Permanent Mission of India to the UN
New York
General Assembly
Permanent Mission of India
New York
--
IGN Plenary: Cluster Debate on the Question of the Veto
Statement by Ambassador Harish Parvathaneni, Permanent Representative
26 October 2026
Mr. President,
Let me begin by thanking you for convening this meeting on this important cluster on the Question of the Veto.
2. India has always maintained that the veto which is right now a prerogative only of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, is a responsibility that must be exercised with great restraint, especially on matters bearing upon the maintenance of international peace and security. It should not be an instrument of narrow political expediency.
3. The record of the Veto is stark. Over the life of this Organization, the veto has been exercised 331 times on around 200 resolutions. We also note that two out of the five permanent members have not exercised veto for over three and a half decades and most of the vetos or threat of vetos have emanated from only three of the P5. The Veto Initiative of 2022 was seen as a harbinger of change, by mandating a UNGA debate everytime a veto is cast, to fix accountability. However, the actual record of the large number of vetos cast since the UNGAR 76/262 was adopted tells a contrary story.
4. The question of veto is one of the five clusters of Security Council reforms under the IGN framework.. While we agree with the sentiment behind UNGA Resolution 76/262, as well as the initiatives on mass atrocity situations, the lived experience shows that piecemeal approaches, however well intentioned, are bound to fail.
5. Limiting the veto cannot be separated from the questions of categories of membership, regional representation, size and working methods. We need to move forward on all five clusters together. India reiterates its call for a comprehensive approach towards Security Council reforms. The starting point is early commencement of text-based negotiations, with clearly defined timelines and milestones. Addressing the veto in isolation does not change the decision making dynamic of the P5.
6. The veto is not only what is cast in the open. There is also the "effective or de facto veto" that every Council member, elected and non- elected, holds over presidential statements, press statements and the decisions of sanctions committees, where the unwritten rule of consensus allows a single member to hold or block a proposal, most often without explanation.
7. In the same vein, the argument of consensus has been harnessed as a disguised, de facto veto in the IGN process as well. UNGAR 62/557, the foundational decision for the IGN, is clear: the guiding principle is the widest possible political acceptance, not consensus. Seventeen cycles later, we have no outcome to show for it.
8. India's position on the veto is principled and well known. It is aligned with the Common African Position. We reiterate that as long as the veto exists, it must be held by all permanent members of a reformed Council. Fairness and justice demand that all permanent members enjoy the same rights and responsibilities. A new category of permanent members, with or without the veto, would only further complicate a discussion that is already difficult, and would further entrench the very inequity we are seeking to correct. Periodic elections and the concept of permanency are fundamentally contradictory.
9. History has a lesson for us. The only expansion of the Council, in 1965, enlarged the non-permanent category alone. The ratio of permanent members to elected members moved from 5:6 to 5:10, and further strengthened the relative power of the P5. A reform that expands the UN Security Council by creating another category of long-term members without the veto effectively makes them ‘second-class’ members and would not change the decision making dynamic of the P5,
Mr. President
10. Our ask remains simple and unchanged. Begin text-based negotiations, the most democratic and time-tested method in this House, at the earliest, with clear timelines and milestones. India will engage constructively with the Co-Chairs and all delegations in that effort.
11. In closing, the questions of credibility, legitimacy and efficacy that hang over the Security Council will not be answered by managing the veto alone. They will be answered by a Council fit for purpose, whose architecture reflects today's realities and not that of the outcome of a war eight decades ago. India stands ready to contribute to that endeavour.
I Thank you.