25 Jan 2021
1 Co-Chairs, my delegation congratulates you both on your appointment to guide the IGN process this year. We are glad that the IGN is resuming its work after almost a year’s hiatus due to the COVID-19 pandemic. We hope that all delegations will seize the opportunity of this new cycle of meetings to engage seriously in order to make tangible progress. We look to the Co-Chairs to organise and steer our work in a manner that will allow us to move beyond the usual repetition of well-known positions towards concrete outcomes.
2 The vastly divergent views on the complex issue of Security Council reform are at the crux of why we have not been able to make progress in the IGN. As the Co-Chairs noted in their letter of 8 December, there is general agreement among the UN membership on the need for and importance of Security Council reform. The problem is that we have been unable to agree on the terms for reform or the type of reform. Every year that passes without progress injects a greater sense of urgency and expectation in terms of outcomes from the IGN process. Every year that passes without progress also creates a greater degree of frustration and fatigue. In recent years, the question has arisen whether the IGN should remain the appropriate platform to continue discussing Security Council reform if it is unable to show any demonstrable progress. The question has also arisen as to whether we should continue employing the current working methods in the IGN if they are unable to produce any results.
3 From Singapore’s perspective, we must make progress on the issue of Security Council reform in order to make the Security Council more effective, efficient and responsive, so that it may act swiftly and decisively when confronted with global crises. This is critical to ensuring that the Security Council remains credible, that it is accountable, and that its decisions enjoy legitimacy. This is necessary to strengthen the United Nations and the multilateral system. A continued failure to do so will erode the trust that people have in the Security Council, and the United Nations.
4 The IGN is the only process that is mandated to discuss reform of the Security Council, and my delegation believes it is a process that can still produce results if it engages in serious negotiations. What is key here is that we should not damage the credibility and legitimacy of the IGN process. The merits of the IGN process are its informal and inter-governmental nature. However, if the IGN process is to be regarded as credible and effective, then it must show it can deliver results and make progress. A key part of this is to have a single, consolidated draft document to focus our attention and that will facilitate text-based negotiations. At the same time, my delegation is open to all options and to adjusting how we work in the IGN if this offers a viable path to making concrete progress.
5 During the debate in the General Assembly last November on this issue, my delegation outlined what we saw as important elements for the resumption of the IGN process and taking our discussions forward.
6 First, Member States must acknowledge and build on the work of previous years. We must expand the areas of convergence to find compromises or landing zones in areas where there continue to be differences. For Singapore, the 2015 Framework Document is the most important reference document that should continue to inform our work as we take discussions forward on the Revised Elements of Commonality and Issues for Further Consideration. We are open to updating and expanding on the existing paper on the Revised Elements of Commonality in its current form. Alternatively, we are also open to capturing its substance and key points in a different way if that helps facilitate discussions or better reflects the progress we have made. Regardless, all views must continue to be listened to, and all options on how to proceed should remain on the table, including taking a different approach if necessary if progress continues to remain elusive.
7 Second, reform of the Security Council can only succeed if there is a strong foundation of trust, understanding and agreement among Member States to strengthen the multilateral system. It is important for delegations to build confidence and increase the level of trust in the way they engage each other on this issue, whether that be in the IGN process itself, through informal discussions or small group interactions. There must be real conversations not just foghorn statements posturing for political effect. The Permanent Members also have an important role and responsibility to play in this regard, and it is imperative that they show leadership in the reform process.
8 Third, my delegation strongly believes that the IGN must carry out its full schedule of work this year even if the COVID situation deteriorates further. Ideally, this should be through in-person meetings such as the one we are having today. But if that is not possible, then the IGN must be prepared to work in virtual format if necessary, so that our interactions and substantive discussions on this important issue continue.
9 Turning now to the issue of substance. There has been no change in Singapore’s substantive positions on the central aspects of Security Council reform, and I will not repeat them here as they are well-known. Instead, I will briefly address the Co-Chair’s request for delegations to clarify their positions on the cluster of “Regional Representation”.
10 The composition of the Security Council must be updated to reflect the diversity of the UN membership that exists today, as well as to reflect contemporary geopolitical realities. This means greater geographical representation and inclusivity in the Council, especially from under-represented and unrepresented regions. In our view, this means there must be equitable representation of Africa as well as of small states and Small Island Developing States. We note and welcome the inclusion of the reference in the Commonalities paper to the increasing support for the Common African Position.
11 Reform of the Security Council must increase opportunities for all Member States to seek election to the Council on a regular basis. It should take into account the interests of small states and of small island developing states, and enhance opportunities for their representation in the Council. Most importantly, any reform exercise should not disadvantage or further marginalise small states. In this respect, Singapore supports the creation of additional non-permanent seats specifically designated for small states and SIDS. We therefore welcome the UfC proposal for one new rotating seat for small states and SIDS. At the same time, we believe the UfC proposal for the creation of nine new longer-term non-permanent seats needs to be carefully studied. The impact of such a new category on small states is unclear, particularly in terms of how this may disadvantage small states. As Singapore has not yet decided our position on the specific details of the regional distribution of potential additional seats, or on the formula for cross-regional representation in an enlarged Council for small states, SIDS and Arab States, I will not comment on that today.
12 To conclude, we are the crossroads where it is critical that the IGN shows that it is a useful process that can continue to serve the interests of Member States and meet the expectations of the wider UN membership by delivering tangible results on the issue of Security Council reform. I assure you of Singapore’s continued commitment to work constructively with all delegations to make progress in the coming months on this important issue. Thank you.
. . . . .