UN Security Council faces a ‘legitimacy deficit’, says India

Why in news?

India told the UN General Assembly that an unrepresentative, 1945-era Security Council faces a ‘legitimacy deficit’ and urgently needs reform.

UPSC Relevance 

Prelims: UNSC composition, voting, Charter provisions, reform groupings (G4, UFC, L.69). 

Mains: GS2 – Important international institutions, agencies and fora – their structure and mandate.

What India said at the UNGA

• India’s Permanent Representative, Ambassador Harish Parvathaneni, spoke at the annual UNGA debate on ‘Question of Equitable Representation on and Increase in the Membership of the Security Council’.
• Authority that comes from winning the Second World War cannot make up for the Council’s lack of legitimacy today. In his words, history can guide us on what not to do, but it cannot decide today’s choices.
• The UN was shaped by and for the victors. The sacrifices of colonised nations in the world wars were ignored. (India alone sent about 25 lakh soldiers in WWII, the largest volunteer army of the war.)
• The Asia-Pacific Group holds more than 60% of the world’s population but gets very limited representation.
• Expanding only the non-permanent category will leave the ‘central imbalance’ untouched and further entrench the status quo.

UN Security Council

• Role – Primary responsibility for maintenance of international peace and security (Article 24). Its decisions are binding on all members (Article 25).
• Composition (Article 23) – 15 members. 5 permanent (P5) – China, France, Russia, UK and US. 10 non-permanent, elected by the UNGA for two-year terms with a two-thirds majority. A retiring member is not eligible for immediate re-election.
• Regional allocation of 10 elected seats – Africa 3, Asia-Pacific 2, Latin America and Caribbean 2, Western Europe and Others 2, Eastern Europe 1. One seat rotates between Africa and Asia for an Arab country (the ‘Arab swing seat’).
• Voting (Article 27) – Each member has one vote. Procedural matters need 9 votes. Substantive matters need 9 votes including the concurring votes of all P5, which is the source of the veto. By practice, abstention of a permanent member is not treated as a veto.
• Only reform so far – The Charter was amended in 1963 (in force 1965) to raise membership from 11 to 15. UN membership has since grown from about 113 to 193, but the Council has not changed.

Why the Council suffers a ‘legitimacy deficit’

• Frozen in 1945 – The membership reflects the post-war power balance, not today’s world of rising economies like India, Brazil and the African continent.
• Under-representation – Africa, with 54 countries, has no permanent seat though a large share of the Council’s agenda deals with African conflicts. Latin America too has no permanent member. Europe is over-represented with three of the P5 (counting Russia).
• Paralysis due to veto – The Council has failed to act decisively on the Russia-Ukraine war and the Gaza conflict because of rival vetoes. Russia (including the USSR) has cast the highest number of vetoes since 1946, followed by the US.
• Selective action – P5 interests decide which crises get attention. Smaller states see this as ‘great power politics’ dressed up as collective security.
• Rise of alternatives – Countries increasingly turn to minilateral groups (G20, BRICS, Quad) or act outside the UN, which weakens the UN’s central role.
• Burden without voice – Troop contributors like India, Bangladesh, Nepal and Rwanda carry the risk of peacekeeping but have little say in framing mandates.

How can the Council be reformed?

• Article 108 – A Charter amendment needs a two-thirds vote in the UNGA (128 of 193) and ratification by two-thirds of members, including all five permanent members. So every P5 country effectively has a veto over its own reform.
• Article 109 – Allows a General Conference to review the Charter, but it is subject to the same ratification rule.
• Intergovernmental Negotiations (IGN) – Reform talks have been held in the UNGA since 2009 under GA decision 62/557. They cover five ‘clusters’: categories of membership, the veto, regional representation, size and working methods, and the Council-GA relationship.
• Main problem with IGN – There is still no agreed negotiating text. India and the G4 have long demanded text-based negotiations, as only then can positions be pinned down and progress recorded.
• Pact for the Future (2024) – Adopted at the UN Summit of the Future. Member States agreed to make the Council more representative and to treat redressing the historical injustice against Africa as a priority, but without any timeline.

The veto debate

• For abolition or restraint – Veto lets one country block action even in mass atrocities. The France-Mexico initiative asks P5 to voluntarily not use veto in cases of mass atrocities. The ACT group’s Code of Conduct (2015) makes a similar request.
• Veto Initiative (2022) – UNGA resolution 76/262 requires the General Assembly to meet within 10 working days whenever a veto is cast, so the vetoing state must explain itself.
• Uniting for Peace (1950) – UNGA resolution 377(V) lets the Assembly take up a matter when the Council is blocked by veto. It was used for the Korean War and more recently for Ukraine (2022).
• India’s stand – Either abolish the veto for all or extend it to new permanent members. India does not accept a ‘second-class’ permanent seat, though G4 has offered to defer its use.

Way forward

• Start text-based negotiations in the IGN with clear timelines, building on the 2024 Pact for the Future.
• Make common cause with the African Union, the largest bloc, as both share the demand for expansion in both categories.
• Use a review clause so that a reformed Council can be revisited after 15 years, which may reduce fears of UFC members.
• Improve working methods meanwhile – more consultation with troop contributors, transparency in sanctions committees and limits on veto use.
• For India, keep building credentials through its 2028-29 non-permanent term, development partnerships with Africa and leadership of the Global South.

Practice MCQ 

Q1. Consider the following statements regarding the UN Security Council:

1. The UN Charter has been amended only once to enlarge the Security Council, raising its membership from 11 to 15.

2. A procedural decision of the Security Council can be blocked by the negative vote of any one permanent member.

3. Non-permanent members are elected by the General Assembly for two-year terms and are not eligible for immediate re-election.

How many of the statements given above are correct?

(a) Only one

(b) Only two

(c) All three

(d) None

Answer: (b)

Explanation: Statement 2 is incorrect. Procedural decisions need any 9 votes and the veto does not apply to them. The veto applies only to substantive matters (Article 27).

Q2. Consider the following statements:

Statement-I: Admission of new permanent members to the UN Security Council cannot happen without the concurrence of all five existing permanent members.

Statement-II: Under Article 108 of the UN Charter, an amendment comes into force only when ratified by two-thirds of UN members, including all permanent members of the Security Council.

Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?

(a) Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II explains Statement-I

(b) Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct, but Statement-II does not explain Statement-I

(c) Statement-I is correct, but Statement-II is incorrect

(d) Statement-I is incorrect, but Statement-II is correct

Answer: (a)

Explanation: Permanent membership is written into Article 23 of the Charter, so adding new permanent members needs a Charter amendment. Article 108 requires ratification by all P5, which gives each of them an effective veto over the reform.

Mains Practice Question 

Q. “The authority of the UN Security Council cannot rest forever on the outcome of a war fought eight decades ago.” Examine the reasons behind the legitimacy deficit of the UNSC and discuss the obstacles in India’s pursuit of a permanent seat. (15 marks, 250 words)

PDF