- Akram says creation of new permanent seats will make the Security Council less representative, less effective and more divided
- The proposal of non-permanent seats will accommodate the interests of all groups including the African, the Arab, the OIC, and Small Island Developing States: Envoy
(Karachi) Pakistan’s Permanent Representative at United Nations Security Council (UNSC) Munir Akram has strongly opposed the addition of new permanent seats in the world body, local media reported on Tuesday.
Addressing the first meeting of the Intergovernmental Negotiations Framework during the 75th session of the UN, Akram said that the creation of new permanent seats will make the Security Council less representative, less effective, more divided, and erode the principle of sovereign equality of states.
He pointed out that the proposal of the United for Consensus (UfC) group to have 21 non-permanent seats would redress the deficit of equitable representation in the Security Council. He said it also accommodate the interests of all groups including the African, the Arab, the OIC, and Small Island Developing States.
Apart from that, he reiterated Islamabad’s principled position for comprehensive reforms of UNSC which meets the interests of all member states.
The Security Council is one of the UN’s six main organs, and is aimed at maintaining international peace and security. It held its first session on January 17, 1946 in Westminster, London.
The UNSC has 15 member and five of them — US, UK, Russia, China and France — are permanent members, who have veto rights. The ten elected or non-permanent members have a tenure of two years. At present, the non-permanent members are Estonia, India, Ireland, Kenya, Mexico, Niger, Norway, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Tunisia and Vietnam.
Non-permanent members of the Security Council, however, do not have veto rights. This, in the eyes of several observers, makes them a toothless grouping because they cannot assert their will on any matter of international concern, merely persuade or dissuade other member states from acting in a certain way.
The council responds to crises around the world on a case-by-case basis and takes action based on options that do not involve armed force. For instance, economic and trade sanctions, arms embargoes, travel bans and financial or commodity restrictions.