As the old-world order transitions to a new one, multiple narratives are gradually shifting gears. Engrossed in the web of past promises and the acid test of the Ukraine and Gaza wars, the United States of America’s energies are invested in multiple directions and its role in shaping the global narrative is at its lowest. This situation provides fertile ground for other actors to influence the global narrative according to their visions. Amidst that, the narrative of the ‘reform of multilateral institutions’ stands out prominently and has gained significant traction. Although conceived long ago, this narrative became firmly rooted after the COVID-19 pandemic. Before that, numerous attempts to strengthen the narrative and bring about such reforms were made but with no major progress.
When the COVID-19 pandemic occurred, the fallacies of the current world order and multilateralism were highlighted, which increased the scope for such a narrative of reform to became clearer and stronger. The fallacies of multilateral institutions were juxtaposed with Western values. This comparison depicted that when an institution designed by the West does not even pass a basic test of Western values, there was no scope of it passing the high standards of the inclusive philosophy of Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam (Oriental values). The depiction was supplemented with a strong appeal to the Global South to join both the narratives for consensus. The first narrative is regarding the reform of multilateral institutions and the other is that the values of Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam must form the foundational philosophy of reformations. As the narratives gained more supporters, it was contemplated that the reform of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) should be first on the agenda for the following reason.
Currently, global peace and security and international cooperation (the two founding pillars of the United Nations) are threatened by frequent conflicts and global inequality. This instability has caused the UNSC to exercise authority and fulfil its responsibilities to initiate actions to restore peace and stability by taking timely steps against aggressors. The UNSC’s authority and responsibility makes it one of the most powerful international councils. However, in reality, the council has not proved to be truly effective because of its unjust and highly autocratic veto system, which contributes to its unrepresentative and undemocratic structure. Veto allows five permanent members of the UNSC, viz., the UK, US, China, France and Russia, to unilaterally reject a proposal placed before the council. The aim of granting veto power was to prevent the power dominance of one country and to balance interests. However, the use of the veto power to uphold Western narratives and interests created an imbalance, which caused the failure of the UNSC and multilateralism. This veto system necessitates reforming the UNSC at the earliest.
There are four types of vetoes, i.e., absolute veto, qualified veto, suspensive veto and pocket veto. These are the ones accounted for. However, the more dangerous forms of veto are the invisible and unaccounted forms, which are known as silent veto, invisible veto, double veto, veto threat, etc. These forms of veto were seen in the Israel-Palestine and Russia-Ukraine issues, where it was assumed that one of the P5 members would veto the resolutions tabled before the UNSC. The influence of these vetoes is so profound that some resolutions are never drafted. For instance, the Algerian war and the partition of India were never discussed in the UNSC because of the expected vetoes by France and the UK, respectively. Democracy is the norm for modern political systems, equal representation implies just governance and hegemony implies a vice. However, equality and just governance are not upheld in the UNSC. Every time the veto is used, the principles of sovereign equality are violated. Consequently, the council, which is supposed to be most powerful in safeguarding global security, becomes helpless in bringing about stability and peace, the very reasons for which it was formed.
The voice of most non-Western countries remains unheard, and the colonial flavor in the structures of the UNSC is reflected due to veto. Out of the 265 times that it has been invoked, China has used the veto only 5% of the times; the remaining times, the veto was used by Western nations or Russia. Veto power has been allowed to grow unchecked, and on numerous occasions, the veto has been used by these countries to safeguard their vested interests, even at the cost of human rights and peace. Most recently, the US vetoed three resolutions calling for humanitarian pauses in the Israel-Hamas conflict, conveying an outright disregard for the daily loss of human lives. It is indeed ironic that the same nation cited human rights to criticize the use of veto by other countries. Similar situations have been observed even in China and Russia’s veto on proposals aiming to condemn North Korea’s development of nuclear weapons. War, slavery, genocide and terrorism have also been legitimized by employing this weapon, and countries of the Global South are left with little trust in UNSC governance. The post-World War II era has become more insecure and chaotic because of veto power— an instrument meant to address security and order.
To address this menace, some efforts were made in that direction, including debates and resolutions adopted to initiate reform in the veto system. On 26 April, 2022, the UNGA, without a vote, adopted resolution 76/262, which entitled itself with a standing mandate for a General Assembly debate when a veto is cast in the Security Council. Moreover, the debates in the form of ‘annual debate on Security Council reform’ – a 43 year old agenda of reforming the UNSC – frequently includes discussions on reforming the veto. The latest debate in this series of debates was held in November 2023. UNGA decision no. 62/557, adopted on September 2008, resolved to reform the UNSC. It also listed the question of the veto among other issues to be considered in intergovernmental negotiations.
However, it is unfortunate that the idea of abolishing vetoes has not been adequately focused on or discussed widely. It is high time that a strong narrative for abolishing the veto by the community of nations, especially the Global South, is created, and this veiled form of colonialism is done away with. It is necessary to abolish the veto and reform the UNSC to ensure that the council assumes a truly multilateral and representative character and upholds its commitment to international peace and security.
Abolishing the veto in the UNSC will be challenging and likely to face severe resistance from the P5 members because they do not want to give up the power they have been enjoying for so long. These nations must be made to realise the flaws of the veto system, its past failures, the shifting power dynamics and the changing trajectory of the world order. Moreover, if these nations disregard this opportunity to be part of the shared future shaped by such a reformation, it may be nearly impossible for them to integrate with this future later. They can also be made to envision that if the UNSC is to uphold the Western values of democratic representation and equality, then abolishing the veto is the only solution. As long as the veto determines international intervention in security and conflicts, peace cannot be achieved in the true sense.
Moreover, if the western countries in P5 are on board then path ahead would become much smoother with respect to other countries in P5.
In fact, all countries must be shown how abolishing the veto is mutually beneficial so that all of them can make conscious efforts to advocate for this reform and participate in global harmony. Instead of concentrating on national interests by allying with one of the P5 members, the community of nations must unite to engage in collaborative dialogue and discuss solutions to address this undemocratic dragon. Applying the Indian aphorism of Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam (the entire world is one family) is essential to shift the perspective from individualistic profit to collective prosperity in a shared future. This is the only solution to improve global security and make the world just and peaceful.
