Restraining the Criminal Misuse of the UN Veto Power in Humanitarian Crises.

Restraining the Criminal Misuse of the UN Veto Power in Humanitarian Crises

The repeated use of the veto power in the United Nations Security Council to block ceasefire resolutions in Gaza – most recently for the sixth time by the United States – has exposed a grave structural weakness in the international order. Originally designed to maintain global peace and security, the veto power has too often become a political instrument to shield allies and perpetuate conflicts. When this tool is used to prevent urgent humanitarian action, it ceases to be a safeguard and becomes a barrier to justice and peace.

The Original Purpose of the Veto

The veto power was created in 1945 to ensure that the major powers of the time could cooperate within a single framework and avoid another world war. It was meant as a stabilizing mechanism, not as a license to override international consensus or enable atrocities.

How the Veto Is Being Misused

In the case of Gaza and other conflicts, the veto is now being employed to block calls for ceasefires, humanitarian corridors, and accountability. This prevents the international community from taking even the minimum steps needed to stop mass suffering and uphold international law. Such a pattern of obstruction undermines the credibility of the UN and weakens the global rules-based system.

Proposals for Reform

1. A Binding Code of Conduct for the Veto

All permanent members should commit not to use the veto in cases of mass atrocities, genocide, war crimes, or crimes against humanity. This idea, advanced by several states and the ACT Group, must be formalized through a General Assembly resolution or a supplementary protocol to the UN Charter.

2. General Assembly Override Mechanism

If the Security Council fails to act because of a veto in a clear humanitarian emergency, the General Assembly should be able to adopt a binding resolution under the “Uniting for Peace” procedure by a two-thirds majority. This would restore the moral authority of the UN and reflect the will of the international community.

3. Limiting the Scope of the Veto by Charter Amendment

A longer-term solution is to amend the Charter so that vetoes cannot be applied to resolutions on ceasefires, humanitarian access, or protection of civilians. This would require consensus among member states but could be pursued through a phased approach.

4. Public Accountability and Transparency

Every time a veto is cast, the responsible state should be required to issue a public justification before the General Assembly explaining how its action complies with international law and the UN’s principles. This would increase political costs for abusive vetoes.

5. A Move toward Qualified Majority Voting

Scholars have proposed replacing or supplementing the veto with a qualified majority system, where blocking a resolution would require more than one permanent member. This would reduce unilateral obstruction without paralyzing the Council.

The Role of Global Civil Society

Reform will not occur without public pressure. Civil society organizations, think tanks, and faith-based movements must build a global campaign to demand that permanent members respect the lives of civilians over narrow geopolitical interests. This is not merely a legal or diplomatic issue; it is a moral imperative.

Conclusion

The misuse of the veto power in the face of humanitarian catastrophe is not only a failure of policy but a crime against the conscience of humanity. The international community must act decisively to restrain this practice and restore the United Nations to its founding mission: to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war. Only by limiting the veto in cases of mass suffering can the world uphold the principles of peace, justice, and shared security.

Syed Ali Raza Naqvi Bukhari

Unity of Peace, Economic Reform, and Global Unity

Founder & Chairman of Tehreek Istehkam Pakistan, and the author of “Law of God” and “Social Democratic System.” Advocates for truth, social justice, and reform in all sectors of society.