Why Is the UN Security Council Needed When It Can't Check Wars or Missiles?

Russia's Invasion of Ukraine, North Korea Missile Launches Rekindle Security Council Reform Debate
Permanent Members' 'Veto Power' Blocks Resolution Adoption... Criticism Over Excessive Authority
Japan's Bid for Permanent Seat, South Korea's Proposal for Semi-Permanent Seat Face Low Feasibility

Representatives of the UN Security Council member states held an emergency meeting on the Ukraine situation at the UN Headquarters in New York on February 21 (local time). (Photo by Reuters, New York)

[Asia Economy Intern Reporter Yunjin Kim] The United Nations Security Council (UNSC), established for international peace, is facing calls for reform as it fails to exert strong pressure against provocations threatening the international community, such as North Korea's missile launches. The main reason for repeated failures of UNSC sanctions is the structure that prevents the adoption of resolutions if even one of the five permanent members exercises a veto.

On May 26 (local time), the Security Council held a meeting at the UN Headquarters in New York and put to a vote an additional sanctions resolution against North Korea, including reducing the cap on its oil imports, but it was blocked due to opposition from China and Russia. This resolution was led by the United States in response to North Korea's multiple test launches of ballistic missiles, including intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), this year. At a closed Security Council meeting held on the 27th (local time), conflicts between the UK and China reportedly prevented the adoption of an additional statement calling for a peaceful resolution to the Myanmar crisis.

Established in 1945, the Security Council is the only core UN body among the six main organs that can make binding decisions on member states. According to Article 23 of the UN Charter, the Security Council consists of five permanent members and ten non-permanent members. The permanent members are the United States, the United Kingdom, France, China, and Russia?victors of World War II?who have held their status without term limits since 1945. Non-permanent members serve two-year terms, with five countries replaced each year through General Assembly votes.

However, for a resolution to be adopted, it must receive the support of at least two-thirds (9 out of 15) of the members and unanimous approval from all five permanent members, which has often led to failures. Permanent members have exercised their veto power based on their national interests. Russia has exercised its veto 120 times, the most among them, followed by the United States with 83 vetoes. The United Kingdom (29 times), China (17 times), and France (16 times) follow.

Since Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February, the Security Council has been unable to pass even resolutions demanding withdrawal due to opposition from Russia, a permanent member. Only on the 6th (local time) did the Council adopt a statement calling for a peaceful resolution by referring to Russia's invasion as a "conflict" rather than a war. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky criticized the Security Council's passive response during his virtual speech to the Council on the 5th of last month, stating, "There is a Security Council, but there is no security guaranteed by the Security Council anywhere."

Representative measures to control the abuse of veto power by permanent members include expanding the number of permanent members and establishing semi-permanent members. Germany, Japan, India, and Brazil, who advocate for expanding permanent membership, proposed in 2005 to increase the number of permanent members by six, including two African countries. However, countries like South Korea, Italy, and Mexico opposed this, arguing that "democratization of the Security Council through elected non-permanent and semi-permanent members is necessary." Semi-permanent members, who do not have veto power but serve four-year terms with the possibility of renewal, were designed as a check against permanent members who have no term limits.

However, realistically, the likelihood of Security Council reform is low. Changing the existing Security Council system, such as expelling Russia or expanding permanent membership, requires amending the UN Charter. The Charter can only be amended with the unanimous approval of all five permanent members and a two-thirds majority in the General Assembly. Permanent members are likely to oppose reforms that limit their powers. Analysts suggest that U.S. President Joe Biden's statement during the U.S.-Japan summit on the 23rd, expressing support for Japan's bid for permanent membership, was primarily aimed at countering China and Russia.

As U.S.-China tensions escalate and Russia's invasion of Ukraine continues, debates over the effectiveness of the Security Council are expected to persist for the foreseeable future.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.