UNSC reform unattainable: Experts

For more than 80 days of Israel’s genocidal war on the Gaza Strip, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) has failed to adopt a resolution for a ceasefire in the besieged enclave due to vetoes from the United States. The failure of the UNSC to use its power to stop bloodshed has renewed calls for the necessity of reforming the council, but is it possible?

Since the start of the Israeli war on Gaza following the operation by Hamas on October 7, the US has used its veto power against resolutions calling for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, even though the number of the Palestinians killed by Israeli shelling has reached more than 20,000 people and the injured recorded more than 53,000, with the majority of them children and women. 

The right to veto, which means “I forbid” in Latin, is a power given only to the five permanent members of the UNSC (the US, the UK, France, Russia, and China) since 1946 to refuse and hinder draft resolutions. Article 27 of the United Nations Charter stipulates: “Each member of the Security Council shall have one vote. Decisions of the Security Council on procedural matters shall be made by an affirmative vote of nine members. Decisions of the Security Council on all other matters shall be made by an affirmative vote of nine members including the concurring votes of the permanent members; provided that, in decisions under Chapter VI, and under paragraph 3 of Article 52, a party to a dispute shall abstain from voting.”

On October 18, the US vetoed a Brazilian-led resolution calling for “humanitarian pauses” in Gaza to allow aid to enter for besieged civilians in the Strip, and 12 countries out of the 15 members of the council voted in favor it, while Russia and the United Kingdom abstained. 

US vetoes Security Council resolution that would have called for “humanitarian pauses” to deliver lifesaving aid to millions in Gaza

Favor: 12 (Albania, Brazil, China, Ecuador, France, Gabon, Ghana, Japan, Malta, Mozambique, Switzerland,UAE)
Against: 1 (US)
Abstain: 2 Russia, UK pic.twitter.com/y4tiAbRMUQ

— UN News (@UN_News_Centre) October 18, 2023

The second US veto was used on December 8 against another resolution calling for an immediate humanitarian ceasefire in Gaza, with 13 voting yes and the UK abstaining. The only resolution to escape the US veto was adopted on scaling up humanitarian aid to the Gazans, with the US and Russia abstaining. 

World leaders, human rights organizations, and political experts criticized the UNSC for its failure to stop Israel’s war on Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank. 

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said that “the US veto yesterday makes it an accomplice in the crimes of genocide and ethnic cleansing launched by Israel.” Meanwhile, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan commented on December 9 that “a US veto against the ceasefire shows once again that the world is bigger than the five permanent members of the Security Council.”

“The US has brazenly wielded and weaponized its veto to strongarm the UN Security Council, further undermining its credibility and ability to live up to its mandate to maintain international peace and security,” said Amnesty International Secretary General Agnès Callamard in a statement on December 8.

Former Egyptian Vice President Mohamed ElBaradie said on his X account that the UN Security Council resolution “unfortunately reflects the extent of Arab impotence, how we have come to accept crumbs, and how the Security Council, which is responsible for maintaining international peace and security, has become an obstructive tool in the hands of countries that have veto power.”

بمزيد من الحزن والقهر أقر مجلس الأمن قرارا بشأن غزة تم إفراغه بالكامل من مضمونه- بناءً على الموقف الأمريكي المشين - وخاصة إسقاط أهم مطلب انساني وقانوني وهو وقف إطلاق النار مما يعطي اسرائيل الضوء الأخضر لتستمر في عملية الابادة الجماعية لاهل غزة بالمخالفة لكل قواعد القانون الدولي…

— Mohamed ElBaradei (@ElBaradei) December 22, 2023

“In light of the continuing heinous crimes in Gaza, any vote today in the Security Council in favor of a resolution that does not include an immediate ceasefire is tantamount to complicity in these crimes, which will also erode what remains of the Council’s legitimacy,” he added in another post on X.

The international barrage of criticism against the UNSC shed light on old calls for making reforms in the UNSC by expanding the permanent membership, changing the voting system, or cancelling or limiting the right to veto.

Dr. Hassan Nafaa, former head of the Department of Political Science in the Faculty of Economics and Political Science at Cairo University and the writer of several books on UN reformation, sees that such reforms have been ruled out for many years.

Nafaa told Jusoor Post that any reform inside the UNSC requires amending the UN Charter, which in return requires an approval by the two-thirds of the UN General Assembly members, including the permanent members of the UNSC. However, he added that the permanent member states “impose a blockade on any reform that goes through in the United Nations.”

In comments on a question about the possibility of creating an alternative body to the UN, Nafaa said that this would rely on changing the world powers. He elaborated that if Russia and China succeeded in making the international system multipolar and the US acquiesced to this request, there could be an alternative body, especially with the cooperation of countries that are currently calling for reforms to the UN.

“Theoretically, all countries that want to create an alternative body could withdraw from the UN and decide to create another international body. However, this is ruled out, because those countries cannot get away from the UN without being sure that there is a new alternative,” he continued.

“Currently, we are in a real crisis, in which the UN is collapsing due to the determination in using the veto and the new cold war, especially after the Russian-Ukrainian war and the Israeli war on Gaza, and the US desire to protect Israel regardless,” Nafaa said.

“The UN is collapsing and the international law is collapsing. But there is no change to create an alternative system. The new system will be created when the major countries are convinced that there is no escape from changing the current system and agreeing on new rules in running a new international system,” he added.

Nourhan El Sheikh, Egyptian professor of political science at Cairo University and director of the Youth Studies & Leadership Training Unit, told Jusoor Post that the Security Council will never be reformed, “because any reform will require an approval from the five permanent member states, and this contradicts their interests, especially for the US.”

“The current system gives them a great privilege, which they achieved after WWII. I don’t see they can waive this privilege. […] This is impossible politically and strategically,” she added, noting that all that can likely be done is expand the membership for other countries like India and allocate a seat for African countries. 

El Sheikh is also of the belief that it is hard to create an alternative body. “Although the UN is weak, its role is important because it is the only forum that has communication channels during times of war,” she said. 

The UN as a whole “represents the conscience of the international community, especially the UN General Assembly. Practically, there is no way to create a parallel body despite all its flaws and shortcomings,” she added.