Posted on 03/21/2008 11:27:09 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
UNITED NATIONS - An interim proposal to tackle the divisive issue of Security Council reform would expand the U.N.'s most powerful body from 15 to 22 members but leave it up to the 192 U.N. member states to decide which countries should fill them.
The proposal, obtained Friday by The Associated Press, also leaves it up to U.N. members to decide how long the new seats should be held — with suggestions of two years, five years and permanently offered as possible options. It leaves the contentious issue of veto power to future negotiations.
There is strong support for enlarging the Security Council to reflect the world today rather than the global power structure after World War II when the United Nations was created. But all previous attempts, starting in 1979, have failed because national and regional rivalries blocked agreement on the size and composition of an expanded council.
The deep divisions forced the General Assembly to shelve three rival resolutions to expand the council in 2005.
The so-called Group of Four — Germany, Japan, Brazil and India — aspire to permanent seats without veto rights on a 25-member council.
A group of middle-ranking countries, including Italy and Pakistan, who call themselves Uniting for Consensus, want a 25-member council with 10 new non-permanent seats.
The African Union, whose 53 members argue that their continent is the only one without a permanent seat on the council, wants to add 11 new seats — six permanent seats including two for Africa with veto power, and five non-permanent seats.
The new proposal says these groups maintain their positions, but the impossibility of achieving them now "has pointed to an apparent willingness to negotiate on the basis of achieving intermediate reform, through the identification of the highest common denominator at this stage."
More than 50 ambassadors representing all the major groups with a stake in reforming the council attended a meeting Tuesday hosted by Germany's U.N. Ambassador Thomas Matussek to discuss the new proposal.
He told reporters afterwards that all the groups were represented, many had ideas on how to improve the proposal, and "for the first time the Africans engaged in meaningful discussion."
The proposal was submitted to General Assembly President Srgjan Kerim on Thursday, Germany's U.N. Mission said. He is expected to study it and have members of his task force on council reform consult groups with differing views.
Kerim also received separate letters from Italy and the African Group.
"My ambition would be — and I don't know how realistic that is — that we by the end of this (General) Assembly (session) will have a text that can be voted on," Matussek said. The current session ends in September.
Of the seven new council seats in the proposal, two would be allocated to African countries, two to Asian countries, one to Latin America and the Caribbean, one to Western Europe and one to Eastern Europe.
The proposal also calls for a mandatory review of the reforms after a fixed period and sets out new working methods for the council, many to promote better communications and openness on its operations.
One proposal appeals to the five veto-wielding council members — the U.S., Russia, China, Britain and France — to ensure that a veto would not be used to continue the commission of war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity.
The proposal was drafted by the ambassadors from the Netherlands, Romania, Malaysia, Britain, Cyprus and Germany, with support from the Bahamas and strong input from Italy, Matussek said.
Answer: “No”
I vote for removing the veto from France, since Napoleon is long dead.
Oh this would be fantastic. You know things always get agreed upon much quicker with a larger group.
NO, and remove Russia who never deserved it in the first place.
especially the UN which is an organization of diplomats who purpose in life is bashing the US and Isreal and banging NYC escorts.
AS far as Africa is concerned, let’s see if you can feed yourself on your own for awhile without attacking your neighbors or brutalizing your own citizens for a whole year, and then any of those countries who can do these two things can have a shot at a seat.
Yeah, they gotta kick the UN out of NYC. Send em all back to the Beast building in Brussels. They think it’s such a cool building anyway.
By all means, lets create more permanent memberships with veto power so that the UN will never be able to reach any consensus on anything.
By all means give a permanent seat to Iran and Venezuela, maybe even a 10 year gig for Raul. /UltraMegaGigaGoogleplexDrippingSarc
After the UK ratifies the Lesbian Treaty, it is slated to give up its Security Council veto seat to EUrotopia.
yitbos
I think there ought to be 40 members on the security council...and both Panama and Guyana ought to have permanent seats...along with the King of Tonga. Of course...this would require a much larger chamber...so we gotta build a new place in New York for these folks....and I would prefer we use union labor. This might take a while...but I think in twelve years...we could build a real assembly building for these folks.
NWO
US out of the UN, UN out of the US.
I vote for the UN to expel the US from all membership rights and obligations, and remove their operations from all US territory.
Ha! I wish I thought of that. You’re a diabolical genius! I’m nominating you for the security council.
Let’s be very clear about this, the UN Security Council is in dire need of reform. Brazil, India, Japan and Germany are all US allies and responsible nations.
We should be careful not to belittle India’s desire for a seat on the UN Security Council. India is the World’s largest democracy, a natural ally and a potential counterweight to China. India’s economic growth is remarkable and with economic growth comes responsibility.
It doesn’t help our standing in India when Russia supports India on the Security Council and we don’t.
Let’s get out of the ‘Cold War’ mentality. The next great conflict is not going to be in Europe. This century is likely to be an Asian/American dominated affair. What clout does France and Britain have in Burma, North Korea, ‘The Stans’ and South East Asia?
We need to stop playing last century’s game this century.
Amen. Why should some of the most failed nations in the world have a seat on the Security Council—especially permanent ones? Makes no sense to me!!
The U.N. gets more ineffectual every day. This will only make it more so—faster.
Thanks, but since my country should be banned from the UN, If nominated, I will not run, if elected, I will not serve.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.