Intergovernmental Negotiations (IGN) on Security Council reform

Excellencies, Co-Chairs,

I have the honour to speak on behalf of the Benelux countries, the Kingdom of the Netherlands, Luxembourg and my own country, Belgium.

At the outset, allow me to express our gratitude to you, Ambassador Albanai and Ambassador Marschik, Co-Chairs of the IGN, for convening this meeting. You have succeeded to bring new energy to the IGN-process. Last month’s first round of structured dialogues on reform models gave us new perspectives and we look forward to another fruitful and rich discussion today. We also remain hopeful that this new approach will contribute to foster convergences and will enable the start of text-based negotiations which in our view is a prerequisite to achieve a comprehensive reform of the Security Council.

We welcome the detailed presentation by Ambassador King, the distinguished Permanent Representative of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines on behalf of the L.69 Group. We appreciate that the L.69 model provides detailed proposals on all five key issues of the IGN.

We note that the L.69 group proposes an expansion in both categories of permanent and non-permanent members, resulting in an enlarged Security Council of 27 seats. We further note that the L.69 has outlined specific proposals on the regional representation and the allocation of the additional seats.

As stated during last month’s IGN session, the Benelux countries are also in favour of an expansion - albeit limited - in both the permanent and non-permanent membership categories with the exact number to emerge from discussions between Member States on the key issues of ‘categories of membership’ and ‘regional representation’. The Benelux countries believe that the reform of the Security Council is needed to make it more representative, democratic, transparent, accountable and effective. We agree with the L.69 group that any enlarged Security Council should be more representative of today’s world and in particular reflect the legitimate aspirations of the African Group.

In addition, the Benelux countries, like the L.69 group, support an increased representation of developing countries and small- and medium-sized Member States, including Small Island Developing States in the Security Council.

We would like to seek clarifications on the following three points:

-          First, the use of the veto has often prevented the Security Council from effectively assuming its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. You pointed out in your presentation that the use of the veto has increased again recently. The Benelux countries believe that special consideration should be given to address ways to limit the use of the veto. We also believe that the potential adverse impact of additional veto powers on the functioning of a future expanded Security Council must be thoroughly considered and discussed. The L.69 model proposes a total of 11 veto powers and states that all new members of the permanent category must enjoy all the prerogatives and privileges of permanent membership including the right to veto. How can the addition of six new veto powers be beneficial to the, accountability and effectiveness of the Council? In your presentation today, you mentioned the introduction of an "override mechanism", a mechanism that would make it possible to overcome the veto. Could you tell us how such a mechanism might work?

-          Second, the L.69 model proposes changing the working methods of the Security Council and to abolish closed meetings. Would there be special circumstances under which closed sessions could still be held?

-          Third, could you share more information on the envisaged review? When would it take place and what elements would be included in the review?

I thank you.