Complications of restructuring UNSC

The question of restructuring and deliberations on possible reforms in UNSC with special reference to its expansion has not been a new phenomenon as this kind of debate is continuously under discussion of diverse stakeholders since 1979. Some member-states have been campaigning for expansion of this global forum that is representing common interests and inspirations, while arguing that adding new members will alleviate the democratic and representative discrepancy from which the UNSC suffers. Disagreement over issues like whether new members should be permanent or have veto power has been a major obstacle to UNSC reform. Furthermore, reaching a consensus for adopting a viable and mutually agreed upon standard for UNSC reform or expansion has also been a serious faltering obstruction.
Paradoxically India is one of the countries that have been lobbying eagerly to build its case to gain a permanent seat in the Security Council, aspirations appear to be more China and Pakistan centric rather than for positive objectives of common benefit to ailing humanity. According to Indian logic its demand is justified because it is the world’s second largest population, largest liberal democracy and one of the leading and fastest growing economy; currently fifteenth largest in nominal terms and sixth largest in terms of purchasing power parity (PPP).
India also claims its right to be permanent part of UNSC on the basis of its contribution of troops to UN peacekeeping missions that stands at 150000, a little more than Pakistan and Bangladesh which are second and third largest contributors of troops respectively. These are main blackmailing and coercive foundations put forth by India to gain a legitimate status in a legitimate organisation like UNSC.
In effect Security Council reform is one of the most intricate and complex issues on UN agenda. Member States and groups of states have vital interests and strong as well as difficultly explainable views on the issue of reform and expansion. Key stakeholders largely include the P-5; the Group of Four (G-4) i.e. India, Brazil, Germany and Japan, who are jointly seeking permanent membership; the Uniting for Consensus (UfC) Group, which also includes Pakistan, Italy, Spain, Turkey, South Korea, Argentina, Mexico, Canada, and the African Group, is yet another contender which demands two permanent seats with veto power for the African region.
On the other hand Brazil, India, Japan and Germany yearn for permanent seats at the apex forum with differing objectives. Acting as a unified group aiming to achieve a common objective, this group has been regularly intimidating other stakeholders to reduce and ultimately withdraw their financial or military troop contributions to the UN if they are not rewarded with permanent member status. Other smaller and medium sized states, which constitute a formidable majority of UN membership, also have an important stake in the reform process.
A variety of propositions on UNSC Reform have remained on board and one of them is UN Secretary General’s Panel. Accordingly in December 2004, the then Secretary General Kofi Annan’s High Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change proposed two models for UNSC expansion. Both these models suggested expanding the Council to 24 members. Likewise first Model proposes adding six new permanent seats but without veto power, and three new two-year term elected seats, in addition to the existing five permanent (P-5) and ten non-permanent elected UNSC members. Second Model proposes a new category of eight seats, renewable every four years, and one new two-year non-renewable seat.
However, the report did not express any preference and also failed to address the key question that whether Security Council reform is feasible as long as certain members have the power to veto any such venture.
Furthermore, the panel’s suggestion related to granting regional representation made the issue even more intricate. The G-4; Key Pushers Nations support one another’s attempts for permanent membership, though they are strongly opposed by their regional competitors. Yet another proposed change is to admit all four as permanent members in the UNSC. UK, France and Russia support G-4 group, it seems that, this is the most popular proposal in connection with reform or expansion.
There are several spoilers groups who have their specific objective of pleasing and appeasing regional and global players. However, this issue inherits greater complexities rather than convergences on reforming the UNSC besides its expansion. Nevertheless there is an agreement in principle to reform the Security Council yet there is an insurmountable disagreement on the modalities and the nature of this reform.
Resultantly so far no reform proposal has garnered necessary support and consensus of the member states and there is no likelihood of a unified consensus. There are broadly divergent positions on various key issues, which mainly include 1) key criterion for UNSC expansion, 2) size and structure of the reformed council, 3) possible processes towards reform and modalities, 4) question of categories of membership and their clout, 5) issue of veto power and so forth and so on.
Ironically India was flabbergasted during US President Barack Obama’s visit to India, whereby America formally announced sealing the civil nuclear technology deal apart from the US reiteration of support for a permanent seat for India in the UNSC. Simultaneously UK and France have also supported G-4, but interestingly are conflicting to extension of veto to new permanent members. Pakistan, Italy and other like-minded countries of the Uniting for Consensus, (UfC) Group support a comprehensive and democratic reform corresponding to the interests of all the states and regional groups, but cannot support an idea of any addition of new individual permanent member not because India is aspiring but on principles of its legitimacy and difficulties of consensus. Pakistan being a leading and proactive member of UfC, has always been enduring positive efforts towards forging a coherent, sound and credible strategy to reform UNSC against Indian desires to coerce and blackmail world community on the issue.