Association for Defending Victims of Terrorism – According to the National Herald website, Indian writer Nilova Roychaudhury criticized the UN’s function in an article regarding the the veto power for five states and the inefficiency of the UN during 26 years of not being able to manage to jointly agree upon a comprehensive definition of the term terrorism.
At the beginning of the article, she states that if the United Nations cannot agree on what constitutes terrorism and cannot prevent the violation of the UN Charter by the permanent members of the Security Council, how useful it can be.
At the beginning of the article, referring to the speech of the Secretary General of the United Nations regarding withdrawal of Russian forces from Ukraine, she stated that Russia’s attack on Ukraine in February 2022 faced Europe with the biggest military conflict since the Second World War, especially that this conflict while the war seemed unnecessary during the Covid-19 pandemic.
In another part of the article, Ms. Roychaudhury added that apart from who caused the war, Russia was a permanent member of the Security Council, which violated the sovereignty of another member state. It undermines the efficacy of this organization, which was established at the end of World War II to keep global peace and security.
Criticizing the right of veto in the Security Council, this Indian writer said that granting the right of veto to the five permanent members of the Security Council was to prevent other members of the United Nations from abusing international laws. However, unfortunately, over the decades, it was only used to protect the interests of the P-5 veto-wielding members. She continued, with the right of veto, one vote in the United Nations, which consists of 193 countries, can be a symbol of the opinion of the whole world.
At the end of the article, he stated that the contemporary global order has been built on the UN Charter, international law, and respect for the sovereignty of countries, and all member states must respect it. That is easier said than done at the UN which, in 26 years, has not managed to jointly agree upon a comprehensive definition of the term terrorism.
