Revolutionary leaders and election to the United Nations Security Council

Why are some states elected to the United Nations Security Council while others are not? I reorient our thinking towards what states find as unattractive features in a candidate regarding the mission of the Security Council—namely, those characteristics of a candidate that undermine promoting international peace and security. I argue that revolutionary leaders are less likely to be elected to the UNSC for both direct—fraying relationships with other countries—and indirect—increased propensity for causing intra- and inter- state conflict—reasons. Probit analysis of UNSC elections reveals that compared to the average UN member, the likelihood that countries led by revolutionary leaders are elected to the UNSC declines in the duration of their tenure, eventually falling below that of other states. Mediation analysis reveals the direct effect is stronger than the indirect effects.