The article examines the prospects for reform of the United Nations Security Council from the perspective of the Group of Four (G4) model, amid increasing global political polarization and declining trust in multilateral institutions. Using a comparative approach, it analyzes the logic and parameters of the G4 model (expansion of the Council to 25 members with the addition of six permanent and four non-permanent seats, and the temporary suspension of the veto for new permanent members until a separate decision is adopted) and compares it with the alternatives advanced by the African Union (AU) and the Uniting for Consensus (UfC) coalition. The study demonstrates that the G4 and the AU share the most similar vision of regional representation, while the key divergence concerns the veto: the G4 allows for its temporary non-extension to new permanent Security Council members, whereas the AU insists on full equality between new and existing permanent members in this respect. By contrast, the UfC adopts a conceptually opposing stance, rejecting the expansion of permanent seats and instead advocating a significant increase in non-permanent membership, along with strict limitations on or the abolition of the veto. Particular attention is paid to the configuration of interests among the permanent members of the Council (P5). The United Kingdom and France consistently support the G4 model and advocate stronger African representation. The United States demonstrates a close yet cautious stance, generally supporting the expansion of the Security Council while opposing the extension of veto power to new permanent members. China and Russia declare openness to “moderate” expansion through the inclusion of developing countries, but block scenarios that involve Germany and Japan, thereby substantially diminishing the prospects for consensus. Ukraine’s position is broadly consistent with the G4 approach: it supports the expansion of both permanent and non-permanent categories of membership, with particular emphasis on the inclusion of African, Asian, and Latin American states, alongside Germany and Japan. At the same time, Ukraine consistently advocates significant restrictions on, and the eventual elimination of, the veto, reflecting its direct experience of aggression by a permanent member of the Council - the Russian Federation. The G4 model emerges as one of the most balanced approaches to Security Council reform by addressing regional imbalances, but its implementation requires broad coalition support within the General Assembly and the minimization of objections from China and Russia. The practical implementation of this model is contingent upon the ability of G4 supporters to forge political and diplomatic coalitions in Security Council reform (for instance, with the AU) and to advance incremental decisions on the veto aimed at reducing political polarization.
Kovtun et al. (Wed,) studied this question.