Germany, Japan fume at Obama's UN nod

[Alphatech]

Why should there be a veto at all for anyone ?

The essence of democracy is to work as the majority wants. Let the UNSC expand & remove the veto for all.

Democracy in this case is not as attractive as it sounds. Imagine a scenario here all the countries had an equal say and no veto. The country with the most international power and influence will be able to coerce many smaller countries to vote for it's benefit. e.g. If we implement it today, America will be able to pass any resolution it wants with impunity and the EU, China, Russia, etc will be powerless to stop it. The UN is already said to be weak, however without the Veto, America will be operating the UN like one of it's government ministries.

The purpose of giving the veto to the most powerful countries from conflicting blocks was to ensure that one group could never dictate the organization's functioning. It's not fair but it's the best option yet. Democracy will not work on an international level because smaller insecure countries will not vote for what is right but will try to use their vote to get in the good books of the leading power. The harsh reality is that international diplomacy is all about getting something for yourself and not about doing the right thing.

 

[indushek]

I am assuming they are happy as they think it is with veto...and all the articles in the Indian media not even seem to have considered the fact that it could be without veto.Not sure they will be very happy if that is the case.

Well u know the media its always without any head in these matters. You should look at the way the talk about defence matters like some missile or a plane. A reporter without any basic knowledge reporting about such things will make u laugh, he does not know the head or tail of a subsonic or supersonic missile.

Back to the topic, its true when the reforms were mentioned the G4 were trying for a vetoed membership and not a position without veto.

If we leave out the $hitty media i don't think the actual think tanks working for this like retired generals or IAS or IFS officers working behind scenes would have missed the obvious point.

In fact the Chinese support is also for a non-vetoed position only.

The only reason this has not been discussed openly according to me, is that they are playing it safe and taking it one step at a time. Asking for too much at the first go itself would be detrimental to our cause. You cannot pressure these powers like USA and China i mean (not Russia, France and UK) to say openly about such things at a single point.

Bringing out such discussions is also a no go , particularly keeping in mind the type of media mentioned above. Ultimately India will never opt for a non-vetoed position as it will not serve any purpose. It definitely will be a slap in the face.

 

[StingRoy]

Democracy in this case is not as attractive as it sounds. Imagine a scenario here all the countries had an equal say and no veto. The country with the most international power and influence will be able to coerce many smaller countries to vote for it's benefit. e.g. If we implement it today, America will be able to pass any resolution it wants with impunity and the EU, China, Russia, etc will be powerless to stop it. The UN is already said to be weak, however without the Veto, America will be operating the UN like one of it's government ministries.

I agree to your point, but with an expanding UNSC this may not be a feasible option since it is always harder for all members in a committee to agree on a topic. That is the reason why a majority voting should be an ideal situation in an expanded UNSC.
Anyways US' powerful image has taken a hit recently and with China emerging, it will be hard for US to operate alone in a global community and push with its policies through the UN.

Even today with the veto power, most of the decisions are unanimous and veto cases are very rare. In almost all the cases unless all the 5 nations agree on an issue they don't go into voting.

 

[luckyyy]

after UN reforms india , japan , germany and brazil should get parmanent seat...

but in my view , the veto power should be terninated with the reforms and resolutions should be passed on majority votes...

 

[MYSTIC]

A security council seat would mean more bragging rights for Indians on this forum. Other than that it is quite useless and India should be in no hurry to get there.