Vote Trading Games in the United Nations Security Council

After the inability to intervene in Syrian civil war, the debate about reforming the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) has been revived. This thesis investigates the voting behavior in the UNSC using a game-theoric model including vote trading. Results show that, whenever possible, voters are more concerned with buying winning coalitions than with maximizing global welfare. Veto members are the most important determinants of the outcome of votes with and without vote trading due to their disproportionate power. It is shown that a trade-off between performance and vote trading exists: increasing performance increases vote trading and vice versa. It is discussed that the optimal reform is to reduce the disproportionate power of the veto by reducing it to an 80% qualified majority rule. Additionally, the number of non-permanent seats may be increased