Mexico says goodbye to the Security Council

Mexico concluded its participation as a non-permanent member of the Security Council on December 31.

He did so for two years and his presence represented a process of diplomatic maturity due to the delicate decisions that are made on security issues.

It is worth remembering that of the UN, the Security Council is the only body whose decisions are binding on the laws of each Member State, that is, countries are obliged to comply with them by mandate of the United Nations Charter.

Personally, I believe that one of the resolutions that Mexico cosponsored with many countries, but which was one of those that initially proposed it, has to do with limiting the veto.

Every time one of the five permanent members vetoes a resolution, it will automatically go to the plenary session to be voted on despite the fact that the result is not binding. It is important to know the positions of each of the nations that are part of the UN and to discover the countries that prioritize their interests over international security and peace.

The veto, for example, has hindered relief solutions in the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

“Multilateralism today faces one of the most important challenges in its history. If we do not manage to find a solution to the conflict in Ukraine through diplomatic channels, I am very afraid that multilateralism will be subjected to implacable criticism for not having been able to prevent what is happening in Ukraine,” Ambassador De la Fuente said last Month of May.

The creation of the United Nations in 1945 generated great expectations around the maintenance of international peace and security. The presence of the great nuclear powers in the Security Council as permanent members guaranteed neutrality in the face of rivalries between them.

Article 51 of Chapter VII of the Charter allowed member states to adopt self-defense measures and establish alliances, but always under the authority and responsibility of the Security Council.

Expectations were diluted with the start of the cold war when the United States and the then Soviet Union paralyzed the Security Council.

The paralysis of the Security Council has to serve as an example for deep reforms to exist within it, particularly with the figure of the veto.

Mexico’s presence in the Security Council should generate greater interest in society, academia and the media. The presence represents being at the center of decisions on international security and peace, priority issues today and in the future.

My appreciation to Ambassador Juan Ramón de la Fuente for his work.

For Mexico, and for some years now, participating as a non-permanent member in the Security Council has made it mature, particularly in its foreign policy.