Statement by the delegation of Ukraine at the fourth informal meeting of the Intergovernmental Negotiations on Security Council Reform

Madam Chairperson, Mr. Chairman,

Please, accept the words of gratitude for your work and that of your teams in preparing and structuring discussions during this session’s meetings of the IGN. We highly appreciate your efforts to keep the negotiations going.

As for your suggestions regarding the focus of today’s exchange of ideas, we view them as absolutely relevant and constructive.

The problem is that in a couple of years and quite possibly that in just one year it won’t matter what this or that delegation stated or is going to state today.

What’s the point in identifying possible convergences or gaps in positions if there is no formal record, no summary, no reference point left for our successors to deliberate further on?

Thus, it comes as no surprise that every year delegations feel compelled to repeat their positions just to make sure that every one is on the same page regarding the subject matter. As a result, the IGN has not actually taken off in the decade since the launch in 2009.

We are convinced that without fixing the methodological approach to conducting the IGN, there is little hope for any meaningful progress.

At this point we all know very well where the differences are. It is also rather obvious in what areas differences can be reconciled and where it is more problematic, to put it mildly.

In light of this, does it make much sense to continue the IGN process as per established practice? On our part, we remain highly skeptical that this approach will lead us anywhere. Moreover, we are convinced that it would just delay any progress.

We are absolutely conscious of the fact that on the substance the UN family is nowhere near of any kind of agreement.

If we cannot achieve a break through on the substance, why not to try to address the form?

On numerous occasions different delegations have expressed their frustrations that their positions are not adequately reflected in documents, prepared by IGN Chairs. Prepared, I must add, in good faith. However, no amount of good faith on the part of the Co-Chairs can fix the problem that only Member States can fix — namely to agree on the procedural matters of the IGN process.

In our opinion it is absolutely warranted to have if not a verbatim record (considering an informal nature of our meetings) then at least a proper summary with Member States being able to submit their specific comments so that no position is ignored, distorted or glossed over.

And this summary document has to have some official standing to avoid bitter bickering among Member State, which we witnessed in the past and continue witnessing in regards to documents prepared by IGN Chairs and Co-Chairs.

The fact of the matter is that if the current approach to the IGN remains unchanged, there is very little hope that in the next ten years a drastically different outcome will be achieved compared to the results of the past decade.

Thank you.