Checked Against Delivery
Excellencies, Chairs,
I have the honour to speak on behalf of the Nordic countries, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden and my own country, Denmark.
Let me begin by thanking the co-chairs for the revised elements paper. This serves as a fundamental document for taking these negotiations forward and we continue to stress the importance of updating this document. While we would have hoped that this 80th session would have concluded with a consolidated model, we are grateful for your tireless efforts throughout this session. We want to thank you for the new initiatives taken during this session, including your efforts to make the discussions more focused, your push for bridging divergences and for putting your own bridging proposal on the table.
Chairs,
The elements paper sets out that a consolidated model has emerged as an important objective of moving the IGN process forward but also notes that mutually exclusive positions will need to bridged before such model can be presented. While we of course support the notion that divergences should be bridged, we question if this is not a process that could be done through work on a consolidated model.
We must recall that these negotiations have now been ongoing for 17 years, and when establishing this process, we gave ourselves the mandate to find a solution “that can garner the widest possible political acceptance by member states”. The calls for a consolidated model and the sense of urgency expressed by Member States have only grown larger during this past session. And we believe this can be better reflected in the elements paper.
Chairs,
The elements paper accurately reflects that a significant number of delegations have expressed support for an expansion in both categories. We would encourage that the groups supporting this view are reflected in the elements paper. While the paper reflects the support by many member states of ensuring equality in the permanent category, the paper could better reflect the concerns expressed by many delegations of the negative impacts of the veto on the work and functioning of the current and a future enlarged Council.
Chairs,
We welcome that the elements paper reflects the significant and growing number of Member States expressing support for limitations to the scope and use of the veto, including the growing number of supporters of the ACT Code of Conduct and the French/Mexican initiative. We would encourage that the number of signatories to these initiatives be reflected in the paper.
Chairs,
There has been broad support for a time bound review clause as a fundamental element in any reform proposal. We believe the elements paper could be updated to not only reflect agreement of such review clause to be “considered” but rather that there is agreement that it should be in fact be included in any reform proposal. We are also of the view that Member States have not only reiterated the “need” to implement all provisions of the Charter but rather the obligation to do so, which could also be updated in the elements paper.
Chairs,
As we wrap up this year’s IGN session, let me reiterate the Nordic group’s steadfast support for our collective endeavour towards reform. We encourage all Member States to engage constructively and in a spirit of compromise in order for a consolidated model to be developed and ultimately for text-based negotiations to be initiated.
I thank you.
