The United Nations (UN), a beacon of hope and unity after World War II, was established to prevent another world war and to maintain international peace and security. In 1945, representatives of 50 nations gathered in San Francisco to draft and sign the UN Charter, which formally established the organization in hopes of ensuring a more peaceful future. Today, the UN finds itself in a critical situation. Despite its many achievements, including its humanitarian efforts and sustainable development goals, the organization’s ability to achieve its original mission is increasingly hampered by structural shortcomings, particularly the disproportionate influence of the five permanent members of the Security Council. To address these challenges, a good global order—where all states have an equal voice in decision-making—could provide a much-needed solution. A system based on equality and mutual cooperation would allow for effective global governance, preventing the dominance and entrenchment of a few powerful nations and ensuring that international peace and security are pursued for the benefit of all.
The Security Council, one of the six main organs of the United Nations, was entrusted with the primary responsibility for maintaining international peace and security as outlined in the UN Charter. Its mandate gives it the power to take decisive action in times of conflict, including investigating conflicts, mediating peace agreements, and, if necessary, imposing sanctions or authorizing military intervention. However, despite this important authority, the veto power held by its five permanent members—China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States—has led to frequent suspensions, preventing effective responses. in global problems.
As António Guterres, Secretary-General of the United Nations, commented during the 2024 Conference on the Future, “The United Nations Security Council is out of date, and its authority is collapsing.” He emphasized that without correcting its structure and working methods, the Security Council “will eventually lose all trust.” This highlights the urgent need to address the permanent members’ veto and ensure that the Security Council reflects the realities of today’s global challenges. Although the vote was originally intended to prevent collective action by any one country, it has often paralyzed the Security Council. , stalled progress on critical issues. This ineffectiveness is particularly evident in conflicts such as Syria and Gaza, where repeated votes have thwarted efforts to bring peace. More recently, the attack on UN peacekeepers in Lebanon in October 2024 has again highlighted the critical nature of peacekeeping operations, as political gridlock within the Council limits its ability to respond firmly to emerging threats.
The conflict in Gaza highlights the inability of the United Nations to enforce peace agreements or lasting solutions, mainly due to the use of votes by full members of the Security Council. As President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan of Türkiye emphasized during the 2024 General Assembly: “The world is bigger than five,” a statement that emphasizes the disproportionate influence held by these permanent members, especially when global conflicts such as Gaza remain unresolved. Erdoğan’s criticism of the Security Council’s inability to prevent the “carnage” in Gaza underscores the urgency of reforming the structure.
Recent attacks on UN peacekeepers in Lebanon, especially in mid-October 2024, highlight the serious risks and limitations of peacekeeping missions in politically charged areas. UN personnel stationed along the Israeli-Lebanese border faced direct fire from the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF), including the deliberate targeting of a UNIFIL position near Kafer Kela. Despite Israel’s assurances of cooperation, the ongoing fighting has resulted in the destruction of infrastructure, injuries to peacekeepers, and increased threats to their security. UN Secretary-General António Guterres stressed the urgent need to ensure the safety and security of UN staff, stressing that these actions violate international law and may constitute war crimes. These incidents underscore the vulnerability of peacekeepers caught between hostile actors such as Israel and Hezbollah, and raise serious concerns about the future effectiveness of UN peacekeeping missions in highly politicized and militarized areas unless major changes are made.
What makes this concentration of power in the hands of the permanent members of the Security Council problematic is that many of these countries have a questionable history of human rights violations and military violence. For example, the United States remains the only country in history to have used atomic bombs on civilians, causing massive damage to Hiroshima and Nagasaki during World War II. Meanwhile, Russia and China have long been criticized for human rights abuses, from Russia’s brutal military campaigns in Ukraine and its crackdown on domestic dissent to China’s treatment of ethnic minorities like the Uyghurs. The paradox of these nations, each with significant internal and external conflicts, having the final say in global peacekeeping efforts is not lost on the international community.
It raises an important question: How can we trust a system where the very nations guilty of the worst violations of the law are the ones expected to create peace? Placing the future of world peace in the hands of a few states, many of which have national interests, seems contradictory. Expecting peace from these powers, given their histories and current actions, often leads to disappointment and failure. This, in turn, leaves the wider global community—especially minority nations and vulnerable people—at the mercy of hegemonic powers, whose interests do not always align with the need for justice or humanitarian resolution.
The lack of diverse representation within the Security Council has made it even more difficult for the UN to function as a truly global institution. Its decisions are often shaped by the political and economic interests of a few, while the voices of the majority are marginalized. As a result, conflict zones like Syria, Gaza, and Lebanon continue to suffer as the UN fails to take decisive action, caught between the conflicting interests of the Great Powers.
The ability of states to cooperate is essential to the resolution of international disputes. The challenges we face, including terrorism, climate change, and mass migration, transcend national borders and require a collective response from the global community. The failure of the United Nations Security Council to act as a unified body has delayed solutions to many problems and caused disturbing consequences for all regions. Instead of solving the root causes of conflicts—such as political instability, economic inequality, and governance failures—states have been slow to act, leading to the spread of global problems.
This separation of powers, coupled with the inability of the UN Security Council to act as a unified body, has not only delayed solutions to the problems but also caused the negative effect of economic collapse. By failing to address the root causes, such as political instability and economic inequality, the Council has indirectly contributed to the proliferation of terrorism and the displacement of many people from their communities. Waves of migration, especially from conflict zones in the Middle East—such as Syria, Gaza, and Lebanon—have resulted in millions of refugees seeking asylum in Europe and neighboring regions, in part because of the Council’s inaction.
To address these challenges, the UN must reform its Security Council, ensuring that it is more representative of the global community and not dominated by a few powers. Reforming the veto system, increasing representation, and ensuring that all voices are heard are essential to enable collaborative decision-making that can effectively address today’s complex security threats. The current world system is governed by five permanent members, each with veto power. This hegemonic structure has often become a tool to protect the interests of these powers, leaving the entire world community at a disadvantage. In order to overcome this crisis, a new opposition space must be created—which includes countries from Asia, Africa, Latin America, Europe and the Middle East. These states must unite in supporting reforms that will make democracy the rule of the world and challenge the rule of the few.
If we fail to raise our voices today, we risk being dragged into another global war, planned by these superpowers. The question is not just about reform but about promoting global awareness and action. The people of these nations must be encouraged to pressure their governments to demand changes at the international level. Social movements and protests should be organized to raise awareness and push for change. By building this momentum, governments may be forced to rethink their stance on reforming the UNSC.
Besides, if some countries continue to block the necessary changes, the time may come for the whole world to show that it is really bigger than the five and create a new system that does not include the so-called superpowers (because they are not the world itself). This new system must be based on true equality, where all countries, regardless of their size or influence, have an equal voice in global decision-making. In a world where justice governs international relations, a global order can work very well, promoting cooperation and preventing the dominance of any single power group. We are in a critical situation. Either we demand and achieve meaningful change today, or we risk being drawn into another catastrophic conflict fueled by the unchecked ambitions of a few powerful forces. Global solidarity in regions and countries is essential to building a future where international cooperation is no longer controlled by a small group but is shared by all in the pursuit of true peace and justice.
All in all, the United Nations is at a crossroads. With world peace and justice hanging in the balance, the time for change is now. It is imperative that the international community stands up and takes strong steps to modernize the Security Council and make the UN a truly representative and effective institution. The examples of Syria, Gaza, Lebanon, and beyond are clear indications that the system dominated by historically conflicted powers can no longer bring much-needed peace and security to the world. Reforming the veto power, expanding the membership of the Security Council, and ensuring that small and emerging countries have a voice in global governance are important steps in creating a more just and secure international order. The world can’t wait any longer.
Further Studies in E-International Relations
Source link
