|
Get AfricaFocus Bulletin by e-mail!
Read more on
|Africa Peace & Security||Africa Politics & Human Rights| URL for this file: http://www.africafocus.org/docs05/un0504.php
Print this page
Africa: Security Council Expansion
AfricaFocus Bulletin
Apr 30, 2005 (050430)
(Reposted from sources cited below)
Editor's Note
Debate is heating up on expansion of the United Nations Security
Council to 24 members. Under one of two options proposed by a highlevel
panel on UN reform in December and by Secretary General Kofi
Annan last month, there would be six new permanent seats, two for
Africa. The proposals are to be discussed this year, but disputes
over details mean that further delays are very likely.
Some observers of the debate on UN reform, such as Jim Paul of the
Global Policy Forum, say that the stumbling blocks to finding
agreement are so formidable that the outcome may only be a slight
increase in non-permanent members. Nevertheless, the prospect of
reform has led to intense competition for the possible new
permanent seats. Japan, India, Germany, and Brazil are the
strongest candidates for new permanent seats from Asia, Europe, and
Latin America. South Africa is the strongest single candidate from
Africa. But candidates for one of the possible African seats also
include Nigeria, Egypt, and Senegal.
This AfricaFocus Bulletin contains excerpts from an article from
the most recent issue of Pambazuka News with background on the
reform proposals and potential African candidates. Extensive
additional background is available on the website of the Global
Policy Forum (http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/reform). For
another recent article on the debate, see
http://allafrica.com/stories/200504130096.html
++++++++++++++++++++++end editor's note+++++++++++++++++++++++
UPDATE
Schoolnet Namibia, which was recently featured in AfricaFocus
Bulletin (http://www.africafocus.org/docs05/itc0504.php) has
released a new comic strip to promote learning by teachers and
students about the internet and open source software. The first
edition of "Hai Ti" ("Listen up") was distributed as an insert in
the Namibian Youth Paper and is available online at
http://www.schoolnet.na/haiti
Africa and the UN Security Council Permanent Seats
Wafula Okumu
(Dr. Wafula Okumu is a Canadian-based analyst of African Affairs)
Pambazuka News 204
April 28, 2005
[excerpts: for full text see
http://www.pambazuka.org/index.php?issue=204]
The campaign for the proposed new permanent seats in the reformed
United Nations Security Council (UNSC), while producing fireworks
around the world, has also opened up old historical wounds and
heightened regional rivalries.
Although the hottest rivalries are in Asia, particularly between
India and Pakistan, and between Japan, South Korea and China,
Africa is also exhibiting deep divisions along regional and
language lines as countries scramble for the coveted seats.
Senegal is the latest African country to put forth its name for a
permanent seat on the UNSC, should the body be expanded. Other
African countries jockeying for the permanent seats are South
Africa, Nigeria, Kenya, Egypt and Libya. The African Union (AU) is
flummoxed as to which of its member states to endorse, and has yet
to establish the criteria to be used for selecting African
countries to the reformed Security Council. The entry of Senegal
into the race has only increased the dilemma, and is an indication
of the AU's indecision. In creating this leadership vacuum, the AU
is leaving the selection of who will represent Africa on the
expanded UN Security Council to be determined by foreign busybodies
and regional power struggles.
Among the criteria laid down by the UN 'Report of the High-level
Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change' (the Report on UN Reforms)
is that the new members of the UNSC must have contributed "most to
the United Nations financially, militarily and diplomatically,"
particularly through contributions to United Nations assessed
budgets and participation in mandated peace operations. The other
conditions spelt out are that new members should represent the
broader UN membership, increase the democratic and accountable
nature of the Security Council, and should not impair its
effectiveness. A working group that was appointed in January 2005
during the Abuja Summit of the African Union to come up with
recommendations on the proposed UN reforms presented its report to
the Foreign Ministers on March 7 in the Ethiopian capital, Addis
Ababa, but was deafeningly silent on the selection criteria for
Security Council permanent seats.
What the AU stands to gain from a reformed Security Council
According to the "Ezulwini Consensus," which was adopted by the AU
Foreign Ministers as Africa's common position on UN reform,
"Africa's goal is to be fully represented in all the
decision-making organs of the UN, particularly in the Security
Council, which is the principal decision-making organ of the UN in
matters relating to international peace and security."
The UNSC is now more important than ever to Africa, particularly
concerning matters of intervention in the conflicts occurring
within the region. These decisions will become more legitimate and
easier to implement if they are made through democratic processes.
...
The position of the AU
When the AU Committee was formed in January to propose a common
African response, its terms of reference included consideration of
the two models relating to the reform of the UN Security Council.
These models were recommended to reflect the 4 global regions:
Africa, Asia/Pacific, Americas and Europe.
Model A provides for six new permanent seats, with no veto being
created, and three new two-year term non-permanent seats; bringing
the total to 24. Africa would have 2 no-veto permanent seats and 4
two-year non-renewable seats. The balance of power would still tip
in Europe's favor as the UK, France and Russia would retain their
veto powers as would the US and China. Africa would still be the
only region without veto power.
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. All the regions
would get 2 four-year renewable-term seats. Although Africa would
get the most (4) of the two-year non-permanent seats, Europe and
the Americas gain most, as they each get two four-year
renewable-term seats. Additionally, all regions will have at least
one member with veto power, except Africa.
AU has rejected both of these models and instead demanded "not less
than two permanent seats with all the prerogatives and privileges
of permanent membership including the right of veto." Although the
AU opposes, in principle, the veto, it strongly feels that it be
extended to all permanent members "so long as it exists."
The AU has also demanded the right to select African
representatives to the Security Council and to set up its selection
criteria for African members of the Council. In this regard, the AU
seems to be overlooking the proposed UN selection criteria, in
favor of some criteria of its own. According to "Ezulwini
Consensus," these criteria will be based on "the representative
nature and capacity of those chosen." However, these criteria have
still not been explicitly defined.
The selection criteria of UNSC permanent seats
Taking into consideration the criteria of the Report on UN Reforms,
some of the African candidates put forward so far are better
qualified than others.
1. Contributions to the promotion of peace, security and stability
in Africa
In the UN's assessments of present troop contributions for
peacekeeping efforts, Nigeria is ranked 7th, South Africa is 10th,
Senegal 12th, Kenya 13th and Egypt 49th. However, taking the past
into consideration, Kenya claims the distinction of being the
second top African nation troop contributor to all UN missions.
Libyan troops are currently not serving on any UN peacekeeping
mission.
South Africa, Kenya, Senegal and Nigeria have all played crucial
roles in promoting and maintaining peace and security in their
respective regions. South Africa's record in promoting peace on the
continent includes playing leading roles to end conflicts in
Burundi and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and most recently
in Ivory Coast. Nigeria has earned praises for playing leading
roles in the peacekeeping missions in the Sierra Leonian and
Liberian civil wars. In the case of Liberia, in 2003 Nigeria was
instrumental in ending the conflict by offering beleaguered
president Charles Taylor a safe haven.
Nigeria also played an instrumental role in reversing a coup in the
tiny oil-rich nation of Sao Tome in 2003 and is currently leading
the AU troops in Darfur. The Nigerian foreign minister has argued
further that a permanent membership seat on the Security Council
would ease the country's burden of peacekeeping in Africa and
inevitably reduce the pressure on resources to the benefit of all
Nigerians.
Kenya played a central role in ending Sudan's 21-year north-south
civil war, Africa's longest running conflict. The peace efforts in
neighboring lawless Somalia have also been maintained through
Kenya's support as host, first to the peace negotiations, and
subsequently the government in exile. Kenya's foreign minister,
Chirau Ali Mwakwere, in his announcement of Kenya's candidature for
the permanent seat in the Security Council, called for these
achievements in the region to be recognized. He also cited Kenya's
peacekeeping efforts worldwide and peaceful nature as additional
qualifications.
2. Are they democratic role models?
All the contenders have contributed positively to emerging African
values and practices in peace, justice and governance. Senegal is
selling itself as a model for religious tolerance and justice.
South Africa was the first country to disarm its nuclear arsenal
and has broken through the barriers to give Africa permanent access
to the Group of Eight most industrialized countries. Both Senegal
and South Africa have commendable records on democratic transitions
and consolidation. Kenya also, in December 2002, underwent a
democratic process that saw the defeat of an incumbent ruling party
and peaceful handover of power to a coalition of opposition
parties. Nigeria in April 2003 held national elections whose
results were generally accepted. Libya and Egypt are not known to
practice universally accepted democracy.
Nigeria's biggest minus is its corruption reputation. Corruption
has not only stigmatized the country as untrustworthy but also
earned it a third ranking as the world's most corrupt nation on
Transparency International's corruption index. Despite President
Obasanjo's declared war on corruption, Nigeria has yet to sign the
UN and AU conventions targeted at enhancing greater transparency in
the fight against organized crime and corruption. In particular,
Nigeria has refused to sign international conventions such as the
2003 UN convention on trans-national crime. Most damning is the
fact that despite being the chair of NEPAD's Heads of State and
Government Implementation Committee (HSGIC), Nigeria has not
ratified the AU Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption.
Only two HSGIC members, Libya and Rwanda, have ratified this
convention. South Africa, Kenya Senegal and Egypt have also not
ratified the AU convention on corruption.
3. Are they representative of Africa?
There has been much debate concerning what it means to represent
Africa. This is often confused to mean to have a large African
population. Nigeria, as the most populous African country would win
on this count, even though, 7/8 Africans do not live in Nigeria,
and would therefore be unrepresented. What is needed, however, is
a selection that is not based on national size and composition.
Whichever country is chosen to represent Africa has to see itself
as African first, and seek to promote the interests of the whole
continent equally.
It has been sarcastically noted that were it not for Egypt's
interest in the Security Council permanent seat, President Hosni
Mubarak would never have attended an AU Summit. Egypt had very
strong Pan-Africanist orientation during Gamel Nasser's rule but
has over the years paid more attention to Middle Eastern issues,
particularly the Palestinian question, than to African problems.
Many watchers of Egyptian African foreign policy have noted that it
is mainly driven by its interest in the waters of the Nile. Many
Africans also resent how Egyptians regard themselves as being
"non-Africans."
Nigeria, on the other hand, has played leading roles in the
promotion of pan-Africanist ideals enshrined in the Conference on
Security, Stability, Development and Cooperation in Africa
(CSSDCA), NEPAD and the AU. Libya too has a strong claim to
represent Africa. Libya's leader, Muammar Gaddafi is widely
regarded as the father of the African Union. South Africa has
played an active role of promoting Africa's development through the
NEPAD initiative and heading the AU at its formative period.
President Mbeki was the brain behind NEPAD and the first Chairman
of the AU after hosting its inaugural summit in Durban in July
2002. Kenya has given shelter to refugees from many other African
countries, and is currently hosting almost 300,000 refugees, not
only from its war-torn neighbors, but from different parts of the
continent.
4. Financial contributions to the UN
An indication of the various countries' level of commitment to the
UN is their fulfillment of financial obligations. The amount of the
membership dues is assessed according to a country's ability to
pay. However, payments are often still not made on time. African
countries are notorious for late payments and delinquencies only
matched by the United States, which intentionally withholds
payments as a way of exerting pressure on the UN or to make
political points.
South Africa and Egypt have already paid their dues, $5,196,166 and
$2,135,411 respectively, for 2005 by the end of January, as
established by UN Financial Regulations Rule 5.4. Since 1996, South
Africa has consistently paid its UN dues on time. Between 1991 and
2004, Egypt paid its dues in time six times, Libya two times, and
Senegal once. As of 16 December 2004, South Africa, Senegal, Egypt,
Nigeria and Libya had paid their full dues to the UN regular
budget. While Nigeria has always paid late, Kenya has been
chronically delinquent.
5. Financial Capability
Financial capability is not listed amongst the UN selection
criteria, however it clearly cannot be ignored, and may end up as
a de facto criteria unless adequate provision is made to enable
poor countries to participate as permanent members of the Security
Council. Among the qualities expected of a country to be an active
and productive member of the Security Council are financial
resources to enable it to staff its New York and Geneva UN Missions
with adequate and highly qualified people. The resources needed to
maintain and run a full permanent representation on the Security
Council to match the other Big 5 are enormous.
The Favorite
South Africa is widely seen as a favorite to fill one of the
"permanent seats" that will be set aside for Africa at the Security
Council, should the UN adopt model 1. South Africa has credibility
among the G-8 nations that the other contenders do not have. South
Africa accounts for nearly 40 percent of Africa's economy, while
Nigeria, with its vast oil reserves, is saddled with a national
debt of $34 billion. Egypt's $2 billion aid from the US has caused
uneasiness on the continent as it is an incentive to kowtow to US
agenda rather than promote Africa's interests, which are in many
cases at odds with Washington's.
Libya, despite its oil wealth is still recovering from the UN
isolation that ended in 2003. Kenya has a weak economy and is
presently too bogged down in domestic politics to carry out a
credible continental and international campaign. Senegal's late
entry will also be costly as it is already experiencing
difficulties in selling itself on a continent where it is seen as
a French proxy. These three seem to be positioning themselves as
regional picks should model B be adopted.
South Africa's emergence as the clear favorite has not been well
received by its rival, Nigeria, which has emotionally invested
enormous hopes in the "African permanent seat" on the Security
Council. To check South Africa's well-oiled diplomatic machine,
Nigeria has launched a desperate and dirty campaign aimed at
stemming what is appearing to be a sure victory. Davo Oluyemi-Kusa,
a close confidante of President Obasanjo, has dismissed South
Africa and Egypt as not being "black enough" to represent Africa,
compared to Nigeria that has "true blacks." Nigeria not only sees
itself as "the only true African candidate" but is also prepared to
back Egypt as "a compromise" should there be strong disunity over
the "African candidate."
International Connections
In view of the AU's indecision to establish selection criteria and
to endorse two candidates, some African countries have sought
"strategic partnerships" with countries from other regions and on
the Security Council. The African campaign for UN Security Council
seats is being watched very closely and with great interest by
other countries that want to trade their support with Africa's to
shore up their own interests. The other regional candidates,
Germany, Japan, India and Brazil have declared their support for
Africa to have seats with veto power and have indicated their
willingness to engage in mutual backing for the seats in exchange
for increased trade.
South Africa has gravitated towards a partnership with Brazil,
India and Japan. Nigeria seems to be angling towards China and
Russia while Egypt is banking on the US support. Senegal seems to
have very strong backing from France but its candidacy will
automatically be vetoed by China as it is one of the few countries
in the world that has established diplomatic relations with Taiwan.
Although the US has not endorsed any of the models it is openly
supporting only Japan's bid, with veto rights. While France and
Russia have called for veto rights for all new members other
Permanent Members have kept their counsel on the issue.
The new members of the Security Council must first be approved by
two-thirds of the 191-member General Assembly. Then the Council's
five permanent members - the US, UK, France, China, and Russia -
must ratify the decision. If the UN General Assembly is left to
decide for Africa, its decision would be most favorable to South
Africa. Nigeria, with a poor international image, would lose to
Egypt.
In the Security Council, South Africa is guaranteed all of the
votes while Egypt will have to rely on the US to muster the needed
support. There is no doubt that the US would prefer Egypt over
Nigeria, given its close historical relations and partnership in
seeking solutions to the Middle East problems. The US, in its
effort to engage and include the Arabs in the world's highest
decision making body, has chosen a method and means that will be
hard fought by Africans. In the process, it is guaranteed to
increase conflict rather than to promote dialogue between
civilizations in Africa.
Role of African Union
The AU has not only failed to pick candidates for potential African
seats on the UNSC, but has also been unable to forge a consensus on
how Africa should be represented at the top decision-making body.
This indecision is only likely to increase the nasty undertones
among those countries campaigning for the seat. ...
Traditionally, the AU decides such issues through regional and
linguistic balancing. However, this is not an option that will be
available in deciding on the UN Security Council seats. As a result
of the failure of the African Union to resolve the issue of which
countries should occupy Africa's two permanent seats on a reformed
UN Security Council it is now inevitable that the campaign between
South Africa, Nigeria, Egypt, Kenya, Libya and Senegal is going to
be long, nasty and brutal.
AfricaFocus Bulletin is an independent electronic publication
providing reposted commentary and analysis on African issues, with
a particular focus on U.S. and international policies. AfricaFocus
Bulletin is edited by William Minter.
AfricaFocus Bulletin can be reached at africafocus@igc.org. Please
write to this address to subscribe or unsubscribe to the bulletin,
or to suggest material for inclusion. For more information about
reposted material, please contact directly the original source
mentioned. For a full archive and other resources, see
http://www.africafocus.org
|
