69th Plenary Meeting of the General Assembly

Statement by H.E. Mr. Bob Rae, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of Canada to the United Nations following the adoption of the “Veto Initiative” -  Standing mandate for a General Assembly debate when a veto is cast in the Security Council (A/76/L.52)

26 April 2022 – UN General Assembly

Checked against delivery

Thank you, Mr. President.

As a co-sponsor, I would like to thank Liechtenstein and Ambassador Wenaweser of Liechtenstein for his tireless two-year work on this initiative. This is evidence of the essential contribution that all member states make to the effective functioning of the United Nations.

Mr. President,

The General Assembly has spoken with authority today. We didn’t have a vote, but we a deep consensus which reflects the exportations that we as members of the General Assembly have of the Security Council, which acts on our behalf to maintain international peace and security. We expect more and better, and that is exactly what we said very clearly today.

Mr. President,

I am not sure what I can say about the veto that can be more eloquent than what has been said by my colleague from Mexico, who I congratulate on his description of the problem. As well as statements by colleagues from Costa Rica and from Turkey.

But I want to add this point: the veto power that is held by the five permanent members of the Security Council is as anachronistic as it is undemocratic. It has prevented the Security Council from doing its job. I couldn’t disagree more with the delegate from Russia, when he said he believed that the veto allows the Security Council to do its job. It does not. It prevents the Security Council from doing its job.

The recent deadlock over Ukraine has happened at precisely the moment when the world needs the United Nations, and that includes the Security Council, the most.

The use and threat of the veto in situations where atrocity crimes are being perpetrated, as in Syria and Myanmar, and Mariupol, for example, or in situations where a Permanent Member of the Security Council has launched a war of aggression against another UN Member State, as the Russian Federation is now doing in Ukraine, are not only shameful. They are also contrary to obligations under the UN Charter, and to international law, and to our commitment to the Responsibility to Protect principle, which was endorsed not only by the General Assembly, but also by the Security Council.

Even veto-wielding Permanent Members of the Security Council are not above the law. None of us is above the law. No one is above the law. The law is above all of us.

So, it is both right and necessary that the General Assembly will now convene a debate whenever a veto is cast at the Security Council. And may I say that the Permanent Members of the Security Council have no one to blame but themselves and their own conduct, for the fact that the General Assembly now feels obliged to do this.

The General Assembly itself has a say in the maintenance of international peace and security. Together with the rest of the UN organization, we have an obligation as a General Assembly to step up when the Security Council has actually sidelined itself. As the International Court of Justice has ruled, the Security Council’s “primary” role does not mean that it has an “exclusive role.”

And this is why the resolution adopted today can help us achieve something that is very important, and that is a United Nations that is actually less exclusive. A place where the voices of all 193 members of the General Assembly will now be heard when a veto is cast at the Security. This is an important moment, a necessary moment, for transparency, fairness, and equality at the United Nations.

We have now learned sadly, because we can say it happening in real-time, we all watched it happen with its use over the unprovoked aggression against a member of this Assembly, Ukraine, by the Russian Federation. We know that the use of the veto can in fact end up sidelining the Security Council but it cannot sideline or deadlock the entire United Nations. We have to show an ability to be nimble, to innovate, and to change. When something is broken and refuses to fix itself, we need to show that we have a capacity for collective action. No member state has the right to inflict chaos or paralysis on the entire world, or on the United Nations, or on the General Assembly.

Now, we all know that there is at the heart of the UN, a Charter which has an inherent imbalance. AS George Orwell might have put it – and I would commend to all members, if you have not been reading Orwell lately, read him now, because he has a lot to teach us, and a lot to tell us – he might have put it this way, if he was watching us. He would say, “Well, I guess all Member States are equal. But some members are more equal than others.” That’s the dilemma of the Charter. What Article 2 giveth, Article 27 taketh away. And that’s the problem and the dilemma that we have been dealing with since 1945.

We may not be able to get rid of this imbalance entirely because, as we all know, the Permanent Members themselves have a veto over reform of the Charter. But we should nevertheless still try to achieve the abolition of the veto; it should be our objective.

But until that happens, we have to continue to take steps, as we have today, of further circumscribing, defining, and limiting the use of the veto, or at least raising the cost of its use, especially in those situations where global peace and security are at stake, or where mass atrocity crimes may be threatened or are being committed.

Mr. President, we are having this debate and discussion on the same time, in real-time, as we are watching on our televisions, or on our phones, or however we get our information, we’re watching the destruction of cities. We’re watching the killing of women and children. We’re seeing the destruction of an entire infrastructure of a country. And we’re seeing a country fight back. The Security Council may not be able to act. That doesn’t prevent us from having an ability to act. The world is watching. And the world is expecting us to act. And so act we must.

Thank you, Mr. President.