SECURITY COUNCIL EXPANSION: THE FUTURE OF THE

C O N F I D E N T I A L USUN NEW YORK 001718

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

FOR IO/UNP:BHARRIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 09/04/2011
TAGS: PREL KUNR UNSC UNGA
SUBJECT: SECURITY COUNCIL EXPANSION: THE FUTURE OF THE
OPEN-ENDED WORKING GROUP

REF: USUN 1488

Classified By: Ambassador John R. Bolton, Permanent Representative, for
reasons 1.4 b,d.


1. (U) The Open Ended Working Group (OEWG) on Security
Council Reform (officially "The OEWG on the Question of
Equitable Representation on and Increase in the Membership of
the Security Council and Other Matters related to the
Security Council") will meet on Friday, September 8 to
approve this year's report and to recommend continuing the
working group's activities in the 61st GA Session. The draft
report and recommendations have been circulated to Member
States and are available through the UN Document System
(A/AC.247/2006/L.1).


2. (C) Dutch Poloff (protect) told USUN that a number of the
strongest advocates for expansion of the Council were
pressing the President of the General Assembly (PGA) and the
two vice-chairs to abolish the OEWG and replace it with a
working group like those created to facilitate the
negotiation of the Human Rights Council and the Peacebuilding
Commission. (Note: Dutch comments indicated that they - as
one of the vice-chairs - might be sympathetic to these
arguments.) The argument is that the OEWG has outlived its
usefulness, having met every year since its establishment in
December 1993. They also argue that, as the call for Council
expansion was included in the 2005 Summit Outcome Document,
the issue should be treated in the same manner as other
post-Summit initiatives (HRC, PBC, Mandate Review, ECOSOC
reform, etc). On each of these other issues, PGA Eliasson
established a working group of the GA and assigned two
co-chairs to facilitate the process.


3. (C) Those advocating for the new format claim that the
OEWG's consensus-based rules effectively block agreement on
the most difficult issues regarding expansion. They believe
that a working group format would provide a venue for actual
negotiations on resolution text, similar to that which
produced the HRC and PBC. And, citing the vote required to
create the HRC, they argue that absolute consensus should not
be allowed to "block progress." While there does not yet
appear to be consensus to replace the OEWG with a "Summit
follow-up working group", we note that the report to be
considered on September 8 includes a call to consider "the
mandate and functions" of the OEWG (para 17e) which has not
been present in previous years' text and may present an
opening to advance this proposal. The Uniting For Consensus
countries, including Pakistan, Italy and Canada, will
fiercely oppose inclusion of this language.


4. (C) Comment. USUN is working quietly with like-minded
delegations to ensure the report language adopted on
September 8 is consistent with previous years' text and the
consensus-based OEWG continues in the 61st Session. The
creation of a "facilitated" working group would overstate the
membership's current interest in tackling the subject or the
likelihood of a successful negotiated outcome. More
importantly, these working groups, as our experience of the
past year amply demonstrates, undermine Member States'
control of the negotiation process. End Comment.
BOLTON