« BACK TO FORUM
 Author |
 Post
|
 |
|
Henry Ekwuruke
Joined: Nov 1, 2003
Posts: 201 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Chatterbox
User is
Offline
Country: Nigeria
Province/State: Abia
City: Umuahia
|
[Poll] What a Democractic Institute in the UN?
August 21, 2006 - 07:27 PM
|
|
Under the Charter, the functions and powers of the Security Council in the United Nation include as follows:
To maintain international peace and security in accordance with the principles and purposes of the United Nations;
To investigate any dispute or situation which mightlead to international friction;
To recommend methods of adjusting such disputes or the terms of settlement;
To formulate plans for the establishment of a system to regulate armaments;
To determine the existence of a threat to the peace or act of aggression and to recommend what action should be taken;
To call on Members to apply economic sanctions and other measures not involving the use of force to prevent or stop aggression;
To take military action against an aggressor;
To recommend the admission of new Members;
To exercise the trusteeship functions of the United Nations in "strategic areas";
To recommend to the GeneralAssembly the appointment of the Secretary-General and, together with the Assembly, to elect the Judges of the International Court of Justice.
These are the functions of the Security Council or SC as they are fondly called, these group are democratic groups in a world where democracy is cherished and encouraged, but what a democracy by a few as against the people greater in number? Can we talk about this?
Do we need reforms in the UN? and What do you think about the Security Council?
Highly - We need Change
(4 votes for 100%)
No - The system is Ok
(0 votes for 0%)
No Answer
(0 votes for 0%)
We can live without them
(0 votes for 0%)
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Hayk
Joined: Dec 20, 2005
Posts: 964 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Blabbermouth
User is
Offline
 Virtual Volunteer
Country: Egypt
Province/State: Al Qahirah
City: Al Qahirah
|
Re: [Poll] What a Democractic Institute in the UN?
August 22, 2006 - 12:59 PM
|
|
The SC is not in any way representing a democratic reflection of the world country division.
Since its inception some 60 years ago several members of the SC have been inbued by special priveleges and most notably the veto power - the final say which might overturn the majority vote.
Ever since, 60 years after, not only major geo-political but also soci-demographic and most importantly military abilities and aspirations of countries, including the original five founding members, have changed..
Countries such as Japan, Germany, and India became more powerful on all apsects of that word and naturally require a permanent seat on the SC board..
The problem is that the UN and the SC in partuclar are keenly aware of their major problems.. There are several models proposed to reform the SC, including Model A, Model B, G4 model, G20 model, and some derived from these. The essence of all these models is to make the SC more representative of current world affairs and make it ultimately mode "democratic", but thre is one big catch...
Any such reform will inherently diminish or deprive powers of P5 members which by definition seems impossible to accomplish due to the same veto powers' veto on any similar reform..
Thus, this unbalanced division of the SC will have to stay for some more time until some drastic changes are under way or the UN reorganizes or disappears alltogether..
This post was edited on: 2006-08-22 at 01:11 PM by: mnopq
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Laura Steiner
Joined: Jul 10, 2005
Posts: 66 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Talkative
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Female, 29
Country: Canada
Province/State: Ontario
City: Milton
|
Re: [Poll] What a Democractic Institute in the UN?
August 22, 2006 - 11:12 PM
|
|
Change in the UN is a definite must- the fact is the world has drastically changed since it was first founded in 1945. Communism has fallen, the EU has formed, and America has become the only superpower.
Two of the world's leading economies were part of the Triple Alliance in World War II (Japan, and Germany). I would start by adding at least one of them to the top five.
Its ineffectiveness in the Mideast ceasefire, is due to its lack of credibilty. When the Americans went to the UN for some kind of international backing for the war in Iraq, on what we now know to be faulty intelligence, the organization's credibility was severely undermined. Its as if the organization works, only when America wants it to. My idea for a solution, if a superpower ever tries that again: a measure that would see that country sanctioned.
Yet another change I would make: give the organization an army with which to enforce the resolutions. Overall command would rotate in set cycles amongst the five vetoing countries on the security council, and all members of the General Assembly would contribute, according to their population size.
Those were just some of the changes I'd make to the U.N.
-concernedcdn
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Hayk
Joined: Dec 20, 2005
Posts: 964 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Blabbermouth
User is
Offline
Virtual Volunteer
Country: Egypt
Province/State: Al Qahirah
City: Al Qahirah
|
Re: [Poll] What a Democractic Institute in the UN?
August 24, 2006 - 04:26 PM
|
|
concernedcdn wrote:
(Japan, and Germany). I would start by adding at least one of them to the top five.
In my opinion, adding of Germany would be resisted by many and rightly so, because:
1. Already 2 of P5 members are from Europe,
2. The general mentality of current German generations, after the WW2, became such that they are reluctant to any kind of military commitement - for example, reflected for example in German opposition to send troops to Iraq..
3. If you consider development, military or economic, there are better candidates such as Sweden or Norway...
Japan, after adoptingits all-too-pacifist constitution to be able to play military, is and, in my opinion, would be a candidate!
Its ineffectiveness in the Mideast ceasefire, is due to its lack of credibilty. When the Americans went to the UN for some kind of international backing for the war in Iraq, on what we now know to be faulty intelligence, the organization's credibility was severely undermined.
Americans didnt go to war based on false information per se. They created the fase information before trying to bully the SC to act according to Chapter 7 and make a pre-emptive war in Iraq..
Its as if the organization works, only when America wants it to. My idea for a solution, if a superpower ever tries that again: a measure that would see that country sanctioned.
I am also an idealist Laura  you arent alone! But its too naive to think your suggestion would be possible unless someone stripped off America of its current superpower status! If you want, its a "feat" of a superpower, to do things in spite every other country!
give the organization an army with which to enforce the resolutions. Overall command would rotate in set cycles amongst the five vetoing countries on the security council, and all members of the General Assembly would contribute, according to their population size.
-concernedcdn
Firstly, no country will let,sadly, he UN have a standing force; it will be too long to explain here though.
Secondly, ther eis such a thing called UNSAS - UN Standby Arrangement System - suppoeed to provide a logistical support on all levels for TCCs (Troop Contributing Countires) -http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/milad/fgs2/unsas_files/sba.htm
But its not effective... There are other ideas of having small rapid deployment forces which could be deployed in less than 2weeks... but thats all work in progress...
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
|
Display posts from:
|
|
