The reform of the Security Council (SC) is one of the issues that most attracts the attention of the international community today. While the latter agrees on its necessity, contradictions exist regarding the choice of the reform model to adopt. According to the author, the Sustainable Development Agenda (SDG) adopted in 2015, in this case Goal 16, serves as a compass for the choice of the reform model. Based on two criteria defined by this SDG, in particular the Development of effective, accountable and transparent institutions (16.6) and the Strengthening of participation in global governance (18.8), the author comes to choose the reform model aimed at the elimination of monopolies, in particular with regard to the right of veto and that of permanent seats, as the ideal reform model of the Security Council.
Keywords: Security Council, SDG 16, transparent institutions, effective institutions, monopolies, veto power, permanent seats.
Какая модель реформы Совета Безопасности [ООН] будет соответствовать требованиям Цели устойчивого развития №16 для обеспечения надлежащего глобального управления?
Аннотация: Реформа Совета Безопасности (СБ) является одним из вопросов, который сегодня больше всего привлекает внимание международного сообщества. Хотя последнее соглашается с ее необходимостью, существуют противоречия относительно выбора модели реформы для принятия. По мнению автора, Повестка дня в области устойчивого развития (Sustainable Development Goals), принятая в 2015 году, в данном случае Цель 16, служит компасом для выбора модели реформы. Основываясь на двух критериях, определенных SDG, в частности, на развитии эффективных, подотчетных и прозрачных институтов (16.6) и укреплении участия в глобальном управлении (18.8), автор приходит к выбору модели реформы, направленной на ликвидацию монополий, в частности, в отношении права вето и права постоянных мест как идеальной модели реформы Совета Безопасности.
Ключевые слова: Совет Безопасности, Цель16, прозрачные институты, эффективные институты, монополии, право вето, постоянные места.
The United Nations organization is several years old. As a result, many of its bodies are no longer relevant and must therefore be modified to adapt to the current context. This was particularly the case with the Trusteeship Council.[1]whose mission was to provide supervision to the territories placed under international trusteeship and whose functioning ended one month after the independence of Palau, the last territory under trusteeship. Following this, the Trusteeship Council amended its bylaws to remove the requirement to meet annually and agreed to meet whenever the occasion required[2]Throughout this work, we will also consider to what extent the Security Council has become obsolete and consider the ideal measures for its reform to respond to the current context.
The Security Council is presented in Chapter 5 of the Charter of Nations as the executive organ of the UN responsible for ensuring peace and security in the world on behalf of all members of the United Nations.[3]. Although its creation dates back to the birth of the UN, its composition has nevertheless undergone some changes, notably the increase in the number of non-permanent members from 11 to 15 members and the maintenance of the number of permanent members at 5.[4].
The question that arises today with the study of the Security Council is that of knowing for what reason the international community is considering its reform and especially the question of knowing which model of reform would be the best?
There are many reasons why there are calls for reform of the Security Council today.[5]. We can thus cite among others:
The bias of the council: Indeed, the members of the Security Council are not only involved in many conflicts in the world but also support certain parties instead of showing neutrality. Among the acts of bias, we note the abusive use of the right of veto for the defense of personal interest.[6]. This is how a kind of doctrine of the systemic use of the right of veto has already developed within the council for certain matters regardless of the facts and motives. On the other hand, we note the financing and sale of arms. Among the members of the council are the main arms dealers, the sale of which sometimes takes place in defiance of international rules.[7]in this area in particular the prohibition of the sale of weapons if they will be used to commit crimes, the obligation of declarations to the United Nations conventional arms register.
As another reason we note the change in the landscape of international relations. Indeed the Security Council in its current configuration no longer meets the ideals that led to its creation, namely to entrust the security of the world to the main economic and military powers. Indeed, some members of the Security Council have over time lost their dominant position in the world while countries that were once emerging or even underdeveloped have today become real military, economic and even demographic powers. Among the countries that have established themselves on the international scene, we can cite India, Japan and even Germany.
Finally, we can mention among others the incapacity of the Security Council. In its current configuration where the permanent members have immutable privileges, the Council is susceptible to blockage.[8]The consequence being the risk for the world to fall into situations with catastrophic and even irreversible consequences because the body which was responsible for preserving them was not in a position to intervene.[9]This is how countries such as Haiti and eastern Congo[10]today find themselves embroiled in conflicts which are impoverishing their economies and causing enormous suffering to populations without the Security Council being able to act.
It is therefore this set of problems that has led the international community to implement the reform of the council. Apart from the initiatives emanating from the UN, namely the implementation of working groups, the proposals for reform of the security council come from various sources. We can distinguish between the proposals made by individual states, notably China, Russia and the United States; the proposals made by individuals, in this case the Secretary of the United Nations; and the proposals made by groups of states. Regarding the proposals of groups of states, we have, for example, the proposal of the G4.[11]. This is a group composed of four countries namely Brazil, Germany, India and Japan. The proposals of this group concern the enlargement of the Security Council to 25 members through the addition of 6 new permanent members among which themselves and another addition of 4 new non-permanent members. As another example, we have the proposal of the Africa group, which for its part suggests an enlargement of the Security Council to 26 members with 2 African countries occupying permanent seats and 2 other temporary seats still for the continent. The group also proposes that 2 other permanent members come from Asian countries, 1 from Latin America and 1 other member from Western Europe.
These two examples sufficiently demonstrate the difficulty that States have in deciding on the future configuration of the council. However, such a reform should go beyond personal considerations to stick only to the common interest and the law. In 2015, the international community adopted the sustainable development agenda as a compass to guide all initiatives on both the international and national scene and in all areas.[12]. With regard to international governance, the agenda has provided in its article 16 that States should work towards «Developing effective, accountable and transparent institutions (16:6)»; and «Strengthening participation in global governance (16.8)». These two provisions can be two key principles of good governance, whether national or international, namely transparency and participation. Transparency can be understood as clarity at the level of mechanisms and actions. Which must be based on the law and not on personal considerations. Participation can refer to a large number of concepts such as equality of opportunity, equity and democracy,[13].
Talking about transparency in the reform of the SC therefore amounts to putting an end to all forms of illegality. Indeed, the Security Council is built on an illegal foundation, in particular the non-respect of the principle of equality between States contained in the Charter of the United Nations.[14]. This illegality could have been covered if the SC had functioned properly. Today with its multiple failures, this defect is resurfacing. The aspects of this equality being the right of veto and the permanent seats. Regarding the introduction of the principle of participation in the framework of the reform of the SC, this amounts to installing equal opportunities of access to the council for all sovereign States in the world, including the Treaty of Westphalia[15]enshrines equality in international relations and before the law.
Ultimately, the right reform of the council within SDG 16 is a reform that contains the following aspects:
- The elimination of permanent seats[16]which are understood to mean seats allocated unconditionally and indefinitely to certain States. In order to respect the principles of representativeness and equality, these may be replaced by a rotation mechanism according to criteria defined by the United Nations Charter. Access to the Council will therefore be according to newly defined rules, which may take the form of regional seats.
- The equal granting of the right of veto. Indeed, there is no circumvention measure for this power outside of the Acheson resolution.[17]which nowadays is practically inoperative. In order to respect legality, this right should be attributed to any new member who joins this council. The allusion is thus made with regard to hypotheses of addition in a possible reform of permanent seat without right of veto for Africa, Asia or even Latin America.
- The elimination of any other form of seats[18]. The current Security Council has non-permanent seats whose access is conditional on participation in peace. Among the reform proposals, there are some calling for the creation of a new type of seats between the permanent seats and the non-permanent seats. However, it turns out in the sense of the strict application of the law that the existence of a double standard is illegal. Thus any reform going in the direction of adding non-permanent seats alongside permanent seats would go in the direction of confirming this illegality and consequently could not prosper.
A reform taking into account all these conditions will therefore allow the construction of strong institutions which will go beyond the States and will establish the guarantees of stability for the future.
Conclusion
Having reached the end of this work on the reform of the Security Council, we note that the reform of the Security Council is an essential measure in view of the problems encountered by this body, which are one of our days a factor of insecurity in the world. It also emerges that in the face of the difficulty of the international community to agree on the model to adopt, it is appropriate to rely on the provisions of international law set out in the sustainable development program which establishes in its provision 16 its vision for good international governance through two key words, namely, the participation of all and transparency in taking into account in the reform of the reform of the Security Council would require the removal of the right of veto and permanent seats. The main question that remains, however, is the acceptance of such a reform by the current permanent members.
Bibliography:
— Philippe Vincent. For better global governance. Pyramids: the reform of the United Nations Security Councilurl :https://journals.openedition.org/pyramides/365?lang=en
— International crisis group. Ten challenges for the United Nations in 2023-2024.https://www.crisisgroup.org/fr/global/sb11-ten-challenges-un-2023-2024
-Butler Richard. Reform of the United Nations Security Council. Penn state journal of law and international affairs. April 2012.url: https://elibrary.law.psu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1001&context=jlia
— Stewart Patrick and others. UN Security Council Reform: What the World Thinks. Carnegie endowment for international peace. URL:https://carnegieendowment.org/research/2023/06/un-security-council-reform-what-the-world-thinks?lang=en
-Herbert Weinschel. The Doctrine of the Equality of States and Its Recent Modifications. The American Journal of International LawURL:https://www.jstor.org/stable/2194542
-Cen Chen and others. The Reform of the UN Security Council: How to Balance Legitimacy and Efficiency. SHS Web of conferences. url:https://www.shs-conferences.org/articles/shsconf/abs/2022/18/shsconf_icprss2022_03004/shsconf_icprss2022_03004.html
-Thomas G. Weiss. The illusion of UN Security Council reform. The Washington Quarterly. September 2003
— Thomas G. WeissThinking about global governance: why people and ideas matter.The graduate center. January 2012.
— Harun Semercioglu. The Effectiveness of the United Nations in Preventing Conflicts in the World in the Context of the 2023 Palestine-Israel War and a Model Proposal. Toplum Ekonomi ve Yönetim Dergisi December 2024.
[1]Article 83 of the Charter of the United Nations. url: https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/nl4/902/56/pdf/nl490256.pdf
[2]United NATIONS https://www.un.org/en/about-us/trusteeship-council
[3]Chapter 5 United Nations Charter: url: https://www.un.org/fr/about-us/un-charter
[4]Butler Richard. Reform of the United Nations Security Council. Penn state journal of law and international affairs. April 2012.url: https://elibrary.law.psu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1001&context=jlia
[5]Stewart Patrick and others. UN Security Council Reform: What the World Thinks. Carnegie endowment for international peace. URL: https://carnegieendowment.org/research/2023/06/un-security-council-reform-what-the-world-thinks?lang=en
[6]Jan Wouters and Tom Ruys. Use and Abuse of the Veto Power.jstor. url: https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/resrep06699.5.pdf
[7]United Nation: The arm trade treaty. https://www.thearmstradetreaty.org/hyper-images/file/TheArmsTradeTreaty1/TheArmsTradeTreaty.pdf
[8]Serge. THE SECURITY COUNCIL: BLOCKAGE, RENEWAL AND FUTURE. file:///C:/Users/HP/Downloads/le-conseil-de-securite-blocage-renouveau-et-avenir%20(1).pdf
[9]International Crisis Group. Ten Challenges for the United Nations in 2023-2024. https://www.crisisgroup.org/en/global/sb11-ten-challenges-un-2023-2024
[10]IOM. A snapshot of the world’s most complex security conflicts. https://storyteller.iom.int/en/stories/in-photos-a-snapshot-of-the-world’s-most-complex-crisis-situations
[11]The debate on the expansion of the UN Security Council promises to be stormy. Le MONDE. https://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2005/07/11/le-debat-sur-l-elargissement-du-conseil-de-securite-de-l-onu-s-annonce-houleux_671693_3210.html
[12]Guide-ODD-and-CT-Committee-21-Part. Agenda 2030 a global reference. URL/ https://odd17.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/Guide-ODD-and-CT-Committee-21-Part-1.pdf
[13]The future we want: outcome document. url: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/733FutureWeWant.pdf
[14]Art 1 alt 2 Charter of the United Nations.url: https://www.un.org/fr/about-us/un-charter/full-text
[15]Klaus MALETTKE, The Peace Treaties of Westphalia and the Political Organization of the Holy Roman Empire. University of Marburg url: file:///C:/Users/HP/Downloads/the-peace-treaties-of-westphalia-and-the-political-organization-of-the-holy-roman-empire.pdf
[16]Philippe Vincent. For better global governance. Pyramids: the reform of the United Nations Security Councilurl :https://journals.openedition.org/pyramides/365?lang=en
[17]Langlois • History. Resolution 377 (V) of the UN General Assembly (November 3, 1950). United Nations Library.
[18]Raoul Delcorde. The question is no longer whether the Security Council should expand and https://www.lecho.be/opinions/general/la-reforme-du-conseil-de-securite-coincee-entre-efficacite-imperative-et-elargissement-legitime/10497558.html evolve, but how this can be done. Ultimately, it is the P5 that will decide.
Information about the authors:
Mboh Ngoma Alain Pierre loic,
Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia
Law Institute
Frank-Valere Yossa,
Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia
Law Institute
Информация об авторах:
Mboh Ngoma Alain Pierre loic,
Российский университет дружбы народов
Юридический институт
Frank-Valere Yossa
Российский университет дружбы народов
Юридический институт
