The UK at the United Nations Security Council

We welcome and recognise the strong leadership demonstrated by the Government in leading on the UK’s global ‘re-engagement,’ including at and through the United Nations. The impending 80th anniversary of the creation of the United Nations system in September 2025, and the ongoing United Nations 80 (UN80) reform agenda, represent an opportunity which the Government must seize to begin a discussion proactively on the future of multilateralism and the role the UK can play in this new system. (Conclusion,Paragraph 29)

The Government should outline its strategy for responding to and engaging with a rapidly changing multilateral system, in its response to this report. This should include a roadmap detailing the UK’s engagement with the ongoing United Nations 80 (UN80) reform agenda at the United Nations and ensuring that the UK is actively in the room and enhancing the efficiency and the effectiveness of the United Nations. This strategy should also indicate how the UK’s soft power and status as a global convening power will enable the UK to navigate the challenging and fragmented period ahead. (Recommendation, Paragraph 30)

The international community’s reluctance to address malign influence within the United Nations system risks the loss of the values- embedded and rules-based international order. If more countries ignore UN resolutions, it will become less and less effective. The UK has a leading diplomatic network, significant soft power, and is a primary financial contributor to the United Nations and must take leadership in responding to these challenges. (Conclusion, Paragraph 35)

The Government should make full use of the whole United Nations system to advance its foreign policy objectives and further British values of democracy and tolerance to counter assertive behaviour by other countries within the 45 United Nations. The Government in its engagement should include publicly calling out countries who are abusing or undermining the United Nations system. (Recommendation, Paragraph 36)

This Committee’s first priority will always be to push for the use of United Nations mediation, peace and security structures to resolve conflict: the international community is strongest together and a peace agreed by the consensus of the many is one which is firm and lasting. Nonetheless, we are cognisant of the changing reality in which conflicts are resolved in Doha and Istanbul, rather than at the United Nations Security Council in New York. (Conclusion, Paragraph 42)

The Government should adapt to the changing conflict environment, recognising the existing geopolitical realities of conflict resolution, whilst continuing to push for multilateral efforts where possible. The Government should enhance its bilateral partnerships with Qatar and Saudi Arabia, as well as Turkey, whilst ensuring it upholds its commitment to a rules- based international order. The Government should also leverage its relationships with regional groupings including the Gulf Cooperation Council, the African Union and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. We call upon the Government to ensure that the UK is in the room during these conversations and driving the agenda forward, drawing upon its expertise in diplomacy and stabilisation, and ensuring that British values, and those embedded universally within the United Nations, are furthered. It is imperative that the Government continues to invest resources in these diplomatic posts and in our representatives to these organisations. (Recommendation, Paragraph 43)

The UK is well placed to mobilise like-minded states and build regional and bloc-based coalitions to advance efforts to lead on the resolution of global conflict. This applies in particular to those organisations which have a regional remit for country files for which the UK holds the pen on the United Nations Security Council. (Conclusion, Paragraph 46)

The UK Government should be more confident in its role at the UN, harnessing its status as a global convenor, and drawing upon the UK’s diplomatic expertise to engage like-minded states in resolving conflict in cases where it is not possible to reach agreement at the United Nations Security Council. The Government should leverage its alliances and influence in its continued collaborative efforts to work with European countries, the Commonwealth, NATO and the US, to actively build creative and fresh blocs and coalitions to advance the agenda of conflict resolution. Within these organisations, the UK should prove its value by exercising leadership in line with international law and accountability and link these efforts to its agenda at the United Nations Security Council. (Recommendation, Paragraph 47) 46

The UK should continue to work closely with the US in the United Nations Security Council to advance the UK’s values-based approach to resolving conflict through multilateral organisations. (Conclusion, Paragraph 51)

Where agreement or consensus with the US may not be forthcoming, the Government must engage the US proactively, in behind-the-scenes and backdoor diplomacy. Simultaneously, the Government should have the confidence to develop robust alliances with Elected Members to the United Nations Security Council to advance British values including the belief in a rules and values-based international order and commitment to reduce global conflict and to secure progress on UK penholder files. (Recommendation, Paragraph 52) Government coordination and alignment

We are concerned about the cuts to the FCDO’s budget, including those to the Directorate responsible for multilateral organisations such as the UN. Such measures will reduce the UK’s ability to be an effective penholder at the United Nations and to lead on the resolution of global conflict through the United Nations Security Council. More so, these cuts risk ceding further influence to China and Russia within the multilateral system. Indeed, such detrimental measures open the door, willingly, to our competitors and adversaries. (Conclusion, Paragraph 60)

The Government must ensure the retention of the high-calibre staff at the UK Missions to the United Nations and it should outline a clear strategy detailing how it plans to retain these staff. When the Government is clear on the structure and composition of the FCDO following its restructuring, it should, as a matter of priority, provide this Committee a detailed overview of how this will affect UK Missions to the United Nations with a focus on resources, financing and staff retention. (Recommendation, Paragraph 61) Impact on global security of cutting foreign aid

With a reduced Official Development Assistance budget and a smaller budget allocation for conflict prevention and peacebuilding efforts, the UK is less visible on the global stage and in key conflict zones. This opens up the space to our adversaries and competitors to make significant inroads, particularly China, Iran and Russia. (Conclusion, Paragraph 65)

For the UK to continue being a lead actor within the United Nations Security Council, and a leading global actor in the prevention and resolution of conflict, it is critical that the Government sets out a pathway and 47 timeline as to how it will return to spending 0.5%, and ultimately 0.7%, of Gross National Income on Official Development Assistance spend as soon as is fiscally possible. This should include details of a protected budget dedicated to conflict prevention, mediation and civilian-led peacebuilding. (Recommendation, Paragraph 66)

The Government should also, in its response, outline how the FCDO’s reduced operating budget will allow it to continue being a leading multilateral actor and fulfil the Government’s responsibility to push through efficiencies identified throughout the ongoing United Nations 80 (UN80) process to ensure it gets full UK support. (Recommendation, Paragraph 67)

It should also detail what interim investments it has made for private finance to plug the Official Development Assistance gap. This includes investment in civilian-led conflict prevention, resolution and peacebuilding. UK expertise, much of it currently concentrated in the Migration and Conflict Department, Integrated Security Fund and FCDO cadre of conflict advisors deployed in various diplomatic posts, is essential to sustaining global credibility and leadership, and must be safeguarded. We also welcome further clarity on how the Government will share its expertise with host countries to develop their expertise on preventing, resolving and reducing conflict in a manner which is reciprocal and mutually beneficial and allows them to develop such capacities over the long-term. The Government must work closely with its European allies to share responsibilities rather than duplicating efforts, to bring about a singular and coordinated response in the prevention and resolution of conflict. Although beyond the scope of this inquiry, a forward-looking whole of government peace and conflict strategy would bring much-needed clarity and ensure that diplomatic, security and development investments are aligned for maximum impact. (Recommendation, Paragraph 68) The UK’s role as penholder at the United Nations Security Council

Sharing the pen allows for Elected Members to the United Nations Security Council to actively partake in the penholder process and to learn from the UK’s expertise as a convening actor in diplomacy and as a leader in the global resolution of conflict. Furthering such relationships would strengthen the UK’s soft power and may lead to the formation of new alliances. (Conclusion, Paragraph 72)

The Government should prioritise co-penholding with at least one Elected Member to the United Nations Security Council per country and thematic file, where appropriate, and where Elected Members are willing and able to contribute meaningfully. This would also provide a practical 48 and implementable reform mechanism within the United Nations Security Council in a manner beneficial to the UK’s interests. The Government should adopt co-penholding as a rule for files where the UK’s foreign policy serves as a barrier to its ability to be an actor in promoting global peace and security efforts at the United Nations Security Council. (Recommendation, Paragraph 73)

Without debate, progress on a file and elevating the platform of a conflict to find diplomatic solutions forward is stalled. This stymies the core mission of the United Nations Security Council, which is to identify and spearhead solutions to restore global peace and security. (Conclusion, Paragraph 77)

We recognise that the UK’s Mission to the United Nations is operating in an increasingly fraught and challenging geopolitical environment, but that should not preclude the UK from raising and debating files such as Myanmar and Sudan at the United Nations Security Council. (Conclusion, Paragraph 78)

The UK must continue to put forward, raise and debate issues at the United Nations Security Council for files it holds the pen for, even if these are ultimately vetoed. It is essential that in situations of conflict where the UK has a responsibility, that conflict is seen to be being raised and debated at the United Nations Security Council, despite the outcome. This demonstrates the UK’s leadership and commitment to a rules-based international order, whilst highlighting deliberate actions by other Permanent Members to forestall resolutions. (Recommendation, Paragraph 79)

The UK has demonstrated strong leadership in its management of the penholder file ‘The UN Office for Central Africa’, and should continue this work. (Conclusion, Paragraph 82)

The UK is to be commended for its role as penholder for Colombia at the United Nations Security Council and continuing to push for stability in a volatile region. (Conclusion, Paragraph 87)

We urge the Government to outline the steps it is taking as penholder to seek to ensure the long-term consolidation and enforcement of the peace process in Colombia. This should include a summary of the actors it is engaging with on the ground, including civil society and women-led groups and the regional Elected Member at the time, to the United Nations Security Council. The Government should continue to raise human rights violations in Colombia at the United Nations Security Council and take all measures possible, including targeted sanctions or travel bans, against those responsible. (Recommendation, Paragraph 88) 49

Our evidence supports the view that UK’s roles as penholder for Cyprus at the United Nations Security Council and as a party to the Treaty of Guarantee in Cyprus do not represent a conflict of interest. (Conclusion, Paragraph 90)

The UK should continue to uphold its commitment to the resolution of the stalemate in Cyprus, utilising jointly its role as penholder and as one of the parties to the Treaty of Guarantee. The Government should detail in its response to this report what steps it is taking to ensure Cyprus remains a primary agenda item at the United Nations Security Council and outline how this work is aligned with ongoing policy on Cyprus at the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office. (Recommendation, Paragraph 91)

Libya is a neglected item at the United Nations Security Council and the UK has not taken sufficient action to raise it. Despite controversy relating to the UN Security Council-backed intervention which the UK participated in, our evidence suggested the UK was the only candidate of the UN Security Council Permanent Members likely to have the appetite to hold the pen for the Libya file. (Conclusion, Paragraph 95)

The Government should demonstrate the actions it is taking to promote peace and security in Libya’s borders as its penholder. (Recommendation, Paragraph 96)

We note with concern that despite increasing violence and reports of human rights violations, there has been no substantive resolution on Myanmar passed by the United Nations Security Council since 2022. (Conclusion, Paragraph 99)

It is critical that the UK continues to raise the profile of Myanmar in all its efforts as penholder for this file at the United Nations Security Council. The Government should introduce regular mandated reporting on this conflict. The Government should also work with regional actors, including the regional organisation, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), to bring about a locally-negotiated solution to this conflict. (Recommendation, Paragraph 100)

We recognise, support and honour the thousands of United Nations peacekeepers who are upholding peace and security and taking risks to their lives in conflict zones around the world. (Conclusion, Paragraph 109)

However, we recognise that United Nations peacekeeping missions require reforms to ensure they are fit for purpose. This should include consideration of technological solutions—like the use of drones for monitoring conflict zones—to both support United Nations peacekeeping missions and reduce 50 costs in light of reducing funding from Member States such as the US. It is also important to review peacekeeping missions regularly to ensure that missions do not run on endlessly. (Conclusion, Paragraph 110)

It is clear that United Nations peacekeeping requires reform, and we support the Government’s efforts to promote a leaner peacekeeping and peace and security architecture at the UN. However, we would urge the Government to maintain UK investment in conflict prevention, including through the UN. The Government should: a. Set out, in its response to this report, its long-term plan to reform the over-inflated peacekeeping bodies and missions at the United Nations and how those plans fit into the United Nations 80 (UN80) agenda. The Government should detail its specific objectives. It should also consider whether in some places, redirecting investments to other UN arms, such as the UN Peacebuilding Support Office and its Peacebuilding Fund, could deliver the same or more impact at a fraction of the cost. b. Drive forward the review and closure of United Nations peacekeeping structures, missions, mandates and agencies which overlap or those which are not delivering their objective of promoting mediation and security. Additionally, the Government should outline its internal review process for deciding how mandates are evaluated. c. Lead on efforts to create a unified and singular United Nations peace and security structure, which is focused on mediation and conflict resolution. This structure should be responsible to the United Nations Security Council. d. Outline how it will use its penholdership of this file to promote, secure and further the United Nations’ role in peace, security and mediation and detail what conflicts it will identify as priorities. e. Seek to ensure that United Nations peacekeeping budgets and relevant peacekeeping mandates are financially supported despite the increasing polarisation evident on the United Nations Security Council, which may hinder regular budgetary processes. f. Actively push for the use of technology, particularly drones, in peacekeeping as a way to mitigate costs and promote safety in regions where peacekeepers may be at greater

The Government should ensure that it is taking all possible steps to ensure that civilians in armed conflict are protected and given access to shelter, food and healthcare. The Government should use the offices of the UN to urge warring parties to respect protected spaces such as schools and hospitals. (Conclusion, Paragraph 113)

The Government, in its response, should detail the process by which national interest is weighed against obligations as penholder at the United Nations when assuming responsibility for a file, with reference to its responsibility for the Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict file. (Recommendation, Paragraph 114)

The UK has demonstrated strong leadership on the Somalia file at the United Nations, drawing on a network of African actors built up over two decades and a strong in-country presence. (Conclusion, Paragraph 119)

A stable Somalia is crucial to global and maritime security. The Government should, in its response, outline how it is continuing to work with regional actors in Somalia and detail which funds it will use to support the implementation of United Nations and regional African Union-led mandates in Somalia. The Government should set out what form this new financing partnership will take, such as a joint UK-led Security Council Stabilisation Fund in cooperation with like-minded countries. (Recommendation, Paragraph 120)

We commend the UK’s tenacity and leadership on the Sudan file but urge it go further to promote peace and security in Sudan, both at the United Nations Security Council and bilaterally. We are cognisant that the UK is operating in a difficult, fractious and complex geopolitical environment and is constrained at the United Nations Security Council. (Conclusion, Paragraph 125)

We recommend that the UK take the following actions as soon as possible: a. Pursue all efforts possible to intensify its diplomatic efforts and pass a United Nations Security Council resolution which calls for an immediate end to fighting in Sudan and upholds the protection of civilians. b. The Government should outline in its response how it plans to enforce deterrents including sanctions against individuals and entities who violate United Nations Security Council resolutions on Sudan. c. As penholder for the Women, Peace and Security file, the UK must do all it can to ensure that mediation efforts involve Sudanese women and women-led civil society organisations. This includes support for 52 accessing healthcare, including supporting organisations involved in assisting women who are victims of gender-based violence and conflict-related sexual violence. d. Engage the Sudanese diaspora in the UK, who have been instrumental in highlighting the devastating impact of this war, to inform the Government’s Sudan policy. (Recommendation, Paragraph 126)

The UK has historically demonstrated strong management and leadership as concerns the Women, Peace and Security file, however it can and must go further. (Conclusion, Paragraph 133)

We recommend: a. The Government should outline in its response to this report what work it is pursuing as penholder for Women, Peace and Security to include women and women-led organisations in mediation and peace negotiations. The UK Mission to the United Nations in New York should lead by example by including women in all stages of the penholding process across files. b. The Government should outline, in its response, its strategy for navigating increasing attempts by some countries who are Permanent Members to the United Nations Security Council to remove references to women’s health and safety from resolutions. The Government should detail how it is engaging like-minded allies, Elected Members to the United Nations Security Council and regional actors to push back against such narratives. c. The Government should seek to strengthen United Nations Security Council statements, resolutions and mandates concerning Women, Peace and Security through the inclusion of measurable and concrete commitments which go beyond symbolism and which protect the language around women’s inclusion and health. (Recommendation, Paragraph 134)

There has been criticism that the UK’s penholdership of the Yemen file was compromised due to UK arms sales to Saudi Arabia who were at war against Houthi terrorists in Yemen. However, Saudi Arabia has now largely withdrawn from Yemen. We agree that the UK remains the best-placed Permanent Member to hold this file at the United Nations Security Council. However, progress on the Yemen file has been slow despite neither Russia nor China having vested interests which could lead them to use their veto. (Conclusion, Paragraph 141)

We encourage the Government, through the UK Mission to the United Nations in New York, to continue to push for long-term peace and security in Yemen, with particular reference to upholding maritime security, the 53 protection of civilians in armed conflict and the safety of women and girls. It must continue to work closely with the United Nations Special Envoy for Yemen and Yemeni stakeholders to secure a sustainable peace in Yemen. (Recommendation, Paragraph 142) 54