Africa's long-running campaign for permanent representation on the United Nations Security Council has gained fresh momentum at the 81st UN General Assembly.

African leaders have argud that the global body cannot claim to represent the modern world while excluding the continent from its most powerful decision-making organ.

Muyoti banks on Leopards knowledge to plot Ingwe downfall Football

Adhiambo set for Lionesses return in Africa Sevens redemption bid Rugby

UN Secretary-General António Guterres and General Assembly President Khalilur Rahman have both called for reform, while President William Ruto has used his address in New York to press for a fundamental overhaul of the post-World War II global order.

The debate is ultimately about more than an African flag being added to the Council chamber.

A permanent seat, particularly one carrying veto powers, would give Africa a continuing role in decisions concerning international peace and security and the ability to block substantive resolutions backed by the required majority of Council members.

Guterres told world leaders on September 22 that the Council's composition no longer reflected contemporary geopolitical realities.

“When the UN was founded, most of Africa was still under colonial rule. Today, Africa still has no permanent representation on the Council,” Guterres said.

“A 21st-century Security Council without permanent African seats is unjust and indefensible.”

Guterres has backed a broader reform process aimed at making the Council more representative of the world it is supposed to serve. The Council currently has 15 members, five of them permanent-China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States-with veto powers.

The other 10 are elected for two-year terms.

For Africa, the difference between a rotating seat and permanent membership is significant.

An African country elected to the Council can participate in deliberations and vote on resolutions, but its mandate expires after two years.

A permanent member would remain at the table and participate continuously in negotiations over conflicts, sanctions, peacekeeping operations and other international security matters.

The veto would add another layer of influence.

Under the Council's voting system, substantive decisions require nine votes and cannot be adopted if a permanent member votes against them.

This means an African permanent member with veto powers could prevent the adoption of a substantive resolution even where it had secured sufficient support among the other Council members.

The power would not amount to unilateral control of the Council, however. A permanent African member would still have to work with the other 14 members to build support for measures it wanted adopted.

The significance would therefore lie both in the ability to block decisions and in the negotiating leverage that comes with possessing the veto.

For Africa, that could be particularly important because the continent has frequently featured on the Security Council's agenda, including through discussions on armed conflicts, peacekeeping missions, sanctions and humanitarian crises.

Ruto said Africa should no longer remain a region affected by decisions in which it has limited permanent influence.

“The equality proclaimed in this assembly ends at the doors of the Security Council,” Ruto said.

“We are frequently the subject of its decisions. Permanently discussed, yet permanently excluded.”

The President argued that the international system still largely reflects the balance of power that existed in 1945, despite profound changes in global population, economics and geopolitics.

“The world has since transformed. The Security Council has not,” Ruto said. “We cannot manage transformation with institutions that refuse to transform themselves.”

Ruto's argument mirrors the position advanced by the African Union, which has made reform of the Council a longstanding diplomatic priority.

AU Commission Chairperson Mahmoud Ali Youssouf has said Africa is seeking to correct what the bloc regards as a historical injustice.

“Africa is not asking for a favour; Africa is demanding the correction of a historical injustice,” Youssouf said in May.

Under the AU's Common African Position, contained in the Ezulwini Consensus and Sirte Declaration, Africa wants at least two permanent seats with all the privileges of permanent membership, including the veto for as long as the veto remains part of the Council, and five non-permanent seats.

The demand for veto rights comes with an important qualification.

The AU has opposed the veto system in principle but argues that, if the veto remains available to existing permanent members, newly created permanent members should not enter the Council with fewer powers.

Kenya has similarly said that demanding equal rights does not amount to supporting the veto itself, but is intended to prevent the creation of what it describes as second-class permanent membership.

General Assembly President Khalilur Rahman also placed Africa's representation at the centre of his opening remarks.

“Africa needs to be at the table, not on the menu,” Rahman said.

He said Africa could not be asked to wait indefinitely for a permanent place on the Council, describing the issue as one of fairness, justice and the credibility of the United Nations.

Yet securing permanent seats would create another difficult question for Africa; who would occupy them?

Africa has 54 UN member states with differing diplomatic priorities, security interests and relationships with the major global powers.

The AU position is that the African Union should retain the right to select the continent's representatives for election to the Council to act on its behalf.

That means negotiations would not end with an agreement to expand the Council. African countries would also have to agree on a mechanism for selecting representatives, regional rotation and accountability to the wider continent.

The continent would also have to balance national interests against a broader African position when its representatives face difficult votes.

The potential benefits, however, extend beyond conflicts.

Permanent representation could increase Africa's bargaining power in wider diplomatic negotiations involving international security, peacekeeping and sanctions. It could also give African governments a more consistent platform from which to influence the international response to crises affecting the continent.