The recent United Nations Security Council (UNSC) meeting has entertained Africa’s loud and unified call for reform that highlights the urgent need to update a structure designed nearly 80 years ago with post-World War II realities, which no longer correspond to today’s geopolitical landscape.
The P5 members (the U.S., Russia, China, the U.K., or France) can single-handedly veto any reform that dilutes their exclusive power and privilege. Under this reality getting all five to agree to share their most powerful tool is, in itself, a labour of mythical proportions yet there is a need for new norm that fits new realities.
Many in the summit has reflected the unjust financial architecture that overly slide favouring the few privileged leaving aside the critical mass in unfair situation which does not fit with the current realities. The vast majority of the world’s population and a significant number of its states—the Global South, including Africa, much of Asia, and Latin America—who are systemically under served in both political and financial governance don’t have much of a say on critical decision that affect their wellbeing.
African leaders, led by figures such as the African Union Chairperson João Lourenço, emphasize that Africa, is a home to 1.4 billion people—about 17% of the global population—and holding nearly a third of UN General Assembly seats, remains excluded from permanent decision-making roles in the UNSC. This exclusion is viewed as a historical injustice that must be rectified through reform
African leaders have recently made a strong, unified call for the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) to be reformed to include permanent seats for Africa with at least two permanent seats of full veto power. The recent speech delivered by Kenyan, Ghanaian leaders, Uganda’s Yoweri Museveni and many others strongly voiced pointing the imbalances and injustices faced by Africans and African descendants, following the daring earlier calls for reparations by the late Robert Mugabe.
This demand highlights the continent’s significant position in global population share, growing youth demographic, and crucial role in international peacekeeping and stability. African leaders argue that the current UNSC structure is outdated, reflecting post-World War II realities that no longer fit contemporary global dynamics.
Amending the UN Charter should not be a Herculean task. Currently it requires a two-thirds vote in the UN General Assembly (including support from many of the P5) and then ratification by two-thirds of member states, including all five permanent members. It should not continue giving any one of the P5 countries the ability to single-handedly block the entire reform
The current P5 (the U.S., Russia, China, the U.K., or France) can single-handedly veto any reform that dilutes their exclusive power and privilege. The heart of the matter is getting all five to agree to share their most powerful tool is, in itself, a labour of mythical proportions. There is a need for new norm that fits new realities. The unjust financial architecture that overly slide favouring the few privileged leaving aside the critical mass in unfair situation does not fit with the current realities.
Just to hitting on the fundamental problem, the current veto power system is the very instrument that prevents any reform aimed at abolishing or diluting that same power. It is a classic case of an institutional inequality designed to perpetuate power to few, on realities and situations of 80 years back. Things have changed now for better or worse. We must accept the change to find new norm that go along with it.
The vast majority of the world’s population and a significant number of its states—the Global South, including Africa, much of Asia, and Latin America—who are systemically underserved in both political and financial governance.
African leaders, led by figures such as the African Union Chairperson João Lourenço, emphasize that Africa, is a home to 1.4 billion people—about 17% of the global population—and holding nearly a third of UN General Assembly seats, remains excluded from permanent decision-making roles in the UNSC. This exclusion is viewed as a historical injustice that must be rectified through reform
African leaders have recently made a strong, unified call for the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) to be reformed to include permanent seats for Africa with at least two permanent seats of full veto power.
This demand highlights the continent’s significant position in global population share, growing youth demographic, and crucial role in international peacekeeping and stability. African leaders argue that the current UNSC structure is undemocratic outdated, reflecting post-World War II realities that no longer fit contemporary global dynamics.
They advocate not only for permanent representation but also the right to veto, seeing this as essential for true sovereign equality and fair global governance. Leading voices, including Ghana’s President John Dramani Mahama, Kenya’s President William Ruto, and Uganda’s President Yoweri Museveni, many others from latin America and Asia with daring assertions of the need during recent high-level UN assemblies and African summits.
They are demanding at least two permanent seats with veto power plus additional non-permanent seats for the 54-nation continent, emphasizing that this reform is a necessity for the UN’s legitimacy and survival in the 21st century. This is not too much for continent having 17% of the global population—and holding nearly a third of UN General Assembly seats.
This unified call is rooted in the argument that Africa, with 54 nations and significant contributions to peacekeeping, must have a proportionate voice that reflects today’s geopolitical realities rather than post-World War II old arrangements. The reform is needed to revitalize the financial architecture that overly slid to the preiveledged leaving aside the critical mass in the unfair situation. Justice: It is a moral and pragmatic imperative to correct the historical power imbalances that have persisted since the colonial and post-WWII eras.
The critical argument highlights the need for reforms that address the current geopolitical and economic realities of Africa within the global system. It emphasizes that Africa, consisting of 54 nations and playing a significant role in peacekeeping, deserves a more proportional and representative voice in international affairs, particularly within financial institutions. The current system lacks legitimacy because it excludes a quarter of the world’s nations in meaningful decision-making.
The query highlights the argument for reforming global governance and financial architecture to better represent Africa’s significant contributions and realities. There is a need for bold steps in steering the reform required in the UNSC old rule. The current global financial architecture often disadvantages African nations through unfair trade rules, debt crises, and loan conditionality’s that don’t fit low economic contexts. Africa has no equitable voting rights in institutions like the IMF and World Bank, and better access to financial resources for development. Such reforms aim at rectifying historic disparities and creating a fairer system that reflects today’s geopolitical and economic realities.
Africa is pushing for its own economic integration through the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA). For this to succeed, it needs a strong voice in global economic governance to ensure supportive, not obstructive, international policies. Africa must be able to set global priorities. For example, putting climate finance, debt relief, and technology transfer at the top of the G20 agenda, rather than only responding to agendas set by the Global North.
Africa’s 54 nations collectively contribute a substantial share of global peacekeeping efforts and are a critical part of international stability. However, the UNSC’s current structure, shaped largely by post-World War II geopolitics, does not reflect Africa’s demographic weight, economic potential, or peacekeeping role. This has led to calls for reform that would provide Africa with permanent or at least more equitable representation in the UNSC.
African leaders have strongly emphasized the need for equilibrium in terms of permanent seats and veto power for Africa in the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). Speaking straight to the heart of the paradox and the crisis at the United Nations Security Council, it is now quiet obvious that some of the (P5) permanent member are wielding their power in open defiance of the very principles the UN charter.
Today’s geopolitical realities of the world clearly reflect that the biggest security crisis and disruption caused by one or two of the prominent members,. It is not long since the world has witnessed the US leading a full-fledged war against Iraq in the name of protecting the world from danger of nuclear set up. Yet end of the game has shown grim and otherwise reality to that nation and the world at large.
This day the biggest war is conducted against Ukraine by one other member (Russia) which has that permanent seat in UNSC to decide on critical matters that keep the world from danger and destruction from others fault. Yet, this permanent seat member itself committed large size destruction openly defying the principle of UN and despite open opposition from others world nations.
The veto power helps Russia to dismiss the request regardless of the gravity of the situation. This paralyzes the council from acting on conflicts where a permanent member is a party, undermining the UNSC’s core mandate of maintaining international peace and security.
The war in Ukraine is the most stark and devastating demonstration of the fundamental flaw in the UN Security Council’s structure. The situation clearly describes the ultimate paradox and failure of the system:
A permanent member, entrusted with the primary responsibility for maintaining international peace and security, has become the primary aggressor in a war of conquest, and uses its privileged position to shield itself from any meaningful action but the very body key part erodes the legitimacy of the UN as a global peacekeeper. This allows powerful countries to shield themselves from accountability while critical mass or non-permanent members have no real recourse. Thus, African leaders’ call for a balanced voice is a justified demand or check that should not be waved off having this lack of fairness and effectiveness in the UNSC system.
The critical mass want reforms on the veto power from being used as a tool to protect states from consequences when they commit aggression, war crimes, or violations of international law. The danger is that when veto power is misused, it can enable prolonged conflict, human suffering, and instability, with no unified global response.
Thus, African leaders united call for a voice that balance such effective message against such misfortune with due permanent seat and veto cannot be wrong for any viable cause. Where is the wrong question? But if in the eyes of wrong doers the question appear otherwise, then the answer is undefined. But the trend in UNSC is forwarding wrong answer for just request because of veto.
How long are we going this way? There is a need to curb this unfortunate situation with no more motive. If all evidence at this is points are not good enough to reverse the anachronistic structure of the UNSC , it is rather difficult to find other to find otherwise in the 21st century realities of the world. In summary, the problem with the UNSC veto system is that it grants a small group of powerful states disproportionate control over global peace and security decisions when some members themselves cause significant problem to peace and security.
Thank be yours for reading this little piece.
