E-Mail Exchanges with Sir Brian Urquhart (2000): Security Council Veto

E-Mail Exchange with Sir Brian Urquhart (2000): Institute of International Studies, UC Berkeley

E-Mail Exchange with Sir Brian Urquhart, former Undersecretary General of the UN, with students at Marin Academy High School, 5/31/00

Has the question ever been raised about whether the five countries with veto power should be changed? The countries were originally the winners of WW II and therefore they were the dominant countries in the world at that time. That was fifty years ago, however. If the UN is not allowed to do this, do you think they should?

Preston

How do you feel the veto power of the UN Security Council affects the UN's integrity and ability to accomplish its goals? Do you think there is any chance of this veto power being changed or eliminated in the future?

Rob

The veto power was the condition upon which both the United States and the then - Soviet Union agreed to join the United Nations. In practice, it means that the organization cannot declare war by a simple majority vote on any one of the five permanent members. In the current state of warfare, this would seem to be common sense, even if it does, from time to time, prevent the Security Council from taking action which the majority support. There is a general feeling that the current permanent members, or at least two of them, do not necessarily warrant the veto power in the light of the rise of many other powerful countries since World War II. There is now an ongoing debate on how to spread the veto power without paralyzing the Security Council. For the moment, efforts to change the system have bogged down on disagreements in three regions as to who should represent them as a permanent member of the Security Council.