Saturday, August 6 2005 13:02 Hrs (IST) - World Time -

United Nations: Co-sponsors of a resolution moved by India, Japan, Germany and Brazil on UN Security Council expansion have firmly denied that African Union's decision not to pursue a joint resolution with the Group of Four on the issue was a setback, while stressing the need to continue to engage the Africans.

The G-4, which met here yesterday (Aug 5, 2005) with co-sponsors including France after AU's decision to go ahead with their resolution for a permanent seat for an African country with veto power, were of unanimous view that at best, it would cause some delay in the vote on their framework resolution but certainly not derail the process.

Asked whether AU's decision constituted a major setback for G-4, a senior diplomat coming out of the meeting said, "Major setback? It is not even a minor setback."

Diplomats also did not agree that the US and China working together would do much damage to the G-4 vote base.

Their efforts have already peaked and some have gone over them but some come to G-4 fold and net numbers do not change, they asserted.

They also downplayed the much touted agreement b/w the US and China

They also downplayed the much-touted agreement between the US and China to work together to defeat G-4 resolution, noting Washington and Beijing had different reasons to oppose.

For example, they said the US strongly supports Japan and China's main plank is opposition to Tokyo.

"How would they reconcile the position? In any case, much work is being done in capitals where the decisions would be taken," they said.

However, all agreed that vote on the resolution would be delayed but declined to speculate whether it would be held before or after the three-day world leaders' summit at UN scheduled to begin on Sept 14.

They said their effort would be to seek a vote before the summit, as it is easier to maintain pressure during the period leading up the meeting.

But it would depend on the negotiations they would have with the AU and how soon they are able to chalk out a common resolution.

One difficulty they might face is that August is a month when several ambassadors go on vacation ahead of the hectic period starting in September when three-month annual session of the General Assembly begins.

Several diplomats, speaking on condition of anonymity as the negotiations were at a 'delicate stage', said the G-4 resolution is the nearest to the AU position and Africans just cannot go to 'Uniting for Consensus' (UFC) group as its resolution would not give them permanent seats that they are demanding.

Nor would the proposal floated by some nations to create a new category of non-permanent members with a ten-year renewable term meet their aspirations.

The resolution by UFC led by Pakistan and Italy, seeks to add ten seats in non-permanent category only.

Some of the diplomats who attended AU's Addis Abba summit said Africans realized that this was the only chance for the only continent with no representation among permanent members to join the coveted club of permanent members and that realistically speaking, it is impossible for new permanent members to get veto power.

Asked what went wrong between London meeting of G-4 and AU foreign ministers where an agreement seemed to have been reached and the AU summit, a senior diplomat expressed the view that more preparation was needed for the summit.

Internal rivalries and tensions as also failure of a majority of members to coordinate their positions did the damage, they said.

Diplomats who were at the AU summit estimated that only between six and ten members were opposed to a compromise with G-4 but they were very vociferous and carried the day.

Most of those who spoke were from among this group and it was a real case of 'silent majority' not asserting itself or arguing its case forcefully, they said.

Those who opposed had no alternatives to offer. Some of them, including Algeria, have been members of UFC and had openly supported its position.

But at the summit, they could not do so and their main aim was to somehow derail the process and they used the issue of veto for the purpose.

Africans realize it is impossible to get veto

Most Africans realize it is impossible to get veto and that if they had pressed others on the understanding with G-4 on the alternative, the result might have been different.

During discussions with AU members, G-4 had explained that it had originally felt the new members should have veto.

But discussions showed that there was strong opposition from both developed nations and developing world.

It was in deference to the wishes of the wider membership that G-4 drafted their resolution, accepting the principle of veto but deferring its exercise by new permanent members by 15 years when the Assembly would revisit the issue, which would give time to evaluate new members' work.

Africans had been explained in detail and diplomats say they do not expect that Africans would like to go through the negotiations process again on the issue in the light of G-4's experience.