Mr. Chairman,
Let me start by expressing my Government’s appreciation for your gentle but steadfast leadership of these intergovernmental negotiations. Security Council reform is long overdue, and you have our full support in your efforts to bring the negotiations towards a successful conclusion.
As we have previously stated, Sweden is in favour of an enlargement of the Security Council. We remain open to various approaches to accomplish this goal. We should seek the broadest possible agreement. This is necessary for the Council to be perceived as legitimate and to avoid new divisions and frustrations that could harm our work in the United Nations for a long time to come.
If we are not yet ready to agree on a more long-term reform, one possibility could be to look at an interim or transitional solution that could eventually lead to a more permanent arrangement.
In our view any reform should be the subject of a recurrent and effective review mechanism. We should avoid decisions which are irreversible for all time to come. We also need to be able to open up for further changes in the future. As the world changes, the Security Council has to be able to change.
The periodic reviews could take into account criteria relevant to the obligations of Council members to contribute to international peace and security. Fulfilling these criteria would add legitimacy for continued membership status. Thus, we would prefer to see an explicit mechanism, which makes it possible for other member states to review the performance of any new permanent members and with the support of 2/3 majority replace them if they fail in their responsibilities. It should not be easy, but it should be possible without going through the full procedure of changing the Charter.
Thank you Mr. Chairman.