The Human Survival Project

The Learning Zone

EXISTENTIAL THREATS:

Introduction

Technology

Climate Change

Destruction of Nature

A NEW UNITED NATIONS:

Introduction

Enforcement Authority

Distribution of Power

Funding

Citizen Involvement

UN Charter Convention

Pact for the Future

Learn More

A NEW UNITED NATIONS:

What's Wrong With the Current U.N.?

Unfair Distribution of Power

One of the biggest issues within the UN is the unequal distribution of power. The UN Security Council has authority over peace and security issues, which is defined very broadly. It has 15 members: 10 rotating members elected for two-year terms, and 5 permanent members - China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States (often called the "P5").

Those 5 permanent members can veto any UN action that goes through the Council.

As you may have noticed, those five countries often disagree - so with almost any policy recommendation, one of the five will likely be opposed to it. This is a recipe for inaction. The Security Council veto might be the single most important factor in the UN's ineffectiveness.

Imagine a car with 5 people hitting the brakes.

You wouldn't get very far.

Global Impotence

When global challenges threaten safety, health, or prosperity, the veto often prevents meaningful action.

For example:

Ukraine:
In 2022, Russia used its veto to block resolutions condemning its invasion of Ukraine and its annexation of Ukrainian territory. In 2025, the Council passed a weaker, US-drafted resolution on the war, and Russia still vetoed amendments to it. The war is now in its fifth year.
Israel and Gaza:
Since the war began in October 2023, the United States has vetoed six Council resolutions demanding a Gaza ceasefire, including two backed by all 14 other members. The US is Israel’s closest ally. It said the drafts failed to condemn Hamas or to recognize Israel’s right to defend itself. A fragile ceasefire arrived only in October 2025, through a US-led plan outside the Council.
Strait of Hormuz:
In April 2026, Russia and China vetoed a resolution to protect shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, where a fifth of the world’s oil normally passes. Iran had effectively closed the strait during its war with the US and Israel. Iran’s two most powerful diplomatic backers shielded it at the Council, and Iran publicly thanked them. Eleven of 15 members voted yes, even after the text was weakened to avoid a veto.
Syria:
During Syria’s civil war, Russia, the ally of President Bashar al-Assad, vetoed at least 16 resolutions that would have condemned the violence, set up ceasefires, or referred war crimes to international courts. Hundreds of thousands died while the Council stood still. In December 2024, Syrian rebel forces overthrew Assad. The UN did not.
Climate change:
In 2021, Russia vetoed a modest resolution asking the UN to treat climate risk as part of conflict prevention. Twelve of 15 members supported it.

Beyond these specific cases, the veto has far-reaching effects across the entire UN system. Diplomats and UN officials often don't even propose solutions they know will be vetoed, creating a chilling effect on innovation and bold action.

Even when the veto isn't used, its shadow stalls progress on solving critical problems.

Permanent Members: A World War II Legacy

The five permanent members emerged as the victorious powers after World War II. While this made sense in 1945, today's world is dramatically different. The global balance of power has shifted with the rise of countries like India (population 1.4 billion), Brazil, Japan, Germany, Nigeria, and Indonesia.

These emerging powers have limited influence in the current structure, undermining the UN's legitimacy and world support. Why would countries representing the majority of the world's population fully commit to a system where they have little meaningful say?

The General Assembly Problem

The General Assembly, the UN's other primary decision-making body, has its own fairness issues. It uses a one-nation/one-vote system regardless of population size. Both India, with 1.4 billion people, and Tuvalu, with fewer than 10,000, have one vote.

This benefits small countries, which deserve representation. But for larger countries without a Security Council veto, their influence is far less than their population size warrants.

Why Reform Attempts Have Failed

Despite decades of discussions about Security Council reform, little has changed. Previous reform efforts have stalled because:

The P5 themselves can veto any changes to the UN Charter that would reduce their power
Disagreement among regional powers about which countries should gain permanent seats
Lack of sustained public pressure to force political action

Potential Solutions

For the UN to have the loyalty and support of all nations and their citizens, decision making power needs to be distributed fairly. This is not just an issue of morality. A strong and resilient UN requires global buy-in, which will only happen if countries believe they are fairly represented.

Replace the Security Council with an Executive Council that has no permanent members and no veto. This would eliminate the ability of a single country to block action vital to humanity's survival. Decisions would require a two-thirds or three-fourths majority vote, ensuring broad support while preventing paralysis.
Change the General Assembly to have two chambers:
- One chamber with delegates distributed by population size, giving citizens in more populous countries fair representation
- A second chamber where each nation gets one vote, preserving the voice of smaller countries

These reforms would balance the legitimate concerns of both large and small nations while enabling the UN to take decisive action on existential threats. Rather than serving the interests of a few powerful countries, the UN would truly represent humanity as a whole.