Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 8 Dec 2004

Vol. 178 No. 24

UN Reform.

Mr. Mooney

I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children, Deputy Tim O'Malley, to the House. I appreciate and acknowledge the fact that the Minister for Foreign Affairs is otherwise engaged on very important matters of state on which all of us in this House wish him and the Government well as they pursue a resolution of the peace process in Northern Ireland.

ln the context of this resolution I think it timely to raise this matter as the high level report on UN reform was published last week. I appreciate the Government had an opportunity to set down its position in the other House and there was a debate on the matter. However, this House which has a long tradition of highlighting issues relating to Ireland's international participation in institutions worldwide, should also have an opportunity to hear the Government's position on the high level report.

I was struck by the phrase in the report in which the panel stated that any reform should increase the involvement of those who contribute most to the UN financially, militarily and diplomatically and make it more representative of the broader membership especially of the developing world. Reforms should also increase the democratic and accountable nature of the body but should not impair the effectiveness of the Security Council. This was published in The Financial Times of Thursday, 2 December 2004 and encapsulates the challenges now facing the UN as a body and Ireland in particular.

Ireland's illustrious history of active participation and support for the United Nations as a body and its membership of the Security Council at critical times in the recent past places it in the centre of the reform initiative. Two models are being proposed and I wish to deal with the second. It would create no permanent seats but would establish a new category of eight four-year renewable term seats which would be shared equally between Asia, Africa, Europe and the Americas. Germany and Japan opposed this idea. They are in favour of the first model which is to create two new rotating seats and six permanent seats without a veto.

Ireland should be central to these debates and discussions because it fulfils all those criteria. We have been committed militarily, financially and diplomatically. I therefore urge the Government to pursue every avenue to ensure Ireland's support for the UN in difficult times would be acknowledged in some practical and effective way.

The report refers to the impairment of the effectiveness of the Security Council. This is having a direct effect on Ireland's international obligations, especially within the European context where the trend is now towards regional solutions to regional conflicts under the UN mandate. The best example is one that has been touted on a number of occasions in the past. When the situation in Macedonia flared within the last two years, the UN and the sentiment of the UN Security Council was towards a UN involvement. China vetoed a UN resolution to provide that mandate because Macedonia had recognised Taiwan, the separate existence of which is opposed by China. Under the triple lock mechanism, Ireland could not participate in that force.

Sweden is a non-aligned country, as distinct from a neutral country, and was able to participate. I recently visited Stockholm and met officials from the Swedish Department of Defence as part of a British-Irish interparliamentary report on the common defence policy implications for Britain and Ireland. They indicated that Sweden sent a force because it interpreted the sentiment of the UN as a body and it wished to be involved. I do not propose nor do I wish to have my remarks interpreted as in any way diluting the triple lock mechanism as it currently operates. That is something for a future debate.

My motion was tabled to provide an opportunity for the Government to outline its views on the reform plan and where it sees the way forward. Unless there is reform of the Security Council, the manner in which it operates and the mechanisms for decision-making, I am firmly of the opinion that the UN as a credible international body will have its reputation severely diminished. Ireland and many other EU countries understand and appreciate this situation. It is a very important issue for this country's international policy position because we are strong supporters of the UN. There has been much criticism by people on all sides of the House about Ireland's provision of fuelling and landing rights at Shannon Airport. Ireland has always operated under a UN mandate. In that context I believe this debate is only beginning. I am anxious to ensure that a wider public debate takes place on what is a long overdue and effective reform of the Security Council and of the UN as a body.

Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Mr. T. O’Malley)

I thank Senator Mooney for raising this matter on the Adjournment. The Senator's question relates to one of the criteria for reform of membership of the United Nations Security Council proposed in the recent report of the UN Secretary General Kofi Annan's high level panel on threats, challenges and change.

By way of background, I should mention that the high level panel was established in November 2003 by Secretary General Kofi Annan to examine how best collective action can meet current and future threats to peace and security. The Secretary General established the panel in response to the increasing strains on the multilateral system evident in 2003, most notably international divisions over Iraq. He memorably described the situation as having reached a "fork in the road" for the United Nations and stated we were in a period as decisive as when the UN was founded in 1945.

Ireland welcomed the establishment of the panel and, during our Presidency, co-ordinated a European Union contribution to it. I am glad to note the central elements of the EU contribution are reflected in the panel's report. Specifically, the panel was tasked with analysing current and future challenges to international peace and security and assessing how best collective action can meet these challenges. It was asked to recommend changes necessary to ensure effective collective action, including but not limited to a review of the principal organs of the United Nations.

The issue of institutional reform of the United Nations has tended to dominate public commentary in advance of the panel's report and in the period since its release. In framing the terms of reference for the panel, however, the Secretary General was careful to avoid excessive emphasis on the question of institutional reform. This has proven to be a prudent approach.

Although Security Council reform is an important issue on which Ireland holds strong views, it has proved contentious at the United Nations. Ten years of deliberations by member states on Security Council reform at the United Nations General Assembly have not yielded any tangible progress towards agreement on change. It is an issue on which the European Union does not have a common position on account of the divergent views of some partners.

The panel's report sets out the case for reform of the UN system, including that of the Security Council, as the logical outcome of the case it makes for an enhanced collective consensus on security. I will return to the specific issue of Security Council reform shortly but let me briefly refer to the essence of the report. The report makes a compelling case for a new, more comprehensive consensus on security. It shows how important it is to have collective strategies which understand how threats and challenges are linked in today's world. For instance, weak states can be a haven for terrorists. The economic repercussions of a terrorist attack can undermine the global economy and make weak states even poorer.

The report demonstrates how security cannot be built in isolation, looking only to one's own immediate concerns. It is important to have a mutual recognition of threats. Effective collective security demands that we address poverty and underdevelopment as well as terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. This also reflects the central premise of the European Union's contribution to the panel that there can be no hierarchy of threats.

The report makes a number of specific recommendations on preventing threats, including terrorism, poverty, internal conflict and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, many of which are sound, constructive and worthy of support. A particular emphasis of the panel, one which Ireland would strongly endorse, is the need for sustained multilateral support for peace building in countries emerging from conflict.

Ireland also welcomes the report's acknowledgement of the growing acceptance of the responsibility of states to protect their citizens rather than use sovereignty as a screen to hide massive human rights abuses. We also welcome the impetus the report has given to reform of United Nations institutions.

Having made the case for a new consensus on collective security, the panel assessed the institutional reforms required in the UN system to implement this consensus. On Security Council reform, the panel noted that the Council had been slow to adapt to changing circumstances. Since the end of the Cold War, its overall effectiveness had improved but it had not always acted consistently or effectively in the face of genocide or other threats. Accordingly, the panel recommended criteria for reform, including those raised by the Senator.

As well as greater involvement for those who contribute the most financially, militarily and diplomatically, the panel selected three other criteria which are as follows: the Security Council should be more representative of the developing world; change should not impair the effectiveness of the Security Council; and reform should lead to an increase in the democratic and accountable nature of the Security Council. The first criterion informed the Senator's question and reflects Article 23 of the UN Charter which sets out the criteria for election of the non-permanent members with "due regard being specially paid, in the first instance, to the contribution of Members of the United Nations to the maintenance of international peace and security". The panel proposes two models of reform of the Security Council. Six new permanent and three new non-permanent seats would be established or the Security Council would have no new permanent seats but a new category of eight seats to which candidates would be elected for a four-year term on a renewable basis, along with one additional standard non-permanent seat. The former is the preferred model of aspirant permanent members. The panel recommends against extending the right of veto.

Ireland believes the Security Council needs to be more representative for the sake of its legitimacy and thus its effectiveness. We have long favoured a regionally balanced increase in membership to create an enlarged Security Council of between 20 and 25 members. We will, in this regard, study carefully the proposals put forward by the panel. The reform of the Council is unquestionably a priority and an aspect of reform to which Ireland attaches great importance. However, Ireland believes that the key immediate task ahead is for UN member states to work together and with the Secretary General to strengthen the UN system.

It is critically important that at the high level meeting at the United Nations next September, which will also examine progress in achieving the millennium development goals, we agree a package of reforms, including institutional reforms, to improve the functioning and effectiveness of the UN system. Ireland will play a full and active part in this critically important work.

Mr. Mooney

I am grateful to the Minister of State. I am particularly pleased that he outlined Ireland's position and its proposals on the reform of the Security Council. It could be inferred from his reply that Ireland may be part of an enlarged Security Council of between 20 and 25 members. This issue lay at the heart of my contribution because of Ireland's long-standing and important contribution to the United Nations.

I hope the Taoiseach and the Minister for Foreign Affairs will follow the example of Prime Minister Tony Blair in supporting the continued role of the United Nations Secretary General, Kofi Annan, against threats from certain right-wing elements in the United States Congress who are calling for his resignation. If Mr. Annan's position was threatened in any way, it would be a disaster for the United Nations, particularly small countries.