Reformed Security Council

Gobalopper · April 15, 2003

He wants Japan, a South American country and India to be represented on the Security Council. France was there only because it was a global power at the end of World War II, he said.

Good or bad idea?

Digital Guerrilla · April 15, 2003

Bad idea because even if France was against the regime change in Iraq that is no reason to demote their position. If other evidence says other wise then France should be demoted from the security council. What are the articles in the UN secruity council for demotion I do not think disagreement is part of the articles for a country being demoted from the security council.

Egeides · April 15, 2003

If it would be done, it would mean that UN is not "the place where democratic countries can be represented" but "the place where democratic countries of a certain opinion can be represented".

Dangerous...

sneezer3 · April 15, 2003

I think we should charge them Cash to stay in....

Digital Guerrilla · April 15, 2003

Charging a fee defeats the whole purpose of a country being on the security council anybody could be a member of the UN security council too much is at risk.

SurlyPIG · April 15, 2003

If it would be done, it would mean that UN is not "the place where democratic countries can be represented" but "the place where democratic countries of a certain opinion can be represented".

How is that? Russia would still be there. SA needs some representation, most likely from one of the Spanish-speaking nations. France shouldn't be on there...You've got much more militarily powerful UK right across the channel. Russia should remain, as should china and the US because the most important factor in determining council position should still be military commitment.

While they're at it, be rid of the veto.

Egeides · April 15, 2003

Russia would be there? This does not mean that France shouldn't... And can you justify to permit China's entry and not France?!

Could you say me which country of SA are in presently? I have no idea if some drug-driven governments are in... About military commitment, you mean "the more you act, the more place you should have"?!

Gobalopper · April 15, 2003

This is the security council we are talking about not the general council. Currently the non-premanent members are:

Angola, Chile, Germany, Pakistan and Spain (Jan 2003-Dec 2004)

Bulgaria, Cameroon, Guinea, Mexico, and Syria (Jan 2002-Dec 2003)

Howard is talking about reforming the security council. Adding countries that are more powerful today then when the UN was first created and perhaps creating a new status of permanent members that don't have veto rights. Countries change over time and the permanent members of the security council should not remain if they are no longer among the most powerful countries in the world.

Mahdi · April 15, 2003

To those of you commenting about if/how a nation could be removed from the security council, it has been done before. Originally, Taiwan was on the security council, but was replaced with China.

I, however, don't agree with this change.

emprworm · April 15, 2003

Howard seeks to demote France in UN
He wants Japan, a South American country and India to be represented on the Security Council. France was there only because it was a global power at the end of World War II, he said.
Good or bad idea?

brilliant. get those french automotans OUT OF THERE

Egeides · April 15, 2003

I don't believe the acceptance on the council should rely simply on power, but instead on democracy. I don't think China applies really well there, except if they would accept to make some reforms to enter. Japan and SA do not have anything to do outside of it though... Espescially Japan, that proved since a long time its correctness and solid social development.

But about France, I still believe this is not about a strategic alliance where we promote our national interests (like NATO). It's not about having certain given ideas, it's about democracy. France is democratic I believe.

SurlyPIG · April 15, 2003

I can see what you mean about China, and I still maintain that there should be NO dictatorial countries allowed in the UN, whether in the general assembly or the security council. There are dozens of other countries more democratic than France, do you think they deserve to be on the securty council instead?

nampigai · April 15, 2003

Japan isn't more powerfull than france when it comes to military. Besides they were on the loosing side after the 2nd ww. If Japan is considered powerfull then so is Germany, they have been an economic superpower in Europe for some time now. But I can see were this is leading though, not that I favor Chiraque, after all he did some very stupid things. Still this seems more like an attempt to get yes sayers in the SC, atleast this is what it looks like in my eyes.

The_Sadukar · April 15, 2003

Howard seeks to demote France in UN
He wants Japan, a South American country and India to be represented on the Security Council. France was there only because it was a global power at the end of World War II, he said.
Good or bad idea?
brilliant. get those french automotans OUT OF THERE

why, so they can't disagree with you anymore?

Gobalopper · April 15, 2003

Well I think the security council should be a combination of military and economic power.

For example look at GDP:

1. United States (10,065,265)

2. Japan (4,141,431)

3. Germany (1,846,069)

4. United Kingdom (1,424,094)

5. France (1,309,807)

6. China (1,159,031)

7. Italy (1,088,754)

8. Canada (694,475)

9. Mexico (617,820)

10. Spain (581,823)

11. Brazil (502,509)

12. India (477,342)

13. Korea, Rep. (422,167)

14. Netherlands (380,137)

15. Australia (368,726)

Now lets look at population:

1. China (1,281)

2. India (1,050)

3. United States (287)

4. Indonesia (217)

5. Brazil (174)

6. Russia (144)

7. Pakistan (144)

8. Bangladesh (134)

9. Nigeria (130)

10. Japan (127)

11. Mexico (102)

12. Germany (82)

13. Philippines (80)

14. Vietnam (80)

15. Egypt (71)

Military power by spending:

1. United States (276,700,000,000)

2. Japan (43,000,000,000)

3. France (39,831,000,000)

4. United Kingdom (36,884,000,000)

5. Germany (32,800,000,000)

6. Italy (20,700,000,000)

7. Saudi Arabia (18,300,000,000)

8. Brazil (13,408,000,000)

9. India (13,020,000,000)

10. China (12,608,000,000)

11. Korea, South (12,000,000,000)

12. Israel (8,700,000,000)

13. Taiwan (8,042,000,000)

14. Canada (7,500,000,000)

15. Australia (6,900,000,000)

And lastly military power by men available:

1. China (366,306,000)

2. India (280,205,000)

3. United States (70,819,400)

4. Indonesia (64,046,000)

5. Brazil (48,298,500)

6. Russia (38,866,100)

7. Bangladesh (36,005,600)

8. Pakistan (35,770,900)

9. Nigeria (29,940,900)

10. Japan (29,926,600)

11. Mexico (26,703,300)

12. Vietnam (21,704,600)

13. Philippines (21,220,200)

14. Germany (20,851,000)

15. Egypt (18,563,000)

So as you can see there are plenty of viable candidates.

Anathema · April 15, 2003

Not exactly Mahdi, China has always been in the SC but when Mao Zedong scared off the last of the Guo Mindang party (anybody know how to spell that?) and their leader Tjang Kai Tsjek to Taiwan, the US forced the whole world to recognise the government on Taiwan as representative for all of China.

France was not a global power at the end of WWII, all they did was help a bit with the D-day landing by softening the Germans up a bit. But if it's about power, France belongs in the SC before Japan does these days.

For those of you who think that undemocratic nations should be expelled from the UN, why do you think they were included in the first place? The primary goal of the UN was to safeguard world stability and for that you would need the cooperation of all major powers, US and Soviet Union included, and China, UK and France as well, even though they were not major powers directly after WWII.

lowzeewee · April 15, 2003

Egypt,China and Indonesia look quite equal but will USA be willing to allow UN to take them :(

Caid Ivik · April 15, 2003

Howard seeks to demote France in UN
He wants Japan, a South American country and India to be represented on the Security Council. France was there only because it was a global power at the end of World War II, he said.
Good or bad idea?

If the UN should be a watchdog of democracy, then I would leave France as they are and get there also only democratical countries of Europe, America and east Asia. But if UN has to be a neutral discussion club trying to make interstate relations decent, then there should be France as well, because they are a nuclear power, and with them also Israel, India, Pakistan and North Korea, as they have nuclear weapons too. If some other country will have a larger (even conventional) army, then it should be in Council too.

Egeides · April 15, 2003

ACE: Countries more democratic than France instead of France? Nope. But they should come in too. France is democratic, I have no reason to want it exclude. And I say same for UK and Spain, even if they aren't following my ideas!!

Birdfolly · April 15, 2003

The UN has no real power nowadays. Many resolutions have been taken up against the US and Isreal, mostly dealing with human rights violations and WMD's only top be vetoed by the US.

In contrast, when the US has a resolution they want passed, they first attempt to buy the votes(or stand-asides) then when that doesn't work(France and Russia threaten to veto), they just go ahead and do what they want anyway, as they did in Iraq.

They UN will be nothing but a janitor until it can become democratic enough to say "no" to the US.

Decide who will be on the security council based on highest military budget? That's got to be one of the worst ideas I've ever heard.

quoudam72 · April 15, 2003

France's membership to the UN Security council could be in jeapordy just on the fact that US tactical intelligence are finding French and German arms in some of Saddam's former military compounds. The items that are being found Roland-2 missiles, Roland-3 rocket launchers, military trucks with "Made in France" label, RPG night sights and many other items that have been manufacutered in France. The French deny wrongdoing saying that Saddam most likely purchased the goods from a black market dealer. These findings are in violation of the 1990 embargo the UN imposed on Saddam's former regime. It is more than likey that Capital Hill's political conversatives will have a great many things to say about Chirac's government.

emprworm · April 15, 2003

France's membership to the UN Security council could be in jeapordy just on the fact that US tactical intelligence are finding French and German arms in some of Saddam's former military compounds. The items that are being found Roland-2 missiles, Roland-3 rocket launchers, military trucks with "Made in France" label, RPG night sights and many other items that have been manufacutered in France. The French deny wrongdoing saying that Saddam most likely purchased the goods from a black market dealer. These findings are in violation of the 1990 embargo the UN imposed on Saddam's former regime. It is more than likey that Capital Hill's political conversatives will have a great many things to say about Chirac's government.

yikes! Thats the first I heard about this.

"made in France" weapons? Ha! No wonder they laid down their arms and surrendered!

LOL

but if this is true, France should be expunged from the UN, and its nuclear arsenal forcibly dismantled.

Caid Ivik · April 15, 2003

France sent their Mirage F-1s to Iraq too. But it's a bussiness. We have a free trade, altough some "rough nations" mine from it. Once the world must decide for what the UN should exist.

quoudam72 · April 15, 2003

No Emprwrm it is not a matter of it being true (French weapons being found) it is true.

The Roland short range air defence missile system is produced by Euromissile, based in Fontenay-aux-Roses, France. Euromissile is a consortium originally set up by Aerospatiale-Matra of France and DaimlerChrysler Aerospace of Germany, now a subsidiary of the EADS company. The missile system activities of Aerospatiale Matra have been merged with Matra BAE Dynamics and Alenia Marconi Systems to form MBDA. Roland entered service with the French Army in 1977, and is in service with ten countries, including France and Germany.

emprworm · April 15, 2003

No Emprwrm it is not a matter of it being true (French weapons being found) it is true.
The Roland short range air defence missile system is produced by Euromissile, based in Fontenay-aux-Roses, France. Euromissile is a consortium originally set up by Aerospatiale-Matra of France and DaimlerChrysler Aerospace of Germany, now a subsidiary of the EADS company. The missile system activities of Aerospatiale Matra have been merged with Matra BAE Dynamics and Alenia Marconi Systems to form MBDA. Roland entered service with the French Army in 1977, and is in service with ten countries, including France and Germany.

well I'll be!! Now the despicable French position on the war is beginning to make sense. Man this government is corrupt!

Q, you do know, right, that it was FRANCE that built Hussein a NUCLEAR REACTOR that Israel later blew up? France seems to have some very shady dealings with billionarre Hussein. What a SICK government.

Sign In

Reformed Security Council

Recommended Posts

Gobalopper

Digital Guerrilla

Egeides

sneezer3

Digital Guerrilla

SurlyPIG

Egeides

Gobalopper

Mahdi

emprworm

Egeides

SurlyPIG

nampigai

The_Sadukar

Gobalopper

Anathema

lowzeewee

Caid Ivik

Egeides

Birdfolly

quoudam72

emprworm

Caid Ivik

quoudam72

emprworm

Join the conversation

Activity

Important Information