July 11, 2005
HEY, REMEMBER DISCO? BREAKDANCING? THE UN?
Competing Plans Threaten UN Reform (Deutsche Welle, July 11th, 2005)
Discussions are starting in earnest this week on expanding the United Nations Security Council. While almost everyone agrees that the body should be enlarged, there is much less agreement on how that should happen or what a new, improved council should look like.Germany’s United Nations envoy Gunter Pleuger said last Wednesday that the so-called Group of Four (G-4) countries -- Germany, Brazil, India and Japan -- planned to call for a debate of their plan in the General Assembly this week. But a rival plan agreed on by African leaders at an African Union summit in Libya last week is likely to frustrate the G-4 bid.
The G-4 resolution, already delayed twice, would enlarge the council to 25 members. The proposal wants to add ten new seats. There would be six new permanent ones – two for Asia, two for Africa and one each for Western Europe and Latin America. [...]
However, the hopes of the G-4 have been dented by the African Union, which has put forward a rival plan which aims to give Africa a greater say in the UN Security Council. African leaders will now ask the United Nations for Africa to be allocated two permanent seats with full veto powers and the number of new non-permanent members to be increased by six.
The African Union was unable to decide on the countries it wants to have permanent seats, but South Africa, Nigeria and Egypt are said to be leading candidates.[...]
Throwing another spanner in the works for the G-4 is the plan put forward by Italy, Spain Mexico and Pakistan. They want to expand the council, but only with non-permanent seats.
According to Pakistan's UN Ambassador Munir Akram, the Security Council is already flawed by having five permanent seats and his allies don't want to compound the problem by adding new permanent members. He says such a plan discriminates against those countries which do not have a permanent representation on the body.
It sounds more like they are jockeying for position in a World Cup soccer tournament
Posted by Peter Burnet at July 11, 2005 7:38 PMNigeria - where women go naked in order to shame the men. If only the current permanent members were so easily, uh, influenced.
Egypt, the Mubarak dynasty - fully deserving of permanent membership.
South Africa, where the president is unable to even ask his good friend Robert Mugabe to stop starving his own.
Posted by: jim hamlen at July 11, 2005 8:44 PMMore like a pack of hyenas squabbling over the gamiest parts of a half rotten carcass.
But the idea that there are not just one, but two countries in Africa that are deserving of a status equal to the US (let alone Russia or France) only exists in some fantasy universe where space aliens built the pyramids and Elvis is still dead.
Posted by: Raoul Ortega at July 11, 2005 8:48 PMOffer membership to Hamas, Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, Fatah, Ansar al-Islam, the Muslim Brotherhood, the Taliban, and the other 'groups'. They have had more impact on the world in the past 10 years than any of the nations mentioned in the article.
Posted by: ratbert at July 11, 2005 8:50 PMThe reform efforts will probably lead to the EU being even more bloated and useless.
Start a League of Democracies in which only democtratic countries can join. The rest can go play with what is left of the UN.
Posted by: AWW at July 11, 2005 11:22 PMWhy in the world should Western Europe have 3 seats on the SC?
Posted by: Sandy P at July 11, 2005 11:28 PMRaoul:
Quite right. It's very disturbing to see all this "me first" squabbling that is quite out of keeping with the selfless imperative that underlies the transational dream. That's why we here in Canada, mindful of the need for efficiency and order, put forth our modest proposal that the Security Council be expanded by just one North American country. Had to withdraw it, though, when Greenland seconded us just a little too enthusiastically.
Posted by: Peter B at July 12, 2005 5:45 AMWhy indeed.
Posted by: erp at July 14, 2005 9:29 PM