STATEMENT BY MS KAREN ONG, DEPUTY PERMANENT REPRESENTATIVE OF THE REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE ON THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL NEGOTIATIONS (IGN) ON “THE QUESTION OF EQUITABLE REPRESENTATION ON AND INCREASE IN THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE SECURITY COUNCIL AND OTHER MATTERS RELATED TO THE SECURITY COUNCIL”, CLUSTER DEBATES ON SIZE OF FUTURE COUNCIL AND REGIONAL REPRESENTATION 15 APRIL 2025, CONFERENCE ROOM 2

Thank you, Mr Chair, for your steady stewardship of the IGN process and for convening this timely and important debate.

2         The goal of any reform process must be the creation of a Security Council that is stronger, more responsive and effective. As the principle organ of the UN mandated with the maintenance of international peace and security, it is imperative that we have a Security Council that is representative of the current UN membership and reflective of contemporary realities. This will enhance its legitimacy and accountability.

3         Let me first speak first to the matter of the future size of the Security Council. The size of the Council has not been changed in more than six decades. In 1945, the UN had 51 Member States, with 11 UNSC seats. In 1965, the UN had about 117 Member States, with the Council being enlarged that year to include four more non-permanent seats. Although the number of Member States has since increased significantly to 193 today, the Council’s composition and size has remained the same since 1965.

4         When the UN Charter was signed in San Francisco, 21 were small states.  In 1965, when the Security Council was enlarged, the number of small states at the UN had increased to more than half of the UN membership.  Today, of 193 member states, the majority are small states with populations of less than 10 million people.  Any reform exercise must therefore take into account the need to ensure the adequate representation of small states.

5         As we deliberate on the best models for reform, we should keep in mind that the Security Council is not a vehicle for the great powers of the world to impose their views on the rest of the world.  It cannot become, wittingly or unwittingly, an instrument to impose the logic of “might is right” or an instrument to create spheres of influence run by the major powers.  The Security Council must be an arena for all countries to have their voices heard.  And it has to be a vehicle to maintain peace and security, based on international law. 

6         There have been various suggestions on an ideal size of the Security Council. We believe that an expanded Council in the mid-20s would be small enough to be nimble and effective. The key for us is not the absolute number, but the overall representativeness of the Council, and whether it has materially improved opportunities for the small states of the world to be represented in an enlarged Council.

7         On the composition and representativeness of an expanded Council, Singapore has long maintained our support for the expansion of both permanent and non-permanent categories to ensure greater geographical representation and inclusivity. In this regard, any outcome from the IGN process would not be credible if the perspective and interests of small states are not adequately addressed. Any model of reform should not marginalize or further disadvantage small states and in particular, SIDS, especially those who come fromunder-represented regions, or are part of regional groups that do not practice subregional rotation.

8         The reality is that the status quo is structurally disadvantageous to many small states, many of whom already find it challenging to campaign and run against much larger states to secure a non-permanent seat.   Of the 60 Member States that have never served on the Council, almost two thirds are small states. This is a clear sign that the playing field is not level. We appreciate the support expressed by different groups and delegations for the representation of SIDS and small states in an expanded Council. In particular, we note that some proposals for reform have incorporated the idea of one dedicated non-permanent seat for a member of SIDS across all regions. While this is a helpful proposal, we do not believe that offering a single seat for small states like SIDS is equitable, given that so many small states have not yet served in the Council, as well as given the reality that they face real challenges in seeking elections.

Mr Chair,

9         My delegation understands and respects that UNSC reform is a complex issue on which many countries and groups have strong views. We know key differences remain.  However, the UN is at an inflexion point and so is the multilateral system.  As we commemorate the 80^thanniversary of the UN this year, it is time to show our seriousness about Council reform to ensure that it is relevant and reflective of our organization today, and future-ready.

10       Thank you for your attention.

.     .     .     .