Lably
Skip to content

Reform of the United Nations Security Council

  • 34 min read
  • 6 chapters
Looking at the empty Security Council chamber of the United Nations at their Headquarters in New York
Jdforrester · CC BY 4.0

Related on Lably

Through United Nations Security Council, United Nations and World War II

Any reform of the Security Council would require the agreement of two-thirds of all United Nations member states and ratification by two-thirds of Member States. All permanent members of the UNSC (P5), which hold veto rights, must also agree.

Despite a common agreement amongst member states, regional groups, and academics on the need for reform, its feasibility is compromised by the difficulty of drafting a proposal that would garner the necessary support, while also avoiding a veto from any of the five permanent members. Several groups inside and outside the UN have developed many competing reform proposals.

Following their victory in the Second World War, the five permanent member states—France, the United States of America, the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union, and China—were considered the best placed to ensure world peace and stability when the UN was established in 1945. Considering the increase of UN member states from 51 states at its creation, to 193 states today, as well as the geopolitical, systematic and normative changes after decolonization and the end of the Cold War, critics judge the Security Council unrepresentative of the current world order. The group of G4 nations, which includes Brazil, Germany, India, and Japan mutually supporting one another's bids for permanent seats in UNSC, India has been supported by all current UNSC members, except China.

The Security Council's adequacy in effectively maintaining international peace and security has often been criticized, citing the use of veto power by permanent members against resolutions which go against their national interests, but that could benefit other member states or the international community as a whole. Some examples cited to bolster this criticism are the Council's reaction to the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda and to the Russo-Ukrainian war; draft resolutions on the latter conflict have been consistently vetoed by Russia.

History

The composition of the Security Council was established in 1945. Since then, geopolitical realities have changed drastically, but the council has changed very little. The victors of World War II shaped the United Nations Charter in their national interests, assigning themselves the permanent seats and associated veto power, among themselves. Any reform of the Security Council would require an amendment to the Charter. Article 108 of the Charter states:

Amendments to the present Charter shall come into force for all Members of the United Nations when they have been adopted by a vote of two-thirds of the members of the General Assembly and ratified in accordance with their respective constitutional processes by two-thirds of the Members of the United Nations, including all the permanent members of the Security Council.

With the enlargement of the United Nations membership and increasing self-confidence among the new members, going hand in hand with processes of decolonization, old structures and procedures were increasingly challenged. The imbalance between the number of seats in the Security Council and the total number of member States became evident, and the only significant reform of the Security Council occurred in 1965: this included an increase in the non-permanent membership from 6 to 10 members. With Boutros Boutros-Ghali elected as Secretary-General in 1992, the reform discussions of the UN Security Council were launched again as he started his new term with the first-ever summit of the Security Council and then published "An Agenda for Peace". His motivation was to restructure the composition and arguably anachronistic procedures of the UN organ to recognize the changed world. In the twenty-first century, the mismatch between the structure of the UN Security Council and the global reality it is meant to reflect became even more glaring, so much so that demands were raised by many politicians, diplomats and scholars to reform the Council at the earliest so that it reflects the reality of the present times and not the time of its establishment. For example, Indian scholar of diplomacy Rejaul Karim Laskar argues, "for the continued existence and relevance of the UN, it is necessary to ensure that it represents as nearly as possible the reality of the power equation of the twenty-first century world".

By 1992, Japan and Germany had become the second and third-largest financial contributors to the United Nations, and started to demand a permanent seat. Also Brazil (fifth largest country in terms of territory) and India (largest country in terms of population) as the most powerful countries within their regional groups and key players within their regions saw themselves with a permanent seat. This group of four countries formed an interest group later known as the G4.

On the other hand, their regional rivals were opposed to the G4 becoming permanent members with a veto power. They favored the expansion of the non-permanent category of seats with members to be elected on a regional basis. Italy, Pakistan, Mexico and Egypt started to form an interest group, known as the "Coffee Club" and later Uniting for Consensus.

Simultaneously, the African Group started to demand two permanent seats for themselves, on the basis of historical injustices and because much of the council's agenda is concentrated in that continent. Those two seats would be permanent African seats, that would rotate between African countries chosen by the African group.

The existing permanent members, each holding the right of veto on Security Council reform, announced their positions reluctantly. The United States supported the permanent membership of Japan and India, and a small number of additional non-permanent members. The United Kingdom and France essentially supported the G4 position, with the expansion of permanent and non-permanent members and the accession of Germany, Brazil, India, and Japan to permanent-member status, as well as more African countries on the council. China supported the stronger representation of developing countries, voicing support for India. Russia has also endorsed India's candidature for a permanent seat on the Security Council.

Sign in to keep reading

5 more chapters are free with a Lably account.

More in India