Amendments to the United Nations Charter
Because Charter amendments require the consent of all five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council—defined in Article 23 of the Charter as "The Republic of China, France, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the United States"—it is impossible for other UN member states to force the permanent five to give up their Security Council 'veto power', by means of a Charter amendment. Many reformers have described this situation as a Catch-22. According to Global Policy Forum, "the P-5 are content with the present arrangements and oppose any changes that might dilute or challenge their power or expand their 'club.' China has already announced it will block permanent membership for Japan, and the United States has suggested that it will only support Council reform that commands an implausibly 'broad consensus'".
Criticism of the United Nations
Some have questioned whether the UN might be relevant in the 21st century.
While the UN’s first and second Charter mandates require the UN: “To maintain international peace and security... (and if necessary to enforce the peace by) taking preventive or enforcement action,”
due to its restrictive administrative structure, the permanent members of the Security Council themselves have sometimes prevented the UN from fully carrying out its first two mandates.
Without the unanimous approval, support (or minimally abstention) of all 5 of the permanent members of the UN's Security Council, the UN's charter only enables it to "observe", report on, and make recommendations regarding international conflicts . Such unanimity on the Security Council regarding the authorization of armed UN enforcement actions has not always been reached in time to prevent the outbreak of international wars.