Pakistan UN Security Council reform was the subject of a sharp warning at the General Assembly on Tuesday, as Pakistan’s delegate said new permanent seats and wider veto rights would deepen inequality and raise the risk of paralysis in the Council.
Gul Qaiser Sarwani, counsellor at the Pakistan Mission to the United Nations, set out the position during a General Assembly debate on the use of the veto, Dawn reported. He warned that adding more permanent members and extending veto privileges would “deepen existing inequalities, perpetuate historical advantages and increase the risk of Council paralysis”.
He said Pakistan called for “comprehensive, democratic and equitable reform of the UN Security Council”. The misuse of veto power, he said, had undermined the Council’s effectiveness, weakened the credibility of the United Nations and perpetuated inequalities within the international system.
Strategic rivalries and narrow interests among the Council’s permanent members had repeatedly blocked collective action on international peace and security, he said. He pointed to the “unique legitimacy” of the General Assembly, whose universal membership and democratic decision-making let it respond when the Council could not act, including when a veto had been cast.
Pakistan UN Security Council reform: no new permanent seats
The Pakistani delegate opposed the creation of any new permanent seats in an expanded Security Council. On proposals to regulate the veto, he said Pakistan favoured its abolition or, at a minimum, severe restrictions on its use. The veto must not be expanded, he said.
Pakistan also reaffirmed its support for General Assembly resolution 76/262, which provides for a General Assembly debate after a veto is cast, so that the use of the veto faces greater accountability. Any measures to restrain the veto must remain consistent with the UN Charter, Sarwani said.
He called for a balanced approach that combines restrictions on veto use with enhanced representation and a stronger role for the Council’s elected members. That combination, he said, would make decision-making “more democratic and providing an effective check on the exercise of veto power”.
The delegate added that the veto question must be addressed alongside the other four interrelated clusters under the Intergovernmental Negotiations on Security Council reform, as part of a comprehensive reform package. He closed by restating what he called Pakistan’s strong commitment to reform that corrects existing imbalances, strengthens accountability and serves the collective interests of the entire UN membership rather than a select few, ending with the slogan “Reform for all. Privilege for none.”
Why the veto debate matters now
The debate did not take place in a vacuum. A recent UN report, the ‘World Social Report 2026’, warned that the veto power of the five permanent members is one of the reasons multilateral mechanisms have been unable to prevent or stop the growing number of state-based conflicts.
The resulting paralysis has weakened decision-making, the report says, and prompted the UN secretary general to call for Security Council reforms, including an expansion of its membership to ensure fairer representation, particularly for Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean, and the Asia-Pacific region.
“All these voices are underrepresented despite bearing much of the burden of peacemaking in an increasingly multipolar world,” the report notes. That tension sits at the heart of the current debate: the secretary general’s call points towards a wider Council, while Pakistan’s position rejects new permanent seats and new veto holders as the way to get there.
What happens next
The reform debate now moves back to the Intergovernmental Negotiations, where the veto, membership and the other clusters are meant to be settled as one package rather than one by one. Pakistan’s test for any outcome, as set out by Sarwani, is whether it corrects imbalances, strengthens accountability and serves the full membership.
Feature Pakistan has also covered the United Nations’ recent warnings in the region, including UN concerns over the Hebron operation in the occupied West Bank. The veto debate will matter for how such warnings are handled when they reach the Council itself.
Frequently asked questions
Why does Pakistan oppose new permanent seats?
Pakistan’s delegate said new permanent seats and wider veto rights would deepen inequality, perpetuate historical advantages and increase the risk of Council paralysis. He argued instead for restrictions on the veto and a stronger role for elected members.
