Why Somalia will head the UN Security Council and why it is not a disaster

From January 2026 UN Security Council will lead Somalia is a country that international experts have for decades ranked among the most unstable and destroyed states in the world.

At first glance, this fact looks paradoxical: a state that barely controls its own territory will preside over the body responsible for global peace and security.

What is the Security Council and who is on it?

The UN Security Council consists of 15 states. Five of them – permanent memberswith veto power: USA, UK, France, China and Russia. They are the ones who determine the limits of any Security Council decisions.

Ten more countries are non-permanent memberswho are elected by the UN General Assembly for a limited term. Currently these include Algeria, Guyana, Sierra Leone, Slovenia, South Korea, Denmark, Greece, Pakistan, Panama and Somalia.

Presidency of the Security Council rotated alphabetically. From January 2026, Somalia will replace Slovenia. It is fundamentally important: non-permanent members have no veto power and cannot single-handedly block or promote decisions.

Why Somalia is considered a failed state

Somalia is often cited as a classic example failed state. The central government controls only part of the country, and the Islamist group remains the key threat Al-Shabab. Regular droughts, famines and chronic poverty are exacerbating the humanitarian situation.

According to international organizations, about 4 million people in Somalia are internally displaced persons. The country’s security is largely ensured with the support of foreign missions.

Does Somalia’s presidency mean a crisis for the Security Council?

Despite the resonance of the news, the functioning of the Security Council is not at risk. The chairmanship is primarily procedural and diplomatic nature.

The work of the Security Council is carried out at the UN headquarters in New York and is strictly regulated. The agenda of meetings, preparation of documents and compliance with procedures are ensured UN Secretariat. Thus, the chairman cannot independently impose decisions or abuse his position.

In fact, chairmanship is diplomatic microphonenot a tool of real influence. It allows you to moderate meetings and represent the Council, but does not provide the ability to change the balance of power or make key decisions.

Conclusion

Somalia’s upcoming presidency of the UN Security Council looks symbolically contradictory, but does not change the decision-making architecture. Real power in the Security Council is still concentrated among permanent members with the right of veto, and the rotation of the presidency itself remains a formality and not a political lever.

Source link