Adding seats to the UN security council

[Krusher]

I see Koffi wants to add a 4th seat (germany) to the permanant security council.  Considering all  but one would be members of the Europe Union,  it seems removing 1 would be a better idea.

[TexMurphy]

Doesnt really matter if all but one are from the EU does it.... as all have veto right..

[OIO]

the EU is an economic union, not a govermental or military one. the EU does not exist as a government and thus cant have a seat in any council.

[Sikboy]

Originally posted by Krusher
I see Koffi wants to add a 4th seat (germany) to the permanant security council.  Considering all  but one would be members of the Europe Union,  it seems removing 1 would be a better idea.

What? Aren't there currently 5 Permanent Members of the Security Council? Adding another would make it 6.

UK
US
France
Russia
PRC

-Sik

[Krusher]

Originally posted by Sikboy
What? Aren't there currently 5 Permanent Members of the Security Council? Adding another would make it 6.

UK
US
France
Russia
PRC

-Sik

UK, France and Russia are in his European pool.  He wants to add Germany.

He wants to expand the council to 24 seats 6 per geographical region. Europe, Americas, Aisia/pacific, and Africa.  Some will be permanant some rotating.

[Sikboy]

Originally posted by Krusher
UK, France and Russia are in his European pool.  He wants to add Germany.

He wants to expand the council to 24 seats 6 per geographical region. Europe, Americas, Aisia/pacific, and Africa.  Some will be permanant some rotating.

Sorry Krusher, this isn't making any sense to me. Right now, we have 5 permanent members, and 10 rotating seats. Adding Germany as a permanent member would be a 6th seat, not a 4th.

Is there an Article you're working from? This really does interest me.

-Sik

[VWE]

Who cares? The U.N. is irrelevant... send the U.N. to brussels, and NATO to New York.

[Krusher]

Originally posted by Sikboy
Sorry Krusher, this isn't making any sense to me. Right now, we have 5 permanent members, and 10 rotating seats. Adding Germany as a permanent member would be a 6th seat, not a 4th.

Is there an Article you're working from? This really does interest me.

-Sik

Ok I see what the problem is, my original post was phrased wrong.  What he has proposed is adding new members to the current system.

front page on the BBC.com  download the pdf

[Sikboy]

Originally posted by Krusher
Ok I see what the problem is, my original post was phrased wrong.  What he has proposed is adding new members to the current system.

front page on the BBC.com  download the pdf

Here it is:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/21_03_05_unreport.pdf

Is that what you are talking about?

Thanks. Links are our friends.

-Sik

[Momus--]

Originally posted by VWE
Who cares? The U.N. is irrelevant... send the U.N. to brussels, and NATO to New York.

70% of Americans surveyed by the BBC supported the Secretary General's proposals.

Linky

[Sikboy]

Eurika! I've got it!

Ok, page 43 of the document has the two proposed models. The first one, adds a 4th European seat... Ok, that's what was confusing me. It would actually add 6 total new seats to the Security council.

Wow, I'm all for SC change, but 11 permanent members, each with a Veto? heh, if we thought the UN was a total waste of effort now, after this reform nothing will ever get done.

Thanks Krusher, this is a very interesting topic. I think that they included model "A" only to make  Model "B" look better. There's no way that all 5 permanent Members will accept A, but I bet they will accept B.

-Sik

[genozaur]

Originally posted by Krusher
I see Koffi wants to add a 4th seat (germany) to the permanant security council.  Considering all  but one would be members of the Europe Union,  it seems removing 1 would be a better idea.

Germany ? Why not Austria ?
But in any case I have to refresh my German.
Zieg heil to every body, uncluding the U.N.
 

[genozaur]

Originally posted by Momus--
70% of Americans surveyed by the BBC supported the Secretary General's proposals.

Linky

And how many of those surveyed Americans work in the U.N. building ?


P.S. Big BS

[Krusher]

Originally posted by Sikboy
Eurika! I've got it!

Ok, page 43 of the document has the two proposed models. The first one, adds a 4th European seat... Ok, that's what was confusing me. It would actually add 6 total new seats to the Security council.

Wow, I'm all for SC change, but 11 permanent members, each with a Veto? heh, if we thought the UN was a total waste of effort now, after this reform nothing will ever get done.

Thanks Krusher, this is a very interesting topic. I think that they included model "A" only to make  Model "B" look better. There's no way that all 5 permanent Members will accept A, but I bet they will accept B.

-Sik

agreed, Plan B is probably it.

Sorry for the confusion.  I was adding a post while I was on the phone listening to elevator music.

[OIO]

The UN fails because there IS a power to veto. Plain and simple.


Hypothetical situation: Imagine the Kyoto treaty was a UN council thing. A treaty they are trying to impose on the world for the benefit of the whole world.

Instead of not signing the treaty, the US simply says they will veto the thing. The other countries really want this to go through so they start the bribing process (thats why vetos exist..so others can bribe you to change your mind).... if the US does not veto the treaty they will give trade concessions,  etc etc etc etc.

Then china sees what a nice bribe the US is getting and says they will veto too. Bribes sent their way as well.

Then whatever nation holds the rotating council seat (lets just say the rotating council seat has veto power too)... say, Costa Rica, says they will veto the treaty... they wont have bribes sent their way but rather threats. If you veto it we will increase tariffs on your products, cut foreign aid, etc etc etc.

The pecking order of the powerful.

And what is funny is that if Annan somehow makes a charter where there is NO veto powers, then the UN would collapse since the member nations that pay for the UN's expenses will just cut funding and leave.