Q. “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.

Model Answer:

UN Reform Deadlock: East-West Policy Confrontations

The United Nations, conceived in 1945’s post-war architecture, faces an existential reform crisis amid the contemporary geopolitical schism between the US-led Western bloc and the Russo-Chinese strategic alignment.

Core East-West Confrontations

The ideological divergence manifests in fundamental disagreements over UN’s operational philosophy. Western powers champion humanitarian intervention through ‘Responsibility to Protect’ (R2P), viewing it as moral imperative in crises like Libya, Kosovo intervention. Conversely, Russia and China invoke state sovereignty and non-interference principles, dismissing R2P as neo-colonial pretext for regime change operations.

Security Council expansion remains deadlocked through strategic obstruction:
• China blocks Japan (historical grievances, regional rivalry) and resists India’s permanent membership despite bilateral engagement
• Russia supports India but opposes Japan, creating selective vetoes that prevent G4 consensus
• Western powers endorse G4 (India, Japan, Germany, Brazil) but lack unified strategy against Russo-Chinese resistance
• Veto usage intensifies – Syria paralysis, Ukraine deadlock demonstrate P5’s weaponization of procedural privilege

The veto power impasse epitomizes this confrontation. Recent crises witnessed unprecedented veto frequency – Russia’s 17 vetoes on Syria, US-China standoffs on Myanmar, creating institutional paralysis on mass atrocities.

Beyond Binary Confrontation: Critical Assessment

However, attributing reform stalemate solely to East-West tensions oversimplifies complex dynamics:

P5’s collective self-preservation transcends ideological divides. Despite confrontations, all permanent members resist diluting their exclusive club’s privileges. France and UK, though supporting expansion rhetorically, maneuver cautiously to preserve influence.

Regional rivalries compound deadlock. The “Uniting for Consensus” coalition – Pakistan against India, Italy opposing Germany, Argentina blocking Brazil – exploits East-West tensions while pursuing parochial agendas. These cross-cutting cleavages create multiple veto points beyond great power competition.

Middle powers’ emergence (India’s non-alignment 2.0, Brazil’s strategic autonomy, African Union’s collective voice) challenges binary frameworks, demanding accommodation beyond East-West paradigms.

Conclusion:

UN reform remains hostage to East-West confrontations, P5 self-interest, and regional rivalries – threatening multilateralism’s future credibility.