At the 68th General Assembly of the United Nations in September 2013, French President Francois Hollande proposed the suspension of the right to veto at the UN Security Council in cases of mass atrocities. It is, after all, a question of humanity and of the defence of the principles that are at the heart of the UN Charter. Using the veto in instances of mass atrocities would be detrimental to the maintenance of peace and international security, as a culture of impunity develops, and radicalisation and terrorism find a fertile ground when the international community is paralysed.
The French proposal sought an informal, voluntary and collective agreement on suspension of the veto in case of mass atrocities by the five permanent members of the UN Security Council.
We have engaged in deep discussions on the parameters of this suspension of veto with our partners — the permanent members of the Security Council as well as other members of the UN and representatives from international civil society. France’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Laurent Fabius has appointed his predecessor, Hubert Vedrine, to a high-level mission in order to engage in dialogue with our partners.
We propose that the suspension of the veto be applicable in cases where mass atrocities can be prevented or ended. This involves cases of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes on a large scale. We have been reflecting on several options to trigger the suspension of the veto and objectivise the situation. This could involve the UN Secretary-General, a consultation with the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Special Advisers to the Secretary-General on the Prevention of Genocide and the Responsibility to Protect, and an initial request by a certain number of member states, for example 50, reflecting the diversity of the UN.
We also envisage an exemption in case a permanent member is of the opinion that its vital interests are being affected. This exclusion is meant to reassure the permanent members attached to the balance reached when the UN was first created. Without that, no agreement could be attained. Even the High Level Panel recommended such an exemption in its 2004 report on UN reform. Still, in case the veto is used, a public vote explanation would be required, including a proposal for an alternative and credible course of action.
Unique opportunity
France welcomes the immense attention given to its initiative and the numerous expressions of support received from members of the UN and the international civil society. We will actively pursue our discussions with the other permanent members in order to make progress. We believe that the 70th anniversary of the UN in September will be a unique opportunity to get international support for our initiative.
We do not underestimate the difficulties or second thoughts. Yet, our conviction is that the veto is neither a right nor a privilege. It entails duties and a particular responsibility. We expect the negotiations to be long, but our commitment to succeed and prevent mass atrocities cannot be questioned.
Michel Miraillet is France’s Ambassador to the UAE.
