UN Security Council Permanent Members: What a BS idea

[DanS]

I don't think a comparison of Japan and China is helpful. By objective standards, I would argue for about half of the security council seats going to Asia.

You could make the argument that Russia is also Asia, and therefore the new seat should be limited to either India or Japan (4 out of 6 in Asia would be a lot). That has some merit.

[Dinner]

Virginie Ledoyen.

An excellent reason why we should still consider France a world power.

[DAVOUT]

Originally posted by DanS
I have three basic criteria, in order of importance:

1) Economy;
2) Geography; and
3) Population.

I would be willing to consider other criteria, of course. But these 3 criteria are the primary determinants of power.

One interesting suggestion was made to disconnect the permanent status from the veto, in order to have all continents represented with permanent members in the council (Indian sub-continent, South America and Africa). And the veto would be limited to instances where the vital interests of the nation are threatened.

[Sirotnikov]

I have an idea that may be worth an extra thread.

assuming you agree with the idea of permanent security council members, please post your suggestions for the ideal countries to fill them.


United States
China
Russia (not sure. they weakened alot)
United Kingdom
Germany (perhaps sharing a seat with France and Italy and Spain)
India
Japan

Australia?
South Africa?

[Q Classic]

the only problem with adding more nations with full veto powers?

you'll probably end up with a situation akin to the polish congress.

you know, the one who couldn't agree on how to defend their country against the russian/prussian/austrohungarian annexation. filled with princes, all of whom had veto power.

and i bet they were all more mature than these countries.

[Sirotnikov]

Q Cubed- most countries don't use veto power. It's like nuclear weapons - primarily used for intimidation

[Q Classic]

oh, i know most don't use it. but the mere threat of its use by more nations, i'd wager, would paralyze an already ossified security council.

[Jon Miller]

I think the Security Council permanent members (With Vetoes) should go to those with the military power to hold them

this is obviously the US, Russia, and China

I think UK is there as well

France is not clearly over others I Think

Jon Miller

[Chemical Ollie]

I think the veto cripples the UN and make it toothless. The veto has become obsolete.

I also think that nations that don't pay their dues to UN should lose their voting right.

[Jon Miller]

if the US left the UN, would the UN have any meaning?

Jon Miller

[Chemical Ollie]

The US has already left UN, whenever it fits their purposes.

[DanS]

By that measure, did the US ever join the UN in the first place?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Q Cubed
the only problem with adding more nations with full veto powers?

you'll probably end up with a situation akin to the polish congress.

you know, the one who couldn't agree on how to defend their country against the russian/prussian/austrohungarian annexation. filled with princes, all of whom had veto power.

and i bet they were all more mature than these countries.

a serious concern - you cant realistically toss existing members of the P5 off, and you need to add members to more realistically reflect 2003 balance of power. at least 3 or 4 members. But too many members with veto leads to paralysis.

Solution - require 2 negative votes by perm members to block a resolution. US wouldnt agree to this, so give them as a "hyperpower" super veto, so that US veto by itself blocks a resolution. Add Germany, Japan, and India making 8 permanent members.

US should go along,as of course the new perm members. For France and UK its preferable to being forced into an EU seat. Only real objections from Russia and China. Oh, and the islamic world, which still doesnt get a permanent member - but who would be theres - Indonesia is best bet, but still a long way from the power level of the others.

[chequita guevara]

US
EU
Russia
China
India
Japan
Arab League?

[Ramo]

Abolish it.