I would argue the UNSC, recognizing states based on their power and regional location, should be as follows;
USA
Brazil
UK
Russia
China
Japan
India
France does not belong on the list when you have both Russia and the UK from Europe. And Brazil's current leader is a nutter.
Of course I would prefer scrapping the UN and replacing it with a league of democracies if anything.
By such standard, Germany has more right then Britian.
Yeah, I could see a UNSC of:
1. US for North, Central American and the Caribean and one rotating seat.
2. China for Asia and one rotating seat.
3. UK for Europe and one rotating seat.
4. India for South Central Asia and one rotating seat. [I guess their region might stretch from India to the Med including Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq Israel etc. ]
5. Brazil for South America and one rotating seat.
6. Australia for Oceana and one rotating seat.
7. Nigeria for Africa and one rotating seat.
8. Russia/Japan on a rotating basis for the 15th seat.
And there could be a rule that no country can be a rotating member of the security council IF they do not have an elected government in an election with competition within the last 8 or 6 or 5 years. Also there could be a rule that any permanent member would have their voting suspended if they do not have an elected government within the last 8 or 6 or 5 years.
But be very careful with these rules. They would be used by the left, to argue that the Electoral College must go and that the US currently does not have an elected government. We know this is bunk, but the left in the US will use anything for political advantage.
You talk about a place that needs all the help it can get!