Minerva, Fall 2011 - Citizens for Global Solutions

The following commentary and editorialappeared in the 7 March & 4 April 2011issues of the New Jersey Law Journal,where Mike Kronisch is a member ofthe Editorial Board. He also is vicechairman of the Center for War/PeaceStudies, a nonprofit organization createdto establish an international politicaland legal system devoted to making theabolition of war possible.Reprinted with permission of New JerseyLaw Journal. © 2011 ALM Media Properties,LLC. All rights reserved.Reform of the United NationsSecurity Council & General Assembly —A Step to FederationMyron W. KronischI ~ The Argument for Weighted Voting at the UN Security CouncilAs the revolution in Egypt and the unrest in neighboring nations poses great risks andequally important opportunities, one wonders what the United States could do in thisdecade to help advance the rule of law.In his 1984 State of the Union address, President Ronald Reagan asserted, “A nuclearwar cannot be won and must never be fought. ... The only value in our two nations possessingnuclear weapons is to make sure they will never be used. But then, would it notbe better to do away with them entirely?”When President Barack Obama spoke in Prague on April 5, 2009, of an eventual endto nuclear weapons, he addressed the need for enforceable international law. He said,“Some countries will break the rules. That’s why we need a structure in place thatensures when any nation does [so] they will face consequences. ... Rules must be binding”(emphasis added). The most logical place for that structure is at the United Nations.The Security Council is the United Nations’ most powerful organ. It has five seats forpermanent members (P5) — the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Russiaand China — and 10, two-year seats. The 1945 charter has given it primary responsibilityfor the maintenance of global peace and security, and its decisions are binding forall member states.Meanwhile, UN Secretary-General BanKi-moon has appointed Atul Khare ofIndia, who has served as Assistant Secretary-Generalfor UN PeacekeepingOperations among other roles, as head ofthe Change Management Team (CMT)tasked with suggesting reforms including“formulation of a comprehensive plan tostreamline processes, increase accountabilityand improve the effectivenessand efficiency of the organisation in thedelivery of its mandates” (UN statementreported by the Times of India, 1 June2011). “The establishment of the CMT isa further step in the efforts of the Secretary-Generalto strengthen the United Nationsas it is called on to play an increasinglyprominent role in a period of rapidchange and financial constraint and builda management culture focused on excellenceand result.”But the council’s design is out of date: three of the P5 — the United Kingdom, Franceand Russia — are surpassed in economic power by India and Japan. Its limited geographicalbalance, combined with P5’s veto power, however, makes the SecurityCouncil less representative than desired by many member states. No component of theUnited Nations system has been the subject of more ideas for reform than the Council.The period 2003–2005 alone witnessed dozens of such proposals.In 2003, Secretary General Kofi Annan flatly told the General Assembly, “I respectfullysuggest to you, Excellencies, that in the eyes of your peoples the difficulty ofreaching agreement does not excuse your failure to do so. If you want the Council’sdecisions to command greater respect, particularly in the developing world, you needto address the issue of its composition with greater urgency.”Professor Emeritus Joseph E. Schwartzberg at the University of Minnesota has draftedthe only plan that would not increase the number of seats. His plan would reduce thenumber to 12; each region would have a weighted vote based on sovereignties, populationand contributions. Called the Universal Regional Representation as a Basis forSecurity Council Reform, it is the only one that gives each of the 192 member-statesdirect or indirect representation on the council: Selection of six of the 12 regional representativeswould take place every year.The paper proposes a universally representative Security Council with 12 “regional”seats: four for individual nations (the United States, China, India and Japan) and eightfor multinational groupings (e.g., Europe, Latin America and the Caribbean). Eachmultinational region would nominate several individual candidates to represent it, andfrom such slates the General Assembly would choose one. [continued, next page]17 • Minerva #39 • November 2011