Context

At the 81st Session of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) in September 2026, member states debated structural reforms regulating the UNSC veto power, particularly during severe humanitarian crises. Russia reaffirmed its support for India's permanent membership of the UNSC, and India reiterated its commitment to the "Pact for the Future" (2024 UN Summit), calling for urgent, time-bound UNSC reforms.

What is the Veto Power of the UNSC?

  • Origin: The word "veto" is not mentioned in the UN Charter; the concept flows from Article 27(3), which requires decisions on non-procedural matters to have nine affirmative votes including the concurring votes of all permanent members.
  • P5: The UNSC has 15 members — 5 permanent (China, France, Russia, UK, US) and 10 non-permanent members elected by the UNGA for two-year terms.
  • Mechanism: A negative vote by any P5 member blocks a substantive resolution regardless of international support. Abstention or absence does not count as a veto.

Arguments For Abolishing the Veto

  • Undemocratic nature: Violates the Charter's principle of "sovereign equality of all Members"; creates a legally codified hierarchy.
  • Institutional paralysis: Russia (often with China) vetoed over 15 draft resolutions on the Syrian Civil War (2011–2023). The "pocket veto" (mere threat) prevents resolutions from even being tabled.
  • Shielding from accountability: US vetoes on Gaza/Israel resolutions; Russian vetoes on Ukraine (2014, 2022, 2024) undermine the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) doctrine.
  • Usage data (1945–2025): Veto used 320 times on 264 draft resolutions/amendments — Soviet Union/Russia (155) and US (94) lead.
  • Anachronistic: P5 reflects the 1945 world; excludes Africa (Ezulwini Consensus), Latin America, and the G4 (India, Brazil, Germany, Japan).

Arguments Against Abolishing the Veto

  • League of Nations Trap: The League collapsed due to unanimity requirements; the veto is a "safety valve" keeping great powers within the UN framework.
  • Structural paradox (Article 108): Charter amendments require ratification by two-thirds of the UNGA including all P5 members — the P5 has a legal veto over abolishing its own veto.
  • Multiplier paralysis: The Uniting for Consensus ("Coffee Club") group argues that extending the veto to new permanent members would multiply gridlock.

Initiatives for Veto Reform

  • French-Mexican Initiative (2015): Political declaration urging P5 to voluntarily refrain from veto in mass atrocity situations; backed by 128 member states, including France and the UK.
  • Liechtenstein Initiative (UNGA Resolution 76/262, 2022): Requires the UNGA to convene a formal meeting within 10 working days of any veto, forcing the vetoing state to publicly justify its action.
  • ACT Code of Conduct: By the Accountability, Coherence and Transparency (ACT) group; urges all UNSC members (permanent and non-permanent) to pledge not to vote against credible resolutions aimed at preventing mass atrocity crimes.

India's Position

  • Opposes a two-tier system of permanent members without veto; demands veto parity if the veto continues.
  • Notes that even non-permanent members exercise an informal "effective veto" (blocking press statements, sanctions committee decisions).
  • G4 Compromise: Proposed a 15-year moratorium on veto use by new permanent members, followed by a UNGA review.
  • Ezulwini Consensus: Supports the African Union's demand for permanent African representation with veto rights.
  • L.69 Group: Coordinates with developing countries for comprehensive reform.
  • Seeks a non-permanent UNSC seat for 2028–29 to strengthen its case for permanent membership; champions reformed multilateralism.

Way Forward

  • Advance normative self-restraint (solidify the French-Mexican Initiative as a global norm).
  • Strengthen post-veto instruments — link Liechtenstein Initiative debates to follow-ups like commissions of inquiry or humanitarian corridors under the "Uniting for Peace" resolution.
  • Move IGN debates toward a single text; consider G4-with-moratorium compromise models.
  • Create objective atrocity triggers via independent bodies (ICJ, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights).

Conclusion

The veto debate balances three objectives: Effectiveness (preventing paralysis), Representation (reflecting contemporary realities), and Accountability (responsible exercise of exceptional powers). For India, reform must go beyond veto regulation to address the composition and representativeness of the UNSC itself.

Previous Year Questions (UPSC)

  • Prelims 2022: United Nations Credentials Committee — answer: (a) 3 only.
  • Mains 2019: "The long-sustained image of India as a leader of the oppressed and marginalised nations has disappeared on account of its new-found role in the emerging global order." Elaborate.
  • Mains 2015: Discuss the impediments India is facing in its pursuit of a permanent seat in the UN Security Council.