The UN Secretary-General, role expansion and narratives of representation in the 2016 campaign
| Published date | 01 November 2018 |
| Date | 01 November 2018 |
| DOI | 10.1177/1369148118784706 |
| Subject Matter | Original Articles |
https://doi.org/10.1177/1369148118784706
The British Journal of Politics and
International Relations
2018, Vol. 20(4) 898 –912
© The Author(s) 2018
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/1369148118784706
journals.sagepub.com/home/bpi
The UN Secretary-General,
role expansion and narratives
of representation in the 2016
campaign
Kirsten Haack
Abstract
The contribution of bureaucratic actors, such as those of the United Nations Secretary-General,
has been a focus in the study of individuals’ contribution to international relations and the
study of United Nations reform. In this context, role expansion has been a central concern.
In January 2017, a new Secretary-General took office on the 38th floor of the United Nations,
following a successful campaign to reform the selection process by increasing its transparency.
Despite different campaign foci, campaign groups framed their claims for reform in the context
of ‘representation’, which shaped expectations and understanding of the role and its authority.
Expectations play a key role in role expansion beyond personality, leeway or institutional demand.
This article discusses the representation of states, gender and the people as referents for the
Secretary-General’s role, which corresponds to campaign claims regarding regional rotation, a
woman Secretary-General and greater independence for the Secretary-General.
Keywords
representation, Secretary-General, selection, United Nations
The 2016 process to select a new United Nations (UN) Secretary-General (SG) marked
a successful innovation in an institution often resistant to reform. The innovations and
the campaigns to achieve them raised questions about the future of the role and how its
nature can be explained. According to the UN Charter, the SG is appointed by the
General Assembly (GA) following recommendation from the Security Council (SC).
This formula has proved ambiguous in practice as ‘recommendation’ turned into pre-
selection, and ‘appointment’ turned into rubber-stamping candidates selected primarily
by veto powers. Reform campaigners criticised the secrecy of the process and the
back-room deals involved, which, they claimed, led to the appointment of compromise
candidates.
Department of Social Sciences, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
Corresponding author:
Kirsten Haack, Department of Social Sciences, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 8ST, UK.
Email: kirsten.haack@northumbria.ac.uk
784706BPI0010.1177/1369148118784706The British Journal of Politics and International RelationsHaack
research-article2018
Original Article
To continue reading
Request your trial