UNSC
The United Nations Security Council, or UNSC, is one of the most powerful and recognisable bodies of the United Nations. It holds primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, and its decisions can carry legal force for all UN Member States. Unlike most other Model United Nations committees, where resolutions usually act as recommendations, the Security Council has the authority to take binding action, impose sanctions, authorise peacekeeping operations, and, in extreme cases, permit the use of force.
The committee is made up of 15 members: five permanent members and ten non-permanent members. The permanent members (China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States) hold veto power, meaning that any one of them can block a substantive resolution from passing. This makes the UNSC uniquely challenging. Delegates are expected to respond to crises with urgency, while recognising how power politics and national interests can shape the limits of diplomatic action.
At GlobalVoices 2026, the UNSC will turn to two major challenges in contemporary international security: The Terms of Peace: Ceasefire Frameworks and Security Guarantees in Ukraine, and War without End: Civil War and Humanitarian Catastrophe in Sudan. Both topics ask delegates to confront the difficult question at the heart of the Security Council’s work: how can the international community respond when war continues, civilians suffer, and peace remains politically fragile?
The Past
The Security Council was established in 1945 as part of the United Nations Charter, following the devastation of the Second World War. Its creation reflected the belief that international peace could not be protected by ideals alone; it required a body capable of responding quickly to threats to global security. The five permanent members were given special status because of their roles in the post-war international order, creating a system designed to prevent direct confrontation between major powers while allowing the UN to act when peace was at risk.
Since its creation, the UNSC has repeatedly been called upon to respond to conflicts that have tested the limits of international cooperation. It has authorised peacekeeping missions, imposed sanctions, created international tribunals, and debated conflicts from the Korean War and the Gulf War to the Rwandan genocide, the wars in the former Yugoslavia, and more recent conflicts across the Middle East, Africa, and Europe. However, its history is also marked by deadlock, especially during the Cold War, when the competing interests of major powers often prevented decisive action.
These tensions remain highly relevant to this year’s topics. In Ukraine, questions of sovereignty, territorial integrity, ceasefire terms, and long-term security guarantees will shape any possible peace framework. In Sudan, the Security Council must confront mass displacement, famine risk, restricted humanitarian access, and the collapse of civilian protection. Both conflicts show how difficult it can be for the Security Council to translate concern into measures that states are willing to support.
The Present
Today, the UNSC deals with questions of war, peace, sovereignty, and humanitarian protection. Its agenda includes armed conflict, terrorism, nuclear proliferation, sanctions regimes, peacekeeping, and the protection of civilians. The Council is often expected to respond to crises where human lives are immediately at stake, making its debates particularly difficult and consequential.
At the same time, the UNSC is frequently criticised for being slow, divided, or unrepresentative. The veto power of the permanent members can prevent action even in situations of mass suffering, while many states argue that the Council no longer reflects the balance of power in the modern world. This means debates about UNSC reform and accountability are never far from the surface. For delegates, the UNSC requires both moral judgement and a clear understanding of what is politically possible.
The two topics before the committee reflect this tension clearly. On Ukraine, delegates will need to consider what a credible ceasefire might require and how security guarantees could be designed, while also asking whether any agreement can be durable without addressing the interests and fears of all parties involved. On Sudan, delegates will consider how to respond to a humanitarian catastrophe in which civilians are trapped by ongoing violence, limited aid access, and deep political fragmentation.
The Future
The Security Council now faces conflicts that are harder to define and harder to resolve. Some involve governments and armed groups rather than states alone; others are shaped by cyber activity, disinformation, humanitarian collapse, or wider regional instability. As these pressures grow, the UNSC must find ways to respond to crises where the lines between war, diplomacy, and civilian protection are often blurred.
For delegates, this makes the UNSC one of the most demanding and rewarding committees at GlobalVoices. Debate will require careful negotiation and a clear understanding of what each state is prepared to support. Delegates must balance principle with pragmatism: defending their country’s position while still seeking solutions that can survive the politics of the Council chamber.
In the discussions on Ukraine and Sudan, delegates will be asked to think seriously about what peace actually requires. When should the Security Council press for compromise, and when should it insist on accountability? How should it respond when the need for action is clear, but agreement between states remains fragile? In the UNSC, delegates will need to work within the realities of international politics. The strongest resolutions will be those that combine clear principles with proposals that can command support across the Council.