Online Reporter
Gibson Nyikadzino in UPPSALA, Sweden
ZIMBABWE’S bid for a non-permanent seat in the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) for the 2027-2028 term comes at an opportune time when issues of global security, conflict prevention, anti-terrorism strategies, conflict resolution, women and youth and reforming the UN are topical.
President Mnangagwa launched the bid after SADC, the African Union, Russia, China, Cuba and Iran, among many other progressive countries, have solidly backed Zimbabwe’s intent.
This is not the first time Zimbabwe is contesting for a non-permanent seat in the UNSC. It was a member during the 1983-1984 and 1991-1992 terms. The previous and current epochs are instructive in understanding why Zimbabwe has a chance to have the seat.
During its 1983-1984 tenure, Zimbabwe, barely three years into its independence, and then a member of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) just as today, became a pivotal voice in calls for the end of Apartheid rule in South Africa, securing its and the region’s interests during the civil wars in Angola and Mozambique; and raising the banner for Namibia’s independence.
This, Zimbabwe did, at a time the world was a bi-polar stage, primarily dominated by the US and the Soviet Union. It was a time when observers either ascribed a status to a country, either as “communist” or “liberal”, the very competing ideologies that characterised US-USSR competition.
It was also a term that came midway the Iraq-Iran war, when the Middle-East (real name Western Asia) had become a global hotspot of conflict; with external powers supplying weaponry and logistical support to the warring belligerents.
This was a critical time that Zimbabwe served in advocating for an end to conflict via peaceful means that could only be attained through diplomatic means, or dialogue.
After the end of communism, signalled by the collapse of the Berlin War in 1989, the introduction of multi-party democracy in Africa in 1990 and the disintegration of the Soviet Union in 1991, Zimbabwe had another term from 1991-1992.
That was a transitional period from the bi-polar world to the unipolar world that was characterised as the US victory of the world and the emergence of the dominance of liberal democratic values over communism.
Besides the collapse of the USSR, this was also a time when the Gulf War (1990-1991) was making the world an insecure place as Iraq and a 42-country coalition led by the US were fighting.
In Africa, Zimbabwe’s term, then, was also characterised by making fruitful deliberations towards the security of the East Africa when Somalia had been plunged into civil war following the overthrow of the Siad Barre government.
In the decades from 2000, Zimbabwe had to deal with some internal issues that attracted external pressures which intended to unconstitutionally remove the ZANU PF Government, ensure it was isolated and that the country had to be a pariah state.
However, the 2017 advent of the Second Republic turned the fortunes of the country, from a perceived pariah state to one that key global political players can collaborate and cooperate with for the advancement of society.
In its 2026-27 bid, Zimbabwe looks forward to locate and address universal challenges the world is facing like terrorism, arms control and the role of women and youth in the global peace agenda as key themes that need to be adequately responded to.
Small power, great influence
In global political lexicon, Zimbabwe is described as a small power. However, from its positioning and alliances, it has been a small power with great influence on the regional, continental and global stage.
This is a country that has excelled in international peacekeeping missions. It is a country that has consistently stood above ideological apexes and advanced the call for the UN reform to suit the existing developments for the sake of the people.
It is also a country that has placed development as a central theme of building new alliances and coalitions in order to exploit the economic and commercial benefits that should be translated to benefit the people.
Therefore, as a small power, with limited economic leverage, Zimbabwe’s significance in diplomatic negotiations cannot be understated, but be elaborated as she has the potential and capacity to influence the global state for a positive outlook.
History is replete with some non-permanent members of the UNSC viewed as small powers or small states that made use of their influence on the global stage. For example, in 2011 Brazil introduced the “responsibility while protecting” against the much know “responsibility to protect”.
The “responsibility while protecting” as a concept denotes a set of rules, norms, and processes that primarily limit the use of force while protecting vulnerable people and groups.
This speaks to the idea that minor nations can impact the international system by enhancing existing international mechanisms and shared standards, and Zimbabwe is not ambivalent to take that responsibility, too!
Friend of all!
The issues at Zimbabwe’s table are not for national security gain, but global benefit. They are meant to give value to countries that observers may want to perceive as friends and foes alike.
As a friend of all, Zimbabwe is placing the agenda of human development at the centre of what it is bidding.
By being a friend of all, Zimbabwe is implying that it will always look ahead to protect the human interest despite its relatively small size.
By being a friend to all and enemy of none, this places Zimbabwe as a neutral by formidable ally of UN member states as it initiates diplomacy, collaboration and cooperation to execute the mandate of the UNSC.
This is a bid for the global good!
