The vote in the UN General Assembly took place this Wednesday, June 3, 2026. The Assembly renewed some of the non-permanent members of the Security Council, the highest body of the United Nations. Germany hoped to obtain a seat there for two years. But Annalena Baerbock, the president of the General Assembly, said that Germany had failed in the first round.
What is the Security Council for?
Article 24 of the UN Charter provides that the Council bears “the principal responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security”. The decisions of the Council are binding on UN member states. It can impose sanctions, send peace missions and authorize the use of armed force.
The Security Council is made up of five permanent members with the right of veto: the United States, Russia, China, the United Kingdom and France. Ten non-permanent members also serve for two years. Half of them are renewed every year. It is therefore to be elected to one of these seats that Germany submitted its candidacy against Austria and Portugal.
Germany, second contributor to the UN system
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs justified Germany’s wish on its website by its financial contribution: “As the second contributing country to the UN system (after the United States), Germany has been a reliable partner of the United Nations for more than fifty years.”
However, Johannes Varwick, professor of international relations at the University of Halle, believes that Germany’s choice was not guaranteed: “For decades, Germany has been hailed in many regions of the world as a driver of multilateral political solutions. Today, there are many areas of contention,” he notes before giving the Israel-Hamas war, the Iranian war and the Russia-Ukraine war as examples.
The reproach of a double morality
But what was Germany planning to do if it obtained this seat? In a short film entitled “More than a Seat”, made especially for the candidacy, we can read: “We are ready to take our seats – to stand up. For respect, justice and peace.” Federal Foreign Ministry writes: “In the Security Council, Germany intends to place emphasis on the themes of conflict prevention, crisis resolution, climate and security.”
These are objectives that almost everyone could defend and which therefore probably did not constitute a unique selling point that distinguished Germany from the other candidates.
Certain aspects of the German candidacy could appear to be in direct opposition to the policy of the strongest advocated by Donald Trump. For example when the German Foreign Ministry called for a “world order governed by rules” or when it recalled the importance of international law.
“The UN system is under pressure,” declared the head of German diplomacy, Johann Wadephul, in an interview with DW from New York. But he added: “I believe in the importance of diplomacy so that the [droit du plus fort] does not impose itself. » Without, however, directly naming the American president.
Even Germany’s insistence on international law poses a problem in the context of the United Nations, says Professor Johannes Varwick. Some criticize Germany for having double standards: “For example, when it sides so clearly with Israel in the Gaza issue. I think almost everyone at the United Nations can understand that Germany has other historical ties to Israel, there is no doubt about that. »
And there, Johannes Varwick refers to the Holocaust, the genocide that killed around six million Jews during the period of Nazism in Germany. He explains, however, that “the fact of siding so clearly with the aggressor – that’s how many perceive it – while almost dogmatically brandishing the flag of international law in Ukraine, that doesn’t really add up. HAS”
A reform of the Security Council with no future
The German Foreign Minister would like the United Nations to once again become a leading player in the settlement of international conflicts. With regard to the conflicts in Ukraine and Iran, he asked that the UN “become the pivot of current crisis diplomacy.”
In these two wars, as in many other conflicts, the United Nations has remained rather passive, mainly because one or more of the powers with veto power in the Security Council are involved in these conflicts – Russia in the war in Ukraine, the United States in the war in Iran. They have prevented adoption of resolutions The Council thus blocked itself.
Johann Wadephul sees this as confirmation of the need to reform the Security Council, a reform that UN Secretary-General António Guterres also supports in principle.Â
His argument: the composition of the Council, in particular that of the veto powers, reflects the world political situation which prevailed shortly after the Second World War and not the world today.
Lack of permanent headquarters…
Germany, Japan, Brazil and India have been demanding a permanent seat each for years. As for the African Union, it demands two permanent seats for states on the continent.
In May 2026, the African Union Commission also requested two more permanent seats for states on the continent. Mahamoud Ali Youssouf, the president of the AU Commission, declared at the Africa-France summit in Nairobi: “Africa is not asking for a favor, Africa is demanding the reparation of a historical injustice.”
The secretary general also supports the principle of UN reform. António Guterres describes the absence of Africa among the permanent members with veto power as “unjustifiable” in the 21st century.
But this refoundation never materialized. And it does not seem likely to happen in the future, because the five powers currently having the right of veto would have to agree to lose their exclusive privileges. Johannes Varwick also describes these attempts at reform, however legitimate they may be, as “doomed to failure”.
In addition, there should be additional seats for four or five non-permanent members, to give more weight to under-represented regions such as Africa, Asia and Latin America.
The decreasing weight of the UN
The question, however, is to what extent the Security Council and the United Nations as a whole still have any relevance.
In a report published at the end of August 2025, the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (Sipri) speaks of an “almost total marginalization of institutions such as the United Nations”, given the marked decline in UN peacekeeping missions and their financing.
For a long time, new groups and alternative power blocs have been formed, such as the G20, the group of twenty main industrialized and emerging countries, or the Brics plus, where important non-Western states have grouped together, including China, Russia, South Africa and India. These entities thus circumvent the United Nations.
This is not in Germany’s interest, according to Johannes Varwick, who assesses the importance of the United Nations as follows: “The strengthening of classic UN multilateralism must remain the strategic objective of German foreign policy. It is very difficult and laborious, but the world would not be better if formats such as the G20 or the Brics emerged as the successors of this UN multilateralism. HAS”
The President of the General Assembly, the German Annalena Baerbock, also declared, in an interview with the magazine “Politico”, that “the world would not be better without the United Nations”.
Austria and Portugal, strong adversaries
Germany has already served on the Security Council six times, the last time in 2019-2020. As part of its current candidacy for 2027-2028, Germany faced two other European Union countries, Austria and Portugal.
During the secret ballot of the General Assembly, Portugal and Austria were elected by obtaining two-thirds of the necessary votes in the first round (134 and 131 votes respectively). Germany, which had never failed to enter the Security Council, received only 104 votes.
Zimbabwe, the only candidate for an African seat to be filled, was also elected with 182 votes. Just like Trinidad and Tobago, with 181 votes, for the Latin America and Caribbean group.
 The Philippines and Kyrgyzstan will be decided in a second round for the seat allocated to Asia.
The five elected countries will replace Pakistan, Somalia, Greece, Denmark and Panama from January 1, 2027.
They will join the 5 other members elected for the period 2026-2027: the Democratic Republic of Congo, Liberia, Latvia, Colombia and Bahrain.
