The Relative Gains theorem and the stalling United Nations Security Council membership reform

Abstract

The United Nations Security Council is the heart of our current global security order. This executive board of fifteen countries is the central transnational organ which discusses and sanctions global breaches of international peace and security. However, over the past two decades, and especially since the late 2004 United Nations high-level panel report on UN reform, there have been growing calls for the Security Council's reform. Reform is often perceived as necessary because the current structure of the Council, and especially its five permanent seats is seen as out of date and not in touch with contemporary geo-political realities, and representation on the Council is seen as largely undemocratic. However, in the background of all efforts to reform the SC are considerations of power and prestige. Ranging from the current permanent five members to the candidate states who fancy themselves worthy of Security Council permanent membership, most actors involved seem guided in their decision making processes by considerations of relative gains and balance of power. This is why applying the realist, or neorealist, theorem of relative gains may be insightful in analyzing the power-plays related to SC reform. The paper first offers a brief overview of the applicable theoretical framework for examining SC reform, and then outlines a background to the actual proposals for that reform. This is followed by a discussion of how perceptions of relative gains are influencing SC membership reform debates, and how these perceptions translate into concrete action of undermining membership aspirations.

Keywords

• United Nations,Security Council, Reform, Realism

Kaynakça

1. African Union 2005. THE COMMON AFRICAN POSITION ON THE PROPOSED REFORM OF THE UNITED NATIONS: “THE EZULWINI CONSENSUS”, Addis Ababa.
2. Blum, Yehuda Z. 2005. “Proposals for UN Security Council Reform.” The American Journal of International Law 99 (3) (July): 632-649.
3. Bone, James 2005. “Payback for Germany in wrangle over UN top seat.” The Times (17 June). China Daily 2009, “Italy seeks support on UN Security Council reform.” 6 February.
4. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung 2005. “Südkoreas Präsident beurteilt UN-Reformpläne skeptisch.” 14 April.
5. Grieco, Joseph M. 1988. “Anarchy and the Limits of Cooperation: A Realist Critique of the Newest Liberal Institutionalism.” International Organization 42 (3): 485-507.
6. Hurd, Ian. 2008. “Myths of Membership: The Politics of Legitimation in UN Security Council Reform.” Global Governance 14 (2) (April): 199-217.
7. Ikenberry, G. John, and Thomas Wright 2008. Rising Powers and Global Institutions, New York: A Century Foundation Report.
8. Kahn, Joseph 2005a. “If 22 Million Chinese Prevail at UN, Japan won’t.” The New York Times (1 April).

9. Kahn, Joseph 2005b. “China is Pushing and Scripting Anti-Japanese Protests.” The New York Times (15 April).
10. Keohane, Robert O. 2002. Power and Governance in a Partially Globalized World, London; New York: Routledge.
11. Lederer, Edith M. 2005. “Italy Accuses Countries on Council Seats.” Associated Press (26 July).
12. Martini, Elisabetta 2009. UN Security Council Reform: Current Developments. Instituto Affari Internazionali.
13. Ori, Konye Obaji 2009. “UN permanent seat: Nigeria taunts South African, Egypt.” Afrik-News (7 March).
14. Palit, Amitendu 2010. “Is China or India Aging Better?” Forbes (30 June).
15. Perdazzi, Marco 2006. Italy, the US and the reform of the UN Security Council. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Marriott, Loews Philadelphia, and the Pennsylvania Convention Center, Philadelphia. 31 August 2006.
16. Pilling, David and Paul Sullivan 2005. “Six countries oppose bids by Japan and India for permanent UN Security Council seats.” Financial Times (12 April).
17. Powell, Robert 1991. “Absolute and Relative Gains in International Relations Theory.” The American Political Science Review. 85 (4) (December): 1303-1320.
18. United Nations 2011. Ranking of Military and Police Contributions to UN Operations. Available at http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/contributors/2011/oct11_2.pdf, accessed on 17/11/2011.
19. Rousseau, David L. 1999. Relative or Absolute Gains: Beliefs and Behavior in International Politics. Unpublished Manuscript, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania.
20. Scotti, Vincenzo 2009. Statement by Vincenzo Scotti undersecretary of state for foreign affairs of Italy Meeting of the informal plenary of the General Assembly on the question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council and related matters, New York, 1 September 2009.
21. Sidner, Sara 2009. “Dalai Lama thanks India for 50 years in exile.” CNN World (31 March). UN Secretary General’s High-level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change report 2004. A more secure world: our shared responsibility. New York: United Nations Publications. Available at http://www.un.org/secureworld/ under document form.
22. United Nations Secretariat 2010. Status of contributions as at 31 August 2010, Annex II. Available at http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=ST/ADM/SER.B/821, accessed on 17/11/2011.
23. The Economist 2010. “Taking the high ground.” 20 August.
24. Trachsler, Daniel 2010. “UN Security Council Reform: A Gordian Knot?” CSS Analysis in Security Policy. 72.
25. Waltz, Kenneth 1959. Man, the State, and War, New York: Columbia University Press.