|
|
Mr. President,
Thank you for giving me the floor.
The Pakistan delegation aligns itself with the statement made by Italy on behalf of the Uniting for Consensus group. We have supported the oral decision you have proposed to continue the IGN process on Security Council reform. We believe it is a technical roll over for continuation of the process.
We fully understand the difficult position you have found yourself in, which resulted in your inability to fully reflect the fact that a limited dialogue substituted for an IGN process this year.
As the UfC has consistently asserted, meaningful reform of the Security Council can be achieved only if there is genuine consensus among member States. The agreed objective of the IGN process is a "negotiated solution with the widest possible political acceptance of member states”.
What we witnessed this year in the IGN was a flawed process. The Chair's actions were arbitrary and not impartial. There was no attempt to reflect the legitimately held and well known positions of a large section of the Membership; no serious effort was made to reflect divergent views or to bridge differences. Discussions were confrontational rather than constructive. The document which has been produced is partial and incomplete. It cannot provide the basis for a negotiated solution.
Thus, the IGN's work this year was a step backwards; not forward. There was regression rather than progress.
We are glad that, despite the constraints put on you, the oral decision acknowledges the need to build on the documents you were provided by the IGN Chair. The UfC would have liked a fuller reflection of our concerns as conveyed to you in our letter of 11 September.
Nevertheless, we will work with others to restore the IGN discussion at the next UNGA session in a constructive and consensual direction. We look to the incoming President of the General Assembly to play an active, impartial and constructive role in reviving the IGN process, taking into account the positions of all parties and the constructive work done at previous sessions of the General Assembly.
Mr. President,
Those who have long sought to use procedural maneuvers to advance their positions on Security Council reform should be aware that such efforts will not and cannot succeed. Mobilizing support on procedures is very different from securing endorsement on substance. Agreement on reform will not be achieved by producing flawed documents through processes that were neither fully inclusive nor completely transparent.
We hope the mistakes of this year will not be repeated in the next session, and the spirit of good faith, transparency and inclusion will be restored to take the process forward in the true sense of the membership driven nature of Decision 62/557.
The one bright spot this year was the in depth and interactive discussion on Security Council reform at the meeting in Rome. The Rome meeting clearly indicated that if reform of the Security Council is to achieve it will need to be a compromise between the divergent views and interests of all Member States and groups. We will draw on the spirit and substance of the Rome meeting to revive the IGN process during the next Assembly.
I thank you, Mr. President.