World News | Veto at UN Security Council out of political considerations, not moral obligation: India

UN, PTI April 27 India has stressed that the use of the veto in the UN Security Council is motivated by political considerations rather than a moral obligation, saying that only five permanent members are given the privilege to use the veto against the very concept of sovereign equality of states.

Pratik Mathur, Counselor at India’s Permanent Mission to the United Nations, addressed the plenary session of the UN General Assembly on Wednesday on the “use of the veto”, a year after the 193-member UN body adopted the Veto Initiative. All five permanent members have used the veto to achieve their own political goals in the 75 years since 1999.

Read also | Zooey Zephyr: US state GOP bans transgender congresswomen for remainder of legislative session.

Of the 15 countries in the Security Council, only the five permanent members, China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States, have veto power. The remaining 10 members are elected as non-permanent members for two years without veto power.

“The use of the veto is motivated by political considerations, not a moral obligation. As long as it exists, one or more member states that can exercise the veto will do so, regardless of moral pressure, as we have seen recently,” Mathur said.

Read also | India’s veto power: India has proposed major reforms in the UN Security Council, saying it would abolish the veto or give it to new permanent members of a reformed UN Security Council.

In April last year, the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted a resolution without a vote on the “standing mandate for debate in the General Assembly when the Security Council has the veto power”, also known as the “veto initiative”.

Once a resolution is passed, a permanent member’s veto in the Security Council will now trigger a General Assembly meeting where all UN members can review and comment on the veto.

The decision came a day after Russia invaded Ukraine last February, after the Security Council used its veto power.

In adopting the resolution, India expressed “regret” at the lack of inclusivity in submitting it and said it had “serious concerns” about such “take it or leave it” initiatives that do not take into account the concerns of all parties. wider membership.

Mathur reiterated that the veto “unfortunately” reflected a piecemeal approach to UN Security Council reform, “emphasizing only one aspect and ignoring the root cause of the problem”.

“This privilege to use the veto is only granted to five members,” Mathur said, adding that “it goes against the notion of sovereign equality of nations and only perpetuates the ‘winner takes the spoils’ of World War II. mentality”, a position echoed by Africa.

Mathur went on to cite Africa’s repeated position in intergovernmental negotiations on UN Security Council reform, saying: “The veto should be abolished in principle. However, as a matter of shared justice, as long as it persists, it should be expanded to new permanent members.”

Either all countries are treated equally in terms of voting rights, or the new permanent members must also have the veto, Mathur asserted.

“In our view, the extension of the veto to new members would not adversely affect the effectiveness of the expanded Security Council,” he said.

India emphasized the need to comprehensively address all five aspects of UN Security Council reform, including the veto issue, through the timetable clearly laid out in the IGN process.

“India remains firmly committed to supporting any initiative that truly advances the goals of meaningful and comprehensive reform of key elements of the global multilateral architecture,” Mathur said.

These five aspects are the category of membership, the issue of the veto, regional representation, the size and working methods of the expanded Security Council, and the relationship between the Security Council and the General Assembly.

Earlier this week, India’s permanent representative to the United Nations, Ambassador Ruchira Kamboj, said in an open debate on “Effective multilateralism through upholding the principles of the UN Charter” under the Russian presidency of the permanent member of the Security Council that India has the right to act in the world’s largest calls for a “significant amendment” to the UN Security Council as democracies are excluded from global decision-making.

India also questioned whether “effective multilateralism” could be achieved by defending a charter that “makes five countries more equal than the rest and gives each of those five countries the power to override the collective will of the remaining 188 member states?” practice? Refers to the remaining 193 member states of the United Nations.

Kamboj asserted that the “starting premise” must be to expand the representation of the core body of the Security Council to more developing countries in order to increase its effectiveness and credibility.

“If we continue to perpetuate the anachronistic mentality of 1945, we will continue to lose the confidence of our people in the United Nations.”

(This is an unedited and auto-generated story from a Syndicated News feed, the content body may not have been modified or edited by LatestLY staff)