Revision summary
UNSC reform needs P5 ratification (Article 108); Intergovernmental Negotiations still lack an agreed text. G4, Uniting for Consensus and the Ezulwini African claim block one another. US vetoes and Russo-Chinese blocking on Ukraine, Gaza and other files show East–West (and North–South) entanglement. The quote is right on deadlock; it underplays African and Latin American vetoes on who joins. Practical movement: longer elected seats, veto restraint on atrocities, GA strength — not a speech about imminent permanency.
Model answer
Introduction
The United Nations was built in 1945 with a Security Council that can bind the world and a veto for five winners of a war. Reform has been ‘imminent’ for thirty years. It remains unresolved because those who hold the veto will not vote to dilute it, and because the rest of the world does not agree who should join. East–West conflict is the daily proof that the 1945 map still sits on 2025 crises.
Body
The unresolved process
Intergovernmental Negotiations on UNSC reform have no negotiating text with numbers. G4 (India, Japan, Germany, Brazil) want permanent seats. The Uniting for Consensus (Italy, Pakistan and others) group opposes new permanents. The African Ezulwini Consensus wants two permanent African seats with veto. The P5 smile in speeches. Article 108 of the Charter needs the P5 to ratify any amendment — a legal catch.
Working methods, peacekeeping money, and General Assembly Uniting for Peace (Resolution 377) are side doors. They do not replace an unrepresentative Council on Ukraine or Gaza.
East–West and the USA vs Russo-Chinese pairing
Cold War East–West was US–USSR. Today the Council’s paralysis on Ukraine is Russia’s veto plus Western arming of Kyiv. Paralysis on Gaza ceasefire texts has often been the US veto. China shields North Korea files and draws red lines on Taiwan language. A Russo-Chinese diplomatic pairing is real in the Chamber: not a single army, but a shared interest in blocking US-led diktat. The US and its allies still dominate finance, sanctions architecture, and many special-political missions. That is the “delicate imbalance”: Western operational weight, Eastern blocking power, and no umpire.
- Calling it only “East versus West” misses North–South: debt, climate finance, and Palestine’s GA majority. India votes with the South on some files and with the West on others. That is why India’s permanent-seat case is both equity and a problem for every existing P5 member.
Critical evaluation
The quote is right that US–Russia–China entanglement freezes Charter change. It is incomplete if it implies that a warmer East–West would automatically admit India. Japan still meets a Chinese (and, historically, some regional) wall. Brazil meets a Mexican and Argentine frown. Africa has not named its two. Even a polite P5 would bargain veto restraint rather than veto extension.
- Reform that could actually move: longer-term elected seats, a written veto-restraint on mass-atrocity files (France has proposed; others have not agreed), GA empowerment on budget and on Uniting for Peace, and a more honest Indian campaign that builds African and Latin American numbers, not only Quad communiqués.
Until then, the UN will work below the Council — specialised agencies, humanitarian law, climate COP — and fail at the Council when a P5 interest is live. That is not a mystery of culture. It is Article 27 plus Article 108.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD C[Charter 108] --> P5[P5 must agree] E[East-West crises] --> V[Veto] G4[G4 India] --> N[No text] UFC[Uniting for Consensus] --> N EZ[Ezulwini] --> N
Conclusion
UN reform is stuck because the veto-holders must consent to their own dilution and the rest cannot agree on new permanents. US, Russian and Chinese confrontations make that consent harder. India’s case is just and still insufficient without a coalition that can live with a Charter the P5 will actually sign.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
Would India on the P5 unfreeze the Council?
It would make the table fairer. It would not end vetoes. A sixth or seventh veto can also paralyse.
-
Is the UN useless until reform?
The Council fails on P5 wars. Humanitarian agencies, peacekeeping where there is consent, and treaty bodies still work. That split is the organisation’s truth.
PYQ trend
When UPSC asked this
Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.
-
2024 · Q19 · GS II · 15 marks
'Terrorism has become a significant threat to global peace and security.' Evaluate the effectiveness of the United Nations Security Council's Counter Terrorism Committee (CTC) and its associated bodies in addressing and mitigating this threat at the international level. -
2020 · Q16 · GS II · 15 marks
"The incidence and intensity of poverty are more important in determining poverty based on income alone". In this context analyze the latest United Nations Multidimensional Poverty Index Report. -
2018 · Q19 · GS II · 15 marks
What are the key areas of reform if the WTO has to survive in the present context of 'Trade War', especially keeping in mind the interest of India? (15). -
2017 · Q10 · GS II · 10 marks
What are the main functions of the United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC)? Explain different functional commissions attached to it. -
2016 · Q17 · GS II · 12 marks
"The broader aims and objectives of WTO are to manage and promote international trade in the era of globalization. But the Doha round of negotiations seem doomed due to differences between the developed and the developing countries." Discuss in the Indian perspective. -
2015 · Q18 · GS II · 12 marks
Discuss the impediments India is facing in its pursuit of a permanent seat in UNSC.
More from this paper
Q1 · UPSC Mains 2025 · GS II · 10 marks
Discuss the 'corrupt practices' for the purpose of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. Analyze whether the increase in the assets of the legislators and/or their associates, disproportionate to their known sources of income, would constitute 'undue influence' and consequently a corrupt practice.
Representation of the People Act
Section 123 RPA lists corrupt practices for election petitions: bribery, undue influence, communal appeal, false statements, booth capturing and related heads. Undue influence is interference with the free exercise of an electoral right, not every unfair gain. ADR and PUCL made asset affidavits part of an informed vote; false disclosure can be litigated. A legislator’s unexplained wealth is primarily a Prevention of Corruption Act and ethics issue. It is not, by itself, undue influence under the 1951 Act unless tied to bribery or intimidation of electors.
Q2 · UPSC Mains 2025 · GS II · 10 marks
Comment on the need of administrative tribunals as compared to the court system. Assess the impact of the recent tribunal reforms through rationalization of tribunals made in 2021.
Governance and Policy
Articles 323A and 323B create tribunals for mass specialised disputes; L. Chandra Kumar keeps High Court judicial review. The need is expertise and volume, not ouster of courts. The Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021, abolished several appellate bodies and restated short tenure and a high minimum age. Madras Bar Association cases (2020–21) insisted on CJI-linked selection and real tenure for judicial members. Rationalisation reduced forums; it did not, by itself, produce independent or faster justice.
Q3 · UPSC Mains 2025 · GS II · 10 marks
Compare and contrast the President's power to pardon in India and in the USA. Are there any limits to it in both the countries? What are 'preemptive pardons'?
Indian Constitution
Article 72 (and 161) are exercised on aid and advice; Maru Ram, Kehar Singh, Epuru Sudhakar and Shatrughan Chauhan frame Indian limits and delay. The US Article II pardon is personal, federal-only, and barred in impeachment. Judicial review is stronger in India; political cost is the main US brake. A preemptive pardon forgives before conviction, as in Ford–Nixon. India has no working doctrine of preemptive pardon for the untried.
Toppers' copies
Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.