We find that Chapter V of the Charter of the United Nations established the legal composition of the 15 permanent and non-permanent members, and based on Article 23, the permanent members of the Security Council in 1945 were: the United States of America, Britain, France, the Soviet Union and national China, and in 1971 The People's China replaced the National China, and in 1992 Russia inherited the seat of the Soviet Union after the collapse of the socialist system.

It may be a legal and political difficulty for the countries that use the veto to succeed in dismissing a permanent member of the Security Council when confronting one another, because there is no explicit provision in the Charter of the United Nations regarding the dismissal of one of the permanent members, given that the five permanent members have the right to veto substantive issues.

The philosophy and origins of granting the veto date back to a victory in favor of the Allied Powers and the resulting battle called the Battle of El Alamein between Britain and the Axis Powers, which sent its forces to North Africa, where the result was overwhelming with the defeat of the Axis Powers and the surrender of Italy, and then the map of the world changed again And two new superpowers emerged in the world: the United States of America and the Soviet Union, that is, Russia today.

As this war led to the weakening of the countries of Europe, led by the Allied countries, including France and Britain, and the two countries no longer control the world.

The world was divided into two blocs: the Western bloc led by America, and the Eastern bloc led by the Soviet Union, and the aim was to spread freedom and get rid of colonialism.

All European countries recovered their old borders, except for Poland. Germany was divided into two states: Eastern with its capital Berlin, and Western with its capital, Born. Germany was also divided into 4 regions under the influence of 4 different countries: France, the United States of America, the Soviet Union, and Britain.

The General Assembly, the Security Council, the International Court of Justice, the World Health Organization, and the International Monetary Fund were all established.

The United Nations was established after the San Francisco Conference in 1945 as an alternative to the League of Nations, which did not provide many logical solutions to the peoples.

In the United Nations joined all the independent countries in the world, which seized the opportunity to cooperate with other countries to live in peace.

Therefore, we find that the philosophy of establishing the right of veto was built on the bases of its sources, not only in the Charter of the United Nations, but rather its sources represented in the balance of power factor and the outcomes of World War II, so the world woke up to the term veto after the end of World War II and the establishment of the United Nations in 1945 It was granted to only 5 of the 15 members of the UN Security Council (the number of member states in the council was 11 when the United Nations was established), and the council expanded by 1936 to include 4 permanent members and 11 non-permanent members.

Therefore, since the founding of the United Nations in 1945, the number of times the veto has been used has reached 293 times.

The Soviet Union and its successor Russia used it 143 times, the United States 83 times, Britain 32 times, France 18 times, while China used it 16 times.

Another way might be for the members of the United Nations to pledge to accept and implement the decisions of the Security Council in accordance with this Charter, and the decisions of the Security Council can be binding on all member states of the General Assembly, even those members who oppose the decisions of the Council, and this binding power is made clear by Article 103 of the Charter , which states that “if the obligations to which the members of the United Nations are bound in accordance with the provisions of this charter conflict with any other international obligation to which they are bound, then their obligations under this charter shall count.”

That is why the Security Council has the power to bind member states to obligations that take precedence over any other legal obligations.

Member States may choose to resort to the International Court of Justice to resolve this existing legal problem, by requesting the International Court of Justice to apply Article 36 of the Charter of the United Nations so that recommendations are made in accordance with this Article taking into account legal disputes and to be submitted to the International Court of Justice in accordance with the provisions of the Statute of this Court, or that Members of the General Assembly or the Security Council submit a request to the International Court of Justice to give advisory opinions on any legal question and to provide advisory opinions on legal issues. The Charter also gives the Council the responsibility to address cases of non-compliance by states with the Court’s rulings before the Council (Article 94).

In addition, the Council, jointly with the General Assembly, elects the judges of the International Court of Justice, and the President of the International Court of Justice briefs the Council in an annual special session.

We find an example in the Corfu Channel case - the first procedure of the International Court of Justice - when on April 9, 1947, in Resolution No. 22 it was recommended that: “Albania and the United Kingdom immediately referred their dispute to the Court. The resolution was adopted by 8 votes in favour, with two abstentions.” The vote, by Poland and the Soviet Union, while the United Kingdom, as a party to the conflict, abstained in accordance with Article 27 of the Charter.

Similarly, the Council requested only one advisory opinion from the Court on 29 July 1970 in Resolution 284, when it requested an advisory opinion on the legal consequences of South Africa's continued presence in Namibia.

Regarding the non-compliance, the Council did not use its powers under Article 94 to enforce the judgment.

However, one attempt to have the Council exercise this power was when Nicaragua, in a letter to the President of the Council on 17 October 1986, requested an emergency meeting to consider the failure of the United States to implement the judgment of the International Court of Justice of 27 June 1986 regarding Military and Paramilitary Activities in the Nicaragua Affair.

The United States vetoed a draft resolution calling for full and immediate compliance with the October 28, 1986 International Court of Justice ruling.

We find this failure part of a larger dynamic than the dismissal of a permanent member of the UN Security Council. Historically, the council has been working and is still working according to political conflicts that are far from the real and legal balance that all UN members enjoy according to the rules of international law, so I think that the council can It is making more concerted efforts to use all the tools available to it to resolve and avoid conflicts and to establish more equitable legal rules that keep pace with the new realities of all members of the United Nations. It stipulated that membership in the United Nations is permissible for all other peace-loving countries, which take themselves up to the obligations contained in this Charter, and which the Commission believes that it is able and willing to implement these obligations, although there are some permanent member states that violated Article VI of the Charter of the United Nations, and with sorryThe severe violations have been committed related to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations and others, and the General Assembly will not be able to separate it from the body on the recommendation of the Security Council, because it will use the right of veto to object.

In the end, today we need a review of all mechanisms of the rules of international law, especially the Charter of the United Nations, in light of countries that do not set any standards for its application and respect, and it is likely that failure to reform the existing international system, whether on the initiative of the Council or otherwise, will not enhance the effectiveness and legitimacy of the Council. As an international institution, it is one of the principal organs of the United Nations.