Brett D. Schaefer
Some topics never die at the United Nations. Calls to expand and reform the Security Council is one of those persistent issues. An amendment increasing its size was adopted only once in 1965. But calls for further expansion were raised again only a few years later. Those subsequent pushes stalled for decades. Yet due partly to a cynical assist from the Biden-Harris administration, that may be about to change.
It is understandable why governments—aside from China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States, who all have permanent seats—want to increase the size of the Security Council. The Council is the most powerful and prestigious body in the UN system with authority to authorize use of military force, impose economic sanctions, and pass resolutions that the other members are obligated to obey. Because of this authority and prestige, non-permanent member nations expend great effort to secure election to one of the 10 non-permanent seats on it.
Proposals to increase the size of the Council are as old as the organization itself. In fact, they precede the UN, as the size of the Security Council was a key point of contention in negotiations to create the world body in 1945. The tension then and now was to balance two countervailing priorities: having enough members for legitimacy and participation among the UN member states while not having so many members that the Council could not act quickly or decisively.
In 1945, the member states decided on five permanent, veto-wielding members of the Council and six non-permanent members elected to two-year terms factoring in equitable geographic representation. As the UN membership grew, pressure increased to increase the size of the Council and, in 1965, the UN Charter was amended to increase the number of non-permanent members to 10.
As UN membership continued to increase, » Read More
https://www.heritage.org/global-politics/commentary/diplomatic-games-un-security-council-expansion