UN SECURITY COUNCIL: TIME FOR CHANGE?

What is the Security Council?

In the aftermath of World War II, the international community created the United Nations as a venue where all countries of the world could work together to solve challenges that no single country can solve alone. The Security Council is the most powerful body in the United Nations, with the great responsibility of maintaining peace and security around the world and help countries resolve their differences peacefully.

Under the UN Charter, the Security Council maintains international peace by:

• Preventing the escalation of existing conflicts and helping settle disputes peacefully when they are brought to the attention of the Council;

• Bringing together countries to work to stop the spread of weapons;

• Sending UN peace-keeping forces to reduce tensions in troubled areas; and

• Enforcing peace through economic sanctions, trade embargoes or collective military action.

How Does the Security Council Work?

The Security Council consists of 15 members. There are five permanent members: China, France, Russia, United Kingdom, and United States (the countries who were victorious after World War II); and the 10 non-permanent members are elected by the UN General Assembly for two year terms.

Decisions are made when least 9 of the 15 members agree on a particular issue. Each member has one vote. The five permanent members have the right to veto, which means China, France Russia, the UK and the U.S. can block any action they do not favor.

If a permanent member does not agree with a proposal but does not want to use its veto, it may decline to vote – thus allowing the resolution to be adopted. The most recent example of such a resolution was in March 2005. Although two permanent members, China and the United States, are opposed to the International Criminal Court, they abstained allowing the Security Council to refer the horrific crimes in Darfur, Sudan, to the International Criminal Court.

Why Do Some Countries Want to Change the Security Council?

The composition of the Security Council reflects the power structure following World War II, when the UN only had 50 members and countries in the global South were not yet independent. Today, the UN represents 191 nations. Countries who support adding more members to the Council argue that it needs to be more representative of the current international community to be a legitimate body in the eyes of the world. Countries who contribute significantly to the UN budget and peacekeeping missions also want to play a bigger role and have a say in world affairs.

Last year, Secretary General Kofi Annan appointed a high level panel to address the challenges the United Nations faced in the 21st century. The High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change was released in December and outlined a wide range of proposals to strengthen the organization, including two possible models for adding nine members to the Security Council. Neither model gives new members the right to veto. In his report In Larger Freedom, the Secretary General endorsed the expansion of the Security Council.

Who Would the New Members Be?

Adding new members to the Security Council is a huge point of contention. Germany, India, Japan and Brazil- also known as the Group of Four (G4) – and the African Union (AU) have been actively seeking permanent membership on the Council. Both the G4 and the AU have been divided on how many permanent seats should be added to the Council. The AU has not decided which African countries would be represented at the Council and has been demanding that new permanent members also be granted the right to veto.

Currently, there is no consensus in the international community as to how the Security Council should be expanded. Both the AU and the G4 countries face political opposition to their bid for permanent membership.

The United States has opposed adding more members to the Security Council because the international community is too divided on the issue. The Bush Administration has emphasized that although geographic representation on the Council is important, it is vital that the Council’s effectiveness not be compromised in the process. In a recent statement, State Department Adviser on UN Reform Shirin Tahir-Kheli said, "We will work with you to achieve enlargement of the Security Council, but only in the right way and at the right time."

Due to the lack of agreement on the issue, Secretary General Kofi Annan has taken Security Council reform off the agenda for September and pushed it to December. He has urged world leaders not to allow the debate on the Security Council to overshadow other groundbreaking proposals on the table to make the United Nations a more effective institution.

About Citizens for Global Solutions

Citizens for Global Solutions envisions a future in which nations work together to abolish war, protect our rights and freedoms, and solve the problems facing humanity that no nation can solve alone. This vision requires effective democratic global institutions that will apply the rule of law while respecting the diversity and autonomy of national and local communities. We work to build political will for our vision in the United States by educating Americans about our global interdependence, communicating global concerns to public officials, and developing proposals to create, reform, and strengthen international institutions such as the United Nations.

Updated September 6, 2005

+ READ THIS REPORT IN PRINTER-FRIENDLY PDF FORMAT