The United Nations was formed up in 1945. It is the world's largest intergovernmental organization. Its purpose is to maintain international peace and security. However, when we look the situations going on around the world, the United Nations has not able to achieve its purposes. I wondered why the United Nations is not able to achieve its purpose if 193 member states work together to promote peace and security. But, after the class discussion, I understood that the vital issue such as peace and security is left to the consideration of the Security Council. Interestingly, the Security Council is under the control of only five select Permanent members states which include USA, Britain, China, Russia, and France. All resolutions in the Security Councils are under the control of these five permanent member states. So, it is time to reform the United Nations Security Council to distribute equal representations and equal distribution of power to its member states.
We know peace and security are vital issues. But these critical issues are left to the consideration of the Security Council. However, the Security Council is mainly under the control of five permanent states, which include Russia, USA, China, France and Britain. Which means that the vital issue of peace and security is under the considerations of these five permanent member states, while the rest of the United Nations member states are simply watching their actions. These significant roles entitled only to the permanent member states undermines the power of the United Nations to maintain international peace and security around the world.
To make the United Nations more effective, the United Nations must reconsider to reform the Security Council. They need to provide equal representations and equal distribution of power among United Nations member states. For instance, till today there is no permanent member states from Africa and Latin America in the Security Council. The United Nations general assembly elected ten non-permanent members to the security council for two years term. However, these ten non-permanent members are not fully effective as compare to the other five permanent member states.
Another problem is the veto power. Allowing the five permanent member states to block the adoption of any resolution. For the resolution to be passed, nine members of the security member have to vote for it. However, if one of the five permanent member states vetoes the resolution, it is considered to be null and void. This shows that these five countries have the power to do anything they want to. This issue weakened the United Nations to promote global peace. For instance, over the past decades, the Russia has used its veto power multiple times to avoid scrutiny over its action in Ukraine or its action to protect its allies such as the Syrian regime from the United Nations pressure. On the other hand, the United States has used its veto power multiple times to protect its allies, Israel from sanctions. Not only that, these five permanent member states act according to their interest even outside the legal consent of the United Nations. For instance, the invasion of the United States in Iraq in 2003.
To conclude, I strongly support that it is time for the United Nations to reform the Security Council. It is time to reconsider the unfair representations and the unfair distribution of power among United Nations member states. If it gives fair representations and fair distribution of power to its members, the world would have been more peaceful and secured. The reason that negates the United Nations to achieve its purpose is that the real power to maintain international peace and security is under the consideration of the few permanent member states.
This was a really great topic and you explained your reasoning very well! I also believe that it is time for the UNSC to reform its structure and rules, considering that its representation and rules are not as fair and equal as they ought to be. I do not think it is right for the same five countries to have absolute power, especially when it comes to the security of other countries. What would you suggest would be a more fair structure in the UNSC? Also, are there any specific rules that you would like to see reformed?
ReplyDeleteThank you Victoria! If possible, I want to increase the number of permanent members states in UNSC, and to strip the veto power that these permanent states have.
DeleteThis was a very interesting post and the reasoning you give for reforming the Security Council are valid points. However, if the United Nations was to go about reforming the Security Council and make it more well rounded, what do you think the best ways to do so would be. For example, do you think it would be better to have rotating members from each continent on the council and abolish permanent member-states, or instead reform some of the powers the present council enjoys and preserve the current structure that includes permanent and rotating members?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThank you Brenna! It is not necessary to abolish the permanent member-states. Firstly, is to increase the permanent member-states. Secondly, I think the veto power should not exist. I think if the UN is the international governmental organization, the UNSC should not be under the control of few states.
DeleteI agree with your views about the security council especially where the same five states have almost complete control. Out of two options which would you pick? 1: having all of the states in the security council (members and non-members) all be equal in a larger vote, or having a completely different mechanism for electing the members of the security council that is fairer?
ReplyDeleteThank you Zach. I would pick the number 1. If a state is a member of the UN, it should have a say on any decision taken by the UNSC.
Delete