UN: Italy Deserves More
UN Risks Excluding Italy from Security Council
By Francesca Di Meglio


The United Nations is considering a much-anticipated reform proposal released in early December that threatens to exclude Italy from the Security Council, the UN’s most visible and important committee. Overseeing international peace and safety, the Security Council investigates differences that might lead to international friction, offers recommendations to resolve disputes, encourages states to inflict economic sanctions on others when necessary and can take military action.
A contingent of Italians and Italian Americans are leading the charge to insure Italy has representation on the Security Council. These leaders argue that Italy deserves a post – either with Europe or on its own – because it is the third largest contributor to peacekeeping and humanitarian operations, the fifth highest contributor to the UN budget and a paid member, adds Conference of Presidents Major Italian American organizations’ UN Representative Filomena Ricciardi. “Italy has already proven herself at the UN,” says Justice Dominic R. Massaro, leading American articulator for the non-marginalization of Italy and the UN. “Ironically, her financial contribution ranks above two – Russia and China – of the five current permanent members of the Council, and is practically at par with two others – Britain and France. And her commitment in terms of men and material is front line.”
Having a say is important to Italy because politicos note that the small country is often the underdog among its industrialized peers. Government officials and the media have already pointed out that Italy often plays second fiddle to countries like Germany, France and Britain in Europe. Although being one of the U.S.’s most loyal allies thanks to a strong bond between Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi and President George W. Bush, exclusion from the Security Council would be a big blow to Italy, a nation struggling to become a major force in world politics and business.
The Security Council took on even more significance when the United States sought UN approval for military action in Iraq in 2003. It was the world’s chance to express its opinions either for or against President George W. Bush’s decision to invade a nation that had not directly attacked the United States. Ultimately, power-player countries, including Italy, want a permanent seat and much-coveted veto power on the Security Council. Right now, the committee is made up of five veto-bearing permanent seats, which are held by the nations that won World War II (Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States), and 10 non-permanent seats, which the General Assembly elects every two years.
After years of talk about reorganization, Secretary General Kofi Annan appointed a panel led by former Prime Minister of Thailand Anand Panyarachun and including former U.S. National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft, former Prime Minister of Russia Yevgeny Primakov, former Foreign Minister of China Qian Qichen and Secretary General of the League of Arab States Amr Moussa of Egypt.
In its 95-page report, the panel offered two different reform proposals, both of which would increase the size of the committee. The first suggestion has six new permanent members, which would most likely include Brazil, Germany, India, Japan, Egypt and either Nigeria or South Africa plus three two-year term members. Ambassador Francesco Paolo Fulci recently told AmericaOggi that the first suggestion would be “disastrous” for Italy because there would be almost no chance of Italy participating regularly in the Security Council. Ricciardi says the proposals are “in violation of the spirit of the UN Charter, which solemnly proclaims the equality of the Member States.”
In fact, Annan will now refine the points of the proposal and present it to the UN General Assembly in September. To enact these changes, two-thirds of the General Assembly and all five permanent members and their governments must approve an amendment change to the UN Charter.
The Italian position clearly seeks to make the world a smaller place and get as many perspectives as possible. “Italy’s stance is premised on the principle of sovereign equality for all states and holds that any enlargement of the council should reflect inclusiveness, that is, an enlargement that insures wider democratic representation to equate with greater efficiency and effectiveness,” says Massaro.
The second proposal would bring in eight additional semi-permanent members that would be chosen for four-year terms and 11 two-year term seats. Fulci has said that this last scenario is better because “in theory there would be the possibility of rotating into regional seats.” Massaro agrees and adds that this proposal meets Italy’s interest in allowing more member states to contribute to the Security Council.
The New York Times reported that Italy is not the only one criticizing the UN. The panel proposing the reforms cast a critical eye on the UN’s bureaucracy and Human Rights Commission, which has incorporated human rights violators like Cuba and Sudan in the past. The group also called for the retirement of many staff members in an attempt to bring in younger people who have had more field experience and a fresher perspective.
The decision about which proposal to choose and whether to enact the reforms is important to Italians for obvious reasons. But even Italian Americans have a stake in this issue, say activists. “We must remember that even if the composition of the Council is approved at the UN, for our country it means the necessity of ratification of a treaty by the United States Senate,” says Massaro. “The organized Italian American community has made clear its pledge to urge rejection of any treaty that leaves Italy as the only major Western power out of the loop. To ignore the Italian reality would be a slap at Italy and at all Americans of Italian decent.”