Africa needs to get real about UN Security Council reform

Africa has long pushed for representation on the UN Security Council, the ultimate global forum for debating war and peace in our time. The Council has for years been dominated by permanent members China, France, Russia, the UK and the US – the legacy of a Cold War era of great power diplomacy from which Africa has been rigorously excluded.

While the two-year terms of non-permanent members offer some African representation, the continent understandably wants much more – especially as African conflicts are frequently discussed at the Council.

President Biden’s decision at the beginning of his presidency to call for a permanent African seat on the Council was therefore greeted with cautious optimism; and his surprising call for two seats, made in September, was taken as a sign that reform of the Council is more or less inevitable.

Open questions

Yet what reform would look like and who it would benefit are open questions. Speaking at the Center for Strategic and International Studies think-tank in Washington, DC, outgoing US ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield said that Africa is far from united – particularly on the question of who would actually get a seat.

“Nigeria says it’s not a question, of course, Nigeria is going to get one. And South Africa says this is not up for discussion. And then I hear from Ethiopia: we should have always had a permanent seat, we were a victor in World War II, so what are you talking about… And then you have North Africa – they’re part of the AU (African Union). They’re on the continent. So where does Egypt and Algeria and Morocco fit into what is going to happen?”

While there has been talk that the African Union could assume a seat on the Security Council – the AU recently took a seat at the G20 – that is far from being confirmed as viable. Currently the Council comprises member states rather than multilateral bodies like the European Union.

Despite warm words, the US commitment to reform is also up for debate. Biden’s offer, such as it is, is conditional on new members lacking the all-important veto power enjoyed by the five permanent members. With the US having also previously backed permanent seats for India, Germany, Japan, and a country from Latin America, the suspicion arises that a push for distant reform is a cost-free way for the US to harvest goodwill.

After all, expanding the Council is not in the gift of the US. Russia, China, the UK and France would all have to lend their agreement to any plan, which would also require a revision of the UN Charter by agreement of two-thirds of the General Assembly.

Facing disdain for multilateralism

Further complicating matters is that the supportive Biden administration has now been consigned to the dustbin of history. President Trump’s administration, which was inaugurated on 20 January, has yet to comment on the pledge. Trump’s disdain for multilateralism – and indifference to the goals of African states – could see any reform initiative dead on arrival.

While the outlook might not be propitious, it remains in Africa’s interests to push for representation in the highest global forums. African nations hold 28% of the votes in the General Assembly, and the continent will soon be the most populous on earth. It remains disproportionately affected by conflict. But Africa must be clear among itself on what it wants at the Security Council – and construct a feasible diplomatic plan for getting there.