Vetoing World Peace

By Levent Tuysuzoglu

Permanent members of the UN Security Council

Veto power in the United Nations is one of the most controversial topics in world politics - a privilege given to the five permanent members of the Security Council (United States, United Kingdom, France, Russia, and China). The Council is the only UN body that has the ability to enact resolutions; all other UN bodies can only submit recommendations to the Council that need to be approved for any real action to occur. Hence, enormous power is given to the five permanent members, who can single-handedly use their veto to turn down any resolution submitted by another permanent member or one of the ten rotating members.
Historically, veto power was given to the five nations as a protection tool to prevent developing countries from passing resolutions that would be detrimental to the few developed nations. However, over the years, the veto has been used between the permanent members to rebuff each other’s individual interests. There are very few documented cases in which veto power was used against the attempts of developing nations.

Currently, Russia holds the title for using the most vetoes, having called more than half of all uses, although most date back to the Soviet Union era. The United States, on the other hand, is a growing user of the veto, but most uses pertain to protecting Israel from UN criticism. Presently, the most controversial uses of veto power come from none other than the People’s Republic of China. Just in this year, China has twice threatened to use its veto not only to counter the interests of the other permanent members, but also to jeopardize world peace.

Most recently, China has threatened to veto any sanctions against its ally, North Korea. This became clear during the second week of July, only days after the first and unsuccessful North Korean missile test. U.S. interest in enacting economic sanctions on North Korea has gathered much support from UN members, yet no action has been taken because of the veto threat from the Chinese representative. Currently, the world awaits China’s response to North Korea’s recent underground nuclear detonation. One would hope that the representative will realize that North Korea is a threat to stability and success in the entire Asian region, including China.

China’s most serious exploitation of veto power by far is the threat to veto any resolution calling for action against those responsible in Darfur. The Chinese government is the biggest investor in Sudanese oil and it has repeatedly acted as a roadblock for any military or economic action against Sudan. Furthermore, Chinese weapon makers are accused of providing the Sudanese government the very weapons Sudan uses to commit genocide. The Washington Post recently labeled Chinese-Sudanese relations as “a partnership of the world’s fastest-growing oil consumer with a pariah state accused of fostering genocide in its western Darfur region.” China’s refusal to take action in Darfur has created a lot of anti-Chinese sentiment around the world, including a movement to boycott the Beijing 2008 Olympics.

Veto power in the UN Security Council has proven to be counterproductive more than anything else. Instead of acting as a tool to balance the interests of developing and developed nations, it has become the source of inaction in the UN as some permanent members continue to use the power for pure self-interest.

The good news is that not all hope is lost. It was in the early 1950’s that the Soviet Union vetoed action against North Korea, yet the Korean War was started under NATO’s decision. It was just seven years ago that China and Russia blockaded UN action in Kosovo, yet a 78-day NATO war freed Kosovo Muslims from slaughter. Do you see a pattern? It is veto power that has continually prevented the UN from competently functioning as an organization, and has enabled closer-knit organizations such as NATO to act as unified and effective forces.