|
The UN Security Council is patently overrepresented by “the West”, in that France, the United Kingdom and the United States hold three of the five permanent seats, with the veto power. This undermines the UN’s legitimacy in the non-Western world. If the UN is to have the weight that we desire, the composition of the Security Council must be altered. Europe should now take the first step towards a more just balance of power within the UN.
Kjell Magne Bondevik (former Prime Minister of Norway) and Geir Sjøberg (Security Council delegate 2001-02), the Oslo Center for Peace and Human Rights.
The United Nations remains the instrument for concerted global action and governance. There is no alternative instrument in our age of globalization. No country or region is strong enough to go it alone. Regional groups can never take on such a global role, but they can take needed steps to enhance the authority and effectiveness of the UN. Europe should now take the first step towards a more just balance of power within the UN. The 192 UN Member States have charged the Security Council with “the primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security”. However, many desire a more representative body at the UN’s supreme policy level, a Security Council with more permanent seats, one that would provide a more just balance between the various parts of the world. Today the West is patently overrepresented, in that France, the United Kingdom and the United States hold three of the five permanent seats, with the veto power. This undermines the UN’s legitimacy in the non-Western world. If the UN is to have the weight that we desire, the composition of the Security Council must be altered.
However, all attempts to enlarge the Security Council with more permanent members have run aground. Even with the concurrence of the five permanent members, it would be very difficult to agree on new permanent members. Regional considerations are insurmountable. For example, India would hardly approve Pakistan and vice versa. The process of reforming the Security Council in the direction of a more representative and balanced composition has also gone nowhere for years. The topic is always on the agenda, with no solution in sight. This is bad for the climate of cooperation at the UN and may provide ammunition for critics of the organization and of cooperation under UN auspices.
A single veto for Europe
Nonetheless, there is a solution: reducing the number of members from the “West”. In this Europe holds the key. Might not France and the UK, members with a veto by virtue of the outcome of World War II – themselves help to redress the imbalance by giving up their two permanent seats in favour of one seat for the European Union? This may also have beneficial healing effects within the EU. In recent years, Germany in particular has actively sought a permanent seat on the Security Council, necessitating in the event a substantial enlargement to ensure a fair regional balance.
A legitimate and effective UN
Here it is appropriate to recall that the UN’s founders intended for the Security Council to act decisively and for that very reason to have a very limited number of members compared with the General Assembly and other bodies. Limiting the permanent members to China, Russia, the US and the EU would now be a step towards a more sensibly composed Council. This would help to keep the Council manageable and effective, while opening the door to the eventual participation of other representative regional organizations. The Security Council originally numbered five permanent and six elected members (later increased to ten), a composition based on the situation after World War II. To ensure relevance and legitimacy, it is crucial to make adjustments with time. Political as well as operational reform has therefore long been at the top of the UN agenda. The high level reform panel appointed by Kofi Annan concluded in 2006 that the UN is too fragmented, with weak coordination. No wonder, if even the mot advanced regional body, the EU, is unable to coordinate sufficiently to speak with one voice!
Will Europe be able to deliver?
An initiative along the above lines will require political will on the part of the EU, with France and the UK taking the lead. In the prevailing situation, this would clearly be a move in the right direction, one that can be implemented in practice and that may pave the way for a similar arrangement for other regions later, such as Africa, as the African Union evolves, and Latin America if and when a regional approach matures. An initiative of this kind from the European side would send a positive signal to our non-Western partners about our willingness to give up something for a greater common good. In itself this would be a highly valuable, conciliatory move. If the EU is serious about a common security and foreign policy, it would be high time. But is the EU ready to take its own words seriously?
|
