What powers do the five permanent members have when the United Nations discusses limiting its veto power?

We can often see some shots about the United Nations on TV, which are very high. As a permanent member, China frequently expresses its opinions and plays an inestimable role in the international status. So what kind of role and authority does the P5 have? Let's have a look.

Let's get to know the United Nations first. The United Nations is an international organization composed of sovereign countries established after World War II.

As we all know, the United Nations was founded after World War II. Its role is to maintain world peace, ease international tensions and resolve regional conflicts.

Which countries do the P5 refer to?

The P5 countries are China, Russia, Britain, the United States and France, that is, they are permanent members of the UN Security Council. They are four countries that joined the anti-fascist alliance in World War II and France that joined the anti-german alliance. Together, they form the only United Nations agency with the power to take enforcement action, whose main responsibility is to maintain international peace and security.

The Charter stipulates that a bill can only be passed if the five permanent members do not vote against it, which means that the permanent members have veto power. In addition to the five permanent members, there are ten non-permanent members elected by the General Assembly for a term of two years.

Rights of the five permanent members

The five nuclear powers bear great responsibility for maintaining international peace and security, and they are the only United Nations agencies that have the right to take enforcement action. The P5 countries have the right to mediate international disputes. They can use weapons, economic sanctions and other means, or they can directly send United Nations peacekeeping troops to ease tensions and safeguard world peace.

In addition, the five permanent members also have the veto power. Compared with other members of the Council, they have no veto power. It is very important to know the veto power of the five permanent members. There is no need to veto a matter of winning more and winning less. One thing must be agreed by all five permanent members. Even if one of the five countries objects, it cannot be passed. But it is not necessary to use this veto power, and the five permanent members also have the right to abstain.

From the founding of the United Nations to 20 12, the P5 exercised the veto power 270 times: 78 times in the United States; 32 times in the UK; France 18 times; Soviet Union/Russia 1 19 times. Many important international affairs are not implemented through veto, so these vetoes also record history.

Let's talk about why the United Nations General Assembly wants to reduce the use of veto by permanent members. One of the privileges of the five permanent members of the United Nations is the right of veto. In other words, when the Security Council votes on non-procedural issues, as long as a big country disagrees, the resolution cannot be passed. This is the so-called "veto". There was a joke before. Ukraine proposes to abolish the one-vote veto power of the "five permanent members" of the United Nations. The result was rejected by Russia by one vote.

There is also the issue of sanctions. The United Nations can impose sanctions on any country through resolutions. However, according to the regulations, all sanctions resolutions must be approved by the Security Council, and the five permanent members have veto power over any Security Council resolution. Therefore, any sanctions by the United Nations Security Council cannot target any of the five permanent members. This is also one of the privileges of the five permanent members of the United Nations.

In my opinion, the veto power of this vote is crucial.

With the veto power, when the five permanent members of the Security Council vote on some major issues discussed by the United Nations in a non-procedural manner, as long as one big country disagrees, the resolution cannot be passed. In this way, the resolutions adopted by the United Nations will not harm the interests of the five permanent members, so that the contradictions and conflicts among some major powers can be better resolved, which can be said to be more conducive to world peace. Of course, the consultation and deliberation functions of the United Nations can also be brought into better play.

But if there is no veto, then some resolutions that are not conducive to the P5 countries may be passed. Once these resolutions that are not conducive to the P5 countries are passed, they may cause more opposition from some big countries, which is obviously not conducive to the function of the United Nations in coordinating and solving problems.

To sum up, it is basically impossible to abolish the one-vote veto power of the P5. We can only find other ways to restrict the use of the veto power.