IGN meeting on SOTF inputs (20-21 May)

UNGA – 20.5.2024 - 1000 hours

REMARKS BY AMBASSADOR RUCHIRA KAMBOJ

Dear Co-Chairs and colleagues,

My delegation wishes to align ourselves with the remarks delivered by SVG on behalf of L-69 and Japan on behalf of G-4 earlier today. We acknowledge the receipt of the draft of advise by IGN Co-Chairs on UNSC reforms; which has set the ball rolling on this critical issue. In addition, in our national capacity, we wish to make the following points:

2. We need to be abreast of the fact that we are discussing the Summit of the Future leadership level engagement, which will define, not just how we perceive UN@80, but also determine the relevance of the organization itself for the 21st century. In the words of the United Nations itself, of which we are all proud members, the Summit is meant to produce “an action-oriented Pact for the Future which will be endorsed by Heads of State/Government at the Summit” in September; aiming to “forge a new global consensus on what our future should look like, and what we can do today to secure it”. In other words, it needs to be able to address the challenges of a “reform or rupture” moment in the history of humankind, as described by Secretary General Guterres himself.

3. At present, the lack of ambition in the draft advise on this critical subject in fact does neither. In other words, low ambition translates into a low hanging fruit, which does not capture the vision of a reformed UNSC, as envisioned by a majority of UN member states seeking expansion in both permanent and non-permanent categories of membership of the UNSC.

4. I have the following points to make on the draft advice:

• First and foremost, on the process itself - A Pact for the Future is an intergovernmentally negotiated outcome document. Resolution 62/557 on Security Council Reforms also calls for intergovernmental negotiations. Hence, any language that the IGN provides to the SoTF should be an outcome of text-based negotiations. It will be important to accept this as a basic premise and principle of our work. If IGN is not able to arrive at negotiated outcome, then it should not provide any inputs at all.

   

• Second, it is critical that the language relating to SCR in SotF is succinct, sharp, leader-like and ambitious; which can be agreed and signed off on by our leadership in the Summit leadership. The draft IGN input so far is not leader like. Further it does not fulfil the format set by the SOTF Pact of the future draft which actually lists actions. The IGN input hardly gives any action-oriented language. There is a lack of ambition, states aspects of a possible outcome of reform without giving a timeline on when the negotiations will begin or end and the draft runs long mirroring aspects of what could be construed as this year’s Roll Over Decision. These are two different matters and should not be linked.

   

• Third, my delegation would also like to raise our reservation on picking and choosing from the convergences section of the Elements Paper. The elements paper is an informal document which often the Co-chairs themselves suggested as a Co Chairs’ summary of the discussions. Picking from certain section of it while ignoring the others is not appropriate with regard to the transparency that we need in a process like this. Further, may I ask why we are not taking inputs from Framework document as it is the submission of member states themselves. The section under Action 1 therefore cannot be only from the convergences section of the elements paper and only from elements paper. This is a redline for my delegation. And it needs to be action oriented and not a mere statement.

• Fourth, the draft contains under Action 3 where the IGN wishes to provide inputs on the working methods of the UNSC. It is important to ensure that IGN does not deviate from its mandate as regards finalizing a resolution which will reform the UNSC as per all five clusters. It cannot start to make informal suggestions, especially in the absence of text-based negotiations. Working methods is an issue GA has been discussing for a long time, even the ‘veto initiative’ resolution which has actually resulted in influencing the working methods of the UNSC did not originate in IGN. Let us be clear, IGN is not an advocacy group and it cannot turn into one just because a few would want to use this platform for half-baked suggestions. Tempering with the mandate of the IGN is a redline for my delegation.

   

• Fifth, Action 2, falls really short of actually suggesting the action that needs to be taken to accelerate the progress on UNSC reforms. Further it does not recall the SDG 16.8 correctly and misses out the point of developing countries which makes us wonder once again about selective picking and choosing on behalf of Co-chairs. Further, on providing support system to IGN or Co-chairs, its bizarre to us that we need our leaders to deliberate on these matters which have not even been fully discussed in the IGN process. It’s simply unbecoming of any input that should be sent for a Leaders declaration.

   

• Lastly, I would like to take this opportunity to go beyond the draft advise to the revised version of the Elements Paper itself. Substantial changes have been made in the revised version which do not reflect the discussions this year objectively. My delegation urges that substantive additions and edits in the revised version of Elements Paper may be dropped and taken up in the next IGN cycle. This is important to ensure for a smooth roll over at the end of this year’s cycle.

   

Dear colleagues,

4. As we move into the final stretch of achieving Agenda 2030, we would do well to be reminded of certain commitments that we the member states have made to ourselves by way of reforming our global governance architecture. Thus, please allow me to refresh our collective memories with regard to Goal 16.8; which notes our combined commitment to “broaden and strengthen the participation of developing countries in the institutions of global governance”.

5. As an intent of our constructive engagement, we renew our call for the following:

• An urgent reform of the UNSC, ensuring that the Security Council in all facets represents 21st century realities and responds effectively to global challenges. Such a reform can only be achieved by ensuring adequate representation of developing countries, especially of unrepresented and under-represented regions and groups, such as Africa and Latin America and the Caribbean as well as Asia and the Pacific, in both categories of membership of the UNSC.

   

• Further, seeking to underline the urgency of UNSC reforms, we reiterate the need to begin text-based negotiations within a fixed time frame, at the earliest, not later than the 80th anniversary of the UN.
   

• Furthermore, we appreciate the language on reforms from the World Summit Outcome Document of 2005 agreed by our leaders included in the draft.

• Lastly, SDG 16.8, where it talks about representation of developing countries in institutions of global governance is the corner stone of UNSC reforms. The paralysis of the UNSC has affected developing countries the worst as it disproportionately impacts the food, fuel, climate and livelihood security of the Global South.

   

7. In the wake of conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza, we all make long statements on the absence of an effective and functioning UNSC. But why do we stop short when we are asked to act, like stitching up a Pact for the Future which is ambitious and forward looking.

8. A more equitable and more democratic global order, best reflected in a truly functional, representative and ‘fit for purpose’ UN Security Council 2.0 for the 21st century, for the future generations. We need to ponder and be able to truthfully answer these questions which will be posed to us come September 2024 not just by our leaders, but also by the people of the world. In our view, what better occasion than the upcoming UN@80 celebrations next year to show the world that we have indeed succeeded in “instilling new life” in both the process and substance of UNSC reforms as promised at UN@75.

Colleagues,

9. The Summit of the Future will be judged on its delivery of reformed multilateralism. It cannot be a Summit of the Past; for that will in our view condemn the edifice of this great institution that has defined multilateralism and its path ahead, to a perilous vicious cycle of fading into irrelevance. Here, I would like to mention India’s Presidency of G-20 last year that ensured that the concerns of the Global South – were placed prominently in the G20 Agenda. The New Delhi Leaders Declaration had also covered the FIVE key chapters identified for the Scope of the Summit of the Future in a timely fashion, thus setting the stage for our ongoing deliberations.

10. As we still run shy of addressing the historical injustices done to Africa, and merely if at all pay lip service to Africa’s permanent representation on the UNSC, on ‘Transforming Global Governance’, an unprecedented transformation of our G-20 Presidency was Africa’s permanent place in the organization. In other words, we have shown where there is political will, multilateralism can and will reform. Similarly, it is now time for UN, a much older institution, to now walk the talk on reforms.

11. Finally, we welcome the opportunity to further discuss the details including language submissions for the SoTF draft with all of you, in a frank and candid manner, and would welcome your thoughts and feedback in the coming days. Let us all not bind ourselves and rush forward with submitting inputs that fail to reflect the will of the majority of UN member states. We still have time till September and we must all utilize it in an optimal fashion. Let us continue to dare to dream big with regard to a Pact for the Future that is truly reflective of a brighter tomorrow. As my Foreign Minister had so aptly put this on the floor of the UNGA last year – “When reality departs from rhetoric, we must have the courage to call it out. Without genuine solidarity, there can never be real trust. This is very much the sentiment of the Global South.”
 

Thank You.