By Prof. (Dr.) Bharat H. Desai
On March 20, 2024, India rebuffed the model presented by the United for Consensus (UFC) group of countries at the meeting of the Intergovernmental Negotiations (IGN) for the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) reforms. The UFC opposes any creation of new permanent members. It advocates for an expansion of the UNSC from 15 to 26 members with an increase merely in the non-permanent elected member category. The UFC group comprises Argentina, Canada, Colombia, Costa Rica, Italy, Malta, Mexico, Pakistan, the Republic of Korea, San Marino, Spain, and Turkiye (with China and Indonesia as Observers). As a permanent member of the UNSC, the presence of China in the UFC reflects conflict of interest. Interestingly, the UFC model has been pitted against the long-standing demand, especially from the G4 countries (Brazil, Germany, India, Japan), for an expansion of the permanent membership of the UNSC. As of now, the crucial question of ‘veto’ isn’t on the radar. “Threats to international peace and security have become more complex, unpredictable and undefined. The world of the twenty-first century desperately needs a UN 2.0 that is credible, representative, reflecting the needs and aspirations of the member states and capable of maintaining peace and security”, India’s Permanent Representative (IPR) to the UN, Ambassador Ruchira Kamboj, said in response to the UFC model presented by Italy at the IGN meeting on the UNSC reforms.
Intergovernmental Negotiations
The UFC group has been dubbed as the ‘spoilers’. In fact, their campaign runs directly contrary to the quest for permanent membership by each of the G4 countries. The UNSC reform formula ‘G4 model’ was mooted on March 08, 2024 at the 13th Informal Meeting of the IGN (equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the UNSC). The Indian PR (Ruchira Kambhoj), put forward a comprehensive 'G-4 model' proposal for UNSC reforms in the five clusters. It is continuation of the G4 approach earlier presented on March 09, 2023. It has sought an increase in the UNSC membership from the current 15 to 25-26, by adding 6 permanent and 4 or 5 non-permanent members. This proposal entails new permanent members to comprise African states (2) Asia Pacific states (2), Latin American and Caribbean states (1); and Western European and Other states (1). A growing number of states support on the limitations and use of veto as well as listed some options on the issue. The Co-chair, however, made it clear that this dialogue is taking place “always under the assumption that in the reform of the Council the veto is not abolished”. Hence, insertion of the anomaly of ‘veto’ in the UN Charter adopted on June 26, 1945 at Opera House in San Francisco still remains a fact of international life even after 78 years.
The IGN are taking place in the proverbial UN Trusteeship Council (UNTC) Chamber itself. In view of the significance and sensitivity of the issue of UNSC expansion, parleys have been taking place both in an open format (recorded) as well as in an informal and interactive closed-door format. The G4 expects possibility of some tangible progress on the UN reforms in general and expansion of the UNSC membership (especially the five clusters of reform) by the UN’s 80th anniversary (2025). The G4 has dubbed the current round of parleys as a “testament to stalled discussion at IGN” being done “without a text” amidst calls for “burning issue” of the UNSC reforms in a “comprehensive and holistic fashion”. It alluded to the calls made by the leaders of the 87 countries, in their respective addresses in the high-level segment (September 18-22, 2023) of the UNGA’s 78th session, for a reformed UNSC that is representative of the UN membership.
UNGA: Conductor of a Grand Orchestra
As the plenary organ of the UN, the General Assembly (UNGA) has been instrumental in setting in motion International Law-making and institution-building processes (through the ILC as its subsidiary organ, global conferences or other intergovernmental negotiations). The UNGA decided at 62nd (2008) - session, to roll out the IGN process in an ‘informal plenary’ starting with the 63rd (2009) session. As a sequel to his April 28, 2023 letter, the UNGA President enlisted ‘elements’ in his June 05, 2023 letter to all the PR and Observers concerning “convergences and divergences on the question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council and related matters”. The UNGA has followed up each meeting of the IGN process and sought to nudge the Member States through a series of its processes (63/565 B, 64/568, 65/554, 66/566, 67/561, 68/557, 69/560, 70/559, 71/553, 72/557, 73/554, 74/569, 75/569, 76/572, and 77/559).
The high-level segment of the 77th session of the UN General Assembly (UNGA) concluded on September 26, 2022 was addressed by 190 speakers included 76 Heads of State, 50 Heads of Government and 48 Ministers. They resorted to posturing and airing of grievances against the global order, the UN system, global flashpoints and other states. Interestingly, the US President Joe Biden’s September 21, 2022 address brought the spotlight back on the long pending discourse for expansion of the UNSC and the Indian claim for a permanent seat therein. “I also believe the time has come for this institution to become more inclusive so that it can better respond to the needs of today’s world. That is also why the United States supports increasing the number of both permanent and non-permanent representatives of the Council”, Biden said. Biden did not spell out the countries that the US would support in both the categories. The Indian External Affairs Minister (EAM), Dr. S. Jaishankar while attending a flurry of meetings in New York, addressed the UNGA plenary session on September 25, 2022 (A Watershed Moment: Transformative Solutions to Interlocking Challenges), contributed to the 32 countries’ joint statement of September 23 for comprehensive reforms for a “legitimate Security Council” and held a meeting of G4 countries on September 22, 2022 – Brazil, India, Germany and Japan – jointly seeking a permanent seat. Each one of them have challengers from the UFC group to their claims in respective regions.
UNSC Veto as the Charter’s Inherent Inequality
The advent of the UN, on the ashes of the League of Nations, was an audacious project to “to save the succeeding generations from the scourge of war” (Preamble, UN Charter). In his address at the adoption of the UN Charter on June 26, 1945, the US President Harry Truman prophesized that “If we had had this Charter a few years ago-and above all, the will to use it--millions now dead would be alive. If we should falter in the future in our will to use it, millions now living will surely die”.
The special provision for the “concurring votes of the permanent members” (Article 27), known as veto, proved most contentious at the outset since many of the original 50 founding members expressed reservations about making the P5 countries – China, France, USSR, UK and USA (Article 23) – more equal than the others. However, with the collapse of the League, the war-ravaged world was left with no option but to accept the imperfect general political organization that the victorious powers pushed down their throat. It was taking it or leave it situation. That legacy continued even after expansion of the non-permanent membership from 11 to 15 by a December 17, 1963 amendment to Article 23. Since then, the world has been greatly transformed in the last six decades including the UN membership of 193 states.
The UN has been a human construct and not a perfect solution for the ‘outlawry’ of war. It was not “to take mankind to paradise, but rather to save humanity from hell”, the Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said in his address to the UNGA on September 24, 2022. Thus, at the outset itself, the instrument of iniquitous veto was not inserted in the UN Charter “in a fit of absent-mindedness”. It was a “deliberate decision to render the Security Council incapable of undertaking enforcement action against, or against the will of, any of the Big Five” [Inis Claude, Jr., International Conciliation 532 (1961) 329]. On numerous occasions, the P5 have proved this prophecy correct in inability of the UNSC to bring about ceasefire, peace agreement in several global conflicts including the stand-off in Russia-Ukraine (since February 2022) and Israel-Gaza (Palestine) (since October 2023) conflicts.
Need for Comprehensive UN Reforms
The Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi gave a call for “comprehensive UN reforms” in his address of September 25, 2021 at the 76th UNGA. “We cannot fight today’s challenges with outdated structures”, the Prime Minster said. His priority list included climate change, poverty alleviation, situation in Afghanistan and the Security Council reforms. In response to a question by this author, the EAM Jaishankar, SIS/JNU alumnus, made similar assertion in during his February 26, 2024 Kunzru Lecture (SIS/JNU) as to why India deserves to be on the Global High Table of the UNSC.
Apart from the claim of India and others, the question of veto remains the bone of contention. Will the P5 allow the future inductees the privilege of wielding a veto? In all probability and as indicated by the Co-Chair at the IGN (March 08, 2024), the question of abolishing or sharing this privilege with new members remains non-negotiable for P5. Hence, the prospective bidders shall have to take a realistic position. Interestingly, some improvising is now discernible from President Biden’s UNGA address (September 21, 2022) when he suggested that the P5 need to “refrain from the use of the veto, except in rare, extraordinary situations”. Similarly, in the wake of use of the Russian veto in the aftermath of the ‘special military operation’ in Ukraine, the UNGA adopted an unprecedented resolution 76/262 on April 26, 2022 for a “standing mandate for a General Assembly debate when a veto is cast in the Security Council”. It provides that “President of the General Assembly shall convene a formal meeting of the General Assembly within 10 working days of the casting of a veto by one or more permanent members of the Security Council, to hold a debate on the situation as to which the veto was cast.” This extraordinary step shows the future pathway to blunt the edges of use of veto by P5. Hopefully, it could render veto less attractive for the future expansion of the UNSC. That inevitably opens the doors for the third category of the UNSC’s permanent membership without veto. It now appears to be the pragmatic way out for India and G4 to secure a permanent seat on the UNSC’s horse-shoe table. The G4 model presented by the Indian envoy Ruchira Kamboj at the IGN (March 08, 2024) and statements of the EAM underscore this graphic reality.
Making the UNSC Permanent Seat to follow India
It is feared that the UNSC expansion would open up a Pandora’s box since different parts of the Charter (General Assembly, ECOSOC, Security Council, Trusteeship Council and the International Court of Justice) need to be reviewed especially on the issue of representation in view of multi-fold growth in the UN membership (from original 50 to 193 at present). Many member states, including India, genuinely feel that the UN Charter does not reflect realities of the 21st century world. In a futuristic scenario, if consensus would emerge at the IGN in the near future, it will necessitate an amendment of the Charter under Article 108. It would require approval by a two-thirds of the UNGA members as well as concurrence of P5 of the UNSC. As an alternative, a review conference under Article 109 can be convened by a two-thirds vote in the UNGA and a vote of any nine UNSC members. Notwithstanding this, any alteration of the Charter proposed at such a review conference would still necessitate the consent of the P5! If the UNSC expansion comes up on the agenda, can the revival and repurpose of the UN Trusteeship Council (UNTC), lying dormant since November 10, 1994, be far behind? This author has suggested (The Tribune, December 2, 2020) for the repurposed UNTC (EPL 52 (2022) 223–235) to exercise trusteeship of the planet through global supervision of environment and the commons. The idea for “trusteeship of the planet” was flagged in the Indian Prime Minister Modi’s address of November 21, 2020 to the G20 Riyadh Summit. That would require an institutional wherewithal that is readily available – at no cost – by revival and repurpose of the UNTC in the same hall where the current IGN meeting are being held at the UNHQ.
The Road Ahead
Assuming that the G4 model and the Indian bid for a permanent seat of the UNSC materializes in the coming years, it would require cutting-edge futuristic ideas for providing solutions to the global problematique. That calls for timely investment in the study of international affairs by institutionalizing knowledge-driven architecture in the mainstream Indian university sector. Set up in 1955, this author’s home turf – School of International Studies (SIS) – has the requisite credentials as envisioned in the role of a ‘think tank’ both at unveiling (December 27) of the SIS Faculty Wall of Honor (2023) as well as in the five years long painstaking process of Making SIS Visible initiative (2008-2013). Cumulatively, it can be based on the bedrock of solution oriented cutting-edge scholarly works of global relevance (addressing issues such as resolutions of the global conflicts affecting 2 billion people; delegitimization and elimination of rape as a weapon of war; environmental crimes; humanitarian crisis; exacerbation of conflicts and disasters by climatic changes; making International Law instruments work etc.) emanating from the SIS as a ‘think tank’ as well as other Indian centers of International Law and International Relations. They need to provide vital building blocks for knowledge to facilitate the Indian role as a Global Solution Provider wherein the UNSC’s permanent seat would legitimately follow India. In this wake, the author has earnestly sought to walk-the-talk, made out a scholarly case, nudged the conscientious colleagues and pleaded in one-on-one meeting with the decision-maker at the highest level. The challenge lies in making this knowledge-driven roadmap possible by putting into place a robust architecture, an ecosystem to facilitate generation of futuristic ideas and finally, an entrustment to genuine scholars as the thought leaders. Rest would follow.
Prof. (Dr.) Bharat H. Desai is Professor of International Law and Chairperson of the Centre for International Legal Studies (SIS, JNU), who served as a member of the Official Indian Delegations to various multilateral negotiations (2002-2008), coordinated the knowledge initiatives for SIS Faculty Wall of Honor (2023), Inter-University Consortium: JNU; Jammu; Kashmir; Sikkim (2012-2020) and Making SIS Visible (2008-2013) as well as contributes as the Editor-in-Chief of Environmental Policy and Law (IOS Press: Amsterdam)