Notice: Undefined variable: showjobtitle in /home/ulhoacin/www.mapamundi.org.br/wp-content/plugins/sexy-author-bio/public/class-sexy-author-bio.php on line 662
Notice: Undefined variable: showseparator in /home/ulhoacin/www.mapamundi.org.br/wp-content/plugins/sexy-author-bio/public/class-sexy-author-bio.php on line 664
Notice: Undefined variable: showseparator in /home/ulhoacin/www.mapamundi.org.br/wp-content/plugins/sexy-author-bio/public/class-sexy-author-bio.php on line 667
Notice: Undefined variable: showcompany in /home/ulhoacin/www.mapamundi.org.br/wp-content/plugins/sexy-author-bio/public/class-sexy-author-bio.php on line 667
Notice: Undefined variable: titleline in /home/ulhoacin/www.mapamundi.org.br/wp-content/plugins/sexy-author-bio/public/class-sexy-author-bio.php on line 751
From July onwards, Brazil will assume the rotating presidency of the United Nations Security Council (HIM-HER-IT). It will be Brazil's 11th term at the head of the Security Council and it takes place at a time of great international tension..
But, after all, what is the role of the current Security Council? Questions about UN reform as a whole and the Council specifically make sense? To answer these questions and understand Brazil's role in the Council, it is necessary, before, understand a little about the UN and its role in the world.
The UN was created after the end of World War II and its main objective was to promote lasting peace.. A similar effort was made at the end of World War I, with the creation of the League of Nations, that did not achieve its main objective, since World War II began 25 years later. Then, What differentiates the UN from the League of Nations? Why the UN was so much more successful in securing peace than the League of Nations?
One of the main explanations comes from the Security Council, when we seek a more institutional perspective. At the UN there is the General Assembly, which brings together all member countries. All UN issues are discussed there, seeking to be a privileged space for the construction of common agendas and the establishment of international cooperation, then carried out within the scope of dozens of organizations that are part of what we call the UN System.
The Security Council, in its turn, is the body responsible for maintaining international security. Because of this, countries that take part in the Council meet to discuss problems and issues that could compromise world peace.
The Council is composed of 5 countries permanently (China, U.S, Franca, Great Britain and Russia) and more 10 rotating members. These are selected by the General Assembly, always seeking an equitable geographic distribution for non-renewable mandates of 2 years. It is interesting to note that only permanent countries have the so-called veto power. Thereby, if any permanent is contrary to a resolution, whether a vote will result in this resolution not being implemented.
Permanent members are those who held the most military power (read atomic) at the end of World War II. Since )Then the world changed a lot and the role of the UN as a whole began to be questioned. Formed by dozens of organizations (such as UNESCO and Unicef, to name two well-known), the UN was responsible for moving important international agendas forward. In the book The Decade of Conferences, by José Augusto Lindgren-Alves (https://funag.gov.br/biblioteca-nova/produto/1-256-decada_das_conferencias_1990_1999_a) there is a good discussion on the topic. Many of the current global standards have been, as a matter of fact, built within the scope of the UN System.
However, the questions continue, undermining the central role that the UN has developed over the last 8 decades. There are different proposals, as the search for the construction of an international order based on laws (rules-based order – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_international_order#:~:text=In%20international%20relations%2C%20the%20liberal,internationalism%20since%20the%20late%201940s). It is an international order based on liberalism and which is questioned by countries, who disagree with this form of global organization.
Another proposal for a new structure of the international system is that which indicates the creation of new global organizations (like the Forum of Democracies), which would have the role of promoting agendas and indicating international standards that would be accepted around the world. Again, from a liberal perspective.
It is interesting to note that both proposals could have the United Nations System as their privileged space for promoting, but that's not what happens. The issue here is that within the UN a balance has already been found between the different interests and international agendas are promoted more slowly, especially because it ends up respecting the diverse interests of its members more. The search for rules or new organizations outside the UN is an attempt to impose world views of some on the complexity and diversity we find in today's world..
And what is Brazil's role in the UN Security Council?? Considering all this questioning about the role of the UN, It is essential that Brazil takes a leading role in reaffirming the Security Council as the privileged space for conducting discussions on international security. Creating rules and organizations parallel to what already exists will end up further harming discussions and progress around peace. More than creating new spheres, Now is the time to think about how current companies can act better.
