See also: G4 (disambiguation).
| G4 | |
| Map: | File:G4 Nations.svg |
| Formation: | 2005 |
| Type: | Political cooperative alliance |
| Purpose: | Reform of the UNSC |
| Membership: | |
| Leader Title: | Leaders |
| Bodystyle: | width:25em |
The G4 nations, comprising Brazil, Germany, India, and Japan, are four countries which support each other's bids for permanent seats on the United Nations Security Council. Unlike the G7, where the common denominator is the economy and long-term political motives, the G4's primary aim is the permanent member seats on the Security Council. Each of these four countries have figured among the elected non-permanent members of the council since the UN's establishment. Their economic and political influence has grown significantly in the last decades, reaching a scope comparable to the permanent members (P5). However, the G4's bids are often opposed by the Uniting for Consensus movement, and particularly their economic competitors or political rivals.[1]
The UN currently has five permanent members with veto power in the Security Council: China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States – comprising the victors of World War II. The G4 nations are regularly elected to two-year terms on the Security Council as non-permanent members by their respective regional groups: in the 24-year period from 1987 to 2010, Brazil and Japan were elected for five terms each, Germany for four terms (one term as West Germany and three terms as unified Germany) and India for eight terms.[2] Cumulatively, the G4 has spent 64 years on the Security Council since the UN's inception, with each country serving at least a decade.[3]
| Comparison of G4 and P5 nations | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| width=130 | Country data |  BRA |  CHN |  FRA |  GER |  IND |  JPN | RUS |  U.K. |  U.S. | |||
| G4 nation or P5 nation | G4 | P5 | P5 | G4 | G4 | G4 | P5 | P5 | P5 | ||||
| Region | Latin America and Caribbean | Asia-Pacific | Western Europe | Western Europe | Asia-Pacific | Asia-Pacific | Eastern Europe | Western Europe | North America | ||||
| Population | 2.7% 7th | 17.9% 2nd | 0.9% 20th | 1.1% 19th | 17.9% 1st | 1.6% 11th | 1.9% 9th | 0.9% 21st | 4.2% 3rd | ||||
| Territory | 8 515 767 km2 5th | 9 596 961 km2 4th | 640 679 km2 42nd | 357 114 km2 62nd | 3 287 263 km2 7th | 377 973 km2 61st | 17 098 246 km2 1st | 242 495 km2 78th | 9 833 517 km2 3rd | ||||
| GDP (nominal) (US$trillion) | $2.33 8th | $18.53 2nd | $3.13 7th | $4.59 3rd | $3.93 5th | $4.11 4th | $2.05 11th | $3.59 6th | $28.78 1st | ||||
| GDP (PPP) (US$trillion) | $4.27 8th | $35.29 1st | $3.98 10th | $5.68 5th | $14.59 3rd | $6.72 4th | $5.47 6th | $4.02 9th | $28.78 2nd | ||||
| UN funding1 | 2.95% 8th | 12.01% 2nd | 4.43% 6th | 6.09% 4th | 0.83% 21st | 8.56% 3rd | 2.41% 10th | 4.57% 5th | 22.00% 1st | ||||
| UN peacekeeping funding2 | 0.59% 19th | 15.22% 2nd | 5.61% 6th | 6.09% 4th | 0.17% 38th | 8.56% 3rd | 3.04% 8th | 5.79% 5th | 27.89% 1st | ||||
| UN peacekeepers | 282 47th | 2,531 9th | 706 30th | 504 37th | 5,353 5th | 6 105th | 70 70th | 279 48th | 33 78th | ||||
| Defence budget (US$billion) | $20.0 17th | $292.0 2nd | $53.0 8th | $55.8 7th | $81.4 4th | $46.0 10th | $86.4 3rd | $68.5 6th | $887.0 1st | ||||
| Military (active) | 366,500 13th | 2,185,000 1st | 208,750 23rd | 183,500 27th | 1,455,550 2nd | 247,150 19th | 1,320,000 4th | 148,500 34th | 1,328,000 3rd | ||||
| Military (reserve) | 1,340,000 4th | 1,170,000 6th | 141,050 30th | 50,050 48th | 1,155,000 5th | 56,000 41st | 2,000,000 2nd | 80,000 35th | 744,950 9th | ||||
| Paramilitary (active) | 395,000 8th | 660,000 6th | 30,800 43rd | 0 — | 2,526,950 3rd | 14,350 60th | 554,000 60th | 0 — | 0 — | ||||
| Military (total) | 2,101,500 7th | 4,015,000 5th | 380,600 28th | 233,550 45th | 5,137,500 4th | 317,500 37th | 3,874,000 6th | 275,053 40th | 2,072,950 8th | ||||
| Active space program | |||||||||||||
| Helicopter carriers projects | |||||||||||||
| Aircraft carriers projects | |||||||||||||
| Nuclear submarines projects | |||||||||||||
| Active nuclear arsenal | 3503rd | 2904th | 3 | 1607th | 5,9771st | 2255th | 5,4282nd | ||||||
| 1share of annual UN budget 2share of funding for UN peacekeeping 3Germany takes part in NATO nuclear weapons sharing agreement | |||||||||||||
The United Kingdom and France have backed the G4's bid for permanent seats on the United Nations Security Council.[4] Japan has received support from the United States[5] and the United Kingdom.[6]
All the permanent members of P5 have supported India's bids for permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), but China has previously implied that it is only ready to support India's bid for a permanent seat on United Nations Security Council if India does not associate its bid with Japan.[7] [8] [9] [10]
The United States has sent strong indications to Brazil that it is willing to support its membership, albeit without a veto.[11] The Council on Foreign Relations recommended that the U.S. government fully endorse the inclusion of Brazil as a permanent member of the Security Council.[12] Brazil has received backing from three of the current permanent members, namely France,[13] [14] Russia,[15] [16] and the United Kingdom.[17] [14]
In the final document of the 2019 BRICS summit, China and Russia say they "reiterate the importance of a comprehensive Security Council reform" and "support Brazil and India's aspiration for more relevant UN roles".[18]
As stated by the Minister of Foreign Affairs Sergey Lavrov at the Raisina Dialogue in New Delhi in January 2020: "I would say the Security Council's main shortcoming is the under-representation of developing countries. We reiterate our position that India and Brazil absolutely deserve to be on the council together with an African candidate, our position is that the purpose of the reform is to make sure that the developing countries enjoy a better treatment in the central organ of the United Nations".[19]
There has been discontent among the present permanent members regarding the inclusion of controversial nations or countries not supported by them. For instance, Japan's bid is heavily opposed by China,[20] North Korea, Russia and South Korea who think that Japan needs to make sincere atonements for war crimes committed during World War II.
Under the leadership of Italy,[21] countries that strongly oppose the G4 countries' bids have formed the Uniting for Consensus movement, or the Club, composed mainly of regional powers that oppose the rise of some nearby country to permanent member status. Uniting for Consensus supports expanding the number of non-permanent security council members and restricting the usage of the veto. The bloc argues that adding more permanent seats to the security council only benefits the nations that gain those seats, and believes that an expansion of the non-permanent membership will make the UNSC both more flexible and more democratic.[22]
In Latin America, Argentina opposes a seat for Brazil.[23] In Asia, Pakistan opposes India's bid.[24]
Another counter-proposal, the Ezulwini Consensus, was presented by the African Union, calling for the addition of five new non-permanent seats and two new permanent seats to be allocated to African nations, in response to a lack of African representation on the Security Council.[25]
The G4 suggested that two African nations, in addition to themselves, be included in the enlarged UNSC. In several conferences during the summer of 2005, African Union was unable to agree on two nominees: Egypt, Nigeria and South Africa all lay claim to a permanent African UNSC seat.[26] [27]
A UN General Assembly in September 2005 marked the 60th anniversary of the UN and the members were to decide on a number of necessary reforms - including the enlarged Security Council. However the unwillingness to find a negotiable position stopped even the most urgent reforms; the September 2005 General Assembly was a setback for the UN.
The G4 retain their goal of permanent UNSC membership for all four nations (plus two African nations). In January 2006, Japan announced it would not support putting the G4 resolution back on the table, not to interfere with any effort by the African Union to unite behind a single plan. And meanwhile, Japan's continuing relations with the G4 were not mutually exclusive.[28] [29] G4 issued a joint statement on 12 February 2011, in which their foreign ministers agreed to seek concrete outcome in the current session of the UN General Assembly.
In September 2015, Narendra Modi, the Prime Minister of India, invited the leaders of the G4 for a summit following the adoption of UN General Assembly Decision 69/560 by consensus, which moved forward for the first time.[30] In 2017, it was reported that the G4 nations were willing to temporarily forgo veto power if granted a permanent UNSC seat.[31]
In September 2019, in a joint press statement during the 74th session of the United Nations General Assembly, the G4 ministers reiterated their strong commitment to an early and comprehensive reform of the UNSC. Bearing in mind that in 2020 the United Nations would celebrate its 75th anniversary, the G4 ministers also expressed their firm hope that the current session of the General Assembly would pave the way for finally moving on the call for an ‘early reform’ of the Security Council and underscored their steadfast support for Africa's representation in both the permanent and non-permanent categories of membership of a future reform.[32]
In September 2023, in a joint press statement during the 78th session of the United Nations General Assembly, the foreign ministers of G4, joined to discuss the state of play of the negotiations for the reform of the UNSC, and reiterated that the expansion of the Security Council is essential to make the body more representative, legitimate, effective and efficient, adding that Africa needs to be represented in both the permanent and non-permanent categories of membership of a reformed and expanded Council.[33]
The following are the head of state and heads of government that represent the members of the G4 nations as of 2024: