United Nations Security Council Reform. New Approaches to Understanding and Unlocking the Gridlock

The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) is the UN’s most powerful organ and, arguably, the international body with the most potential for global impact – good or bad. The UNSC can adopt resolutions that initiate and legitimise sanctions and interventions. The UNSC, however, is seen by many as serving the interests of WWII’s victors vis-á-vis the permanent memberships and veto rights of China, France, the United Kingdom, the USA, and Russia. Moreover, and in many cases resulting from the veto rights of the actors above, the council appears ineffective and inefficient. Accordingly, calls for and discussions about reforms of the UNSC remain ubiquitous. The UNSC, nonetheless, has only undergone one reform, in 1965, where the non-permanent membership was expanded from six to ten, and the permanent membership structure remained intact.  

The focus of the dissertation
The dissertation focuses on the UNSC reform debate among scholars and diplomats. Via four different articles and a so-called frame document, I present the historical and political contours of the discussion and propose new ways to approach the issue, both in terms of academic and political approaches.

My research relies on the vast body of literature about UNSC reform, official statements from UN member states, UN documents, and interviews with high-level diplomats and diplomatic personnel. In engaging the issue of UNSC reform, academia should look more towards new research methodologies to inspire and innovate the gridlocked debate. Moreover, the discursive, social, and argumentative dimensions all include under-explored possibilities in unlocking the debate about UNSC reform.