“The reform process in the United Nations remains unresolved, because of the delicate imbalance of East and West and entanglement of the USA vs. Russo-Chinese alliance.” Examine and critically evaluate the East-West policy confrontations in this regard.
Approach · directive: “examine / critically evaluate”
What it asks · Examine how US–Russia–China rivalry blocks UN (especially Security Council) reform, and critically evaluate whether East–West confrontation is the whole explanation.
The question has 3 parts — answer each
- Examine: how US–Russia–China rivalry blocks UN (Security Council) reform
- Critically evaluate: whether East–West confrontation is the whole explanation — cross-cutting interests, the North–South divide, partial progress
- India's stake and the way forward
Open with · Eight decades after 1945, the Security Council still mirrors the power map of the Second World War — and reform is hostage to the rivalries it is meant to manage.
Cover
- Reform agenda: expansion of permanent and non-permanent seats, the veto, working methods, regional balance; Intergovernmental Negotiations since 2009.
- Charter hurdle: amendments need two-thirds of the General Assembly and ratification including all five permanent members.
- East–West split: the US and allies versus Russia and China on Ukraine, Syria, sanctions and Gaza; rising veto use paralyses the Council.
- But interests cut across blocs: China resists Japan's (and India's) permanent seat; the Uniting for Consensus group opposes new permanent members; all P5 guard the veto.
- North–South divide: Africa's Ezulwini Consensus seeks two permanent seats with veto; the Global South wants voice, not just East–West balance.
- Partial progress: the 2022 General Assembly veto initiative requires debate after every veto; the Pact for the Future (2024) recommits to Council reform.
- India: G4 and L.69 coalitions, outreach to Africa, and a record of UN peacekeeping support its claim.
Close with · East–West rivalry explains the paralysis only in part; reform will come when collective pressure from the Global South makes the status quo costlier than change.
Add value (verified)
- Under Article 108 of the UN Charter, every permanent member effectively holds a veto over Charter amendments. Charter of the United Nations — full text (un.org) ↗“ratified in accordance with their respective constitutional processes by two thirds of the Members of the United Nations, including all the permanent members of the Security Council.”
Question: UPSC's CS (Main) 2025, GS Paper II — paper ↗. Approach: Minimalist IAS, checked 30 Sept 2026 (how we verify) — UPSC publishes no model answers. ·
Model answer · 308 words (UPSC limit 250) · Minimalist IAS
Eight decades after 1945, the Security Council still mirrors the power map of the Second World War. Reform needs the consent of the very powers whose rivalry it is meant to manage — and that is where it stalls.
The reform agenda and the Charter hurdle
- Agenda: more permanent and non-permanent seats, limits on the veto, better working methods and regional balance; Intergovernmental Negotiations have run since 2009 without a negotiating text.
- Hurdle: Article 108 requires two-thirds of the General Assembly and ratification by all five permanent members, so any P5 member can block change.
How East–West confrontation blocks reform
- Paralysis in practice: the US and its allies against Russia and China on Ukraine, Syria, sanctions and Gaza; frequent vetoes leave the Council unable to act on the gravest conflicts, and each side reads reform as the other's gain.
- Entanglement: Russia and China coordinate positions, while Washington backs expansion selectively — endorsing India and Japan but wary of diluting its own weight.
Why the explanation is incomplete
- Interests cut across blocs: China resists permanent seats for Japan and India; the Uniting for Consensus group, including Italy and Pakistan, opposes any new permanent members; every P5 member guards the veto.
- North–South divide: Africa's Ezulwini Consensus demands two permanent seats with veto; the Global South wants representation, not merely a re-balanced East–West Council.
- Partial progress despite rivalry: the 2022 General Assembly veto initiative forces a debate after every veto; the Pact for the Future (2024) recommitted members to Council reform.
India's stake
- Through the G4 and L.69 coalitions, outreach to Africa and a long record of peacekeeping, India presses for text-based negotiations — while keeping working ties with both camps.
East–West rivalry explains the paralysis only in part; reform will come when collective pressure from the Global South, including India, makes the status quo costlier for the P5 than change.
Written by Minimalist IAS from facts checked at source (how we verify) — a little fuller than exam length, so every part of the question is covered; in the hall, keep the structure and trim the detail. UPSC publishes no model answers: compare your structure and coverage with this, then write your own.