While the conflict rages in Ukraine….and the idiots here in the US like MTG and Trump and Gaetz mouth their lunacies there is a big story on the international stage…..the UN.
There are 5 permanent members of the UN Security Council and all it takes to kill any legislation is one member to veto the action.
How moronic is that?
First we should ask why 5 permanent members?
The permanent members of the United Nations Security Council (also known as the Permanent Five, Big Five, or P5) are the five sovereign states to whom the UN Charter of 1945 grants a permanent seat on the UN Security Council: China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
According to Oppenheim’s International Law : United Nations, “Permanent membership in the Security Council was granted to five states based on their importance in the aftermath of World War II.”
It is the 21st century and those dark days of WW2 are gone….time to re-think the Security Council.
The UN is doing just that…..
The United Nations is on Tuesday set to debate a provision that would require the five permanent members of the body’s Security Council – the United States, United Kingdom, France, China and Russia – to justify invoking their veto powers.
The reform to the Security Council has been floated for years at the UN but has regained new traction following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Currently, the five permanent members can veto any resolutions put forth by the Security Council. Meanwhile, the rotating 10 other members have no such power.
The latest proposal, put forth by Liechtenstein, is co-sponsored by 50 countries including the US. No other permanent members are currently co-sponsors, although France has indicated it will support the move, according to the AFP news agency.
The text of the proposal, obtained by the AFP, calls for the 193 members of the General Assembly to gather “within 10 working days of the casting of a veto by one or more permanent members of the Security Council, to hold a debate on the situation as to which the veto was cast”.
This is a major item for accountability….but most people will ignore this simply because they hate the UN for whatever reason….but I think that hatred is misplaced and I have let my thoughts on it be known…..
Why Hate The United Nations (UN)?
After WW2 and the founding of the UN much has happened……
World War II demonstrated this ugliness in the Holocaust and in the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. From Hiroshima and the Holocaust rose two mighty movements, one for peace and against the perils of further nuclear attacks, and the other for an end to the divisions of humanity and for a nonalignment from these divisions. The Stockholm Appeal of 1950, signed by 300 million people, called for an absolute ban on nuclear weapons. Five years later, 29 countries from Africa and Asia, representing 54 percent of the world’s population, gathered in Bandung, Indonesia, to sign a 10-point pledge against war and for the “promotion of mutual interests and cooperation.” The Bandung Spirit was for peace and for nonalignment, for the peoples of the world to put their efforts into building a process to eradicate history’s burdens (illiteracy, ill health, hunger) by using their social wealth. Why spend money on nuclear weapons when money should be spent on classrooms and hospitals?
Despite the major gains of many of the new nations that had emerged out of colonialism, the overwhelming force of the older colonial powers prevented the Bandung Spirit from defining human history. Instead, the civilization of war prevailed. This civilization of war is revealed in the massive waste of human wealth in the production of armed forces—sufficient to destroy hundreds of planets—and the use of these armed forces as the first instinct to settle disputes. Since the 1950s, the battlefield of these ambitions has not been in Europe or in North America, but rather it has been in Africa, Asia, and Latin America—areas of the world where old colonial sensibilities believe that human life is less important. This international division of humanity—which says that a war in Yemen is normal, whereas a war in Ukraine is horrific—defines our time. There are 40 wars taking place across the globe; there needs to be political will to fight to end each of these, not just those that are taking place within Europe. The Ukrainian flag is ubiquitous in the West; what are the colors of the Yemeni flag, of the Sahrawi flag, and of the Somali flag?
Now is the Time for Nonalignment and Peace
I believe that the world would be better off without these powers of veto in the hands of a single nation.
All nations need to be held to the same standard and the elimination of this silly veto power would be a great step forward.
Turn The Page!
I Read, I Write, You Know
“lego ergo scribo”
5 thoughts on “UN Security Council Veto”
Escreveste o que eu pensava em escrever: “A civilização da guerra prevaleceu. Essa civilização da guerra se revela no enorme desperdício da riqueza humana na produção de forças armadas – suficientes para destruir centenas de planetas”.
The UN has outlived its usefulness. But the least it could do now is to expel Russia from the UN, thereby removing its veto. I am beginning to wonder why everyone is so scared of Russia, given its piss-poor performance on a modern-day battlefield against a relatively tiny enemy. Isolate the country, and if necessary, cal what is quite obviously a bluff by Putin. That bluff does not have the full support of most Russians. Like us, they just want to live their lives, watch their grandchildren grow up, and retire in relative comfort. Yes, Putin has the huge propaganda advantage, but we should not simply assume that all ordinary Russians are stupid.
I am getting tired of ‘the fear’. NATO and the UN should shit, or get off the pot. Call him out.
Best wishes, Pete.
Pete I think ridding the Security Council permanent members could be a step forward. chuq
The best way to reform The UN would be to raze the buildings, build low income housing and a MacDonald restaurant on the site and write a nice paragraph about it in the history books, right about in the same area of the books as The League of Nations. (But make sure it is not written in the history books coming out of Texas schoolbook publishing companies.)
The League failed because of the US….the UN is failing thanx to the US….do you see a trend yet? chuq