Against Veto Power: A Paradoxical Power

In a world theoretically built to create equality and unity, five nations hold the power to overrule 188 peers.

The UN Security Council Veto Power is a special voting right held by five nations: China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. To pass a substantive resolution, at least nine UN member states must vote in favour, and no veto powers must vote against it. A veto power abstention does not veto the resolution so long as it has the necessary nine votes.

This article explains that, while it is designed as a mechanism for global stability, veto power, by its nature, undermines fundamental human rights that serve as the foundation of the United Nations.

Why Was Veto Power Introduced?

China, France, Russia, the UK and the US are regarded as the five victors of the Second World War. Veto power, serving as a defence tool for national interests, was created with the utopic idea of maintaining international peace and security, to ensure the powers cooperate in peace-making.

Contradicting Human Rights

This is where power and profits outweigh justice and egalitarianism. Veto powers are not limited when it comes to holding human rights violators accountable. The right has detrimentally stalled the UN’s role in stopping mass atrocities and genocide, which are the very reasons for the existence of the United Nations. Examples of this are numerous. The US has vetoed six UN resolutions against Israel for committing genocide in Gaza, most recently in September. Russia has vetoed mandates for aid operations in Syria. These two examples of many illustrate that human rights will always come second to the five powers’ interests.

Contradicting Sovereign Equality

Article 2(1) of the UN Charter states that “the Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.” Providing 5 out of 193 nations with veto power creates at least the subconscious principle that these five member states’ voices are more vital than the remaining 188. Consequently, the ability of five to rule and overrule, regardless of moral, humanitarian, or legal considerations, creates a political oligarchy rather than the alleged international democracy.

While the veto power may have been born from pragmatism and a mission to maintain world order, its effect has been anything but that. The power, in contradicting the founding principles of the UN, continues to be an area of great academic debate, the subject of heavy criticism, and calls for reform. As long as veto power endures, the promise of a fair and equal international order remains an illusion, for peace cannot flourish where privilege reigns over principle.