Asia, Africa, Latin America, Japan and Germany are calling for reforms of the United

Nations Security Council. Give a detailed explanation why this is necessary and
overdue.

Introduction

The United Nations Security Council is an organ of the United Nations. Under the United
Nations charter, the functions and powers of the council are;

i) To maintain international peace and security in accordance with the principles and
purposes of the United Nations.
ii) To investigate any dispute or situation which might lead to international friction.
iii) Its powers also include establishment of peace keeping operations and
international sanctions as well as the authorization of military actions through
resolutions

Definition of terms

Reforms – in general terms, reform is a move aimed at improving performance, altering for
better, it is concerned at repairing defects and overcoming limitations in order to realise some
higher state of performance or effectiveness.

Asia , Africa , Latin America, Japan and Germany – are geopolitical regional groups of
member states of the United Nations.

United Nations Security Council – is an international community’s principal organ for

peace keeping and conflict management.

Reform of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) encompasses five key issues:
categories of membership, the question of the veto held by the five permanent members,
regional representation, the size of an enlarged Council and its working methods, and the
Security Council-General Assembly relationship.

Categories of membership reform.

The Group of Four (G4), consisting of heavy-weight actors Germany, Japan, Brazil and India
all advocate for the expansion of permanent membership for themselves. The Uniting for
Consensus Group, consisting of numerous “middle power” states and G4 regional rivals,
prefer the sole enlargement of non-permanent member seats, perhaps in the form of a new
class of membership.

The issue with enlarging permanent membership is very important and necessary as power in
international politics is not constant. It could set a precedent that, given the evolving nature of
global and regional balances of power, future additions of permanent members would need to
take place. Nonetheless, member states that have demonstrated credibility and capacity to
shoulder the responsibilities of the principal UN organ should have a presence to ensure the
legitimacy of the council.

Thus a new category of “semi-permanent” seats is intriguing as, if properly structured, it

could ensure legitimacy without preventing flexibility for a changing world.A class of seats
that allows for longer terms, say four years, and renewal based on merit criteria – such as
those suggested by the USthat include economic size, population, military capacity,
commitment to democracy and human rights, and financial and peacekeeping contributions –
would ensure the council is more reflective of the contemporary geopolitical reality, giving
the G4 and regional heavyweights a presence today while leaving the door open to emerging
nations in the future. This would ensure the  process remains democratic and renewals ensure
accountability.

The size of an enlarged council and its working methods

The Security Council’s enlargement must take into account the emergence of new powers
that are resolved to assume the responsibility of a permanent presence in the Security Council
and are, in accordance with the UN Charter, capable of making a significant contribution to
the Council’s international efforts to maintain peace and security.In this supporting
permanent membership for Germany, Brazil, India and Japan ,also supporting an enhanced
Security Council presence for African countries, notably among the permanent members.

But the Security Council must not be enlarged to the detriment of its effective action and its
credibility as the main body responsible for maintaining international peace and security. It is
therefore important for the Council to remain a reasonable size as this will improve
accountability and equality in the council.
on working method Brazil pursues the improvement of the Council’s working methods as a
member and coordinator of a group of states called   “Accountability, Coherence and
Transparency” (ACT).

ACT recognizes and commends past efforts of the Security Council in the domain of the
working methods but considers that the current implementation of measures already
adopted remains inconsistent and unsatisfactory. In addition further measures are needed
to enable the Council to genuinely and efficiently carry out its mandate.The move to reform
the working methods will improve the UNSC on

 more open and interactive sessions of the Council; a transparent program of work and
stocktaking after each presidency
 Develop the use of prevention measures (Chapter VI of the UN Charter);
 Improve cooperation with regional organizations (Chapter VIII of the UN Charter);
 Closer consultation with troop-contributing countries, neighboring states and regional
organizations in the planning and conduct of missions;
 Voluntary renunciation of the veto right in cases of atrocity crimes (genocide, crime
against humanity, war crimes).

Equitable representation

The Council currently includes ten non-permanent members and five permanent members
(P5) who hold veto power, consisting of the post-World War II powers of the United
Kingdom, United States, China, USSR (now Russian Federation) and China.

In order to enhance regional representation, there is consensus that the council must be
enlarged to improve the current makeup, giving more weight to regions such as Africa, the
Asia-Pacific and Latin America/Caribbean states, especially when most agenda issues center
on these regions.

While an enlarged Council should address any democratic deficit and improve
multilateralism, a modest increase has been preferred by P5 members (22-25 total
membership) to ensure it remains effective and does not descend into a talk shop unable to
act quickly.

Representations and permanent seats in the UN Security Council

The argument of many critics of the United Nations Security council is that it isn’t effective
and that it needs to be fundamentally reformed. The loudest call for reform come from those
who believe that the inclusion of host of new permanent member is the answer to the
effectiveness deficit. Others argue that it is folly to suggest that addition of new permanent
members would amount to meaningful reforms

Japan, Germany, India and Brazil (the G4) plans envisage a council with a total membership
of 25 including six permanent members which would be Brazil, Japan, Germany, India and
two African countries and an additional three elected seats. Under this proposal the
permanent members would be granted all the prerogatives and privileges of permanent
member including the right to VETO, by so doing the council will reflect contemporary
power realities and the so called new realities of the 21st century. It is clear that aspirant
countries understand the value of membership, each have interest in their own election and
each uses rhetoric of representativeness in support of their claims.

Adding India Brazil Germany, Japan South Africa and Nigeria is not an exercise in
representativeness, nor is it an act of dispersing power. Permanency concentrate power in the
hands of five or five plus six, in the case of a reformed council. In other terms of other forms
of representation, the argument have been made that many of the BRICS (namely Brazil,
South Africa and India) aspirant are representatives of their region or of the global South a
permanent seat for Africa on the UN security council will allow the continent to at least have
some voice in all decision making organs of the UN, setting the stage for the reconstructing
of global affairs. The weakness of this argument is that in the end countries will be
representative of themselves, the name plate of each new permanent member would not read
“global south or Latina America or south Asia”. This might be fatuous, but it underlines an
undeniable fact.

Equitable representation in the UN Security Council

The United Nations Security council is in need to reform due to its failure to represent the
majority of the world, as it only represents the interest of the western nations as well as those
of Russia and China. This leads to grievous under representations of Asian, African, and
South American nations that has caused resentment to grow among these nations. For
example, the council which is tasked with the primary duty of maintaining international peace
and security, continues to be dominated by a few powerful nations at the expense of the
majority .Of the five permanent member with VETO power, non is from Africa yet the
continent provides largest membership of the United Nations, meaning to say the permanent
members enjoys the VETO right, hence the council cannot implement any decision, If one of
the five permanent members objects to it which is unfair to other UN members.

Currently the council is dominated by a few countries that were victorious in a war fought
some 70years ago, and thus determine every important decision on peace and security in the
world. This arrangement and structure where some countries are more important than others
is what Africa and other developing regions want to be reformed as it is now overdue and
continues to tear apart the relations amongst countries and continents.

UN Security council General Assembly relationship

Efforts to revitalize the assembly’s work focus on increasing its power vis-à-vis the Security
Council, as well as improving the quality of debate within the body. But the assembly has
continued to resist deep- seated reforms, a reflection of the rift between its many members
from the developing world, who want to retain a strong say in deliberations, and the
wealthy nations that serve as the United Nations’ main donors.

the assembly has been criticized the for focusing excessively on reaching consensus and
passing resolutions that reflected “the lowest common denominator” of opinions. Michael
W. Doyle, an international affairs expert at Columbia University, says the assembly is “an
important institution that has never quite sorted out its role” in terms of being a truly
deliberative and functional body and has “insufficient deliberation and not enough genuine
discussion.” Doyle, who was an aide to Annan, says that the assembly could enhance its
relevance by holding hearings with expert testimony. The assembly has made an effort in
recent years to make its work more substantive and relevant. Resolution 59/313, adopted in
2005, established a more influential role for the assembly’s president by authorizing the
position with the power to propose debates and expand the resources available to this
office.

VETO POWER

The United Nations Security Council "veto power" refers to the power of the five permanent
members of the UN Security Council which are China, United States, United Kingdom,
Russia and France to veto any substantive resolution.

on Equality of Nations If everybody is equal before law, then every country is equal before
international law. The five permanent members holding the veto power have jointly or
severally defied UN General Assembly decisions passed with absolute majority. Thus the
veto power has always been, and will be for ever, an undemocratic instrument wielded by the
world powers to their own advantage as defined by their respective governments regardless
of human rights international law.

The veto power of the UN security council needs to be reformed as it is totally unfair. It
harms other countries other than the permanents as the opinion on their basis is not given
much importance as given to the permanents. Even if one of the members of the security
council is not willing to a given appeal of the other 4 members the given appeal would be
abolished & it would not hold any importance. In this way any of the permanent members
could make their profit ( if any appeal is harming or against one of the permanents but in
favor of the others or making profit of the whole world, it could be abolished by the unwilling
member of the appeal. Thats why this veto power is unfair and hence, it should be abolished
which would lead to the abolition of the permanent members of the UN.

The United Nations has members all around the world and I can't really find a reason for
some of them to have veto powers. After all, that's not the equality a promoter of
international stability a check against military interventions and a critical safeguard against
U.S. domination.The veto is the most undemocratic element of the UN as well as the main
cause of inaction on war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Conclusion
In conclusion , in order to gain its lost legitimacy the united nations security council should
change to reflect new world realities UNSC should inrease the permanent membership by
incorporating the left out areas of world such as Africa and under represantation of South
Asia.If represantation of such areas is improved, it may lead to wider opinions and
consultations which can help in rational decision making it widely accepted by the whole
world.