United Nations General Assembly (UNGA), 2025 ended in New York last month with Africans continuing their push for reforms to reflect more credibility and legitimacy in an institution founded more than 81 years ago to promote peace, stability and prosperity for all in the aftermath of World War ll, which was arguably the most horrific conflict man had ever seen. At the time of the UN’s formation on October 24, 1945, there was only one African independent country, Ethiopia.
The rest were still under colonial domination and Africans fought in both WWl and WWll as mere chattels of fellow human beings. With independence, starting in the 1960s, more African countries gained freedom, joining the global comity of nations as equal members, at least on paper. There have been since, calls for Africa too to have at least two permanent seats on the UN Security Council with veto power, ostensibly to reflect equality and redress centuries of disrespect. The Security Council is the decision-making organ of the UN system, which includes the IMF and the World Bank, two institutions blamed for keeping Africa’s quest for development in check, even as they appear to represent inclusivity. I have no problem with Africa’s case and aspirations but I have a huge question mark on how to achieve those very noble ideals.
A Security Council permanent seat with veto power, cannot be given to Africa as a “gift” to the region, much as it is the African Union (AU) that leads the demands on behalf of Africa, for reforms in the UN system. Membership to the UN is not by virtue of belonging to a region but through meritorious credentials as independent and sovereign state. In principle, any African country, including tiny Lesotho, deserves that right in the context of membership to the UN. So, why should any African country override that right of others or, any country, for that matter, have its right made subordinate to another African country? The only solution and mechanism is through, and by consensus in Africa itself. In other words, Africa needs to reform internally first before it makes demands on the global arena to be a bigger and more respectable player. We must admit that in Africa, we have fundamental and very profound problems. In the first place, our governments do not have coordinated foreign policy. Veto power at the UN is for protecting domestic interests.
Can Africa, with all due respect, step forward and proclaim to have shared and coordinated values? The answer is certainly no. As I write, Africans cannot move freely across the continent as Africans. Then, how can we project a united front globally? I stand to be corrected. But as a write, only five countries, Benin, Gambia, Kenya, Rwanda and the Seychelles have an open border policy for all Africans. To travel to any African country, an African needs a visa, with conditions, as Africa’s riches man, Aliko Dangote once complained, more stringent than those given to people from outside the continent. Africa needs to have shared values, and not just shared skin colour. Africa should have shared principles for the rule of law, good governance and human rights. To understand the principle of veto power, we have to go back to the time of the UN’s formation starting in June, 1944 until when the Treaty was signed in October, 1945. Veto power was designed to act as a mechanism for stability and reward to the victors in WWll in the two main theatres of war in Europe and Asia.
That is why the P5 have remained largely unchanged, save for the expulsion of Taiwan and the admission of Mainland China (a process in which Tanzania played a pivotal role) to take its rightful place in the UN and its agencies in 1971. Currently, there are 193 UN members, while the Vatican and Palestine have permanent observer status. There 15 Security Council members, five permanent, and 10 non-permanent. Veto power is the authority to block any decision even if the majority vote in favour. I think that is where the problem partly lies for Africa.
