UN Secretary-General António Guterres has once again put an uncomfortable truth before the world: Africa remains the only continent without permanent representation on the United Nations Security Council. The imbalance is difficult to miss. The Council still revolves around five permanent members — China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States — a structure inherited from the geopolitical realities that followed the Second World War over 80 years ago. ALSO READ Guterres: UN Security Council remains 'unjust' without permanent African seat Africa’s demand for permanent representation is therefore central to the debate over the legitimacy of the Council. The African Union’s common position goes further, seeking at least two permanent and five non-permanent African seats, with equal privileges if the veto is retained. But the bigger question is whether simply adding more countries to the existing structure would solve the deeper problem. ALSO READ: What to know ahead of UN General Assembly The international system of 2026 bears little resemblance to that of 1945. Economic power has shifted, new regional powers have emerged, conflicts have become more complex, and issues such as climate change, artificial intelligence, cyber security, pandemics and transnational crime have become central to global security. Yet some of the UN's most consequential decision-making mechanisms remain anchored in structures established eight decades ago. The veto is particularly contentious. Current UN reform discussions include proposals ranging from abolishing it altogether, limiting its use, allowing the General Assembly to override it under certain circumstances, or extending it to new permanent members. That illustrates why the reform conversation cannot be reduced to simply finding additional chairs around the Security Council table. Questions also remain about the relationship between the Security Council and General Assembly, representation of developing regions, the effectiveness of multilateral responses to crises, and whether international institutions adequately reflect today's distribution of populations, economies and political influence. Guterres himself has argued that global institutions should reflect the realities of the 21st century rather than those that existed immediately after World War II. Africa’s absence from permanent membership is therefore one highly visible symptom of a much wider institutional challenge. The approaching leadership transition at the United Nations offers another opportunity for member states to confront that question seriously. The debate should encompass not only who occupies permanent seats, but how decisions are made, how power is distributed and how the wider UN system responds to today's challenges. Adding Africa to an architecture whose underlying weaknesses remain untouched would address representation without necessarily addressing effectiveness. The more consequential question facing the international community is whether an institution designed for the world of 1945 can be substantially redesigned for the world that exists today.
