Permanent Mission of India
New York

--

IGN meeting on Security Council reforms – G4 Statement

Statement by Ambassador Harish Parvathaneni, Permanent Representative
21 January 2026

Distinguished co-Chairs, Excellencies and Colleagues,

I deliver the statement on behalf of G4 – a reform-oriented group consisting of Brazil, Germany, Japan and my own country, India.

2. At the outset, I would like to congratulate the co-Chairs, Ambassador Tareq of Kuwait and Ambassador Lise of Netherlands, on their appointment to this important position. The group also expresses its sincere appreciation to them for convening the first IGN meeting during the current session.

3. The context of today’s meeting is very significant. The world is going through unprecedented times. Challenges of diverse nature are emerging on an almost every day basis. The universal multilateral organization, the United Nations, is no exception either. The credibility and efficacy of the organization are being called to question. The limitations of the UN in meaningfully addressing raging conflicts across the globe are a driving reason for this phenomenon, although it is a part of much wider power dynamics.

4. Co-chairs, the UN was founded 80 years ago with the hope of maintaining and sustaining peace for humanity. The foundational principle of this organization was clear – maintenance of international peace and security. As a principal organ, the United Nations Security Council was entrusted with this critical responsibility. Therefore, the UN’s shortcomings in terms of delivering on this vital function are inherently linked to the lack of effectiveness of the Security Council. Against this backdrop, the G4 would like to make the following points:

First, the need for reforming the UNSC is getting more pronounced by the day. Further delays in implementing timely reforms would result in more human suffering and misery. The ongoing conflicts come at a heavy cost – countless innocent lives are lost on a daily basis. We do not have the luxury of time to engage in cycles of meetings that are devoid of outcomes. We must collectively make every moment count.

Second, the G4 has been consistent and categorical about the essential ingredients for an outcome-centric process. Negotiations on the basis of a text, which stipulate clearly laid out milestones and timelines, are central to this. G4 remains committed to working towards a consolidated model as this could be the precursor for text-based negotiations.

Third, G4’s advocacy clearly outlined its vision for a reformed UN Security Council. The size must be increased from the present 15 to 25 or 26 seats. The increase must entail expansion in both permanent and non-permanent categories.

Fourth, reflection of contemporary geo-political realities is the fundamental principle driving the G4 model. Therefore, a reformed UN Security Council must have balanced geographic representation. The means for achieving this is by enhancing the presence of unrepresented and underrepresented regions. Let me elaborate. There must be six new permanent members – two from the African region, two from the Asia Pacific, one from GRULAC, and one from WEOG; and 4 or 5 additional non-permanent members – one or two from Africa, one from Asia Pacific, and one each from GRULAC and the EEG.

Fifth, our model is aligned with addressing the gross lack of appropriate representation of the Global South on the Security Council. It is based on established norms in the UN. We subscribe to giving due consideration to the case of SIDS for their continued and adequate representation in the non-permanent category. Proposals to introduce new parameters, such as religious affiliation run counter to established UN practice and add considerable complexity to an already difficult discussion.

Sixth, our support for unrepresented and under-represented regions is clear and firm. G4 has specified its formula to address the historical injustices against Africa. This is distinct from general calls, without specifics and references to their presence in the permanent category in a reformed UN Security Council. As we said in the past, one cannot say they support addressing such injustices and, at the same time, oppose the expansion in the permanent category. We will tackle the problem for real if and only if States from unrepresented regions are elected for permanent seats.

Finally, it is the earnest wish of G4 to see tangible progress during the current session. For decades, status-quoists have been posing hurdles and impeding forward movement. In so doing, they contribute to the failure of the Security Council that, as stated earlier, help fuel serious questioning of legitimacy and credibility of this Organization. Groups and member states inclined on achieving real reforms need to come together and resist these efforts.

I thank you, co-Chairs.

***