IGN fifth round - Way Forward for the IGN Process

(4-5 May 2023)

Remarks by Ambassador Ruchira Kamboj

Permanent Representative of India to the UN

------

We thank the Permanent Mission of Kuwait and Austria for organizing this timely fifth and final round of IGN discussions. We align with the statements delivered by G-4 and L-69 this morning and wish to make the following additional remarks in our national capacity.

2. We do positively acknowledge the initiatives taken by the present co-Chairs Kuwait and Austria with regard to webcasting and opening of a website repository. We reiterate our appreciation for the efforts of the Co-Chairs in taking this small positive step this year. However, we need to take credible steps to instill new life in the discussions on the reform of the Security Council. This was the commitment of our leaders in the UN 75 Declaration.

3. We believe the co-Chairs Elements Paper serves a critical role in this pursuit. It provides a clear indication of where we stand collectively; how we approach the five aspects of UNSC reform; and the elements of convergence and divergence. The Elements Paper and the Framework document, along with the roll over decision provides continuity to our work. In this context, let me recall here that President of the 76th UN General Assembly HE Abdullah Shahid in his letter presenting the roll over decision last year had clearly urged member states to undertake text-based negotiations based on the Elements Paper and Framework document. Regrettably, we are far from reaching that goal post, despite our collective efforts and able stewardship of co-Chairs.

4. In this context, we note the transmission of the Revised Co-Chairs’ Elements Paper before this fifth round of the IGN. The Paper has a few sensitive elements that my G-4 and L-69 colleagues have already mentioned. Therefore, it is appropriate that delegations are given adequate time to analyze the Paper and revert with feedback.

5. We also need to be cognizant of the fact that the IGN process is a democratic process, and it is our collective responsibility to ensure that Elements Paper accurately reflects its deliberations. The Elements Paper, in the past, has been the agreed outcome of an informal process based on the principles of transparency, inclusiveness and equality. The IGN process doesn’t work on presumed discretionary powers, and I am sure our co-Chairs will agree with me on this.

6. As I stated in the beginning, we have a collective pursuit to instill life into the IGN process. The roll over decision is integral to determining the trajectory of the IGN in the next session, and therefore, is a substantive decision of critical importance. It remains the only formal documentation to emerge out of the General Assembly with respect to the IGN. We need to work constructively to see that we make progress. We also expect the Elements Paper to be a progressive step. Towards this end, we hope the co-Chairs will consider the views of the membership in the interest of the IGN process. Thus, it is our minimal expectation that the Elements Paper accurately reflects the area of divergences and convergences. For example, it was clear from the interventions that a large majority of the Member States supported expansion of both permanent and non-permanent categories. To say, anything beyond this, and present it as convergence is just an imagination.

7. Conceptually, while we may all have our respective national positions or may even subscribe to or align with some regional grouping positions, when we discuss ‘the way forward’, as this round of IGN has set out to do, we need to fundamentally address three basic questions:

Question One. Can we practice “reformed” multilateralism in the 21st century through a body like the present UN Security Council that celebrates the principle “to the victor belong the spoils” privileged more than three generations ago?

Question Two. The UN Charter as indicated by Article 109 of the Charter never wanted it to be cast in stone for perpetuity, and that’s why it had recommended a General Review Conference of the Charter to be held before the 10th UN General Assembly. 77 years later, we are nowhere closer to making that a reality. Why is this stasis acceptable state of affairs?

Question Three. Can we practice “reformed” or “effective” multilateralism by defending a Charter that makes five nations (*P-5) more equal than others, and provides to each of those five the power to ignore the collective will of the remaining 188 member states?

8. UN General Assembly, through its decision 62/557 of the year 2008, is explicit in the need for this reform process to be member-state driven, based on member states' proposals, done in good faith and with mutual respect. To this end, we emphasize that the early commencement of text-based negotiations remains the very essence of the spirit of Decision 62/557. A text prepared on the basis of member states’ proposals is part of a member state-driven process, while the subsequent negotiation and agreement by member states make it member state-owned.

9. Finally, as we come to this fifth round of IGN, we will do well to recall that this past September, during the High-Level Week, the UNGA heard unequivocal calls for comprehensive and meaningful reforms from more than 70 global leaders. These calls must be answered. We must all realize that the clock is ticking and turning the other way in the face of global challenges is just not an option for multilateral institutions rarely die. We need to have a clear timeline for IGN process and begin text based negotiations. Let’s ACT before the UN itself loses its relevance.

Thank you!

-----