Statement
by
Ms. Irena Zubcevic
Minister Plenipotentiary
Permanent Mission of the Republic of Croatia to the United Nations
General Assembly Fifty-ninth Session
Informal meeting of the plenary to continue an exchange of views on the recommendations contained in the
report of the High-level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change
27 January 2005
Mr. President,
At the outset, let me reiterate that we commend the Secretary-General for the establishment of the High Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change and that we welcome their report as they stress the urgency for a new consensus regarding collective security emphasizing the interconnectedness of six clusters of threats and challenges and especially how security and development are related.
I would also like to thank you, Mr. President, for convening this informal meeting in order to express and exchange our views in the most transparent manner.
Let me say that Croatia aligns itself with the statement by the European Union and therefore will restrict its comments at this stage to the UN reform as we concur with the view of the High Level Panel that international organizations, notably the United Nations, should adapt to changing conditions and needs to tackle the challenges.
General Assembly
? Making General Assembly more relevant by focusing on most important issues. This is, of course, easier said than done, because, we, member states, lack consensus among ourselves what is important and what we should concentrate on;
? We are of the opinion that through the outcomes of the Millennium Summit and other relevant UN summits and conferences, we have a clear framework, which we need to strengthen and implement and the General Assembly should provide a necessary norm-setting structure for this. By clustering the issues and through bi-annalization and tri-analization of items we can give further focus to the agenda.
Security Council
? Representation at the Security Council is of great importance to us and we support the enlargement of the Council in both categories of membership, based on the appropriate regional representation;
? However, as a member of the Eastern European Group, we have to underline that under both options "A" and "B", chances for the members of the Eastern European Group to serve on the Security Council are seriously diminished;
? If a proposal to combine Western European and Other Group and Eastern European Group to one group "Europe", should be accepted, it can be done only, in our view, as part of the overall reform of the UN system and not only for the purpose of elections to the Security Council. This would mean different allocation of seats in the whole of the UN taking into account overall contribution of Europe to the UN (budget, UN peacekeeping operations, voluntary contributions, diplomatic and political activities);
? If this will not be the case, the East European Group should stay as it is and should be given equal status as all other regional groups, which should include two non-permanent seats at the Security Council;
? As much as we think that representation is important, we are also of the view that working methods of the Security Council should be improved by being more transparent, efficient and accountable, including more consultations with other UN bodies, UN member states, regional organizations as well as with civil society including non-governmental organizations. Additionally, we support a proposal of the High Level Panel that United Nations peacekeeping budget should be amended to give United Nations the option, on case-by-case basis, to finance regional operations authorized by the Security Council;
? In this regard, we view the establishment of the Peacebuilding Commission. However, we need to be very clear about its mandate, composition and reporting as well as support from the Secretariat. We are of the view that one of the criteria for membership should be their country''''''''s role in peacekeeping operations both on international and regional levels as well as in peace building activities (e.g. through ad hoc working groups in ECOSOC). We also think that having joint reports for both Security Council and ECOSOC would be beneficial in order to get better coordination of the two bodies in this field. Having a separate Secretariat for the Peacebuilding Commission should be also well thought through, because we need to be careful not to duplicate what already is being done by existing mechanisms within the Secretariat.
The Economic and Social Council
? The relevance of the Economic and Social Council should be increased by strengthening its analytical and normative leadership in peace building activities and in transition from conflict and relief to long-term development. To this end we concur with the view of the High Level Panel that exchange of information between Security Council and Economic and Social Council should be further strengthened. Reacting directly to possible emergencies and continuing its work all year round can be another way of strengthening the Economic and Social Council, while its agenda should be focused on current challenges. Establishing a multi-year work program for its coordination segment would also go in that direction;
? We are also of the view that the role of the ECOSOC bureau should be strengthened, rather than, as proposed by the High Level Panel, establish a small executive committee. We would think of such a creation as a duplication of the structure that is already in place and regionally representative. What it needs is more leeway to further the agenda and give it more focus to the current and relevant issues including country situations;
? Establishing the Commission on the Social and Economic Aspects of Security Threats can be looked into, even though we are of the view, that ECOSOC subsidiary bodies, that are already in existence, would be in a better position to deal with these issues, but a better coordination and harmonization is needed among them and with the Economic and Social Council. Therefore, strengthening this kind of synergy within already existing structures would avoid duplication and would make them more effective. Additionally, some aspects of work of the Peacebuilding Commission could be utilized in this regard.
The Commission on Human Rights
? Universal membership of the Commission on Human Rights, as attractive as it might sound at the first glance, could duplicate the work of the already existing Third Committee of the General Assembly and make the Commission less effective. Therefore, additional examination of the proposal is required.
The Secretariat
? We concur with the opinion of the High Level Panel that a professional Secretariat is necessary to provide advice and support to member states as well as to the Secretary-General and that he should also have more authority and flexibility in exercising leadership towards the Secretariat. At the same time, more coordination and harmonization is also necessary at the Secretariat level in order to support better coordination of the United Nations system as a whole;
? Creating a new post of the Deputy Secretary-General for peace and security should be further discussed regarding his mandate and responsibilities in order to avoid duplication with already existing mechanisms. In addition to that, rules of appointment should be further elaborated.
Let me conclude by saying that we will continue to cooperate with you Mr. President, with the Secretary-General and all member states in order to create a more effective and capable United Nations equipped to deal with challenges of the twenty-first century.
Thank you, Mr. President
Press releases
