Reforming the UN Veto: A Two-Veto Limit for Global Accountability
The UN was established in 1945 to support global security, human rights and international cooperation. This guest writer believes the UN Security Council is no longer fit for purpose.
-Opinion-
The United Nations emerged from the ashes of global war, envisioned as a forum where nations could resolve disputes peacefully and prevent future atrocities. Its Charter, signed in 1945, pledged collective security, human rights and international cooperation. For decades, the UN played a vital role in peacekeeping, decolonisation and humanitarian coordination.
Today, that vision is dimming.
The Security Council — the UN’s most powerful body — is increasingly paralysed by the very mechanism meant to safeguard global stability: the veto. Five permanent members (P5) — the US, Russia, China, the UK and France — hold the exclusive right to veto any resolution. Once justified as a safeguard for post-war balance, this privilege has become a tool for obstruction.
Repeated vetoes on humanitarian crises, war crimes and peacekeeping missions have eroded trust in the UN’s ability to act decisively. In Syria, Palestine, Myanmar and Ukraine, the Council has failed to intervene — not due to lack of evidence or urgency, but because one nation said “no”.
The result? A global institution unable to respond, even when the world is watching.
It is time to reform the veto system. I propose a simple but meaningful change: limit each P5 member to no more than two vetoes per issue. If a third veto is attempted on the same matter, it should be procedurally invalid or subject to override by the General Assembly. This would preserve sovereign caution while curbing abuse and preventing endless deadlock.
A two-veto limit would encourage compromise, foster diplomacy and restore the UN’s moral authority. It would also empower smaller nations and regional coalitions to participate more meaningfully in global governance.
This proposal is not radical — it is responsible. It does not abolish the veto, but rebalances it. It affirms that no single nation should indefinitely silence the will of the world.
The UN must evolve to meet the challenges of our time. Limiting the veto is a step toward a more effective, equitable, and accountable international order — one that honours the promise made in 1945.
Tesh Chanthorn is a Cambodian citizen who advocates for peace The views and opinions expressed are his own.
-The Phnom Penh Post-
