Distinguished Chair, Excellencies, colleagues,

I deliver this statement on behalf of the G4 – Brazil, India, Japan and my own country, Germany.

We thank you, Chair, for your continued commitment to advancing the IGN, and we express our appreciation for the preparation of the revised Elements Paper, which provides your personal understanding of the state of discussions in the IGN.

We recognize and appreciate the continued efforts to identify points of convergence and divergence across the five clusters. However, as the objective parameters for drawing them up are not agreed, much less the convergences and divergences themselves, differences arise as to the accuracy of the characterization of the overall state of play. Further, as we all know, this document in this current format does not offer a path toward real progress, given that the Elements Paper is not an agreed text and it provides only partial attribution of positions. Without text-based negotiations, we risk continuing this discouraging cycle of repetition.

Having reserved our general position regarding the role of the revised Elements Paper in our work, the Group offers four specific substantive remarks. Due to the late distribution, we were unable to secure enough time to consider, so we will also be submitting comments in written form for your kind consideration.

First, the Pact for the Future does reaffirm the significant role of the IGN for the discussion of the Security Council reform. However, in no way does it qualify the IGN as the exclusive Member State-led platform to carry this agenda forward, as indicated in the beginning of the revised Elements Paper, in contradiction with a similar passage later in the document. We formally request that this formulation be revised.

Second, we wish to express our concern about the way convergences under the category of membership are currently framed. No model or group has advocated for expansion in the 2-year non-permanent category alone. It should therefore not be seen as a viable standalone option. Doing so does misrepresent the actual state of the discussion and undermine the calls by a majority of member states and groups for expansion in the permanent category. We reiterate that the G4 understands the reference to “as part of a comprehensive Security Council reform” as meaning a reform that encompasses the expansion in both categories.

Third, we note that the Paper includes attribution in various places. In this spirit, we strongly encourage the Chair to clarify the current wording regarding “a significant number of delegations” supporting expansion in both categories. We believe it would add precision and transparency to spell out that this majority position includes, at least, the African Group, the Arab Group, CARICOM, the G4, the L.69 Group, the Nordic Group, the Benelux countries, and four permanent members of the Council.

Finally, we would like to recall that in last year’s Elements Paper, it was rightly acknowledged that several delegations, not just one, had raised questions regarding the inclusion of different cross-regional groups as part of a convergence on regional representation. As we do not believe that these questions have been fully resolved, we respectfully request either retaining last year’s formulation or omitting this as a convergence altogether.

Now, what is the way forward in the IGN? We have taken note of the discussions of various models that have taken place in the past two sessions. It is now time to consolidate those discussions in a form of a text. G4 has long called for text-based negotiations, and we reiterate this call today. It is time for a consolidated model that can serve as a basis for negotiations, as also highlighted in your Revised Elements Paper.

As the United Nations approaches its 80th anniversary, it is facing one of the most severe crises in its history. We must restore the effectiveness, credibility and authority of this institution. Security Council reform is central to that task. Let us waste no more time – let us move to action.

Thank you.