Russia “mocks the United Nations every day it continues its illegal and immoral invasion of Ukraine”, foreign minister Penny Wong has told the UN General Assembly, reiterating calls for reform of the security council on which Russia sits.
Australia is seeking a non-permanent seat back on the powerful council at the end of the decade, but says it risks becoming an anachronism without fundamental reform.
“We must ensure greater permanent and non-permanent representation for Africa, Latin America and Asia, including permanent seats for India and Japan,” Wong told the general assembly in New York on Saturday Australian time, arguing the global community must demand the five permanent members be constrained in their use of their veto powers.
“With its special responsibility as a permanent member of the security council, Russia mocks the UN every day it continues its illegal and immoral invasion of Ukraine.
“The rest of the permanent members and all member states must be unyielding in our response to Russia’s grave violation of Article II of our shared UN charter,” Wong said.
Article II of the UN charter prohibits, inter alia, “the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state”.
The security council, charged since 1945 with the maintenance of international peace and security, has weathered decades of demands for change, but its reform is one of the UN’s longest-running and – to date – insoluble debates.
The five permanent, nuclear-armed members – the US, China, Russia, the UK, and France – have a standing veto power over any substantive security council resolution.
The 10 non-permanent members – who serve two-year rotating terms – do not have the veto.
The extraordinary powers and, accompanying influence, held by the permanent five (P5), are not rights those nations have demonstrated a willingness to relinquish.
Wong’s call for reform comes two days after a fiery speech from Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskiy, who told the council it had been left impotent by “aspirations to compromise with killers”.
“All the UN actions, either by the security council or by the general assembly, that could have stopped this aggression are shattered by the privilege granted to the aggressor with this seat,” Zelenskiy said.
“We should recognise that the UN finds itself in a deadlock on the matters of aggression. Humankind no longer pins its hopes on the UN when it comes to the defence of the sovereign borders of nations.”
Australia has consistently argued the UN’s primary security body is growing increasingly ineffectual and is in urgent need of reform. Domestically, the position has bipartisan support.
Wong told the UN general assembly last year reform of the security council was necessary for “keeping it vital”.
And in 2019, then new Australian ambassador to the UN, former Liberal senator Mitch Fifield, argued the security council needed “to reform and evolve to… reflect contemporary geopolitical realities, with greater representation for Asia, Africa and Latin America”.
On Friday, Wong planned to reiterate Australia’s position that it would seek a non-permanent seat on the security council for 2029-2030. Australia last sat on the council in 2013-14.
In a wide-ranging address, Wong argued the broader UN was failing to protect the peoples of the world, citing mass displacement, widespread hunger, escalating conflicts and worsening climate change.
“This institution and our shared multilateral system is falling short of the commitments we have made together. And we are collectively falling further behind,” she said.
“There are more people displaced, and more people hungry. There is more conflict, and greater risk that a nuclear weapon could be used. The climate is changing faster than our combined efforts to stop it.”
Wong warned against the growing “risk of conflict between great powers”.
“The Indo-Pacific is home to unprecedented military build-up, yet transparency and strategic reassurance are lacking.
“Military power is expanding, but measures to constrain military conflict are not – and there are few concrete mechanisms for averting it.
“So it is up to all of us to act to deploy our collective statecraft, our influence, our networks, our capabilities, to minimise the risk of misunderstanding and miscalculation, to prevent catastrophic conflict.”
