India to recharge bid for UN Security Council seat

[justanobserver]

deleted, offtopic

 

[Nomenclature]

Just out of curiousity what does Mexico and Italy have against Brazil?

It's a typo in the article, Italy is against Germany not Brazil.

 

[CardSharp]

I feel if the UNSC is expanded, Veto power should become a "Power" granted through democratic ideals of election...

So say you have the parmanent Members as you listed....

Every 5 years, the UN votes to elect the states that will gain Veto power.....

This means that unlike an "inheritance" that US, UK and Russia treat their Veto, it becomes something earned through the efforts of their diplomacy, playing nice with other countries etc....

This will allow the UN to monitor any unjust actions implemented by Perm 5....and avoid blunders such as Iraq WMD and make the veto powers accountable for their actions.....

Besides, with the current power scenario, I feel France and Britain fall grossly behind the other 3 powers in terms of Military or economy....

Just a thought....

The justification of veto power is not to give those 5 countries powers above and beyond but to ensure that these important major countries would support the UN whole-heartedly. If they see the UN as a power that would unit the world against them these core countries wouldn't support UN or maybe even work to undermine it.

With a veto, they can feel assured that their interest would always be respected no matter what. The UN is built around these core powers, if any of them would break off like Japan and Germany did with the League of Nations, it could create a rival camp and destabilize the international community.

 

[Kambojaric]

Algeria is the best candidate for representing both Africa and Islamic nations.

Its the 11th largest country.

Algeria has gained a great deal of respect for its neutrality over the years and its great commitment to African development.

Morocco would flip out on this. Read about "western sahara dispute"/polisario front.

 

[Nomenclature]

I think the world is changing too rapidly at the moment to make meaningful reform at the UNSC.

Europe and Japan are both relatively declining, not point in letting a declining continent having 4 permanent seats.

In addition to a dwindling population, Japan with its pacifist constitution and essentially subservient role to the U.S in their military alliance, I don't think it has the diplomatic independence to qualify as a permanent SC member. I do see a very strong case to move UN headquarters to Tokyo though.

 

[Peshwa]

The justification of veto power is not to give those 5 countries powers above and beyond but to ensure that these important major countries would support the UN whole-heartedly. If they see the UN as a power that would unit the world against them these core countries wouldn't support UN or maybe even work to undermine it.

With a veto, they can feel assured that their interest would always be respected no matter what. The UN is built around these core powers, if any of them would break off like Japan and Germany did with the League of Nations, it could create a rival camp and destabilize the international community.

The way I see it, the Veto has been used to support the interests of the Veto powers less to support the general consensus of UN......dont you think? for eg. US has used 32 vetoes to play down resolutions against Israel....there is an obvious bias there.....

Besides....as far as rival camps are concerned.....NATO as an organization consists of 3 out of 5 members of the UNSC, and probably the most powerful bloc ever.....Isnt that what the UNSC is supposed to be?

 

[indushek]

The way I see it, the Veto has been used to support the interests of the Veto powers less to support the general consensus of UN......dont you think? for eg. US has used 32 vetoes to play down resolutions against Israel....there is an obvious bias there.....

Besides....as far as rival camps are concerned.....NATO as an organization consists of 3 out of 5 members of the UNSC, and probably the most powerful bloc ever.....Isnt that what the UNSC is supposed to be?

You have hit the nail there for sure. The SC has become a group of individuals acting for their own ends rather than for the common cause. This is the reason why a expansion of this group is much required. Emerging powers like our country should be given a say.

Also this brings more balance to the world.

Man seriously why do the germans have to get in there the European continent has already two votes.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Man seriously why do the germans have to get in there the European continent has already two votes.

Good point, I think France should be replaced with Germany.

Actually Germany and Japan have had pacifist constitutions after WW2, so I'm not sure they are right for the UN Security Council anyway.

My ideal list is: US, China, India, Russia, UK. Those are the essential ones.

Maybe Brazil, Turkey and Germany could join too, if the conditions are right.

 

[gogbot]

Algeria is the best candidate for representing both Africa and Islamic nations.

Its the 11th largest country.

Algeria has gained a great deal of respect for its neutrality over the years and its great commitment to African development.

Islamic and African Nations as group don't have enough unity to form a cohesive group. At least not one solid enough to be a global player.

That's one of the reasons why a single EU seat will also never happen.

Africa does need more representation. Agreed but a unified seat just is not going to work. Maybe in a few years the if AU can increase its membership and turn out to be Economic and Military player. It's leading member's can get a seat.

The idea of an Islamic seat however is a different case , where Most nations are not even pushing that agenda. We really can't say until someone actually makes a serious attempt.

 

[mike05]

All the permanent members on the UNSC are also major arms exporters, not sure if that sways any decisions though.


The Arms Trade is Big Business ? Global Issues