Statement by H.E. Carolyn Rodrigues-Birkett, Permanent Representative of Guyana to the UN, at UNSC meeting on “Maintenance of international peace & security: Addressing the historical injustice & enhancing Africa’s effective representation in the UNSC"
Your Excellency President Julius Maada Bio,
Please accept my delegation’s appreciation for convening this debate on a subject of longstanding concern to Guyana – addressing the historical injustice and enhancing Africa’s effective representation in the United Nations Security Council. I also thank Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, President of the General Assembly, and Ms. Sithembile Mbete for their insightful perspectives.
Mr. President,
The matter of Africa’s underrepresentation on the Security Council and addressing this historical injustice continues to feature prominently in discussions concerning the reform of the organ. Guyana therefore sees this as a historic moment today to extend that debate to this table – in the Council itself for the first time. As members of the Council, we are uniquely positioned to proffer perspectives on this subject since we are intimately acquainted with the impacts of Africa’s underrepresentation on the Council.
In this regard, I take this opportunity to reaffirm Guyana’s support for the Common African Position as expressed in the Ezulwini Consensus and Sirte Declaration. We support expansion of African representation in the non-permanent category of membership and Africa’s aspiration to permanent membership as part of a broader reform of the Security Council that also addresses the deficit in permanent membership from other regions including my own Latin America and the Caribbean region.
Indeed, Mr. President, the role and power of the Security Council and its current membership is perhaps the greatest of all international paradoxes in a rules-based system. On the one hand, the Council is the only UN organ whose decisions and resolutions are binding on all UN Member States. On the other, it is the most unrepresentative and undemocratic. This must be addressed with urgency.
Against this backdrop, allow me, Mr. President, to put forward a few points for reflection.
First, Guyana’s engagement on the Council over the last several months has reinforced to us the primacy of politics in decision-making, sometimes trumping principle on extremely critical issues. We must consider how this affects the interests of affected countries, particularly those in the throes of conflict and war. Underrepresented regions such as Africa from which a comparatively higher number of items feature on the Council’s agenda are therefore at a disadvantage since this translates to underrepresentation in decision-making on matters that are of direct interest to the region. Even in instances where the strength of Africa’s advocacy is enhanced through a coordinated approach in mechanisms such as the A3+, this can easily be countered by the use of the veto in a manner that is contrary to the interests of the country or region concerned.
This takes me to my second point which concerns the use of the veto. In discussions on the reform of the Security Council, some advocate for expanded permanent membership but without the veto privilege. Guyana does not support this proposition since it advocates the creation of hierarchies of members in the permanent category. Moreover, it will perpetuate the injustice which is the subject of our discussion today by restricting the prerogatives of new permanent members, including from Africa. While we firmly support the abolition of the veto itself, Guyana contends that as long as it continues to exist, all new permanent members should have the prerogative of its use. To do otherwise would also perpetuate the existing imbalance on the Council – the one we are trying to fix.
Notwithstanding, the use of the veto has to be curtailed. It should never be used to paralyze the Council in cases of mass atrocities such as genocide, war crime and crimes against humanity when the expectation of Council action is great given its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. We have extant examples of how effective Council action is stymied when civilians are in extreme circumstances and desperately need Council intervention to survive.
My third point is therefore a warning about the privilege of power inherent in permanent membership. This privilege does not exist in silos but comes with attendant responsibility. The Charter clearly provides that the Council acts on behalf of all Members of the United Nations when carrying out its duties for the maintenance of international peace and security. It is therefore a legitimate expectation, indeed a responsibility, that the Council would be attendant to the interests of the wider membership on peace and security issues, especially where there is broad consensus for the Council to take decisions of a particular nature on specific issues.
I cite, for example, Mr. President, the case of the decades-long Israeli/Palestinian conflict. The Council’s relevance risks erosion when the privilege of power is weaponized against the very people it is supposed to defend and protect. The Council’s relevance is also at risk when the privilege of power restricts enforcement of decisions. For this reason, justified accusations of impotence continue to be levelled at this Council. Those countries with this privilege and those that aspire to permanent membership with all its prerogatives must be seized of this perspective and commit to not weaponizing the privilege of power to pursue narrow self-interests, including in situations where the principle of the responsibility to protect must guide Council action.
My fourth and final point Mr. President, concerns accountability. While the Charter is clear that the Council acts on behalf of all Member States, Guyana firmly believes that elected members of the Council demonstrate a greater sense of responsibility to their constituents, that is to the General Assembly that elected them and their home populations that support them. This sense of responsibility is often the driving force behind actions by elected members, including greater involvement by non-Council members in the work of the Council. I am therefore hopeful that the election of new permanent members to the Council would translate to an increased sense of responsibility and accountability, and to more actions driven by this.
Mr. President,
As with most difficult questions on the UN’s agenda, the requisite political will can facilitate an early and long overdue reform of the Council needed to bring it in line with the current composition of the UN membership, making it better fit for purpose.
We must muster the political will now, or face the UN’s only law making body losing both its credibility and legitimacy, thus risking greater global instability. Addressing the historical injustice against Africa is central in this regard.
I thank you.
