Is the UN System Still Fit for Purpose? Legal & Geopolitical Challenges in Reforming the UN Security Council.

By: Daria Grishina

On February 20, 2025, Republican Senator Mike Lee of Utah, along with co-sponsors Senator Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee and Rick Scott of Florida, reintroduced the Disengaging Entirely from the United Nations DebacleAct (DEFUND Act)) (Lee, 2025). This proposed legislation coincides with the 80th anniversary of the United Nations, further intensifying debates over the effectiveness of international institutions and the future trajectory of global governance. 

Fueled by frustrations over the UN’s fiscal mismanagement, the misuse of American taxpayer funds, and its failure to address critical national sovereignty-related issues, Senator Lee argued that withdrawing from all UN agreements would allow the U.S. to allocate resources better and uphold its core principles of self-determination. Alternatively, he asserted that any future U.S. engagement with the UN should be conducted solely on American terms, “with the full backing of the Senate and an iron-clad escape clause,” (Lee, 2023). 

Meanwhile, Representative Chip Roy (R-TX), who is working on a companion bill in the House of Representatives alongside House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mike Rogers (R-MI),  reinforced these concerns, stating that “the UN's decades-old, internal rot once again raises the question of why the United States is even still a member or why we're wasting billions (...) every year on it,” (Roy, 2025). In 2022 alone, the U.S. contributed over $18 billion to the UN (United Nations MPTF Office, 2024). Sharing a sense of betrayal of trust, the legislators emphasized the need to hold the “wayward” UN accountable for issues such as “placating Hamas terrorists and the Chinese Communist Party,” (Blackburn, 2025). 

 Through Trump’s administration, the U.S. has been reducing its engagement with the UN. He dismantled UN programs deemed counterproductive or that are “not living up to their potential,” (Trump, 2025). During his first term, Trump suspended financial support for the UN Population Fund (UNFPA), reduced contributions to the UN Programs on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) by 30%, and cut funding to the World Health Organization (WHO) by 20% (McMahon, 2024). At the beginning of February 2025, Trump rescinded  U.S.  involvement with the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) (NPR, 2025), confirmed plans to exit the WHO in 2026 (The White House, 2025), and officially withdrew from the Paris Agreement on climate change (The White House, 2025). 

The DEFUND Act, however, is particularly significant as it could revoke U.S. status as a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) – a move that would fundamentally alter the balance of power within the UN’s most influential body. The organization possesses the unique authority to take decisive actions including sanction imposition and military intervention to address threats to international peace. Moreover, the UNSC is the only UN organ with the power to issue binding decisions, not simply recommendations, member states must legally implement (United Nations, 2025). 

The UNSC consists of five permanent members: the United States, China, France, Russia, and the United Kingdom (the so-called P5) – along with ten non-permanent members elected for two-year terms by the General Assembly. The Security Council adopts resolutions by a majority of nine votes, but on substantive matters, each of the P5 members has exclusive veto power that permits them to block any resolution (United Nations, 2025). As a result, many of the UNSC’s failures can be attributed to the P5’s inability to reach consensus, often leading to legal paralysis on critical global issues. 

Since the Security Council’s founding, P5 countries have blocked a total of 293 resolutions. Russia, including the Soviet era, has exercised its veto 158 times, making it the most frequent user. The U.S. has employed its veto 92 times, with 49 instances related to protecting Israel. China has used the veto 21 times, while France (18) and the UK (32) have rarely exercised it in recent years (Security Council Report, 2024). 

Beyond legal inconsistencies, the UNSC also faces significant challenges regarding the limits of its authority. While the Council has passed numerous resolutions imposing sanctions or demanding compliance, its lack of an enforcement mechanism has undermined the binding nature of its decisions, often rendering them ineffective in practice. Additionally, serious questions remain regarding UN military interventions and the ability of the UNSC to prevent humanitarian disasters. The increasing trend of unilateral or coalition-based actions has further eroded the UNSC’s authority as the ultimate arbiter of international security, raising concerns about its relevance in managing global and regional conflicts (Benomar, 2024). 

A  potential U.S. exit from the UNSC would dramatically weaken the UN system while simultaneously enhancing the influence of the remaining permanent members. It would also create a structural imbalance within the Council. With an equal number of permanent states, rather than an odd one, the voting process could become even more complex, increasing the likelihood of a full decision-making collapse. 

On the other hand, the threat of such a shift could accelerate efforts to reform the UNSC, in particular, by adding new permanent members. Any replacement state’s strategic priorities, however, would unlikely fully align with those of the U.S., consequently disbalancing global power dynamics with repercussions for the UN system. As a scenario of U.S. withdrawal from the UNSC remains unlikely, the discussion “per se” underscores the broader issue of the Security Council’s outdated structure, still reflecting the post-World War II international order. The absence of reform since then has led many states, particularly those from the Global South, to criticize the Council as unrepresentative of the modern multilateral framework. Despite the near quadrupling of UN member states—from 51 in 1945 to 193 today—and the growing influence of several nations in global affairs, such as India, Germany, Brazil, and Japan, the composition of the UNSC has only been expanded once, with the addition of four non-permanent members in 1965. 

Any reform would necessitate amending the UN Charter – the founding document of the UN establishing member states’ purposes, structure, and obligations. The General Assembly would need to approve and then ratify this reform with a two-thirds majority, having at least 129 out of 193 members, including all of the P5, voting in favor. Since its creation, the UN Charter has only had three total amendments (United Nations, 2025). With increasing pressure for institutional change, many agree that the time for UNSC reform is long overdue. 

Possible variants of the reform include increasing the number of UNSC permanent members, limiting veto power, particularly in cases of genocide, and enhancing inclusivity to ensure that decisions reflect the concerns of a broader international community. Such a change was proposed last year through a joint statement of the G4 countries: Brazil, Germany, India, and Japan, who advocate for “better representation beyond the existing regional groups,” (Yamazaki, 2024). The G4 wishes to enlarge the UNSC to a total of 25 members with four new non-permanent and six new permanent members. 

Beyond the G4 nations, several other groups and countries have actively proposed reforms to the UN Charter, particularly concerning the Security Council's structure and membership. Led by Italy, “a sizeable group of countries from every region that share key principles, especially in opposing new permanent national seats” formed the Uniting for Consensus (UfC) coalition (Permanent Mission of Italy to the UN, 2025). Over the years, UfC has put forward several reform proposals. In 2014, for instance, they introduced an “intermediate approach,” suggesting that long-term seats be allocated to regional groups rather than individual countries, with the possibility of one immediate reelection (Permanent Mission of Italy to the UN, 2025). 

Citing historical injustices and the continent's significant priority on the Council's agenda, the African Union (AU) has consistently advocated two permanent seats on the UNSC for African nations. In September 2024, the U.S. voiced support for this idea as well as for including a rotating seat for small island developing states (Reuters, 2024).

These multiple reform initiatives demonstrate the necessity for updating the UNSC’s composition and its playbook, reflecting the current international landscape. Enacting meaningful reforms, however, would require approval from the P5, who have little incentive to lessen their power.  Thus,  any changes remain unlikely in the near future. As global conflicts and geopolitical tensions evolve, a key question persists. Can the UNSC adapt to modern challenges or its role will be completely diminished while it becomes increasingly irrelevant in a world where alternative security alliances and unilateral actions shape international relations? 

Sources:

Council on Foreign Relations. (n.d.-a). Funding the United Nations: What impact do U.S. contributions have on UN agencies and programs? https://www.cfr.org/article/funding-united-nations-what-impact-do-us-contributions-have-un-agencies-and-programs#chapter-title-0-3

Council on Foreign Relations. (n.d.-b). The UN Security Council: Its role and importance. https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/un-security-council

Einsiedel, S. von, Malone, D. M., & Stagno Ugarte, B. (Eds.). (2014). The UN Security Council in the 21st century. Lynne Rienner Publishers.

Financing the United Nations. (n.d.). Funding sources. United Nations. https://www.financingun.report/un-financing/un-funding/funding-entity

Guardian News & Media. (2024, September 30). In a world in tumult, the UN’s leadership flaws are all too clear. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/sep/30/world-tumultuous-united-nations-leadership-flaws

Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. (n.d.). Uniting for Consensus (UfC). https://italyun.esteri.it/en/italy-and-the-united-nations/uniting-for-consensus-ufc/

Khalil, M. A., & Lavaud, F. (Eds.). (2024). Empowering the UN Security Council: Reforms to address modern threats. Oxford University Press.

Lee, M. (2025, February 2). Lee introduces Defund Act to pull USA from UN [Press release]. U.S. Senate. https://www.lee.senate.gov/2025/2/lee-introduces-defund-act-to-pull-usa-from-un

Nadin, P. (2016). UN Security Council reform. Routledge.

Nichols, M. (2024, September 12). US supports two permanent UN Security Council seats for Africa. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/world/us-supports-two-permanent-un-security-council-seats-africa-2024-09-12/

NPR. (2025, February 3). Trump announces U.S. withdrawal from UN Human Rights Council. https://www.npr.org/2025/02/03/nx-s1-5285696/trump-un-human-rights-council-withdrawal

Roy, C., Rogers, M., & Lee, M. (2025, January 15). Rep. Roy, Rep. Rogers, and Sen. Lee lead fight to defund the United Nations [Press release]. U.S. House of Representatives. https://roy.house.gov/media/press-releases/rep-roy-rep-rogers-and-sen-lee-lead-fight-defund-united-nations

Security Council Report. (2024, February 13). The veto. https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/un-security-council-working-methods/the-veto.php

United Nations. (n.d.-a). Security Council members. United Nations. https://research.un.org/en/unmembers/scmembers

United Nations. (n.d.-b). UN Charter. United Nations. https://www.un.org/en/about-us/un-charter

United Nations. (n.d.-c). What is the Security Council? United Nations. https://main.un.org/securitycouncil/en/content/what-security-council

White House. (2025, January). Putting America first in international environmental agreements [Presidential action]. https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/putting-america-first-in-international-environmental-agreements/

White House. (2025, January). Withdrawing the United States from the World Health Organization [Presidential action]. https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/withdrawing-the-united-states-from-the-worldhealth-organization/

Yamazaki, K. (2024, February 16). Joint G4 Statement by Brazil, Germany, India, and Japan, delivered by H.E. Ambassador Yamazaki Kazuyuki, Permanent Representative of Japan to the United Nations, at the Informal Meeting of the General Assembly on the Intergovernmental Negotiations on Security Council Reform [Press release]. Permanent Mission of Japan to the United Nations. https://www.un.emb-japan.go.jp/itpr_en/yamazaki021624.html

Image Source:

https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/un-security-council