|
|
|
|
Tussle over UN seats is a shadow
play
By Thalif Deen
NEW
YORK - The proposed expansion of the 15-member UN
Security Council has been thrown into disarray
once again - this time by a spirited political
campaign to block the permanent membership of
Japan, Germany, India and Brazil. It has
underscored a fact that has become increasingly
clear: expansion of the council from its current
five permanent members simply is not going to
happen.
The latest campaign is being led
by a group of about 40 "like-minded" countries -
headed by Italy, South Korea, Pakistan, Argentina
and Mexico. All five countries publicly oppose any
increase in permanent members and instead back an
alternative proposal to increase the number of
non-permanent members in the Security Council.
At present, the council has five
veto-wielding permanent members - the United
States, the United Kingdom, France, China and
Russia - and 10 non-permanent members elected
every two years on the principle of rotating
geographical representation.
Italy is
livid that it is being shut out of the Security
Council despite the fact that it has a claim for
permanent membership equal to or better than that
of Germany. As a result, Italy has expressed
strong reservations about Germany's candidacy and
is determined to scuttle Berlin's chances of
joining the Security Council permanently.
On Monday, Italian Foreign Minister
Gianfranco Fini was quoted as saying: "We don't
think it would be useful to admit new permanent
members unless it could be done with the widest
possible consensus, which doesn't exist right
now."
Argentina and Mexico, for their
part, are peeved that their claims to represent
Latin America have been overtaken by Brazil, the
front-runner from that region.
Pakistan, a
longtime rival of neighboring India, does not want
see New Delhi elevated to the ranks of a permanent
member. Although it is not publicly opposing
India, Pakistan is against the expansion of
permanent membership.
South Korea is
critical of Japan's wartime past, and is currently
in a dispute with Tokyo over historically symbolic
islands midway between the two nations (see Japan-South Korea ties on the
rocks, March 23). "A country that does
not repent for its historical wrongdoings and that
does not have the trust of its neighbors cannot
play a leadership role in international society,"
South Korea's ambassador to the United Nations,
Kim Sam-hoon, said last month.
All these
countries, vehemently opposed to permanent
membership, have formed a group called Uniting for
Consensus, which held a meeting in New York on
Monday.
Jim Paul, executive director of
the New York-based Global Policy Forum, said the
grouping of countries opposing permanent
membership is reminiscent of the Coffee Club led
by Italy at the United Nations in the early 1990s.
"It's quite a powerful lobby," said Paul,
who has been monitoring developments relating to
the Security Council since 1994. Equally important
but less noted is the very determined opposition
of the existing five permanent members (P5) to
expansion of any permanent membership, he said.
"We have seen this, particularly with respect to
China. The anti-Japanese riots in China last week
[were] a bigger statement."
Paul also said
there was a "write-in campaign" in China, where
millions of signatures were gathered against
Japan. In other words, the Chinese are able to
say: "Look, our people just don't want this," he
said. In China, this sort of campaign doesn't
easily occur without the blessings of the
government. "So that's important," he noted.
Last month, UN Secretary General Kofi
Annan released a landmark 62-page report, "In
Larger Freedom", described as a blueprint for
restructuring the world body. The report backs a
proposal made by a high-level panel on UN reform,
which early this year called for two alternative
models for a revamped Security Council:
Model A provides for six new permanent
seats, none with veto powers, and three new
two-year-term non-permanent seats, divided among
Africa, Asia and Pacific, Europe, and the
Americas.
Model B provides for no new permanent
seats but creates a new category of eight
four-year renewable-term seats and one new
two-year non-permanent (and non-renewable) seat,
divided among the four regional groups.
But last week, both the US and China were
critical of Annan's proposals. The secretary
general also decided to force the issue by setting
a September deadline - to coincide with a summit
meeting of world leaders in New York - for a
radical transformation of the United Nations, and
more specifically the Security Council. Both the
US and China have opposed any "artificial
deadlines", thereby undermining plans to revamp
the Security Council.
The reservations
were a disappointment to Japan, Germany, Brazil
and India, which had hopes of finding a permanent
seat on the council table at least by the end of
this year.
China also rejected a proposal
to force through any proposals that lacked
"consensus". Paul said "consensus" is a code word
that means: "Unless everyone agrees, we don't do
it." This, he said, has "infuriated" the Germans
and the Japanese, who were apparently confident of
getting support from two-thirds of the 191 member
states.
He said the two countries may have
lined up a two-thirds majority for a "framework
resolution" calling for the expansion of the
Security Council.
"But there was no way in
hell they would have got a two-thirds majority
once they get down to specific names as permanent
members," Paul said. This has always been the
stumbling block - and will remain a stumbling
block, he added.
Paul said his own
observation is that there may be strong support
for "a slight increase in non-permanent members",
as was done in 1965 when three new non-permanent
members were added to the council - a sort of
Model C, far different from Model B, he said.
This may be the lowest common denominator
that everyone could eventually agree on, Paul
said. "It would be non-controversial and it would
not weaken the domination of the P5."
(Inter Press
Service) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
All material on this
website is copyright and may not be republished in any form without written
permission.
© Copyright 1999 - 2005 Asia Times
Online Ltd.
|
|
Head
Office: Rm 202, Hau Fook Mansion, No. 8 Hau Fook St., Kowloon, Hong
Kong
Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
|
|
|
|
