Equity In The United Nations

I READ Tjiurimo Hengari’s column about Security Council reform with interest.

I think the gist of what Hengari was saying (in a very convoluted way) was that when thinking about reform and in particular the idea of expanding the Security Council seats to include an African country; we should not perpetuate the current ideology of the security council, which is that only powerful and rich countries get a seat and less powerful ones are left out. There are two reasons why this is not a sound argument.The first is that for Security Council resolutions to work they have to be backed up with actions.Small African countries would not be in a position to back resolutions with the money, sanctions or military might necessary to do the job.The second is a somewhat fine point: I think the ‘big boys’ at that particular table think that inviting any African country into their club is already a concession to Hengari’s main point, which is that the big countries condescend to allow little countries to have an ‘equal’ say in resolution making, but without necessarily footing the bill.This is the problem with the concept of equality in general…we all know that in reality it does not exist.Even the most powerful African country is a mere pip squeak compared to the least of the big five.I think the idea of ‘equity’ is a much more sound idea.What South Africa should do is give leadership to the idea of consolidating an African bloc.We all know that the Security Council is hampered by the power of veto that member states have, so having a seat on the Council has limited appeal any way – but an African bloc would be powerful indeed.The Security Council would not be able to pass resolutions concerning Africa if all African countries approached their resolutions about specific African countries in a bloc.This bloc would enable Africa to control its own destiny and it would have the practical outworking of a veto power.Andrew Wright, AustraliaThere are two reasons why this is not a sound argument.The first is that for Security Council resolutions to work they have to be backed up with actions.Small African countries would not be in a position to back resolutions with the money, sanctions or military might necessary to do the job.The second is a somewhat fine point: I think the ‘big boys’ at that particular table think that inviting any African country into their club is already a concession to Hengari’s main point, which is that the big countries condescend to allow little countries to have an ‘equal’ say in resolution making, but without necessarily footing the bill.This is the problem with the concept of equality in general…we all know that in reality it does not exist.Even the most powerful African country is a mere pip squeak compared to the least of the big five.I think the idea of ‘equity’ is a much more sound idea.What South Africa should do is give leadership to the idea of consolidating an African bloc.We all know that the Security Council is hampered by the power of veto that member states have, so having a seat on the Council has limited appeal any way – but an African bloc would be powerful indeed.The Security Council would not be able to pass resolutions concerning Africa if all African countries approached their resolutions about specific African countries in a bloc.This bloc would enable Africa to control its own destiny and it would have the practical outworking of a veto power.Andrew Wright, Australia