UNSC Reforms

Why does the UNSC need to be reformed?

The rapidly changing world of the 21 century is characterised by structural changes like a
threefold increase in world population and a crisis in the world order. In such a scenario,
following reasons can be cited for reformation in UNSC
The current composition of the Security Council reflects the geopolitical situation of 1945:
The Council’s present composition is no longer representative of a world that has seen 142
new countries join the United Nations since 1945. In particular, Africa, Asia, Latin America,
and the Caribbean do not have permanent representation on the Council.
Encroaches on state sovereignty: The UNSC is the international community's principal organ
for peacekeeping and conflict management. Unlike the decisions made by the General
Assembly, its decisions (known as resolutions) are binding on all member states. That means
it has wide-ranging powers and can, if necessary, take actions – e.g. the imposition of
sanctions – that encroach on state sovereignty.
Under representation delegitimizes this encroachment: If the resolutions of UNSC are to be
respected and implemented by all countries, the Council needs to have the necessary
authority and legitimacy over all its members. This legitimacy gets eroded in under
represented countries
Lack of recognition: Alongside geographically balanced distribution of seats, the Charter of
the United Nations also expressly states that countries that make considerable contributions
to the UN should be members of the Security Council. This is why India, Germany and Japan
are regarded as candidates for new permanent seats.
Limited attempts at UNSC reform: The UNSC was last reformed in 1965 when it increased its
nonpermanent members from 11 to 15. The UNSC reforms again became an international
agenda only in 1992 with a UN resolution titled, “The Question of Equitable Representation
on and Increase in the Membership of the Security Council.”
Misuse of Veto Power: Veto power has been always criticized by many experts as well as by
most States calling it a” self-chosen club of the privileged” and non-democratic and not
allowing the Council to make necessary decisions whenever it displeases any one of the P-5.
It is also not appropriate for the current global security environment to be guided by elite
decision-making structures.
In the absence of Security Council reform, there is a danger that decision making processes
could shift to other forums thereby discouraging multilateralism in the long term.
Steps taken by the UN
The Atlantic Council Working Group (1977) proposed
Strengthening of the machinery of settlement of disputes
The Sec General to be allowed to use his full authority in International diplomacy
Development of international bodies and agencies for int. management of global problems
Effective development of relationship between UN and NGOs
An Agenda for Peace by Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali in 1992
Recognised problems in the UN capacity to maintain world peace
a) Shortages of fund in particular for planning and starting peace operations
b) Recruitment and training of personnel
c) decisions of the Council could not be carried out because of lack of resources
d) justify military involvement without the consent of both parties
Brahimi Report by Kofi Annan (2002)- related to Peacekeeping
The report noted that the United Nations member states have not yet implemented a
standing UN army or standing UN police force. As a result, UN peace operations have been
based on ad hoc coalitions of willing states. The report addressed many of the resulting
dysfunctions of United Nations peace and security operations, including lack of commitment
from Member States to make available standing peace operations personnel and resources,
and particularly its inability to carry out its mission for lack of a proper global information
collection, processing, and analysis capability.
The United Nations Security Council adopted several provisions relating to peacekeeping
following the report. In Resolution 1327 (2000): Rules of engagement had to have a clear
legal basis, A peacekeeping operation had to be ready to deploy as soon as possible, The
roots of conflict had to be addressed with sustainable development

Kofi Annan- In Larger Freedom (2005), Investing in the United Nations (2006)
UNGA should speed up the deliberative process
UNSC should reflect the realities of power thru expansion
ECOSOC- should be reformed in order to realise the MDGs and SDGs
United to Reform by Antonio Gueterres (2017)
Mr. Guterres then highlighted three strategic priorities for the Organization: working for
peace; supporting sustainable development; and reforming its internal management.

India’s Stand
India has arcticulated its positions on these aspects of UNSC reforms on two organising
principles: purposeful, result-oriented negotiations and parity for unrepresented and under-
represented. These principles have shaped following positions.
Categories of membership: India has called for expansion in both permanent and non-
permanent memberships and not only in non-permanent category. Increase in non-
permanent category only would not address the issue of accountability and lack of checks
and balances in the council.
Supporting groups include the two largest groups- Africa with 54 members and L-69 with 42
members - and CARICOM (The Caribbean Community and Common Market), and G4 (India,
Brazil, Japan, Germany). India has highlighted the need of Africa to be represented in both
categories.
Question of veto: India has called for the abolition of veto and till it exists, it needs to be
provided to all members of the permanent category of the Security Council. India is not in
favour of quantitative reform (of extending it immediately to new permanent members) but
of quality - of introducing restrictions.
Regional representation: India has argued for an equitable geographical representation and
urgent need for mitigating the non-representation and under-representation of some
regions in both permanent and non-permanent categories. The demand for regional
representation has been made on multiple grounds including historical injustice, entire
regions not equitably represented or even unrepresented in a key category, and hope of
moving beyond the nation state as the primary actor in international affairs.
Size of an enlarged council and working methods of the Council: Even though global
population has trebled, and UN membership has grown by about 4 times since 1945, India,
realising the need to be realistic, has not called for a three-fold expansion in the
membership of the Council. Instead G4 suggests a total of 25 or 26 members.
G4 & L69 groups would like the non-permanent members to hold the presidency of the
Council at least once in their tenure.
Relationship between the Security Council & the General Assembly: India opines that it
should not be competitive or adversarial, but “one of synergy and complementarity” that
benefits the UN objectives of the promotion of international peace and security. A
relationship with the General Assembly based on transparency, mutual trust and frequent
interaction with all Member States will increase the credibility of the Council, which includes
increase in dialogue between the Council and the Assembly. India thus has called for a
greater transparency and consistency to improve the relationship between the two.

India’s Claim to be a Permanent Member

India’s current calculus on permanent membership of Security Council flows broadly from a
mix of three streams described below.
India in UN System: India has been an active participant in all initiatives undertaken by the
UN and the various UN organs including the various discussions on the Agenda for Peace
and the Agenda for Development, the Sustainable Development Goals, and various UN
summits, including most importantly on climate change.
India has been instrumental in establishing the G77 of developing states at the UN, other
than supporting the establishment of various bodies like the UNICEF on a permanent basis,
the UNDP, the UNEP etc.
In the arena of peacekeeping, India has remained among the largest cumulative contributor
of UN peacekeeping troops with more than 200,000 Indian troops having served in 49 of the
71 UN peace keeping operations (UN PKO) up till 2019. India has almost twice the number
of peace-keepers deployed in the ground as do the P5 combined.
India’s Intrinsic Value: By any objective criteria, such as population, territorial size, GDP,
economic potential, civilizational legacy, cultural diversity, political system, India is
eminently qualified for permanent membership. India’s rising economic stature globally has
added to Indian claims as well. India has been one of the fastest growing major economies
in the world. India’s status as a Nuclear Weapons State (NWS) (acquired in 1998) also makes
India a natural claimant as a permanent member, similar to the existing permanent
members who are all Nuclear Weapon States. India has also developed a credible image as a
responsible nuclear power based on its no first use policy.
India’s Great Power Ambitions: India sees itself carrying the necessary abilities, actual and
potential, which entitles it to a permanent seat at the Council. Indian strategic interest in
the Council seat will ensure Indian interests are not sacrificed at the altar of great power
politics. Further, the seat on the UNSC would provide it the much-needed leverage to
expand its geopolitical and geo-economic clout globally. It would serve as an equalizer to
increasing Chinese influence - an ever increasing strategic and security concern in India’s
immediate neighbourhood and beyond.
India has adopted a multi-layered strategy. It consists of two components: Maximising
support in the UN General Assembly and Minimising resistance in the UN Security Council.
India hopes that its continued leadership of various Global South forums such as G 77 and
NAM would garner much needed numbers in the UNGA. India has also formed the G4 along
with Brazil, Germany, Japan, as “coalition of the willing”, and a “collaborative strategy” to
negotiate reforms of the Council.

G4 Proposal
In 2005, Germany co-drafted a resolution for Security Council reform with India, Brazil, and
Japan (the G4). The proposal included the following elements:
Adding six new permanent members to the Security Council (two seats each for Asia and
Africa and one seat for the Western European and Others Group and the Latin American
and Caribbean Group respectively.)
Adding four non-permanent members to the Security Council (one seat each for Africa, Asia,
Latin America and the Caribbean as well as for Eastern Europe
Reforms in Working Methods
Review of the Reforms 15 years after the amendment to the charter has entered into force.

Coffee Club
Uniting for Consensus, nicknamed the Coffee Club, is a movement that developed in the
1990s in opposition to the possible expansion of permanent seats in the United Nations
Security Council.
An informal “coffee club”, comprising 40-odd members states, has been instrumental in
holding back reforms to the United Nations Security Council. Most members of the club are
middle-sized states who oppose bigger regional powers grabbing permanent seats in the UN
Security Council. The prime movers of the club include Italy, Spain, Australia, Canada, South
Korea, Argentina and Pakistan.
While Italy and Spain are opposed to Germany’s bid for Security Council’s permanent
membership, Pakistan is opposed to India’s bid. Similarly, Argentina is against Brazil’s bid
and Australia opposes Japan’s. Canada and South Korea are opposed to developing
countries, often dependent on their aid, wielding more power than them at the UN.
The UfC proposes that the UNSC be expanded to include more non-permanent members,
with longer terms and the possibility of immediate re-election. This would allow for greater
representation of different regions and increase the legitimacy of the UNSC. However, the
UfC opposes the addition of new permanent members with veto powers, arguing that this
would create an imbalance of power within the Council and perpetuate an outdated system
of international relations.

African Union -Reforms

The African Union (AU) has been a vocal advocate for the reform of the United Nations
Security Council (UNSC) to better represent the interests and perspectives of African
countries. The AU has called for the expansion of the UNSC to include more African
countries as permanent members with veto power, arguing that this would increase the
legitimacy and effectiveness of the Council. The AU has proposed a number of specific
reforms to the UNSC, including the addition of at least two permanent members from Africa
with veto power. The AU has also called for an increase in the number of non-permanent
members of the UNSC from Africa, as well as the abolition of the veto power held by the
current permanent members.