UNSC is the decision making body of the UN that mandates the use of force under Chapter VII of the UN Charter; it decides when military action in any capacity has become necessary to maintain global peace and security. Currently UNSC has to decide whether collective military action should be taken against Syria given the Assad regime’s alleged use of Chemical Weapons against civilians.
A consensus exists that any such action (i.e. collective military action) can only be initiated with the formal approval of the UNSC, and on the basis of hard facts. In this context, the UN Secretary General has clearly asked that “no action should be taken until the U.N. chemical weapons inspectors’ finish their work”. Currently UN experts are processing the evidence collected in Syria, and a final report remains pending.
Ironically, three permanent members of UNSC – the USA, UK and France – wish to run UNSC business by a different set of rules. These three states are calling for immediate military action in Syria, with or without a UN mandate and are not willing to fulfill international law requirements or formal procedures.
It would be a better option for maintaining legitimacy of action and upholding international law that all states refrain from taking unilateral military action against Syria, till such time that the UNSC report is released and allows for collective military action.