UN reforms and its current financial crisis were major issues discussed by UN Secretary-General António Guterres during his remarks to the Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary Committee) on the proposed programme budget for 2020.

The UN is an inter-governmental organisation responsible for maintaining international peace and security, developing friendly relations among nations, achieving international cooperation and being a centre for harmonising the actions of nations.

It is the largest, most familiar, most internationally represented and most powerful inter-governmental organisation in the world.

The UN has six principal organs - the General Assembly, the Security Council, the Economic and Social Council, the Trusteeship Council, the International Court of Justice and the UN Secretariat. The UN system includes a multitude of specialised agencies such as the World Bank Group, the World Health Organisation, the World Food Programme, UNESCO and UNICEF. Additionally, NGOs may be granted consultative status with the Economic and Social Council and other agencies to participate in the UN’s work.

UN Security Council

The Security Council is one of the six principal organs of the UN. Like the UN as a whole, the Security Council was created following World War II to address the failings of the League of Nations in maintaining world peace. The Security Council held its first session on January 17, 1946.

Role and powers

The Security Council is the UN’s most powerful body, with the primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security.

Its powers include the establishment of peacekeeping operations, the establishment of international sanctions and the authorisation of military action through UNSC resolutions.

It is the only UN body with the authority to issue binding resolutions to member states.

Under the UN charter, all member states are obliged to comply with the UNSC decisions.

Membership

The UNSC has 15 members, and each member has one vote. The UNSC has five permanent members (P-5) - the US, Russia, China, UK and France. These permanent members can veto any substantive UNSC resolution, including those on the admission of new member states or secretary-general candidates.

The UNSC also has 10 non-permanent members, elected on a regional basis to serve two-year terms. The body’s presidency rotates monthly among its members. The General Assembly elects the non-permanent members.

The need for UNSC reforms

The debate about reforming the UNSC is about as old as the UN itself. One of the most contested issues has been the veto power of the P-5, which they assigned to themselves under the UN charter. Over time, the chorus for reforms has grown significantly and at present, it includes various aspects, besides veto power, such as regional representation, membership reform, procedural reforms, etc.

Arguments in favour of reforms

Regional representation

Supporters of UNSC reforms claim that there is a huge European bias in the P-5 due to the presence of the UK and France, as well as Russia, while regions such as Latin America, Caribbean, West Asia and Africa do not have a single permanent member. Similarly, there is a western bias, because China is the only Asian country in the P-5. Thus, a large chunk of the population and many different regions remain unrepresented in the permanent membership.

It seems unfair that Africa does not have a single member in the P-5 despite the fact that most of the affairs of the body concern this part of the world. So, regions such as Africa and Latin America and others will have to be accommodated in the reformed UNSC.

Changing geopolitics

The victors of World War II shaped the UN charter in their national interests, dividing the permanent seats and associated veto power among themselves. It has been 73 years since the formation of the UNSC. During this period, geopolitical realities have changed a lot, but the Council has changed very little.

How can we have aUNSC in 2015 that still reflects the geopolitical architecture of 1945? The rapidly changing world of the 21st century is characterised by a shifting influence and power from west to east and a gradual shift from unipolarity to multi-polarity.

The US is no longer the dominant economic and political power it once was. The G-4 (India, Brazil, Germany and Japan) nations all have bigger economies than Russia, France and Britain. They possibly have bigger global footprints. Japan and Germany, the main defeated powers in World War II, are now the UN’s second- and third-largest funders, while Brazil and India are two of the largest troop contributors to peacekeeping missions. It is only appropriate that the UNSC accommodate this changing geopolitics through reform in its membership to make it more representative.

The veto question

All five permanent members of the UNSC enjoy veto power. Veto is a kind of negative vote by a permanent member that prevents the adoption of a proposal, even if it has received the required overall votes from members.

Sadly, veto power is grossly misused by the permanent members in their own national interest. For example, out of 24 vetoes over the past 20 years, 15 have been used by the US to protect Israel. This also badly affects the conduct of the business of UNSC as many important proposals get blocked due to use of veto by any of the five permanent members.

Clearly, the use of the veto itself must be reviewed. One nation alone must not be allowed to block consensus. One of the demands by those calling for reforms is the elimination of the veto. There are also alternative suggestions like dual veto i.e. veto will only be effective if it is used by two permanent members instead of just one. Now, the time has come that a threshold of members to collectively enforce the veto is discussed.

The question of veto is also concerned with any future expansion of the UNSC as the veto power is jealously guarded by the permanent members and they are averse to any sharing of veto power. This has created a hurdle in the membership reform of the UNSC.

Transparency and working methods

While the expansion of the UNSC has been hotly debated across the world, debate on the working methods of the Council - an equally important aspect of reform to many member states - has attracted less attention.

The UNSC has often been accused of functioning in the most non-transparent and non-consultative way. The undemocratic nature of the UNSC within the supposedly democratic UN has compromised the overall credibility of the world body.

There is a pressing need to enforce greater accountability, coherence and transparency in the Council’s activities by making it accountable to overall UN membership.

India’s quest for a permanent seat

In recent decades, India has been vocal in demanding a permanent seat at the UNSC. It is part of the G-4 to lobby for a permanent spot or at least to make the UNSC more representative.

Many member-states have pledged support for India’s aspiration. Several P-5 countries have also announced their support. China is the only P-5 member opposing India’s bid.

The G-4 wants to expand the permanent seats in the UNSC to 10 to include six new members - the G-4 nations apart from one seat each to Africa and the Arabs.

The G-4’s initial position was for the same rights as the permanent members, essentially the veto right. Over the years, they have become more realistic and would be willing to forego the veto right for 15 years or so.