Caution over vision: how the UN’s next chief gets chosen

With António Guterres less than six months from the end of his mandate as UN Secretary-General – and perhaps from the quieter rhythms of Portugal’s Alentejo – the race to replace him still feels strangely unfinished.

In mid-June, Carolyn Rodrigues-Birkett, Guyana’s permanent representative to the UN and a former foreign minister, entered the race. A month earlier, Antigua and Barbuda nominated Ecuador’s María Fernanda Espinosa, a former foreign and defence minister and former president of the UN General Assembly. In UN circles, insiders believe more people will soon raise their hands.

With the Security Council expected in July to begin closed-door deliberations, including informal straw polls, the contest in New York City so far appears to be defined by a longtime leading candidate in International Atomic Energy Agency chief Rafael Grossi and the expectation of surprise, last-minute contenders.

Whoever emerges as the next UN Secretary-General will inherit an embattled institution both reputationally and institutionally. After Donald Trump returned to the White House, Guterres rushed to implement cost-cutting reforms while trying to preserve the institution’s core mission – no easy task. As such, fewer high-level candidates have thrown their hats in the ring than had been expected. Guterres’ successor must manage an institution battered by the reality of several bitter wars, mistrusted by major powers and under pressure to shrink. The question is not only who wants the job (Opens in new window), but who can still make the job matter.

But before taking on the task, the divided permanent five powers of the Security Council – China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States – must agree which candidate embodies their drastically different views of the future of the institution. While many people believe it will be harder than ever, others think that the P5 will unite around preserving that very privilege. The process itself exposes the contradiction of the UN: it needs a bold leader, but the P5 may prefer a controllable one.

When the UN General Assembly held its interactive dialogues with candidates in April, several diplomats shared their disappointment by how few people were running for the job. At the time, four candidates presented their vision to the world body: Argentina’s Grossi, Costa Rica’s Rebeca Grynspan, Chile’s Michelle Bachelet, and Senegal’s Macky Sall. In 2016, 13 candidates ran (Opens in new window) for the job.

Experts saw people’s reluctance to run as a reflection of how difficult the job has become.

Ever since Grossi announced his candidacy last Fall, presenting himself as a manager with a track record from his time dealing with conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East while at the helm of the IAEA, he has been widely seen by diplomats as Washington’s favourite and well regarded by others. China and Russia’s support is a question mark, however, and he was also criticised (Opens in new window) for not stepping down from his IAEA post while campaigning – a conflict of interest in the eyes of some member states.

Grynspan’s campaign has been applauded by civil society and member states alike, but her Security Council support is uncertain. Bachelet, whose résumé echoes Guterres’ as a former head of government and senior UN official, faces steep odds amid scepticism (Opens in new window) from Washington and Beijing. Sall's campaign, unsupported by his own country or the African Union, surprised many.

At this stage it’s anyone’s guess who will be sworn in as UN Secretary-General on 1 January 2027.

Grynspan, Bachelet and Espinosa this month attended a debate in Geneva. Grossi declined (Opens in new window) the invitation and Sall sent a pre-recorded video. While this may give the three women an edge compared to the other candidates – many still hope for the first female to lead the world body – the event is likely to have little impact on who ends up getting the job. The so-called election is nothing like a democratic one: the Security Council recommends a single candidate, largely shaped by the P5, and the General Assembly formally appoints the winner. As such, the next UN chief will be the one who can successfully convince Beijing, Paris, Moscow, London and Washington that they will best represent their interests – or at least not be an obstacle.

Grossi’s pragmatic approach to the campaign has reflected this dynamic and shows his understanding of the process and the role. Since the United States blocked Boutros Boutros-Ghali’s bid for a second term in 1996, UN chiefs have known the cost of antagonising a permanent member. But many believe the next person to lead the UN needs to be willing to stand up to the great powers, to take the organisation off life support and make it shine again.

But Guterres’s experience is telling of the challenge, with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and Washington’s military and diplomatic operations in the Middle East illustrating the near-impossible expectation for the UN Secretary-General – to be at the heart of international diplomacy while unable to criticise world powers in the middle of wars.

The question, then, goes well beyond winning a campaign. It is who can survive the bargain. The next Secretary-General will be asked to revive an institution whose most powerful members prefer it constrained. That contradiction has always defined the job. This year, it will define the race.