UNITED NATIONS Pakistan Wednesday rejected what it called a self-contradictory argument of some member states that the UN Security Councils efficiency, including an improvement in its working methods, is only possible by adding more permanent members to the 15-member body. This defies logic, Ambassador Abdullah Hussain Haroon told a closed-door session of the General Assembly on expanding the most powerful UN body aimed at making it more representative and more effective. A larger number of permanent members will further aggravate the exclusive and elitist culture of the Council, the Pakistan envoy said in an obvious reference to the bid by India and some other countries for a permanent seat on the Security Council. The Security Council, which is entrusted with maintaining international peace and security, is composed of 15 members - five veto-wielding permanent members - Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States - and 10 non-permanent members who are elected for a two-year term. At present, the council has to reconcile the positions of five permanent members, the Pakistan Ambassador said. Then it will have to reconcile the interests and position of even more permanent members. Such a council definitely will be more opaque, less effective and more exclusive - both in terms of working and decision-making, he added At the same time, Ambassador Haroon said any expansion of the Security Council must be accompanied by re-balancing the representation of various regions of the world on an equitable basis. This necessitates greater allocation of seats to address the historic injustices to Africa and to redress the under-representation of Asian, Latin American and the Caribbean Countries, he said. In this regard, the Pakistan envoy especially pointed out that the proposal made by the Italy/Pakistan-led Uniting for Consensus (UfC) group in 2005 allocates 80 percent of the 10 additional seats on the Council to the three regions - Africa, Asia and Latin America - in an obvious effort to garner more support from the member states. Reminding that the basic objective of the exercise to restructure the Council was to make it more representative and efficient, the Pakistan envoy emphasised that the issue of Security Councils size was linked to four other issues: the categories of membership, the question of veto, regional representation and working methods of the Council and its relationship with the assembly. Ambassador Haroon said the broad agreement emerging in the negotiations to keep the Security Council in mid-twenties was in accord with UfCs proposal for a 25-member body. But, he said, there still serious differences between various groups seeking to expand the Council. For example, the UfC and the group of four - India, Brazil, Germany and Japan - both propose 25 members, but there is a fundamental difference between the two sides. While G-4 wants four new permanent members and six non-permanent members, the UfC opposes permanent members and prefers 10 additional non-permanent members with a possibility to get re-elected. Therefore, merging the two positions, even if similar, is not so simple, Ambassador Haroon said, while commenting on a document produced by Afghan Ambassador Zahir Tanin, who oversees the negotiations on reforming the Council. Tanin says that the compromise text reflects all positions. But the Pakistan Ambassador took issue with that claim. We must realise that comprehensive reform of the Council is a little more than just a drafting exercise or simplistic merging of positions. On the issue of Working Methods of the council, Ambassador Haroon said there was a desire for transparency, interaction with non-permanent members and efficiency. This also validates the most widely held view that Working Methods of the Council, in their entirety, would improve by making the Council more democratic, inclusive and accountable to wider membership, he said. Such a change can be brought about in the Council only by more frequent elections and rotation of its membership, he added.