Towards a more representative UN Security Council

It was at the BRICS Summit in Johannesburg in July 2018, which was also the 10th anniversary of the summit, that Prime Minister Modi first articulated his vision of ‘reformed multilateralism.’ At the retreat, where I was also present as BRICS Sherpa, the prime minister underlined that BRICS (an acronym for five countries: Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) came into existence 10 years earlier precisely because the existing status quo of multilateralism was not acceptable to the five emerging economies.

He urged that ‘reformed multilateralism’ be pursued vigourously, especially that of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). However, BRICS got bogged down in its internal contradictions on reform since some wanted retention of select elements of the post-World War II architecture, which was not acceptable to the rest.

India has consistently pursued reforms in all aspects of the multilateral system, as opposed to reform of institutions only, challenging the status quo of World War II institutions and the structure of multilateralism heavily stacked in favour of developed countries. The most glaring example of this inequity is the UNSC.

Also Read | Maldives supports India's candidature for UNSC non-permanent membership

Before leaving the UNSC after a two-year stint under our Presidency, in December 2022, India held a high-level open debate on ‘New Orientation for Reformed Multilateralism’ for the first time.

As the External Affairs minister said in the meeting, “While the debate on reforms has meandered aimlessly, the real world meanwhile has changed dramatically. We see that in terms of economic prosperity, technology capabilities, political influence and developmental progress.”

Even as the UN increased from 51 member states in 1945 to 193 members now, it is clear that the UNSC had long stopped reflecting current realities. Inevitably, it has become ineffective in maintaining international peace and security.

Currently, the permanent membership of the UNSC is a small club of five member States (P5), without any representation from the entire continents of Africa and Latin America, none from Small Island Developing States (SIDS), and of course, without the largest democracy in the world, India.

The reform ‘process’ in the UN is essentially under the informal Intergovernmental Negotiations process (IGN) which started functioning in 2008.

In 15 years, it has nothing to show by way of progress. On the contrary, IGN has only regressed. And the answer is not far to seek. It is a process that has degenerated into a talk shop since no records are kept of the discussions; no UN rules govern its proceedings; it is closed to the public; has no time frame for a conclusion; and to top it all, does not even have a text before it to negotiate!

Behind the veil, the IGN is being stopped from going forward since a small group of ‘naysayers’ are effectively vetoing progress by putting forward the condition that consensus is required to take any decision and then preventing that consensus from being reached.

The group that is blocking reform is predictably called ‘Uniting for Consensus' (UfC).

Calls for reform

The most vocal groups for reform include the L.69 Group, G4 and the African Group, which demand expansion in both the permanent and non-permanent categories of the Council.

The L.69 group has more than 30 members, including India and many developing countries from Africa, Latin America, the Asia-Pacific and the Caribbean. This diverse set of developing countries, ranging from bigger States like India, Brazil, South Africa and others to smaller States like SIDS, gives the group the necessary credibility in unequivocally calling for UNSC reform.

The G4 consists of aspirants to the permanent seat, namely Japan, Germany, Brazil and India. While the African Group is yet to make up its mind on its candidates, they have a strong claim to correct a historical injustice towards a large continent of 54 countries, which has no permanent representation in the UNSC — though African issues dominate the Council’s agenda.

In fact, their issues get handled by P5, which has the West, their former colonial masters and their new development partners — not the ideal combination. However, African countries are unfortunately divided on how the process of negotiations should move forward, in direct contradiction to their own desire to see early reforms, therefore, impacting the progress of the IGN itself.

The naysayers are ‘spoiler’ countries which oppose reform merely because they do not want someone else to get in. In the UfC, Pakistan opposes India’s candidature, Italy opposes Germany, the Republic of Korea does not want Japan in, and Mexico does not want Brazil to be included.

China and Russia, though not in the UfC group, are status quoists using their considerable influence to support UfC’s stand from the outside (since they do not want, at the very least, Germany and Japan or any dilution of their clout as P5). The UfC’s proposal for reform goes against what the majority wants, thereby stymieing a consensus.

The new UN General Assembly (UNGA) process has just started this week once again. An elaborate charade plays out every year inside the UNGA premises, while the world outside has no idea of what is happening inside those hallowed premises.

Many now see the G20 as having the necessary financial and economic heft to become the fulcrum to drive forward the overall reform agenda. While the G20 is attractive since it works through consensus and there are no vetoes and it is also a far more inclusive group than most, the representation of Africa is still weak and that of SIDS and some important smaller states, non-existent.

Therefore, a strong socio-economic role is welcome but one is not fully convinced that a more political role for G20 will be fully reflective of the broader membership of the UN. Our Presidency of G20 this year gives us an opportunity to shape the discourse in this body.

What next?

With the polarisation of the P5 and the paralysis of the UNSC fully exposed after the Ukraine conflict, what is next? This impasse in UNSC gives an opportunity to a credible group like the L.69, consisting of diverse developing countries, to table its own comprehensive draft text on UNSC reform in the General Assembly.

Nothing prevents a draft text from being tabled in the UNGA by anyone. Once tabled, the draft has to be dealt with as per the rules. So willy-nilly, genuine negotiations will begin on a draft text in full public glare. It will expose those against reform, who hide behind the smokescreen of the IGN process. For once, a genuine transparent negotiating process will begin.

The current status quo in UNSC suits no one except the Permanent Five. All it needs now is the political will to take that bold step forward to initiate reformed multilateralism.

(T S Tirumurti was Ambassador and Permanent Representative of India to the United Nations in New York between 2020-2022 and President of the UN Security Council for August 2021. Views are personal.)