BROKEN BEACONS: RUTO’S CALLOUT AND THE CRISIS OF THE UN SECURITY COUNCIL

INTRODUCTION

On April 23, 2025, while addressing a diplomatic forum in China, Kenyan President William Ruto issued a bold indictment of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), declaring that it has betrayed its mandate as a guardian of international peace. 

Ruto’s remarks came at a time of mounting global tension, with permanent members of the UNSC embroiled in or backing active conflicts in clear contravention of the very resolutions they helped pass. 

His statement—pointing to one permanent member invading another country and another openly violating its impartial obligations—revived urgent calls for Security Council reform and refocused global attention on the structural flaws within the international order.

This op-ed unpacks the significance of Ruto’s critique, contextualizes it within a long-standing debate over UNSC reform, and examines the broader implications for Africa, global governance, and the pursuit of international justice.

A HISTORICAL LEGACY OF INJUSTICE AND INEQUITY

The UNSC was established in 1945 with the intention of ensuring global peace following the devastation of World War II. Its five permanent members—China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States—were granted veto power as victors of the war. This structure, while pragmatic in its Cold War context, has aged poorly. 

It not only excludes most of the world from decision-making but also paralyzes action when those with veto power are the very culprits of aggression. From the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003 to Russia’s annexation of Crimea and current occupation in Ukraine, the UNSC has repeatedly failed to hold its own members accountable.

President Ruto’s critique echoes decades of frustration from the Global South, where countries have long borne the brunt of UNSC inaction and double standards. His remarks crystallize a shared sentiment: the current architecture of global power does not reflect the realities of the 21st century.

RUTO’S DIPLOMATIC STRATEGY: AN AFRICAN RECALIBRATION

President Ruto’s remarks are not merely rhetorical; they signal a broader strategic repositioning of Kenya on the world stage. Since assuming office, Ruto has styled himself as a Pan-African statesman, advocating for African sovereignty, economic justice, and institutional reform at global forums. His criticism of the UNSC aligns with a growing African consensus that multilateralism, as currently structured, is failing the continent.

By voicing these concerns in China—a nation with its own tensions with Western hegemony—Ruto also signals a calculated diplomatic pivot toward multipolarity, leveraging Kenya’s credibility as a peacekeeping contributor to demand a seat at the global governance table. Kenya’s history of mediation in Somalia, Sudan, and Ethiopia lends credibility to Ruto’s calls for a more representative system of global diplomacy.

THE PROBLEM WITH THE VETO POWER

The most criticized feature of the UNSC is the veto power wielded by the five permanent members. While originally conceived to prevent deadlock among superpowers, the veto has instead become a shield for impunity. In 2022 alone, Russia vetoed several resolutions concerning its actions in Ukraine. The United States has similarly blocked resolutions critical of Israeli military actions in Gaza.

This misuse of veto undermines the Council’s legitimacy and fuels perceptions of a biased, Western-dominated system that privileges geopolitical interests over international law and human rights. Ruto’s indictment throws light on these hypocrisies and echoes longstanding demands by the African Union for a more representative system. Reforming the veto system has become the litmus test for the UNSC’s credibility in the 21st century.

THE AFRICAN CASE FOR REFORM

Africa is home to over 1.4 billion people and constitutes more than a quarter of UN member states, yet it has no permanent representation on the Security Council. This glaring exclusion has bred skepticism about the Council’s credibility on African issues. From Rwanda’s 1994 genocide to the ongoing instability in the Sahel, the Council’s record in Africa is marked by delayed responses, inconsistent engagement, and post-crisis hand-wringing.

Kenya, as a non-permanent member of the UNSC from 2021 to 2022, used its platform to advocate for greater African agency. Ruto’s April 2025 remarks continue this push, reinforcing the African Union’s Ezulwini Consensus—which calls for two permanent seats for Africa with veto power—as a baseline for reform.

By amplifying this consensus, Ruto positions Kenya as a leading voice for a continent no longer content with marginalization in matters of global significance.

CHINA, MULTIPOLARITY, AND THE GLOBAL SOUTH

Ruto’s platform in China is also telling. Beijing has increasingly positioned itself as a champion of the Global South, using forums like BRICS and the Belt and Road Initiative to build influence. While China is itself a permanent UNSC member, it has occasionally supported calls for reform, especially when they align with its efforts to counterbalance U.S. dominance.

Ruto’s speech may find receptive ears in Beijing, Moscow, and even in parts of Europe weary of Washington’s unilateralism. This growing axis of discontent could catalyze a serious rethinking of global governance—though critics warn it may simply replace one form of hegemony with another.

Still, if coordinated through strategic diplomacy, such alliances could be harnessed to push for meaningful reform rather than rhetorical posturing.

WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE COUNCIL FAILS?

The practical consequence of UNSC dysfunction is impunity. Whether it is the war in Gaza, the conflict in Ukraine, or the deteriorating situation in Sudan, UNSC gridlock has allowed violence to fester unchecked. Peacekeeping missions are often deployed too late, humanitarian corridors remain blocked, and war crimes go unpunished.

In this vacuum, regional bodies like the African Union and ECOWAS have stepped up—but without the resources or mandate to enforce lasting peace. Ruto’s warning is not hyperbolic; it reflects a real crisis of credibility and efficacy at the heart of global diplomacy.

As new threats emerge—ranging from cyber warfare and pandemics to climate-induced displacement—the cost of an immobilized Security Council grows even higher.

TOWARD A JUST GLOBAL ORDER

To rebuild trust in the international system, reforming the Security Council is imperative. Proposals include expanding the Council to include more permanent and non-permanent members, restricting the use of the veto in cases involving mass atrocities, and enhancing the role of the General Assembly.

Africa’s representation should no longer be a matter of charity but of justice. Ruto’s voice adds moral weight to these calls and reinforces the urgent need for institutional innovation in a multipolar world. It also opens the door for a reimagination of the UN system that decentralizes power, empowers regional blocs, and promotes democratic norms in global decision-making.

CONCLUSION

President William Ruto’s critique of the UNSC is both timely and necessary. It exposes the contradictions of a system designed for a post-WWII world that no longer exists. In doing so, it elevates the voice of Africa, speaks truth to power, and demands accountability from institutions that have long escaped it.

Whether the world listens remains to be seen. But what is certain is that the age of quiet acquiescence is over. The Global South, led by bold voices like Ruto’s, is asserting its place in the architecture of global power—not as a passive recipient, but as an architect of the future.

Author's Bio: Teddy Okello is an Advocate of the High Court of Kenya and Program Lead at the Institute for Policy and Diplomacy, Nairobi, Kenya. His work focuses on review, critique and development of national and regional frameworks for governance, finance, health, infrastructure, climate change, international trade, security and geopolitics. Email: T.Okello@ipd-global.com