The UN was never intended to be the world's police force. Reading the UN Charter makes this abundantly clear.

If we are going to debate the UN and the Security Council, it is necessary to consider the Charter of the UN, which is the legal basis for the UN and the Security Council. Article 7 is most relevant to debates about the Security Council.

Plerdsus,

The peace between the major powers may have been kept by the nuclear stalemate, but could it also be the fact that the major powers gradually realised that security implies safeduarding the trading patterns,- which also implies the security of access to resources?
Could it also be that certain things just can not be decided by war? - For example, the control of epidemics, the freedom of all kinds of navigation, global telecommunication, and even the humble global postal network? All these, and more, need international law. (Treaties that are administered by an independent directorate.)

Usually, people or governments make decisions for very complex reasons,- although, a particular event may be "triggered" by a certain action.

Shadow Minister,

The UN at present is only useless as far as security issues are concerned. (Which is very important.) It is not in the interest of Russia or of China to help the West, - or vice versa. In spite of this, the major powers just cannot let the UN collapse. Why?

Humans have an innate tendency to seek patterns, and hence to be able to make predictions. In the field of science we have gone a long way along this path. In the field of economics and international relations we have to go back to the drawing board.

Economics and international relations are also complicated by our "reflexive" tendency. (The reflexive tendency is when our action justifies a perceived theory.)

Having a somewhat more realistic view of the true nature of things (such as economics and international relations)may take some time.

Governments realise that the alternative to any form of reference to international law is international anarchy. Acquiescing to anarchy is not human nature.

Nick-Syd,

Talk about reforming the Security Council always includes nations having the veto. Very true.

Reform largely depends on how long the rest of the world is going to be willing to be in hock to the major powers. Just to remind ourselves, democracies the world over far outnumber the major powers population-wise. They also have considerable exporting clout. Even the majority of the population within the major powers question the perceived wisdom of permanent confrontation.