Reform of the United Nations Security Council

This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these template messages) The article's lead section may need to be rewritten. Please help improve the lead and read the lead layout guide. (January 2024) (Learn how and when to remove this message) This article's lead section may be too short to adequately summarize the key points. Please consider expanding the lead to provide an accessible overview of all important aspects of the article. (January 2024) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

Reform of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) encompasses five key issues: categories of membership, the question of the veto held by the five permanent members, regional representation, the size of an enlarged Council and its working methods, and the Security Council-General Assembly relationship. The Member States, regional groups and other Member State interest groupings developed different positions and proposals on how to move forward on this contested issue.^[1]

Any reform of the Security Council would require the agreement of at least two-thirds of UN member states in a vote in the General Assembly and must be ratified by two-thirds of Member States. All of the permanent members of the UNSC (which have veto rights) must also agree.^[2]

According to critics, the five permanent member states, France, the United States of America, the United Kingdom, Russia, and China, have abused their power by vetoing resolutions that could benefit member states but go against political views of the P5 (permanent five member states). The main argument is that it is undemocratic and the power is imbalanced to the permanent member states, countries picked at the end of World War II during the creation of the UN in 1945.^[3]