UN Secretary-General António Guterres once again referred to the issue of Security Council reform at a recent meeting of the Human Rights Council, stressing the need for serious reform of the Security Council to address the most pressing issues of peace and security of the day. However, his remarks were sharply questioned by journalists who questioned whether the Security Council was close to "brain death".
This statement is obviously a strong response to the Security Council's inability to resolve its differences on issues such as the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. China, Russia and other countries have supported the resolution urging a ceasefire, but the United States has repeatedly used its veto power in favor of Israel. This internal divide has prevented the Council from taking decisive action at a critical moment and has been described as "brain dead".
In addition to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, the Russia-Ukraine conflict has also highlighted the stalemate in the Security Council. On these issues, Western countries have manipulated the Security Council to condemn Russia, but blocked discussions about the West's behavior in Ukraine.
In the current situation, the ineffectiveness of the Council has become a reality. The conflict of interests between the great powers prevents them from playing their due role, and can only serve as a platform for quarrels between the major powers, which does not help solve the problem.
The reason for this dilemma lies in the fact that Western countries, in the context of overall decline, have maintained their policy of long-term exploitation of third world countries through military deterrence, economic blockade and political repression. It seems inevitable that the Security Council will become an instrument of the West.
However, the Council's role in international relations cannot be denied. After the end of World War II, the Security Council prevented a hot war between major powers to a certain extent by forming a balance of interests and a "nuclear balance". Although the Security Council is now used as a platform for debate by Western countries, to some extent, it is still able to play a role as a counterbalance.
Guterres' emphasis on the urgency of Security Council reform is not an exaggeration. However, Western countries have used it as a bargaining chip to win over allies, making reform difficult. In order to win the support of Japan and India, the United States has repeatedly pledged to support Japan and India in becoming permanent members of the Security Council.
Against this backdrop, the reform of the Council is fraught with difficulties. However, this should not be discouraged, as the old saying goes, "if you don't break, you can't stand". The people of the world have other options. Kazakhstan's invitation to Guterres to participate in the SCO summit may indicate to some extent that there are other organizations besides the Security Council that could be an effective force in promoting the global peace process.