Underpin Museveni’s Call for UNSC Reforms

President Yoweri Museveni has once again, and rightly so, added his voice to the growing calls from Africa for permanent representation on the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). The UNSC, the UN’s principal organ and in many ways a microcosm of a world government, continues to exclude Africa from permanent membership despite the continent’s 54 independent states—representing about 28% of the UN’s total membership. Africa’s continued marginalization at the UNSC stems from the post–World War II arrangements, when the so-called “big five” unilaterally entrenched their privileged positions.

With sweeping powers that include investigating disputes, recommending solutions, and authorizing sanctions or even military action, the UNSC grants its five permanent members—China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States—special veto authority. This privilege is denied to the ten rotational, non-permanent members. Ironically, and indeed unjustly, Africa, the continent with the largest number of countries, has no permanent representation at the council. The UN Charter, signed on April 25, 1945 in San Francisco and effective from October 24 that year, codified these power imbalances at a time when most of Africa was still under colonial rule.

This flawed arrangement has had long-lasting consequences. Africa has consistently been sidelined in key UNSC decisions in ways that directly affect its future.

First, the veto power, reserved for the permanent five, has often been used against Africa’s interests. A single veto can overturn a resolution supported by the rest of the international community. The absence of a permanent African voice means the continent remains vulnerable to decisions imposed from outside, fueling persistent grievances about its exclusion.

Second, the ideals of equal representation and fair decision-making are routinely undermined by club-like maneuvering within the council. Instead of advancing equity, justice, and truth, the UNSC often reduces Africa’s participation to a symbolic exercise in futility.

Third, Africa’s lack of permanent representation erodes its global influence. This denies the continent the ability to shape critical decisions on peace, security, and development—issues that disproportionately affect it. The legitimacy of the UNSC is therefore weakened, especially in the eyes of Africans who see it as distant, unresponsive, and, at times, weaponized against them.

Fourth, without veto power or consistent sponsorship of agenda items, Africa struggles to prioritize its urgent concerns. This vacuum allows powerful nations to dominate proceedings and force through agendas that may run counter to African interests.

Fifth, the credibility of the UNSC itself is undermined by the absence of Africa. With a population of over 1.5 billion, the continent is more populous than Europe, which, with 745 million people, nonetheless enjoys two permanent seats through the UK and France. This glaring imbalance renders the council less inclusive and weakens its ability to address global crises comprehensively.

Lastly, Africa’s under-representation has stifled progress on peace, security, and development initiatives. Without a permanent seat, the continent cannot effectively champion its own regional priorities at the highest level of international decision-making.

President Museveni’s call is therefore both timely and justified. For the UNSC to claim legitimacy and credibility in today’s world, permanent African representation is not a favor—it is a necessity.

By Amb. Henry Mayega