The presidents of the United Nations Security Council and the General Assembly recently issued the now-traditional joint letter to member states calling for nominations for the next secretary-general to succeed Antonio Guterres in 2027. The letter, with its negotiated language, set out the process and certain parameters for the selection process, and for the first time, the letter specifically encourages member states “to strongly consider nominating women as candidates.” This might seem a heavy lift in this time of conservative populist backlash against diversity and gender equality, including among the most powerful U.N. member states. And yet, after 80 years and an unbroken string of nine men leading the U.N., selecting a woman who embodies the institution’s core values of human rights, peace, and multilateralism is more important than ever.
New research analyzing official statements of member states shows that at least 94 states seem intent on appointing the U.N.’s first-ever Madame Secretary-General. To better understand where U.N. member states stand on elevating a woman to the to the Organization’s highest post, our teams—at New York University’s Center for Global Affairs, the Global Network of Women Peacebuilders (GNWP), and 1 for 8 Billion, a civil society campaign advocating for a more transparent and inclusive selection of the U.N. secretary-general) analyzed official statements at U.N. events. The result is an interactive Statements Tracker.
It shows that, as of mid-November, a total of 145 countries have, in one way or another, raised concerns about the lack of gender balance in the U.N.’s leadership. This is a significant increase from February of this year, when 97 countries raised the issue. There is, of course, considerable variation in how committed countries are to seeing a woman in the post of secretary-general. There are 46 countries in the “strong” category, meaning they would like to see a woman SG, though they provide no specifics on how to achieve that outcome. A total of 99 countries have clearly implied that the lack of gender balance in the U.N.’s leadership is a concern and must be addressed.
A Secretive Process
The appointment of a secretary-general has always been a secretive process. The U.N. Charter offers no guidance on desirable qualifications or experience. On the process for selection, the Charter says only that the Security Council makes a recommendation to the U.N. General Assembly, which then makes the appointment. This means that the permanent five (P5) veto-wielding members of the Security Council — China, France, Russia, the U.K., and the United States — dominate the decision. An arcane system of straw polls is used by the Security Council’s 15 members over the course of several months to winnow the list of candidates, using colored voting slips to ‘encourage’ or ‘discourage’ candidates. A single ‘discourage’ signal from a P5 member is in effect a veto.
In 2016, under pressure from non-governmental organizations and the General Assembly, the process was made more transparent, including with a public shortlist of candidates. Seven of 13 were women. During the sixth and final straw poll, only Irina Bokova, then director-general of UNESCO and former foreign minister of Bulgaria, and Helen Clark, former prime minister of New Zealand and Administrator of UNDP, made it to the top five, placing fourth and fifth, respectively. Nevertheless, the selection process showed a desire by many member states to get a woman into the role.
What are the prospects for women candidates this time around? Article 8 of the U.N. Charter states that the organization “shall place no restrictions on the eligibility of men and women to participate in any capacity and under conditions of equality in its principal and subsidiary organs.” However, despite its supposed foundational commitments to equal opportunity, it has not lived up to them, whether in its leadership or, according to feminist critics, in its operations.
The very fact that no woman has ever served in the role of U.N. secretary-general, and that women have until relatively recently been a minority in its leadership, is increasingly seen as symbolic of a U.N. out of step with significant social dynamics. More substantively, research on women’s leadership in international organizations provides evidence that women leaders help promote diversity in staffing, inclusive decision-making, and institutional reform to improve delivery in particular on human rights mandates.
A New Surge of Support
That 145 countries recently signed on to expressions of concern about gender representation in the U.N.’s top ranks indicates, at the very least, that they believe gender balance is as important as the tradition of rotating the geographic origin of the secretary-general across the five U.N. regional groups. In a November 2025 meeting of the General Assembly, a new surge of support was apparent. A statement by Algeria on behalf of the 120 countries of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) explicitly acknowledged the obvious gender imbalance in U.N. leadership, stating that the secretary-general selection process must be guided by merit, rotating regionally, and “with continuing efforts to achieve fair distribution in terms of gender…noting that there has yet to be a woman secretary-general.” The Statement Tracker labels this as “implied/indirect” support for a woman SG. While not emphatic or insistent (in contrast with statements labeled “strong” or “very strong”), this must be read as highly significant, in view of a traditional resistance from some non-aligned countries to what are sometimes dismissed as Western feminist policy priorities.
But will this growing number hold sway in the process? The General Assembly, where all U.N. member states are represented, has the numbers, but the Security Council is the body that identifies the successful candidate. Among the P5, only France and the U.K. have taken a “strong” position. Russia has indicated it opposes efforts to prioritize women candidates. In February, its deputy permanent representative said at a General Assembly meeting: “We are convinced that excessive codification of requirements for candidates will not contribute to an optimal decision. For example, gender is one of the criteria, but it should not play a decisive role. If, for instance, there is only one woman on the list of candidates, then neither the Security Council nor the General Assembly would have a choice.”
The Calculus in the Security Council and the General Assembly
The United States signed a joint statement last year under the Biden administration supporting the representation of women in leadership positions at the U.N. Today, the environment is different. The Trump administration has led an aggressive rollback on women’s rights at the United Nations, prompting sharp funding cuts along the way. It also has extended its domestic crusade against diversity to the U.N. – for example, urging UNICEF and UN Women to eliminate use of the word “gender” entirely.
China, in a notable development, has joined the conversation. Breaking a streak of avoiding the issue since the tracking started last year, it stated in November that it “would also be pleased to see female candidates presented by Member States.”
The “elected 10” (E10) members of the Security Council are a crucial counterpoint to the P5. To adopt its decision on the selection, the Council will require nine affirmative votes and no P5 member casting a veto (voting against). This means that if a candidate gains the support of all P5 states, a further four votes from the E10 would be required for that candidate to prevail. Or put differently, if seven of the E10 were to insist on selecting a woman who embodies the institution’s core values, then they could block any candidate that they felt did not match up to this criterion.
So where do the E10 states stand? Five states — Colombia, Pakistan, Panama, Somalia, and the Democratic Republic of Congo — have been part of joint statements showing “indirect” support in our research. The remaining five — Bahrain, Greece, and Liberia, Denmark and Latvia — have signed onto statements showing “strong” support for a woman SG, with the latter two showing “very strong” support by proposing specific measures to ensure this outcome.
The Security Council is scheduled to make its recommendation in the second half of 2026. Then all eyes will turn to the General Assembly. It gets the final say. It is within the Assembly’s powers to actively consider any recommendation received and, if necessary, reject it and ask the Council to think again. For instance, the large group of states that are eager to see a woman selected as secretary-general have the option to reject the Security Council’s one recommendation if it turns out to be a man. Given that the vast majority of diplomats, irrespective of their views on any given issue, tend to eschew divisive actions such as this, those who want to break the glass ceiling and elevate a woman to the U.N.’s highest office need to mobilize and work together for this outcome ahead of time. One way to do this would be to call indicative General Assembly votes on candidates earlier in the process, so that the Assembly can indicate its preferred candidate(s) before the Security Council makes its selection.
Feminist Leadership
Of course, those calling for a woman secretary-general must be careful not to put the burden of repairing and renewing the United Nations on a single leader. It has to come with a determination to democratize the U.N.’s processes and sustain its core commitment to diversity. This will require specifically feminist leadership.
The Security Council is scheduled to hold an open debate on the secretary-general selection process on Dec. 15. As each member state takes their seat at the horseshoe table for their five minutes on this topic, we will be listening to see how determined they are to resist the current gender backlash and stand up for a U.N. led by a feminist woman.
This may be one of the toughest of times to insist that the U.N. deliver on gender equality — but this is also why it is so important. Those benefiting from the present power imbalances at the U.N. may be resistant to the idea of a feminist woman secretary-general. But for those committed to solving global problems — and for the credibility of the U.N. itself — it is an important step forward that must be taken.
