UNSC permanent membership should be disbanded

[RedHulk]

UNSC permanent membership should be disbanded as it only protect the interest of certain countries and it violates the norm of democracy as only few countries get to decide the future for rest of the world. For each security issue there should be direct voting from all countries to decide the course of action. UNSC nonpermanent membership should also be changed, right now its according to voting election. It should be on rotation basis for all the countries.
If above all cant be done then UNSC permanent membership should have representation from certain groups or parts of the world for example OIC don't have any representation there. So to protect the interest of 2 billion people it must have a neutral member country on UNSC permanent membership. Same is the case for Africa as it has been plundered by some countries for their resources and nothing has been done to save their interest as it suits the permanent members.
A permanent member for UNSC should be elected by the countries only from that region or group as overall voting undermine the rights of that region or group. Its just a random thought to put the world on right path.

 

[Cliftonite]

Indian getting butthurt?

 

[RedHulk]

Indian getting butthurt?

More about our Case as representation on front as we the only country neutral in OIC group.

 

[sinait]

UNSC permanent membership should be disbanded as it only protect the interest of certain countries and it violates the norm of democracy as only few countries get to decide the future for rest of the world. For each security issue there should be direct voting from all countries to decide the course of action. UNSC nonpermanent membership should also be changed, right now its according to voting election. It should be on rotation basis for all the countries.
If above all cant be done then UNSC permanent membership should have representation from certain groups or parts of the world for example OIC don't have any representation there. So to protect the interest of 2 billion people it must have a neutral member country on UNSC permanent membership. Same is the case for Africa as it has been plundered by some countries for their resources and nothing has been done to save their interest as it suits the permanent members.
A permanent member for UNSC should be elected by the countries only from that region or group as overall voting undermine the rights of that region or group. Its just a random thought to put the world on right path.

The UN was formed by the 5 victorious nations after WW2.
Others joined the UN on their own voilition, not forced.

Any nation not satisfied with the UN structure can withdraw from the UN and form their own.
Lets take Boxing for example.
First there was WBA, World Boxing Association.
Subsequently WBC, World Boxing Council was formed, followed by IBF and WBO.

You can try to form the "New United Nations" and make yourself the permanent member or according to what you propose.
The rest of the nations will flock over to this new organization making it a success.
Or wait for WW3 and the new victorious nations will form a new "United Nations" among the nuclear waste.
.

 

[Figaro]

UNSC permanent membership should be disbanded as it only protect the interest of certain countries and it violates the norm of democracy as only few countries get to decide the future for rest of the world. For each security issue there should be direct voting from all countries to decide the course of action. UNSC nonpermanent membership should also be changed, right now its according to voting election. It should be on rotation basis for all the countries.
If above all cant be done then UNSC permanent membership should have representation from certain groups or parts of the world for example OIC don't have any representation there. So to protect the interest of 2 billion people it must have a neutral member country on UNSC permanent membership. Same is the case for Africa as it has been plundered by some countries for their resources and nothing has been done to save their interest as it suits the permanent members.
A permanent member for UNSC should be elected by the countries only from that region or group as overall voting undermine the rights of that region or group. Its just a random thought to put the world on right path.

Why should they do that? If anything the security council represents the 5 most powerful countries in the world extremely well (not to mention is a tribute to the victors of WW2).

 

[waz]

No.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

The Veto power does , prevents WWIII from happening
However it can still cripple innocent countries with decade long sanctions


The FATF and CATSA like initiatives now go further , into punishing cultures and societies not even requiring input from many world nations

 

[RedHulk]

Why should they do that? If anything the security council represents the 5 most powerful countries in the world extremely well (not to mention is a tribute to the victors of WW2).

The world is rapidly changing. Two of the countries aren't even powerful anymore. In next 15-25 years they will be replaced by different countries. This whole covid19 have broken the backbones have many big nations. So eventually there will be new players in picture, specially India. So what the Muslim world is doing to counter that? If India get elected there need to be a Muslim country as a permanent member to keep the balance. Brazil is not far behind in the race as well.

The Veto power does , prevents WWIII from happening
However it can still cripple innocent countries with decade long sanctions


The FATF and CATSA like initiatives now go further , into punishing cultures and societies not even requiring input from many world nations

That's the whole point that there will not be WW3 any time soon. If powerful countries can come to table on Syria issue then there will not be any big conflict.
Main drawback of permanent membership is that its stopping many nations from progressing by putting sanctions on them if they don't go their way.

 

[LKJ86]

UNSC permanent membership should be disbanded as it only protect the interest of certain countries and it violates the norm of democracy as only few countries get to decide the future for rest of the world. For each security issue there should be direct voting from all countries to decide the course of action. UNSC nonpermanent membership should also be changed, right now its according to voting election. It should be on rotation basis for all the countries.
If above all cant be done then UNSC permanent membership should have representation from certain groups or parts of the world for example OIC don't have any representation there. So to protect the interest of 2 billion people it must have a neutral member country on UNSC permanent membership. Same is the case for Africa as it has been plundered by some countries for their resources and nothing has been done to save their interest as it suits the permanent members.
A permanent member for UNSC should be elected by the countries only from that region or group as overall voting undermine the rights of that region or group. Its just a random thought to put the world on right path.

UNSC permanent members (USA, China, Russia, France, and UK) make the authority of UNSC, not on the contrary.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

We will have WWIII in our life time

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

UNSC permanent membership should be disbanded as it only protect the interest of certain countries and it violates the norm of democracy as only few countries get to decide the future for rest of the world. For each security issue there should be direct voting from all countries to decide the course of action. UNSC nonpermanent membership should also be changed, right now its according to voting election. It should be on rotation basis for all the countries.
If above all cant be done then UNSC permanent membership should have representation from certain groups or parts of the world for example OIC don't have any representation there. So to protect the interest of 2 billion people it must have a neutral member country on UNSC permanent membership. Same is the case for Africa as it has been plundered by some countries for their resources and nothing has been done to save their interest as it suits the permanent members.
A permanent member for UNSC should be elected by the countries only from that region or group as overall voting undermine the rights of that region or group. Its just a random thought to put the world on right path.

UNSC is not about democracy. it is about raw power. UNSC representation is the purest expression of "might is right".

you can remove anyone from UNSC if you want. Just have your soldiers arrest the envoys and drag them out. but be ready to deal with the retaliation. are you going to try it?

 

[Figaro]

The world is rapidly changing. Two of the countries aren't even powerful anymore. In next 15-25 years they will be replaced by different countries. This whole covid19 have broken the backbones have many big nations. So eventually there will be new players in picture, specially India. So what the Muslim world is doing to counter that? If India get elected there need to be a Muslim country as a permanent member to keep the balance. Brazil is not far behind in the race as well.


That's the whole point that there will not be WW3 any time soon. If powerful countries can come to table on Syria issue then there will not be any big conflict.
Main drawback of permanent membership is that its stopping many nations from progressing by putting sanctions on them if they don't go their way.

How will it get replaced by other countries? France, UK, and Russia are still the most powerful countries in Europe besides economics. China is the most powerful in Asia. And of course America is still the most powerful nation in the world. Adding India into the permanent council and then adding Pakistan would just make it a huge incoherent mess. It's better for the big 5 to resolve their disputes.

 

[HalfMoon]

My list for the permanent UNSC members would be

1) China
2) USA
3) Russia
4) Turkey
5) Pakistan
6) Iran
7) EU
8) Israel

Only these powers have the demonstrated capability to project power.

 

[Hassan Guy]

My list for the permanent UNSC members would be

1) China
2) USA
3) Russia
4) Turkey
5) Pakistan
6) Iran
7) EU
8) Israel

Only these powers have the demonstrated capability to project power.

 

[Kylin]

Why don't you just say all nuclear countries should give up their nuclear arms?
If you don't like a system, other than change from within, all you can do is then get out, you don't get to call this, it's a pipe dream.