UN Security Council Reform

Continuing the earlier post on UN Security Council reform, developing countries now make up more than two-thirds of the total UN membership, but are grossly underrepresented on the Security Council. I guess many of these countries did not exist as sovereign independent states at the time the organisation was founded. Nevertheless, it is clear that the structure of the Security Council is unreflective of the current realities of the post-cold war world. More importantly, the Security Council decisions in the recent history have been greatly impactful on the developing nations, and it is perhaps not a matter of great debate that the impact has not always been the best.

Proposals for its reform, however, have not been met with enthusiasm by the permanent members. The biggest counter argument appears to be the economic contribution of the nation to the UN. In addition to this, there is the question - "Is more better"? However, with a U.S. global presence as great as that of any empire in history, it seems to be becoming more difficult to control U.S. actions at the UN. Today, there are two world “organizations”: the UN—global in membership—and the United States—global in reach and power. Clearly, initiative stays in Washington, not NY.

Will the inability to reform the UN Charter compromise the credibility of the Security Council, particularly regarding matters shaping the future use of force? This is not really clear. Changing the composition of the Security Council might not overcome its core weaknesses—the veto and almost total reliance upon U.S. military power.

Thomas Weiss says "The war on terrorism provides an evident example of overlapping U.S.and international security interests. Fighting this plague obviously requires cooperation across borders if policies are to be even modestly successful instopping financial flows to terrorist organizations or improving intelligence. The Security Council, for example, responded instantly to the attacks onthe World Trade Center and the Pentagon by passing an unequivocal con-demnation of terrorism in Resolution 1368 on September 12, 2001."

I wonder where the UN was for over two decades when tens of thousands were killed in Kashmir - the cross-border terrorism issue was only internationalized and continues to be so today.

Related Links: UN Security Council Reform, Thomas Weiss' "The Illusion of UN Security Council Reform"