The Feasibility of
Reforming the UN Security
Council: Too Much Talk,
Too Little Action?
Seryon Lee
While a broad consensus exists over the necessity of reforming the Security Council,
the disagreement among the different groups of member States prevails in great part
due to the enlargement and category of membership and the working methods. Such
divergence in views attributed to the stalemate in the debate over the Security
Council
s reform. However, the recent discussion has gained momentum since the
launch of the intergovernmental negotiation at the UN level. The key issues
surrounding the UN Security Reform include the size of an enlarged Council,
categories of membership with proper regional representation, the veto, working
methods and relations with the General Assembly. It is essential not only to properly
assess the content of the different proposals to bring out the most
sensible
solution,
but the attitude of the five permanent members should also be closely examined. In
any case, the potential changes in the structure of the Security Council would
ultimately require a unanimous decision of the 5P States. This article aims to review
the historical development of the Security Council
s reform debate and concentrate
on the most contentious questions by analyzing the content of the relevant proposals
to test the feasibility of each option.
Keywords
UN Security Council Reform, G4 Proposal, UFC Proposal, Ezulwini
Consensus
KFBJM3)3122* SfgpsnjohuifVOTD 405
* Professor of International Law at Chonbuk National University(CNU) School of Law, Korea, B.A.(Chicago),
LL.B.(CNU), LL.M.(NYU), Ph.D.(Yonsei). The author may be contacted at: seryon@jbnu.ac.kr / Address: 567 Baekje-
daero, Deokjin-gu, Jeonju-si, Jeollabuk-do, 561-756 Korea.