The adoption of the final decision on the reform of the UN Security Council suspended because the state is unable to come to a unified position. The 2 groups have different opinion on the matter, but neither 1 of them has a confident majority. In the UN Security Council was formed 2 groups, which have different alignment to reform the organization. None of them have strong advantage, in connection with which the whole process of reform can be frozen. Talk about having the configuration format of the security Council started a long time ago, however the UN has not been able to move from the discussion stage to the stage of even planning. "The decision to start a formal intergovernmental negotiations on Security Council reform was made, if I am not mistaken, in 2007. This decision was preceded by 11 years of consultation. Only after 11 years of disputes, it was decided to initiate a formal intergovernmental negotiations. Since then, it took 10 rounds, there has their own agenda, cut 5 main blocks of questions. Data 10 rounds of negotiations have further clarified the parties ' positions, but slightly closer to the fact that this reform was completed successfully", - quotes "Rossiyskaya Gazeta" multiple representative of the Russian Federation to the United Nations Vitaly Churkin. With all of this prospects to a decision in the foreseeable future diplomat sees. "Since there are 2 groups of States. 1 wants to have a fresh constant members of the Security Council. There are powers that are actively assert their claims to be such. This is our BRICS partners - India, South Africa, Brazil, and Germany and Japan. Africans want to have 2 constant members of the Security Council. There is another group of States who understand that they are not likely to reach in order to qualify for permanent membership, but do not want to ever be in some other category. Because they strongly protest against, to create a fresh permanent members. Around it are the main disputes" - described the emerging situation Churkin. The main problem is that no 1 side has a decisive advantage when making decisions. In order for the reform was adopted, it is necessary that voted for it at least 129 States, and such assistance does not expect any 1 of the groups. "Neither one nor the other group is not bravery to this resolution put to the vote. For the following reasons if to grab and put to the vote a resolution on the enlargement of the Security Council and not to get 129 votes, then the entire change process will be frozen for the near future. Because every year such resolution was not put to the vote. This question is extremely relevant, of course, he's paid a lot of attention," said the Russian diplomat. Russia, moreover, is in favour of reform was adopted with unconditional most supportive States. It would be a mistake to make a decision, if thirty percent of the States will be strongly against such a reform. It would not be enhanced, but on the contrary, would have cut support of the security Council. "We say, what should be the maximum possible number of States that are ready to support such reform. Now around this and there is a dialogue", - said Vitaly Churkin.