UNITED NATIONS: Populous Nations Make Bids for Council Seats

By Farhan Haq Reprint | | Print |

UNITED NATIONS, Oct 4 1995 (IPS) - Large developing nations are seizing the opportunity of the ongoing reform of the 15-member U.N. Security Council to see how they can land permanent seats on that body.

Several of the largest member-states have opened bids at the U.N. General Assembly’s current session to obtain permanent, veto- wielding membership on the Council. So far, only Britain, China, France, Russia, and the United States have that privilege.

Tom Ikimi, Nigeria’s foreign minister, made one of the most open bids Wednesday when he told the Assembly, “My delegation renews the offer made by our country to serve the international community as a permanent member in an expanded Security Council.”

He also made pointed reference in his speech to Nigeria’s status as “the most populous black nation,” a key point for Nigerians hoping to grab the first permanent African seat.

Brazil, the largest of the Latin American states, made only a slightly subtler plea last week.

“A qualitative increase in the number of permanent members of the Security Council, together with the enlargement of the non- permanent membership, would correspond to the necessity of making it more authoritative and efficient,” said Luiz Felipe Lampreia, the Brazilian foreign minister.

“Brazil is ready to assume all of its responsibilities in this endeavour,” he broadly hinted.

India, second only to China in population, also has sought to make an issue out of including the most populous nations on the Council permanently.

“You can’t ignore the second-largest population in the world,” argued Pranab Mukherjee, India’s foreign minister, at a press conference Tuesday.

Accordingly, India has set up a series of “objective criteria” which may be used to determine which nations are best fit to hold veto power and permanent tenure on the Council. Among those criteria, Mukherjee said, are “size of population, size of democracy, contributions to the U.N. Charter, and contributions to U.N. agency.”

The Indian envoy says those are all categories in which his nation fares well.

India, Brazil and Nigeria have formed nearly a second tier of permanent Council aspirants, right behind the two nations that are most likely to wind up in those seats: Japan and Germany.

The support for German and Japanese inclusion is so strong that two of the most powerful Council members — Britain and the United States — vocally back any expansion of the Council which would give them permanent seats.

The catch, however, is that any Council expansion will have to include permanent seats for at least a few developing nations to pass muster with the General Assembly, which must approve any change in the Council.

Although there were only 51 Assembly members 50 years ago when the U.N. Charter was first ratified, the sweeping decolonisation of the world following the Second World War has stretched the Assembly membership to 185. Most of the new members are developing nations, eager to see their own ranks wield real power — including veto power — on the Council.

As a result, many of the nations bidding for Security Council expansion are warming up to a ‘two plus three’ proposal, in which the addition of Germany and Japan would accompany those of three new permanent developing members: one each from Africa, Asia and Latin America.

Predictably, a number of countries in each region are jockeying for consideration in such a plan. The current plenary has thus become a venue for intense lobbying — not least by the most populous states.

India, for example, has sought to counter any problems it might face from arch-rival Pakistan by offering its objective criteria. The advantage of that approach, Mukherjee argued, is that it would guarantee that Council expansion would not simply be an ad hoc affair.

India garnered support for its criteria in talks with the Latin American countries of the Rio Group, Mukherjee said.

But the disadvantages are also plain.

Francesco Paolo Fulci, Italy’s U.N. ambassador, has noted that all three of the continental population leaders face challenges to their ascension to permanent seats.

Pakistan already objects to any permanent Council membership for India, with which it has fought three wars. Nigeria, whose ruling military regime has repeatedly put off transition to civilian rule, could suffer a tough fight from South Africa, now a symbol of democratic hope. Portuguese-speaking Brazil has faced charges that it cannot adequately represent its mostly Spanish- speaking continent.

“The quick fix did not fly,” Fulci said of the ‘two plus three’ plan. “We are back to square one.”

There are a few alternatives, however.

One is to have a ‘permanent’ seat each for Africa, Asia and Latin America — but then have a few countries in each region share that seat for rotating, two-year terms.

Italy has proposed a second compromise: instead of more permanent seats, the largest U.N. states and contributors should have eight to 10 more ‘frequently rotating’ seats. In that plan, nations as large as India, Brazil or Nigeria would sit on the Council for two years and then sit out four years in a six-year cycle. No new members would have veto powers.

Some nations hoping for a full permanent seat, with full veto powers, want no part of that idea.

“I am afraid this is not a realistic approach,” Mukherjee said of Italy’s idea. He said the expanded Council should either have more permanent or non-permanent members. “Quasi-permanent members do not reflect the realities on the ground.”