The Stability of Divisions within the UN Security Council
For some background knowledge, the United Nations Security Council is composed of 22 rotating members and 5 permanent members. The five permanent members, besides serving on the council indefinitely, sit at a unique position of power: each has an absolute veto on any action taken by the council. The five permanent members are Russia, China, United States, France, and United Kingdom.
On September 27th of this year, several European leaders addressed the United Nations General Assembly regarding the conflict in Ukraine. This conflict has reopened the discussion of the “East vs. West” mentality that underlies much of international relations—in various forms. Many diplomats at the United Nations are particularly concerned about this after the Cold War era brought East-West relations to an all time low. Frank-Walter Steinmeier, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Germany, warned his fellow diplomats in his address, saying, “We must not allow the old division between East and West to re-emerge in the United Nations.”
In practice, however, Steinmeier’s fears have already been realized. Chinese media sources have criticized the West’s “biased mediation” that “polarized Ukraine and only made things worse in the country”. Even more worrisome, it does not contain criticism for Putin’s decision to send troops to Crimea. This is most likely explained by China and Russia’s growing relationship both as major powers in the East and as BRIC nations. Ironically, Steinmeier, a German, implicitly revealed the growing tension between Eastern and Western powers with his open criticism of Russia, saying, “Not just any state, but a permanent member of the Security Council, Russia, has annexed Crimea, unilaterally changing the borders of Europe and thus breaking international law.”
The security council is very obviously divided into two opposing factions: Russia and China against US, UK, and France. Many diplomats see this as a destabilizing force in the United Nations. If we turn this situation into a network, however, with the nodes representing countries and edges representing positive or negative relationships, then structural balance theory tells us that an East vs. West arrangement is very stable. The only alternative stable network would be if every country were in agreement—highly unlikely given any major conflict. This explains why the Security Council, and the United Nations in general, has had trouble with enforcing international laws and regulations on even its own member states. In an international body where every country has one vote (the General Assembly) or where five countries each have a veto (Security Council) it seems miraculous that these bodies have produced anything at all considering how balancing, and therefore entrenched, the “us vs. them” mentality is in the realm of international politics.
Articles:
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=48926#.VCrH2SldWd8
http://thediplomat.com/2014/03/china-backs-russia-on-ukraine/