Nigeria's Point of View in the the United Nations Security Council 2010 2011 - Coursework Example

De-Briefing No. 7 – Nigerian Mission to the United Nations Security Council – This report outlines proceedings of the March Security Council meeting, attended by Ambassador Joy Ogwu, Nigeria’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations and the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Nigeria, Mr. Odein Ajumogobia. The March 2011 Security Council meeting was unique in so far as it constituted a continuation of the long overdue debate on Security Council Reform. The main issues tabled were increases in the number of UN Security Council members, veto powers and arms control. The submission of these issues was considered timely following the September 2008 decision (GA) 62/557 to move the issues from Working Groups to the Intergovernmental Negotiations’ (Martini 2). The Nigerian undertaking was in accordance with policies laid down by his Excellency, Dr. Goodluck Ebele Jonathan and his Cabinet, and consisted of proposals to increase the elected members to thirty-five, to change the nature of the power of ‘veto’ from being an instrument of ‘individual power’ to a collective and democratic instrument and to subject nuclear powers to accountability within a circle of client states. The meeting was attended by all fifteen members currently sitting, and there was a standing ovation after the conclusion of Mr. Oedin’s speech. Private consultation prior to sitting had also yielded some positive results – there is clearly a ‘climate for change’ among the members. However, when two of the delegations later approached the Nigerian desk, with the intention of arranging a private meeting in April, it became immediately clear that there was a discrepancy between the intended content of our document and the interpretation by these delegations. Nevertheless, a window of opportunity has opened up for further discussions. Background to Problems The UN Security Council (UNSC) is the enforcement arm of the United Nations and has been in operation since 1945, with initially eleven members of which five were permanent, with individual powers of ‘veto, and six were elected members. In 1965, the latter body was increased to ten, bringing the total number of UNSC members to fifteen. The mandate of the UNSC has remained unchanged during the 55 years of its operation and it is now – as it was then – charged with keeping the Peace. The missions the UNSC carried out under this aim were greatly hampered during the ‘Cold War’1, obscuring systemic problems within the structure of the UNSC for over forty years. It is therefore mainly during the past twenty years that these problems have become obvious, through repeated unauthorized military actions by states as well as self-motivated use of veto powers by the permanent five members (Butler 10pp). In addition, the increase in member states of the United Nations between 1947 and 2011, from 50 to 1921 is in no way reflected in the increase in the numbers in the UNSC during the same period. The former nearly quadrupled whereas UNSC membership has only been increased by less than a quarter, making it questionable that member states are now adequately represented. This is particularly true when viewed from a regional perspective, as Latin America, the Middle East and Africa do not currently have a permanent voice through a permanent UNSC member (Jaramillo). Although Nigeria has been able to represent its concerns on three previous occasions3, this does ultimately not amount to permanent representation. This is clearly also a general sentiment among the UN member states, which have often felt that the decisions of the Security Council do not reflect the will of the General Assembly as a whole but rather are often motivated by self-interest (Martini 2). There have been numerous past reform proposals for both the membership numbers and the powers of veto but, despite all efforts so far no solution has emerged that might have success of being debated in the UNSC (quotation needed) Nigerian proposal for reforms tabled at the March Council: His Excellency, the Honorable Minister of Foreign Affairs of Nigeria, Mr. Odein Ajumogobia, proposed that the following be adopted as a basis for further discussion in the UNSC: 1. That the total membership be increased by 20 permanent member states to a total of 35 members, drawn from five continents/territories in accordance with criteria based on basic members per region and an additional ‘number of state actors’ factor. 2. That the ‘individual’ veto power of the current permanent members be rescinded and replaced with a more democratic instrument, and that objections to proposed actions be put to the vote by all 35 members, who can exercise power of ‘veto’ only if the majority (18 members or more) are opposed to the action. 3. That each UN member state form an alliance with one of the 35 permanent members to the UNSC, to achieve permanent representation and that this system of ‘patronage’ also extends to voting rights by the client states (members and non-members alike) on the deployment of armament by the patron state. Political and theoretical justification for the Proposal: The UNSC is an intergovernmental organization that brings together state actors of unequal economic and military power, with the aim of safeguarding world peace. Whilst there have been instances where the decisions of the UNSC were timely and effective, they are few and it is our understanding that this is due to conflicting ideologies informing state government politics. Thus realist and neo-realists understand the international arena as being permanently in a state of ’anarchy’, in which alliances must be sought by the stronger states with the weaker, to achieve a balance of power (Waltz in Kegley 35). This thinking is evident in the discourse and actions of particularly the USA, China, Russia and the UK, expressed through ‘amassing arms’, a willingness to conduct armed conflict and, in the context of the UNSC, through the self-serving use of their ‘veto’ power. Examples of the use of a veto to block actions in an attempt to force other actors to rethink their international affiliations (Martini 7) must be seen as acts of unilateralism, with ultimate hegemonic and often disastrous consequences (Mathews 2000 in Kegley 329). Such a world view is considered to be out of keeping with global developments as it fails to consider possible negative consequences of armament, not only in destroying the security of other actors but also by causing a general armaments race (Vasquez in Kegley 36). It would also appear that already the USA is taking a more transparent approach to international relations with the Obama administration (Raasch in Kegley 239). It is further pointed out that realist views of the world do not take into account the multiple levels at which state actors are already cooperating with each other in the international arena, in economics, health security, law and a large number of other issues. This is sufficient evidence that ‘intentions, interests, information and ideals’ are visible as being influential in the interaction of States (Kegley 43) and that there must be at least attempts to incorporate a world view, that seeks to institutionalize peace rather than anarchy (Kegley 43) in the procedures of the UNSC through democratic processes. It is here that Nigeria sees part of its mandate whilst it fulfills its function as a sitting member of the UNSC, in particular in relation to the ‘veto’, which is a controversial point with many member states of the UN. The Belgian Minister for Foreign Affairs, Erik Derycke represented the view of many, when he said, “the right to veto is incompatible with the general interest.”i (UN SC Reform.doc) To this effect, His Excellency, the Honorable Minister of Foreign Affairs of Nigeria, Mr. Odein, proposed two measures. Firstly the re-distribution of veto power to all UNSC members, who will use this veto power in democratic voting processes, thereby preventing that any one state has absolute power. Secondly, he also posed that nuclear powers, which are members of the Security Council, may form ‘circles of influence’, through the representation of non-nuclear states on an armament level, thus allowing both sides to increase their influence, ensuring at the same time that all member states have representation at the armament level. This ensures that a nuclear power may not propose the use of armament without the consent of its ‘client states’. The third proposal focused primarily on achieving permanent regional representation, not just for Africa but also for other territories that have so far been without permanent voice at the UNSC. The past five years in particular have seen a large number of applications for permanent seats at the UNSC, particularly by the G44, which includes an additional nuclear power. Their aspirations have in turn been opposed by the UFC5. Bids for membership of either group are in turn either supported or questioned by the current five permanent members, making it highly unlikely that consensus can be achieved under these circumstances. As previously pointed out, this indicates, apart from self-interest, a profound mistrust in the political authority of the international institutions and a reluctance to cede any power to intergovernmental institutions. Nevertheless, the climate is right for a push to increase the number of seats at the Security Council as there are, despite the controversies, some moves to accept a number of additional members. The number of 35 seats was arrived at after consideration of regional circumstances and are composed of four members from each of the continents/territories as well as the Middle East, with an additional ten members from regions in terms of the number of state actors present in these areas, set out in Table 1. Continent Africa America Asia/Pacific Europe Middle East Current members 0 1 2* 2 0 Top-up to ‘4’ 4 3 2 2 4 Top of in relation to no. of state actors 4 3 5 3 0 Total 35 8 7 9 7 4 * Russia forms part of Asia Conclusion The Proceedings of the March 2011 have provided a renewed opportunity to consider changes to the existing number of UNSC members, the status of the ‘veto’ and interrelationships between UN and UNSC states. The Nigerian delegation will continue to work towards advancement of these proposals during its term in office. Reference List Butler, Richard. Bewitched, Bothered and Bewildered. 1999. Foreign Affairs, Vol 78, 5. p 9-13. Jaramillo, Luis Fernando (Sept. 1998), “Conference on Security Council Reform.” Martini, Elisabetta. UN SECURITY COUNCIL REFORM. CURRENT DEVELOPMENTS. 2010. Institutio Affari International (IAI). Web. Retrieved 8..4.2011 from Kegley, Charles W and Shannon, Blanton L. World Politics: Trend and Transformation. 12th edition, Cengage Learning, 2009, Belmont CA. Read More