I have the honor to deliver these remarks on behalf of the G-4- Brazil, India, Japan and my country Germany.
We commend the Co-Chairs for their persistent efforts to advance progress in the IGN and appreciate the early start of this year’s cycle. However, we note with concern that discussions continue on the five clusters of reform, as they have for the past 16 years.
We have already made significant progress: the Pact for the Future provides us with a unique opportunity to advance negotiations on the reform of the Security Council in a meaningful way:
We have a clear objective of preparing a consolidated model as soon as possible, in line with the call made by all world leaders in the Pact for the Future. While we continue to encourage all Member States to submit and update their proposals, we must not wait indefinitely to begin actual negotiations on a consolidated model.
In our view, the widespread demand from Member States for an expansion in both membership categories must be reflected in the consolidated model. We need to enhance the participation of under- and unrepresented regional groups, and of those significantly contributing to international peace and security in the Security Council.
Additionally, the widely shared support for greater representation of Africa in line with the Common African Position can only be realized through an expansion in both categories.
We would like to underline that the commitment of G4 in this regard is real. Proforma statements that seek expansion only in the non-permanent category, excluding the permanent category, are incongruent with the so called support for Common African Position and greater representation of Africa in the
Council.
The G-4's position on the veto is well-established: while new permanent members should, in principle, bear the same responsibilities and obligations as current ones, they would not exercise the veto until a decision on the matter is reached during a review. We have, however, also signaled openness and flexibility on this issue and seek to foster constructive negotiations.
We would also like to encourage a restrained use of this instrument. Notably, some current permanent members have refrained from using their veto power for decades. This demonstrates, how meaningful engagement as a permanent member is possible without relying on the use of the veto.
Recognizing the importance of the veto issue, we believe it should be addressed alongside other critical topics. However, it is essential that the question of the veto does not obstruct progress on the broader issue of Council reform.