Turkiye’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has called for the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council to lose their veto power, arguing that the current system is unjust and hinders global stability and peace. The demand, delivered ahead of a deadlocked diplomatic calendar, targets the exclusive authority held by the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Russia, and China.
Understanding the UN Security Council Veto Structure
The UN Security Council consists of five permanent members alongside 10 rotating, non-permanent members elected for set terms. Under the current charter framework, the permanent five members hold a special power to veto any substantive resolution brought before the body. Even if 14 of the 15 council members vote in favor of a measure, a single veto from any permanent member can tank the resolution entirely. Historically, Russia and the Soviet Union have cast the most vetoes by far, accounting for 163 out of 331 recorded vetoes, nearly half the total. The United States follows in second place with 95 vetoes, representing about 28 percent of the total count.
Erdogan’s Push for a Complete Overhaul
Speaking to journalists in New York on a Thursday following his address to the UN General Assembly, President Erdogan argued that the current model protects only five members instead of encompassing all nations. Laying out his case in a September 22 article published by Bloomberg, Erdogan wrote that the structure, developed eight decades ago, no longer meets the needs of a changing world. He stated that leaving the resolution of global crises to a handful of capitals is no longer compatible with modern realities. Turkiye’s proposal calls for ending permanent membership altogether, eliminating the veto power, and granting greater authority to the UN General Assembly to elect all security council members.
Did you know? While the UK and France are permanent members, neither country has used a veto since 1989. Their combined total stands at 50 vetoes, most of which were cast decades ago alongside the United States.
Why the Permanent Members Resist Reform
Formally ending the veto power requires an amendment to the UN Charter under Article 108. This process demands approval by two-thirds of the UN General Assembly and ratification by two-thirds of UN member states, including all five permanent members. In practice, the P5 would have to sign off on stripping away their own privileges. Diplomatic analysts note that such an effort is bound to fail due to fierce opposition from the veto-wielding states. Russia has responded to the Turkish initiative by stating that permanent members should retain their veto authority, although Moscow expressed support for expanding the total number of permanent seats. Both the US and China have historically defended their veto privileges strongly.
The France-Mexico Veto Suspension Proposal
As sweeping structural reform remains stalled, an alternative initiative led by France and Mexico has steadily gained traction among member states. First tabled in 2015, the proposal urges permanent members to voluntarily suspend their vetoes during situations involving mass atrocities such as genocide and crimes against humanity. The initiative relies on a collective and voluntary agreement rather than a formal charter amendment. According to the French government, 128 UN member states now back the measure, bringing it just one short of the number needed to pass a resolution in the UN General Assembly. However, analysts note that the impact of the France-Mexico initiative remains limited. Writing in a Lawfare article, analysts John Ramming Chappell and Emma Svoboda pointed out that such measures are couched in voluntary language and lack consensus from the most frequent veto-users.
Prospects for Expanding the Security Council
While abolishing the veto faces insurmountable hurdles, expanding the composition of the Security Council is viewed as a more plausible, though still difficult, objective. The US and China have previously stated support for modest increases, including adding permanent seats for African nations, none of which currently hold permanent status. Similarly, the UK and France have backed expansions that would include permanent seats for Brazil, Germany, India, Japan, and African countries. Professor Ibrahim Gambari, a former Nigerian foreign minister and former permanent representative to the UN, told Al Jazeera that the existing status quo is not truly interested in change. Any expansion effort still requires a charter amendment, leaving the permanent members in control of deciding which nations get to share power.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who holds veto power in the UN Security Council?
The veto power is held exclusively by the five permanent members of the UNSC: the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Russia, and China.
How many vetoes has the United States cast in recent years?
Over the past three years, the US has vetoed seven resolutions related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, including five calling specifically for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza.
What does it take to amend the UN Charter to end the veto?
An amendment requires approval by two-thirds of the UN General Assembly and ratification by two-thirds of UN member states, which must include the unanimous sign-off of all five permanent members.
What is the France-Mexico initiative?
It is a voluntary, non-binding proposal urging permanent members to suspend their veto power during mass atrocities, which has garnered support from 128 member states.
What are your thoughts on reforming the United Nations? Share your perspective in the comments below, or subscribe to our newsletter for ongoing updates on international diplomacy and global governance.
Related reading