The Second Straw Poll to Choose the Next UN Secretary-General

A mathematical model to assess where each candidate stands

By Javier Surasky

Date drafted: 21/08/2026

Versión en español (ES)

Introduction

Today, the United Nations Security Council held its second straw poll as part of the informal process to choose the next head of the UN Secretariat.

Here, I apply to its results the calculation used to assess each candidate’s chances mathematically, following the formula presented and described in the analysis of the first straw poll, where we also set out its assumptions and limits. It is important to note that we still do not know which votes were cast by permanent members, something that, as we explained in that blog, is critical to giving the model’s results greater certainty.

What do the results of the second straw poll tell us?

The vote in the second straw poll gives us the following table, which includes for the first time the candidate Ivonne A-Baki, an Ecuadorian of Lebanese descent, recently put forward by Tonga and known for her public statements in support of Donald Trump.

The result is shown in the following table

Candidacy	E	D	N
Carolyn Rodrigues-Birkett	8	3	4
Rebeca Grynspan	7	4	4
Rafael Mariano Grossi	7	6	2
Macky Sall	6	7	2
Olara Otunnu	5	5	5
María Fernanda Espinosa	4	3	8
Michelle Bachelet	2	6	7
Ivonne A-Baki	0	8	7

Source: 1 for 8 billion

In an initial comparison between the first and second straw polls, several interesting points emerge: Rodrigues-Birkett moves into first place despite losing one vote of support compared with the previous round, because Grynspan, who had received the largest number of favorable votes in the first informal ballot, loses three positive votes and gains three negative ones.

Otunnu shows the clearest improvement, moving from 2 to 5 votes of support, while Bachelet suffers the sharpest fall, dropping from 6 supporting votes to only 2. Grossi keeps his 7 votes of support, but his discourage votes climb from 2 to 6; the stability of positive votes therefore appears less relevant than the increase in aggregate opposition.

This situation means that P5 uncertainty — that is, the fact that we do not know whether any of the discourage votes came from a permanent member of the Council, which would in practice amount to a veto of a candidacy — increases for the two best-positioned candidates if we count favorable votes: 73.6% for Rodrigues-Birkett and 84.6% for Grynspan, according to the same model applied to the first straw poll.

Change in the number of votes between the first two rounds
Candidacy	E1	E2	ΔE	D1	D2	ΔD	N1	N2	ΔN
Carolyn Rodrigues-Birkett	9	8	-1	2	3	+1	4	4	0
Rebeca Grynspan	10	7	-3	1	4	+3	4	4	0
Rafael Mariano Grossi	7	7	0	2	6	+4	6	2	-4
Macky Sall	6	6	0	7	7	0	2	2	0
Olara Otunnu	2	5	+3	5	5	0	8	5	-3
María Fernanda Espinosa	5	4	-1	2	3	+1	8	8	0
Michelle Bachelet	6	2	-4	5	6	+1	4	7	+3

Source: Own

Let us briefly recall that the model I propose recognizes that the person who manages to become United Nations Secretary-General must meet two conditions: secure at least 9 votes in favor in the Security Council and ensure that no permanent member votes against them. This creates, in turn, a double uncertainty: uncertainty over the vote deficit and uncertainty over possible vetoes.

Taking both elements into account, the model calculates what we call “distance from the threshold” and “P5 uncertainty.”

	Votes			Distance from the threshold			P5 Uncertainty
Candidacy	E	D	N	Deficit (9-E)	Neutrals to convert	Minimum D votes to reverse	No P5	At least one P5
Carolyn Rodrigues-Birkett	8	3	4	1	25%	0	26,4%	73,6%
Rebeca Grynspan	7	4	4	2	50%	0	15,4%	84,6%
Rafael Mariano Grossi	7	6	2	2	100%	0	4,2%	95,8%
Macky Sall	6	7	2	3	150%	1	1,9%	98,1%
Olara Otunnu	5	5	5	4	80%	0	8,4%	91,6%
María Fernanda Espinosa	4	3	8	5	62,5%	0	26,4%	73,6%
Michelle Bachelet	2	6	7	7	100%	0	4,2%	95,8%
Ivonne A-Baki	0	8	7	9	128,6%	2	0,7%	99,3%

Source: Own

From this aggregate table, we can see that:

Carolyn Rodrigues-Birkett

She moves into the strongest position: she needs to convert one of four neutral votes, but her three discourage votes raise the uncertainty of at least one P5 vote to 73.6%.

Rebeca Grynspan

She needs two additional votes of support and must convert half of her neutral votes, which represents a double setback: she loses three votes of support and gains three discourage votes. Her P5 indicator rises to 84.6%.

Rafael Grossi

He maintains seven votes of support, but would have to turn both of his neutral votes into positive ones, while also facing P5 uncertainty of 95.8%.

Macky Sall

He is the only candidate to repeat the same result in both rounds (6-7-2), which means that turning his neutral votes into support would still not be enough: he needs to gain the support of at least one of those who have discouraged his candidacy. The current number of discourage votes gives him the second-highest P5 uncertainty, reaching 98.1%, behind only A-Baki.

Olara Otunnu

His position shows strong momentum compared with the first round, but still leaves him in a difficult situation, since he would need to turn at least four of the five neutral votes he received into support and face five discourage votes, which produces P5 uncertainty of 91.6%.

María Fernanda Espinosa

She faces the challenge of turning at least 5 of her 8 neutral votes into support, but because she has the lowest number of discourage votes outside the top two positions, her P5 uncertainty stands at 73.6%, equal to that of Rodrigues-Birkett and lower than Grynspan’s.

Michelle Bachelet

She is in a difficult position that would require turning her seven neutral votes into support. Although turning neutrals into positive votes would be enough for her, without needing to convert negative votes into positive ones, the high number of discourage votes results in P5 uncertainty of 95.8%.

Ivonne A-Baki

Newly added to the race, she received no support and, even if she turned her seven neutral votes into support, would still need to reverse two discourage votes. She is also the candidate with the most discourage votes (8), resulting in the highest P5 uncertainty: 99.3%.

What to watch in the next round

I believe there are five main elements to watch in the third straw poll:

• Whether Rodrigues-Birkett can secure the ninth vote of support without increasing her discourage votes.

• Whether Grynspan manages to reverse her decline or whether it begins to look like a trend.

• If Grossi fails to reduce the opposition he generates, whether he will begin to fall out of the race.

• How Ivonne A-Baki evolves.

• Whether differentiated ballots appear for permanent and non-permanent members, which would reduce P5 uncertainty by turning it into a certainty to be integrated into the final calculation, putting an end to the combinatorial uncertainty created by the observed number of discourage votes.

In general terms, the hardest question, and perhaps the best proxy indicator of how negotiations among Council members are unfolding, is whether the overall decline in support reflects a more strategic round of informal voting or represents real fragmentation.

It will also be important to begin interpreting “no opinion” votes, particularly by trying to understand whether they represent a “reserve of early support” or, on the contrary, a delay before expressing a discourage vote.