Good Carder
Carder
- Messages
- 49
- Reaction score
- 19
- Points
- 8
UN Security Council (SC) reform is one of the most pressing and long-term issues in international politics. As of January 23, 2026, despite years of intergovernmental negotiations (IGN), there has been no significant progress. UN Secretary-General António Guterres has repeatedly emphasized in his recent statements that the current SC structure reflects the realities of 1945, not the multipolar world of 2026 with new centers of power, non-military threats, and the growing influence of the Global South. In January 2026, new non-permanent members (Bahrain, Colombia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Latvia, and Liberia) joined the SC, but veto paralysis persists: in 2025, a record number of vetoes were cast on issues such as Ukraine, Gaza, Sudan, and the Red Sea. The Pact for the Future (adopted at the Future Summit in September 2024) gave impetus to reform, but 2025–2026 are characterized by stagnation due to geopolitical tensions among the P5 (the permanent five: the United States, Russia, China, the United Kingdom, and France).
Traditional reform models—such as the G4 (Brazil, Germany, India, and Japan) proposal to expand to 25–26 members with six new permanent seats (without a veto for newcomers) or the African Ezulwini Consensus (two permanent seats for Africa with a full veto)—face insurmountable barriers: the P5 do not want their dominance eroded, while developing countries demand full equality. In this context, fresh, innovative approaches are needed that balance the interests of all parties, take into account new threats (climate, cybersecurity, AI, pandemics), and improve efficiency without radically disrupting the system.
Below, I examine in detail seven unique and practically oriented reform proposals. Each includes a detailed mechanism, historical and current context, advantages, potential risks, ways to overcome resistance, and options for phased implementation. These ideas are designed as a compromise to avoid completely blocking the P5 while making the Security Council more legitimate, transparent, and responsive.
Context and relevance: African countries have long demanded representation, but there is no agreement within the continent (Nigeria, South Africa, and Egypt are all laying claim). Rotation solves this problem. In 2026, the AU is actively involved in peacekeeping (missions in Somalia, Cahele), and ASEAN is involved in stabilizing the Indo-Pacific region. This reflects a shift toward regional multilateralism.
Advantages: Reduces national competition and strengthens regional coordination and accountability. Regions decide for themselves who represents their interests, which increases legitimacy.
Risks and mitigations: The P5 may see their influence threatened; intra-regional conflicts (for example, in the Arab League over Saudi Arabia and Iran). Solution: Start with one pilot seat for the AU as a "regional permanent observer."
Implementation: Initially through a General Assembly resolution as long-term non-permanent seats (without a Charter amendment), then a full amendment.
Context and relevance: In 2025–2026, the veto paralyzed the Security Council on multiple crises. New threats (cyberattacks on infrastructure, climate migrations) require a rapid response. The French and Mexican initiatives (2015) to voluntarily renounce the veto in cases of genocide could be expanded.
Advantages: Preserves the veto for "classic" geopolitical issues but unlocks action on transnational threats. An automatic trigger minimizes manipulation.
Risks and solutions: Strong resistance from Russia, the United States, and China. Solution: Initially introduce a voluntary "Code of Conduct on Vetoes" with a public report.
Implementation: Start with the code (signed voluntarily by the P5), then enshrine it in the Security Council's rules of procedure.
Context and relevance: Middle powers (Japan, Germany - the largest donors) complain of injustice. In 2025, the UN financial crisis has increased this discontent.
Strengths: Dynamic system that motivates real contribution rather than historical status.
Risks and overcoming: Rich countries can dominate; the formula needs transparency. Solution: Independent calculation commission and regional quotas.
Implementation: Through a simple General Assembly resolution (does not require a Charter amendment).
Context and relevance: The veto is often perceived as arbitrary, reducing trust in the UN in the age of social media and instant information.
Benefits: Increases the accountability of the P5 without legally limiting their privileges.
Risks and mitigation: The P5 can ignore it. Solution: Link it to public pressure and the Secretary-General's annual report. Implementation
: Amend the rules of procedure of the Security Council (decided by the Council itself).
Context and relevance: The Security Council ignores non-military threats that require scientific expertise, not just politics.
Advantages: Depoliticization of decisions on new challenges.
Risks and overcoming: Countries may suspect "external influence." Solution: Strict selection and no voting rights.
Implementation: Security Council resolution.
Context and relevance: The Security Council remains a male-dominated and age-biased body that does not reflect the demographics of the planet (especially the Global South).
Benefits: Increases diversity of perspectives and links to the Sustainable Development Goals.
Risks and overcoming: Cultural resistance. Solution: Phased introduction from 2030.
Implementation: General Assembly recommendation, then mandatory rule.
Context and relevance: The lessons of COVID-19 and current crises show the need for flexibility.
Advantages: Rapid inclusiveness without constant changes.
Risks and mitigation: Subjectivity in defining a crisis. Solution: Clear criteria in the rules.
Implementation: Amend the rules of procedure.
These proposals can be implemented in stages: first "soft" reforms (codes, rules of procedure), then structural ones. They create a balance between maintaining the influence of the P5, the demands of the Global South, and the need to respond to the challenges of the 21st century. As a result, the Security Council will become more effective, legitimate, and ready for the future. If you would like to further analyze a specific idea or add a comparison with existing models, let us know!
Traditional reform models—such as the G4 (Brazil, Germany, India, and Japan) proposal to expand to 25–26 members with six new permanent seats (without a veto for newcomers) or the African Ezulwini Consensus (two permanent seats for Africa with a full veto)—face insurmountable barriers: the P5 do not want their dominance eroded, while developing countries demand full equality. In this context, fresh, innovative approaches are needed that balance the interests of all parties, take into account new threats (climate, cybersecurity, AI, pandemics), and improve efficiency without radically disrupting the system.
Below, I examine in detail seven unique and practically oriented reform proposals. Each includes a detailed mechanism, historical and current context, advantages, potential risks, ways to overcome resistance, and options for phased implementation. These ideas are designed as a compromise to avoid completely blocking the P5 while making the Security Council more legitimate, transparent, and responsive.
1. Hybrid regional permanent seats with rotation
Detailed mechanism: Instead of adding permanent seats to individual countries, introduce 4-6 new permanent seats tied to regional organizations. For example: 2 seats for the African Union (AU), rotating every 5 years among member countries by internal AU decision; 1 seat each for the EU, ASEAN, the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC), the Arab League, and possibly the Pacific Island States Forum. A representative is appointed by the region by consensus or a qualified majority. Veto power for these seats is either absent or limited (applied only on issues directly affecting the region).Context and relevance: African countries have long demanded representation, but there is no agreement within the continent (Nigeria, South Africa, and Egypt are all laying claim). Rotation solves this problem. In 2026, the AU is actively involved in peacekeeping (missions in Somalia, Cahele), and ASEAN is involved in stabilizing the Indo-Pacific region. This reflects a shift toward regional multilateralism.
Advantages: Reduces national competition and strengthens regional coordination and accountability. Regions decide for themselves who represents their interests, which increases legitimacy.
Risks and mitigations: The P5 may see their influence threatened; intra-regional conflicts (for example, in the Arab League over Saudi Arabia and Iran). Solution: Start with one pilot seat for the AU as a "regional permanent observer."
Implementation: Initially through a General Assembly resolution as long-term non-permanent seats (without a Charter amendment), then a full amendment.
2. Subject-limited veto with automatic override mechanism
Detailed mechanism: Expand the list of veto exceptions (existing ones: genocide, crimes against humanity) with new categories: global climate disasters (according to the IPCC report), pandemics (according to the WHO classification), major cyberattacks (tantamount to an armed attack according to NATO/Tallinn Manual criteria), and risks of uncontrolled AI (e.g., lethal autonomous weapons). If a veto is cast on other issues, the resolution is automatically transmitted to the General Assembly under the "Uniting for Peace" procedure (Resolution 377A of 1950) with an increased quorum of 75% for adoption of the recommendation.Context and relevance: In 2025–2026, the veto paralyzed the Security Council on multiple crises. New threats (cyberattacks on infrastructure, climate migrations) require a rapid response. The French and Mexican initiatives (2015) to voluntarily renounce the veto in cases of genocide could be expanded.
Advantages: Preserves the veto for "classic" geopolitical issues but unlocks action on transnational threats. An automatic trigger minimizes manipulation.
Risks and solutions: Strong resistance from Russia, the United States, and China. Solution: Initially introduce a voluntary "Code of Conduct on Vetoes" with a public report.
Implementation: Start with the code (signed voluntarily by the P5), then enshrine it in the Security Council's rules of procedure.
3. Semi-permanent long-term positions based on contribution
Detailed mechanism: Create 6-8 seats for a 10-year term (with the possibility of one extension) for countries with the largest objective contribution. Calculation formula: 40% - participation in peacekeeping operations (troops, police, finance); 30% - contributions to the UN regular budget; 20% - GDP and diplomatic activity; 10% - representation of vulnerable groups (small island states). Examples of candidates for 2026: Indonesia, Bangladesh, Canada, Nigeria, Pakistan, Turkey, Australia. No veto, but with the right to initiate an agenda.Context and relevance: Middle powers (Japan, Germany - the largest donors) complain of injustice. In 2025, the UN financial crisis has increased this discontent.
Strengths: Dynamic system that motivates real contribution rather than historical status.
Risks and overcoming: Rich countries can dominate; the formula needs transparency. Solution: Independent calculation commission and regional quotas.
Implementation: Through a simple General Assembly resolution (does not require a Charter amendment).
4. Mandatory public justification of a veto with an appeal mechanism
Detailed mechanism: Each veto is accompanied by a mandatory, detailed justification (up to 5,000 words) within 48 hours, which is published on the UN website. The General Assembly, by a two-thirds majority, can issue an "appeal": the veto remains legally valid, but is transformed into a public recommendation with moral and media weight.Context and relevance: The veto is often perceived as arbitrary, reducing trust in the UN in the age of social media and instant information.
Benefits: Increases the accountability of the P5 without legally limiting their privileges.
Risks and mitigation: The P5 can ignore it. Solution: Link it to public pressure and the Secretary-General's annual report. Implementation
: Amend the rules of procedure of the Security Council (decided by the Council itself).
5. Permanent expert advisory panels on emerging threats
Detailed mechanism: Create three permanent panels (25-30 experts each): climate and environment; cybersecurity and AI; global health and biorisks. Members will be independent scientists, representatives of NGOs, and tech companies, with rotation and regional balance. The panels have the right to initiate discussions in the Security Council and propose draft resolutions (mandatory review within 30 days).Context and relevance: The Security Council ignores non-military threats that require scientific expertise, not just politics.
Advantages: Depoliticization of decisions on new challenges.
Risks and overcoming: Countries may suspect "external influence." Solution: Strict selection and no voting rights.
Implementation: Security Council resolution.
6. Gender and youth parity in the composition of delegations
Detailed mechanism: Mandatory quotas: at least 40% women and at least one delegate under 35 in each delegation. When electing new members, priority is given to countries with high gender equality (according to World Economic Forum indices).Context and relevance: The Security Council remains a male-dominated and age-biased body that does not reflect the demographics of the planet (especially the Global South).
Benefits: Increases diversity of perspectives and links to the Sustainable Development Goals.
Risks and overcoming: Cultural resistance. Solution: Phased introduction from 2030.
Implementation: General Assembly recommendation, then mandatory rule.
7. Emergency temporary expansion mechanism for periods of crisis
Detailed mechanism: In the event of a global crisis (defined by the Secretary-General and confirmed by a majority of the Security Council without a veto), temporarily (for 1-2 years) add 5-7 members from the most affected regions with full voting power (without a veto).Context and relevance: The lessons of COVID-19 and current crises show the need for flexibility.
Advantages: Rapid inclusiveness without constant changes.
Risks and mitigation: Subjectivity in defining a crisis. Solution: Clear criteria in the rules.
Implementation: Amend the rules of procedure.
These proposals can be implemented in stages: first "soft" reforms (codes, rules of procedure), then structural ones. They create a balance between maintaining the influence of the P5, the demands of the Global South, and the need to respond to the challenges of the 21st century. As a result, the Security Council will become more effective, legitimate, and ready for the future. If you would like to further analyze a specific idea or add a comparison with existing models, let us know!
