CONSTRUCTIVIST ASPECTS OF THE UN SECURITY COUNCIL’S PERMANENT MEMBERS’ CONDUCT: THE CASE OF FRANCE AND THE UNITED KINGDOM

Abstract

While all five permanent members (P5) of the UN Security Council (UNSC) have the
same statutory rights and privileges, not all of them use these rights and privileges in the same
way. These differences cannot be explained solely by the differences in material factors between
the P5 – the differences in power or wealth – as realist theories in IR would claim, but the
explanation should involve the ideational factors behind them as well, as constructivist theories in
IR would argue. This paper deals with the main constructivist aspects – the ideas, identities, norms,
beliefs – of the behavior in and around the UNSC of two permanent members – France and the
United Kingdom (UK). These two countries have many similarities in their positions and behavior
in the Council, which are mainly expressed in these two countries being pro-active in the UNSC
and in advocating for a proactive UNSC in accordance with its responsibilities; in their non-use of
their veto in the UNSC; and in their pledges to reform the UNSC, especially the use of the veto by
the permanent members in cases of mass atrocities. There are also some differences between
France and the UK, stemming mainly from the different identities they build and present for
themselves on the international scene and the role of their countries in international politics, related
to the importance of Africa for France; to their different relationships with the USA; and their
different relationships with the EU.