A Summary of Debate: The question of structural reforms of the UN Security Council.
A Summary of Debate: The question of structural reforms of the UN Security Council.
Nina S.
The Security Council is a vital part of the United Nations. It is one of the UN’s six main organs and provides peace and security internationally. The Security Council determines threats and ways to act against them (“Peace and Security”). One of the key factors that makes the Security Council so important, is the fact that it is a legally binding committee. Unlike the General Assembly where the resolutions that are passed do not require member states to follow it, the Security Council does. Fifteen United Nations member states make up this council, with ten countries elected for a two-year term, and five permanent members. These five members are known as the Permanent Five (P5) and are The United States of America, the United Kingdom, France, China, and Russia.
The Permanent Five are given distinct privileges, such as the power to veto any amendments. They were given these privileges due to the important role they played in the aftermath of the Second World War. However, in today’s day and age, due to numerous political differences between members, their veto powers often lead to a standstill amongst the Security Council (“UN Security”). Many modern conflicts and wars are unable to be addressed because of this. This can be seen through Russia vetoing resolutions regarding the war against Ukraine, in addition to the United States vetoing resolutions regarding the conflict in Palestine. This ability to refuse change goes against the ideology of the Security Council. Instead of protecting international peace and security, veto power allows countries to promote war and terror. The Prime Minister of Liechtenstein, Daniel Risch urged the idea that a veto must not be the “last word” anymore (“Reform of Security”). This is not the only example of a world leader petitioning for a change within the Security Council. Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, the former President of Liberia preached that “No system however good can long endure if it cannot adapt to its changing environment and circumstances.” (“Reform of Security”).
This topic was debated on November 8, 2024, and a resolution was submitted by South Sudan. Within this resolution, many changes were proposed to the Security Council, however, the underlying idea of all of them was that there needs to be a more cultural representation. This is shown in the first clause which says, “Requests that there be admitted two permanent members from the African Union into the UNSC by having the African Union hold a vote for the two African nations, that are proposed to be voted on by the UNSC for permanent membership, requiring half of the UNSC’s vote for the admission of the proposed members into the UNSC;”. This clause highlights the fact that the Security Council is made up of mostly Western countries and addresses this issue by including the requirement for two countries in Africa to be represented in the council.
That was not the only topic discussed in the debate. The issue of veto power was also extremely relevant. While some delegates believed that providing even more member states veto power would be good, the majority disagreed. This was shown when Spain proposed an amendment that “Emphasizes the need to increase representation and ensure an equal distribution of power in the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) by: a) increasing the number of permanent members to 10 including France, USA, UK, Russia, China, India, Nigeria, South Africa, Brazil and Australia b) all permanent members will have a veto power contingent to their contribution to UN funding their contribution to the maintenance of international peace and security”. This was very poorly received by other delegates, seeing as if more countries obtained veto power, even fewer issues would be properly addressed, because many of the countries on this list have opposing views.
Throughout the debate, it was clear that the Security Council needed reforms. Many Member states felt underrepresented, and through the passing of South Sudan’s resolution, this idea was only solidified. The idea that certain countries have more ability to dictate what happens on a global scale is no longer seen as a justifiable solution to threats that are imposed on the world as a whole. More countries want a voice and greater ability to create international legally binding regulations.
Works Cited
"Peace and Security." United Nations, main.un.org/securitycouncil/en. Accessed 7 Nov. 2024.
"Reform of Security Council, Other Global Institutions Vital to Maintaining Peace, Speakers Tell Summit of Future Dialogue." United Nations, 22 Sept. 2024, press.un.org/en/2024/ga12629.doc.htm. Accessed 7 Nov. 2024.
"UN Security Council Reform: What the World Thinks." Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, carnegieendowment.org/research/2023/06/un-security-council-reform-what-the-world-thinks?lang=en. Accessed 8 Nov. 2024.