81st UN General Assembly Opens: Who Will Become the Next UN Secretary-General? Eight Candidates Compete Without a Clear Consensus—Could a “Ninth Candidate” Emerge as a Compromise?

Celebrity Media News Commentary: The 81st session of the United Nations General Assembly officially opened at United Nations Headquarters in New York on the afternoon of September 8.

This session of the General Assembly is confronting multiple challenges, including ongoing wars, geopolitical divisions, the climate crisis, development disparities, and declining confidence in multilateralism. At the same time, it carries another important responsibility that will shape the direction of the United Nations for the next five years—the appointment of the next UN Secretary-General.

Current Secretary-General António Guterres’s second term will end on December 31, 2026. With the opening of the 81st General Assembly, the selection process for his successor is entering a more intensive period of political consultation.

The new President of the General Assembly, Bangladeshi diplomat Khalilur Rahman, has chosen the following theme for the 81st session:

“Restoring Trust, Managing Transformation: A United Nations That Delivers for All”

This is not only the working theme of the current General Assembly session; it can also be viewed as a challenge for the next Secretary-General: In an environment where international cooperation is becoming increasingly difficult, who can rebuild trust and help the United Nations adapt to a world that is fundamentally different from that of 1945?

The Tenth UN Secretary-General Will Be Appointed by the General Assembly—but the Security Council Decides Whom to Recommend

In his opening address, Rahman directly confronted the “trust deficit” facing the United Nations. He said that today’s world is no longer the world of 1945 and that the United Nations must adapt to change, advance reform, and regain the trust of both its member states and the international public.

He also identified the selection of the next Secretary-General as one of the 81st General Assembly’s major responsibilities, pledging to work with the President of the Security Council and all member states to ensure that the process remains fair, inclusive, and transparent.

Under Article 97 of the United Nations Charter, the Secretary-General is appointed by the General Assembly upon the recommendation of the Security Council.

This means that although the 193 member states complete the appointment through the General Assembly, the Security Council remains the primary arena in which the final candidate is effectively determined. A candidate must receive the support of at least nine Security Council members while avoiding a veto from any of the five permanent members—the United States, China, Russia, the United Kingdom, and France.

The selection of the Secretary-General is therefore not only a competition based on individual qualifications and leadership ability; it is also a process through which the major powers seek the minimum level of political consensus necessary to reach an agreement.

Eight Candidates Compete, but None Secures Nine “Encourage” Votes in the Second Round

So far, eight candidates have entered the race:

• Carolyn Rodrigues Birkett, Permanent Representative of Guyana to the United Nations
• Rebeca Grynspan, Secretary-General of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development
• Rafael Grossi, Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency
• Macky Sall, former President of Senegal
• María Fernanda Espinosa, former Foreign Minister of Ecuador and former President of the UN General Assembly
• Olara Otunnu, former UN Under-Secretary-General from Uganda
• Michelle Bachelet, former President of Chile and former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights
• Ivonne A-Baki, former Ecuadorian diplomat and government minister

[Image 2: Composite photograph of the eight candidates for UN Secretary-General]

The Security Council held its second informal straw poll on August 21. Although the Council did not officially release the detailed vote count, PassBlue, a news organization specializing in United Nations affairs, reported the following results based on information provided by sources:

Rodrigues Birkett currently leads with eight “encourage” votes, while Grynspan and Grossi each received seven. Their positions, however, are not identical: Grynspan received four “discourage” votes, while Grossi received six, suggesting that Grossi faces greater resistance.

Although Espinosa received only four “encourage” votes, she received just three “discourage” votes. This shows that a candidate’s prospects cannot be assessed solely by the number of supportive votes. It is equally important to examine the level of opposition and whether any of that opposition may come from a permanent member with veto power.

Support for the Front-Runners Remains Unstable

Compared with the first round, the second-round results reveal another noteworthy development.

According to media reports, Grynspan received 10 “encourage” votes in the first straw poll held on July 30, while Rodrigues Birkett received nine and Grossi received seven. In the second round, Grynspan’s support fell to seven votes, while Rodrigues Birkett’s declined to eight.

This indicates that although front-runners have emerged, their support bases have not yet stabilized, and no clear consensus has formed within the Security Council.

Nevertheless, straw polls are nonbinding tests of support and are not equivalent to a formal vote. At this stage, the ballots also do not distinguish between permanent and elected Security Council members. As a result, outside observers still cannot determine whether a candidate’s “discourage” votes include a potential veto from one or more of the five permanent members.

In other words, the fact that a candidate reached the nine-vote threshold in the first round does not mean that the candidate had cleared all obstacles. Likewise, the fact that no candidate received nine “encourage” votes in the second round does not necessarily mean that the process has reached a deadlock. The decisive question is who can secure sufficient support while avoiding a veto from the permanent members.

Will the Prospect of the First Female Secretary-General Become a Decisive Factor?

In the more than 80 years since the United Nations was established, no woman has ever served as Secretary-General. Five of the eight candidates in the current race are women, creating a genuine possibility that the United Nations could appoint its first female Secretary-General.

[Image 3: Photographs of the leading female candidates]

The two current front-runners, Rodrigues Birkett and Grynspan, are both women. However, Bachelet’s support declined from six “encourage” votes in the first round to only two in the second. This demonstrates that although gender may be an important advantage, it does not automatically translate into Security Council support.

The real question is no longer whether a woman can serve as Secretary-General, but rather:

Which female candidate can balance regional representation, political experience, diplomatic ability, and demands for reform while remaining minimally acceptable to all five permanent members?

This selection cycle is widely viewed as an opportunity for Latin America and the Caribbean. Combined with calls from member states to appoint the first female Secretary-General, women and candidates from the region may enjoy certain political advantages. Regional origin and gender, however, are only factors in the selection process—not guarantees of the final outcome.

When Will the Permanent Five Begin Serious Negotiations Over a Candidate?

The most important turning point will come when the five permanent members move from observing the candidates and testing their levels of support to negotiating seriously over the final choice.

[Image 4: UN Security Council meeting or representatives of the five permanent members]

The United States, China, Russia, the United Kingdom, and France may not share the same view of the issues that the next Secretary-General should prioritize:

• Peace and security, or global development?
• Human rights, or coordination among the major powers?
• Reforming the United Nations, or first ensuring that the organization can continue its basic operations?

Different priorities could point toward entirely different candidates.

Therefore, even if a candidate receives a relatively high number of “encourage” votes, firm opposition from any permanent member could still prevent that candidate from advancing to the final stage. Conversely, a candidate who currently ranks lower but faces less opposition and is acceptable to multiple sides could rise during subsequent negotiations.

What matters most in the next stage is not simply which candidate has the most supportive votes, but which candidate faces the lowest risk of a veto.

Could a “Ninth Candidate” Emerge?

This is currently the most intriguing uncertainty in the selection process.

The selection of the Secretary-General is not a direct election in the conventional sense. If none of the existing candidates can secure at least nine votes while avoiding a veto after multiple rounds of consultation, the Security Council would still have political room to seek a compromise candidate.

[Image 5: Image symbolizing a “ninth candidate” or compromise candidate]

So far, there is no public evidence that any specific “ninth candidate” has entered substantive consultations among the permanent members. However, additional nominations have not been institutionally ruled out. The absence of a clear winner in the second round may also prompt other potential candidates to reassess whether they should enter the race.

The real “dark horse” may not be the person receiving the most public attention or the first to announce a candidacy. Instead, it may be someone who can satisfy all of the following conditions:

Acceptable to the United States, acceptable to China, acceptable to Russia, and unlikely to face strong opposition from either the United Kingdom or France.

If the current front-runners cannot clear this threshold, a person who may not have the greatest public profile but faces relatively little political resistance could emerge as the compromise candidate.

Until a specific name emerges or reliable diplomatic information becomes available, however, the idea of a “ninth candidate” should be treated as a possibility rather than an arrangement that is already underway.

What Should We Watch After September 22?

The general debate of the 81st General Assembly will begin on September 22. Heads of state, heads of government, and foreign ministers from around the world will gather in New York, creating opportunities for numerous bilateral meetings and informal diplomatic contacts.

Although no date has been publicly confirmed for the next straw poll, four signals will be particularly important to watch in the coming weeks:

1. Whether the leading candidates from the second round can expand their support again;
2. Whether candidates with a relatively high number of “discourage” votes decide to withdraw;
3. When the Security Council will introduce color-coded ballots that can reveal the positions of the five permanent members;
4. Whether another country formally nominates a ninth candidate.

These developments will reveal more about the likely final outcome than the rankings in any single round of voting.

The Real Contest Is Only Beginning

With the opening of the 81st General Assembly, the selection of the next Secretary-General is moving from candidate presentations into a more complex stage of political negotiation.

The second straw poll produced temporary front-runners but no consensus candidate. Rodrigues Birkett currently ranks first, followed by Grynspan and Grossi. None of the three, however, has established a stable advantage sufficient to overcome the risk of a veto by one of the permanent members.

The real question going forward is not merely how many “encourage” votes each candidate receives, but who can reduce opposition, broaden acceptability, and ultimately become a choice that the major powers can accept.

If none of the eight current candidates can clear that threshold, a new nominee or compromise candidate may come into view.

The United Nations is searching for more than Guterres’s successor. It is also searching for a leader capable of preserving dialogue, bridging the Global North and South, and advancing institutional reform at a time of geopolitical division and declining confidence in multilateralism.

Who will ultimately prevail remains far from certain. The real contest is only beginning.