October 2016 Monthly Forecast 1 In Hindsight: The Overview Security Council Penholders 3 Status Update since our Russia will have the presidency of the Council in an Arria-formula meeting on illegal Israeli September Forecast October, when Council members will hold their settlements; 4 Secretary-General first colour-coded straw poll for the position of • Lebanon, the implementation of resolution Appointment the next Secretary-General, giving the first clear 1559; and 5 Sudan (Darfur) indication of which candidates could face a veto • Yemen, the regular update by the Special 7 Mali in a formal vote. Envoy. Russia has organised a debate on UN coopera- Council members will continue to monitor 8 Central African tion with regional and sub-regional organisations, developments in South Sudan and will consid- Republic in particular the Collective Security Treaty Orga- er the Secretary-General’s monthly assessment 9 Democratic Republic of nization, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization on the deployment and future requirements of the Congo and the Commonwealth of Independent States. the Regional Protection Force, as well as obsta- 11 Haiti The Council is expected to adopt a resolu- cles to setting up the Force and impediments to 13 Syria tion early in the month renewing member states’ UNMISS in carrying out its mandate. Other Afri- 15 South Sudan authorisation to interdict vessels used for migrant can issues that will be considered this month are: smuggling or human trafficking on the high seas • Central African Republic, the activities of 17 Israel/Palestine off the coast of Libya. The other adoption sched- MINUSCA; 18 Yemen uled for October is the renewal of MINUSTAH’s • Democratic Republic of the Congo, updates 20 Women, Peace and mandate in Haiti. on the political tension surrounding presiden- Security Members will be closely following develop- tial elections, and briefings on the activities 22 Lebanon ments in Syria, following the rupture of the 9 Sep- of MONUSCO and the Peace, Security and 23 Western Sahara tember cessation of hostilities agreement between Cooperation Framework for the DRC; 24 Notable Dates Russia and the US, and the massive military esca- • Mali, the activities of MINUSMA; lation in Aleppo. The regular monthly briefings on • Sudan (Darfur), the activities of UNAMID; the political, humanitarian and chemical weapons and tracks have been scheduled, but other Council • Western Sahara, an update on MINURSO and activity is possible, given the urgent nature of the its return to functionality. Syrian crisis. Finally, the Council will hold two annual There will be discussion on several other Mid- meetings in October, the open debate on women, dle East issues this month: peace and security and a private briefing by the • Israel/Palestine, the quarterly open debate and International Court of Justice. In Hindsight: The Security Council Penholders Contrary to a widespread assumption, the Secu- 2016, the US was serving as the penholder for rity Council’s so-called penholder system is not eight of these situation-specific agenda items, the a longstanding practice. Rather, it is still in its UK for seven and France for six. Elected mem- 30 September 2016 first decade. Under the current arrangement, bers have been serving as penholders on Afghani- This report is available online at securitycouncilreport.org. most Council outcomes (including resolutions, stan and Guinea-Bissau and on some thematic presidential statements or press statements) are issues. For daily insights by SCR on evolving Security Council actions please drafted by one of the P3 (France, the UK and the Drafting of outcomes has been an increas- subscribe to our “What’s In Blue” US) which are the penholders on most situation- ing task ever since the workload of the Council series at whatsinblue.org or follow @SCRtweets on Twitter. specific issues on the Council’s agenda. As of early exploded a quarter of a century ago, after more Security Council Report Monthly Forecast October 2016 securitycouncilreport.org 1 In Hindsight: The Security Council Penholders (con’t) than 40 years of paralysis during the Cold undertaking visiting missions. The chairper- Jordan as penholders on Syria’s humanitarian War. Members, permanent and elected alike, sons of the Council sanctions committees (all situation. After the end of Jordan’s term on took the initiative to produce a text. Specific, of which currently are elected members) are the Council, Egypt joined New Zealand and recurring topics were not seen as “belonging” generally not involved in the drafting of reso- Spain as co-penholder in 2016. to a particular Council member. Sometimes, lutions on countries to which the sanctions In February, Venezuela took the initiative members with an interest in a given situa- apply—not even when the draft deals with of organising a Council debate on the politi- tion would join forces or, on some occasions, sanctions issues. In at least two cases, there is cally sensitive issue of the Council’s approach compete to produce a draft first, in order a separate P3 penholder specifically for sanc- to the use of sanctions, which resulted in to then chair the negotiations. Occasionally, tions-related drafts. agreement on a rare note from the president members with shared concerns about a par- In some cases, when a crisis arises while on the topic (S/2016/170). The interest- ticular conflict would constitute “groups of the penholder is either unwilling or unable to ing aspect of the process was that Venezuela friends”, fairly temporary and changeable take the initiative (for example, because it is started out by circulating the draft to the ten arrangements which might be represented already managing other crises on the agenda), elected members and negotiating it initially in the Council by either a permanent or an the Council is paralysed and delayed in tak- within that group. elected member. ing any action. This “default” situation has In May, the Council adopted a resolu- Under the current penholder practice, quite possibly affected Council effectiveness tion on healthcare in armed conflict that was one of the P3 produces a draft that is then in addressing conflicts. drafted jointly by five elected members— agreed within the P3 group. The next step is The net effect is that while the demand Egypt, Japan, New Zealand, Uruguay and to negotiate the text with China and Russia. for Council action has become the highest Venezuela—who led all the negotiations on Only thereafter, sometimes very close to the it has ever been, the burden-sharing within the draft and secured co-sponsorship by most intended time of adoption, is it shared with the 15-member body is probably at its his- Council members and by several member the ten elected members. torical lowest. states not on the Council. Possibly the first example of this drafting In 2014, the Council issued a note by During its September presidency of the and negotiating practice was the lengthy pro- the president (S/2014/268) in which it pro- Council, elected member New Zealand took cess leading up to the adoption of the Coun- claimed that members of the Council agreed the initiative of holding a high-level debate on cil’s first resolutions on nuclear non-prolif- to support “where appropriate, the informal the overall situation in Syria, with the coun- eration in the Democratic People’s Republic arrangement whereby one or more Coun- try’s Prime Minister John Key presiding. of Korea and Iran in 2006. For a few years, cil members (as ‘penholder(s)’) initiate During the annual Security Council open this approach was used only for non-prolif- and chair the informal drafting process” of debate on working methods, the penholder eration issues, with some elected members documents, including resolutions, presiden- system has received considerable criticism occasionally protesting (in one case in 2008, tial statements and press statements of the from the UN leadership at large, the elected the adoption of a resolution on Iran had to Council. The note specified that any mem- Council members and also, in a recent case, be postponed by several days because South ber of the Council can be a penholder. The from a permanent member, Russia. Speaking Africa requested time for its capital to study document also emphasised Council mem- during the October 2015 open debate, the the text). In the next year or two, this drafting bers’ commitment to enhancing the partici- country’s Permanent Representative, Vitaly and negotiating system was gradually extend- pation of all members of the Council in the Churkin, said: ed to more and more situation-specific issues drafting process, including through early on the Council’s agenda. and timely exchanges and consultations, We are convinced that the Council This arrangement may have seemed logi- while continuing to consult informally with would benefit from a democratization of its cal in terms of Council efficiency and conve- non-Council members. work, facilitated by a more balanced dis- nience, but it soon developed several conse- The issuing of the 2014 note did not result tribution of obligations informally linked quences. Elected members were left out of the in any noticeable change in actual arrange- to the so-called penholdership of some dos- drafting process altogether and were brought ments. However, the dynamic with respect siers. Certain Council members should not into negotiations only at the very end—and to the penholder system had possibly already consider countries or even regions to be were often discouraged from making mean- begun to change in 2013. Elected members their exclusive purview or act as mentors ingful amendments because they might dis- Australia and Luxembourg were instrumen- on issues concerning those countries. Such turb the wording agreed to among the P5, tal in focusing the Council’s attention on the conduct is a remnant of days gone by that sometimes after painstaking negotiations.