Statement by the Permanent Representative of Brazil to the United Nations, Ambassador Ronaldo Costa Filho, at the UNSC meeting on “New Orientation for Reformed Multilateralism” - December 14th 2022

Your Excellency Minister Jaishankar, President of the Security Council,

Distinguished PGA, Secretary-General, Ministers, Excellencies, colleagues,

I would like to start by commending India for organizing this very timely high-level debate, and the PGA and the SG for their instigating remarks.

The post-war global governance structure was created in an entirely different international context than that which we face today. Equally challenging and complex, but very, very distinct.

The crises we have been facing – and may yet face in the not too distant future – whether related to health, climate, economic and trade issues, or peace and security, have clearly demonstrated that the world has changed at a much faster pace than multilaterally agreed norms and rules, as well as the governance structures of multilateral institutions responsible for negotiating and setting these rules.

As a result, the international community remains unable to provide timely and effective coordinated solutions to old and new challenges that affect us. So much so that we begin to lose the confidence of our peoples and, indeed, the entire fabric of multilateralism seems to be unravelling.

There seems to be widespread agreement that we are facing crises on multiple fronts. And yet the consensus that none of these issues can be truly overcome by one nation, or even in small groups, lives side by side with the slow, but steady fragmentation of the multilateral order and growing lack of credibility of the post-war international regimes.

The development gap between nations needs to be at the centre-stage of international governance if we want to address the root causes of many of the interconnected problems the world faces today. Discussions in the Security Council clearly show that poverty and inequality, within and between nations, are intrinsically linked to conflicts. In this regard, we could devote more time to discussing the linkages between poverty, inequality and conflict, on an equal footing with other emerging challenges that have captured the Council’s attention in the last years.

The conflict in Ukraine reignited old disputes and brought the world, once again, to the brink of a disaster. The deadlock in the Security Council and the spill-over effect that the conflict had in other multilateral forums – some of them unrelated to the situation itself – played a destabilizing effect over the institutions we rely on to uphold the principles we share. More than that, the conflict in Ukraine exacerbated long-known shortcomings and unveiled the consequences of our inability to adapt old institutions to new realities.

Since World War II, many new issues and threats have emerged, and the multilateral system has created new tools to address them. If the main international organizations in the economic domain, such as the IMF and the World Bank, were able to initiate a reform process to update their composition and working methods, we would expect the same from the main world political body. It is shocking that entire regions are excluded from the UNSC’s central decision-making processes, with the complete absence of Africa and Latin America and the Caribbean among permanent members.

Although reform is needed on many fronts, peace and security is an area of particular concern. This is where reform talks are completely stalled, despite the blatant inadequacy of the current structure of the United Nations Security Council.

While world governance has become increasingly more complex and challenges more serious, the reform of the UN Security Council has become only more urgent and essential to make the body more representative, legitimate and effective.

Sadly, we have already started to bear the consequences of our inaction. An instrument designed according to the interests of 20th century powers to solve 20th century problems, the Security Council is no longer fit for purpose. It is proving unable to uphold international law and defend the principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations. Above all, it no longer spurs peaceful resolution of conflicts, as well as diplomacy and dialogue.

As a consequence, we are now regretfully confronted with a political crisis, without the tools in place to remediate it in a legitimate and effective manner. The world outside these halls is taking note of this.

We are glad, however, that the vast majority of the membership agrees on the need to act swiftly. The urgency of reform was clearly acknowledged by many of our leaders in the General Debate, last September, including developing and developed countries, from all regions of the globe, and most of the permanent members of this Council.

Mr President,

Turning to the main elements of reform, there are two points I would like to stress. First, the deadlock that emerged in the Council in the context of the conflict in Ukraine increased the support for initiatives aiming at curtailing and regulating the veto power. Brazil agrees with the general intention behind most of them, such as the French-Mexican initiative on veto restraint to the case of mass atrocities.

The veto, however, is rather an expression of the great divide that stalls the Council than the main reason why the organ has become ineffective. A veto is cast only after diplomacy and dialogue have not prospered.

This brings me to my second point. The composition of the Security Council remains the central and most important issue of the reform. The Security Council cannot and will not be a legitimate and effective body as long as the Global South remains side-lined and whole regions, such as Latin America and the Caribbean and Africa are not represented in the permanent category.

We need to pave the way for the inclusion in the Council of new members capable of taking on major responsibilities in the field of international peace and security, representing all regions of the world. For effective diplomacy, the Security Council needs to be fully attuned to today’s reality.

Furthermore, it is imperative that the lack of representativeness of the Council be addressed in the reform in both categories of membership. A half-hearted reform that does not address the fundamental problem of lack of representation and, by consequence, lack of legitimacy, in the permanent category will be merely window dressing.

Besides the composition itself, it is imperative to make progress in the discussions related to the Council`s working methods with a view to bringing more transparency and accountability to its activities.

The UNSC must be more open in relation to non-member states, more efficient in its decision-making process and seek greater coordination with other UN bodies, especially the Peacebuilding Commission.

Mr President,

The international system is at a critical juncture, facing a multifaceted crisis, while its central body in the field of peace and security seems unequipped to provide us with answers and solutions.

The Council should be much more than a forum for mutual accusations or a stage to entertain a specific audience. Reform is needed so that the Council becomes, once again, a forum for constant dialogue and diplomacy. An organ where mutually agreed compromises are found and tensions subside.

We take this unique opportunity to express our great disappointment with the fact that the Security Council reform is not mentioned in the proposals concerning “A New Agenda for Peace” proposed by the Secretary General in the report “Our Common Agenda”. Brazil firmly believes that any Agenda for Peace that does not include the UN Security Council reform cannot be considered “new”. The formulation of a new agenda for peace must include a profound discussion on how to re-launch the discussions beyond the IGN format, which has run its course. Let’s finally go for the high-hanging fruit.

After almost a decade in which some delegations effectively took the reform process hostage, we need to untangle ourselves, galvanize Member States to negotiate in good faith and act with a sense of urgency. Too much is at risk and therefore we all need to rise to the occasion. In the current circumstance, more of the same has become irresponsible, at best.

If we fail to advance reform in a timely fashion, the entire multilateral architecture constructed at the end of World War II will be in peril.

I thank you.