Mr President,

First of all, thank you to both Co-Chairs of the Informal Working Group for their valuable work. I would also like to thank speakers, especially Ms. Kandiah Thompson and Ms. Sievers, for their insightful briefings.

Germany has long called for a comprehensive reform of the Security Council for it to reflect the realities of the 21st century. Underrepresented regions and countries significantly contributing to global peace and security need stronger representation in both permanent and non-permanent membership categories. The other part is of course the working methods, which must be made for purpose.

Because: the membership of the United Nations - that is to say, our people in all countries - rightfully expects that the Council to deliver solutions to the issues on its agenda.

I want to make four brief points:

Firstly, on penholdership. Looking at the changing world, it is hard to understand why the lead of most files on the Council’s agenda is concentrated in the hands of only a few members. Countries from conflict regions, or those who actively contribute to solving conflicts should act as co-penholders more frequently. This is possible, and has been done in the past. Germany was proud to act as the first non-P5 co-penholder in the Council during our last Security Council tenure, where we cooperated closely with the United Kingdom, in sharing the pen on Libya sanctions and Darfur.

Secondly, on cooperation among elected members. The diversity of the E10, in our view, is a valuable asset that, if fully harnessed, can greatly enhance the Council's performance. When united, the E10 are more powerful. Recently, the E10 have proven their ability to find solutions when the humanitarian situation in the Middle East gridlocked the P5. The E10 could further improve their co-operation and present their own drafts. Consultations between incoming and incumbent E10 could also help to define common priorities and pave the way for smooth co-operation and transitions of membership.

Thirdly, on UN system coherence. The Security Council should systematically draw on the expertise of other UN bodies. From our experience as Chair of the UN Peacebuilding Commission and as the biggest long-term donor of the Peacebuilding Fund, the UN peacebuilding architectures has great potential and is extremely valuable, particularly in post-conflict settings. This is evident in many cases and is becoming more evident aspeacekeeping missions mandated by this Council are drawing down. And we have successful examples like Liberia and Sierra Leone that showcase how transitions benefit from a close cooperation between the Security Council and peacebuilding institutions.

And finally, on the use of the veto. Let's be clear: the veto has been misused in the past. And using the veto,to mainly and clearly advance national interests undermines the credibility and effectiveness of the Council. The use of the veto is particularly inacceptable when a permanent member itself has initiated a conflict and is part of a conflict Germany welcomes efforts to limit its use in particular in cases of genocide, in cases of crimes against humanity and war crimes on a large scale. When countless lives are at risk, then, there should be no right to veto.

Mr President, in closing, let me say:

Transparency, efficiency, and accountability within the Security Council are not merely nice words or elusive goals to strive for — they are essential to its effectiveness and legitimacy in the eyes of the world. We will continue to advocate strongly for these issues, within the Council today - and beyond.

Thank you very much.