Briefing on the United Nations Security Council Report of the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee Contents Recommendation 2 New Zealand s term on the United Nations Security Council2 Summary of hearing on 4 December 2014 2 Summary of hearing on 26 February 2015 3 Summary of hearing on 4 June 2015 4 Summary of hearing on 27 August 2015 5 Summary of hearing on 10 March 2016 6 Summary of private hearing on 7 July 2016 6 Summary of hearing on 16 March 2017 7 Acknowledgement 8 Appendix 9
Briefing on the United Nations Security Council Recommendation The Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee has concluded its Briefing on the United Nations Security Council, and recommends that the House take note of its report. New Zealand s term on the United Nations Security Council In October 2014 New Zealand was elected to the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) for a two-year term from 1 January 2015 until 31 December 2016. On 6 November 2014 the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee initiated an ongoing Briefing on the United Nations Security Council. The committee held a total of seven hearings, mainly with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade. The hearings were recorded, except for one on 7 July 2016 which was held in private. This report provides a summary of the hearings, held between 4 December 2014 and 16 March 2017, at which New Zealand s work on the UNSC was discussed. We outline here the main points covered at each hearing. Summary of hearing on 4 December 2014 This discussion with Colin Keating, former New Zealand Ambassador to the United Nations, focused on New Zealand s election to the UNSC. Mr Keating was involved in promoting New Zealand s candidacy over a three-year period as a special envoy of the Prime Minister. He noted the following points: The result was seen as a significant achievement ( absolutely decisive ), with an almost unprecedented level of support. New Zealand received 145 votes, more than the 129 votes required for election. There was strong support from South Pacific and Asia Pacific regions, smaller countries, Latin American countries, Africa, and the Caribbean. The Commonwealth connection was also important. The ministry will examine the reasons for votes not won. Frequency of non-permanent membership: In the past, rotation every 15 to 20 years was considered reasonable. Now it is sought every 5 to 8 years. The success of New Zealand s campaign was attributed to the hard work of the Prime Minister and Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, and the multi-partisan nature of the campaign. National capitals were visited several times to secure votes. Luck played a part in New Zealand s success. Spain, as a strong contender, had a considerable budgetary handicap. Turkey s relatively complicated political situation was seen as more controversial. 2
New Zealand s practical, business-like approach meant it had its team ready on day one. New Zealand s approach to dealing with problems was seen as fair, balanced, constructive, independent, and disciplined. Its past actions were considered important. New Zealand is critical of the UNSC s ability to deliver. It was seeking to push for outcomes, and better participation and involvement of the countries that provide peace-keepers. The aim was to ensure better access to the UNSC for countries through procedural techniques. The nature of the operation of the UNSC means the focus is on the crisis of the moment. This makes it difficult to maintain focus on a particular issue when you are drawn back to immediate conflicts. To be able to make a difference it is important to build connections and alliances with countries inside and outside of the UNSC. New Zealand recognises the need for more effective negotiations, and a willingness to compromise. The veto was opposed by New Zealand in 1945. Summary of hearing on 26 February 2015 Gerard van Bohemen, Permanent Representative of New Zealand to the United Nations; and Simon Draper, Divisional Manager, United Nations, Human Rights and Commonwealth Division at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, discussed the main issues the UNSC was dealing with. New Zealand faced a steep learning curve. However, there was a willingness among other members to engage with New Zealand, due to its strong mandate. Israel/Palestine: monthly debates were being held on this topic. The Palestinians ratification of a number of international agreements had heightened tensions. New Zealand provided a statement, at the level of a general principle, on the two-state solution. Iraq and ISIL: the UNSC had taken a homogeneous view of ISIL as a serious threat to be dealt with. The UNSC was focusing on starving ISIL of its funds. ISIL is considered to be an affiliate of Al Qaeda, so sanctions concerning Al Qaeda also apply to ISIL. Countries were addressing ISIL s use of social media to recruit by taking down ISIL websites when they can. There was interest in addressing things that gave rise to ISIL, including poverty, disaffected young people, and frustration with the failure of the Middle East peace process. Discussion took place about the interpretation of Resolution 2170 condemning the systematic and widespread abuses of human rights and international humanitarian law. The UNSC members received a letter from Iraq inviting all member States to assist. A resolution was unanimously passed concerning the sale of antiquities. 3
Syria: there was a stalemate regarding the position of President Assad, with China and Russia considering Assad to be the leader of a legitimate Government, while others were saying he must go. Although this presents a dichotomy, there is a need to be accommodating because of the battle around ISIL. New Zealand was the penholder on humanitarian issues. It was proving difficult to deliver humanitarian aid, but resolutions were in place, and measures were to be implemented from December. Ukraine: the situation had recently blown-up following a meeting in Minsk about a ceasefire. A debate was held about this and the need for an international force and peacekeepers. New Zealand considered it important to maintain political momentum, and that any resolution would not prejudice the downing of Malaysian Airlines flight MH17. An earlier resolution about this was reaffirmed. Yemen: the Government had been ousted. A resolution was adopted about keeping an arms embargo in place. There was a desire from UNSC members to hold the country together. Libya: There had been an execution, and retaliation by Egypt. There was a nervousness about Libya s connections with Syria. Emphasis had been placed on the need for a unified Government. Boko Haram: this had spread into Chad and Nigeria. The African Union (AU) was taking the lead, and New Zealand was working with the AU countries. North Korea: a review of sanctions was coming up. Human rights were also on the agenda. Reform of the UNSC was being discussed in the General Assembly, including the use of the veto. Expanding the permanent UNSC membership to include Germany, India, Brazil, and Japan was not seen as highly likely. Two-thirds of the General Assembly are needed to vote and ratify any proposal. An intermediate solution could be to allow these countries to have a longer membership period. This idea was recently endorsed by the UNSC elders as most promising. Summary of hearing on 4 June 2015 This discussion took place with officials from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade: Lucy Duncan, Deputy Secretary Multilateral Group; Simon Draper, Divisional Manager, United Nations, Human Rights and Commonwealth Division; and Andrew Robinson, Senior Policy Officer. The hearing focused on New Zealand s upcoming presidency in July, and its main objectives to provide a fair hearing for Small Island Developing States (SIDS) at the UNSC, and to improve the UNSC s working methods. The ministry provided brief updates on the situations in Syria, Yemen, Libya, the Middle East, the Western Sahara, South Sudan, Somalia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and the Republic of Burundi. 4
New Zealand was to take up the one-month presidency of the UNSC in July. This would involve being responsible for the agenda and running the UNSC meetings. Ninety percent of the work was already scheduled, but there was some ability to direct the focus, and to respond to issues raised by members. Good preparation was important. By providing effective and credible leadership New Zealand was seeking to increase its profile and influence. This serves New Zealand s foreign policy interests and its ability to make a difference in the world. The provision of New Zealand-wide communications was considered important for the New Zealand public s understanding and support. Committee members considered that the July presidency provided an opportunity to tell a relevant story. In seeking to give SIDS a voice at the UNSC, New Zealand was planning an open debate, involving participation by non-member countries, on issues of concern to them. The issues for debate were to include transnational crime, border management, climate change and related disasters, and exploitation of natural resources. The UNSC does not consider climate change a threat to international peace and security, but there is scope to discuss this during an open debate. New Zealand s other priority was to address the UNSC s working methods, including the veto. This work was to involve sensible discussion with members with the aim of making the UNSC more collaborative, inclusive, and transparent. New Zealand was wanting to advocate, and seek agreement, for countries to be heard. The power of the P5 (the five permanent members of the UNSC) is that they know the rules. However, nine votes (of the 15 UNSC members) are still needed to get a resolution passed. The UNSC does not reflect the current global community. However, New Zealand was concentrating on reforms to the council s ways of working, rather than its structure, which is a charter issue for the General Assembly to determine. New Zealand was in dialogue with France about its proposal for voluntary restraint on the use of the veto where crimes of mass atrocity are involved. Neither France nor the United Kingdom have used the veto in the last 20 years. Summary of hearing on 27 August 2015 This discussion was held with officials from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade: Lucy Duncan, Deputy Secretary, Multilateral and Legal Group; and Charlotte Darlow, Unit Manager, United Nations, Human Rights and Commonwealth Division. The ministry reported on the achievements during New Zealand s presidency in July. New Zealand s management of the UNSC s agenda was credible and efficient, and New Zealand was commended for this. New Zealand was able to put into practice a more collaborative, inclusive, and transparent way of working, which included extensive outreach. New Zealand held the first ever open debate on peace and security issues facing SIDS, and informal, frank and unscripted discussion on the veto, that was attended by all 15 UNSC members. 5
The open debate created a platform for SIDS to have an enduring voice. A summary of the debate was circulated as a UN document. Upcoming engagement opportunities included the Leaders Week at the end of September, and the climate change conference in Paris at the end of the year. A veto discussion at the UNSC did not focus on the abolition of the veto, but on changes to attitudes and behaviour that could see voluntary restraint on the use of the veto. Summary of hearing on 10 March 2016 This hearing with Gerard van Bohemen, Permanent Representative of New Zealand to the United Nations, looked back at the past year and on to the year ahead. The traditional understanding of the world was being challenged, making it hard for the UNSC to get traction. There was tension between permanent members because of actions like Russia s annexation of Crimea. Updates were provided on the situation in Syria, Libya, Yemen, South Sudan, the Democratic Republic of Congo, the Middle East, and Africa. New Zealand considered that the theatre of the UNSC chamber was not necessarily politically effective. Instead, New Zealand invited all of the UNSC members to the New Zealand residence to talk about the month s work, thus establishing the practice of the New Zealand breakfast. New Zealand also held a lunch to talk about the veto. All the UNSC members attended. However, Russia, the United States of America (USA), and China were not excited about the initiative to commit to not using the veto in cases of mass atrocity. The open debate on peace and security issues facing SIDS saw 30 Ministers come to New York. Climate change was discussed in that context. Committee members discussed the legal basis on which States can act by using force. Each State is responsible for its own actions and may act in self-defence when directly threatened. There was also discussion about the appointment of the new United Nations Secretary-General. The seven candidates were all from Eastern Europe, except one. New Zealand s next presidency was to be in September, during Leaders Week in New York. The presidency provided a big opportunity to consult about the issues and make a constructive, useful difference. Summary of private hearing on 7 July 2016 This discussion with Hon Murray McCully, Minister of Foreign Affairs, focused on the candidates for the election of the new UN Secretary-General. The hearing was held in private. The Minister provided brief updates on the situation in conflict areas (those previously mentioned). 6
There had been consideration of whether New Zealand should step down from the UNSC because of Helen Clark s candidacy. Other UNSC members had said they trusted New Zealand s integrity. Discussion took place about the work with SIDS. An event was planned for September. The SIDS provide an important support group for New Zealand, with over 40 countries involved. However, the three big subgroups within need to work more closely together. New Zealand s work on the UNSC, particularly the SIDS agenda and the work on conflict prevention, has enhanced the country s credentials. Summary of hearing on 16 March 2017 Gerard van Bohemen, Permanent Representative of New Zealand to the United Nations, provided an overview of New Zealand s term on the UNSC. The international climate had made for difficult times in terms of the operation of the UNSC. The annexation of Crimea (including the sanctions imposed), and Russia becoming a major player in Syria, had heightened tensions between members. New Zealand had worked to influence the main issues before the UNSC, and to change behaviour. The SIDS open debate was an example of this. This provided an opportunity for SIDS to raise a wide range of issues in the context of peace and security. The political influence, power, and profile of SIDS was raised (SIDS make up 57 of the 193 States in the United Nations). Syria was the biggest issue. The Syrian regime had become stronger, and the possibility of a ceasefire had unravelled. Talks had resumed in Geneva, but there was a long way to go before progress was made on the ground. South Sudan: fighting had broken out in July between the two largest tribes, moving up into the provinces. The army was also not united. The UN people had kept to the barracks, and were unable to move without permission. New Zealand had supported resolution 2334 affirming that settlements established by Israel in the occupied Palestinian territory are illegal and a major obstacle to achieving a two-state solution. All of the UNSC members voted for the resolution except the USA, which abstained. The resolution was adopted on 23 December 2016. The role of the UN is to set legal and political parameters. The ministry was working with Israel. Procedural: the New Zealand breakfast worked strongly to promote more active, engaged conversation, and provided the opportunity for elected members to be more influential. New Zealand also established an end-of-month lunch and meeting for the 10 elected UNSC members. The aim was to provide more direct access to information for all of the members. Reform of UNSC: the priority was to focus on behavioural change among the P5 concerning the use of the veto. New Zealand does not accept the veto as a way of keeping the big powers in the room. The threat of the veto also means resolutions are not put forward. The veto was used five times during New Zealand s term. 7
The high degree of tolerance and indifference to human suffering was noted. Conflicts had worsened, often driven by a desire for political and economic power. Priorities for 2017: The focus was to be on Pacific issues, conflict prevention, and working with Singapore to build coherence among the elected 10 members of the UNSC. Acknowledgement We appreciate the time taken by ministry officials to keep us briefed about New Zealand s candidacy for, and membership of, the United Nations Security Council. We commend them on their solid work on behalf of New Zealand. 8
Appendix Committee procedure The committee met between 6 November 2014 and 10 August 2017 to consider the Briefing on the United Nations Security Council. We heard oral evidence from the Minister of Foreign Affairs; the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade; the Permanent Representative of New Zealand to the United Nations; and Colin Keating, former New Zealand Ambassador to the United Nations. Committee members Todd Muller (Chairperson) Hon Jo Goodhew Dr Kennedy Graham Hon Annette King Hon Hekia Parata Hon David Parker Dr Shane Reti Stuart Smith Fletcher Tabuteau Lindsay Tisch 9