-
The Struggle For A Permanent Seat At The Security Council: A Critical Assessment Of The Contestants In 2012
CHAPTER ONE -- [Total Page(s) 4]
Page 4 of 4
-
-
-
Continuing he opined that
indeed, the powerlessness of the council’s non-permanent membership
betrays its real purpose. Elected in regional blocs (by a process that
makes selecting a World Cup host look transparent), it exists to provide
the UN Security Council with a democratic veneer, to legitimise the
non-democratic decision-making of the permanent five. So which countries
make up the numbers? Most non-permanent members sit within three
informal categories. The first are the â€great-power wannabesâ€, countries
such as India and Germany. Next are the â€minnows†– Togo and
Azerbaijan, for example – so lacking in diplomatic weight that a UN seat
is one of the only ways they manifest international presence. The third
category comprises countries with geopolitical situations so benign
they can afford a UN seat as a diplomatic comfort zone.
According to
the http://www.dw.de/dw/article/0,,5999729,00.html, the G4, (an alliance
of some developed countries made up of Germany, Japan, Brazil and
India) been pushing for an overhaul of the UN system as part of the G-4
alliance. A move which has seen them campaigning to join this elite
group (United States, Britain, France, Russia and China hold permanent
seats on the UN Security Council and the power to veto all resolutions)
as part of a more comprehensive project to revamp the Council for most
of the past decade. The G-4 group has been calling for the addition of
six permanent seats to the Council without the power of veto, and a
further four non-permanent seats.
The fall of the Berlin Wall and the
unipolar stand of the United States have also added to the urgent need
for a radical reformation of the entire UNSC structure and operations.
Akpotor and Agbebaku (2010) observed that at the end of World War II,
the United Nations was born with the Big Five negotiating them into the
Security Council which is the most powerful organ of the U.N.O. But
since 1955 there had been clamour for changes and reforms of the UN
especially the Security Council which is regarded by many as a
prestigious exclusive club. The calls for reforms increased with the
collapse of the USSR in the 1990s. This made the United States too
powerful and many times going against the decisions of the Security
Council especially in the area of collective security as in Iraq.
Tanin
(n.d) commenting on the issue of Reform of the United Nations Security
Council (UNSC) argued that the reform encompasses five key issues:
categories of membership, the question of the veto held by the five
permanent members, regional representation, the size of an enlarged
Council and its working methods, and the Security Council-General
Assembly relationship. Member States, regional groups and other Member
State interest groupings developed different positions and proposals on
how to move forward on this contested issue.
On the United Nations Reform and the Position of Africa in the Security Council
On
his part Kasese-Bota Zambia’s Permanent Representative to the United
Nations, argued that the African proposal for permanent seat in the UN
Security Council sought to redress the historical injustice to the
continent through the Security Council composition and processes. Thus:
It
is the position of the African Group that there should be expansion in
both the permanent and non-permanent categories with the new permanent
members exercising all privileges and obligations that go with
permanency tenure. (Kasese-Bota, 2012:5).
He also added: “However,
Africa exercises flexibility on issues of maintaining or abolishing the
veto for all permanent members of the Security Council.†(Kasese-Bota,
2012:8).
In the same vein, Charles Ntwaagae, (2012) Permanent
Representative of the Republic of Botswana to the United Nations,
maintained that Africa remained committed to reforming the Security
Council to make it more representative, more accountable, more
democratic and inclusive in its composition and methods of work. He
however, said that the identification of the candidate countries to
occupy the Permanent Seats should be left to the wisdom of African
leaders to decide on.
Responding to the double standard nature of the
UN membership Security Council, Ambassador Wilfred Emvula, Permanent
Representative of the Republic of Namibia to the United Nations, said
his country was strongly opposed to any second-class permanent
membership status for African countries or any other member state:
The
fact that the agenda of the Security Council has dealt more with issues
concerning Africa than any other region is a compelling case for the
continent to play an active part in deciding upon matters affecting its
wellbeing (Emvula, 2012:3).
Moreover, Coordinator of the C-10 Group
negotiating on behalf of the African Group, Ambassador Shekou Touray,
Permanent Representative of the Republic of Sierra Leone to the United
Nations, said that support for the African Common position continued to
receive support in the continent’s quest to claim permanent membership
in the Security Council and address the historical under-representation.
Arguing further he observed that:
The
UN Security Council was the principal decision-making organ in matters
relating to international peace and security. Currently the UN Security
Council is composed of five permanent members — China, France, Russia,
the United Kingdom and the United States of America — and 10
non-permanent members of which only South Africa and Togo are from
Africa, the continent with the largest number of members of the UN
(Touray, 2012:6).
Commenting on the issue of reforming the UN
Security Council Nigerian President, Goodluck Jonathan (2012) called for
a reform of the United Nations (UN) and support for Nigeria’s quest for
permanent membership of the UN Security Council. President Jonathan
made the call when he received the visiting UN Secretary General, Mr.
Ban Ki-Moon, at the State House. President Jonathan decried the
situation whereby no African nation is represented in the permanent
category of the UN Security Council said the reforms were necessary to
bring the world in line with the global current realities.
World Opinion Leaders and the United Nations Reform and Expansion
According
to the http://www.wikipedia.org (2011) the existing five 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 an increase the presence by
African countries on the Council. China supported the stronger
representation of developing countries, voicing support for the Republic
of India. Russia, India’s long time friend and ally has also endorsed
the fast growing power’s candidature to assume a seat of a permanent
member on the Security Council.
On his part the United Nations
Secretary General, Ban ki Moon (n.d) opined that the UN Security Council
reform, being debated since two decades is too long overdue and the
necessary expansion must be made considering how much the world has
changed.
In a joint declaration by the United Kingdom and France on
reform to the United Nations Security Council through their permanent
representatives, held that:
Reform of the UNSC, both its enlargement
and the improvement of its working methods, must therefore succeed. We
reaffirm the support of our two countries for the candidacies of
Germany, Brazil, India and Japan for permanent membership, as well as
for permanent representation for Africa on the Council. We regret that
negotiations towards this goal remain in deadlock and are therefore
ready to consider an intermediate solution. This could include a new
category of seats, with a longer term than those of the current elected
members and those terms would be renewable; at the end of an initial
phase, it could be decided to turn these new types of seats into
permanent ones. We will work with all our partners to define the
parameters of such a reform. UNSC reform requires a political commitment
from the member states at the highest level. We will work in this
direction in the coming months with a view to achieving effective
reform.
India’s permanent representative to the UN commenting on the need for a reform of the Organisations, said that:
Activities
of the Security Council have greatly expanded in the past few years.
The success of Security Council’s actions depends upon political support
of the international community. Any package for restructuring of the
Security Council should, therefore, be broad-based. In particular,
adequate presence of developing countries is needed in the Security
Council. Nations of the world must feel that their stakes in global
peace and prosperity are factored into the UN’s decision making. Any
expansion of permanent members’ category must be based on an agreed
criteria, rather than be a pre-determined selection. There must be an
inclusive approach based on transparent consultations. India supports
expansion of both permanent and non-permanent members’ category. The
latter is the only avenue for the vast majority of Member States to
serve on the Security Council. Reform and expansion must be an integral
part of a common package.
Moreover, the Indian Prime Minister,
Manmohan Singh during the General Debate of the 59th Session of the
United Nations General Assembly observed:
It is common knowledge that
the United Nations is often unable to exert an effective influence on
global economic and political issues of critical importance. This is due
to what may be called as “democracy deficitâ€, which prevents effective
multilateralism, a multilateralism that is based on a
democratically-evolved global consensus. Therefore, reform and
restructuring of the United Nations system can alone provide a crucial
link in an expanding chain of efforts to refashion international
structures, imbuing them with a greater degree of participatory
decision-making, so as to make them more representative of contemporary
realities. The expansion of the Security Council, in the category of
both permanent and non-permanent members, and the inclusion of countries
like India as permanent members, would be a first step in the process
of making the United Nations a truly representative body (Manmohan
Singh, 2004:13)
During the General Debate of the 64th Session of the United Nations General Assembly
CHAPTER ONE -- [Total Page(s) 4]
Page 4 of 4
-
-
ABSRACT - [ Total Page(s): 1 ]This work set out to investigate the struggle for Permanent Seats At The Security Council: A Critical Assessment of the Contestants in 2012. While observing that there exists a fundamental need to reform and enlarge both the membership and voting pattern in the Security Council in order to reflect geopolitical realities of the 21st Century by making both the organisation and the Security Council in particular to appear democratic while at the same time enhancing its efficiency and legitimacy aro ... Continue reading---
