&w=3840&q=100)
How did Pakistan get picked to lead the UN Security Council?
In July 2025, Pakistan assumes the rotating presidency of the UN Security Council, a position it takes on as part of its two-year term as a non-permanent member. The presidency rotates monthly among the Council's 15 members based on English alphabetical order. Pakistan last held UNSC membership in 2012–13, and has served seven times since 1952 read more
Pakistan's Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Asim Iftikhar Ahmad, speaks during a meeting of the United Nations Security Council at UN headquarters in New York City, US, June 20, 2025. File Image/Reuters
The Islamic Republic of Pakistan will take over the presidency of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) for the month of July 2025.
This role falls within Pakistan's current two-year tenure as a non-permanent member of the Council, which commenced on at the start of this year.
Ambassador Asim Iftikhar Ahmad, Pakistan's Permanent Representative to the United Nations, will lead the Council throughout the month.
He recently met with UN Secretary-General António Guterres to outline the Security Council's agenda during Pakistan's presidency.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
This marks the eighth time Pakistan has served on the Security Council, having previously held non-permanent membership in 1952–53, 1968–69, 1976–77, 1983–84, 1993–94, 2003–04, and 2012–13.
The presidency offers Islamabad a platform to steer discussions and spotlight key international issues.
Pakistan is expected to convene at least two open meetings during its presidency of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) in July, with indications that it may bring up topics such as Operation Sindoor and the situation in Jammu and Kashmir.
According to a source speaking to The Print, there is a prevailing view within the Indian establishment that Islamabad could use its current seat on the UNSC — where India is not presently represented — to spotlight regional South Asian matters on the global stage, particularly in the context of recent developments following Operation Sindoor.
During its presidency, Pakistan will also reportedly convene two major high-level signature events. One will focus on multilateralism and the peaceful settlement of disputes, while the second will examine cooperation between the United Nations and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC).
How is the UNSC presidency determined?
The presidency of the Security Council rotates monthly among its 15 members, according to Rule 18 of the Security Council's Provisional Rules of Procedure, which states: 'The presidency of the Security Council shall be held in turn by the members of the Security Council in the English alphabetical order of their names. Each President shall hold office for one calendar month.'
This rotation includes both permanent and non-permanent members and follows a fixed alphabetical order to ensure equity.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
In 2025, Pakistan's presidency follows Guyana (June) and precedes Panama (August). Earlier in the year, Algeria (January), China (February), Denmark (March), France (April), and Greece (May) held the presidency.
Later months will see the Republic of Korea (September), the Russian Federation (October), Sierra Leone (November), and Slovenia (December) take on the rotating role.
The monthly presidency allows each Council member, regardless of permanent or elected status, to chair meetings, steer the Council's agenda, and represent the body publicly.
Although largely procedural in nature, it grants the presiding country notable visibility and agenda-setting influence.
How are UNSC members chosen?
The UNSC is composed of 15 member states: five permanent members (China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States) and ten non-permanent members elected for two-year terms.
These non-permanent members are chosen by the General Assembly and must secure a two-thirds majority in a secret ballot, in accordance with Rule 83 of the Assembly's rules of procedure.
Notably, there are no formal nominations, and retiring members are ineligible for immediate re-election as per Rule 144.
The criteria for election to the Security Council include a country's contribution to the maintenance of international peace and security — often demonstrated through leadership in regional peace initiatives, troop contributions to peacekeeping missions or financial support — as well as equitable geographical distribution, which was formalised through a 1963 amendment to Article 23 of the UN Charter.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
That amendment came into force in August 1965 and expanded the number of non-permanent members from six to ten.
As per the General Assembly's Resolution 1991 A (XVIII), the distribution of non-permanent seats follows this pattern:
Five from African and Asian states
One from Eastern European states
Two from Latin American states
Two from Western European and other states
An informal agreement ensures that one of the Asian or African seats is always held by an Arab country, alternating between the two regions.
What does the Security Council do?
The Security Council is the UN's chief organ for international peace and security. It is empowered to make decisions that are binding on all 193 UN member states.
It can impose sanctions, authorise peacekeeping missions and even permit the use of military force to address conflicts.
The Council's authority stems from Chapter VI and Chapter VII of the UN Charter. Chapter VI encourages peaceful resolution through dialogue, arbitration or mediation, while Chapter VII provides for stronger measures — including coercive sanctions or military intervention — if peaceful means fail.
Over the decades, the Council has dealt with a wide spectrum of global crises: civil wars, nuclear proliferation, humanitarian disasters, terrorism, and more. Yet its effectiveness has increasingly come under scrutiny, particularly when the interests of its five permanent members diverge.
The permanent members, collectively known as the P5, hold veto power — any one of them can block the adoption of any substantive resolution.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
This has repeatedly led to stalemates, especially on high-profile matters such as Syria, Ukraine and Palestine. For instance:
Russia (including during the Soviet era) has used the veto 158 times, making it the most frequent user.
The United States has used the veto 92 times, including to block a resolution in April 2024 supporting Palestinian statehood.
China has increasingly exercised its veto rights, often aligning with Russia—more than three-quarters of China's vetoes have had Russian support.
France and the UK have not used the veto since 1989 and have called for restraint in its usage.
Despite structural limitations, the Council remains central to multilateral diplomacy. It oversees 11 peacekeeping operations as of 2024, with nearly 100,000 uniformed personnel deployed across three continents.
These missions range from traditional peacekeeping to more robust interventions that include civilian protection, electoral assistance and legal institution-building.
Why aren't other global powers involved actively in the UNSC?
Criticism of the UNSC's composition and effectiveness has grown louder in recent years. While the last structural reform occurred in 1965, many argue that the Council no longer reflects today's geopolitical realities.
Global powers like India, Brazil, Germany, Japan, Nigeria and South Africa have long pushed for a more inclusive Security Council — either through permanent seats or an expansion in elected membership.
There have also been suggestions that France could relinquish its seat in favour of the European Union, particularly after Brexit.
In 2019, France and Germany took the unprecedented step of jointly presiding over the Council for two months. In 2021, the UK publicly supported Germany's bid for permanent membership.
More recently, in January last year, UN Secretary-General António Guterres expressed hope that Africa would receive permanent representation, citing support from each of the five permanent members.
Despite such advocacy, progress remains slow. With every structural change requiring the approval of the current P5 — who are unlikely to dilute their power — UNSC reform continues to be one of the most contentious and unresolved issues in international governance.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Also Watch:
With inputs from agencies
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
32 minutes ago
- First Post
Turkey arrests cartoonist, journalists accused of depicting Prophet Muhammad, Moses amid outrage
Four journalists from the Turkish satirical magazine LeMan have been arrested after publishing a cartoon that allegedly showed the Prophet Muhammad and Prophet Moses, sparking outrage and protests in Turkey. read more There is a growing call to boycott Turkey in India after it backed Pakistan during Operation Sindoor. File photp/AFP Four journalists from LeMan, a long-running Turkish satirical magazine, were detained by police on Monday (30 June) after a cartoon sparked outrage for allegedly depicting the Prophet Muhammad and Prophet Moses. One of those detained has been identified as cartoonist Doğan Pehlevan. The others are a graphic designer, the magazine's editor-in-chief, and its institutional director. The cartoon drew strong condemnation from Turkish government officials and religious conservatives, who accused the artists of insulting religious values, sparking widespread outrage and protests. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Peygamber Efendimizin (S.A.V) karikatürünü yaparak nifak tohumları ekmeye çalışanları bir kez daha lanetliyorum. Bu alçak çizimi yapan D.P. adlı şahıs yakalanarak gözaltına alınmıştır. Bir kez daha yineliyorum: Bu hayasızlar hukuk önünde hesap verecektir. — Ali Yerlikaya (@AliYerlikaya) June 30, 2025 Police also detained Pehlevan over the cartoon, which led to demonstrations outside LeMan's Istanbul office. In multiple posts on X (formerly Twitter), Turkish Interior Minister Ali Yerlikaya confirmed the arrests and shared videos showing the four journalists being taken away. 'I once again curse those who try to sow discord by drawing caricatures of our Prophet Muhammad,' Yerlikaya posted. 'The person named DP who made this vile drawing has been caught and taken into custody… These shameless individuals will be held accountable before the law.' Three other videos shared by the minister showed police forcefully arresting the other men—one of them barefoot—as they were taken from their homes and placed into police vans. Authorities said a total of six people are facing detention orders in connection with the cartoon, according to Reuters. Earlier, Turkey's justice minister announced an investigation into the magazine for possibly 'publicly insulting religious values.' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD A group of young people, reportedly linked to an Islamist group, threw stones at LeMan's headquarters after the magazine published a cartoon showing Prophet Muhammad and Prophet Moses exchanging greetings in mid-air while missiles fell from the sky. Justice Minister Yilmaz Tunç said such drawings harmed religious feelings and social harmony. 'No freedom grants the right to make the sacred values of a belief the subject of humour in an ugly way,' he said. The incident has revived memories of the 2015 Charlie Hebdo attacks in Paris, when two gunmen stormed the French satirical magazine's office after it published cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad, killing 12 people, including prominent cartoonists.
Time of India
35 minutes ago
- Time of India
Karnataka pushes jail terms for 'fake news', sparks worries
Live Events (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel Draft legislation by India's tech hub state of Karnataka that would impose jail terms of up to seven years for spreading "fake news" and other misinformation has stirred concerns among free speech activists that it could lead to censorship. With nearly 1 billion internet users, the stakes are high in a sprawling country of many ethnic and religious communities where fake news risks stirring deadly strife and AI deepfake videos have alarmed officials during federal government already regulates social media content with legislation empowering it to order takedowns of disputed content. But some states such as Karnataka have begun taking their own bill, the strictest of its kind yet, stipulates that those posting "fake news" and "anti-feminist" content, or "promoting superstition", would face imprisonment along with potential 11-page Karnataka Mis-Information And Fake News (Prohibition) Bill does not define such offences in practice, but said special courts and a regulatory committee would be set up to implement speech advocates have cited what they say would be the risk of selective enforcement arising from Karnataka's measure and flagged concerns that people posting memes or making honest mistakes online could be prosecuted."Misinformation is fairly subjective and every person who uses the internet is susceptible to falling within the dragnet of this law," said Apar Gupta, founder of the Internet Freedom Foundation, a New Delhi-based digital advocacy group which first made the Karnataka draft legislation state government of Karnataka, home to the city of Bengaluru that hosts the offices or branches of many Indian and foreign tech giants, has said the bill will be released for public consultation before Kharge, Karnataka's IT minister, said on Friday "there is a lot of misinformation on the proposed Misinformation Bill in public". He later added that the "sole objective is to address the growing digital information disorder " and the government's focus was to tackle misinformation and fake news, "and nothing beyond that".He did not immediately respond to Reuters calls seeking further comment on move could risk creating multiple regulations imposing conflicting obligations and regulatory challenges for companies, said Aman Taneja, partner at law and policy firm Indian media have sharply criticised the draft Deccan Herald newspaper on Monday titled an opinion piece "A remedy that's worse than the menace", saying the Karnataka government should "do away with the criminal provisions" in the has over the years held talks with U.S. tech giants like Google it sees as having been slow to remove fake news posts, and New Delhi in 2019 set up a "Fact Check Unit" to debunk what it sees as misinformation.
The Print
37 minutes ago
- The Print
Meaning of Zohran Mamdani lies in an admission that globalisation failed to lift all boats
Backed by New York billionaires such as Bill Ackman , a Donald Trump supporter, Cuomo was also the candidate of the Democratic Party's establishment. Mamdani's funds came from small donors. Since New York City is heavily Democratic, Mamdani is now the clear frontrunner. Only very unlikely circumstances can deprive him of the final trophy. In the Democratic primary for New York's mayoral contest, Zohran Mamdani, a 33-year-old migrant of Indian origin, defeated the 67-year-old Andrew Cuomo, part of New York's biggest political dynasty. Thus far, Mamdani's political career has spanned only two victories for New York's state assembly. In contrast, Cuomo's career includes three election victories as Governor of New York State. A seismic eruption has hit New York politics, with national ramifications. And it may also have international implications. Though the election was local, New York is unparalleled in its influence and resources. It is the richest city in the United States. At nearly $116 billion, its adopted budget for Fiscal Year 2026 is not only the highest for any city, but also exceeds that of many US states. The annual budget of Massachusetts, where I live, is only half as large. New York is also the most cosmopolitan American city, with diasporas from all over the world. So why did Mamdani win? And what are the implications? Much has already been said about his charisma and 'privileged upbringing'. Undoubtedly charismatic, his mother is the well-known filmmaker Mira Nair, who is originally from New Delhi. Her films include the critically acclaimed Monsoon Wedding (2001), Mississippi Masala (1991), and Salaam Bombay (1988). His father, Mahmood Mamdani, born in Mumbai and raised in Uganda, is a professor at Columbia University. His path-breaking book, Citizen and Subject (1996), enlightened us all about the lasting effects of colonialism in Africa. But having accomplished parents is no guarantee for electoral success. Thousands of voters need to be convinced. Mamdani also knows how to deftly use social media, going beyond X and YouTube to embrace TikTok and Instagram, thus reaching thousands of 'digitally native' younger voters. The world of 18 to 25-year-olds is no longer governed by newspapers and television. Cuomo's campaign, though much richer, was strangely devoid of a creative social media strategy. Zohran Mamdani's Left populism Better communication alone is not enough to win an election. What substantive message did Mamdani carry? His policy proposals include government-subsidised free buses, free child care for struggling families, increased minimum wage, and affordable housing. All of this will be funded by higher taxes on rich corporations and affluent individuals. Political economy scholars call this 'Left populism'. In political economy, Left populism has a long history. Its focus is always on fiscal handouts for, and policies to uplift, the low-income populations. Indira Gandhi's 'Garibi Hatao' (abolish poverty) in the 1970s was a classic example in India, as was Juan Peron's claim in Argentina in the 1940s that his government should smell of the sweat of the masses and grime of the streets. Left populism also typically goes with a policy of ethnic inclusion. Just like the economically underprivileged, the ethnic or religious minorities are to be especially looked after. Also read: New York, New Comrade. Mayor Mamdani and his India-style socialism Right populism In the West, a different kind of populism – 'Right populism' – has been dominating politics of late. Its focus is, and has historically been, on majoritarian consolidation on one hand and marginalisation of minorities and/or immigrants on the other. The claim is that a nation must give primacy to its soul, which is said to reside in the longstanding majority community. Minorities and migrants must accept such primacy as constitutive of national strength, which is weakened by the idea of ethnic or racial equality. Right populism often has a clear-cut economic programme, defined by an emphasis on economically strengthening the majority community against its globally networked elites. Europe is viewed as the historic birthplace of Right populism, but the US has also experienced it, most recently in the form of Trumpism. Some scholars view Narendra Modi as a Right populist, too. But he is a populist with a difference. His economic welfare policies are bigger than what Right populism generally allows for. In effect, Modi combines Left populism with a majoritarian cultural policy. Zohran Mamdani's victory, then, raises the following question: Will Left populism now increasingly challenge Right populism in the US? In which direction would the Democratic Party, badly in need of electoral victories, go? Also read: India-US trade deal and the Trump suspense & investigating Delhi's yearly bout of pollution Links with globalisation At a deeper level, both Left and Right populism are currently linked to globalisation, the world's greatest economic force between 1980-2010. But it has run into trouble in the West. Globalisation was about the free movement of capital, labour, and goods across national boundaries, with the assumption that it would lead to economic betterment for all. As it turned out, trade liberalisation, while making goods cheaper overall, led to job losses in Asia. Free capital flows meant businesses could go wherever labour was cheaper, reducing the tax base of Western governments and causing job losses. And immigrants began to change the pre-existing ethnic/racial make-up of societies, generating majoritarian anxieties. The Right populist attack on globalisation is premised upon bringing the majority community back in, both economically and culturally. Even though Right populism was meant to attack globally networked elites, a segment of such elites, reading the writing on the wall, began redefining their interests and developing an alliance with populist governments. Globalisation's benefits could only be saved by cancelling a lot of globalisation. This phenomenon has come to be called 'plutocratic populism'. Mamdani's rise should be viewed as an attack on the idea that plutocratic populism is a good response to the inability of globalisation to lift all boats. Zohran Mamdani has posed a serious challenge, but are his alternative proposals politically and economically viable? This question is now likely to dominate political debates in America. Ashutosh Varshney is Sol Goldman Professor of International Studies and the Social Sciences and Professor of Political Science at Brown University. Views are personal. (Edited by Zoya Bhatti)
