At its 10,000th meeting, the UN Security Council failed to adopt a Gaza ceasefire resolution after a US veto, highlighting geopolitical rifts and humanitarian urgency.

Introduction

The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) marked a historic milestone on September 18, 2025, holding its 10,000th meeting since its creation in 1946. Yet, the day’s proceedings underscored the persistent fractures in global diplomacy, as the United States once again vetoed a draft resolution calling for an immediate, unconditional, and permanent ceasefire in the Gaza Strip. Against the backdrop of a worsening humanitarian catastrophe, the moment demonstrated the tension between history and reality—where landmark achievements are overshadowed by urgent crises.

Context & Background

The roots of this deadlock lie in the Gaza war, which erupted on October 7, 2023, after Hamas and allied groups launched a deadly assault on Israel, killing approximately 1,200 people and abducting 250 hostages. Since then, Israel has carried out a relentless military offensive in Gaza, leading to more than 65,000 Palestinian deaths according to local health authorities. Roughly 48 hostages remain in captivity, adding to the urgency of diplomatic intervention.

The UNSC, tasked with maintaining international peace and security, has debated the conflict since October 8, 2023, the day after the war began. However, the Council’s ability to act has been consistently hindered by veto power—particularly the United States’ repeated blocking of ceasefire resolutions. September’s session was the fifth such veto since the war began, with the previous one cast in June 2025.

Main Developments

The September 18 meeting carried both symbolic and substantive weight. Chaired by South Korea, which holds the rotating presidency this month, the Council considered a draft resolution floated by its ten non-permanent members: Algeria, Denmark, Greece, Guyana, Pakistan, Panama, South Korea, Sierra Leone, Slovenia, and Somalia.

The resolution called not only for an immediate ceasefire but also demanded:

• The release of all hostages held by Hamas

• The lifting of Israeli restrictions on humanitarian aid into Gaza

• Guarantees for safe distribution of relief supplies by UN agencies and partners

Despite broad support and more than the nine votes required for passage, the resolution was blocked by the US veto, a negative vote that outweighs the will of the majority due to the unique powers of permanent members. Four other permanent members—China, France, Russia, and the UK—did not exercise their veto, further underscoring the Council’s division.

Expert Insight & Public Reaction

Global analysts point out that the US justification centers on what it calls Israel’s “right to self-defense” and the need for a ceasefire arrangement that addresses hostages and security guarantees. Critics, however, argue that Washington’s repeated vetoes are isolating it diplomatically and worsening humanitarian suffering.

Human rights advocates have condemned the continuing deadlock. “Every veto delays life-saving aid and prolongs human tragedy,” said a humanitarian worker affiliated with a UN relief agency. Civil society groups worldwide have echoed similar sentiments, with growing calls for reform of the UNSC’s veto system.

India, a frequent advocate for reform, has consistently criticized veto power as contradicting the principle of sovereign equality among UN member states. New Delhi emphasizes that the veto is wielded for political expediency rather than moral responsibility, creating asymmetry in global governance.

Impact & Implications

The failure of the 10,000th UNSC meeting to deliver concrete results underscores the deep paralysis of international institutions at times of crisis. For Gaza, the humanitarian fallout is escalating: famine is spreading, access to healthcare remains crippled, and civilian displacement is at unprecedented levels.

Diplomatically, the impasse weakens confidence in the Security Council’s ability to fulfill its mandate of maintaining peace and security. It also raises serious questions about the credibility of multilateralism in a world increasingly defined by great-power competition.

Looking ahead, two likely developments stand out:

Humanitarian Agencies Under Strain: With restrictions still in place, UN relief agencies and their partners will face worsening security and operational challenges in addressing Gaza’s urgent needs.

Calls for UNSC Reform: The landmark 10,000th meeting is likely to fuel broader debates on veto reform, especially among countries like India, Brazil, and South Africa who push for a more democratic and representative Security Council structure.

Conclusion

The 10,000th meeting of the UN Security Council should have been a moment of global reflection and achievement. Instead, it became another reminder of the Council’s limitations, where historical milestones collide with political stalemates. As Gaza reels from humanitarian devastation, the inability of the world’s highest peacekeeping body to act decisively threatens not only the credibility of the UN but also the collective belief in multilateral solutions. Without reforms to address the imbalance of power embedded in the veto, milestones such as this risk becoming symbols of inertia rather than progress.

Disclaimer : This article is for informational and journalistic purposes only. It is based on credible news sources and UN records. It does not endorse any political stance and should not be construed as legal or policy advice.