NEW YORK, United States – Web Desk: Pakistan has reaffirmed its opposition to expanding the number of permanent members in the United Nations Security Council, arguing that such a move would deepen dysfunction within the 15-member body and undermine the principle of sovereign equality.
Speaking during a resumed session of the Intergovernmental Negotiations on Security Council reform, Ambassador Asim Iftikhar Ahmad, Pakistan’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations, stated that proposals for individual permanent membership contradict the core principles of meaningful reform.
Pakistan, as part of the Uniting for Consensus coalition, advocates for expanding only non-permanent, elected seats in order to enhance democratic representation and ensure what the group describes as “reform for all – privilege for none.”
Negotiations on Security Council reform began in the General Assembly in 2009 and focus on five key areas: membership categories, veto powers, regional representation, size of an enlarged council, working methods, and relations with the General Assembly. Despite years of discussions, progress remains limited.
Major reform efforts continue to face deadlock, as the G-4 countries—India, Brazil, Germany, and Japan—push for permanent seats, while the Uniting for Consensus group argues that additional permanent members would create new centers of privilege and fail to address existing imbalances.
Pakistan’s envoy emphasized that permanent membership and veto privileges are central factors in the council’s historical paralysis and inability to respond effectively to global crises. He warned that expanding the club of permanent members would entrench unequal power structures rather than resolve them.
“The best way to strengthen the council is through increased elected representation and greater accountability,” the ambassador said, arguing that a larger number of non-permanent members would enhance transparency and democratic decision-making.
Pakistan also acknowledged Africa’s demand for permanent representation, noting that it reflects regional aspirations rather than individual state ambitions—a distinction, officials argue, that sets it apart from proposals seeking permanent seats for specific countries.
The debate over Security Council reform continues as member states search for compromises that balance effectiveness with inclusivity in global governance.
