---
title: "The Continent With the Most Business and No Permanent Chair at the Security Council"
description: "At the 81st UN General Assembly, Africa renews its claim to two permanent seats — and a veto, for as long as the veto exists."
author: "Inez Holloway"
published: 2026-09-26T03:07:55Z
modified: 2026-09-26T20:04:06Z
url: https://rews.cc/a/the-continent-with-the-most-business-and-no-permanent-chair--1bb361
language: en
tags: ["un", "security-council", "nigeria", "guterres", "world"]
publisher: "Rews (https://rews.cc)"
---

# The Continent With the Most Business and No Permanent Chair at the Security Council

*At the 81st UN General Assembly, Africa renews its claim to two permanent seats — and a veto, for as long as the veto exists.*

By Inez Holloway · September 26, 2026 · https://rews.cc/a/the-continent-with-the-most-business-and-no-permanent-chair--1bb361

## In brief

- At the 81st UN General Assembly, African leaders again demanded reform of the unchanged 1945 Security Council structure
- Nigeria seeks at least two permanent African seats with veto power while the veto exists, plus five non-permanent seats
- In 2025, 18 of the Council’s 24 Chapter VII resolutions concerned Africa, which has no permanent seat
- Charter change requires two-thirds of the General Assembly and ratification by members including all five permanent members
- The AU’s Ezulwini Consensus insists new permanent African members hold the veto while the veto remains

The arithmetic of the United Nations Security Council was settled in 1945 and has not moved since: five permanent members, ten elected for two-year terms, and of the five with the power to say no, none is African. At this year’s 81st General Assembly — the same gathering at which half the chamber walked out on Israel’s prime minister — Africa asked again, Al Jazeera reported from Abuja. The answer will be the one it always gets, which is the absence of an answer.

Secretary-General Antonio Guterres used his final address to the Assembly on Tuesday to renew his own call for reform, saying the Council must become more representative of today’s geopolitical realities. Nigeria’s vice president, Kashim Shettima, delivering President Bola Tinubu’s national statement, asked for at least two permanent African seats — with veto power for as long as the veto exists — plus five non-permanent seats for the continent. Ghana’s President John Mahama put it as a condition of survival:

> Security Council reform is not a favour to Africa; it is an imperative for the legitimacy, credibility and survival of the United Nations

Consider the workload of the body in question. In 2025 the Council adopted 44 resolutions, 24 of them under Chapter VII of the Charter — the chapter that covers sanctions and authorisations of force. Eighteen of those 24 concerned Africa. The continent supplies the business, in other words, and is absent from the board.

Ibrahim Gambari, a former Nigerian foreign minister and former permanent representative to the UN, told Al Jazeera the problem is not geography. “The status quo is not really interested in change,” he said. “In the appointment of the Secretary-General, you cannot be a candidate unless each of the five permanent members agrees. Therefore, we have the privilege of the unelected P5, which they don’t want to relinquish.” Africa, he noted, is the largest single bloc in the organisation and holds no permanent seat.

The process exists, in the way such processes exist. The General Assembly launched intergovernmental negotiations on Council reform in 2008; they have continued through successive sessions without agreement on the core questions. Changing permanent membership requires amending the Charter, which under Article 108 needs two-thirds of the General Assembly and ratification by two-thirds of all members — including all five permanent members. The beneficiaries of the arrangement hold a formal veto over its revision. This is sometimes called a design flaw, and sometimes a design.

Who would sit in the seats is its own unresolved question. Nigeria has long presented itself as prepared for the role. Fola Aina, a political scientist and international security expert at SOAS in London, told Al Jazeera that a permanent seat would “elevate Nigeria’s global diplomatic influence, give Africa a continuous voice in international security decisions” and consolidate Nigeria’s position “as a regional hegemon and middle power” — the timing, he said, “particularly strategic given the current age of strategic competition.” Egypt and South Africa have also sought permanent representation. The African Union has not named its candidates; its common position asks for at least two permanent and five non-permanent seats, with the AU deciding who fills them.

Then there is the veto, which is really the whole argument. The AU’s Ezulwini Consensus holds that any permanent African member must carry the same rights and privileges as the existing five — including the veto, for as long as the veto remains part of the system. Permanent seats without the power would not, African governments argue, correct the imbalance they are complaining about. So the question divides in two: whether the Council should grow, and whether the newcomers would be allowed to say no.

Gambari argues the absence costs the Council in its daily work. “All these peacekeeping missions in Africa are based on the mandate of the Security Council,” he said. “The P5 assign themselves the role of penholders, which hardly allows elected non-permanent African countries to initiate draft resolutions affecting their region.” Even Council missions to Africa, he noted, are not led by Africans these days. “How can the parties in dispute have confidence in such a team?”

For Favour Aniezi, a Nigerian creative and youth advocate, it is a question of whose voice shapes decisions about the continent. “We should not simply be represented at the table,” she told Al Jazeera. “Africa should have a voice with the weight to influence what happens at it.”

So the questions stand where they stood: how many new permanent members, which countries, with or without a veto, and whether the five would ever consent. Gambari has watched the formula hold for decades, and his forecast was a sentence, not a paragraph: “As long as they keep sticking to this anachronistic formula, reforms will be hard to attain.”