It will be with great heart that Philippine officials and diplomats will be monitoring, in real time, on Wednesday, June 3, the expected vote before the United Nations (UN) General Assembly (GA) that will decide whether the Philippines will get a non-permanent seat in the UN Security Council for 2027 to 2028.
The June 3 vote, expected to take place at 10 p.m. Philippine time (10 a.m. in New York, where the United Nations is based) is the culmination of more than three years of public and private campaigns by all corners of the executive — from President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. himself, two veteran diplomats who have served as foreign affairs secretary under his term, and ambassadors persuaded various Philippine embassies and consulates to host their courts abroad.
If all goes well, Filipinos will know well before midnight on June 4 (Manila time) if the Philippines won its seat — that is, if Manila manages to get at least two-thirds of the votes from the members present and voting in the General Assembly.
Considering that all 193 member states of the United Nations will be present on June 3, that means that the Philippines should get at least 129 positive votes.
The election is done by secret ballot. Sometimes, several rounds of voting – again, by secret ballot – are required for a member state to win a seat.
What is UN SC?
The UN SC is considered the most powerful body in the UN, tasked with maintaining “international peace and security in accordance with the principles and purposes of the United Nations.” If it is before the UNGA where statements are made by member states, it is the UN SC where those feelings are turned into actions.
There is a range of members in the UN SC.
Five countries are permanent members (known as the “P5”) – China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The permanent members have the power of veto, maning, any one of them can block the resolution even if it is supported by another council.
Non-permanent membership, meanwhile, is decided by voting before the UN GA. Members are then elected for staggered two-year terms. The 10 positions are divided by region:
- Third for the African Group
- Two for the Asia-Pacific Group (to which the Philippines belongs)
- Two for the Latin American and Caribbean Group
- One for the Eastern European Group
- Two for the Western European Group and Others
On the June 3, 2026 ballot, the following seats will be elected:
- One for the African Group
- One for the Asia-Pacific Group
- One for the Latin American and Caribbean Group
- Two for the Western European Group and Others
The five states that will win seats from the June 3 vote will serve for a term beginning January 1, 2027 and ending December 31, 2028.
The Philippines is among the many countries that have called for reform and better inclusion in the UN SC, including a “competent General Assembly that can be accountable to the Council,” Marcos said in 2022.
The Philippines has called for permanent African representation in the council and limits the use of the veto for permanent members.
The last time Manila held a non-permanent seat in the Security Council was from 2004 to 2005, or two decades ago. It previously held seats in 1957, 1963, and from 1980 to 1981.
Competition in the Asia-Pacific region
The race to grab the seat of the Asia-Pacific is, unexpectedly, very difficult. While Philippine diplomats openly express the level of confidence that the Philippines will get the seat – there are always caveats. After all, voting is by secret ballot.
It means that even if Manila gets commitments from the countries that it gets their Asia-Pacific votes, there is no real way to check if those commitments were actually followed.
It is especially difficult because the seat is contested by Kyrgyzstan, a member country that has never sat on the council.
Some UN observers have framed the Asia-Pacific competition as a struggle between regions – between Southeast Asia and Central Asia. There are also fears that sympathy may go to Kyrgyzstan precisely because it has never had a turn in the council.
In an Op-Ed of Philippine Daily InquirerPhilippine Foreign Secretary Maria Theresa Lazaro rejected these comments, saying that the Philippines has a “demonstrated record” at the UN.
“At a time when the international rule-based order is under unprecedented pressure, the composition of the Council is more important than ever,” he said.
But what exactly, does the Philippines have to offer?
Belief in laws, systems
For Manila, the desire for a seat in the UN SC has always been about having a voice in international security matters and its faith in the international system, despite its obvious limitations and obstacles.
Observers and critics are quick – and right – to point out the failure of the UN General Assembly to implement change gracefully, especially in light of the many upheavals in the international order: Russia’s war against Ukraine, Israel’s attacks on Gaza, and the war initiated by the United States and Israel against Iran. The three cases involve either a P5 country or a nation closely related to the P5, in the case of Israel.
Philippine observers have often positioned the UN SC seat as beneficial for the Philippines in the context of the Philippines’ conflict with superpower China in the South China Sea. But Manila has not held its campaign on that.
The argument of Philippine leaders and diplomats has always been for the Philippines to be a country that upholds international law and order based on principles, even if, at sea, it has been a victim of what happens when those laws and principles are difficult to implement.
Timor-Leste President José Manuel Ramos-Horta, speaking ahead of the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore on May 30, called the UN SC “moribund, sclerotic, irrelevant.”
Manila, of course, doesn’t see it that way – even as it acknowledges the shortcomings of the international system it stands to defend and has sometimes done little to influence for the better.
“The permanent problems of the Security Council – stemming from superpower competition and the near paralysis of the veto – have placed a high premium on elected members capable of building coalitions, bridging divisions, and injecting orderly creativity into the stalled institution. The Philippines brings special and credible assets to the role,” Lazaro said in his Op-Ed.
He added: “The Philippines has a track record, relationships, and diplomatic culture to carry out that role effectively. Manila has spent decades building the kind of trust—across regions, at the development level, across geopolitical groups—that cannot be assembled quickly. The question before member states on June 3 is not which country deserves the seat, but which country can best use it.”
Will that be enough to prevent a potential upset in the vote? – Rappler.com
