January 7, 2024

The role of regional powers in the Security Council: Influence and Dynamics

This article has been written by Ms. Krisha Rawal, a 2nd year student of NMIMS Kirit P. Mehta School of Law, Mumbai.

Abstract

The majority of the research on regional powers and the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) has been on Council reform. There has been not much research into the role of regional authorities at the Council. Have regional powers been able to increase their influence in ‘upstream’ procedures such as resolution drafting and closing the gap with the P5? Or do they function like any other elected official? If a comparison of regional powers to permanent and elected members is made, a contrasting image emerges. While regional powers are distinct as a collection of actors, their influence on Council operations is minimal. Membership has an equalizing effect, tying countries into established institutional norms. As a result, they are unable to easily translate their regional power status into institutional influence. 

Introduction

The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) is the supreme global authority in charge of ensuring international peace and security. Regional powers have a vital role in influencing and molding the direction of critical discussions, resolutions, and actions within this council. These nations, which include both permanent and non-permanent members, represent various geopolitical regions, each bringing unique perspectives and priorities to the Council’s debates. The five permanent members of the UN Security Council, known as the P5, are China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Their permanent status affords them veto power, a powerful tool that allows them to veto any substantial resolution, highlighting their enormous influence on global security choices. Despite their worldwide influence and obligations, these countries often bring regional issues and perspectives to the front lines of Council debates, recognizing the inherent relationship between local difficulties and global peace. 

Non-permanent members, on the other hand, are elected for two-year terms and represent various regions around the world. These members, who are frequently referred to as regional powers, play an important role in pushing for their respective regions’ interests and concerns. While they do not have veto power, their combined voting power and diplomatic efforts help shape resolutions and policies. They use their positions to advocate for regional issues, highlighting the significance of confronting regional disputes and difficulties within the framework of global security. These nations frequently take the lead in fostering conversation and exploring equitable solutions to problems within their spheres of influence, using their awareness of regional dynamics. Their engagements go beyond regional boundaries, providing knowledge and resources to combat global challenges such as terrorism, weapon proliferation, and humanitarian disasters.

However, the politics of the Security Council including regional countries are complicated. Collaboration among regional powers can help to build agreement and increase the Council’s ability in addressing global concerns. Divergent interests and alliances, on the other hand, can hinder decision-making processes, resulting in deadlock or diluted resolutions. Furthermore, the global political landscape is always changing, with new regional countries contending for influence and a place at the UN Security Council table. These movements have the potential to change existing power dynamics, bringing new perspectives and priorities to the Council’s debates.

 

How are ‘Regional Powers’ identified on a global stage like UNSC?

The term “regional power” refers to a “state which is dominant (with respect to its physical assets or qualities) in a specific geographic setting and that tries to demonstrate power in this regional setting”. Material resources are frequently used to refer to a nation’s armed forces and financial capabilities, as well as its population size. A state’s military capabilities are determined by its ownership of substantial military assets, which include a significant number of military people, persistent high military expenditure, broad experience in battle, and adequate internal ability to create conventional weapons. 

Economic strength, as measured by Gross Domestic Product (GDP), Gross National Product (GNP), purchasing power, technology, and industrial infrastructure, is also required for a state to be designated as a regional power. States with strong military and economic capabilities can successfully exert control and influence over regional security issues. Combining a state’s military and economic prowess with demographics size and diplomatic efficiency increases a candidate’s regional dominance even further. States in a position of regional dominance have the desire or pretension to take the lead, exercise authority, and serve an instrumental part in regional security problems by carrying out peacekeeping and peacemaking efforts. These states can also have an impact on regional security challenges by utilizing current regional governance mechanisms. 

However, a certain level of political stability within the region is required to exert regional leadership.  To be characterized as a regional power, other states in the region must recognize or acknowledge the potential candidate’s authority and position. Other regional states, however, frequently resent the rise and leadership of regional powers. A state’s designation as a regional power is often based on a predominance of material capabilities, a claim to leadership, and recognition. According to this viewpoint, relative rather than absolute a majority in terms of material resources is important because there are “big disparities in the financial capabilities of regional powers around the world, and, second, because it is this relative preponderance over neighboring states that matters in regional relations.” While governments may be regional powers in their immediate vicinity, their power may be less obvious or inconsequential at a global scale.

 

Influence of Regional Powers in the decision-making of the Security Council

Regional countries wield enormous influence at the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) by utilizing their distinct expertise and strategic positions. They campaign for specific regions and participate actively in decision-making processes to define global security agendas. One significant example is India’s position in the UN Security Council, where it advocated for topics, such as combating terrorism, conflict resolution, and denuclearization. The efforts of India resulted in the approval of measures on military reform and counterterrorism measures, demonstrating the significance of regional powers in setting UNSC priorities. 

Turkey, another regional power, participates frequently in the UN Security Council, particularly in Middle Eastern conflicts. Its diplomatic efforts and participation in peace processes, particularly in Syria, have aided discussions and initiatives inside the Council. Turkey’s activities emphasized the regional viewpoint in conflict resolution, highlighting the significance of regional countries in molding the UN Security Council’s discourse on conflict resolution. Similarly, Nigeria, as a major African regional power, has advocated for tackling Africa’s conflicts and security issues. Its participation in peacekeeping missions and measures to settle regional crises, such as in the Sahel region, indicates the influence regional powers wield in determining the UN Security Council’s approach to African security challenges. 

Brazil, representing Latin America, has campaigned for altering UNSC structures to increase participation from developing regions. Its participation in peacekeeping missions, economic engagements, and initiatives toward worldwide peace demonstrate the influence of regional powers on influencing UNSC talks on broader global concerns. These examples demonstrate how regional countries bring distinct viewpoints, tackle specific regional concerns, and proactively participate in global security talks inside the UN Security Council. Their impact goes beyond their immediate regions, helping to shape global decisions. Despite their lack of veto power, regional powers’ combined efforts and diplomatic power have a considerable impact on the UN Security Council’s direction and priorities, emphasizing their critical position in the realm of global governance.

 

Shifting dynamics of regional powers in the Security Council

The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) has long functioned as a worldwide arena for regional countries to assert their dominance, changing and renewing the dynamics of international security policy. The long history and contemporary positions of regional countries within the UN Security Council reveal an intricate relationship of geopolitical chaos, diplomatic maneuvering, and desires for more representation and influence.

Historical Context:

The UNSC’s structure was anchored in the post-World War II era by the five permanent members (P5), who wielded veto power and dominated decision-making. Within this power framework, regional powers frequently found their influence limited. But as the world saw new sovereign countries emerge and colonialism disappear, regional powers actively participated in the Council to make their concerns heard. Numerous regional powers’ impact was limited during the Cold War due to the rivalry between the US and the USSR, which defined the global geopolitical landscape. Regional actors like as India, Brazil, and Nigeria, on the other hand, began to emphasize their presence in the UN Security Council, lobbying for more participation and a more equitable decision-making process.

The Evolution:

The late twentieth century saw a seismic upheaval in world geopolitics. Emerging economies, notably the BRICS nations, sought greater clout in the UN Security Council. These regional authorities sought to modernize the Council’s structure by campaigning for greater permanent membership or adjustments in veto powers to increase diversity. As a representative of the developing world, India advocated for UNSC reforms by stressing its roles in international democracy, peacekeeping, and nuclear non-proliferation. Brazil stressed its diplomatic prowess and efforts to promote regional stability as criteria for a permanent seat. Nigeria attempted to address African security problems by lobbying for stronger support and intervention in regional conflicts.

Present Dynamics:

Regional powers are still actively involved in and influence UNSC talks in the twenty-first century. While the P5 continue to wield substantial authority, regional powers’ responsibilities have expanded, showing varied perspectives and lobbying for their regions’ interests. Despite their lack of permanent seats, several countries have made significant contributions and lobbied for reforms. India continues to play an active role in peacekeeping missions, counter-terrorism measures, and climate change negotiations, highlighting its worldwide contributions. Brazil continues to engage in debates on humanitarian crises, peacekeeping, and international diplomacy, emphasizing its reform ambitions. Nigeria continues to advocate for African issues, seeking assistance and backing for regional peacebuilding initiatives. Furthermore, newer regional countries such as South Korea and Indonesia have emerged as powerful actors wanting expanded positions in the Council. These countries hope to solve regional and global issues by participating in conversations about cybersecurity, maritime security, and regional conflicts.

Changing geopolitical paradigm:

Global occurrences and geopolitical upheavals have affected the relationship between the P5 and regional nations. The Council’s power balance has shifted as a result of Russia’s revival and China’s economic progress. Their perspectives on global issues have influenced interest alignments and divergences between the P5 and regional powers. The shifting picture of regional power impact reflects an increasing demand for diversity, democracy, and reactivity to global concerns. While the P5 continue to wield considerable authority, the active engagement and expanding roles of regional powers point to a progressive shift in the structure and decision-making processes of the UN Security Council. In conclusion, there is a continuous need for more representation and influence on issues pertaining to international security, as evidenced by the changing dynamics of regional powers inside the UNSC. Historical legacies, shifting global geopolitics, and regional states’ aspirations of contributing significantly to international security governance impact these dynamics.

 

Conclusion

The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) is the supreme authority of global peace and security, although its effectiveness is frequently influenced by regional powers. The interaction of regional interests within this prestigious council has been a source of both balance and controversy, affecting key decisions that have global ramifications. Regional powers bring a complex dynamic to the UN Security Council, employing their geopolitical power to shape resolutions in line with their tactical objectives. Their power presents itself in a variety of ways, from exercising veto authority to using diplomacy and monetary leverage to further their goals. While this influence can be viewed as a means of ensuring regional harmony and interests, it can also be perceived as undermining the Council’s impartiality, limiting its capacity to treat problems with the requisite neutrality. Furthermore, regional powers frequently bring direct knowledge and awareness of particular concerns to the table, providing critical perspectives for developing effective solutions. Their participation can help the Council better understand the complexities of regional conflicts, thereby paving the way for more personalized and thorough resolutions. However, regional states’ dominance in the UN Security Council poses unique obstacles. Their interests may conflict with the greater goals of world peace and security, resulting in deadlocks, delays, or weakened outcomes. The use of veto power, in particular, by these powerful states has been a source of contention, since it has the ability to prevent critical acts even when there is broad consensus among other members. Striking a balance between regional authorities’ participation and the Council’s neutrality is an ongoing challenge. Maintaining global peace while ensuring that the UN Security Council reflects the collective goals of the international community necessitates skilled diplomacy, compromise, and a dedication to the overriding aim of global peace. In essence, regional states’ influence on the UN Security Council is a two-edged sword. While their participation adds nuanced viewpoints and regional perspectives, it also introduces complexity and potential biases that can limit the Council’s efficacy. Safeguarding global security and peace requires the UN Security Council to strike a difficult balance between avoiding undue influence and welcoming varied opinions in order to build more equitable as well as efficient decision-making procedures.

 

References

  1. This article was originally written by Brosig, M., & Lecki, M. published on Taylor and Francis Online website. The link for the same is herein. https://doi.org/10.1080/03932729.2023.2226521
  2. This article was originally written by Manoj Kumar Mishra published on www.jstor.org. The link for the same is herein. “The United Nations Security Council: Need for a Structural Change?” https://www.jstor.org/stable/41858827
  3. This article was originally written by Staff, C. published on the website of Council on Foreign Relations. The link for the same is herein. https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/un-security-council
  4. This article was originally written by Muttiah Alagappa published on www.jstor.org. The link for the same is herein. “Regional Institutions, the UN and International Security: A Framework for Analysis” https://www.jstor.org/stable/3993261
  5. This article was originally written by Björn HettneFredrik Söderbaum published on www.jstor.org. The link for the same is herein. “The UN and Regional Organizations in Global Security: Competing or Complementary Logics?” https://www.jstor.org/stable/27800614
  6. This article was originally written by Nicolas De Riviere published on the website of France ONU. The link for the same is herein. “Regional integration contributes to the maintenance of international peace and security.” https://onu.delegfrance.org/france-is-convinced-that-regional-integration-contributes-to-the-maintenance-of.
  7. This article was originally written by Gailišs, E. published on the website https://securityanddefence.pl/  The link for the same is herein. https://doi.org/10.35467/sdq/172983
  8. This article was originally published on the website of United Nations. The link for the same is herein. https://www.un.org/en/model-united-nations/security-council
  9. This article was originally written by Fawcett, L., & Jagtiani, published on the website https://link.springer.com/. The link for the same is herein https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-022-00374-z
  10. This article was originally written by Anjali Dayal and Caroline Dutton published on the website of United States Institute of Peace. The link for the same is herein. https://www.usip.org/publications/2023/03/un-security-council-was-designed-deadlock-can-it-change

 

Related articles