SA Membership of United Nations Security Council

FOREIGN AFFAIRS PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE
22 August 2007
SA MEMBERSHIP OF UNITED NATIONS SECURITY COUNCIL

Chairperson: Mr D Sithole (ANC)

Documents handed out:
Briefing on SA Membership of the UN Security Council

Audio recording of meeting

SUMMARY
After receiving support from 186 of 192 Member States, South Africa was elected as a non-permanent member of the UN Security Council (UNSC) in October 2006 to serve a two-year term beginning on 1 January 2007. The UNSC is comprised of fifteen UN Member States with China, France, Russia, the UK, and the US holding permanent seats and veto powers. Current non-permanent seats belong to South Africa, Congo, Ghana, Panama, Peru, Qatar, Indonesia, Belgium, Italy, and the Slovak Republic. The UNSC mandate is to maintain international peace and security and it stands as the only international body entitled to authorise the use of force in situations not involving individual or collective self-defence.

Ambassador Sipho George Nene, South Africa’s permanent representative to the Office of the United Nations in Geneva, appeared before the Committee to give a briefing on the first seven months of South African membership, including March, in which South Africa held the rotating presidency of the UNSC. He outlined SA strategic objectives, the role SA has played in several subsidiary bodies, specific milestones during its tenure, as well as challenges SA has faced in that time – both foreseen and unforeseen. The Committee discussed the exclusion of Zimbabwe from the UNSC agenda, child soldiers, the dissemination of information, defining terrorism, and the specific challenges of pursuing multilateralism given the frequent inflexibility of the five Permanent Members of the UNSC.

MINUTES
Briefing on SA’s Non-Permanent Seat on the UN Security Council
SA began its two-year term on the UNSC 1 January 2007 after having been endorsed by the African Union (AU) and 186 of 192 UN Member States. In joining the UNSC, SA strategic objectives were to promote SA foreign policy and national interests while maintaining and contributing toward international peace and security. With a strong preference for multilateralism and international law, SA seeks to specifically promote and advance the African agenda.

SA participated in three subsidiary bodies during 2007. Chairing the Somalia Sanctions Committee, SA was involved in the oversight and monitoring of the Somalian arms embargo. As Co-chair of the Ad-Hoc Committee on Mandate Review, SA helped review UNSC mandates with an eye toward eliminating or consolidating as per 2005 World Summit recommendations. Finally, as one of three vice-chairs of the Counter-Terrorism Committee, SA Chairs a subcommittee overseeing one-third of UN Member States counter-terrorism performance.

SA has been nominated to be Lead Nation on the SC regarding Timor-Leste (earlier East Timor). As such, SA would follow developments, consult with interested parties, and draft all UNSC resolutions and statements regarding Timor-Leste.

The Ambassador discussed specific milestones that have been achieved during SA membership – most of which related to African conflict situations. Through a Chapter VIII initiative, SA was able to align UNSC focus with various regional and sub-regional organisations, a move that came in direct response to the recent AU Summit calling for greater partnership between the UN and AU.

During SA’s busy one-month tenure as President of the UNSC, thirty items appeared on the agenda and SA was responsible to facilitate the Council’s work. SA notably revived a former practice of conducting regular briefings on UNSC work to the General Assembly and the international media. On International Women’s day, SA introduced a presidential statement addressing the important role of women in the maintenance of international peace and security. SA also took initiative to draft a presidential statement requesting a report from the Secretary-General on the impact of illicit small arms and light weapons – an issue previously ignored by the SC because of American influence.

Regarding Rwanda, SA pressure helped to secure the lifting of the arms embargo and other sanctions that will greatly assist the nation in its post-conflict reconstruction phase.

Regarding Liberia, SA was instrumental in getting the SC to allow lifting of diamond and timber sanctions after Liberia’s acceptance into the Kimberly Process Certification Scheme.

During the UNSC Mission to Africa (18-22 June 2007), SA played a key role drafting a joint communiqué that emphasised closer cooperation between the UNSC and the African Union Peace and Security Commission (AU PSC).

The Ambassador discussed challenges associated with SA’s SC membership. The most significant challenge relates to the five permanent member states’ ability to dominate the SC. Disproportionate representation is given Western nations and their veto power makes reforming the imbalanced power structure impossible. The Ambassador noted the tendency for SC issues to be managed in smaller groups that, again, are often dominated by larger developed nations. Also discussed were challenges regarding strategic alliances and communication.

He closed the presentation listing country-specific situations, by continent, which are currently on the UNSC agenda. In Africa these were Burundi, Rwanda, CAR, Chad/Sudan, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Cote d’Ivoire, Guinea-Bissau, DRC, Ethiopia-Eritrea, and the Western Sahara.

Discussion
Ms S Camerer (DA) highlighted the challenge of disseminating information to the public asking how those problems are to be solved.

The Ambassador responded by noting a recent round-table discussion including key members of SA civil society, academia, the media, and non-government organisations to address communication issues and to seek concrete suggestions to the government.

Ms Camerer asked whether or not the two other African nations on the UNSC had supported SA votes? Do the three nations vote as a block?

The Ambassador replied that they did not vote with SA on the Myanmar issue, but added he could only speak for SA policy.

Ms Camerer asked for clarification. Did SA consult with them on issues? Did SA on this issue? Why did they not support the SA vote?

The Ambassador responded that SA agreed with the AU PSC that it should attempt to forge closer unity between the three African Council members – especially given that the majority of issues on the SC agenda are in the African continent. SA continues to consult with all members, regardless of whether or not disagreement exists.

Mr M Sibande (ANC) asked what must be done about Zimbabwe. Why was it not on the SC agenda? Admittedly, Zimbabwe was not a nuclear threat, but how was it not seen as a threat to international peace and security? Should it not be in the discussion?

The Ambassador replied that the UNSC had not taken up the issue of Zimbabwe, but this in no way meant the situation was being ignored by the UN in general. To this point, the situation in Zimbabwe had been viewed as a humanitarian crisis. In 2006, before SA was a member, Zimbabwe had been raised for the Council and opposed on grounds that it was not an issue of international peace and security.

Mr W Seremane (DA) asked what was the definition of “terrorism” and then asked about SC policy regarding child-soldiers in armed conflicts.

The Ambassador noted that no international definition for terrorism had been adopted. It was one of the most complicated issues for the UN with many complicated angles. Regarding child soldiers, he assured them that issue was taken very seriously by the international community. There was a UN Special Envoy regarding child soldiers. Though not specifically a SC issue, SA participated in a working group on child soldiers chaired by France that was one of the most active on the Council.

Adv Z Madasa (ANC) asked about SC procedure. What happened when there was an objection to any issue?

The Ambassador responded that procedurally, any Council member could propose an issue for the Council to adopt in its agenda, but consensus was required for it to be taken up. If six Members vote against its inclusion, the issue was dropped. Then, only a specific directive from the Director-General could force an issues inclusion on the SC agenda.

Ms K Magau (ANC) commended the Ambassador for the SA presidential statement on the important role women play in international peace and security and asked about specific support strategies in place for women in Darfur.

The Ambassador did not have any specific information at hand.

Mr Sibande asked about the situation in Timor-Leste and suggested SA should take a leadership role on the Council regardless of international support, noting specifically that had SA led on the Western Sahara issue, others would have followed.

The Ambassador responded that SA always tried to take a leadership role advancing African issues. Regarding Western Sahara, it was difficult taking a leadership role, but SA worked very closely with Algeria on the issue. Often AU PSC concerns overlapped with UNSC concerns, so SA was a natural leader on such initiatives.

The Chair asked, when dealing with security issues, was there a way for the SC to discuss Zimbabwe? Would members of the Permanent Five (P5) ever allow this to be a security issue? Could SA discuss the conduct of the P5 in that it often created instability? Given SA’s belief in the multilateral approach, could anything be done about P5 members increasingly pursuing a unilateral agenda outside of UN processes?

The Ambassador acknowledged the many difficulties associated with P5 members, but assured the Committee that SA maintained a strong relationship with all Council members. Frequently, SA was involved in discussions before issues arise. For instance, SA had held many discussions with President Bush before the invasion of Iraq. At the end of the day though, SA could not do much if one of the Superpowers decides to pursue its own agenda.

Regarding Zimbabwe, the Ambassador assured that reconstruction and redevelopment projects were always on the SA agenda and its role on SC was to ensure that the UN supported any post-conflict phase.

The Chair asked about soldiers using civilians as human shields. Pointing specifically to the Israeli-Lebanon conflict where media outlets relayed images of Israeli soldiers doing just this, was there anything to be done to combat the gross human rights crime?

The Ambassador responded that he was not sure what specifically occurred in the Israeli-Lebanon conflict regarding human rights abuses. It was nearly impossible to have any consensus on Israel because the Americans refused to agree on any measures meant to pass judgement on them, regardless of the action.

Mr Seremane asked about issues not taken up by the SC. Were they tabled for good?

The Ambassador responded that consensus was always changing and issues passed on by one particular group were often adopted by others. For instance, there was no current consensus on a definition for terrorism, but perhaps there would be in five years.

Mr Seremane asked about Sudanese refugees fleeing through Egypt that were being shot by Egyptian forces.

The Ambassador responded that he did not have specific information on that issue, but noted that there was a strong consensus in the UN about the treatment of refugees. Because in this instance, the refuges were not settling in Egypt, but passing through. Many complicated factors were involved.

The Chair thanked the Ambassador for his presentation and lamented the unilateralist approaches of many UNSC members. Often P5 members would come to the UN for blessing of an action, but refuse to let UN disapproval prevent that action. There was great hypocrisy in P5 states having so much control over issues of peace and security when they were often the ones causing global insecurity and instability. The UN needed to accept and acknowledge that P5 members were not living up to the institutional charter.

The meeting was adjourned.