Chechen Country's Veto Power

Nothing in life is black and white; there will always be some sort of grey area to debate whether something is good or bad, helpful or harmful, or if the reward is greater than the punishment. This holds true for the UN Security Council and its members’ vetoing powers because the power granted by the veto makes it so that the top dogs so-to-speak have the ultimate say in matters regarding the world. Of course, in some cases this is incredibly important, but when it comes to the “pet projects” there seems to be great debate. With any threat of losing power, any of the five countries with the veto power can destroy any chance of change in a “pet” nation. With China, France, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom, and the United States all

Between Tibet and China, there has been more peaceful attempts than anything else, and the only reason other countries have not intervened is more than likely for economic reasons. In this situation, the UN veto policy is probably doing more harm than good since the Tibetan people have been politely asking for autonomy for years. On the other hand, the issues between Russia and Chechnya show that the veto power is also able to do good in the world. Even if other countries knew how the Chechen people were trying to obtain independence, they may fail to veto the Chechen peoples’ request due to the general dislike of Russia. In this instance, it is best that a country such as Russia has an absolute say in what is to happen since the Chechens have been murdering Russians for years to try and prove a point and get their way. The Russian veto would symbolize strength in the sense that they will not tolerate terrorism as a form of persuasion. In the long run it is truly challenging to decide if the veto power is more positive than negative or vice versa. Even if the UN Security Council were to change the rules to make any three countries veto or some other compromise, permanent seat holders would just make alliances with other countries on the council. Although it would be harder to veto things, it would still be possible to do so and in some instances where a veto would be needed, it would be passed simply due to diplomatic relations. Any topic dealing with the UN is up for debate because there are several ways to look at every point. It is easy to say that the United Nations should simply focus on passing things dealing with human rights and moral issues; however, an entire country can be hurt by focusing on human rights. In the end people have to make a conscious effort to educate themselves and others in order to raise awareness for the hurting countries that have