As of April 1, we are facing an unprecedented, almost bizarre situation. The UN Security Council, this key body in matters of world peace and security, will be chaired, for a month, by “a pariah country” in international terms, Russia. This, given that three quarters of the UN member countries have condemned it for the aggression against Ukraine, and the country’s president, Vladimir Putin, is the subject of an arrest warrant for war crimes issued in March by the International Criminal Court (ICC). .
Danger to the credibility of the Security Council
An unprecedented situation is being created, say Western foreign policy commentators, experts in international law. A situation, say the analysts from “Les Echos”, which “seriously mortgages the credibility of the Security Council”. It is true that this UN institution, whose presidency changes by rotation every month, has also been led by representatives of countries engaged in military interventions or colonial operations. However, this is the first time that the Council will be chaired by a country whose head of state is subject to an arrest warrant issued by the ICC. Never before has the UN Security Council been chaired by a country accused of documented war crimes, which invaded a neighbor and annexed four regions a few months ago, an annexation recognized only by one country, North Korea. Volodymyr Zelenski described Russia’s current access to the presidency of the Security Council as “a bad joke”.
This situation will not, however, lead to the paralysis of the Council’s activity, since the president cannot oppose the request to organize an exceptionally urgent meeting, requested by 9 of its 15 members. Apart from the 5 permanent members with the right of veto (Russia, the USA, China, the United Kingdom, France), the Council currently includes 10 countries, known to be less sympathetic to the Kremlin, with the exception of Brazil (Albania, Brazil, the United Arab Emirates , Ecuador, Gabon, Ghana, Japan, Malta, Mozambique and Switzerland). Also, custom obliges the President of the Council to confine himself to the role of observer when a conflict concerning him is under discussion. But nothing, informed sources say, guarantees that the Kremlin will conform to custom if the issue of bombing Ukrainian cities is addressed.
The problem of permanent membership
This month of the Russian presidency of the Security Council brings back into focus an issue already under discussion, that of permanent membership and the right of veto. This privilege is not related – contrary to what some believe – to the fact that they possess the nuclear weapon (in 1945, only the United States had it), but to the fact that these countries are at the origin of the main victors in the Second World War and that they represented, together with the colonies at that time, half of the world’s population. A long time has passed since then – 68 years. While all five of these permanent members now have nuclear weapons, three of them have a population equivalent to 2% of the world’s inhabitants and a GDP of less than 3% of the world total. Kiev’s supporters also say that the manner in which Russia succeeded the Soviet Union in the Security Council in 1991 is legally questionable: it was never validated by a formal vote by UN member states.