Futile Attempt for Reform

Having no clear perspectives for an achievement, Japan, Germany, India and Brazil, a group calling themselves G4, submitted new draft of reform of Security Council to the United Nations. It was a revised version of former draft a decade ago, which aimed to get more support from African countries. Although the action was made with consultation among those four ambitious countries, their strategy strangely lacked an important viewpoint: how do they get indispensable approval from all of current five permanent members.

While the draft was made in the timing of seventieth anniversary from establishment of U.N., it had only minor changes from the draft for sixtieth anniversary. The 2005 draft requested to increase permanent membership from five to eleven. New permanent members included G4 and two African countries. Non-permanent members would be increased from ten to fourteen.

New draft added possible one non-permanent member, which was distributed to Africa. By increasing a seat for Africa, G4 hopes firm support from the region with great share of votes in General Assembly. To persuade permanent members that worried dysfunction of the council, the draft proposed fifteen-year moratorium of veto for new permanent members.

Ten years ago, the action of G4 was blocked by China that did not like Japan’s permanent membership. Although United States supported only Japan’s participation, it showed basic opposition to increasing permanent membership that might be disturbing consensus building. U.S. was tired of incompetence of the council in setting common ground in its War on Terror. Biased support of U.S. for Japan worked for psychological division inside G4.

France submitted last year its own reform plan for restricting veto in the issues closely related to humanitarian crisis. But, it was regarded as merely an action to avoid criticisms to the council on handling Syrian situation. It is unlikely Russia to agree with any reform plan, when it is opposing every collective action of the council in the issue related to its relationship with Ukraine.

The reform needs amendment of U.N. Charter anyway, which requires two-thirds majority in General Assembly. Even if it passes G.A., it will need to get ratifications of all five permanent members. Officials in Japanese government believe that permanent members will not be able to oppose the voices from two-thirds majority. But, that is definitely wrong as most nations realize. Each permanent member of Security Council has a right to destroy overwhelming consensus of U.N. Some of them actually did. That is what U.N. is all about.