![\"Amb.](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/iimun.in\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/IMG_6069.jpg?resize=580%2C387\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
If a country which is the largest democracy in the world, has a population of some 1.3 billion\u00a0people, is multi-religious, multi-cultural, multi-lingual and multi-faceted, has provided the\u00a0largest number of soldiers to UN’s peacekeeping operations, has played an important role in\u00a0peacemaking, and has a major say in its regions affairs cannot be a permanent member of the\u00a0Security Council, there is probably a need to revise and review what qualifies a country to be\u00a0a permanent member of the UN Security Council, under the UN Charter.\u00a0It was said during the 50th Anniversary of the Charter that to talk of the United Nations is to\u00a0speak of the humanities ideals but to explain the reality of the UN during its first 70 years is\u00a0to confront the failures of humanity, which is central to the UN’s efforts. Even though the UN was intended to be the new collective security forum borne out of the\u00a0disastrous experiences of the Second World War and intended to remedy the many failings of\u00a0the League of Nations, its structure evolved from the balance of power paradigm that existed\u00a0at the end of the Second World War.<\/p>\n
No organization, United Nations included, established under a totally different set of\u00a0circumstances which existed in 1945 can deal with the contemporary challenges thrown up\u00a0by the 20th Century. It is a lot to expect that whatever was done in 1945 in formulating the\u00a0UN Charter should also be relevant in dealing with the international situation that we face\u00a0today. What is not expecting a lot, however, is to understand and accept the need for a\u00a0continuous review in order that we meet the dynamic challenges facing the changing\u00a0requirements of mankind. The new international reality of today is formulated by\u00a0globalization, privatization, development, economics, human rights and so on which have\u00a0metamorphosed the global scheme of things, which is no longer determined by politics and\u00a0military might alone. Threats to international peace and security are no longer confined to\u00a0military threats but are largely determined by terrorism, communicable diseases, global\u00a0climate change, humanitarian issues, intrastate conflicts etc which are non-territorial in\u00a0nature.
\nThere were 51 members when the UN was established in 1945. The UN has grown today to\u00a0accommodate more than 190 member nations. What is meant by this exponential increase in\u00a0the membership of the UN is that the balance of power paradigm of 1945 is no longer\u00a0relevant in dealing with today’s international reality. So the question of reforming the\u00a0Security Council has not been an issue of controversy in recent times. Almost everybody,\u00a0both in the United Nations and outside, agrees that the Security Council needs to be\u00a0restructured, its permanent membership re-looked and the so-called veto right is revisited.\u00a0The major criticism of the only mandatory decision-making body of the United Nations is\u00a0that it lacks representation from Africa, Latin America and the developing countries of Asia\u00a0in its permanent membership and provides a platform for waning rather than rising powers\u00a0and does not have a place for economically powerful nations such as the G4 members. This is\u00a0despite the fact that the global influence is now pivoting towards Asia and away from the\u00a0West, meaning that the composition of the UN’s Security Council reflects a post-World War\u00a0II colonial system which is woefully outdated and yet still powerful in global matters of war\u00a0and peace.
\nIt is not that the P5 does not understand that the world has changed dramatically in the last 70\u00a0years and the structure of the decision-making body needs to be revisited. The problem lies in\u00a0the reluctance of P5 to share or give up their entrenched powers, given to them by the 1945\u00a0UN Charter which has been so structured that it cannot be changed substantively without the\u00a0positive votes of all 5 permanent members. The question that faces us now is how to move\u00a0forward in restructuring the permanent membership of the Security Council, now that the\u00a070th anniversary has just been observed without any major change.<\/p>\n
One way to move forward is to bring the issue before the entire membership of the UN\u00a0represented in the UN General Assembly, to bring forward a framework resolution that\u00a0defines the restructuring of the Security Council and to seek the vote of the entire General\u00a0Assembly in the belief that it is the only democratic institution in the UN. If the framework\u00a0resolution lays down the reality voted by two-thirds of the membership of the General\u00a0Assembly, then the P5 and the naysayers would have a difficult time resisting it’s\u00a0implementation or to negotiate more seriously for the solution of this issue. But there are some more provocative ideas which those who want the permanent membership\u00a0to be reviewed could implement. For example, the G4 insists that the Security Council as\u00a0constituted in 1945 is unrepresentative of today’s UN, that it has no permanent member from\u00a0Africa or Latin America, that it’s structure and processes are non-transparent and even self-serving and that the veto power is often exercised in an arbitrary manner. And yet, every time\u00a0the Security Council, which the G4 describe as unrepresentative and ineffective, makes a\u00a0decision which the 5 permanent members approve, all UN members including the G4,\u00a0beautifully respect and implement. It might be necessary for the G4 to give a thought to the\u00a0fact that the impression they give to the 5 permanent members that the G4 will always follow the decisions of the unreformed Security Council and therefore there is no need for them to\u00a0change the status quo.<\/p>\n
The G4 needs to consider whether their position should not be changed from the current one\u00a0where an issue of international importance being discussed in an organization in which they\u00a0have full representation as well as decision-making power needs to be moved to an\u00a0unrepresentative UN Security Council. I am referring to the Iran nuclear issue which was\u00a0originally before the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), whose board includes all\u00a0G4 members as well as several other important countries besides the P5, were parties to a\u00a0resolution in the IAEA to hand over the issue to the UN Security Council despite the fact that\u00a0the Iran nuclear issue concerns not just the 5 permanent members but more importantly West\u00a0Asia, South Asia, and the whole world. Similarly, the all-important issue of sending peacekeeping forces in conflict situations is\u00a0decided basically by the P5 even though peacekeeping role is conducted in countries and\u00a0continents which have no representation in the Security Council. In reality, while the P5 does\u00a0provide both financial resources and logistics for peacekeeping forces, a large majority of the\u00a0boots on the ground in Africa and Asia is provided by developing countries. The G4 and\u00a0those who provide forces for UN peacekeeping efforts may someday decide to tell the P5 that\u00a0they will not provide these forces merely because of decisions by unrepresentative Security\u00a0Council unless the structure of the permanent membership is changed.<\/p>\n
The suggestion I make\u00a0is not to confront the P5 but to convey to them that the important decisions on war and peace\u00a0can no longer be made solely by the victors of the Second World War in the changed order of the 21st Century. \u00a0There is another idea that needs to be considered by the G4. There is no doubt that whatever set of credentials or qualifications that are laid down by the UN for a permanent seat in the\u00a0Security Council, the member countries of the G4 will be able to meet them. And yet there\u00a0have been occasions where a veto by a permanent member has stalled a security council\u00a0resolution, and the more powerful countries led by one or two of them have resorted to\u00a0military action through the principle of “Coalition of the Willing”. The G4 should ponder\u00a0whether it is not possible for them to demonstrate that on regional issues of less importance to\u00a0the international community, they could get together to find a solution, to implement it, to\u00a0provide economic aid and to create capacity without the help of the P5.<\/p>\n
What I am suggesting is to make it more apparent through actions that the world does not\u00a0begin and end with 5 permanent members of the Security Council, that there are others who\u00a0have both influence and power, without whose support Security Council decisions cannot be\u00a0implemented. The change in the structure of the Security Council or its reform cannot be\u00a0brought about merely by arguments in regard to credentials or demonstrations of a large\u00a0majority of humanity to convince the P5 of the need for change. Nor should the potential\u00a0candidates for permanent membership in the Security Council be assuaged in their feelings\u00a0by the repeated assertions of individual permanent council members of support for reforms\u00a0when it is clear that they have no intention of providing the permanent membership with veto\u00a0rights to anyone other than the present P5. What is required if the world has to move forward\u00a0and the UN has to become a more effective international organization in matters of war and\u00a0peace is the action that potential candidates can take to force the P5 to accept the new\u00a0international reality.<\/p>\n
*Ambassador Prakash Shah was India’s permanent representative at the United Nations and\u00a0Under-Secretary-General of the United Nations.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
If a country which is the largest democracy in the world, has a population of some 1.3 billion\u00a0people, is multi-religious, multi-cultural, multi-lingual and multi-faceted, has provided the\u00a0largest number of soldiers to UN’s peacekeeping operations, has played an important role in\u00a0peacemaking, and has a major say in its regions affairs cannot be a permanent member of […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":72,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"nf_dc_page":"","om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"advanced_seo_description":"","jetpack_seo_html_title":"","jetpack_seo_noindex":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[5,8],"tags":[],"coauthors":[],"class_list":["post-69","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-international","category-national"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/iimun.in\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/69","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/iimun.in\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/iimun.in\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/iimun.in\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/iimun.in\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=69"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/iimun.in\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/69\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/iimun.in\/blog\/wp-json\/"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/iimun.in\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=69"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/iimun.in\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=69"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/iimun.in\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=69"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/iimun.in\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=69"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}