Small Nation, Big Dreams: Sierra Leone Learns Tough Lessons in the Security Council

Sierra Leone came to the United Nations Security Council ready to change the system. Instead, it found itself learning just how resistant the system is to change. The small West African country took its seat as an elected member of the Council in January 2024, driven to tackle its reform and enhance conflict resolution. It ends its term on Dec. 31.

“We were very ambitious,” Michael Imran Kanu, Sierra Leone’s permanent representative to the UN, told PassBlue in an interview on Oct. 28. “There are a lot of things which we thought of in setting up our priorities, implementing and achieving them. There were many things, including in our presidency, which we thought of introducing, but we knew the climate was not right.”

Sierra Leone, an Anglophone coastal country, took the Council’s monthly rotating presidency on Nov. 1. At the start of its membership, Kanu had hoped to use his country’s experience of civil war to provide solutions to several conflicts that the Security Council grapples with everyday. The country was engulfed in a civil war for more than a decade, starting in 1991. In 2002. a UN peacekeeping mission helped disarm approximately 45,000 fighters.

In his interview with PassBlue, Kanu said going through a civil war has given his country a unique perspective on trying to solve conflicts around the world. It was this background that Kanu said he shared with his United States counterpart in the Council, Mike Waltz, as a testament that peacekeeping missions work and UN funding cuts would diminish the organization’s impact, especially for small countries like Sierra Leone. The US is aiming to reform the UN by ending some peace operations and slicing budgets for a wide range of UN work.

“This is what we say to them: That we have a model, we have a success story; that is the core mandate of the United Nations, and we have to support that,” Kanu told reporters at a breakfast meeting last week. “So, we told that story, and we hope that was effective enough to get resources.”

It is unclear whether the sharing of Freetown’s postwar success story influenced the commitment by the US last month to pay $682 million of its mandatory dues to the UN peacekeeping budget. Even if it helped, the sum is a drop in the $2.1 billion deficit in peacekeeping funding as the operations face major budget shortfalls.

The UN has announced that it will reduce peacekeeping personnel and operations by roughly 15 percent to 25 percent, affecting thousands of troops and civilian staff. The reductions are linked directly to large nonpayments in dues by a handful of countries, starting with the US.

Contentious issues

The two priorities of Sierra Leone in the Council are conflict resolution and Council reform, perhaps the most contentious issues for the 15-member body. The permanent members, or P5 — Britain, China, France, Russia and the US — have been divided over what to do, if anything, about several ongoing conflicts around the world, especially the wars saddled with grievous humanitarian consequences.

It is well known that the Council is struggling to make progress toward resolving wars, including in Ukraine, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Sudan. (The Council had no role in the Oct. 11 ceasefire in Gaza now underway.)

The P5 prefer to leave any Council reform to the relevant General Assembly committees to tackle. Kanu said Sierra Leone’s debate on reform during its first rotating presidency, in August 2024, got members — including the P5 — to put their positions on record. The African stance for two permanent seats was declared.

“It’s quite understood that any formulation of Council reform needs to seriously consider two permanent African seats,” Daniel Forti, a senior analyst with the International Crisis Group, a conflict-prevention organization, said about Sierra Leone’s reform debate last year. “But no one would be naïve to say that this is the hardest part. I think we’re still a long way away from realizing Council reform.”

Most member states, including the P5, agree that the Council needs to change, particularly its representation, but there is no unanimity on what a revision would look like. Some Asian, European and Latin American countries want permanent seats as well, while a few of the P5 agree there should be more permanent seats. Other countries want the veto gone. (The Biden administration supported two permanent seats for Africa, but the current administration has not voiced its opinion on the matter.)

The veto has emboldened geopolitical spite among some permanent members who use it to protect themselves and their allies in the Council. Russia and the US have used their vetoes to kill widely popular draft resolutions that do not serve their national interests.

Since October 2023, the US has used the veto seven times to block humanitarian and related resolutions on Gaza and to shield its biggest ally in the Mideast, Israel. Russia also plays godfather with its veto, using it as a chip to win the loyalty of countries in Africa and the Mideast. Such deadlocks by both countries have significantly hampered the Council’s ability to end conflicts, its primary role in the UN.

The Council has passed 31 resolutions so far in 2025, compared with 36 this time last year. At the end of 2024, it passed 46 resolutions, the least since the end of the Cold War, in 1991. For context, the Council has passed only one resolution this year on Ukraine, a pittance ever since Russia fully invaded the country in 2022. All European members — including Britain and France — abstained from voting on the draft text.

The so-called “path to peace” resolution, led by the US, was also approved by Russia, an act that shook the UN for the document’s perceived appeasement to President Vladimir Putin.

While the division among the P5 is the most pronounced factor hurting unity in the Council, the elected members don’t always agree with one another as well. Sometimes, they align with certain permanent members over others.

Sierra Leone was caught in that web when it worked with Britain, the Council member responsible for the agenda on Sudan, to draft a resolution in November 2024. The text was killed by a Russian veto, to the delight of the Sudanese authorities, who complained they were not consulted in the negotiating process.

Al-Harith Idriss al-Harith Mohamed, the permanent representative of Sudan to the UN, said shortly after the vote that the draft had failed to include clauses condemning the United Arab Emirate’s interference in the civil war in Sudan and to designate the militia Rapid Support Forces (RSF) as a terrorist group. The UAE, a strong ally of Britain and the US, continues to deny involvement in the war, despite repeated documentation that it is supplying weapons to the RSF.

In his remarks, Mohamed questioned the paternalistic relationship of the P5 toward Africa, but the draft text also did not sit well with Freetown’s national position to elevate African solutions for African problems in the Council.

“International strain”

“We entered the Council at the time of significant international strain, particularly with geopolitical tensions,” Kanu told PassBlue. “So, I don’t think it’s about consulting on Sudan at the time. Given the opportunity, we will try again, because for us, that’s our commitment. And we’ll work with any P5, even if it’s the Russian Federation, to find a solution.”

Forti said the failure of Sierra Leone to take a more assertive position on the war in Sudan stems from a lack of clarity and political leadership by the African Union. The three African countries in the Council are better coordinated when they operate with a clear strategy that is backed by the continent. (Currently, they are Algeria, Sierra Leone and Somalia.)

“One of the defining characteristics of this particular war has been the lack of unity from African member states, in addition to major powers and regional powers placing their weight on various sides of the conflict,” Forti said. “Whether Sierra Leone, on its own, could have broken this deadlock. . . . It’s perhaps unfair to say that they could have hurdled over geopolitical powers and tried to resolve [conflict] that even countries like the United States and Gulf powers have spent months and years unsuccessfully trying to do.”

Each month, PassBlue profiles UN ambassadors as their countries assume the presidency of the Council. This month, Sierra Leone spoke with PassBlue about how it has tried to reform the body, to solve conflicts in Africa and the challenges with both efforts.

Excerpts from the interview with Kanu, held on Oct. 28, have been edited and condensed for clarity and flow.

PassBlue: What were the Council’s successes in the last two years?

Kanu: When we came into the Council, two regions were in serious conflict, Sudan and, of course, Ukraine. That affected the nature and dynamics of the Council. So, we already knew it was a difficult environment. We wanted to prioritize African issues, and the discussion on structural reform of the Council was important to us. It was also when the G5 Sahel [framework] was being asked to close down, Minusma [peacekeeping mission] was withdrawing and the conversation was a little acrimonious. It was more about political organization. Of course, political organization is important, we have to deepen democratic credentials in the region. But we also had a deeper and bigger crisis — the epicenter of terrorism in the world in the Sahel and parts of West Africa. We saw the threats moving to coastal West Africa, where there was no focus on how we could come together and have a coordinated response. Terrorism is still an issue, but at least we reframed the conversation around that.

When we come to the broader global context, particularly with big conflicts, what we’ve done as a success story is to use our own story, that we went through this challenge, to serve as a voice of reason but also to be pragmatic. We wanted to be a bridge-builder, to bring together opposing sides; to say, “This is what we think, but also this is what we can do to address the situation.” Those have been our successes.

PassBlue: You have prioritized conflict resolution in the Council and promoted “African solutions for African problems.” How successful has that plan been, given that current ceasefires and other peace initiatives have come from Washington?

Kanu: When the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo [in early 2025] was evolving, and we framed the Council’s engagement around supporting the Luanda [peace] process, we recognized that important foundations had been laid. There was an agreement and commitment by the parties to neutralize the FDLR [Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda] and, essentially, the withdrawal of forces. There was also an agreement on a ceasefire and for a verification mechanism to monitor it, as well as a broader peace framework.

Eventually, the [Luanda] summit was not successful because one of the parties withdrew. It was frustrating. But those elements formed the main thrust of the agreement signed in Washington. So, I would still call it successful. The efforts of President João Lourenço [Angola] and former President Uhuru Kenyatta [Kenya] were quite valuable. There was clearly an African solution for an African challenge. Work has been done in the past, and even those efforts have continued with support from partners like the United States.

PassBlue: Given reports of deals between African states and global powers like the US, how do these transactions align with the principle of African nations benefiting from their own resources? The Washington peace deal with the Congo and Rwanda was negotiated to provide access to DRC’s minerals.

Kanu: Now, on critical minerals — as chair of the [Security Council] 1533 Committee, when we reviewed its panel of experts report, this was a big issue. We organized an Arria-formula meeting in the Council on the “race for critical minerals” and how to ensure responsible private sector engagement. We brought in stakeholders from the Kimberley Process to discuss whether what was done for diamonds could apply to other minerals. They pointed out that the International Conference of the Great Lakes Region has a gold certification scheme.

So, the conversation was about finding ways to ensure that minerals based in countries can be used for their own economic development. A sovereign African state, like the Congo, can decide to enter bilateral agreements on how to manage its minerals. We can deconstruct these issues, and where gaps exist, we can introduce certification schemes.

PassBlue: Let’s look at Sudan. Sierra Leone worked with the UK on a Security Council draft resolution in November 2024 that was vetoed by Russia. Sudan’s ambassador to the UN said at the time that his country wasn’t consulted on the text. Could that process have been handled differently?

Kanu: We took every moment to consult with the countries concerned as a member state and as part of the A3-plus [the three current African members in the Council plus Guyana]. I’m not sure I agree that Sudan was not consulted. Consultation doesn’t always mean agreement. The resolution was meant to do one thing: Use the commitment of the parties, the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and Rapid Support Forces, on the protection of civilians and give it the authority of a Security Council resolution. The parties themselves agreed they had to protect civilians.

When we entered the Council in January 2024, it was a time of significant international strain. The draft resolution on Sudan was a victim of that political tension. Now, the situation in Sudan has changed. The SAF has retaken control of Khartoum [the capital], and there’s a civilian administration. We’ve said this administration must be supported toward elections and democracy. We condemned any fragmentation of Sudan or formation of alternate governments. Given the opportunity, we will try again, because that’s our commitment. It’s an African file, and we’ll work with any P5 member, even Russia, to find a solution. Whatever effort leads to a peaceful resolution, Sierra Leone will support it.

PassBlue: Sierra Leone’s presidency coincides with the co-drafting of a letter by the president of the General Assembly and your country in the Security Council to kick off the UN secretary-general selection process for 2026. What’s the conversation around that like?

Kanu: We have the UN Charter as our normative framework. It says the Security Council recommends, and the General Assembly elects. But over time, there have been calls for greater transparency and engagement. The resolution on revitalization spells this out: start the process early to allow time for nominations and consideration. The Russian Federation, holding the presidency [in October], made an initial attempt after receiving a letter from the president of the General Assembly. It appears that letter won’t be finalized in time, so . . . we’ll work with every Council member to put out a letter, but as an African member state, we have our own priorities. There are calls for the first female secretary-general. We want a process that will allow for member states to put forward those views.

PassBlue: Your president, Julius Maada Bio, has expressed frustration that issues like the Sahel didn’t get much attention during the General Assembly high-level week, in September, as the focus shifted to Gaza. Did that shift undermine your priorities in the Council?

Kanu: No. We have to acknowledge that during high-level week, we were dealing with a situation that experts were describing as genocide [in Gaza], so understandably, the world focused on that.

PassBlue: What has Sierra Leone achieved during its two years on the Council?

Kanu: We were very ambitious. There are a lot of things which we thought of in setting up our priorities and implementing and achieving them. We were quite effective and principled in defending international law, particularly at a time of serious international strain and selective application of the law. There were things we could have done — for example, the Sudan resolution would have been helpful. But the political climate wasn’t conducive. Even adopting press elements has been difficult this year.

We knew we couldn’t reform the Council from within — that’s a General Assembly mandate — but we had hoped to issue a presidential statement. Still, we’ve been realistic and identified one achievable goal: adopting a resolution on youth before our term ends.

PassBlue: Finally, what would you like Sierra Leone’s presidency to be remembered for?

Kanu: We came with a message: The UN works, particularly when partnering with states willing to move from conflict to peace. Sierra Leone’s own journey, from war to peace-building and democracy, is proof of that. Secondly, on agenda setting, we wanted to change the conversation about Africa, to highlight historical injustices and the need for legitimacy through permanent African seats. We also wanted to reframe how African issues are discussed, emphasizing African agency and African solutions. But we can’t achieve that without being able to set the agenda and shape conversations in the Council. That’s what we hope continues.

Ambassador to the UN: Michael Imran Kanu, 40
Since: 2024
Languages: English
Education: Doctorate of juridical science degree in international business law (SJD), Central European University; master of laws in international business law (LL.M), Central European University; degree of utter barrister (B.L), Sierra Leone Law School; and bachelor of laws with honors (LL.B), Fourah Bay College, University of Sierra Leone.

His story, briefly: Kanu, the permanent representative of Sierra Leone to the UN, also holds the positions of ambassador to Argentina, Cuba, Mexico, Uruguay and Venezuela, as well as permanent representative to the International Seabed Authority in Kingston, Jamaica. He is a member of the Legal and Technical Commission of the International Seabed Authority (2023-2027) and co-chair of the review mechanism of the International Criminal Court and the Rome Statute system.

Kanu previously served as ambassador and deputy permanent representative of legal affairs to the Sierra Leone mission in New York City from 2018 to 2023. In Sierra Leone, he practiced law as the managing partner of Kanu & Associates and was a prosecutor for the country’s Anti-Corruption Commission. He is married to Rita Sia Abibatu Kanu and they have two children.

Country Profile
Head of State: Julius Maada Bio
Minister of Foreign Affairs: Timothy Kabba
Type of Government: Presidential republic
Year Sierra Leone Joined the UN: 1961
Year in the Security Council: 1970-71
Population: 8.6 million
Carbon emissions: 0.1 tons; world average of CO2 emissions per person: 4.7 tons (2023)