I see the impotency of the United Nations to halt the current Israeli incursion into southern Lebanon as a proof that veto power within the United Nations Security Council needs to be abolished (tag). Abolition of the veto power granted to the five permanent members of the UNSC is crucial as part of effort to restructure the world body.

I'm convinced that if a vote were called today to send a peacekeeping team to unilaterally enforce a ceasefire in southern Lebanon, a majority within the UNSC - even in the General Assembly - would resoundingly say yes. Yet, realistically, it would be vetoed by the United States. United States of America is of course of one of the five permanent members of the UNSC with veto power. It's no brainer that the US is siding with Israel and prefer no ceasefire until Hezbollah and practically Lebanon is razed to the ground.

The ability to veto the voice of the majority goes against the spirit of democracy. It silences the will of the majority, benefiting the few; the few are imposing their will on the majority. The US, with its perchant to spread democracy, should've known better. For it to retain veto power is a hypocritical act, just like its support for Israel in the current Israel-Lebanon conflict.

Veto power is also another form of bureaucracy. With five veto powers, all resolutions need to satisfy the demand of the five, regardless whether the majority had already a say on it. A resolution passed by the majority will have to come back and forth from the masses to the five powers over and over again until total consensus is built - correction; consensus among the five permanent members is built.

The removal of veto privileges will democratize the UNSC. It's also the first step to cut red tape within the UN. More importantly, the crisis in Lebanon would have been averted if there were no veto power.