Written by Huseyin Ali Kudret and Myfanwy Sequeira
More than 80 years ago, mankind was fighting the Second World War, when genocide and human rights violations reached their peak. It was a terrible period in which millions of people were murdered and displaced. For this very reason, after the Second World War, the United Nations (hereinafter UN) was established by 51 countries that did not want to see the horror of war and genocide again. In the past 70 years, the UN's membership and significance have expanded, now encompassing 193 member states.[1] As a matter of fact, this situation is emphasized in the UN Charter[2]’s preamble as follows:
“We the peoples of the United Nations determined to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person… and to unite our strength to maintain international peace and security, and to ensure, by the acceptance of principles and the institution of methods, that armed force shall not be used,…. have resolved to combine our efforts to accomplish these aims.”
Accordingly Article 1 of the Charter states that maintaining global peace and security through collective action and peaceful resolution of disputes is among the aims of the organization. In doing so, the UN has always functioned on the principle of sovereign equality[3], the practical consequence being, that votes are equally weighed when the member states vote on a UN General Assembly resolution. In addition, the UN Charter gives members of the UN the primary responsibility for global peace and security to the Security Council, thereby entrusting it to the Security Council in Chapters VI, VII, VIII and XII.[4] However, Article 27 of the Charter granted veto power to the 5 permanent members - China, Russia, the United States (US), France and the United Kingdom (UK) [5]. Consequently, the purpose and the duties were not fulfilled against many important human rights violations rendering the draft resolutions defenseless against the veto power. [6]
Since the founding of the UN, the veto power has been used 293 times: Russia (including the USSR) has used the veto power 120 times, the US 82 times, the UK 29 times, and both France and China have used the veto power 16 times each.[7] Often, this has resulted in the Security Council remaining unresponsive to serious human rights violations.
This short blog article will focus on the 'effectiveness' of the Security Council regarding human rights violations in conflict zones and ‘the accountability problem’ based on the UN database as well as Amnesty sources. Moreover, it emphasizes the need for reforms in order to relinquish the veto power in the UN Security Council to ensure international peace and security.
Abuse of Veto Power in Conflict Regions in the Historical Process
Al-Aqsa intifada by the Palestinians in 2000
September 2000 saw a second uprising of the Palestinians, famously known as the Al-Aqsa intifada. The demonstration was escalated by the then, -Israeli opposition leader Ariel Sharon. The opposition leader entered the al-Aqsa Mosque along with an Israel army and the individuals in the mosque were met with violence. Amnesty International noted that “570 Palestinians had been killed by Israeli security forces”. Furthermore, “more than 150 Israelis, including 115 civilians, had been killed by Palestinian armed groups and individuals. Many children were victims: more than 150 Palestinian and 30 Israeli children were among those killed. Thousands of other people were wounded, many maimed for life.”[8]
The continuing violence and the tragic deaths were concerning, which led to a draft resolution, put forward by Egypt and Tunisia, put to vote in the UN Security Council. The resolution expressed the need for peaceful dialogue between Israel and Palestinian authorities. It specifically demanded “the immediate cessation of all acts of violence, provocation and destruction, as well as the return to the positions and arrangement which existed prior to September 2000”[9]. This resolution was vetoed by the US. The then US Ambassador John Negroponte justified this veto, stating:
“the draft resolution before us fails to address the dynamic at work in the region. Instead, its purpose is to isolate politically one of the parties”[10]
The US continues to abuse its veto power in almost every decision regarding the Palestine issue. As a matter of fact, a current example will be given below.
The Chemical Attack during the Syrian Conflict
For over a decade Syrian civilians have faced grave human rights violations due to the ongoing conflict. According to the UN Human Rights Office of the Commissioner, an estimated 306,887 civilians were killed by 2022[11]. In 2016, Kafer Zita was under a chlorine attack. Following the adoption of resolution 2235, the Joint Investigative Mechanism (JIM) investigated to identify the individuals accountable for this attack[12]. According to a report by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), the government as well as the armed groups were believed to have been involved in this attack[13].
A draft proposing sanctions on the individuals that were linked to these attacks was put forth for voting in the UN Security Council[14]. This resolution was vetoed by Russia and China[15]. The Head of the UN office in New York for Amnesty International, Sherine Tadros, criticised this abuse of powers stating “… by vetoing this resolution Russia and China have displayed a callous disregard for the lives of millions of Syrians... there is simply no excuse for their vetoes...”[16]. Russia has used its veto power to block resolutions regarding the Middle East conflict in Syria 19 times to date[17].
It can be argued, on the other hand, that there were multiple resolutions[18] passed by the UN Security Council regarding the conflict in Syria. In particular, no veto power was exercised on resolution 2209 (2015). This resolution condemned the use of chemical weapons and noted grave concerns regarding the finding of the OPCW, that the use of chemical weapons was a systemic attack. It particularly stressed that the individuals who were guilty of carrying out this attack should be held accountable[19]. However, the adoption of these resolutions, without any substantive action, furthers the violation of these resolutions, rendering the prior resolution meaningless.
Ukraine’s Fate in the Hands of its Aggressor
In February 2022, Russia launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine and violated the UN Charter by conducting acts of aggression[20]. Following this invasion, the Permanent Representative of Ukraine, Yuriy Sergeyev, addressed a letter to the UN Security Council. The letter brought the UN Security Council’s attention to the situation in Ukraine, highlighting the threat to its territorial integrity. The letter further requested that an urgent meeting be held regarding this issue[21]. As a result, a draft resolution was presented to the UN Security Council in February. This draft resolution condemned the “special military operation” carried out by the Russian Federation called for the cessation of the use of force against Ukraine[22]. The resolution was, unsurprisingly, vetoed by Russia[23]. There were subsequent attempts by the UN General Assembly to maintain peace and security by facilitating a discussion on the abuse of veto power [24](this will be discussed in the later text of this article). However, the subsequent resolution was also vetoed by Russia when put to vote in September 2022[25]. This injustice of the invasion, however, has not just been limited to the special meetings and resolutions, according to the report of the UN, an estimated 10,000 have died so far, while many are injured and others displaced[26].
A Landmark Resolution: Veto Accountability for Permanent Security Council Members
The UN General Assembly took a landmark resolution as a result of the abuse of veto powers, as we briefly emphasized above, especially in times of conflict, and the subsequent escalation of the 'accountability' problem in Ukraine.[27] This resolution introduces a mechanism for greater accountability and transparency regarding the veto powers of the permanent members of the Security Council. The resolution states that following a Security Council veto, the General Assembly will convene a formal debate within 10 working days unless an emergency special session has already addressed the issue.[28] This promotes a more inclusive dialogue within the UN on critical peace and security decisions by providing a platform for discussing and justifying the use of veto(s).
On the other hand, even though the adoption of the decision without a vote was criticized by some countries, as Singapore Representative Burhan Gafoor stated, the adoption of the resolution without a vote shows great support for ensuring transparency and accountability in the use of veto(s).[29] Indeed, the fact that France, the US, and the UK, which possess veto powers, are among the 83 supporters[30] of the adopted text also indicates this.
However, it should be emphasized that this does not mean that the Resolution regulates the sanctions of states or situations. Therefore, more needs to be done for accountability. In fact, as Agnes Callamard, Secretary General of Amnesty International said:
“It is a way of addressing the acute failure of the Security Council to take effective action on various situations as result of the veto. Much more needs to be done to address the paralysis, but this resolution is a first step towards increasing the cost of using the veto – and it could not have come soon enough.”[31]
Continued ‘Morally Indefensible’ Veto Power:
The conflict situations continues today and, although there are serious pieces of evidence regarding the allegation that Israel has committed war crimes,[32] the US prevents the implementation of international law by using its veto power in the UN Security Council.[33]
In areas of ongoing conflict, the US stands out for its veto of a draft UN Security Council resolution demanding an immediate ceasefire in the Occupied Palestinian Territories and Israel[34], demonstrating a significant example of the current abuse of veto power. It is important to note that although all the remaining members of the Security Council accepted this resolution, the US veto prevented its adoption. Amnesty International Secretary-General Agnès Callamard criticized the US action as showing ‘a callous disregard for civilian suffering’ and undermining the credibility of the Security Council. Callamard condemned the veto as ‘morally indefensible’ and condemned the failure of the US to fulfil its duties to prevent atrocity crimes and uphold international law, highlighting the isolation of the US and its impact on global leadership and the protection of civilians in conflicts.[35]
Although the UN Security Council later adopted a resolution aimed at facilitating ‘safe, unhindered and expanded humanitarian access’ to Gaza and creating conditions for a sustainable cessation of hostilities[36], Amnesty International Secretary-General Agnès Callamard criticized this resolution as inadequate. Callamard highlighted the resolution's failure to demand an immediate ceasefire during Israel's devastating offensives in Gaza and condemned the US role in ‘watering down’ the resolution to avoid a veto. As Callamard stated, to find an effective solution to the humanitarian crisis, conflicts must be stopped immediately,[37] and for this, the veto power should not be used in such humanitarian crises.
Conclusion:
The UN Security Council, which we briefly touched on in the article and currently remains significant to conflict situations, is often unable to respond to many horrific human rights violations by states and other armed groups due to abuse of veto powers. This results in the shameful ineffectiveness of the Security Council, failing to fulfil the purpose of the UN Charter and protect civilians.
Just as Amnesty International has been criticizing the situation for a long time and has renewed its insistence on the relinquishing of veto power,[38] we would like to emphasize once again the need for the UN Security Council to make serious reforms regarding the veto power. Otherwise, conflict situations and the protection of civilians cannot be fully achieved, which means the dysfunction of international law. Moreover, when we look at the aforementioned examples where these veto power holders themselves committed these actions, it is obvious that there is a serious accountability problem.
Sources:
[a1] Cartoon Movement, https://africacartoons.com/wp-content/uploads/Nayer-The-United-nation-kinda-works.jpg (accessed on 17 February 2024)
[1] Amnesty International, Overview of United Nations, https://www.amnesty.org/en/what-we-do/united-nations/ (accessed 16 February 2024).
[2] Charter of the United Nations, (adopted 26 June 1945, entered into force 24 October 1945), 892 UNTS 119, https://www.un.org/en/about-us/un-charter/full-text (accessed 16 February 2024).
[3] Charter of United Nation Article 2(1)
[4] Charter of the United Nations, Article 24.
[5] Charter of the United Nations, Article 27 (3).
[6] Charter of United Nation Chapter VII and Article 39
[7] Security Council Report, ‘The Veto’, 13 February 2024, https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/un-security-council-working-methods/the-veto.php (accessed 16 February 2024). For a detailed database see. https://research.un.org/en/docs/sc/quick (accessed 16 February 2024).
[8] Amnesty International, ‘Broken lives – a year of intifada’ (2001) https://www.amnesty.org/en/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/mde150832001en.pdf (accessed 17 February 2024).
[9] UN documents resolution S/2001/1199
[12] UN SC document S/RES/2235 https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/atf/cf/%7B65BFCF9B-6D27-4E9C-8CD3-CF6E4FF96FF9%7D/s_res_2235.pdf (accessed 17 February 2024).
[13] OPCW, ‘Report Of The OPCW Fact-Finding Mission In Syria Regarding The Incident Of The Alleged Use Of Chemicals As A Weapon In Kafr Zeita, Syrian Arab Republic’ (1 October 2016)
https://www.opcw.org/sites/default/files/documents/2022/02/s-2020-2022%28e%29.pdf (accessed 17 February 2024).
[14] UN SC document S/2017/315 https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/atf/cf/%7B65BFCF9B-6D27-4E9C-8CD3-CF6E4FF96FF9%7D/s_2017_315.pdf (accessed 17 February 2024).
[16] Amnesty International, UN: Russia and China’s abusive use of veto “shameful” https://www.amnesty.nl/actueel/un-russia-and-chinas-abusive-use-of-veto-shameful (accessed 17 February 2024).
[17] United Nations, ‘Security Council - Veto List’ https://research.un.org/en/docs/sc/quick (accessed 17 February 2024).
[18] UN documents 2042 (2012), 2043 (2012), 2118 (2013), 2139 (2014), 2165 (2014), 2175 (2014), 2191 (2014), 2209 (2015), 2254 (2015), 2258 (2015) and 2268 (2016)
[19] UN documents, Resolution 2209 (2015)
[20] Charter of United Nation Article 2(4)
[21] Letter dated 28 February 2014 from the Permanent Representative of Ukraine to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council S/2014/136 (accessed 17 February 2024).
[22] UN SC document S/2022/155 (accessed 17 February 2024).
[23] United Nations, ‘Security Council - Veto List’ https://research.un.org/en/docs/sc/quick (accessed 17 February 2024).
[24] UNGA Res. A/RES/76/262
[25] United Nations, ‘Security Council - Veto List’ https://research.un.org/en/docs/sc/quick (accessed 17 February 2024).
[26] United Nations, ‘Civilian Deaths In Ukraine War Top 10,000, UN Says’ https://ukraine.un.org/en/253322-civilian-deaths-ukraine-war-top-10000-un-says (accessed 16 February 2024).
[27] See. UNGA, A/RES/76/262, https://research.un.org/en/docs/ga/quick/regular/76 (accessed 16 February 2024). For the Meeting Coverage see. https://press.un.org/en/2022/ga12417.doc.htm (accessed 16 February 2024).
[28] UNGA Res. A/RES/76/262, para.1.
[29] https://press.un.org/en/2022/ga12417.doc.htm (accessed 16 February 2024).
[30] https://press.un.org/en/2022/ga12417.doc.htm (accessed 16 February 2024).
[31] Amnesty International, UN: Veto resolution is a vital step towards accountability, https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2022/04/un-veto-resolution-is-a-vital-step-towards-accountability/ (accessed 16 February 2024).
[32] Amnesty International ‘Damning evidence of war crimes as Israeli attacks wipe out entire families in Gaza’ https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2023/10/damning-evidence-of-war-crimes-as-israeli-attacks-wipe-out-entire-families-in-gaza/ (accessed 16 February 2024); Amnesty International ‘Israel/OPT: ‘Nowhere safe in Gaza’: Unlawful Israeli strikes illustrate callous disregard for Palestinian lives’ https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2023/11/israel-opt-nowhere-safe-in-gaza-unlawful-israeli-strikes-illustrate-callous-disregard-for-palestinian-lives/ (accessed 16 February 2024); Amnesty International ‘Israel/OPT: New evidence of unlawful Israeli attacks in Gaza causing mass civilian casualties amid real risk of genocide’ https://amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/02/israel-opt-new-evidence-of-unlawful-israeli-attacks-in-gaza-causing-mass-civilian-casualties-amid-real-risk-of-genocide/ (accessed 16 February 2024).
[33] UN News, ‘Israel-Gaza crisis: US vetoes Security Council resolution’, https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/10/1142507 (accessed 16 February 2024).
[34]See. Draft Resolution of UNSC, S/2023/970, 8 December 2023, https://research.un.org/en/docs/sc/quick (accessed 16 February 2024).
[35] Amnesty International ‘Israel/OPT: US veto blocks UN ceasefire resolution that would end mass suffering in Gaza’ https://www.amnesty.org.uk/press-releases/israelopt-us-veto-blocks-un-ceasefire-resolution-would-end-mass-suffering-gaza (accessed 16 February 2024).
[36] See. UNSC Resolution, S/RES/2720, 22 December 2023, https://www.un.org/securitycouncil/content/resolutions-adopted-security-council-2023 (accessed 17 February 2024).
[37] Amnesty International, ‘Israel/OPT: Adoption of UN resolution to expedite humanitarian aid to Gaza an important but insufficient step’, https://amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2023/12/israel-opt-adoption-of-un-resolution-to-expedite-humanitarian-aid-to-gaza-an-important-but-insufficient-step/ (accessed 17 February 2024).
[38] Amnesty International, Press Release regarding Global Report 2014/2015, https://www.amnesty.org.uk/press-releases/amnesty-international-global-report-call-un-security-council-relinquish-veto (accessed 17 February 2024); Amnesty International, Press Release regarding Annual Report 2022/2023, https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2023/03/international-system-unfit-to-deal-with-global-crises-annual-report-2022/(accessed 17 February 2024).