(Session 4) Broader Engagement and Opportunities - Briefing for Delegates on the Work of the United Nations Security Council

Welcome back. We now turn to session four, broader Engagement and Opportunities, which focuses on how all delegations, including those not currently serving on the Security Council, can engage with influence and prepare for the Council's work. Our first presentation this afternoon will examine ongoing efforts and proposals to improve the working methods of the Security Council, a topic of great interest and importance to all Member States. I am pleased to introduce our speakers this afternoon. Mr. Shane Dowling, Deputy Political Coordinator at the Permanent Mission of Denmark to the United Nations. Mr. Gul Kaiser Salwani, Political Coordinator at the Permanent Mission of Pakistan to the United Nations. So, Shane, without further ado, the floor is yours.

Thank you so much and good afternoon, colleagues. Thank you to Unitire for hosting this event. I remember our Council training back in 2024. It feels just like yesterday. And now we're nearly outgoing members, so time is truly flying. And I'm honored and humbled to be here at this event and with real experts, which I'm not sure I fully identify as particularly. We've only officially co chaired the Council's working group for six months of the last year and a half. But thank you for the opportunity to speak about working methods and about our role as co chair of the Security Council's informal working group on documentation and other procedural questions. And I think for a working group focused so much on efficiency, I think we need to work on a catchier time. Google, we can work on that. I think, just as a way of introduction. When I came to New York, seeing this title and this working group thinking, wow, that sounds incredibly technical. It sounds that it could be quite boring. You come to New York with grand ideas of peace and security and Nobel Peace Prize in your first year, maybe second year at Max, and now you want me to talk about documentation. But, you know, many years later and two terms on the Council, in my case, I know that the name of this group is deceivingly anodyne and that it is in fact a hugely important part of the Security Council's work and of the architecture of the Council. So, working methods, they may sound technical, but they are fundamentally political. We always say that we view working methods as the vehicle through which the Council can implement its mandate to maintain international peace and security. They shape how it fulfills that mandate and they can determine whether it can do so effectively and credibly. And in the discussions on working methods, from open debates to meetings of the IWG to briefings such as this, we're always keen to stress from Denmark side that this is not procedure for procedure's sake. They can sometimes sound a bit abstract, but they do determine really concrete issues on the Council, such as who is heard, what issues reach the agenda, how decisions are written, shaped how positions on the Council are filled, and ultimately how legitimate the Council's outcomes are perceived. And of course, the Security Council acts on behalf of the wider UN membership, and that's very clear in the UN Charter. So how it does that is a matter of importance for everyone. So that for us creates the responsibility to work in a manner that is transparent, inclusive and accountable. So that's the angle of entry that we as Denmark take when we're looking at the working methods question. And that's how we encourage all incoming Council members to view it, and all current Council members as well. So while any working methods question can suddenly become a live issue worthy of review and updating, we do have a very solid base of working methods practice through notes by the President, which are agreed by consensus in the Working Group, and through the consolidated note 507. This is our kind of our guiding document in the iwg. I didn't want to say Bible for some reason, but I would encourage you all to read through it and then read through it again. And I also want to just commend Japan for their amazing efforts and commitment to that document and making it so relevant to the work of the Council today. And a lot of our. It is surprising how often that note is raised in Security Council meetings, in consultations. I see gool you have a copy of it here. We always take copies with us as well to the Council. It's a very, very relevant document. So what does all that look like in the practice of the iwg? So Denmark and Pakistan are the co chairs. It's a working group with a great deal of flexibility. No, two meetings last year at least, were the same. We don't have panels of experts, we don't have mandated briefings to the Security Council. But of course, there are some common threads and discussions in particular that I can highlight. Now, the first is that we think the IWG should always be focused on improving the methods of work of the Council, which is a constant working process, never static, constantly evolving. There are new practices that arise, challenges and new dynamics, and the fact that the IWG can convene and discuss these issues at short notice sometimes. But also when we have our regular meetings, we address issues that come up in that period. And then for us, when we were assuming that role last year with Pakistan, we were very much guided by the challenges that the Council faced at the time. So for context, Last year, similar but different to this year as well. We're in a period of prolonged deadlock on the Security Council's agreement on subsidiary bodies. And when we prepared our program last year, our first work stream was therefore to facilitate discussions on how to make that process better. We clearly saw that it did not work last year, it is not working again this year. And that was something that we wish to address in the iwg. We've had many discussions on the topic, many proposals have been put forward on how to make it better, on how to implement the existing process in the note. And those discussions are ongoing. And this year's process only further underlines for us the importance of that conversation. I think, and I'm sure Gould will also mention our second work stream as well, in the context of the iwg. We've also sought to make the IWG a safe space for real reflections on working methods to make the discussions quite solutions, focused, less rigid. My pr, when she chairs it, really encourages all delegates to come with questions for each other, not to read pre prepared statements, anything like that. And as you can imagine, at the UN in particular at the Security Council, that's quite difficult to achieve, but it's one that we really stress on together with Pakistan to facilitate a really frank discussion. And we have, in that sense, we have a standing item every month or every time we, every month when we meet on reflection, working methods, reflections from all of the presidencies and from all of the penholders. So every month we're encouraging those Council members to come forward with any novel practices that they thought worked, with any challenges that they came across with any practices that they thought didn't work. And you know, this can range from presidencies, you know, from challenges in the presidencies arising from the fact that emergency meetings end up outnumbering scheduled meetings. You know, is there something we can do about that? Is there a way that we can, we can try to work in the IWG to address these questions or seeking advice from the Peacebuilding Commission or engagement with the General Assembly. These are all questions that have come up from the presidencies and then from the penholders. We've had questions about engaging with regional countries, the use of technical rollovers to facilitate agreement or additional time for discussions. Just, you know, really a kind of brainstorming session on working methods, which I think is a really useful way to keep this Council working group effective and solutions oriented. And then I guess before handing over to my co chair Gul, I just want to mention the important role that the Elected members have been playing on working methods. Of course, it is the E10 that have to chair the subsidiary bodies and also to bring fresh ideas, to bring new perspectives to the working methods. We see a lot when we come into the Council with new eyes what may be established practice but might not be the most effective ways of doing things. So we have common positions on this topic. And it's one of the very rare files that the East E10 delivers a joint statement in the Security Council open debate, when we have an open debate on working methods which Pakistan prepared and delivered last year. So I guess to close and to hand over to Gould for us just to really stress that working methods, they're not a technical afterthought, they're the practical tools through which the Council really delivers or in some cases fails to deliver on its responsibility to maintain peace and security. The discussions can become very spirited in the, in the working group, they can be very prolonged, protracted. And I think, you know, that's a reflection of the importance that all Council members attach to these questions. And of course we hope to make progress this year as we did last year. And while maybe I won't get my Nobel just yet, I think we can maybe get a few working methods notes across the line. So I'll leave it at that. And thank you very much. Happy to answer any questions.

Thank you so much, Shane, for sharing your experience as well as Denmark's angle to the working methods of the Council. And now I'm pleased to give the floor to our second speaker, Mr. Gul Kayser Sarwani, Political Coordinator at the Permanent Mission of Pakistan to the United Nations.

Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you, Shen. And let me also start by thanking United Nations Institute for Training and Research for organizing this important briefing on the work of the Security Council and also inviting us as co Chairs to share our reflections on improving the working methods of the Council. As Shane mentioned, discussions on the Council's procedures and practices are important not only for Council members, but also for the wider UN membership. As the Council's work affects all Member States and remains central to the maintenance of international peace and security. That is the fundamental thing that we are discussing and Council's working methods are, are grounded in the UN Charter Provisional Rules of Procedure and established practices of the Council, including those compiled in note 507 that Shen referred in detail. Article 30 of the UN Charter says that Security Council shall adopt its own rules of procedure. At the same time, under Article 24, Member States confer on the Council primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security and agree that in carrying out its duty, the Council act on their behalf. So this is very important to put in context and then Article 25 of the UN Charter says all Member States agree to accept and carry out the Council's decision in accordance with the Charter. So this unique authority carries a corresponding responsibility for the Council to conduct its work in a transparent, inclusive, accountable and credible manner. Here comes the role of working methods to ensure that the Council works on behalf of all members of the United Nations. Over the year, Council has made important progress. The adoption and Successive revision of note 5. 0 have consolidated best practices on transparency, participation and accountability. Open debates, wrap in and wrap up sessions, improved communication with the wider membership, greater use of informal formats such as ARIA formula meetings have contributed positively to the Council's work. At the same time, we believe that improving working methods remains an ongoing process, like Rules of procedure remains provisional, so they need to be formalized. Note 507 remains a living document and that requires continuous review. In this regard, updating the Note as necessary in response to the contemporary needs is crucial for the Council's effectiveness. It is equally important that Council reviews, updates and streamline those working methods that no longer align with the current realities in the interest of improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the Council. So this is overarching role of the working methods to make the Council more effective, efficient, credible and accountable. These are the larger goals and in that context we still believe that there is need of greater interaction with the wider membership, including countries directly concerned, troop and police contributing countries, which would strengthen the effectiveness of the Council decisions. Enhanced transparency in the functioning of subsidiary bodies, sanction committees and working group of remains essential as far as Pakistan is concerned. In our national perspective, we highly value the working methods of Security Council and we are committed to the Council's credibility, effectiveness, transparency, inclusivity and accountability in line with the UN Charter and Provisional Rules of Procedure and note5.0 that we are referring. During our presidency last year, we also circulated our commitments on working methods that focused on transparency, efficiency, inclusivity, accountability, follow up and regional cooperation. So that was the context that I wanted to make. And now, like Shane, I will focus on three areas in my remaining intervention. I will try to be brief. One, of course, the working of the informal working group on the documentation other procedural questions last year under the Co chairmanship of Denmark and Pakistan. And the second thing that I'll focus is appointment of Chairs and Vice Chairs of the subsidiary bodies. I think this issue is of immense importance, rather concern of all of you because of the continued delay that this Council is facing in resolving the issue. And third is application of Rule 37 of the Provisional Rule sub procedure. So, coming to the first work of the informal working group last year, as you know, and also Shane mentioned that due to the unprecedented delay in the appointment of Chairs and Vice Chairs of subsidiary bodies last year, Pakistan and Denmark began their work as chairs of co chairs of the informal working group after lapse of five months. So last time the decision regarding the appointment of Chairs and Vice Chairs was taken on the 29th of May. So that was unprecedented. That had never happened in the Council's history. Nevertheless, once we were appointed as Co Chairs we worked very closely and in close coordination to advance groups work. Serving as Co Chair was a unique experience and I must say that coordination between the two delegation was smooth and effective throughout. Despite the delayed start, the group remained active and productive throughout the year, holding six meetings. In addition to the Council held its annual debate on the working methods Last year in November at our first meeting, both Co Chairs, Pakistan, Denmark presented a focused program of work centered on implementation of note 507, selection of chairs and Vice Chair, Subsidiary bodies, penholdership participation or application of Rule 37 and engagement with civil society. Importantly, all meetings of the informal group last year included a standing agenda item strengthening and advancing the implementation of note 507. And under this item, Council presidencies briefed members on the commitment, progress and challenges relating to working method during their respective presidency and there were also discussions by penholders on their experiences. So this practical and implementation oriented approach made discussions more substantive, experience based and forward looking. In October last year the group also discussed application of Rule 37. So there were guiding questions that we prepared in circulated and the discussion was focused on those lines. The questions we had and member staff discussed it. Last year we had annual debate on working with I mentioned and during the debate Council members and the wider UN memberships participated very actively and shared their perspectives on improving the Council's working methods. And the discussions again focused on transparency, efficiency, penholderships, subsidiary bodies and the role of the Council in ensuring an inclusive and transparent process for the selection of the UN Secretary General, which is the most important issue this year the Security Council is engaged with and there are processes going on, discussions going on in this regard. As we discussed, Pakistan delivered the statement on behalf of Eaton and after that it was the first time in the informal working group there was a follow up discussion on the suggestions made by the wider membership. During the annual debate there were exchanges on the role of subsidiary bodies. So this indicates that there were repeated discussions on the appointments of chairs, Vice Chairs of subsidiary bodies, whether it was annual debate or the meetings of the Working Group or even in the close consultation of the Security Council. In addition, the Group adopted a Presidential note concerning the notification of flag installation ceremony for incoming members. You have often seen that there is a flag ceremony at the beginning of each year with five new incoming members. So that process process has been codified last year and then the Group adopted annual report. So this is a brief view that what the informal Working Group on documentation did last year, despite being starting. Despite starting this work in June, more or less. And the other important issue is appointment of Chairs and Vice Chairs of the Subsidiary bodies that remains very important and matter of concern. As we said, as per Note 507, the appointment of the Chairs and Vice Chair should be made or agreed by no later than the 1st of October. Failure to meet this timeline, which unfortunately we were not able to meet the timeline recently that affects the work of the Security Council undermines predictability and continuity and effectiveness of the Subsidiary bodies themselves as well as the Council because it affects the Council's functioning. Subsidiary bodies basically continue or supplement the work of the Security Council. As co Chair. Based on our experience last year, we facilitated the discussion on the negotiations with incoming members and therefore the negotiation initially reached or concluded before first October. But unfortunately because of where the season, we could not move forward. So that is the thing. And of course as I said that Security Council is engaged in discussions. We had discussion yesterday, even in close consultation today at the PC level, we had discussion on it. We are trying to find a solution. Hopefully you will be able to make it as soon as possible because next month there will be five more elected members elected on 3rd of June. And then it would further be complicated, of course, so that is one thing. But moving forward in future, I think there is in our observation some procedural or inherent problems in the appointment process of the Chairs or Vice Chairs. There is three tiered process. First the incoming member discuss negotiate the Chairmanships and then the E10 discusses it. Then it goes to P5. So this three tiered process, perhaps in our observation is flawed, is not correct and that need to be rectified. But that comes later and the informal working group on the documentation could play its role. And we hope that if we get some more time, we will work on it to find a solution. In this regard, my last point is Rule 37. I think you all are very well aware about IT and Rule 37 of the Provisional Rules of Procedure provides that any Member State which is not a member of the Security Council may be invited to participate, without a vote, in discussions when its interest are specifically or especially affected, or when it brings a matter to the attention of the Security council under Article 35 of the charter. And that is a routine thing that is happening very common at the Security Council. But recently, what we have seen is that there are some questions which have been raised regarding the timing and handling of the requests under Rule 37, particularly in situation where a Member State directly concerned by a discussion, seeks to participate after a meeting has already started, or where the references have been made to this State during the meeting. So when this situation comes, there is this discussion whether such a request should be accepted or not. So there are informal discussions going on, but the right place is the Working Group to find a solution. And our view that the application of Rule 37 should remain guided by the principles of inclusivity, fairness, transparency and consistency. Member States directly affected by matter under consideration should have sufficient and meaningful opportunities to present their perspective before the Council. And, of course, it should be consistent and objective application of Rule 37. So let me just conclude by saying that Security Council operates through a combination of both formal rules and evolving practices that we discussed, and its flexibility has enabled it to improve or respond to challenge, changing global realities and emerging challenges. At the same time, improving working method must remain an ongoing process. As I mentioned in the beginning, that means enhancing transparency, inclusiveness, accountability, efficiency and institutional credibility. Working method shapes how Council exercise the authority entrusted to it by a wider membership under the Charter. In many ways, effective working methods are directly linked to the effectiveness of the Council itself. Thank you so much for your attention. Thank you.

Thank you go for your remarks and for sharing the progress that have been made to improve the efficiency, effectiveness, accountability, transparency, inclusiveness and institution credibility of the Council. Now, we're going to move the Q and A. We'll open the floor for questions. We have 10 minutes, so please remember to briefly introduce yourself before speaking. The floor is open. Yes, please go ahead. Hi, I'm Lizzie. I'm from the Permanent Observer Mission of the Sovereign Order of Malta. And my question is. In a dream world where you could rewrite the Charter and the Council structure, what would you keep and what would you change and why? About how the Council works and how it operates. Thank you so much for your question. We can take 12 additional questions before the speakers answer, so if there's any questions from the floor, please don't hesitate to raise your hand. Yes, please go Ahead.

Good afternoon. Marielle of Honros from the Permanent Mission of Trinidad and Tobago. Just two questions. In terms of deciding, I understand that there's a deadlock in determining the chairs and by chairs of the subsidiary bodies. But that aside, you had mentioned there is a treaty head approach in deciding before 1st of October. And one, the first one is for incoming members to discuss. Who is it? Does it obtain that an incoming member have to initiate show initiative or does somebody convene it? And in terms of Rule 37,

what

obtains now if a state asks to participate in the discussions, what has been the practice now? Thank you.

Perfect. Thank you so much for your question. I don't see any further questions from the room. So perhaps we can start with this two first questions. I don't know who would like to start. Please don't hesitate to go ahead. Thank you.

To the first question, if I reimagine and rewrite, I would like to see the Council to be more representative, more democratic, more accountable. And that is what I can think based on my experience on the Council. Of course charter is important and the current structure of the Security Council is in accordance with the UN Charter. As you mentioned, it's very difficult to rewrite or amend the Charter. But if it is, these were things that I would like to see based on my own experience. The other two questions I would shortly respond and then ask Shane to comment on this as well. On subsidiary bodies, incoming members discuss among themselves first. And this year, given our experience as co chairs of the informal working group, we did facilitate their discussions to share our own experiences and also to facilitate their discussion so that they can reach an early agreement. But that is not in accordance with the note 507 as such. So what is happening, even what is happening is not in accordance with node 507. So i5 discusses and then e10 discuss and then goes to P5. So this is the practice and a note, there is a reference that the 2:1 coordinator from the P5 it doesn't say P5 but coordinator and also reference to another coordinator that is understood as the chair of the informal working group or working method to facilitate the discussions. But what is happening, as I said, is not strictly in line with 507 but practice the Council is following and but given the experiences recently, it seems bit complicated. And then Chen, you can comment on that last point. The current practice is the Council, the President decides the Rule 37 request and mainly the countries concerned to the discussions are allowed to participate. And in our tenure we have not seen much controversies except some questions when the meeting already started and then we received requests that we experience couple of of times and that became complicated. Therefore I referred that we need to discuss that how can we resolve such issues if they emerge during the discussion. And that happened during our time as well. Shane, over to you please.

Sure. Thank you. Gul, I think the question on kind of what would you change? I don't think we have enough time in this discussion to talk about all the things that I would change. No, but I think what Gule said is very, kind of, is a very good answer in making, you know, a more representative, a more effective, a more accountable Security Council. One in which, you know, everyone has the political will to compromise and reach consensus. And this is kind of ideal world situation, of course, but there are things that we are consistently working for in the confines of the structures that we do have. But it is nice to think about the things that we could, if we could change them in such a way. On the subsidiary bodies. Yep, Google covered it. On the i5 having that initial discussion, I think our advice would be to have that discussion as early as possible. Basically as soon as the election takes place, that the i5 meet, that they discuss their priorities and because it will be the group of subsidiaries, subsidiary bodies that the outgoing council members currently occupy. So we know what the package is. So to identify priorities and ways that you can come together and have a consensus package, because that's very. When the i5 is united quickly, that's a very kind of effective way to move the process along as effectively as we can. And then on Rule 37, I think go covered only arises mainly as a question of practice when the meeting has started. So this was a question that the Council took up in an informal setting. Was it just, was it in 2024, 2025? 24, I think 2024, this, this was like a broader discussion where the Council thought about, you know, once a meeting has started, then the 37, Rule 37 requests will not be accommodated. But the practice has varied since then. So some Council members have some presidencies, have received requests after a meeting has started, they have accepted them, they have not accepted them. And then we have those discussions in the iwg when the practice varies and the rules are not very clear. That's when I think the IWG is a very effective body to kind of try and bring the different perspectives to together share those experiences and see what actually makes sense, whether it is more makes sense to be more flexible based on a case by case basis or whether it makes More sense to actually codify a guideline or a rule.

So

thank you. Thank you so much for your questions and the interesting debate. I don't see any further questions from the. From. Yes, there's the last question there. Yes, please go ahead. Thank you. Thank you so much for the detailed presentation.

I'm Carla. I'm with the PGA Fellowship program. My question is about the penholder system as working method. I believe it doesn't have a legally binding status on the charter. How does it work? Are members elected, encouraged to be penholders, or they come with the initiative? How does it work? Thank you.

Thank you very much for the question and great to see the PGA's office here. I spent two years in the PGA's office, so it's great to see the fellowship coming to meetings at the UN on penholdership. Pen holdership is fundamentally an informal arrangement. There's no rules to say who holds the pen on a specific file. Any council member can hold, pick up a pen and write a resolution. It's an informal system, however, it is quite entrenched, I think, whereby most of the files are currently penned by the permanent members of the Council. So that's the reality of that. The elected members have written and kind of taken the lead on quite a few products over the course of the last few years. Last year in particular, on the Middle east east, the elected members took. Took initiative on several resolutions and on thematic issues. It kind of varies between permanent members, elected members, but there are guidelines in the Council's working methods. Note the note 507 on how to be an effective pen holder. But it does kind of open with that chapeau to say any council member can and should, you know, be empowered to pick up the Japan. So no rules, but a lot of kind of practice and guidelines on that.

Oh, thank you, Shane and Gul for joining us today with this last question. Will we now conclude this presentation? So thank you once again. It's been an alchemist. Pleasure having you here today. I think we all learned a lot from the working methods of the Council. So please join me to give a big round of applause to our speakers. Thank you so much. Appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you. Now meanwhile, we prepare the next presentation. Let me introduce the topic. So our next presentation will focus on how incoming elected members prepare for their seat on the Security Council and the negotiation dynamics among the elected 10, an area where practical guidance and peer experience are especially valuable. I am pleased to introduce our chief two speakers for this session. Ms. Loise Wisner, legal advisor at the Permanent Mission of the Republic of Liberia to the United nations and Mr. Rodrigo Amaya, Political Coordinator at the Permanent Mission of Colombia to the United nations. Floor to Our first speaker, Ms. Louise Wiesner. Legal advice for the permanent admission of the Republic of Liberia to the United Nations. Do it whenever you want. The first presentation.

Okay. Good afternoon to all and thank you very much for this opportunity to share our experience with you. I know coming on the council is. It seems exciting, but hey, trust me, it's a lot of work. So just get ready for the work. Okay? So we will be talking to you. My name is Lobos. Lois Wisenham from the Liberia mission. I, as you all know, Liberia is on the council. So my colleague and myself, we will give you our little experience. We almost one year on, on the council, trying to get there, you know, so it's a pleasure to share our experience with you. So we will be talking to you on the incoming. We call it R5, but it's actually the incoming five. They like, you know, when you come on council, you are elected, so it's the R5, incoming 5, and the negotiation dynamics of the E10. So when you get on the council, you join the other elected five, then you become E10. So I know it would take some time for you to get used to the R5, the PC and other, you know, but it's, it's fine. You, you will get there because when we started we were like, you know, kind of struggling with all the, the agro names and everything. But you will be called the R5 after June, I think the election says June 2nd or June 3rd. And after you are elected, you'll be called the R5. And in January the next year, you will be called, you'll be into the 18th, next slide. So you see, the objective of this section is to inform you or to elect you of the elections to the council. You are now trying to get on the council. So when you are on the council, it's kind of different. You have to be prepared. That's the main word, preparation. If you get on the council unprepared, you will be confused. And don't take it lightly. I'm talking from experience. You have to capture every detail, every information. You have to be prepared. And the Dynamics within the E10 is also important. After you are elected and you are on the council, you have to pay attention to the different Dynamics on the E10. So the Security Council landscape, as I said earlier, you will be called the R5. Then the permanent five is the P5. After you are on the council you join the E10. So sometimes people get confused. What is R5, P10 and all of those. So the P5 is the permanent countries that own the Security Security Council. So the security council have 15 members. They elected. The E10 is the elected 10. You have two terms on the council. So if you are elected like Liberia, we got elected, we started on January this year. Next year, December we'll be leaving to give the next R5 the opportunity to serve. So before you get on the council, before January, you have to start preparing. So if you are elected in June, well, you have to do your in house preparation for October. You will be allowed to go into the council and observe. And it's not just observing, it's taking, make, put, paying attention to every detail. When we got on the council, we started observing, but we were just taking notes, taking notes, taking notes. It's good to take notes, but you have to pay attention. Like I was confused. When you get in the council, you will be seated like this. So every month the seat rotates because for example, if Liberia is there, Liberia is close to the chair. So the next month Liberia would get to the chair and other countries would shift. We were confused. After the first month we got on the council, our seats were different. I went to the secretary, I said, why is this country on our seat? And she laughed. You know, so you have to pay attention because every month the seat, you know, you move until your term to get on the chairmanship. So, so that is also important. And I always emphasize preparation, coordination. The Security Council is coordination. You have to coordinate, you have to get on the council. Not guessing. It's a format, it's a system of real dynamics that you have to follow the next step. Now the question, and I want this to be interactive. I know you have questions, but who are the R5? I know I told you the elected five. But when you hear R5, you will be R5 soon. What comes to mind? No answer is wrong. Anybody want to try? Just try. You have been called the R5. What is expected? What do you expect? Okay. Okay. So the i5, you are preparing to join a council, okay? And your transition from being an elected member, you will be now on the council as a council member, okay? And there will be a institutional change. You will see politics, technical preparation. You have to get involved with all those, okay? And you have to get engaged with the day to day work of the council. There's no excuse to say that I didn't prepare my statement or I didn't prepare my P my. P My. My pr. You have to, to prepare your pr. If you are the PC or you are the DPC or you are the expert, you have to understand your different, different issues. On a council now building an effective council team, the council you will have political coordinator. So, so you have two political coordinators. The deputy political coordinator and the principal political coordinator. The political coordinator is PC and the deputy is dpc. Then you have experts. The experts are the engineers on the team. They go for the information, they draft the statements, they do the negotiation. The PC is the link between the experts and the pr. The PC is the toll. I mean when you get on your toll, you can't sit. You have to be on top of issues because the PRR looks up to the PC and the tpc. So the P, the PC is always on top of every issue. The PC looks to the experts, he directs the experts, he gives information to the PR and everything. So you have the PC. If you are the PC, you have to be on top of every issue, every information. You have to be over your negotiation because you don't want to miss anything. If the PC doesn't get the information, the PR gets misdirected because the PR looks to the PC. The PC is the director for the pr. When the PC is not there, I mean the political coordinator will call them PC. The DPC is there. So if you are the PC, always get your DPC involved with the work because you may not be around and the DPC will take take over. So you cannot do it in isolation. You have to get your DPC in the loop with you because the PR looks to the PC and the dpc. Then you have your experts. I told you by the experts, they go out, do negotiation, prepare files, go to meetings, you know, and all of those. Then the legal advisors. You have legal advisors. For my mission we have three legal advisors. So I don't know it different from mission to mission, you know, I don't know how you do that. So you also have your administrative reporter, those people who are there to report. And it's important we are reporting. The next thing is to how you communicate with your capital. Do not let your capital get the information from the P5 or another E10 country. You get lost. You have to create the opportunity where you will be the one who will give the information to your capital. Because most times, and there's not a secret most, some of the countries will leave you and go to your capital. And if your capital is not informed before time, you will be like you just on the council. So every information, your, your media, your, your record keeper, your, your secretariat, however you call it, you must be on top of your information to communicate with your capital every day. For us, Liberia, we have a time difference of four hours. So when they asleep, we are up. When we up, they sleep. So we have a meeting at 12am every day. There's a team in our capital that handles just Security Council. So we meet them every day. So by the time we sit with them, we are going to be they are up working on the information we've given them. So if any country goes and give your capital any information, by 12 o', clock, you've already informed your capital. By the time you come to New York, it's in the morning, your capital is informed. So if they go to your capital, we say, oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, my pr, my PC, my dbc, my team in Liberia already, I mean in New York already, inform us. So strong communication is so important. Inform your capital every day, everything. Do not take any information for for granted, because this information is important to a situation. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Any question?

Thank you, Luis, for the presentation. Now I'm pleased to introduce our second speaker, Mr. Rodrigo Amaya, a political coordinator at the Permanent Mission of Colombia to the United Nations. Rodrigo, the floor is yours. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Good afternoon to everyone. And to begin with, thank you very much for this invitation. Very happy to be here. Not long ago, both of us, we were sitting at the other end of the table, so we know how useful this exchange is. So thank you again for this. I will make four specific points building upon what Luis has shared with us. I'll make two points on incoming members prepping for the Security Council. And I will also make two points about the E10 dynamics. And of course, I'll try to be as short as possible so that we can have perhaps a longer period for any questions that you may have. So, on the first front, regarding incoming preparations, I would coincide with Luis in the sense that preparation is paramount. Perhaps it's the most difficult time for any member in coming to the Security Council. It's not the actual membership, but the whole prepping of this. And on that note, I would make two points. First, and this is of particular importance for any country who is next to be which is already an incoming five or will become an incoming five. That first element is the fact that you need to build your team in New York. And the key here is that you need to build your team in New York early. Your Tenure might start on January 1st, but not only do you have this observation period three months prior to you entering the Council, but you start negotiations regarding subsidiary bodies, like previous speakers were speaking about early after you're elected. So you need to build your team rather early for that. And that also is because as you are posted here in New York and we think about the General assembly, it is my belief that any diplomat, regardless of their rank, they need at least a year to understand how the UN actually works. So for instance, I came in as a second committee expert. I was in charge of everything like the Green agenda and development. But it took me a whole year to see what the FFD was, the HLPF was, the high level week was, and then how the negotiation process in the committees at the end of the year were. And this also applies for the Security Council with the difficulty that you have a short term term tenure. And hence you need to have your team arrive as early as possible so they get to know the feelings of how the Security Council works. In countries like Colombia, that might be a little bit easier for us because as we have a file in the Council, we have already an established relation with the Council. But not every member of the UN has a file in the Council. Hence it is very important that your team knows the ins and outs of how the Security Council works, even if it's from the outside, prior to getting into the Council itself. And then also another element on building your team, you're going to build your team as you need it for your specific needs. There is no magic formula, there's no magic bullet. For instance, in our case, I'll share you with with you this element, usually there's an Americas team, there's a Europe team, an Africa team, a MENA team and an Asia team. Us, for instance, we do not have an Americas team, just because the files of the Council on this front are too sensitive for us. So we decide not to handle them at the expert level, we handle them at the political coordination level. But that is our reality. Some missions, and based on the acronyms shared by Lois, some missions have a PC and two DPCs. Some missions have three DPCs. In our case, we have one PC and one DPC because that's what works for us. But again, don't believe that you are forced into building your team as every other country actually does it. And the second element, and I'll about talk touch upon an element mentioned by Louis regarding communication with capital. It is very important, not only that regular communication with your capital, but there has to be some very cleared and defined lines of responsibilities. It is of course a national effort. It is of course a national team working towards the same objective. But like any team in any sports or game that you have, they have clear roles. So of course the mission will recommend, capital will instruct. But again, it comes back to the mission. And the mission has to be the one and only voice vis a vis the members of the Council. There is no good scenario or no good results. When things are negotiated between your Ministry of Foreign affairs and embassies back home. That is not the way to go. That just complicates things. So make sure for incoming members that this division of labor is quite clear, quite respectful, of course, but that's the way to articulate the job. And then going to the second topic that we have here regarding the E10 dynamics, I will share perhaps a very frank view of what I believe you must bear into account. First off, you need to of course recognize the value of collectivity. It's a little bit of this thesis around collective diplomacy, but also the strength in numbers. And of course when there's a difference, an imbalance in terms of permanent and elected members. I don't like the expression non permanent. We're elected, but then that brings counter non elected. So let's just call them permanent and elected members. But it's important that at that moment you understand, of course, that the E10 has the capacity of doing so. Agenda setting, however, and here's the flip side to this element, the E10 changes every year. And you just taken from the most recent experience, if you look at the last perhaps three to four months of last year, the E10 was very, very active on very specific topics, including acting as co pen holders on an initiative surrounding issues in the Middle East. But as the membership of the E10 changed this year, you know, compromises are different, positions are different. And hence the possibility of having an E10 strong voice on that specific topic has been diluted, to say the least. And perhaps that possibility of working jointly has shifted towards other topics that are not the ones that we perhaps would have envisaged once we came into the Council. So just bear in mind that you will have to understand that yes, the E10 can do agenda setting. It comprises 2/3 of the Security Council, but it's based on a dynamic set for a one year rotation. And that, you know, just bear that in mind because that will avoid tensions, but also frustrations within the group. And then the second element of E10 dynamics, and this is perhaps a structural flaw as to how some of the issues at the Security Council work. And this has to do with something that was mentioned in a previous session regarding, for instance, subsidiary bodies. You might have your national priorities as every single country has it, but then you're going to be struck with a little bit of luck or lack of luck. And it's the fact that sometimes you're going to go into your term and perhaps you have some thematic priorities, but the subsidiary bodies that handle those issues are not open for the tenure that you're coming into the Council. So somehow you need to take the back seat for a while, perhaps even for a your whole tenure. And you're just going to have to analyze what's actually free and open. And this has become a very clear dynamic. So once you're entering the council either in 27 or in 28, it's already clear what are the things that are going to be available. So if you're lucky enough, great for you. We had some very specific priorities as Colombia when we came into the Council. But just as we entered in 2026, our most our highest priorities were already taken by members that are already in the Council. So we just have to readjust find a way to contribute to the work of whichever country is actually doing this and find creative ways like copenhauding or informal, you know, co chairing those different spaces that provide the work of the Security Security Council. On that note, I would close of course. Lois and I, we certainly have more to say, but I think it's important to hear from colleagues any questions they may have. Thank you.

Thank you so much, Rodrigo. Unfortunately, Lois had to step out of the meeting. He had to leave. But thank you to both speakers for sharing your experience on how to navigate the Council effectively and for your insights on the paramount importance of preparation, coordination, distribution of clear roles and regular communications with capital. And then I got Negotiation dynamics of the elected 10. Now we are going to move to the Q and A. Perfect. I see there's a question already. Yes, please go ahead.

Hi, my name is Abdullah Sahak from Civil Society Organization. My question is about the Security Council reform as you said, the revolving 10. Kind of, because sometimes they are the lead penholders and they do revolve each year. Then it makes the substance of a topic gets diluted. Right. So how do we reform the whole Council in a way that we don't experience these things? And sometimes you gonna see that the current geopolitical climate doesn't reflect the Council members. So you have people that discuss issues that do not affect Them what are the ways in making these reforms? Thank you.

Thank you so much for your question. If there's any additional question, perhaps we can take one or two additional questions before answering. Okay, I see there's no questions from the room, so perhaps, Rodrigo, we can start with this question.

Yes, thank you for that and thank you for the question. The answer is quite complicated in the sense that in order to adjust or to reform the practices, you're gonna face a lot of restrictions. There's this phrase, a very famous phrase within the Security Council that states that the Security Council is the master of its own procedures. But the issue there is that some of them are actually written down. You know, note 507, provisional rules of Procedure of the Security Council. But there's a lot which is informal, hence it is practice. And hence you have to count on the willingness of specific members to have that sort of change. And then sometimes for you to actually have a change, perhaps a two year tenure doesn't quite get you there. You know, there are processes that take every five or ten years. Speaking about SG selection, for instance, which has a process, but then of course that is a little bit more difficult to change because it's not a common thing that you do every single year. And then there are certain other things, like for instance, and I heard what was being spoken before about pen holdership and things like this, but that again, is informal. So the only way that, that you could actually do that is make efforts to actually formalize that. And there has been some sort of efforts, and I would here note to the efforts made by some elected members to have an E10 handbook which somehow describe in a more clear and step by step fashion the different things that you would actually need to do for specific things, things within the Council that is a step forward. But of course there's also, again, going back to the initial point, a lot of resistance to change how the Security Council works. Take for instance, the reform of the Security Council itself. It's been going on for over 40 years. And where are we on that now? We're actually on UN80 and there's additional calls. And last year with the for the Future, there were additional calls for reform. But again, it is quite a difficult thing to do. It is urgent that we do reform the Council in very different ways to make it more legitimate, to make it more effective, to make it more efficient. But again, the only way to do this, at least from the E10 perspective, and here's my take on this, you would need to somehow have this push inherited by incoming members that then would pass the post to the next incoming members. That is a way that it has been done in several occasions with different topics, but it's not an easy task at all.

Perfect. Thank you so much. Rodrigo, is there any final questions? Yes, we have a question over there. Yes, please go ahead. Hi. Thank you so much for the presentation and for the answer to that question. It was very interesting. Laura, from the Mission of Norway here, I was just wondering if you could please say a little bit more about if there's any kind of institutionalized coordination amongst the iten. Obviously, on substantive issues it's difficult, but perhaps on things like working methods, you mentioned SG selection in terms of keeping that institutional memory going between the E10 members.

Thank you.

Perfect, thank you. And I believe my colleague Nayel has another question, so we can take these two questions.

Yeah, thank you. I just wanted to jump in because it's a little bit related, but you. I think Lois mentioned it about the i5, the e10, the P5 and various groups within the Council itself. Can you touch a little bit more on again, like internal coordination between the E10. So I know, for example the E3 or the A3 and sometimes the A3 plus one if there's a closely aligned Caribbean nation, for example. So if you can touch a little bit more on those dynamics as well. Thank you. Of course. Thank you. Thank you, Niall. Because that was exactly the way I was. I was headed. But thank you for that. I know you know how this works. So again, going back to an element of luck or lack of luck, the way the E10 operates is that we have a monthly coordinator and that is a rotational roll that goes in alphabetical order throughout the year. And then what month of the year you actually end up with, well, that's entirely up to luck. And what specific moment you joined the Council. For instance, Colombia, we were E10 coordinators in the month of March. And that is where the E10 actually will coordinate specific positions on topics either on the Middle east, like last year, on SG selection this year and such. And so the responsibilities of the E10 coordinator are, you know, are pretty straightforward. There is a PR level engagement with the Secretary General. So this is a specific space different from the meeting of the Security Council as a body of 15 with the Secretary General. This is just the E10. That's one. The PCs of the E10 have also their joint meeting lunch and to work on things of coordination. And of course, during that month, what the rotating coordinator will do is try to establish a topic or a subject that they want to push. So I'll speak from the Colombian experience, what we identified on the last month of March was that what Slovenia had done in December with the YPS agenda was a little bit fading away and there was not much of an attention set on wps. So we decided to bring that and we did a briefing for the E10 members regarding the YPS agenda. We identified a second element which is the lack of agreement on the allocation of chairs and vice chairs of subsidiary. So we took took it upon ourselves to try to push that a little bit forward. And ever since that date, and despite the fact that we have stopped being the monthly coordinator, we've continued to make that push per the agreement of the E10. And then you're going to have your counterpart, which is the P5, which they also have their coordinator. The difference is that they do that on a rotation every, every three months. So the other task of the E10 coordinator for the month is to coordinate with the P5 coordinator for the quarter and make sure that if there's any negotiation, be it on whatever topic, that there's some bridging positions if there is that tension, if there is that tension. And I emphasize that because at least from our take, we're trying to move away from that potential tension because there's no need to just make that difference between two, like a first tier and a second tier membership in the Council and then perhaps additional configurations that might happen within the Council. You may have either the P2 and the P3 on different, you know, ends of the table. You're going to have sometimes the, the E5 meaning the five European members, or the E3 which would be the three elected European countries within the Council. And then last but not least certainly you have the A3, the three African members of the Council, which sometimes, as Niall mentioned, every other year there might be the possibility of that becoming the A3 whenever there is a Caribbean country. So last year it was with Guyana and they did several of the statements jointly within the Council, raising the voice. And the agreement of the A3 was, you know, whenever there is a discussion on an African file, the A3 coordinator for the month will speak on that file in representation as well for Guyana. And Guyana would take the voice on the files of the Americas, meaning Haiti and Colombia, and would speak as well on behalf of, of the A3 this year, no specific member of the Caribbean sub region. So there's no A3 at the moment. But then I understand that, you know, there's someone from Trinidad, I believe, here so perhaps a three plus next year, which perhaps again goes back to the element of strength in numbers and how we can have a more fruitful engagement and put the work of the Security Council, you know, moving forward.

Thank you so much, Rodrigo. I believe there's no further questions from the. From the room. So just to conclude, before we conclude this presentation, I want to thank you once again, Rodrigo, for joining us during today's session and for sharing your practical guidance and experience with us. This kind of life perspectives is something that one cannot learn in any textbook. So thank you so much for sharing your insights with us. So please join me for a big round of applause to her speaker.

Thank you.

Perfect. Now we're going to move to the last session before the closing remarks. Before we set up the stage for the next speaker, let me briefly introduce the next topic. The next topic is on Council relations with other organs and regional organization. Our final substantive presentation will examine the Security Council relations with other unregulated organizations, a dimension that is central to understanding how the Council operates with the broader UN system and how it coordinates with partners on the ground. I am pleased to introduce and to give the floor To His Excellency, Mr. Omar Hilale, permanent Representative of the Kingdom of Morocco to the United nations, speaking on behalf. Yes, sorry, the United Nations. So, Ambassador, the floor is yours.

Thank you. Thank you for giving me the floor. I have the honor to deliver the flight following statement on behalf of His Excellency Ambassador Omar Hilal. I'm Salim Yusfi, Counselor in the Permanent Mission of the Kingdom of Morocco to the United nations here in New York. And it is indeed a great pleasure to join you all this afternoon among many friends and partners with whom Morocco has walked the long stretch of the peace building road. Allow me also to convey our deep appreciation to the unitar, to the Permanent Mission of Portugal, and also for DPPA for convening this timely and important program. As you are well aware, the voice of the Peace Building Commission, which Morocco is proudly chairing this year, remains the collective voice of its members. So this afternoon I'm speaking on behalf of Morocco's national capacity. This room understands, and I will listen also carefully to all my colleagues who have preceded me in this room. We understand that fundamental truth. It's that keeping the peace is a shared undertaking. The Security Council carries this principle responsibility under the Charter of San Francisco. But I believe that also peace is built over the long term by many hands, in many places, and also by many actors. Our panel today asks how the UN Security Council connects to Everything beyond its chamber. And this is actually where Morocco finds its diplomatic vocation. Twenty years ago, the United nations asked the General assembly and the Security Council to co parent the Peace Building Commission. Pbc that dual parentage is recognized that the work of peace extends beyond any single organization and benefits from being encoded within the pillars of the United Nations. The Peace Building Commission is the intergovernmental forum in the UN designed to bring the country concerned, its neighbors, its donors, financial institutions, the regional organizations and civil society into a one single conversation. It does so in service of the Council, not in a competition with it and not as a substitute for it. The PBC is the Council's natural partner. And allow me just to draw with you the following image. I consider the United Nations Security Council as a surgeon and intervene when life is at stake. The Peace Building Commission is the physician who knew the patient before and stays long. The operating theater has closed peace needs. Both in last November, the General assembly and the UN Security Council have adopted twin resolutions to review the peace building architecture. They delivered an act of shared leadership adopted unanimously by the 15 members of the Security Council, as I said, and the 193 member states of the United Nations. Those twin resolutions, they came at a very demanding moment for the un. The UN Security Council members and the wider membership agreed that peace building is worth to invest on it. It's a political fact of considerable weight and it's also a working capital that the Commission intends to spend wisely and faithfully to. The mandate of the Council has entrusted to it. In this regard, three shifts matters. First, the renew with mandate placed nationally owned prevention strategies at the center, voluntary at the request of the concerned countries and grounded in its own priorities. Also, engagement on that basis allows the UN to support member States well before situations come to require the Council's direct attention. It's among the most cost effective forms of prevention this house has developed. Second, it brings me to the international financial institutions, IFIs, the Regional Development banks. And we have too many partners in this regard. I can say the African Development Bank, I can say the Asian Development Bank, I can say the the American Development bank. And the PBC remains this natural platform where the World bank, the imf, the African Development bank and all those partners can engage substantively with the peace and security pillar as a bridge. The Council itself has very long encouraged three it closes that gap or feedback loop with the Peace Building Fund. The Peace Building Fund is the financial arm of the Commission. And countries that benefits from this fund are beyond 50. Share back what worked and what didn't. Work. Allowing also the Peace Building Commission and the United nations as a whole to learn systematically from its own experience. When it comes to the relationship between the UN Security Council and the Peace Building Commission, if I can call it on one term, we are building on what works. We have three country specific configuration. The first one is on Liberia and it's shared by Sweden. We have the second one, it's on Guinea Bissau and it's chaired by Brazil. And last but not least, we have the configuration on the brotherly Central African Republic and is chaired by the Kingdom of Morocco. That kind of engagement is very useful because it is sequenced with mandate decisions anchored in the host government priorities. And the three said areas where the partnership can be deepened further are when it comes to the interaction here between the UN Security Council of course and the pbc. The timing. Early requests to the Peace Building Commission advice allow the PBC to sharpen its product and its written advice and make them very useful. We work in the Commission to anticipate the Council calendar and respond with appropriate speed. The second one on the format we have heard many, many times the distinguished members of the Council asking the PBC to sharpen and to make its written advices more strategic. We are taking this one on board under the Moroccan chairmanship and the BBC is trying to produce as much as we can more concise and more political and also more faithful written advices to the perspective of the countries concerned, which is only legitimate and core when it comes the interaction between the the African Union and the United nations and its partnership within peace building. I do believe it's the most consequential regional partnership that the UN has and also a substantial share of the UN Security Council agenda concerns Africa as even higher share of the BBC's engagement with does and also the Peace Building Fund. Africa remains at the center of the UN work and both as a subject of its attention and increasingly as an inspiration of its own solutions. The revised AUPCRD on Post Conflict Reconstruction and Development. AUPCRD is one of the most appealing responses to the United nations and and the Commission exit to accompany it and to reinforce it. Peace is built in Africa. The UN is its partner and the BBC. The Peace Building Commission can be the bridge. And I'm going to now speak a little bit about the wider ecosystem beyond the African Union and the PBC. Convince the network whose contribution to the UN's work is considerable. We have partners like the European Union whom are essential to financing civilian capacity and accompanying transitions. We have the asean, the OIC and The international financial institutions, as I mentioned before. So bridging finance into systematic dialogue with peace and security is a service the PBC only place to do so. And we intend to make it the signature of our chairmanship. Three priorities I think deserve a candor here. We believe in Morocco or in our foreign policy of soft and honest diplomacy. In this regard, three priorities in particular deserve to be named openly. First is the financing. The Fund unfortunately remains under resourced relative to the demand of its support. And the case for predictable sustained financing remains a priority. And we continue to make that through established channels of the un. The second one is the impact. One of the the key elements highlighted on the PBAR twin resolutions is the impact. You go as a Peace Building Commission, for example, you receive a request to establish a national prevention strategy immediately. You respond to the priorities, to the needs and to the assessments that are expressed by the concerned country itself. And you take all those concerns, you formulate them and and then you hand them to the Peace Building Fund who starts working with the local authorities. And after one year we need to assess what worked the most, what is still remaining to do, what are the gaps, what worked the most and what worked the less. And how could we do to adjust the situation Also on national ownership. And this is the main pillar of the Commission. It's the fundamental order principle on which the Commission was built over than 20 years ago. The Commission only acts at the request of the host country. We are among the few organs in the United nations where countries come and ask for the PBC's guidance. And also the PBC support and also its sovereign anchor is the foundation of the trust between the Commission that enjoys and also the countries that are falling within its own agenda. To conclude, what I can say very briefly is that the UN Security Council, the Peace Building Commission and regional organizations, international financial institutions are a lot of pieces. But into one puzzle or into one architecture designed by the UN charter eight years ago and refined 20 years ago of practice by the Peace Building Commission. The question running through this very fruitful program is whether that architecture functions as a whole. And if you ask me, my answer is going to be very clear. Yes, it can and it must. The PBC by design and by mandate is one of connecting beams in this regard. Last but not least, from the 22nd to the 26th, the Commission will convene for the first time a Peace be Building Week. It will be held here in the United nations headquarters from the 22nd to the 26th. And it also coincides with the 20th anniversary of the Commission, the Chair this year has decided to make that Peace Building Week open to all UN Member States. You can all come and participate in this meeting. Open. Also, during this week, we have over 30 side events on a peace building. So please consider this as an extended invitation to you all to come and interact with the Peace Building Commission. To conclude, we remain very determined that this year will be the year this architecture delivers together the peace our people expect of us. I thank you all for your attention and for this kind invitation. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Yusuf, for your insightful presentation. We'll now take our final questions from the floor, so if you have any questions, please don't hesitate to raise your hand. Thank you. The floor is open. I know it's been a very long day before the long weekend, so thank you so much for being here. I don't see any questions from the floor. But Mr. Yusui, thank you so much for being here with us and for sharing your experience. So please join me for a big round of applause for our last speaker of today's session. Thank you so much. Representative of Portugal, two nations cannot join us for the closing ceremony. However, on behalf of unitar, we would like to extend our thanks to all of you for this two day interactive session. We have now reached the end of the two briefing work on the two day briefing on the work of the United Nations Security Council. And over the course of this briefing, we have had the privilege of hearing from a truly outstanding group of experts, practitioners and fellow diplomats. On day one, we built a solid foundation exploring the securities Council functions and powers, its procedural architecture, its program of work, its documentation system, its substance, subsidiary organs and its research tools. And today, during day two, we move into the heart of the Council's decision making. From the experience of presiding over the Council, to negotiation decisions and outcomes, to navigating the use of the veto, to the informal processes that are often as decisive as formal meetings. And finally, we turn to the broader picture. How the Council's working methods can be strengthened, how incoming elected members can best prepare, and how the Council relates to other organs and regional organizations. I would like to seize this opportunity to express on behalf of UNITAR, our deepest gratitude to His Excellency and the entire team of the Permanent Mission of Portugal for their leadership, generosity and and commitment in making this briefing possible. This partnership reflects our shared commitment to advancing dialogue and cooperation in strengthening multilateral diplomacy. And it's a partnership we deeply value and look forward to continuing. I also wish to thank all of our speakers across both days. Without exceptions, their contributions have been of the highest quality. And their willingness to share their expertise and live experience with fellow delegates is a powerful expression of the collaborative spirit that animates the best of the United Nations. And once again, thank you to every single one of you. Your engagement, your questions, and your commitment to deepening your understanding of the Security Council's work have made these few days truly worthwhile. That is ultimately what this briefing is for. To equip you with the knowledge, perspectives and connections to engage more effectively with one of the most important organs of the United Nations. We very much look forward to welcoming all of you again in our activities in the near future. Thank you all, and we wish you a very pleasant evening. Thank you.