安保理改革に関する政府間交渉会合における石兼大使によるステートメント
令和3年2月16日
(Check against delivery)
Thank you, Madam Co-Chairs, for convening this meeting. Japan aligns itself with the statement delivered by Ambassador Ronaldo Costa of Brazil on behalf of the G4. Please allow me to make additional remarks in my national capacity.
Let me begin by thanking you for the announcement of the dates and the agenda of the IGN meetings up to the fourth meeting in April. It is a well-thought-out schedule, which allows us to discuss all five clusters by the third meeting and discuss the status of the IGN document in the fourth meeting. Japan earnestly requests you, Madam Co-Chairs, to draft a single consolidated text, which compiles the arguments in the first three meetings, and circulate it before the end of March, so that the Member States will have a better image of what to discuss at the fourth meeting in April.
At the first meeting last month, the President of the General Assembly stated, I quote, “this process will be put at risk if we fail to make real progress”, end quote. Japan fully shares this recognition and urges all Member States to be faithful to our commitment to “instil new life” in the discussions and to engage constructively in the IGN process.
Madam Co-Chairs,
Let me briefly reiterate Japan’s position regarding today’s agenda. We heard again during the last meeting, an overwhelming majority of the Member States express their support for an expansion in both categories. Only by expanding both permanent and nonpermanent categories can we realize a truly representative Council with the legitimacy it needs and with increased and enhanced representation of countries with the capacity and willingness to contribute to the maintenance of international peace and security. An expansion only in the non-permanent category, by contrast, will fixate the underrepresentation of developing countries and the historical regional imbalance within the permanent category.
Also, in the first meeting, an overwhelming majority stated that Africa should be represented in the Council in both categories. Japan reiterates its support for the Common African Position as stipulated in the Ezulwini Consensus and the Sirte Declaration, including African permanent seats with all the prerogatives and privileges of permanent membership including the right of veto.
Furthermore, Japan shares the recognition that the Council has at times been unable to fulfill its mandate and failed to address humanitarian crises due to the exercise of the right of veto. Japan has therefore joined the “Political Declaration on Suspension of Veto Powers in Cases of Mass Atrocity” initiated by France and Mexico and supports the Code of Conduct regarding Security Council action against genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes.
There seems to be considerable gaps between different positions on veto, especially between that of the UFC and the Common African Position, which call for further in-depth discussion among delegations and groups.
Madam Co-Chairs,
If we are “to make real progress” on these and other difficult issues, the minimum first step would be to have a record of our discussion. Otherwise, as it has been in the past 12 years, the same discussion will
be repeated again and again like a broken record, and no progress will be achieved.
If we are to break away from this situation in this 75th commemorative session and “instil new life” in our discussion, the minimum procedural actions we should all agree are:
- No.1 Application of the General Assembly rule of procedures
- No.2 Preparation by the Co-Chairs of a single consolidated document that compiles the positions stated by the Member States.
This is not a proposal to promote any specific position, but a proposal to “give this (IGN) process a chance”, as stated by the President of the General Assembly in the last meeting.
I thank you.
Let me begin by thanking you for the announcement of the dates and the agenda of the IGN meetings up to the fourth meeting in April. It is a well-thought-out schedule, which allows us to discuss all five clusters by the third meeting and discuss the status of the IGN document in the fourth meeting. Japan earnestly requests you, Madam Co-Chairs, to draft a single consolidated text, which compiles the arguments in the first three meetings, and circulate it before the end of March, so that the Member States will have a better image of what to discuss at the fourth meeting in April.
At the first meeting last month, the President of the General Assembly stated, I quote, “this process will be put at risk if we fail to make real progress”, end quote. Japan fully shares this recognition and urges all Member States to be faithful to our commitment to “instil new life” in the discussions and to engage constructively in the IGN process.
Madam Co-Chairs,
Let me briefly reiterate Japan’s position regarding today’s agenda. We heard again during the last meeting, an overwhelming majority of the Member States express their support for an expansion in both categories. Only by expanding both permanent and nonpermanent categories can we realize a truly representative Council with the legitimacy it needs and with increased and enhanced representation of countries with the capacity and willingness to contribute to the maintenance of international peace and security. An expansion only in the non-permanent category, by contrast, will fixate the underrepresentation of developing countries and the historical regional imbalance within the permanent category.
Also, in the first meeting, an overwhelming majority stated that Africa should be represented in the Council in both categories. Japan reiterates its support for the Common African Position as stipulated in the Ezulwini Consensus and the Sirte Declaration, including African permanent seats with all the prerogatives and privileges of permanent membership including the right of veto.
Furthermore, Japan shares the recognition that the Council has at times been unable to fulfill its mandate and failed to address humanitarian crises due to the exercise of the right of veto. Japan has therefore joined the “Political Declaration on Suspension of Veto Powers in Cases of Mass Atrocity” initiated by France and Mexico and supports the Code of Conduct regarding Security Council action against genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes.
There seems to be considerable gaps between different positions on veto, especially between that of the UFC and the Common African Position, which call for further in-depth discussion among delegations and groups.
Madam Co-Chairs,
If we are “to make real progress” on these and other difficult issues, the minimum first step would be to have a record of our discussion. Otherwise, as it has been in the past 12 years, the same discussion will
be repeated again and again like a broken record, and no progress will be achieved.
If we are to break away from this situation in this 75th commemorative session and “instil new life” in our discussion, the minimum procedural actions we should all agree are:
- No.1 Application of the General Assembly rule of procedures
- No.2 Preparation by the Co-Chairs of a single consolidated document that compiles the positions stated by the Member States.
This is not a proposal to promote any specific position, but a proposal to “give this (IGN) process a chance”, as stated by the President of the General Assembly in the last meeting.
I thank you.