The United Nations Security Council:
Globalization’s Strength and Weakness
John Sampsel
November 21, 2020
PS510: Post-Conflict Politics
Abstract
Since the founding of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) in 1945, it has stood
as the main international body for maintaining peace throughout the world. While it has
successfully ensured no further direct conflicts between the world’s large-scale hegemons, the
UNSC has come under excessive criticism for a failure to act in smaller international conflicts.
With the continued globalization of the world it is worthwhile to reexamine the UNSC to ensure
its charter and mission remain relevant in a sizably smaller international order than existed at its
onset. In order to fully realize the scope of the UNSC it is important to examine its foundation,
early years, most prevalent actors, and conflicts that demonstrate both successes and criticisms.
Following these examinations the ground work should exist to recommend improvements and
realignments in the UNSC structure and charter in order to account for the fact that as the world
continues to grow smaller so too will conflicts become more localized generating a new set of
peacekeeping challenges.
Introduction
The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) was established under the charter of the
United Nations (UN) when the organization was formed in 1945. When it was first established
the world was coming off of World War II, a war that spanned the entirety of the globe and saw
over 20 million civilian casualties (Gesner and Stagno Ugarte 2014, 457). In establishing the
UNSC it was expected that it would “maintain international peace and security in accordance
with the principles of the United Nations” (United Nations Security Council 2020). In reading
through the functions and powers of the UNSC it is evident that at its formation the UN sought to
alleviate the fears of another large-scale global conflict. While this is a noble ambition, the lack
of direct conflict between great actors has been replaced by proxy wars and internal humanitarian
crises. Given the metamorphosis the world has had since 1945, it is worthwhile to examine the
UNSC to see if it still holds relevance in today’s conflicts as it currently exists or if fundamental
changes to its structure are essential in maintaining the place of the UNSC in the grander scheme
of global security. In order to achieve this process this paper aims to examine the charter of the
UNSC, examine how the permanent members of the UNSC view its function, analyze key
conflicts to emphasize its successes and failures, and to provide recommendations for how the
UNSC can better function in a globalized world.
Methodology and Literature Review
In determining how to approach this topic it became apparent that simply relying on
scholarly articles would not properly address the UNSC’s overall effectiveness in todays world.
The 21st century is unique to generations before it as the tools exist broadcast opinions and
observances at the tap of a finger. Given that this paper looks to examine the UNSC through the
lens of the present and future, then it would be disingenuous to not also consider perspectives in
that same light. In keeping with this concept, the paper will revolve heavily around scholarly
articles pertaining to the UNSC, as well as reference the book The United Nations Security
Council in the Age of Human Rights written by Jared Genser and Bruno Stagno Ugarte. The
UNSC website will be used to provide perspective from the UN and UNSC members
themselves. Beyond these traditional forms of input, applicable news articles and social media
platforms will be utilized to provide the human perspective, something often overlooked in
traditional academic literature.
Scholarly Articles
While there are a bevy of academic journal articles to choose from when examining the
UNSC, this paper has chosen to focus on “Innovating to Restrain the Use of the Veto in the
United Nations Security Council”, written by Sina Alavi and Christian Wenawser, and “Why is
change so slow? Assessing prospects for the United Nations Security Council reform”, written
by Thomas Dorfler and Madeleine O. Hosli. These writings were chosen because of the
credentials of those that wrote them just as much for the substance found within. The
perspectives in these articles come from those with a background in the subject matter that are
also from the continent of Europe. It felt necessary to provide insight from other western nations
that were not necessarily American. This serves provide a counterbalance to the author’s own
perspectives, as well as provide a greater whole for the reader to observe.
Christian Wenawser and Sina Alavi serve as members of Liechtenstein’s representation
to the UN. Wenawser is an ambassador of the country and has been Liechtenstein’s permanent
representative to the UN since 2002. Alvi serves as the senior legal and political advisor of the
Permanent Mission of Liechtenstein to the UN. Their expertise in dealing within the UN is
displayed in their article which manages to make two clear recommendations for improvements
to the UNSC’s operations in the span of only eight pages. Their examination focuses on the veto
power in the UNSC specifically, but it falls short of examining whether broader reform of the
council may be in order. Beyond the scope of their duties, Alvi and Wenawser also help to bring
a European perspective to the discussion that is not a European Union (EU) perspective as their
country, while cooperative in many of its programs, are not members of the EU.
Thomas Dorfler and Madeleine O. Hosli are both academics from EU nations. Hosli
serves in the Institute of Security and Global Affairs at Leiden University in the Netherlands.
Dorfler serves in the Social Sciences, Economics, and Business Administration department at the
University of Bamberg in Germany. This article differs from that of Alvi and Wensawer in both
voice and substance. “Why is change so slow? Assessing prospects for United Nations Security
Council reform” is written for an academic audience with at least a tenable grasp on data
analysis. Whereas Alvi and Wensawer took a human approach, however bureaucratic its
undertones may have been, Dorfler and Hosli remain stringently factual in their delivery. Their
work examines the structure of the UNSC while also spending time examining the veto power. It
still, however, falls short of recommending large-scale reform to the UNSC.
The United Nations Security Council in the Age of Human Rights
This book, like the scholarly articles previously addressed, was chosen as much for the
credentials of the authors as for the content of the book itself. Jared Genser is the founder of
Freedom Now and is a lawyer that specializes in human rights. Bruno Stagno Ugarte provides
training for new UNSC members and served as Costa Rica’s Permanent Representative to the
UN from 2002-2006. Stagno Ugarte was also the Foreign Minister of Costa Rica from 2006-
2010. The perspectives of a humanitarian lawyer and career diplomat with intricate knowledge of
the UNSC help to shine light on the UNSC in a way that few others could.
The book itself is broken down into five sections, six if including the conclusion, and lays
out a thematic approach to the UNSC in the perspective of human rights. Of particular note is
section five which provides case studies to shore up the perspectives in the previous four
sections. This approach was one that I found interesting, as it provides the feeling of a course in
the UNSC and its interaction with human rights, with the case studies almost feeling like a
practical exercise to apply what you have learned about the UNSC to real world missions. The
book itself will be utilized to both provide insight into the UNSC formation and reference to
successes and short comings.
Websites, News Media, and Social Media
Websites, news media, and social media will be used throughout the paper to provide
perspective on points that are often overlooked in more scholarly works. The UNSC site will be
examined to demonstrate the perspective of the council, especially those of its permanent
members. The news media, and social media, provide the human perspective that is often times
lacking in these papers. The advent of social media has made it so that you can access the
opinions and perspectives of anyone in the world by simply following a hashtag, it would feel
disingenuous then if those perspectives were not made available in this paper. The use of social
media platforms will be especially prevalent when reviewing the UNSC successes and short
comings, as the human security of a local population can generally best be described by that
local population.
Political Analysis
The UNSC, as with any political organization, has established itself under a charter, a set
of rules governing the body to ensure the preservation of the institution as well as the will of its
members. When considering the will of its members, it is necessary that the five permanent
members to the UNSC, its veto power members, be held in specific regard. Given their status in
the world order at the time of its founding in 1945, Great Britain, France, the United States,
mainland China, changed from the Republic of China in the original charter, and Russia,
changed from the Union of Soviet Social Republics, were the founding five members of the
council and as such yield significantly greater power than the remaining 10 members of the
UNSC(Dorfler and Hosli 2019, 36). Given that the charter establishes the limits of the UNSC,
and the five original members wield a substantial amount of power, examination of both
instances is necessary to fully understand the politics involved in the UNSC.
UNSC Charter
The UNSC’s role in the greater UN organization is established in Chapter V of the UN
charter, with various degrees of additional responsibility coming in Chapters VI, VII, VIII, and
XII (UN 2020). The most telling position in the charter comes from Article 34 which reads in
part that the role of the UNSC is to “determine whether the continuance of the dispute or
situation is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security” (ibid). This
statement outlines what is widely regarded as the core of the function of the UNSC, to maintain
international peace and security. Incidentally, the role of the term international could be
perceived as the reason that so little action is taken by the council. It is worth noting that many
believe the charter needs to be reformed to “account for the shifting distribution of global power”
(Dorfler and Hosli 2019, 35).
That is not to say that the UNSC has never faced reformation. In December of 1963
Articles 23 and 27 were amended graduating the membership to the council to 15 members and
specifying that “procedural matters shall be made by an affirmative vote of nine members…on
all other matters by an affirmative vote of nine members, including the concurring votes of the
five permanent members” (UN 2020). These provisional changes help to demonstrate two key
functions within the UNSC, that it maintains a mechanism to be changed and that it is
established to avoid drastic shifts of power. The change to Article 23 provides one of the clearest
examples that the UNSC is not immune to the fact that the world order has shifted greatly since
the end of World War II. The amendment to Article 27, specifically the maintenance of the
requirement that any action beyond procedural members receive the approval of the five
permanent member states, demonstrates that malleability does not necessarily mean power shifts.
Veto Power
As has been noticed by many, the presence of the veto power is one of the most unique
aspects of the UNSC. This is not to say that veto powers are unique to the UNSC, however when
there are five separate entities, with separate strategic goals, it becomes even more difficult to
reach consensus. Dolfer and Hosli categorize this beyond simply the veto powers stating that “a
steep increase in UN membership that decreases the likelihood of finding a winning coalition”
(2019, 36). Alavi and Wenaweser go further describing the veto powers as having “prevented the
Security Council from exercising its functions with respect to some of the gravest threats to
international peace and security” (2020, 65). These statements taken together paint a picture or
rigid compliance that often hampers the progress of UNSC matters. A quick look into each
nation as they relate the UNSC to the greater international order helps to enlighten where this
disconnect comes from.
France
France views its presence on the UNSC as a function of the European Union (EU). This
is best illustrated when examining how France reacted to Germany taking the presidency of the
UNSC on June 1, 2020, stating that they were “happy to be just in the middle of this European
spring” (Fillion 2020). Statements such as these demonstrate France’s willingness to see
international affairs through the rose-colored lenses of the EU.
Great Britain
British statements on the UNSC provide the clearest path forward for UNSC reform. The
United Kingdom Mission to the United Nations states that they seek security and prosperity “by
making the UN more effective and efficient” (2020). While this displays a clear desire for the
UNSC to develop with the world, it is worth noting that in the wake of the Brexit it is yet to be
seen the full extent of power wielded in the international order by the current UK.
China
Chinese position on the international stage has largely been to prefer a noninterventionist
approach. A recent statement from Wang Yi, the current Chinese Foreign Minister, stated that
“unilateral sanctions and long-arm jurisdiction needs to be opposed” (Lederer 2020). On the
outset this appears to make China an ally in UNSC reform, however their ability to deny actions
they deem as overreach with a simple “nay” is likely to provide a deterrence to any large-scale
reform.
Russia
In a statement to the UN General Assembly (UNGA) in September 2020, Russian
president Vladmir Putin stated that the UNSC should make decisions that consist of a consensus
of the broader world while praising the need for the veto power. According to Putin the veto
power “helps to prevent unilateral actions that could lead to a direct military confrontation” (UN
2020). While this statement clearly acknowledges the shift in global power dynamics, it also
demonstrates the Russian position of being unwilling to relinquish its veto powers.
United States
In a 2018 address to the UNSC President Donald Trump, on the issue of North Korean
nuclear proliferation, stated that “we must enforce existing U.N. Security Council resolutions”
and then derided unnamed actors for violating these sanctions (White House 2018). This
statement demonstrates the usefulness that is seen in the UNSC by the current US administration.
President Trump was also sure to state multiple incidences of US leadership in the world,
demonstrating an unwillingness to alter tools that allow the US voice to dictate the world order.
Successes and Failures
When considering the efficacy of the UNSC it is important to look to real world actions
to display its true effect. Often when discussing policy adjustment this is the piece that does not
receive its proper weight. After all, what good are governing bodies when they do not appear to
favor those that they govern. Given the global reach of the UNSC, this paper will choose to focus
on its effects in the Sudan and Kosovo. These conflicts represent not only separate continents
and cultures, but they also demonstrate the difference that geo strategic importance plays in
UNSC decisions.
Sudan
The conflicts within the Sudan began decades ago with the process of decolonization in
the African continent. Sudan represents one of the largest demonstrations of inaction by the
UNSC in terms of human interests. With Sudan’s independence in 1956, the UNSC continued to
hide behind the ideal of noninterference as a reason to turn a blind eye to human rights suffering
in the country (Genser and Stagno Ugarte 2014, 339). This lack of empathy for the Sudanese
people by the UNSC has been on display throughout the country’s history, notably on display
through the inaction of the UNSC in facilitating the Addis Ababa Accord of 1972 (ibid, 341).
Despite their presence as the world’s actor for disparaging international violence, the UNSC has
remained rather muted on the point of the Sudan. Through their inaction, the UNSC has stood by
as hundreds of thousands of Sudanese lost their lives and livelihoods.
US Department of State 2005
While it is worth noting that the passage of UNSC Resolution 1769 in 2007 aimed to quell the
violence in Darfur, the establishment of a UN peacekeeping mission in the area came after
decades of war and implied political gains (Schimmer n.d., 39).
Kosovo
As with the Sudan, the efforts of the UNSC in Kosovo fell short of the task at hand. This
issue was heightened by the fact that it pitted three veto members, the US, Great Britain, and
France, at odds with another veto member, Russia. This inaction by the UNSC led to the military
alliance of NATO stepping in to fill the void left by the council (Genser and Stagno Ugarte 2014,
380). This disengagement by the UNSC left the humanitarian mission in a perilous spot as the
United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) found itself in a political nightmare
torn between its association with the UN and its reliance on NATO logistical support to tackle
the abundance of refugees begat by the crisis (ibid, 383).
US Department of State n.d.
It is worth noting that out of this tragedy of inaction in Kosovo the UNSC eventually adopted the
Right to Protect, outlining that the absence of human security for a population outweighed the
noninterference protocols put in place at its establishment.
Changes to the System
Whether it be inaction through a disinterest in a region or political dispute between two
or more veto powers, the structure of the UNSC has allowed it to take a back seat to its role of
keeping international peace. It is obvious to most that it is the presence of the veto powers that
allows this disparity in mission and action to continue. The problem of the veto powers has been
documented in multiple studies, to include Alavi and Wenaweser’s 2020 study. In keeping with
the idea that true productive discourse requires examination of ideas from moderate to extreme,
this author would suggest that it is worth looking at how the council would function without the
veto power entirely.
The concept being suggested is not to change the overall structure; in fact, the permanent
membership of the five veto powers and rotational membership of others appears to be the most
effective way of considering international action. This suggestion is that those five permanent
members not have a singular vote dominance over the outcome of the UNSC decisions. There
are risks with this adjustment to the council. It is easy for the rise in populism, coupled with this
change, to lead to the exodus of some of the UN’s biggest funders. However, considering those
same economies still aim for strategic influence in the world, that seems unlikely. The positives
to come from this would be the formation of global alliances to address global concerns.
Conclusion
In its initial establishment, the Unrecognized the need to have a governing body mitigate
international conflict. The establishment of the UNSC in its original charter provided the UN
with that body. With special consideration paid to its five permanent members, the UNSC has
taken the term noninterventionism to new heights. Often at the detriment of human security, the
UNSC has avoided international conflicts at nearly all costs. However, as the world, and
conflicts, continue to shrink, it is time that the efficacy of a veto process on the UNSC be
reexamined.
References
Alavi, Sina, and Christian Wenaweser. 2020. “Innovating to Restrain the Use of the Veto in the United Nations Security Council.” Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law 52: 65-72. https://eds-a-ebscohost-com.ezproxy.bellevue.edu/eds/detail/detail?vid=5&sid=39479cf1-a300-44ca-bc07-54f5ef672751%40sdc-v-sessmgr01&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmU%3d#AN=143604601&db=bth.
Bureau of Intelligence and Research. 2005. “Sudan: Death Toll.” US Department of State. Published March 25. Accessed November 21, 2020. https://2001-2009.state.gov/s/inr/rls/fs/2005/45105.htm.
Dorfler, Thomas, and Madeline O. Hosli. 2019. “Why is change so slow? Assessing prospects for United Nations Security Council Reform.” Journal of Economic Policy Reform 22.1: 35-50. Doi: 10.1080/17487870.2017.1305903.
Fillion, Stephanie. 2020. “France’s Printemps Europeen on the Security Council.” PassBlue. Published June 1. Accessed November 15, 2020. https://www.passblue.com/2020/06/01/frances-printemps-europeen-on-the-security-council/.
Genser, Jared, and Bruno Stagno Ugarte. 2014. The United Nations Security Council in the Age of Human Rights. New York: Cambridge University Press. EBSCOhost.
Lederer, Edith M. 2020. “At UN, China, Russia and US clash over pandemic responses.” Associated Press. Published September 24. Accessed November 15, 2020. https://apnews.com/article/virus-outbreak-wang-yi-united-states-antonio-guterres-russia-38dc347cba1f35723757d666df118e79.
Schimmer, Russell. N.d. “Tracking the Genocide in Darfur: Population Displacement as Recorded by Remote Sensing.” Yale University. Accessed November 21, 2020. https://gsp.yale.edu/sites/default/files/files/GS36.pdf.
UK Mission to the United Nations (New York). 2020. “Our Mission.” Accessed November 15. https://www.gov.uk/world/uk-mission-to-the-united-nations-new-york.
United Nations. 2020. “Charter of the United Nations.” Accessed November 15. https://www.un.org/en/sections/un-charter/introductory-note/index.html.
United Nations News. 2020. “Forgetting lesson of history ‘short-sighted’, Russia’s Putin says, calls for cooperation to tackle health challenges.” Published September 22. Accessed November 15, 2020. https://news.un.org/en/story/2020/09/1073152.
United Nations Security Council. 2020. “About the Council: Functions and Powers.” Accessed November 8. https://www.un.org/securitycouncil/content/functions-and-powers.
US Department of State. N.d. “Towns and Villages in Kosovo Attacked by Serbs.” Accessed November 21, 2020. https://1997-2001.state.gov/regions/eur/map1.html.
White House. 2018. “Remarks by President Trump at the United Nations Security Council Briefing on Counterproliferation | New York, NY.” Published September 26. Accessed November 15, 2020. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-
president-trump-united-nations-security-council-briefing-counterproliferation-new-york-ny/.