UN calls for full-scale talks on expanding Security Council

[Flintlock]

The whole UNSC needs to be discarded in the dustbin of history. The veto powers have been nothing but a useless instrument to bully and derail progress.

Doubt the others would allow any further expansion to the group of hegemons.

Without the UNSC, the UN will be a body without a head IMO. It will never reach a consensus on anything.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Without the UNSC, the UN will be a body without a head IMO. It will never reach a consensus on anything.

With so many nations having an equal voice, it does make the entire process of reaching a consensus far more rewarding for smaller members (and a greater number of members) whose interests then have to be protected, and compromises arrived at, in order to reach a solution.

As it is, the smaller nations get ridden roughshod over, and the consensus arrived at with the current structure, favors the big powers primarily - so hardly a 'consensus' worth boasting about.

 

[blain2]

Without the UNSC, the UN will be a body without a head IMO. It will never reach a consensus on anything.

It will reach consensus as it does now (I.E. through wheeling and dealing). The veto power has no part to play in reaching consensus. On the contrary, it actually destroys the consensus by singular votes. You could have 60 nations wanting something and then one Veto and its all over. This is the problem with this retarded and biased system. The failure of UN ever since its inception is due to this flawed system of granting veto powers.

 

[Neo]

No marshal I think the veto must be abolished, otherwise nothing will change except members.

UN needs to reform and kill the veto at all including the P5. Hence there's no need to expand UNSC, let the seats float and devide them between the continents equally.

A country being involved in war or border dispute should automatically be excluded from UNSC till the matter is resolved.

 

[Neo]

The UN is not a democracy.

Well it should be, how else can we speak of United Nations if the power of few (P5) rises above their interests?

 

[nitesh]

Well my view about UN security council is that it should have been something like google has introduced for it's shareholders. There promoters keeps shares which carry 10 voting power per share normal shareholders keep shares which carry one voting power per share. So now if there is a disagreement between members and shareholders then the voting is done. And obviously the promoters carry more weight age. But it also gives other some chance to have a say in the matter. But veto power just kills the whole concept of having others have a say it becomes like dictatorship.

But I don't think that P5 will be ready to give away that power. So if india is joining the extended security council then it also should have equal rights.

 

[Marshal]

.

But I don't think that P5 will be ready to give away that power. So if india is joining the extended security council then it also should have equal rights.

well accourding to the news article I posted it says the UN has started full scale talks on expanding the UNSC that only means P5 is not yet ready to give up their power .....they are not talking about the full scale reforms of UNSC... from the moral point of view the UNSC must be democratised. but I dont think that it is going to happen anytime soon therefore as far as India is concerned she should not accept the membership of UNSC without veto.

 

[nitesh]

well accourding to the news article I posted it says the UN has started full scale talks on expanding the UNSC that only means P5 is not yet ready to give up their power .....they are not talking about the full scale reforms of UNSC... from the moral point of view the UNSC must be democratised. but I dont think that it is going to happen anytime soon therefore as far as India is concerned she should not accept the membership of UNSC without veto.

marshal, I got your point. I am just putting my words that if change is happening it has to remove the veto power. But as you said correctly nobody seems to be ready to give up that power. So hence if the new expanded list includes India and India does not have veto power then better walk off.

 

[Flintlock]

France backs expansion of UNSC, India's inclusion in G-8


United Nations, Sep 24 (PTI) France has made a strong case for expansion of the UN Security Council and Group of eight industrialised nations, saying "we cannot wait any longer" to bring in countries like India and China into G-8.
"The 21st century world cannot be governed with the institutions of the 20th century," French President Nicolas Sarkozy told the United Nations General Assembly.

"Let today's major powers and the powers of tomorrow unite to shoulder together the responsibilities their influence give them in world affairs," Sarkozy, who is the current president of the EU, said yesterday.

He favoured expansion of the powerful 15-member Council and G-8, saying that it is not just "a matter fairness" but a necessary condition for "being able to act effectively".

"We cannot wait any longer to enlarge the Security Council. We cannot wait any longer to turn the G8 into the G13 or G14 and to bring in China, India, South Africa, Mexico and Brazil," said Sarkozy, who will host Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on September 30.

India is among the countries which are strong favourites for becoming a permanent member in an expanded Council. Currently, the permanent members are the United States, Britain, France, Russia and China.

Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva said "only legitimate and effective instruments can assure collective security." "The United Nations has spent 15 years discussing the reform of the Security Council. Today's structure has been frozen for six decades and does not relate to the challenges of today's world," he said. PTI

http://www.ptinews.com/pti/ptisite.nsf/$All/74F4FCEFE5898F6B652574CE002DD19D?OpenDocument

 

[bernard]

France backs expansion of UNSC, India's inclusion in G-8


United Nations, Sep 24 (PTI) France has made a strong case for expansion of the UN Security Council and Group of eight industrialised nations, saying "we cannot wait any longer" to bring in countries like India and China into G-8.
"The 21st century world cannot be governed with the institutions of the 20th century," French President Nicolas Sarkozy told the United Nations General Assembly.

"Let today's major powers and the powers of tomorrow unite to shoulder together the responsibilities their influence give them in world affairs," Sarkozy, who is the current president of the EU, said yesterday.

He favoured expansion of the powerful 15-member Council and G-8, saying that it is not just "a matter fairness" but a necessary condition for "being able to act effectively".

"We cannot wait any longer to enlarge the Security Council. We cannot wait any longer to turn the G8 into the G13 or G14 and to bring in China, India, South Africa, Mexico and Brazil," said Sarkozy, who will host Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on September 30.

India is among the countries which are strong favourites for becoming a permanent member in an expanded Council. Currently, the permanent members are the United States, Britain, France, Russia and China.

Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva said "only legitimate and effective instruments can assure collective security." "The United Nations has spent 15 years discussing the reform of the Security Council. Today's structure has been frozen for six decades and does not relate to the challenges of today's world," he said. PTI

http://www.ptinews.com/pti/ptisite.nsf//74F4FCEFE5898F6B652574CE002DD19D?OpenDocument

just a welcome lollypop to Manmohan Singh,getting unsc seat is different than nuke deal,US wont support there and had never said it openly either

 

[Flintlock]

^What's with your flags?

 

[Goodperson]

just a welcome lollypop to Manmohan Singh,getting unsc seat is different than nuke deal,US wont support there and had never said it openly either

India's quest for UNSC seat started much before Nuclear deal, But UNSC seat is much difficult.

 

[Neo]

^What's with your flags?

Either ashamed of tri-color or a wanna be Pakistani.
You decide.

 

[Flintlock]

Either ashamed of tri-color or a wanna be Pakistani.
You decide.

More like confused fellow.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Threads merged