Speakers at Security Council Debate on Working Methods Express Widespread Concern over Use of Veto, Citing Its Destructive Consequences in Gaza, Ukraine
The Security Council must amend its working methods, including through restraining the use of the veto and making improvements to its penholdership system and sanction regimes, to enhance its transparency, accountability and credibility and to improve its ability to take effective action in the face of multiplying and worsening global and regional conflicts, speakers told the 15-member organ today in an open debate on the topic.
Karin Landgren, Executive Director of Security Council Report, noting that the organization she heads had published five reports on Council working methods, cited the New Agenda for Peace, in which the Secretary-General described conflict prevention as a high priority that was “chronically underprioritized”. In that context, she pointed out that, while establishing the facts and understanding their context was a critical part of conflict prevention, “Agreeing on a set of facts is notoriously hard”. She set out several approaches by the Council which supported receiving accurate and timely information, including enhanced briefings by the three UN regional offices and regular in-depth briefings by the UN Secretariat.
Warning that the Arria-formula meeting format has “risked becoming tarnished as it moved away from not-for-attribution information to the televised trading of insults”, she also recalled the Council’s long-standing intent to “expand consultation and cooperation with regional and subregional organizations, including by inviting relevant organizations to participate” in its meetings. On that, she cited last year’s high-level Informal Interactive Dialogue with the League of Arab States as one such occasion. Spotlighting Council resolution 2719 (2023) on African Union-led peace support operations, she stated that, for the measure to be effective, the respective Councils of the African Union and the United Nations would need to design a new and much closer way of working together. Existing meetings between both Councils “are not yet a forum for candid, strategic or even routine exchange”, she observed, noting “a strong case for the Councils to hold more frequent, more interactive and less scripted meetings”.
Kazuyuki Yamazaki, Security Council President for September, speaking as Chair of the Informal Working Group on Documentation and Other Procedural Questions, told the organ that its responsibility to maintain international peace and security “has never been more crucial, given the challenging political dynamics worldwide”. To make timely decisions, the organ’s effective functioning is essential, he said, stressing: “What is at stake is not only the Council’s reputation and ability to fulfil its mandate, but the relevance of the entire UN.”
The Working Group has consistently been deliberating on how to improve the working methods of the Council, he went on, highlighting a series of Notes issued by the President of the Security Council to this end. Since the adoption of Note 507 in 2017 — the compilation of prior Notes — 16 new Notes by the President on the working methods have been adopted, many in response to demands from the broader membership. Spotlighting the adoption of the Note regarding the arrangement of penholderships (document S/2023/945) in December 2023, he called for a practical approach to be taken to realize the long-standing objective of enhancing the Council’s transparency, efficiency and effectiveness. Council members had agreed to initiate an update to Note 507, he said, detailing his intention to build on previous efforts to this end, as well as to improve its implementation.
In the ensuing debate, spanning half a day, nearly 30 speakers set forth their suggestions and concerns with issues ranging from the use of sanctions to the unorthodox selection of briefers by some delegates. The issue of the veto by the Council’s permanent members was the focus of widespread concern, with many delegates calling vociferously for it to be addressed, citing its destructive consequences in the unfolding conflicts in Gaza and Ukraine.
Among them was Mozambique’s representative, who, speaking on behalf of the 10 elected members of the Council — his country, as well as Algeria, Ecuador, Guyana, Japan, Malta, Republic of Korea, Slovenia, Sierra Leone and Switzerland — called for a Council that “demonstrates both the determination and the capacity to take action”. Members were dedicated to working “towards a more transparent, inclusive and representative Council”, he said, noting that such efforts were crucial in advancing international peace and security and in restoring confidence in the organ, as well as its credibility. Note 507 is a “living document”, which requires ongoing revision to remain fit for purpose, he said, calling for the Council to draft new Notes in response to contemporary needs and to strengthen its engagement with the wider UN membership.
The representative of the Russian Federation, describing the topic of the debate as “sensitive”, stressed the need for any changes or reform to focus on the meaningful improvement and efficiency of the Council, rather than serving “counter-productive” inchoate objectives. Taking issue with some members’ “systematic exploitation” of the Council’s working methods to serve their parochial interests, she said that such interests were “cloaked in lofty intentions and pseudo-altruism” and resulted in broad and vague mandates given to certain missions. On that, she cited the inclusion of topics such as climate change and transboundary water issues to the mandate of the special political mission in Iraq, as well as the unjustified use of the “truncheon” of sanctions. She further assailed the “blatant double standards” by Western colleagues, who pushed through for consideration a hasty resolution on cessation of hostilities in Sudan, while blocking demands to end violence in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict zone.
The United Kingdom’s delegate countered that he would not address the “litany of complaints” put forth by Moscow’s representative, pointing out that her delegation had brought the Council “Roger Waters as a briefer on Ukraine”. While stressing the need to continue to hear the views of relevant and competent civil society briefers, he warned members of the dangerous trend of using the Council as a platform for disinformation and revisionist history, through the use of underqualified briefers in “vexatious” debates in support of a war of aggression in breach of the Charter of the United Nations.
In a similar vein, France’s representative objected to some members’ use of the Council as a platform for disinformation and for saturating it with propaganda meetings. Working methods will never replace the spirit of responsibility and compromise, which remains essential to finding solutions to crises, he said, pointing out that, while the Council remained the only multilateral forum that exists to preserve peace and international security, it was not in a position to condemn the 7 October attacks; nor to call for a ceasefire in Gaza; nor halt Moscow’s war of aggression in Ukraine. Given the multiplication of crises, improvements to the Council’s working methods are necessary, he observed, urging “the right balance between public diplomacy and closed-door work”. Calling for the reasonable use of the veto, he spotlighted an initiative — advanced by his country and Mexico — which proposes the voluntary and collective non-use of the veto in cases of mass atrocities.
The representative of the United States, meanwhile, observing that many have been deeply frustrated by his delegation’s use of the veto over the past several months, offered that Washington, D.C., has, vice versa, “been deeply frustrated by the use of the veto by other permanent members over the last few years”. Nevertheless, the General Assembly adopted resolution 76/262 — co-sponsored by the United States — which established a general mandate for the Assembly to convene a meeting every time a veto is cast, he added. On the Council’s “milestone” Note on penholding, which came after many years of failing to achieve consensus, he said it demonstrated that “even seemingly intractable issues that the Council is grappling with can eventually lead to a consensus result”.
China’s delegate, urging the five permanent members to abandon their “cold war mentality” to better respond to global security challenges, called on Council members to hear the “the prevalent voices of the international community and act in line with the overwhelming consensus”. Imbalances in the veto’s use are caused by “the Council’s unfair composition and unreasonable structure”, he added. On sanctions, he called for them to be handled through a case-by-case approach, adding that they must not replace diplomatic efforts. On penholdership, which he called “a responsibility, not a privilege”, he urged penholders to “uphold objectivity and impartiality” while advocating for more States to take on this responsibility, especially African members.
Norway’s delegate, speaking on behalf of the 27 members of the Accountability, Coherence and Transparency group (ACT), stated that improving the Council’s working methods and updating Note 507 were not just a matter of housekeeping, but an imperative process in transparency and accountability, and in ensuring the Council can better fulfil its mandate. To this end, she called for the co-sponsorship of Council texts to be made easier, and for the use and codification of the use of special reports each time a veto is cast. Note 507 does not mention the veto, she said, calling on the inclusion of a dedicated section on the use of the veto in the annual report, calling on Council members to adhere to Article 27 (3) of the Charter of the United Nations, which calls for obligatory abstentions in cases where members are a party to a dispute.
Voicing similar points, Dominique Hasler, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Liechtenstein, emphasizing that “the veto is at the heart of political paralysis”, highlighted the ACT Code of Conduct and the France-Mexico initiative as political commitments to curtail the use of the veto. The more the Council struggles to make decisions necessary for maintaining peace and security, the more important the demand for accountability becomes, she said, adding: “Our strong interest is an effective Security Council.” Noting that too often people become disillusioned by the inaction of the Council, she said, “When the Council is unable to do what it should, it is a collective failure for all of us.”
The representative of Mexico was also among the ranks of speakers taking aim at the veto, urging all States that have not yet done so to join the France-Mexico initiative. Observing that some permanent members’ abuse of the veto had serious consequences for the organ’s credibility and for international peace and security, he stated that the Council’s paralysis amounted to death and destruction in Gaza and Ukraine. Any permanent member exercising the veto to override the majority’s will would have to pay the political and historical cost. As well, he called for greater transparency and communications on States invoking the right to legitimate defence enshrined in Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations.
Similarly, the representative of the Philippines said that the Council should consider co-penholdership on all files, enhance systematic consultations with affected countries and institutionalize greater accountability for the use of the veto. “The exercise of the right of veto carries an extraordinary level of responsibility and should not be employed without due accountability,” he added, calling for the measure to be judiciously used to avoid undue constraints on the Council’s primary mandate of maintaining international peace and security.
Costa Rica’s delegate, meanwhile, welcomed the Informal Working Group’s efforts on documentation and procedural questions, suggesting that their annual reports could address more procedural issues in the Council, such as votes and formulation of new agenda items. Voicing concern over the low submission rate of monthly assessments by Council presidencies, she emphasized the need “to ensure proper accountability and to promote global security cooperation”.
Brazil’s delegate, for his part, highlighted the importance of transparent and inclusive penholder practice, adding: “Enhancing cooperation between the Council and the Peacebuilding Commission is paramount,” especially in the context of deliberations on mandate renewals. Meanwhile, he called for listings by the sanctions Committees to be evidence-based, and to comply with international law in listing or de-listing designated persons and entities.
The representative of Egypt, underscoring the need for the inclusion of views of States that are directly affected by conflicts, said that all Member States should have access to draft resolutions and presidential statements, and be kept abreast on consultations on issues that directly affected them, as in the case of the conflict in Gaza, which had repercussions for the entire region.
In a similar vein, South Africa’s delegate voiced concern over the Council’s inability to find a lasting solution to the conflict in Gaza, where a veto was used by one of the permanent members three times against resolutions calling for a humanitarian ceasefire. He also encouraged deepened cooperation between the United Nations and the African Union, in the context of the Council’s adoption of resolution 2712 (2023), to make available assessed contributions for peace operations led by the African Union. Furthermore, he commended the Council’s regular annual consultations with the Union and encouraged in-depth discussions on conflict situations in Africa.