Pakistan opposes new category of members
Pakistan on Tuesday opposed any move to create a new category of permanent members “without veto powers” on the UNSC.
UNITED NATIONS:
Pakistan on Tuesday opposed any move to create a new category of permanent members “without veto powers” on the United Nations Security Council, and reiterated its support for increasing the number of non-permanent members as talks on ways to reform the 15-member body continued.
“There is neither a comprehensible criterion nor a definitive logic” in the UN Charter for adding ‘permanent members without a veto’ to the Security Council, Pakistani Ambassador Abdullah Hussain Haroon told a closed-door session of the General Assembly that was discussing reforming and expanding the council.
India, Germany, Japan and Brazil are aspiring to become new permanent members in an expanded Security Council. But during discussions over the past few days, the existing five veto-wielding permanent members - Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States - have ruled out the possibility of extending veto power to new permanent members.
Full-scale negotiations to restructure the Security Council began in the General Assembly in February last year on five key areas - the categories of membership, the question of veto, regional representation, the size of an enlarged Security Council, and working methods of the council and its relationship with the 192-member assembly.
A house divided
Despite the general agreement on enlarging the council, as part of the UN reform process, member states remain sharply divided over the details.
In July 2005, the so-called group of four, India, Germany, Japan and Brazil, made a bid for 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.
In the same year, 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.
In April 2009, Pakistan also backed a proposal, tabled by Italy and Columbia, which would create a new category of members - not permanent members - with three to five years duration and a possibility to get re-elected.
The proposal envisaged the Security Council’s enlargement by 10 seats to make it a 25-member body.
Balancing the power of veto
Outlining Pakistan’s reasons against including permanent members without a veto in the council, Ambassador Haroon said an addition of permanent members would undermine the leverage of non-permanent members to keep the veto-power in check.
“Addition of permanent members would further tilt the equation away from electable non-permanent seats, thus eroding the democratic and accountable credentials of the Council,” he said.
Published in The Express Tribune, July 14th, 2010.
Pakistan on Tuesday opposed any move to create a new category of permanent members “without veto powers” on the United Nations Security Council, and reiterated its support for increasing the number of non-permanent members as talks on ways to reform the 15-member body continued.
“There is neither a comprehensible criterion nor a definitive logic” in the UN Charter for adding ‘permanent members without a veto’ to the Security Council, Pakistani Ambassador Abdullah Hussain Haroon told a closed-door session of the General Assembly that was discussing reforming and expanding the council.
India, Germany, Japan and Brazil are aspiring to become new permanent members in an expanded Security Council. But during discussions over the past few days, the existing five veto-wielding permanent members - Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States - have ruled out the possibility of extending veto power to new permanent members.
Full-scale negotiations to restructure the Security Council began in the General Assembly in February last year on five key areas - the categories of membership, the question of veto, regional representation, the size of an enlarged Security Council, and working methods of the council and its relationship with the 192-member assembly.
A house divided
Despite the general agreement on enlarging the council, as part of the UN reform process, member states remain sharply divided over the details.
In July 2005, the so-called group of four, India, Germany, Japan and Brazil, made a bid for 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.
In the same year, 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.
In April 2009, Pakistan also backed a proposal, tabled by Italy and Columbia, which would create a new category of members - not permanent members - with three to five years duration and a possibility to get re-elected.
The proposal envisaged the Security Council’s enlargement by 10 seats to make it a 25-member body.
Balancing the power of veto
Outlining Pakistan’s reasons against including permanent members without a veto in the council, Ambassador Haroon said an addition of permanent members would undermine the leverage of non-permanent members to keep the veto-power in check.
“Addition of permanent members would further tilt the equation away from electable non-permanent seats, thus eroding the democratic and accountable credentials of the Council,” he said.
Published in The Express Tribune, July 14th, 2010.