Politics & Power Quote by Harri Holkeri

Technocratic on the surface, this is really a quiet power play dressed up as procedural housekeeping. By naming “big issues” and then immediately narrowing in on Security Council reform, Harri Holkeri is signaling the holy grail of UN politics: who gets to decide what counts as “international peace and security,” and who gets a permanent seat at that table. It’s the kind of topic everyone agrees is important, precisely because agreement costs nothing and change costs everything.

The phrasing matters. “These kinds of questions” is a strategic understatement, the diplomatic equivalent of putting a live wire in a padded envelope. Security Council reform implicates veto power, post-1945 hierarchies, and the enduring bargain where legitimacy is distributed broadly in the General Assembly while coercive authority is concentrated in the Council. Holkeri frames it as something the President of the General Assembly “must keep his eye on,” which is both modest and pointed: the office can’t force reform, but it can keep the issue in circulation, set agendas, convene coalitions, and apply moral pressure. In UN terms, that’s real leverage.

The context is an institution perennially accused of being frozen in time. By emphasizing vigilance rather than promises, Holkeri manages expectations while asserting relevance. He’s also reminding member states that the General Assembly’s presidency isn’t just ceremonial pageantry; it’s an attention economy job. If you can’t move the machinery, you can at least keep the spotlight trained on the part that everyone pretends isn’t rusting.