Vetoing Peace: How the UN Security Council’s Power Structure Undermines Global Security and How We Can Reform It

Introduction: The Council That Couldn't

The United Nations Security Council (UNSC), created after the cataclysm of World War II, was meant to be humanity’s last line of defence against war and tyranny. But today, it functions more like a geopolitical theatre, one where power, not people, takes centre stage. While the world burns from Gaza to Ukraine, Congo to Yemen, the five permanent members (P5) of the UNSC hold the stage door keys, deciding who gets aid, who gets bombs, and who gets ignored.

Their veto power, marketed as a mechanism to prevent global catastrophe, has instead been weaponised to shield allies, perpetuate war, and silence justice. According to Oxfam’s Vetoing Humanity report, Russia and the United States alone account for 75% of all UNSC vetoes since 1989, often blocking resolutions aimed at ending protracted conflicts.

This isn’t just a diplomatic deadlock; it’s a moral failure. And it’s costing lives.

The Power of the Few: What the Veto Means

The P5, China, France, Russia, the UK, and the USA, wield disproportionate control over the world’s peace and security. With a single vote, any of these states can veto a resolution passed by the majority of the 193 UN member states. It’s not democracy. It’s dynastic rule in multilateral clothing.

In practice, the veto has been used to protect state interests, not human lives. For example:

Russia has vetoed action against its invasion of Ukraine.

The United States has repeatedly blocked resolutions condemning Israeli actions in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.

China and Russia have jointly blocked action on Syria, rendering the UNSC impotent, as over 600,000 Syrians died and millions were displaced.

These vetoes don’t just delay action, they kill it. In Syria, 15 resolutions were vetoed between 2014 and 2023, paralysing humanitarian aid and peace processes. It’s as though the fire alarm is ringing, but the five gatekeepers argue over who started the blaze instead of grabbing the hose.

The Quiet Weapon: Penholding

If the veto is the UNSC’s nuclear option, then penholding is its silent dagger. This informal, undemocratic process allows certain P5 members to “hold the pen” on specific conflicts, drafting and negotiating the text of resolutions. Unsurprisingly, France, the UK, and the USA have monopolised penholding on two-thirds of protracted crises.

This practice lets colonial legacies linger. The UK holds the pen on Yemen, where it has strategic interests. France held the pen on Mali until Mali formally objected, accusing France of violating its sovereignty. The result? Former colonial powers write the narratives of today’s crises, often omitting their complicity.

Underfunded, Overarmed: The Hypocrisy of the P5

Humanitarian need has exploded. Nearly 300 million people require humanitarian assistance in 2024, but less than half of the needed funding has been met. Meanwhile, the P5 continue to dominate global arms sales, accounting for 73.5% of exports and raking in over $90 billion in 2021, five times the global humanitarian funding gap that same year.

It’s a grotesque contradiction: the same states that sell the weapons fueling conflict control the council that’s supposed to stop it. They can veto justice while profiting from violence.

The Broken Promise of Global Representation

When the UN was founded in 1945, there were 51 member states. Today, there are 193, but the UNSC’s permanent membership hasn’t changed once. Nations that were colonies at the time of the UN’s formation now demand a seat at the table they built with their suffering.

As the Carnegie Endowment’s UN Security Council Reform: What the World Thinks notes, the P5 represent just 25% of the world’s population, yet dominate decisions that affect the entire globe. Major powers like India, Brazil, and South Africa remain excluded. Africa, home to over 1.4 billion people and the focus of 70% of UNSC resolutions, has zero permanent representation.

The African Union’s Ezulwini Consensus calls for two permanent seats with full veto power for the continent. Yet the status quo is held hostage by internal rivalries and, more insidiously, by P5 resistance to sharing power.

Why Reform Fails—and Why It Mustn't Anymore

Reform efforts have been circling the drain for over three decades. An “open-ended” working group created in 1992 still meets. No decisions. No reforms. Just diplomatic déjà vu.

Obstacles to reform include:

• Veto-wielding P5 powers refusing to dilute their authority.
• Disagreement among member states over who should gain new seats. 
• The immense procedural hurdle of amending the UN Charter (which requires two-thirds of the General Assembly and all P5 to agree).

Yet without reform, the UNSC risks becoming irrelevant. Like the League of Nations before it, it may fade into impotent irrelevance, more symbolic than functional.

What Needs to Change: A Blueprint for Hope

1. Veto Restraint in Atrocity Crimes
   France has proposed that P5 members voluntarily refrain from using their veto in cases of mass atrocities. This doesn’t require Charter reform—just political will.
2. Expand Permanent Membership
   Add seats for Africa, Latin America, and emerging powers like India and Brazil. The G4 and AU must compromise—perhaps accepting transitional arrangements without immediate veto rights.
3. End the Penholding Monopoly
   Non-permanent members must share drafting responsibilities. The pen is power and it should be democratically distributed.
4. Mandate Humanitarian Funding
   Create mandatory contributions to humanitarian appeals, similar to peacekeeping budgets. Taxing arms trade revenues even minimally could fill funding gaps overnight.
5. Elevate the General Assembly
   Strengthen the UNGA’s ability to act when the UNSC fails. The 2022 resolution mandating a UNGA debate after any veto is a start. Make it binding.

Final Word: Reform or Relapse?

António Guterres said it best: “We can’t build a future for our grandchildren with a system built for our grandparents.” And yet, the P5 continue to cling to the past, ignoring the present and endangering the future.

The UNSC cannot protect global peace while protecting the profits, interests, and impunity of its most powerful members. Reform isn’t a diplomatic nicety, it’s a moral necessity.

Because if the Security Council continues to veto peace, the world may soon veto the Council itself.