Arguably the most powerful body in the entirety of the United Nations, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) is mandated with “the maintenance of international peace and security.” Formally comprised of fifteen different members, the UNSC has the unitary power of authorizing actionable resolutions, which may result in the imposition of economic sanctions or even the authorization of the use of military force. However, this power is not evenly distributed among the members of the council, allowing five members in particular to exercise disproportionate influence over the proceedings of the UNSC, often times using their specially designated permissions to protect their domestic interests, calling in to question the integrity of the UNSC and presenting significant human rights implications.
As mentioned previously, the UNSC is comprised of fifteen total members, which includes five permanent members and ten rotating non-permanent members. The non-permanent members are subject to certain limitations, as they are elected every two years and are unable to serve consecutive terms in order to ensure diversification of the UNSC. This seems intuitive to the establishment of an international institution such as the United Nations, which was built on the liberal democratic values shared by most of the victors of the Second World War. The regional composition of the non-permanent members of the UNSC is explicitly outlined to help facilitate equal representation, requiring five non-permanent members to represent states in Africa and Asia, one non-permanent member to represent Eastern Europe, two non-permanent members to represent Latin American Nations, and two additional non-permanent members to represent Western Europe and other global areas.
Despite this diversification requirement, the UNSC website identifies almost sixty different member-states of the United Nations that have never been elected as non-permanent members to the UNSC, with island nations and small, poor countries in Africa, Latin America, and Asia being the most underrepresented. While the marginalization of these countries, most of which have very little economic power or global influence, is in itself is problematic for various reasons, the primary issue with the structure of the UNSC does not even concern non-permanent membership. Rather, it is the permanent members, or the P5, that have been unduly granted special status, undermining the function of the UNSC.
Permanent membership of the UNSC, popularly referred to collectively as the “P5,” is held by the United States, the United Kingdom, France, the Russian Federation, and the People’s Republic of China. These nations were selected for permanent membership due to their international primacy in the immediate aftermath of World War II, and since then have only further entrenched their positions of international influence. Members of the P5 continually top the list of the world’s largest economies and maintain formidable militaries, already allowing them to boldly pursue their domestic agendas. However, the structure of the UNSC provides P5 nations with incentive to prioritize their domestic interests over the general welfare with asymmetric access to “veto-like” powers.
While the Charter of the United Nations does not specifically mention the word “veto,” Article 27 (3) establishes that all substantive decisions of the UNSC shall be made with “the concurring votes of the permanent members,” essentially allowing P5 nations to indisputably veto any and all resolution drafts set before the council, even in cases where the resolution is intended to address the actions of one of the nations on the council. This inherently creates a conflict of interest and stimulates an environment that allows P5 members to unfairly exercise their veto powers in the name of their domestic interest. This fact, coupled with a general uptick in the frequency of veto use—which averaged two instances a year between 2000 and 2022 but has recently been used upwards of five times—has generated a disturbing trend with concerning human rights implications.
The Russian Federation’s invasion of Ukraine in February of 2022 perfectly exemplifies how the veto power of permanent UNSC members can be corrupted for the domestic interest, undermining the mandate of the United Nations. Beyond simply violating Ukrainian’s rights to sovereignty and self-determination, the Russian Federation has also engaged in continual human rights abuses, with some actions amounting to war crimes. In particular, reports from Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International detail the “indiscriminate and disproportionate” bombings on civilian areas and critical infrastructure, which international law condemns as collective punishment, as well as pervasive mistreatment of civilians and prisoners of war, including but not limited to torture, sexual violence, and execution. It is clear that in its invasion and continued military assault on Ukraine, the Russian Federation has committed significant human rights violations, resulting in global outrage and urging the United Nations to respond with decisive action.
The General Assembly was quick to condemn the Russian Federation’s invasion of Ukraine, passing a resolution in March of 2022 demanding the immediate withdrawal of Russian military forces from Ukrainian territory. However, resolutions passed by the General Assembly are not actionable, as only the UNSC is able to authorize specific actions. Unsurprisingly, the resolution was unable to pass in the UNSC, as the Russian Federation was able to exercise its charter-bestowed veto power, effectively preventing the United Nations as a whole from taking action to support both its formal mandate and enforce the protection of human rights.
As the civilians of Ukraine continue to suffer the humanitarian implications of a failing U.N Security Council, it is necessary to consider what changes could be implemented to prevent continued abuse of power by the P5. Allowing a select few countries unparalleled power to formally determine binding international responses to crises has proven to be dangerous, most often harming vulnerable civilian populations and resulting in continued human rights violations. In order for the United Nations as an organization to truly fulfill its mandate of maintaining international peace and security, the structure of the United Nations Security Council must be permanently reformed, dismantling the veto advantage of P5 nations and ensuring the efficacy of international institutions.
