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

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.