24 April 2009

Member States met on 20 April 2009 to discuss the relationship between the General Assembly and the Security Council in the fifth and last meeting in a first round of negotiations on how to reform the Security Council.

The meeting, which took place in a closed conference room at the UN, was mainly aimed at allowing states to express their respective perspectives on the issue at hand, and not so much at reaching definite agreement at this point.

The Issue

In general, the question of the relationship between the Security Council and General Assembly has been at the center of an ongoing power struggle between the two major organs of the organization.

More specifically, countries not on the Council have often sought more insights into the inner workings of the Council as well as influence over its decisions, and have argued that the annual report of the Council to the Assembly, which is usually a factual account, should be more analytical than it currently is. Furthermore, some countries have also complained that the Council increasingly discusses issues that they feel fall somewhat outside the Council's mandate. On the other hand, permanent members of the Council have largely insisted that the there is no hierarchy between the two bodies.

The Meeting

Before the meeting, the chairman and Afghan Ambassador, Zahir Tanin, had sent a letter to Member States outlining previous debates on the subject to be discussed (click on link for a full list of letters sent before each meeting on Security Council).

In all, almost 70 countries took the floor, with many developing states arguing that the Security Council should refrain from considering issues that fall under the purview of the General Assembly. As the Jamaican ambassador, speaking on behalf of the Caribbean Community, noted in his statement, "The Council should confine its consideration of thematic debates to areas which constitute direct threats to international peace and security."

The Indian ambassador added in his speech that "The Council should remain focused on its mandate and not try to re-define ‘threats to international peace and security'." He continued saying that the Security Council's annual report should be more analytical in nature. The reason that it is currently not, the ambassador said, "is perhaps reflective of the fact that the UNSC remains insufficiently representative, its working methods remain non-inclusive, and its activities remain extremely opaque."

Italy noted that "A central goal of a comprehensive reform of the Council is enhanced accountability of the Council to the whole membership."

Colombia, a member of the UfC, interestingly stepped forward with a proposal involving longer-term seats, and Germany reportedly replied that they could consider longer-term seats instead of the permanent ones they had been advocating for

Reportedly, the permanent members of the Council, on the other hand, appeared rather dismissive. The US apparently noted that the Council acts on behalf of the Member States of the UN, but not on behalf of the General Assembly. According to Chapter V of the UN Charter, they argued, there is no established hierarchy between the Council and the General Assembly.

Way Forward

According to the chairman of the intergovernmental negotiations, Ambassador Tanin of Afghanistan, a second and more focused round of negotiations will be scheduled to take place in mid to late May. Little, however, is currently known about the actual approach to be used, and several countries therefore seized on the opportunity to comment on the way forward, with some reportedly encouraging the chairman to compile a list of all suggestions to date and some calling for an actual draft resolution to be put forward. The chairman is expected to present some kind of response before the start of the next round.

Unless attributed to a specific source, all expressions of opinion are those of the author. The Center for UN Reform Education does not endorse any particular reform proposals.