Africa makes up more than a quarter of the United Nations' member states and features heavily on the Security Council's agenda, yet holds no permanent seat on the body. Nigeria's Vice President Kashim Shettima used the 81st session of the UN General Assembly in New York on September 24 to press, once again, for that to change.
Representing President Bola Tinubu, Shettima called for comprehensive reform of the world body, beginning with the reconstitution of the Security Council. It was the third consecutive year he had delivered Africa's case at the General Assembly, having made similar arguments at the 79th and 80th sessions.
The core demand
Shettima's address was direct. "The reform of this institution must begin with the reconstitution of the Security Council, for the world of 2026 cannot remain captive to the distribution of power in 1945," he told delegates, according to ThisDay.
"Africa cannot continue to fill the council's agenda while remaining absent from its permanent membership," the vice president said.
He then spelled out the specific ask. Nigeria, he said, demands, in line with the Ezulwini Consensus, at least two permanent seats for Africa with all the rights and responsibilities of permanent membership, including the veto for as long as it exists, plus five non-permanent seats in total.
What the Ezulwini Consensus says
The Ezulwini Consensus is the African Union's common position on UN reform, adopted in 2005 at a meeting in Eswatini. It has remained remarkably stable for two decades. The position holds that Africa should have two permanent seats with veto powers, alongside five non-permanent seats, and that the African Union itself should decide which countries fill them.
The veto question is the most contentious element. Many reform proposals floated over the years would expand permanent membership without granting newcomers a veto. African states have consistently rejected that idea, arguing that a permanent seat without equal powers would create a second class of members. Shettima's formulation, demanding the veto "for as long as it exists", leaves room for an eventual broader reform that might limit or abolish the veto for everyone.
Why the issue is gaining traction
Security Council reform has been debated for decades with little concrete progress. Several developments have nonetheless given the African case fresh momentum. Repeated deadlocks over conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East have exposed the limits of the current structure. The United States under the Biden administration voiced support for two permanent African seats in 2024, and other permanent members have signalled general openness, although the details remain disputed.
There is also a moral argument that resonates broadly. A majority of the council's peacekeeping mandates and country-specific discussions concern African situations, from the Sahel and Sudan to the Democratic Republic of Congo and Somalia. Decisions with enormous consequences for African lives are taken by a permanent membership that includes no African state.
Nigeria's own candidacy
Nigeria has long considered itself a natural candidate for one of the two seats, citing its population, the largest on the continent, its economy, and its history of contributing troops to peacekeeping missions in Liberia, Sierra Leone, Darfur and elsewhere. South Africa and Egypt are frequently mentioned as rivals, while countries such as Kenya, Ethiopia and Senegal also have claims.
ThisDay's analysis made an important point: Nigeria can deploy its considerable soft power, including its cultural influence through music and film, to advance the continent's quest for a more representative UN, but it must first put its own house in order. Persistent insecurity, economic hardship and governance challenges weaken the country's case when competing for a role that demands global leadership.
The obstacles ahead
Amending the UN Charter requires approval by two-thirds of the General Assembly and ratification by two-thirds of member states, including all five current permanent members. Any one of them can effectively block change. Regional rivalries complicate matters further: the Uniting for Consensus group, which includes Italy, Pakistan and Argentina, opposes new permanent seats altogether because it does not want regional rivals elevated.
Within Africa, agreeing on which two countries should represent the continent may prove just as difficult as winning global approval. The Ezulwini Consensus deliberately leaves selection to the African Union, but consensus there will require delicate diplomacy among competing powers.
Lessons from earlier reform attempts
History offers a cautionary note. In 2005, the so-called G4 nations of Brazil, Germany, India and Japan pushed hard for permanent seats and came close to tabling a vote, only to see momentum collapse amid disagreements with African states over the veto. Analysts often cite that moment as a missed opportunity, because a joint G4 and African Union proposal might have commanded enough support to pass the General Assembly. Building bridges with other aspiring members, rather than competing against them, could prove decisive this time around.
What to watch
The intergovernmental negotiations on Security Council reform continue in New York, and the 2026 session will test whether recent support from major powers translates into a negotiating text. For African governments, maintaining a united front is the most important asset they have. Shettima's repeated appearances signal that Nigeria intends to remain one of the loudest voices in that campaign, and that it expects to be in the room when any final deal is written.