<P> Various discussions have taken place in recent years over the suitability of the Security Council veto power in today's world . Key arguments include that the five permanent members no longer represent the most stable and responsible member states in the United Nations, and that their veto power slows down and even prevents important decisions being made on matters of international peace and security . Due to the global changes that have taken place politically and economically since the formation of the UN in 1945, widespread debate has been apparent over whether the five permanent members of the UN Security Council remain the best member states to hold veto power . While the permanent members are still typically regarded as great powers, there is debate over their suitability to retain exclusive veto power . </P> <P> A second argument against retaining the UNSC veto power is that it is detrimental to balanced political decisions, as any draft text needs to be approved of by each permanent member before any draft resolution can possibly be adopted . Indeed, several proposed draft resolutions are never formally presented to the Council for a vote owing to the knowledge that a permanent member would vote against their adoption (the so - called "pocket veto"). Debate also exists over the potential use of the veto power to provide "diplomatic cover" to a permanent member's allies . The United States has used its veto power more than any other permanent member since 1972, particularly on resolutions condemning the actions or policies of Israel . </P> <P> Advocates of the veto power believe that it is just as necessary in the current geo - political landscape, and that without the veto power, the Security Council would be open to making democratic "majority rules" decisions on matters that have implications at a global level--decisions that may well go directly against the interests of a permanent member . </P> <P> Discussions on improving the UN's effectiveness and responsiveness to international security threats often include reform of the UNSC veto . Proposals include: limiting the use of the veto to vital national security issues; requiring agreement from multiple states before exercising the veto; and abolishing the veto entirely . However, any reform of the veto will be very difficult, if not impossible . In fact, Articles 108 and 109 of the United Nations Charter grant the P5 veto over any amendments to the Charter, requiring them to approve of any modifications to the UNSC veto power that they themselves hold: it is highly unlikely that any of the P5 would accept a reform of the UN Charter that would be detrimental to their own national interests . </P>

Who has the right to veto an issue