Plenary debate entitled “use of the veto”

We are meeting today (20 November) for the third time under the agenda item “Use of the veto” following the adoption of resolution 76/262 on 26 April 2022. 

This resolution, which is better known as the “Veto Initiative” remains a significant milestone that goes beyond mere symbolism. 

This resolution, passed by consensus, ensures that the Security Council is held accountable each time a permanent member casts a veto. 

Since its adoption, we have held ten debates in this same format, each time demonstrating how the Veto Initiative contributes to increased transparency and accountability. 

With another veto cast at the Security Council this week, the relevance of the Veto Initiative becomes even more profound.  

The Veto Initiative builds on the Uniting for Peace resolution, under which the 10th and 11th Emergency Special Sessions have been convened in recent years, leading to several constructive actions. 

However, the achievement of the Veto Initiative is bittersweet. 

Its very existence underscores the troubling reality that divisions in the Security Council are incapacitating this vital organ of the United Nations from taking action. 

Its very existence, however, also underscores that in such circumstances the General Assembly can step in to act. 

Too often, against strong majorities in the Security Council and an uproar among Member States and the public opinion, we are faced with paralysis, inaction, and a failure to address urgent global crises. 

We have seen this paralysis impair responses to pressing situations in Gaza, Syria, Mali, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, and Ukraine. 

The vetoing of a draft Security Council resolution calling for a ceasefire in Sudan this week proves further that inaction has often become the norm, not the exception. 

A norm that directly undermines the Council’s mandate, damaging the United Nation’s legitimacy as a whole and, more importantly, its credibility. 

It is true that the Veto Initiative arose out of frustration and deadlock within the Security Council. 

However, I urge each of you to reflect on new approaches that we can take to improve our Organization’s effectiveness and credibility; to reflect on how we can uphold the moral authority of this Organization. 

We need to respond to crucial questions: 

Should the General Assembly build on the Veto Initiative and adopt further measures to ensure that international peace and security are upheld? 

Should it recommend action to parties in conflict, or to the Security Council itself? 

Or should we consider other tools at our disposal, such as seeking advisory opinions from the International Court of Justice? 

I invite Member States to reflect on these and other questions, including in the context of the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Revitalization of the General Assembly. 

While we must fully support the Security Council to discharge its primary responsibility for maintaining international peace and security, the General Assembly must be ready to act in case of a deadlock. 

The pursuit of global peace and saving future generations from the “scourge of war” are embedded in the very purpose of the United Nations—a founding mission enshrined in its Charter. 

As the most inclusive, representative, and authoritative platform for global dialogue, the General Assembly has a crucial role in this mission. 

Let us move forward with boldness, using the full authority vested in us. 

Let us constructively use the synergetic relationship between the General Assembly and the Security Council in the interest of achieving international peace and security. 

When the Security Council is unable to fulfill its responsibilities, this General Assembly should embrace its own authority to act. 

If the Member States decide so, the General Assembly can act decisively and employ all mechanisms at its disposal to uphold and advance peace and security worldwide. 

This is the mission of our Organization.

And it is our responsibility to carry it forward.

Thank you.

[END]