Security Council is of interest to All including the Sahel
United Nations Summit for the future opened on 23 September in a tense international context far away from the enthusiastic 1992' one that adopted the Peace Agenda. Will this Pact for the Future restart the lost enthusiasm?
Indeed, ongoing wars and expanding terrorism do not give an image of an active United Nations. Security Council members' incapacity to end ongoing wars weakens trust in it and supports calls for its reform. The world over, peoples are doubtful of its commitment to peace and skeptical of its effectiveness. Its five permanent members are not the winners.
Increasingly, international community is seen not as a global entity but as groups with conflicting interests. The UN Charter famous "we the people" is waning. In this background, the 78 th General Assembly should support the Secretary general report and its Security Council Reform proposals. In 1992, it adopted "Preventive diplomacy, peacemaking and peace keeping: the Peace Agenda" whose one of its main priorities was that Global Peace should be a sustained international mission for all. However, present serious antagonisms between the major nuclear powers, risks of a World War are more than ever real. Others crises - climate change, chaotic regional and international migrations - affecting nations relationships need effective actions.
Today, great powers' peace calls are disregarded as they, themselves, are seen as ignoring peace. Thus, with worldwide decline of democracy, in itself a security risk, Security Council reform should be more than a new quest, a necessity.
As ongoing wars do weaken Security Council as peace guarantor, they urge to conclude decades old consultations on its reform. Proposals to enhance its legitimacy and effectiveness often recommend enlarging it for better geographical representativeness. Its permanent members - China, France, Russia, United Kingdom, USA - could be more forthcoming while reform supporters could be lesser ideological. Indeed UNSC restructuration involves major diplomatic interests in each of the UN defined five Regions.
Reforming or continuing?
Security Council was discreetly and successfully enlarged in 1965, adding 4 members to its 6 non-permanent ones. However, since the 1970's multiple reform proposals, without effective results, have occurred.
In 1979, General Assembly voted for Security Council reform. In 1992, the African Group "called for an equitable representation" and its implementation in 1993. Under Kofi Annan mandates, UNSC reform discussions became more formal and in 1998, General Assembly, with 2/3 majority, recommended its enlargement. Thus, a working group for "equitable representation at the UNSC" was established. In 2005, African Union adopted "Ezulwini consensus," its position on Security Council reform.
In 2007, the working group on "increasing the Security Council membership" called for equitable geographical representation and General Assembly created "the Inter-Governmental Negotiating framework (IGN). In 2008, General Assembly adopted a more detailed reform proposal addressing: category of membership; veto question; issue of regional representation; size and enlargement; working methods and Security Council relationships with General Assembly.
However, Security Council reform calls for understanding that issue extreme complexity in particular at regional level where solidarities, supposed strong, are not. Asia potential candidates are Japan, a major contributor to the UN budget and India. With its veto power, China position is decisive. Regarding Latin America - two former Spanish colonies - Argentina and Mexico face Portuguese speaking popular Brazil. Western group: France and United Kingdom cannot keep ignoring Germany, EU main economy and third internationally. The USA Senate constitutional powers in defense and foreign affairs make it almost a sovereign State. The Society of Nations SDN, UN failed predecessor, lost credibility after Senate rejection of President Wilson decision to join it. Today also, reforming Security Council cannot ignore the US Senate.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
Africa has logical demographic candidates: Egypt, Ethiopia, Nigeria and South Africa. Colonial past, persistent civil wars and ethnic exclusion shouldn't be bases for Security Council membership. Many of those denouncing Africa absence from Security Council aim at mobilizing additional votes to force a larger reform they failed to obtain for themselves. Africa shouldn't fight for others as in past two world wars and instead start moving for itself.
In fine, preventing declining international legitimacy from falling further apart is a pressing responsibility. With wars spilling all over, millions of refugees, internally displaced persons, mass migrations and continued environment degradation, the strengthening Security Council effectiveness is critical.
