Global Governance on Trial: Egypt’s Push Against UN Veto Power
This is because in 2025, Egypt stepped up the pressure on the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) demanding a complete reformation of the organization, particularly the veto authority wielded by the five permanent members of the organization. Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty termed the veto system a defect in the structure which impedes multilateral action and distorts the balance of international power.
Requesting to abolish or expand the veto system, Egypt claims that the existing system allows a few countries, in particular, the United States, Russia, China, the United Kingdom and France, to stall the international reaction to humanitarian disasters and wars. Egypt says this monopoly has made the Security Council more ineffective.
A Call For Institutional Realignment
The renewed status of Egypt is timely as the credibility of international institutions of governance is being challenged. Abdelatty clarified that limiting the power of veto to five nations is against the very principle of the UN Charter and the spirit of ensuring conflict resolution without any bias.
In its 2025 speech at the General Assembly, the Egyptian delegation demanded access to equal decision-making processes, especially to African, Arab, and third world countries whose regional interests are frequently ignored during discussions in the UNSC.
Historical Function Of The Veto And Modern Criticism
The veto came into being after World War II to keep the great powers at peace by providing them with an avenue to block resolutions that would trigger a direct confrontation. But its contemporary use has become very controversial and sometimes, quite polarising.
The powers of veto of the permanent members have been exercised over 300 times since the inception of the Council. This has led to a large number of resolutions being vetoed by the United States, with almost half of them concerning the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which has caused massive condemnation.
Recent Gaza Crisis Highlights Ongoing Tensions
In this case, the United States used several vetoes in 2023-2025 to prevent ceasefire resolutions and humanitarian aid delivery to Gaza in the framework of the Israeli military operation in the territory. Egypt, and some of the non-aligned and Arab states, characterized this as a blot on the conscience of humanity and an illustration of how veto power can protect states against responsibility.
Egyptian delegates claim that this dynamic gives countries the right to put geo-political interests before human suffering, which discredits not only the UN itself but also its purpose.
Africa’s Bid For Permanent Representation
The advocacy of Egypt is consistent with the larger African needs to be represented. African Union leaders have been arguing for a long time that Africa with over 1.4 billion people and the fastest growing economies in the world is still sidelined structurally in world governance arenas.
In June 2025, Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni restated this argument when he said that Africa must be afforded at least two permanently seated seats with the veto power to remedy historical injustices. The African states currently comprise more than a quarter of the UN membership, but they are not allowed to make permanent decisions in the Council.
Proposals From The Global South Gain Traction
The G4 group, which consists of Brazil, India, Japan, and Germany, has also advocated for Council expansion in addition to Africa. Egypt supports a version of reform that includes both regional representation and balanced veto rights. However, divisions remain over whether to extend veto privileges to new members or curtail them altogether.
At the General Assembly’s 2025 Special Session, more than 130 member states supported motions calling for talks to resolve power imbalances in the UNSC structure, demonstrating widespread support for reform.
The Veto’s Impact On Global Peacekeeping
The G4 which includes Germany, Japan, India and Brazil have also lobbied to expand the council alongside Africa. Egypt endorses one variant of reform that incorporates a regional presentation and a veto balance. The question of whether or not the new members should be given the veto power is still up for debate, though.
Consensus regarding supporting reform was also widely present at the 2025 Special Session of the General Assembly, where over 130 member states voted in favor of motions asking negotiations to be conducted with the aim of discussing imbalances of power within the UNSC structure.
Legal Reform Remains Complex
Analysts point to the effect that the veto has had in preventing collective action during crises like Syria, Yemen, Ukraine, and Sudan. Ceasefire, sanctions or investigations draft resolutions were often vetoed by a permanent member, often to defend allies or strategic interests in these conflicts.
This malfunction, Egypt argues, has contributed to a more widespread loss of confidence in multilateral institutions. The paralysis observed during the proceedings in the Security Council not only procrastinates humanitarian intervention, but also encourages impunity.
Egypt’s Diplomatic Offensive In 2025
It is also not legally easy to change the composition or powers of the UNSC. It demands amendments to the UN Charter that should be passed by two-thirds of all the member states including all five permanent members. This is an effective means of enabling the P5 to prevent a reform of their own privileges.
Different models of reform have been suggested. Others want to abolish the veto altogether. Others propose that there be limits on its application when the acts in question are mass atrocities or that more than one veto be necessary to prevent a resolution. There has been no agreement as to the way forward.
Broader Debate Over Multilateralism
Motions calling for negotiations to resolve power imbalances in the UNSC structure were supported by more than 130 member states during the General Assembly’s 2025 Special Session, demonstrating widespread support for reform.
Another form of multilateral diplomacy was that done by Foreign Minister Abdelatty where he conducted side meetings with members of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) and the Arab League to rally support. The Cairo approach suggests that it is the desire of the country to be a leader in the region and the world through the reform of the international systems.
Voices Amplifying Reform Demands
The veto debate belongs to a broader debate about the future of global governance. With the appearance of new geopolitical blocs and the transition of old alliances, institutions developed during the Cold War are becoming ever less suitable to the requirements of the 21st century.
Egypt is placed in this crossfire, which is both regional and universal disappointment over the existing international status, as well as global disappointment over the international status quo.
Egypt’s Case Embodied In Global Sentiment
The call of Egypt has been heard in public and civil society discourse. According to think tanks and other specialists in international law, non-reform of the UNSC would further hasten the death of multilateralism. According to them, when people have symbolic power without functional legitimacy, the UN will become irrelevant during times of global crisis.
Legal scholar Dr. Nada Ismail observed at a 2025 policy conference, that the veto has changed to become a tool of protection to benefit supporters and not international peace.
In the meantime, grass-roots movements and online campaigns have condemned the failure of the Council to take decisive action on climate change, the protection of refugees and war crimes.
The Path Ahead For Council Reform
The future of veto reform may ultimately depend on shifts in global power alignments. If countries like India, Brazil, and South Africa expand their influence economically and diplomatically, continued exclusion could become untenable.
Egypt’s 2025 campaign raises a critical question: can an institution tasked with maintaining global peace be credible if it systematically excludes over half the world’s population from meaningful participation?
As Egypt continues its diplomatic efforts, its challenge to the Security Council reflects not only national interests but a deeper reckoning with how global authority is constructed and exercised.
The demand for reform may not yield immediate results, but it marks a pivotal moment where the legitimacy of the UN system itself is being publicly contested and potentially reshaped.
