Brazil formally introduced a proposal to reform the Security Council on Monday, a move that could bring the United Nations a step closer to ending a decade-long debate about the composition of its most powerful body. Yet the negative response the draft resolution drew from a familiar group of opponents underscored just how divided the United Nations remains. Nearly all the 191 U.N. member states agree that the 15-nation council in its current form is an anachronism of the post-World War II era, no longer an accurate reflection of the world's landscape of power. But so far there's been no agreement on how to change it. The proposal from Brazil, Japan, Germany and India would expand the council from 15 to 25 members, adding six permanent seats without veto power and four non-permanent seats. Those four each want a permanent seat, with the other two earmarked for Africa.
The so-called group of four could seek a vote on its proposal as early as the end of the week. Brazil's U.N. Ambassador Ronaldo Mota Sardenberg repeated his supporters' main arguments - that any other proposals won't correct the council's balance. ``As for the argument that working to bring this issue to a conclusion after 12 years of discussion is somehow still premature, we can only consider it beguiling,'' Sardenberg said.
Opponents of the idea retorted with their argument: that the so-called Group of Four's bid is nothing more than a bid for power. ``The seekers of special privileges and power masquerade as the champions of the weak and disadvantaged, asserting that the special privileges that the seek would make the council more rep and neutral,'' said Pakistan's U.N. Ambassador Munir Akram. Akram is a leading proponent of an alternate proposal, from a group calling itself ``Uniting for Consensus.'' Their proposal would add only non-permanent members who would face periodic election.