Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Proposal would expand Security Council
AP on Yahoo ^ | 3/21/08 | Edith M. Lederer - ap

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.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: expand; proposal; securitycouncil
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-52 next last

1 posted on 03/21/2008 11:27:09 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Answer: “No”


2 posted on 03/21/2008 11:30:13 PM PDT by Red6 (Come and take it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

I vote for removing the veto from France, since Napoleon is long dead.


3 posted on 03/21/2008 11:31:21 PM PDT by spyone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Oh this would be fantastic. You know things always get agreed upon much quicker with a larger group.


4 posted on 03/21/2008 11:32:08 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man (I'd like to tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

NO, and remove Russia who never deserved it in the first place.


5 posted on 03/21/2008 11:33:05 PM PDT by Proud_USA_Republican (We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good. - Hillary Clinton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Secret Agent Man

especially the UN which is an organization of diplomats who purpose in life is bashing the US and Isreal and banging NYC escorts.


6 posted on 03/21/2008 11:34:22 PM PDT by Proud_USA_Republican (We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good. - Hillary Clinton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

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.


7 posted on 03/21/2008 11:34:56 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man (I'd like to tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Proud_USA_Republican

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.


8 posted on 03/21/2008 11:35:54 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man (I'd like to tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

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.


9 posted on 03/21/2008 11:38:23 PM PDT by denydenydeny (Expel the priest and you don't inaugurate the age of reason, you get the witch doctor--Paul Johnson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

By all means give a permanent seat to Iran and Venezuela, maybe even a 10 year gig for Raul. /UltraMegaGigaGoogleplexDrippingSarc


10 posted on 03/21/2008 11:38:44 PM PDT by NonValueAdded (Who Would Montgomery Brewster Choose?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: spyone
"I vote for removing the veto from France, since Napoleon is long dead."

After the UK ratifies the Lesbian Treaty, it is slated to give up its Security Council veto seat to EUrotopia.

yitbos

11 posted on 03/21/2008 11:43:24 PM PDT by bruinbirdman ("Those who control language control minds." - Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Secret Agent Man

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.


12 posted on 03/21/2008 11:50:25 PM PDT by pepsionice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

NWO


13 posted on 03/21/2008 11:53:49 PM PDT by John Robie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

US out of the UN, UN out of the US.


14 posted on 03/22/2008 12:01:41 AM PDT by wastedyears (More Maiden coming up in a few months!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: spyone

I vote for the UN to expel the US from all membership rights and obligations, and remove their operations from all US territory.


15 posted on 03/22/2008 12:20:41 AM PDT by tdscpa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: tdscpa

Ha! I wish I thought of that. You’re a diabolical genius! I’m nominating you for the security council.


16 posted on 03/22/2008 12:25:27 AM PDT by spyone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

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.


17 posted on 03/22/2008 12:30:37 AM PDT by KingJaja
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Secret Agent Man

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.


18 posted on 03/22/2008 12:33:23 AM PDT by singfreedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: spyone

Thanks, but since my country should be banned from the UN, If nominated, I will not run, if elected, I will not serve.


19 posted on 03/22/2008 12:43:37 AM PDT by tdscpa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
The so-called Group of Four — Germany, Japan, Brazil and India — aspire to permanent seats without veto rights on a 25-member council.

Why should Germany, Japan, and India - all more important nations in today's world than the UK and France - be required to have no veto rights?

Not that it matters very much - the UNSC veto has been useful only inasmuch as it has helped to ensure that the UN never actually does anything, which is for the best.
20 posted on 03/22/2008 12:47:13 AM PDT by AnotherUnixGeek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-52 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson