India Warns of Parallel Bodies Undermining UN Security Council Authority

India has expressed serious concern over the emergence of parallel platforms taking on peace and security roles outside the United Nations framework. UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres emphasized that only the Security Council can legally authorize the use of force and make binding decisions. The discussions indirectly reference challenges posed by initiatives like the U.S.-created Board of Peace, which seeks a broader security role. Indian diplomat P. Harish stressed that comprehensive UNSC reform, including expansion, is urgently needed to reflect contemporary global power dynamics and maintain the credibility of international law.

Key Points: India Concerned Over Parallel Platforms to UN Security Council

  • India warns of parallel security frameworks
  • UNSC paralysis tests credibility
  • Guterres stresses Council's unique legal authority
  • Calls for urgent Security Council reform
3 min read

India concerned over emergence of 'parallel' platforms to UN (Lead)

India voices concern over parallel security platforms as UNSC faces paralysis, calls for urgent reform to reflect contemporary global realities.

"Security conversations... have moved on to parallel plurilateral frameworks - P. Harish"

United Nations, Jan 27

India has expressed concern over the emergence of platforms "parallel" to the United Nations, seeking to take on peace and security roles while the Security Council is paralysed.

"Security conversations and discussions have moved on to parallel plurilateral frameworks, some even involving private sector actors to bring about outcomes on peace and security outside the United Nations," India's Permanent Representative P. Harish cautioned on Monday, pressing the case for Council reform.

Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said no organisation or "ad-hoc" coalition can usurp the powers of the Council.

The Council alone can make decisions binding on all, and "no other body or ad-hoc coalition can legally require all member states to comply with decisions on peace and security", he said while speaking at the Council at a high-level debate on "Reaffirming International Rule of Law".

"Only the Security Council can authorise the use of force under international law, as set out in the Charter", he said. "Its responsibility is singular. Its obligation is universal."

Therefore, he said, Council "reform is essential".

"That is why we must act without delay to enhance the representation and effectiveness of this Council," he added.

Guterres' reference to an "ad hoc coalition" and Harish's mention of "parallel plurilateral frameworks" were about the Board of Peace that US President Donald Trump has created and is seen as a challenge to the UN.

With diplomatic finesse, they were careful not to name him or the Board.

Trump said last week at Davos: "Once this (Peace) Board is completely formed, we can do pretty much whatever we want to do."

Although he added a rider, "We'll do it in conjunction with the United Nations", it still meant he was seeing a downgraded role for the UN, losing its monopoly under the Charter for using force to enforce international peace and security.

Trump announced the Board as a part of his Gaza peace plan under which it was to oversee the rebuilding of the devastated territory.

The plan received the approval of the Security Council.

Trump has since said the Board could take on a broader role in international security.

The Board of Peace has 22 members, including Pakistan, and Trump has offered "permanent" membership for contributions of $1 billion.

Except for Belgium, Western countries have so far stayed away from the Board, where the majority - 13 members - is made up of Muslim majority nations.

Calling for urgent reform of the Council and adding permanent members, Harish said that it was essential to make the international rule of law effective when the world organisation "at its core is under strain".

"Paralysis and lack of effectiveness in tackling conflicts remain a significant shortcoming", testing the UN's credibility.

Because of the veto powers of the permanent members, the Council was not able to act on crises like Gaza and Ukraine.

"For multilateralism and international rule of law to remain effective and credible, global governance structures must evolve to reflect contemporary realities," he said.

While the world has undergone a profound transformation in the 80 years since the UN's founding, the Council is stuck in a bygone era, he said.

Given the changes in "power dynamics, demographics and the nature of global challenges, there's an urgent and compelling need to undertake comprehensive reform, including expansion in the permanent and non-permanent categories", the Indian diplomat said.

- IANS

Share this article:

Reader Comments

P
Priya S
The fact that Pakistan is a member of this "Board of Peace" tells you everything you need to know about its credibility. 🤦‍♀️ How can a nation that sponsors cross-border terrorism be a credible actor for peace? This is why UNSC reform with India as a permanent member is non-negotiable.
V
Vikram M
Ambassador Harish has put it perfectly. The world has changed since 1945. It's high time the Security Council did too. We cannot have global security decisions being made by a body that doesn't represent Africa, Latin America, or major economies like India, Japan, and Germany.
S
Sarah B
While I agree with the need for UN reform, I have to respectfully question if India's push is solely about global governance, or also about securing its own permanent seat. The national interest is clear, which is fine, but let's be honest about the motivations behind the diplomacy.
R
Rohit P
"We can do pretty much whatever we want to do" - this statement from Trump is chilling. It shows complete disregard for international law and the sovereignty of nations. The UN has flaws, but replacing it with a billionaire's club is a recipe for chaos. Jai Hind!
K
Kavya N
The veto power is the root cause of the paralysis. How can we expect action on Gaza or Ukraine when the very nations involved can block any resolution? A new, inclusive platform might seem tempting, but as India says, reforming the existing one is the only sustainable way. Well said!

We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.

Leave a Comment

Minimum 50 characters 0/50