of the first round of negotiations. To the best of our recollection, this has been the only comprehensive proposal submitted so far during the intergovernmental negotiations. That's why we feel that a reference could have been made in the "overview" paper to this proposal. Similarly, there were several useful proposals made by some delegations on the working methods of the Council which could have been reflected in the paper. The stipulation in Decision 62/557 that "the positions and proposals of Member States, regional groups and other Member States groupings will form the basis for the intergovernmental negotiations" needs to be upheld in this regard.
Third, we believe that the new restructuring of the 5 key issues contained in the paper is not in full compliance with Decision 62/557 of the General Assembly. It is true that "categories of membership", "regional representation" and "the size of the enlarged Council" are closely linked to each other. However, we feel that "the question of veto" is also very much related to to these three issues. Linking the veto question to more procedural aspects of the Council reform, in our opinion, might lead to an imbalance among these issues. We therefore sympathize with the concerns raised by the African states on this issue as well.
We felt the need to share these views with you at an early stage so that these shortfalls could be remedied before we embark on the next stage of the negotiations. We value your efforts and contributions. And we trust your understanding and cooperation on this important issue.