Sierra Leone's President Bio Rallies Africa's Push for United Nations (UN) Security Council Reform at C-10 Ambassadors Retreat in Freetown

President Dr. Julius Maada Bio has reaffirmed Africa's united demand for equitable representation on the United Nations Security Council, describing the continent's exclusion as 'a profound historical injustice.' He made the remarks during the opening ceremony of the Retreat of Permanent Representatives of C-10 Member States in Addis Ababa and New York.
As Coordinator of the C-10, President Bio underscored the urgency of reform and Africa's growing influence in global peace and security governance. 'This Retreat is not merely administrative,' he told delegates. 'It is a moment of reflection, unity, and renewed commitment to a cause that is not only African, but truly global.'
President Bio highlighted major diplomatic milestones over the past year, including Sierra Leone's presidency of the UN Security Council in August 2024—the first time the body debated Africa's under-representation. This was followed by the U.S. backing two permanent seats for Africa (without veto) and the Pact for the Future, which acknowledged Africa's marginalization.
'Recognition is welcome,' he said, 'but it must lead to tangible outcomes.'
Delegates are expected to develop three core strategic documents: an AU Model for a Reformed Security Council, a Strategic Roadmap, and an Aide-Mémoire to guide global advocacy. These tools, President Bio said, would equip the C-10 for the next phase with 'greater coherence and persuasiveness.'
He also outlined five key imperatives that should guide the delegates' deliberations and actions moving forward: internal unity, targeted diplomacy, clear messaging, unwavering demands based on the Ezulwini Consensus and Sirte Declaration, and sustained high-level engagement. Africa, he stressed, must be granted at least two permanent seats with full rights, including the veto if retained, and at least five non-permanent seats.
'A Council stuck in the paradigms of 1945 cannot address the crises of today,' he said, calling on ambassadors to amplify Africa's voice globally.
President Bio proposed naming the Retreat's outputs the 'Freetown Roadmap', a technical and political guide for Africa's final push toward meaningful Security Council reform.
He closed by reaffirming Sierra Leone's commitment to the cause and commending the work of the C-10, the African Union Commission, and all partners. 'This Retreat marks a defining chapter in our pursuit of a reformed, just, and inclusive UN Security Council,' he concluded. The Retreat is scheduled for the 25th – 26th April 2025.
Distributed by APO Group on behalf of State House Sierra Leone.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Middle East Eye

an hour ago

• Middle East Eye

Exclusive: UK privately says attacks on nuclear facilities not illegal

The British government has carefully refused to publicly reveal whether it supported the US bombing of Iranian nuclear sites on Saturday, and even whether it deems the attack to be lawful. On Monday morning in an interview with BBC Radio 4, British Foreign Secretary David Lammy repeatedly declined to say whether he believed the US strikes were legal. Now numerous diplomatic sources with knowledge of the matter have told Middle East Eye the UK's private stance is that attacks on nuclear facilities are not illegal and should not be banned by the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). "The UK has taken the view that attacks on nuclear facilities are not by themselves illegal," said one British diplomat at the UN with knowledge of the matter who asked to remain anonymous. "This has put it at odds with the approach of most UNSC member states, which oppose such attacks outright." New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters Another diplomat with knowledge of the matter, also speaking on condition of anonymity, told MEE: "Most Security Council member states take the view that strikes on nuclear facilities should be prohibited, but Britain opposes that. Iranians say their hopes of peace have been buried by US bombs Read More » "The British view is that these attacks are not illegal in and of themselves, and so they shouldn't be prohibited. This is the position conveyed to diplomats but it isn't said in public statements." One diplomatic source confirmed this but stressed that "while it may be a minority position in the Security Council, it isn't a unique view and the Russians take the same approach, although they've criticised this particular US attack." MEE asked the Foreign Office and Ministry of Defence to confirm whether the UK believes that attacks on nuclear facilities are not illegal. The Foreign Office did not respond directly but pointed MEE to Lammy saying on Monday morning that "questions of legality are for the Americans to discuss themselves". "We wanted to get the Iranians back to the table, there is still an off-ramp. I was discussing that with the Iranian foreign minister on the phone yesterday." The Foreign Office also denied Iranian reports that Lammy expressed regret over the US strikes to his Iranian counterpart, Abbas Araghchi, in a phone call on Sunday. 'Iran can never be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon' After the US strikes on three Iranian nuclear facilities - Fordow, Nantaz and Isfahan - which the UK did not participate in, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said on X that "Iran can never be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon and the US has taken action to alleviate that threat." Notably, Starmer stopped short of endorsing the attack. "We call on Iran to return to the negotiating table and reach a diplomatic solution to end this crisis," he said. The Security Council met on Sunday to discuss the US strikes, which UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said "marked a perilous turn". Guterres said at the meeting: "We must act – immediately and decisively – to halt the fighting and return to serious, sustained negotiations on the Iran nuclear programme." The UK's permanent representative to the UN, Barbara Woodward, echoed Starmer in her public statement at the meeting, saying that the US "took action last night to alleviate" the "serious threat" of Iran's nuclear programme. "My prime minister has been clear," she added. "We urge Iran now to show restraint, and we urge all parties to return to the negotiating table and find a diplomatic solution, which stops further escalation and brings this crisis to an end." Pakistan announced on Sunday that it would present along with Russia and China a joint UNSC resolution calling for an immediate and unconditional ceasefire in the Middle East. Palestine Action to be proscribed as a terror group after break-in at UK's largest airbase Read More » The draft resolution condemns the US attack on "peaceful nuclear sites and facilities under the IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency] safeguards in the Islamic Republic of Iran". Britain is unlikely to vote in favour of the resolution. The Starmer government is attempting to perform a delicate balancing act in softly endorsing the outcome of the US attack on Iran while refusing to explicitly express support for the strikes themselves. When Israel launched its first wave of attacks against Iran, the UK was quick to announce that Britain played no role in the offensive or in helping to defend Israel against the retaliatory Iranian drone attacks, in contrast to previous episodes. Starmer has consistently made it clear that his government has no appetite for entanglement in the conflict, and is instead bent on promoting diplomacy. UK-Israel relations are increasingly strained, particularly after Britain sanctioned Israeli ministers Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben Gvir nearly two weeks ago. Last week it was reported that Attorney General Richard Hermer, the UK government's top legal adviser, privately raised questions over whether Israel's bombing in Iran, which has killed at least 430 civilians, was lawful. Hermer reportedly said the UK should not be involved in the conflict "unless our personnel are targeted".

Arabian Post

4 hours ago

• Arabian Post

Oil Markets Jitter as Iran Escalates Strike Response

Iran has launched a new wave of missile and drone strikes against Israel, following U.S. airstrikes that obliterated key Iranian nuclear facilities under Operation Midnight Hammer. The ripple effects are already being felt in global oil markets, while diplomatic channels strain under mounting pressure. The bombardment hit Israeli cities including Tel Aviv and Ashdod, with satellite monitoring confirming sirens and intercepted projectiles. Iran disclosed the deployment of dozens of drone strikes featuring anti-fortification warheads, claiming successful strikes on military installations. Iran's armed forces spokesperson warned U.S. President Trump—whom he labelled a 'gambler'—that Tehran intends to finish the war it believes Washington started. U.S. involvement under the codename Operation Midnight Hammer saw bunker-buster bombs and Tomahawk missiles strike Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan around 2:30am Iran Standard Time on 22 June. President Trump hailed the strikes as a 'spectacular success' and hinted at possible regime change even as officials insisted the goal was solely the elimination of Iran's nuclear threat. ADVERTISEMENT State media reports have confirmed Israeli attacks across multiple fronts—targeting runways, missile depots, and even Tehran's Evin Prison—with hundreds of Iranian casualties reported, primarily civilians. Iran, in turn, acknowledges missile strikes that killed at least 24 civilians in Israel, though tensions have yet to directly involve U.S. military assets. Markets are acutely rattled. Brent crude briefly climbed over $80 a barrel before settling around $76.6, reflecting investor anxiety over potential closures of the Strait of Hormuz—through which nearly a fifth of global oil transits. Iran's parliament approved a measure to block the strait, though practical implementation requires Supreme National Security Council approval. Experts warn closure could send prices soaring beyond $100, risking a global economic downturn. Diplomatic initiatives are mounting but yielding little success. Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi travelled to Moscow to discuss coordination with Russia, while the UN Security Council and IAEA held emergency sessions to assess fallout and potential regional contamination. European leaders, including those in Brussels, are urging restraint, though unity remains elusive. On the military front, analysis of commercial imagery indicates substantial damage at Fordow—deep underground—though Iran maintains that much of its nuclear material had been removed beforehand. Experts suggest Iran's retaliatory capacity may be limited due to depleted missile reserves and weakened regional proxies like Hezbollah and the Assad regime. Yet, threats to withdraw from the Nuclear Non‑Proliferation Treaty and ramp up nuclear weaponisation are being voiced by hardliners. U.S. authorities have raised global alerts: the State Department issued a 'Worldwide Caution' travel advisory, and the Department of Homeland Security flagged potential cyberattacks from pro-Iranian actors. U.S. cities have boosted security around cultural and diplomatic sites amid fears of retaliation. Oil traders also show signs of hedging—gold and Swiss franc investments are up, mirroring a flight to safe havens seen in June's earlier Israeli‑Iran exchanges. Tehran has warned no diplomatic efforts will resume until payback is achieved. Meanwhile, Washington and its allies are weighing strategic options, including naval deployments to secure oil flows and counter threats in the Gulf. The situation remains volatile, with escalation possible at any moment.

Khaleej Times

6 hours ago

• Khaleej Times

Turning 80, United Nations faces fresh storm of doubts

With its influence discredited and its budget in tatters, the United Nations is weathering a firestorm of criticism as it celebrates its 80th anniversary -- and tries to convince a polarized and conflict-wracked world it is more vital than ever. The UN's 193 member states will mark Thursday the signing of the organization's foundational treaty, the UN Charter, on June 26, 1945 in San Francisco. After ratification, the United Nations came into being on October 24. The anniversary comes as the world body faces a multi-faceted crisis that has raised questions about its future. "Since the end of the Cold War, we have seen the organization struggle in cases from the Rwandan genocide to the Iraq war," Richard Gowan, an analyst at the International Crisis Group, told AFP. "When each big crisis comes, commentators announce that the UN is finished. And yet it still survives," he added. "That said, this is an especially bad moment," Gowan acknowledged, pointing to numerous countries that are "deeply frustrated" by the UN Security Council's failure to act on major conflicts like those in Ukraine and Gaza. That inaction is largely due to the veto power of the council's five permanent members -- Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States -- which have competing interests. "The UN system as a whole has a credibility crisis, and it is not clear that the organization's members have the resources or political energy to rescue it," Gowan told AFP. For Romuald Sciora, a research fellow at the French Institute for International and Strategic Affairs, the credibility issue can only result in the virtual disappearance of an organization that is already a political "dwarf" on the world stage. "I'm not sure the UN will cease to exist, even by its 100th anniversary," Sciora told AFP. "I see a slow vanishing, and the UN becoming a bit of a ghost," like "these old organizations whose names we have forgotten." But experts say while the UN desperately needs to enact tough reforms, not all of its problems come from within, and it has become an easy scapegoat for its divided membership. 'Worse' without UN Gissou Nia of the Washington-based Atlantic Council think tank says she fears that "the approach of might is right... is what is taking hold, and it brings us further and further away from the ideals" that led to the UN's founding as World War II ended. Nia, a human rights lawyer, says she hopes enough people will remain committed to the set of ideals and values "that will keep the UN alive," but still worries about the constant questioning of those values, notably from US ally Israel. "The constant berating from some very loud voices about the UN either being anti-Semitic, or the UN being a waste of funding, or the UN propping up dictators, actually has an impact," Nia told AFP. In a world devastated by the largest number of ongoing conflicts since 1945, and ravaged by major humanitarian crises, "the United Nations has never been more needed," Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said recently. "Our values have never been more relevant. And the needs have never been greater." Funding has nevertheless grown scarce as donors -- especially the United States under President Donald Trump -- pull back. Given the financial constraints, Guterres launched the UN80 initiative in a bid to streamline operations. Those changes could include thousands of positions being cut. For Gowan, "the UN is a very big organization, and of course it suffers from a variety of bureaucratic problems, just as almost all big organizations do. (...) So of course it deserves scrutiny and criticism." But, he added, "I think we have gotten a bit too accustomed to having this system at our service, and tend to spend too much time grumbling about its flaws and not enough time acknowledging its successes." The United Nations remains a place where arch-rivals and enemies still sit at the same table to air grievances, and where the smallest member state can have its voice heard. The UN also does important work on the ground, from the World Food Programme bringing needed supplies to more than 100 million people in 120 countries last year, to the thousands of peacekeepers protecting civilians in conflict zones. "The UN was a magnificent tool," Sciora said. "Obviously, it would be worse if it were to disappear from one day to the next."