Context of the News
The debate over United Nations Security Council (UNSC) reform has gained renewed attention amid discussions on the use and regulation of veto power.
The issue is important for India because New Delhi has consistently demanded comprehensive UNSC reform, including permanent membership for India and greater representation for the Global South. Russia has also reiterated its support for India’s permanent membership.
At the 81st Session of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) in September 2026, member states discussed reforms concerning the use of the UNSC veto, particularly during humanitarian crises. India reiterated its call for urgent and time-bound UNSC reform and referred to the Pact for the Future, adopted in 2024. Pasted markdown
Background: What is the UN Security Council?
The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) is one of the six principal organs of the United Nations.
It was established under the UN Charter in 1945 and has the primary responsibility for maintaining international peace and security.
The UNSC held its first session on 17 January 1946 at Church House, Westminster, London. Its headquarters is in New York City.
Composition of the UNSC
The UNSC has 15 members:
- 5 Permanent Members (P5)
- China
- France
- Russia
- United Kingdom
- United States
- 10 Non-Permanent Members
- Elected by the UN General Assembly.
- They serve two-year terms.
- Five non-permanent members are elected each year.
The Presidency of the UNSC rotates every month among the 15 members.
What is Veto Power?
Veto power is the special power of a permanent member of the UNSC to prevent the adoption of a substantive resolution by casting a negative vote.
The term “veto” is not explicitly mentioned in the UN Charter.
Its legal basis is found in Article 27(3) of the UN Charter.
For non-procedural matters, a decision requires:
At least 9 affirmative votes, including the concurring votes of the permanent members.
Therefore, a negative vote by even one P5 member can prevent the adoption of a substantive resolution.
Important Distinction
A P5 member’s abstention is not a veto.
An abstention does not automatically prevent the adoption of a resolution if the required number of affirmative votes is obtained. Pasted markdown
How Does UNSC Voting Work?
| Feature | Provision |
|---|---|
| Total UNSC members | 15 |
| Permanent members | 5 |
| Non-permanent members | 10 |
| Vote of each member | One vote |
| Term of non-permanent members | 2 years |
| Veto power | Held by P5 |
| Substantive decisions | Require 9 votes, including required P5 concurrence |
| P5 abstention | Not a veto |
Members of the UN that are not members of the UNSC may participate in discussions when invited, but do not have voting rights in the Council.
Why is the UNSC Veto Controversial?
The veto was created to ensure that the major powers remained involved in the UN system.
However, the same mechanism can also create institutional paralysis.
Arguments for Reforming or Abolishing the Veto
1. Unequal Power Structure
The UN Charter is based on the principle of sovereign equality of its members.
However, only five countries possess the veto.
This creates a significant difference between the P5 and other UN members.
2. Institutional Paralysis
A single permanent member can block a substantive resolution even when there is significant international support for it.
This becomes particularly important during:
- Armed conflicts
- Humanitarian crises
- Genocide
- Crimes against humanity
- Large-scale violations of international law
The possibility of a veto can also discourage a proposal from being formally introduced.
This is sometimes described as the “pocket veto” effect.
3. Accountability Concerns
Critics argue that permanent members may use the veto to protect:
- Their own strategic interests
- Their allies
- Political positions
This creates concerns about the accountability of powerful states within the international system.
4. The UNSC Reflects the World of 1945
The current permanent membership reflects the geopolitical structure that existed at the end of the Second World War.
The global distribution of:
- Population
- Economic power
- Political influence
- Regional importance
has changed considerably since then.
Yet the permanent membership has remained unchanged.
This has strengthened demands for representation of Africa, Latin America and major emerging powers such as India and Brazil. Pasted markdown
Why Do Some Countries Oppose Abolishing the Veto?
The debate is not entirely one-sided.
1. Preventing a Repeat of the League of Nations Experience
The League of Nations, the predecessor of the UN, failed to effectively prevent major international conflicts.
Supporters of the veto argue that the mechanism acts as a safety valve by ensuring that major powers remain invested in the UN system.
Without such a mechanism, major powers might simply ignore or withdraw from decisions that seriously affect their interests.
2. Article 108 Creates a Legal Barrier
Article 108 of the UN Charter provides the procedure for Charter amendments.
An amendment requires:
- A two-thirds majority in the UN General Assembly; and
- Ratification by two-thirds of UN members, including all permanent members of the Security Council.
Therefore, the P5 have a decisive role in any amendment affecting the veto itself. Pasted markdown
3. More Veto Holders Could Mean More Paralysis
Some countries argue that simply adding more permanent members with veto power could make the UNSC even less effective.
The Uniting for Consensus (UfC) Movement, informally known as the Coffee Club, opposes expansion of permanent seats with veto powers.
Uniting for Consensus Movement
The Uniting for Consensus (UfC) is a group of countries that opposes the expansion of permanent seats on the UNSC.
It is also known as the Coffee Club.
Countries associated with the movement include:
- Italy
- Spain
- Australia
- Canada
- South Korea
- Argentina
- Pakistan
The group has historically argued against creating additional permanent seats.
UPSC Point
The UfC position should be contrasted with the G4 position.
| Group | Broad Position |
|---|---|
| G4 | Supports expansion of permanent and non-permanent membership |
| UfC / Coffee Club | Opposes expansion of permanent seats |
| African Union | Demands permanent African representation |
| India | Supports comprehensive reform and permanent membership |
Major Initiatives for Veto Reform
Several initiatives have attempted to make the use of veto power more responsible and transparent.
1. French-Mexican Initiative
The French-Mexican Initiative, launched in 2015, calls for permanent members to voluntarily refrain from using the veto in situations involving:
- Genocide
- Crimes against humanity
- Large-scale war crimes
It is based on the idea that veto power should be accompanied by special responsibility during mass atrocities. Pasted markdown
2. Liechtenstein Initiative
The Liechtenstein Initiative led to UN General Assembly Resolution 76/262 in 2022.
It is also called the Veto Initiative.
Under this mechanism, the General Assembly convenes a formal meeting after a veto is cast in the Security Council.
The meeting is to take place within 10 working days.
Significance
The initiative does not abolish the veto.
Instead, it seeks to increase:
- Transparency
- Political accountability
- International scrutiny
Thus, a veto does not simply end the discussion at the UNSC. Pasted markdown
3. ACT Code of Conduct
The ACT Code of Conduct was developed by the Accountability, Coherence and Transparency (ACT) group.
It encourages UNSC members to avoid voting against credible resolutions aimed at preventing or stopping mass atrocity crimes. Pasted markdown
India and the UNSC
India has a long history of participation in the Security Council.
According to the supplied reference material, India has served seven times as a non-permanent member and was elected for an eighth term for 2021–22.
India has also made significant contributions to UN peacekeeping, with its participation in 43 peacekeeping missions highlighted in the reference material.
India’s case for permanent membership is based on factors including:
- Population
- Territorial size
- GDP and economic potential
- Cultural diversity
- Political system
- Contribution to UN peacekeeping
- Role in shaping international norms
India’s Position on UNSC Veto Reform
India’s position is based on the principle of comprehensive UNSC reform.
1. India Opposes a Two-Tier Permanent Membership
India does not support a system in which new countries receive permanent seats but remain permanently without veto rights while the existing P5 retain their veto.
India’s position is that if the veto continues to exist, new permanent members should also receive comparable rights. Pasted markdown
2. G4
India works with the G4, comprising:
India + Brazil + Germany + Japan
The G4 countries support each other’s aspirations for permanent membership in the UNSC.
3. 15-Year Veto Moratorium
As a compromise, the G4 has proposed a 15-year moratorium on the exercise of veto by new permanent members.
Under this approach:
- New members would become permanent members.
- They would have the same responsibilities and obligations.
- They would voluntarily refrain from exercising veto power for 15 years.
- The arrangement could subsequently be reviewed by the General Assembly. Pasted markdown
India and the Global South
India presents itself as a major voice of the Global South.
Global South broadly refers to developing and emerging countries, particularly in Asia, Africa, Latin America and other developing regions.
India supports greater representation of developing countries in global institutions.
Ezulwini Consensus
The Ezulwini Consensus is the African Union’s common position on international institutional reform.
It seeks:
- Permanent African representation on the UNSC.
- Non-permanent African representation.
- Veto rights for African permanent members if the veto continues to exist.
India supports the African demand for greater representation. Pasted markdown
L.69 Group
India also works with the L.69 Group, a grouping of developing countries supporting comprehensive reform of the UNSC.
India has coordinated with both the G4 and L.69 to strengthen developing-country support for reform. Pasted markdown
India’s Larger Idea: Reformed Multilateralism
India’s demand for UNSC reform is part of its broader vision of reformed multilateralism.
Multilateralism means cooperation among multiple countries through common institutions, rules and decision-making mechanisms.
India argues that global institutions must become:
- More representative
- More inclusive
- More democratic
- More accountable
- More reflective of contemporary geopolitical realities
The Pact for the Future, adopted at the 2024 UN Summit, provides an important contemporary framework for this discussion. Pasted markdown
UNSC Reform: Major Challenges
The image-based reference highlights several structural challenges facing the UNSC.
1. Lack of Transparency
Usual UN procedures do not always operate in the same manner during UNSC deliberations.
The absence of complete public records of some deliberations raises questions about transparency.
2. Anachronistic Veto Structure
The P5 structure reflects the geopolitical realities of 1945, rather than the contemporary distribution of global power.
3. Deep Polarisation
Differences among permanent members can prevent the Council from reaching consensus on major international issues.
4. Inadequate Representation
Several regions and major emerging powers remain inadequately represented in the permanent membership.
This is one of the strongest arguments behind demands for UNSC expansion.
UNSC Reform: Key Groups to Remember
| Group / Initiative | What UPSC Aspirants Should Remember |
|---|---|
| P5 | China, France, Russia, UK, USA |
| G4 | India, Brazil, Germany, Japan |
| UfC | Opposes expansion of permanent seats; Coffee Club |
| L.69 | Developing countries supporting UNSC reform |
| Ezulwini Consensus | African demand for permanent representation |
| French-Mexican Initiative | Voluntary veto restraint during mass atrocities |
| Liechtenstein Initiative | UNGA debate following a veto |
| ACT Code | Accountability, Coherence and Transparency |
What Measures Can Reform the Veto System?
A practical reform strategy need not immediately begin with complete abolition.
1. Promote Voluntary Restraint
The international community can strengthen initiatives such as the French-Mexican Initiative.
The objective should be to create a strong international norm against veto use during extreme humanitarian crises. Pasted markdown
2. Strengthen Post-Veto Accountability
The Liechtenstein Initiative can be linked with stronger follow-up mechanisms.
General Assembly debates should lead to meaningful diplomatic and humanitarian responses wherever possible.
3. Build Consensus on UNSC Expansion
Intergovernmental negotiations should move towards concrete proposals rather than remaining indefinitely open-ended.
Compromise models, including the G4’s proposed 15-year veto moratorium, could help bridge differences between competing groups. Pasted markdown
4. Improve Representation
A reformed UNSC should provide greater representation to:
- Africa
- Asia
- Latin America and the Caribbean
- Major emerging powers
- The Global South
Prelims Focus: High-Value Facts
UNSC
- Established under the UN Charter in 1945.
- First session: 17 January 1946.
- Headquarters: New York City.
- Total members: 15.
- Permanent members: 5.
- Non-permanent members: 10.
- Non-permanent members serve two-year terms.
- Presidency rotates every month.
P5
China – France – Russia – United Kingdom – United States
Voting
- Each UNSC member has one vote.
- P5 members possess veto power.
- Abstention is not veto.
- Non-members of the UNSC may participate in discussions when permitted but cannot vote.
Important UN Charter Articles
| Article | Significance |
|---|---|
| Article 27 | Voting procedure in the UNSC |
| Article 108 | Amendment of the UN Charter |
Important Groups
- G4: India, Brazil, Germany, Japan
- UfC: Uniting for Consensus; Coffee Club
- L.69: Group of developing countries supporting UNSC reform
- P5: Five permanent members
Important Initiatives
- French-Mexican Initiative: Veto restraint during mass atrocities.
- Liechtenstein Initiative: General Assembly debate after veto.
- ACT Code of Conduct: Accountability, Coherence and Transparency.
- Ezulwini Consensus: African position on representation in global institutions.
Prelims Check
Question 1
With reference to the United Nations Security Council, consider the following statements:
- The Security Council is one of the six principal organs of the United Nations.
- All members of the United Nations can vote in the Security Council when matters concerning international peace and security are discussed.
- A non-permanent member of the Security Council is elected for a two-year term.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
(a) 1 and 2 only
(b) 1 and 3 only
(c) 2 and 3 only
(d) 1, 2 and 3
Question 2
Consider the following pairs:
| Group/Initiative | Associated with |
|---|---|
| 1. G4 | India, Brazil, Germany and Japan |
| 2. Uniting for Consensus | Opposition to expansion of permanent seats |
| 3. Ezulwini Consensus | African position on UNSC reform |
| 4. Liechtenstein Initiative | Creation of additional permanent members with veto |
How many of the above pairs are correctly matched?
(a) Only one
(b) Only two
(c) Only three
(d) All four
Question 3
With reference to the veto power of the United Nations Security Council, consider the following statements:
- A negative vote by any permanent member can prevent the adoption of a substantive resolution.
- Abstention by a permanent member necessarily amounts to a veto.
- The French-Mexican Initiative seeks voluntary restraint in the use of veto during situations involving mass atrocities.
- The Liechtenstein Initiative abolished the veto power of the permanent members.
Which of the statements given above are correct?
(a) 1 and 3 only
(b) 1, 2 and 3 only
(c) 2 and 4 only
(d) 1, 3 and 4 only
Answers and Explanations
Answer 1: (b) 1 and 3 only
- Statement 1 is correct: The UNSC is one of the six principal organs of the UN.
- Statement 2 is incorrect: Non-members of the UNSC may participate in certain discussions but do not have voting rights.
- Statement 3 is correct: The 10 non-permanent members are elected for two-year terms.
Answer 2: (c) Only three
- Pair 1 is correct: G4 = India, Brazil, Germany and Japan.
- Pair 2 is correct: The UfC/Coffee Club opposes expansion of permanent seats.
- Pair 3 is correct: The Ezulwini Consensus represents the African position on greater representation.
- Pair 4 is incorrect: The Liechtenstein Initiative did not abolish the veto. It created a mechanism for greater General Assembly scrutiny following its use. Pasted markdown
Answer 3: (a) 1 and 3 only
- Statement 1 is correct: A negative vote by a P5 member can block a substantive resolution.
- Statement 2 is incorrect: Abstention is not a veto.
- Statement 3 is correct: The French-Mexican Initiative seeks voluntary restraint during genocide, crimes against humanity and large-scale war crimes.
- Statement 4 is incorrect: The Liechtenstein Initiative seeks accountability and transparency, not abolition of the veto. Pasted markdown Pasted markdown
Conclusion
UNSC reform must balance representation, effectiveness and accountability while ensuring that veto power does not paralyse collective action during global crises.
“Strong institutions are not those that never change, but those that evolve with the changing needs of the world.”
