Context
In April 1986, the US, Britain and France voted a rare triple veto in the UN Security Council to prevent a non-aligned resolution to criticize the US air attack on Libya (Operation El Dorado Canyon). The vetoes vetoed the motion, even though it had 9 affirmative votes, which were sufficient to pass. This was a move that brought out the cold war politics, the power of the P5 veto and the constraints that the UNSC has on major powers, which is frequently referred to in debate on UNSC reform.
Historical Significance of the 1986 Triple Veto
The triple veto of 1986 was a very strategic event in the Cold War period.
- Background: A unanimous draft resolution criticized the US bombing of Libya. Although he had the required nine positive votes, the three permanent western powers exercised their vetoes, and this marked the gap between NAM and the Western powers.
- The Power Structure: Article 27 of the UN Charter demands concurring votes of the permanent members (P5) on substantive issues. This great power unanimity was to make sure that only the P5 would act.
- The Cold War Lens: Although the USSR has historically led the list of the most vetoed states, this event showed that when united, Western powers could easily prevent collective action, which supports the narrative of international law being driven by power rather than rules.
The Veto Power: Misuse and Structural Deadlock
The veto has been invoked more than 300 times to safeguard national interests.
- Trends since 1990: Although there was a decline in use of veto, it has been reevaluated following the crisis in Syria and Ukraine, with Russia being the most active user of the power since 1992, and then the US.
- Implications on Human Security: The use of vetoes is common when it comes to humanitarian crises to safeguard followers, resulting in the loss of extensive civilian lives and destroying the doctrine of the Responsibility to Protect.
- The Hidden Veto: The veto threat leads a lot of resolutions not to be drafted at all, which is difficult to record but actually halts action on important subjects.
40 Years On: Need for Reforms & India’s Position
40 years later, the UNSC faces a profound crisis of legitimacy and credibility.
- Unrepresentative Formation: The UNSC uses the 1945 post-WWII power formation where new powers such as India, Brazil, and Germany have not been taken into account.
- G4 Initiative: India has been pushing towards a more democratic and representative Security Council and has sought to expand the permanent and non-permanent seats.
- Veto Initiative: On April 26, 2022, the UNGA voted a resolution that demanded a debate whenever a veto is cast, in an effort to hold the P5 members accountable.
- The Indian Position: At the previous IGN meetings, India requested that the veto must be employed with consensus and not as a measure to fulfill personal political agendas.
Conclusion
The 40th anniversary of the 1986 triple veto serves as a reminder that the veto is, according to critics, an obstructionist instrument. The UNSC requires some immediate changes in order to be relevant in the 21st century and not to be a dead body.
Source: Press Reader
.png)
