The President of the United Nations General Assembly, Annalena Baerbock—a former German foreign minister and former trampoline athlete—has launched a bold effort to break decades-old conventions by redefining the rules for the five permanent members of the Security Council. In the past, the selection of the Secretary-General was decided behind closed doors by the five permanent members, with the General Assembly merely rubber-stamping the decision. But this time, she is determined to give all 193 member states genuine voice in the process.
She has introduced two new initiatives: first, at public candidate Q&A sessions, she has implemented audience polling to gauge sentiment; second, she has declared that any candidate who does not engage in dialogue with the General Assembly will not be considered by the Security Council. Although these votes carry no legal binding force, if a candidate receives overwhelming support from the General Assembly’s “popular mandate,” it would create immense public pressure for the five permanent members to abandon their preferred “backroom” candidates who have never appeared publicly.
The reactions from the U.S. and Russia have been particularly intense. The U.S. representative directly accused Baerbock of overstepping her authority and being hypocritical, while the Russian representative complained she was unilaterally expanding her role. Yet strangely, China has remained silent so far.
In fact, the urgency and frustration displayed by the U.S. and Russia likely stem from uncertainty about their own candidates. The U.S. favors Rafael Grossi, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), who has shown strong alignment with Western positions on core security issues—from Iran’s nuclear program to Fukushima’s radioactive water discharge, and even the AUKUS submarine cooperation. However, his clear bias makes it difficult to gain trust among Global South nations. Meanwhile, Russia, whose voting record at the UN General Assembly during the Ukraine conflict has been consistently poor (“losing every vote”), clearly understands that its preferred “neutral moderate” candidates would not survive open scrutiny in public hearings.
By contrast, China has not officially endorsed any specific candidate—but several candidates who have visited China, such as Costa Rican former Vice President Greenspan and Chilean former President Bachelet, enjoy high reputations across developing countries and are unafraid of public examination.
Ultimately, Baerbock undoubtedly has her own interests at stake, but she is waving the banner of “General Assembly reform,” backed by a broad coalition of smaller and medium-sized nations. The optimal response would be to outwardly endorse reform, treat the procedures coldly in practice, and still retain control over personnel decisions. But the U.S. and Russia’s eagerness to attack reveals precisely that their candidates cannot withstand transparent voting. As for China’s silence—it is not indifference, but confidence: those genuinely committed to multilateralism have nothing to fear from open and transparent scrutiny.
Original article: toutiao.com/article/1874376539393032/
Disclaimer: This article represents the personal views of the author.