The Security Council has primary responsibility, under the United Nations Charter, for the maintenance of international peace and security. Today the P5 (permanent members) or simply speaking just 5 countries determine the fate of millions during a seize, war or invasion. -by their "veto power by nullifying any attempt to join a conflict or break down an invasion. These countries being the United States, China, France, Russia, and the United Kingdom. However this group has now become polarized due to which most actions are vetoed out by either group A or B.
Group A: China, Russian Fed
Group B: USA, UK, France
Other countries who have nuclear capability but do not have a permanent seat being Pakistan, India, Israel, and North Korea. So should some of these countries also be included in the P5 to make it P7 and bring more stability and rationality to the powers given to P5, who in most cases cannot really work together and oppose each other using their Veto card.
The issue of Security Council Reform has been discussed for nearly 30 years. No progress has been made and I do no think it will really happen in the coming years. Including emerging global power like India to the club of permanent members is long overdue. It is however pretty hard, in times of geopolitical conflict, to reform any international institution, especially as important as the UNSC. The current geopolitical dispute should first be resolved and only then will the winning bloc decide on the new shape of the international order. The United Nations only came into being when the Allies were already winning the Second World War, not when they signed the Atlantic Charter.
When the United Nations was established and the permanent members of the Security Council were determined, this was related to a specific international context that resulted from the end of the Cold War, but now, after nearly eight decades have passed since that time, the composition of the Security Council must be reconsidered, and permanent membership in it granted to other countries from different continents. In a manner consistent with the nature of international developments and the balance of power that took place during those past decades, Currently, new powers have risen and the map of international powers has changed. It is inconceivable for the continent of Africa to remain without any representation in the Council. The same is the case with regard to Latin America. As for the continent of Asia, it has become the home of the most important emerging powers now. Therefore, its representation in the Council must be expanded to include other countries such as India and Japan, and changing the composition of the Security Council will achieve a greater balance for international relations and how to deal with international issues that it studies
In my opinion the problem that the international community is facing is not who the permanent members are, but their right to veto. That said, I think that the best solution is to cancel the respective right, so that there can the SC can reach to a decision each time a vote is conducted.
Yes, the permanent seats on the Security Council should be reconsidered. The Security Council is the most powerful organ of the United Nations and its permanent members are responsible for maintaining international peace and security. However, the current permanent members – the United States, the United Kingdom, France, China and Russia – do not reflect the world’s current geopolitical landscape. The permanent members should be expanded to reflect the diversity of the world today and to ensure that all voices are represented in the decision-making process.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Biological Science
- Histology