The countries who are the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council enjoy the use of veto power to stop any resolution or debate. The excessive use of veto power since the creation of the United Nations resulted into failure of United Nations to intervene and help the oppressed nations and to maintain international peace and security in the region. Should the use of veto power be abolished by the UN?

yes it should be... but how?

Here is a letter,send to Dawn newspaper.Read it.

Reforming the UN Council
By From the Newspaper
Published Apr 06, 2013 071am





TO introduce changes in the existing structure of the UN Security Council is a big challenge. It includes key issues: categories of membership, the question of the veto held by the P5, regional representation, the size of an enlarged council and its working methods and the relationship between the Security Council and the General Assembly. Among them permanent status of five countries, regional representation and the size of a large council are important and disputed ones.

Five permanent countries -- China, Russia, the US, France and the UK — are not willing to surrender their veto power and they cannot be deprived of it by amending the UN charter because the charter cannot be amended without their approval.

The second issue is about regional representation. Africa and Latin America are two regions which are under-represented in the Security Council. Brazil from Latin America is striving hard for getting a permanent status in the Council but it is opposed by Argentina, a member of the so-called coffee club.

Many suggestions have been presented about the size of the Council, namely low-20s, mid-20s and high-20s. I want to present some formula which will ensure regional representation, democracy and appropriate size.

First, there is no need to deprive the P5 of their veto power.

Second, a continental group should be created. Asia, excluding the already permanent members, will comprise a single continental group. A continental group will have a single veto vote and it will be able to exercise it when two-thirds of the members of the continental group will go for veto for any resolution.

There will be 10 veto powers and 10 non-permanent members in the UN Council, three (C1, Russia and China) from Asia, three (C2, UK and France) from Europe, one 1 (C3) from Africa, one (C4) from Latin America and two 2 (C5 and the US) from North America.

For example, Pakistan wants the implementation of UN resolutions on the Kashmir issue.

If Russia vetoes this move, and China and continental group (C1) favours Pakistan, then it will be considered a positive vote because two out of three permanent members have given their approval and the opinion of other permanent members will also be taken region-wise. If a majority in other continents is supporting the move, then it will ultimately pass.

SADAM KHAN Kot Addu

What do you mean by C1, C2, C3, C4 and C5.

__________________
Then which of the favours of your Lord will ye deny?
Al Rahmaan

continent 1,continent 2,etc.

For example:Asia---two already veto powers(Russia and China) plus other countries of the continent(c)

Dear,currently security council consists of 15 members.out of which 5 are veto powers.For any resolution to be passed,consent of the 5 members is necessary.if any one rejects the resolution,we say it has been vetoed.

now if we want to bring an amendment(abolition of veto),it can not be passed.Because no one of the veto powers will be willing to be deprived of it.so it is impossible to get it passed without the approvel of all 5 members.So Sammad khan,in the above letter, has suggested an alternate way to reform the security council.He suggests that there is no need to deprive the p5 of their veto power.Instead,we should increase the number from 5 to 10 of the permanent members.
How…?
Three from Asia:Russia+China+other countries of asia(c).

Three from Europe:Britian+France+other countries of Europe(c).

One from africa:as africa has no current super power,so all the countries of africa will constitute one representative collectively(c).

One from latin America continentc).

Two from North America Continent:USA+Other countries of north america(c).

these all,now,consist of total 10 members.

That's not easy to become permanent member of Security council plus Current super powers will never enhance number of members , who wants to share power in this world ?
Also from South Asia who is looking forward to become member ? India Pakistan .
China will never let India become member , America has same apprehensions for Pakistan .
In order to become a permanent member you first need to become a super power , it means that the world recognizes you as the one , for that either you have Big Economy , or Very big military ( which again super powers will never let you have ) .
So i think its a deadlock , it will not go farther from current situation , Or there is another solution .
There is WW III , luckily you plunge in War and emerge victorious ( like America did ) And you become Super Power , then another Peace Organization will be formed , In which you can have your say :And you are the permanent member , including others .

Asslam O Alaikum,
I just read the letter, you shared regarding reforms in UN Security Council. Its really an appreciative suggestion. All of us demand restructuring SC but no one give a practicable method. This guy done this, his work is appreciative in fact.

Another change could also be introduced in the structure of SC is that:

As we know UNGA appoints non-permanent members of SC. If some countries which want to be non-permanent members of UNGA and at the same time want to abolish the veto power can also be convened by UNGA for consensus on it, after becoming non-permanent members of UNSC. After this, a resolution could be passed by a majority vote in the SC. If majority is in favor of the abolition of veto power, then it must be abolished at once.

Nice . But there is a catch , if you are to become a non-permanent member , let suppose Pakistan has become by far far chance ..... who will put forward the Resolution ??? how come Non-permanent member recommend abolition of some thing which it does not own ?
Plus one thing you are forgetting , THAT RESOLUTION WILL BE VETOED BY ALL THE PERMANENT MEMBERS ( SUPER POWERS ) ,
Plus Who in this world is ready to take on America ???