The New York Times reports that a new plan has the UN Security Council expanding to include more "No" votes against US policy. The leading proposal seems to be adding 6 more permanent* members to the Council, without a veto. These new members would include Egypt, Germany and maybe Nigeria. I guess Sudan and Iran didn't make the cut this time. And why not the Saudis if you're going to include Egypt. Or Israel. Heck, if Germany can join the other two EU members, I want California to have a seat. Sixth biggest economy, etc.
Seriously, though, there needs to be reform, and adding some members is probably a good idea. India, Japan, Brazil and South Africa make sense, as does Australia (who else contributes troops more often?). But no more dictatorships, please -- that should also disqualify a state from rotating membership.
One big change I'd make is that it would take two "No" votes from among the (expanded) permanent members to effect a Veto. And if the US can't drum up a second vote for something that matters, tough. Narrow-interest vetoes need to become a thing of the past.
Oh, and can we get rid of the General Assembly? Not to mention Kofi Annan? Hey! How about we appoint Bill Clinton, and have him form "the most ethical [UN] administration in history."
-----------
* see China, Republic of
Not sure I understand your footnote. Did Taiwan originally occupy the "permanent" seat now held by Red China?
Posted by: Xrlq at December 1, 2004 06:38 PMThe UN seat representing all of China was held by the Nationalists for over two decades before being lost in Oct. 1971, when the People's Republic of China was admitted and Taiwan was forced to abdicate its seat to Beijing.
Posted by: Kevin Murphy at December 1, 2004 08:40 PM