Resolution for the Security Council

The United Nations is an organization that was formed to promote peace and stability throughout the world. It has not been a perfect organization. It has more than enough flaws. One of those flaws has been the Security Council. For those who are unfamiliar, this is the council seen on TV when there is a world crisis. There is a table in the the middle of the room with the United States, China, Russia, France and Great Britain. Then another horseshoe table surrounding that table with ten representatives from other nations. The Secruity Council has the teeth of the UN. It can authorize actions and gives those actions international legitimacy.  The council has authorized actions such as peacekeeping missions. It also authorized the use of force to help South Korea fight North Korea after the 1951 invasion of the south. The USSR missed that meeting. 

There are currently three main problems with the council. It is very difficult to get an action authorized even when there is an obvious need. The five permanent members of the council carry a great deal of power when they do agree on an action. Three of the permanent five members have been surpassed by other nations throughout the world when it comes to power and influence. 

A huge hurdle to getting a resolution passed by the council is the fact that anyone of the permanent five members can unilaterally veto the action. This either leads to no approval for an action or to softer actions to ensure some sort of action. A solution to this problem is to require three of the five permanent members to agree to a veto before a resolution fails. Also allow for an override of a veto. If twelve members of the council agree on a veto, they should be allowed to override a veto.

The next problems are when the five do agree, this gives them a great deal of power and they are not always the five most powerful nations. Under the current system, if the five agree on a resolution, they only need to find four more votes from the ten non-permanent members. The reasoning behind allowing the permanent five to have so much power is because they led the fight against Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. To combat this problem of these nations now having so much power, the council size needs to be increased to 17 members (5 permanent and 12 non-permanent). The current system has set areas where the non-permanent members are elected. There needs to be two new areas created in addition to the current areas. Those nations who became independent after the Soviet collapse should always have a member on the council. The next group should be the Commonwealth Nations that are associated with Great Britian. The former Soviet nations had those who were just as much apart of the Red Army as were the Russians. Those in the Commonwealth were either part of or fought along side the British Army. Under the current system, a non-permanent member has a representative for two years on the council. Half are elected on odd years with the other half on even years. The former Soviet republics an Commonwealth Nations need to have three year terms with the election of each not being in the same year. Those other nations should also be allowed to stay in their current areas. For example, Georgia would still be eligible to hold the Eastern Europe seat in years that it was not holding the former Soviet seat. Under this system, there would need to be 10 members to vote for a resolution to pass it.  This would decentralize more power and allow for the council to reflect world power more accurately. 

The Secruity Council has been used to help bring peace an stability to the world at times. It needs to be improved to avoid situations like Rwanda.