What Countries Should Have a Permanent UNSC Seat?

Discussion in 'General Global Topics' started by onedomino, Sep 20, 2004.

  1. onedomino
    Offline

    onedomino SCE to AUX

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,677
    Thanks Received:
    474
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Ratings:
    +476
    A rationalization of what countries should have a permanent seat on the UNSC will not necessarily make the organization functional. However, the current list of countries with permanent UNSC seats is outdated and does not reflect international demographics. The following is my opinion of what countries should have a permanent UNSC seat. What's your take?

    China
    Russia
    India - by 2020 will be the world's most populous country.
    Japan – by a great margin, the world's number two economy.
    United States
    European Union - of course the EU is not a "country," but Europe should have a permanent seat on the UNSC. No individual European country has the combination of population, economic strength, and military capacity, that should justify a permanent UNSC seat.

    http://www.boston.com/dailynews/264/world/As_Japan_spreads_its_wings_int:.shtml

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Measures_of_national_income

    http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/2000/04/21/stories/0121000a.htm
     
  2. CSM
    Offline

    CSM Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2004
    Messages:
    6,907
    Thanks Received:
    708
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Northeast US
    Ratings:
    +708
    Interesting take on the EU. If we use that as a baseline, then the Islamic fundamentalists have just as big an impact (maybe more) and I sure dont want them on the UNSC.

    In my opinion, nothing but a total revamp of the entire UN is in order, not just the Security Council.
     
  3. 5stringJeff
    Offline

    5stringJeff Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    9,990
    Thanks Received:
    536
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Puyallup, WA
    Ratings:
    +540
    China, Russia, India, and the US for sure. Probably the UK for number 5. Make the rest rotational by continents: 2 for Africa, 2 for South America, 2 for Europe, 2 for North America, 1 for Asia, 1 for Australia.
     
  4. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    Just dismantle the damn thing. It's got to go. EU should have one seat, but not individual countries, just like US and 50 states. Not going to happen.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  5. NATO AIR
    Offline

    NATO AIR Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,275
    Thanks Received:
    282
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    USS Abraham Lincoln
    Ratings:
    +282
    The UN should be drastically reformed in three major ways:

    (a) the Security Council system as it is is abolished. A new, permenent security council is enacted with no veto powers for any parties. The 15 nations comprising it should be as follows (America, Britain, Germany, France, Russia, Brazil, India, China, South Africa, Nigeria, Japan, Australia, South Korea, Turkey/Pakistan/Egypt and Mexico).

    (b) the UN should cease peacekeeping activities as an organization and contract them out to regional organizations (African Union, Arab League, EU, NATO, OAS, ASEAN) which willl have the option of flying under the UN flag or not. This way, there is no shortchanging of the peacekeeping operations by donor countries or volunteer countries who contribute troops only to get money and acclaim)

    (c) Automatic triggers will be built into key emergencies like genocide, nuclear proliferation and oppressive invasion. This way, no nation like China or France will be able to discredit the system by making deals and stalling for time for oppressive regimes like Sudan, Iran, North Korea, Burma, etc etc.

    I don't know, there are lots of other ideas, but these are the ones that appear most possible (still improbable though sadly)
     
  6. CSM
    Offline

    CSM Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2004
    Messages:
    6,907
    Thanks Received:
    708
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Northeast US
    Ratings:
    +708
    I am not sure what the UN should look like these days. It seems to me that the more parties involved in any decision making process, the more beauraucratic things will get.
     
  7. NATO AIR
    Offline

    NATO AIR Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,275
    Thanks Received:
    282
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    USS Abraham Lincoln
    Ratings:
    +282
    there is considerable truth to that
     
  8. onedomino
    Offline

    onedomino SCE to AUX

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,677
    Thanks Received:
    474
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Ratings:
    +476
    Good ideas NATO; although, the UN might end up militarily attacking Israel without the US veto in place. Perhaps the OAU could vote for Africa. The OAS could vote for Central and South America. Due to its massive population, maybe Indonesia should be seated. Then Islam would not be excluded. It is outrageous that a few Communist Party hacks determine the Chinese use of its veto in the UNSC. Also, giving France as powerful a vote as China or the US does not seem reasonable; only one vote for the EU.

    China
    India
    Russia
    Japan
    Indonesia
    OAS
    OAU
    EU
    United States
     
  9. edwbrown
    Offline

    edwbrown Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2004
    Messages:
    11
    Thanks Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1
    I say dismantel the UN the only time they seem to get involved and want to help is when the US forces them to do something.
     
  10. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    Welcome, edwbrown!
     

Share This Page