Veto powers for permanent members of the UN Security Council be abolished P #8
The United Nations Security Council has 15 members, but only its five
permanent members - the United States, the United Kingdom, France, China
and Russia - hold the power to impose a veto on the council's
resolutions. This means that if one of the five does not want a resolution to be passed all it has to do is veto it.
There should not be veto power
Side Score: 62
|
 |
There should be veto power
Side Score: 62
|
|
|
|
|
Veto power should not be given to the security council. Many member states of the UN have disputed the concept of veto power. The abolishing of the veto is already being pushed even more in the category of genocide and crimes against humanity, where this power could cost the lives of large numbers of people. Many nations believe there are too many occasions where veto power has blocked the functionality of the council and not allowed them to take action. Side: There should not be veto power
1
point
1
point
I think veto power is too much.Veto power can be used as good or mostly for bad. Number one it overrides ANYTHING and stops it and itself can not be stopped.Say UN wanted to restrict how much oil North Korea is making and selling but if ONE out of the FIFTEEN say no the plan is amediatly stopped.And now North Korea is sitting on money they don’t deserve or need. Side: There should not be veto power
I agree because when veto power is used every person has to agree with the case and if one person does not then the case will be granted and i personally think that that is unfair do to other peoples personal decisions when the 5 people make there decisions Side: There should not be veto power
4
points
There should not be veto power. The veto power has caused vital international security issues and multiple crisis. [http://www.peace.ca/ [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UnitedNationsSecurityCouncilveto_power] The veto is a threat to international peace and security, and as many members propose, should be abolished. [https://www.globalpolicy.org/ Side: There should not be veto power
3
points
When the national security council comes together for a meeting, I very important decision is usually extremely important to our nation. When all countries say yes but one country says no....the whole thing is over. Giving one country the power to overrule all the other countries, it can pose as a major problem. Veto power is a huge amount of power to be given to a country, for instance if a country has a dictator that is in the security council, and they do horrible things to their country, and the security council comes to stop him, he has the power to veto all of their decisions. Another reason why veto power can be bad is because if a country is in a war with us and we go to the security council to attempt to stop it, the country in the security council can very easily veto the decision and continue the war. This is why giving countries veto powers is too much power to be given. Side: There should not be veto power
2
points
The information was received by multiple websites, for instance. the information is a brief and modified summary to my opinion but is still supported by this website. Side: There should not be veto power
There should be no Veto power because the UN should have a very subjective look at the problems and come to an agreement democratically. One country should not be able to stop any changes. 12,000,000 people have died because of veto. Side: There should not be veto power
2
points
1
point
If veto power is abolished, it might lead to disastrous effects on the world, because small countries might make alliances to pass resolutions which would make other countries pay for their development. The UN needs help from the P5 members to fund peacekeeping missions and a lot of other stuff,Israel will be unfairly bashed, and US won't be able to help.Veto power has helped keep peace, and limit the human rights violations all around the world. Abolishing veto power will only lead to another war or even more bad things. Side: There should not be veto power
Veto should be abolished because if one of the five countries declines a resolution then the resolution will be passed but that can lead to conflicts between the countries and permanent members are not elected into the council but temporary members have to be voted into the council. Side: There should not be veto power
1
point
Because it has been written in the rules that there is no discrimination and members have equal right, but with the presence of veto right is contrary to the rules, and the veto rights is dominated by modern nations which have large ego with its self , and how about the developing nation which still not represented yet in veto right. The UN should not have veto powers only because if there is an important veto for something threatening, it could get denied and all goes down badly. Especially with China and north Korea. If war or a request comes in, China is probably going to do something about it.Link to evidence: https://www.theguardian.com/world/ Side: There should not be veto power
1
point
1
point
|
6
points
With the Veto power, the 5 main countries have to power to stop a plan despite popular vote. One pro to a veto is, if a chair member brings in something that would effect a country greatly, a veto would stop it right away. Veto's keep things from going too low, too fast. If a majority of people always want to change a lot things, then the world would change very often. Thus with the Veto power that The United States, The United Kingdom, Russia, France, and China can make sure that wouldn't be the case. membershttp://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/ Side: There should be veto power
Veto power may be used for good, but in the event of civilians being killed or other rights violations, a country could be bribed. The case of China vetoing North Korean sanctions mainly because they are prime trading partners is an example of this. The veto could cost many innocent lives in the event of a war. Side: There should not be veto power
4
points
Veto power is important because if a country wants to do something that will affect your country you should be able to say they can't do that. The time when veto is used are outnumbered by resolutions adopted unanimously. Diplomacy is about to compromise after all. Side: There should be veto power
If a country is doing awful things to his people, and vetoes sanctions or other restrictions, this is still conforming to you first example. How is this a good thing? Veto could allow a country to kill civilians, violate their rights, and starve them. Side: There should not be veto power
1
point
Veto power is important because it keeps the Security Console together and balances their decisions. Veto power was established to help escape one-sided decisions and to impose a culture of consensus. Side: There should be veto power
2
points
3
points
With veto power, the security council can keep balance in power between countries. If the countries do not have a balance in power, one country can be able to do anything they want with little consequence, and making it very unfair for other countries. Without this balance of power, other countries would not only be treated unfairly, but would be vulnerable to being taken over or even damaged by that 1 country. Side: There should be veto power
The veto powers of the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council should not be abolished. If the power was abolished national disasters, such as a war. Also, if new members take the place of countries like the USA the UN would need more money to support it. The USA gives about 40% of the UN funds. Side: There should be veto power
Veto power should not be abolished because without the veto, dictatorship could occur. The five countries who gained the power deserved the power because they won WWII. The veto is imperative to ensure no bad or crazy actions occur globally. Also, some people say that new countries deserve veto power, but if new countries were granted veto power the countries could misuse the power and not have enough money to support it. Side: There should be veto power
Veto power is important and is in place for a reason. Veto power is in place to protect a country or establishment. If a vote does not do good or it is bad for a country/establishment can veto it therefore eradicating the idea. Without veto any sanction or request etc. is possible. It prevents conflicts or arguments by having the veto power "card" be a no argument thing. It is about upholding diplomacy. Side: There should be veto power
If a country is faced with unilateral aggression(military) then the veto power could save the country from such. For example if the USSR hadn't vetoed a decision for ceasefire in Bangladesh in 1971, the country wouldn't have existed and would have gone through countless human rights abuses by West Pakistan. Also, it keeps the world from changing too quickly and general chaos ensuing. For example, if they make drastic changes all the time it could turn right into wrong and left into right. Also an example is if we didn't have veto power and someone wanted to blow up North Korea, they could do so. Since there is veto, this kind of chaos won't occur. Side: There should be veto power
4
points
3
points
A veto is a powerful and strong tool in the hands of a few responsible leaders of the council members of the UN All countries in the world are not on equal level of development. Especially in the part of the meeting of human rights and freedoms are huge differences between member States of the UN. Side: There should be veto power
1
point
Why veto power is good: Motivates security council to make balanced decisions https://www.rt.com/op-edge/193352-un-urkaine-human-rights/ Helps to restrain violence *Can bring irrational decisions to an end http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/ Side: There should be veto power
1
point
I believe that there should be voting power. The five countries that never switch out, Russia, China, France, The United Kingdom, and the United States, have veto power. These countries fought against the German Nazis in World War II and won, therefore giving them veto power. This veto power gives them all the power to stop something that they do not want to happen and think is a bad idea. These countries are the strongest and smartest countries therefore they have the most power. http://www.un.org/en/sc/meetings/ Side: There should be veto power
1
point
1
point
|
