The U.N.'s Security Council makes
many important decisions that affect much of the world's security. In the
current set-up, there are five permanent members in the Security Council:
Russia, U.S., U.K., France, and China. I believe that current system for the
U.N. is flawed because the state involved needs to be changed, the veto system
needs to be changed, and it needs to be more effective at preventing wars.
Since the U.N. Security Council
is comprised of 15 nations, with 5 of them being permanent members with veto
powers, these five powers have influence on all decisions taken by the Security
Council. In order to avoid all decisions being affected by one member, there
should be a different system in place to promote more fairness. The veto system
should be changed to a system where the majority of Security Council members
need to agree without veto power in order to achieve their goals. If that isn't
feasible, it should be at least amended so that three of the five permanent
members agree to a decision. If this new system isn't implemented, one country
has the potential of influencing important decisions. The U.N. was unable to
take serious action against Syria because Russia did not want to take action.
In order to prevent that, there should be a veto-less system or at least a
system where the permanent members
The permanent members of the U.N.
Security Council were decided after World War II. The four main ones were the
winners of the war while China was added on later. The current permanent
members need to be reformed to reflect the modern world. Although France and
U.K. might be seen as strong powers, they could either be replaced with other
states or other states should be added to the permanent members list. Possible
countries in the permanent members list could be India, Japan, Germany, or
Brazil. There should be more countries from different parts of the world in
order to reflect the diverse powers. Four of the five permanent members are in
Europe, which is not an accurate reflection of the world. France and U.K. have
also lost much of their power and influence in the world and there are other
countries that are becoming as strong as them.
In order for the U.N. Security
Council to be effective, it should have military support from all the countries
involved. These countries should be able to negotiate with each other and
cooperate. In order to effectively
prevent wars, the members need to have a policy of intervening in all
major conflicts that need help. This includes places like Bosnia and Herzegovina
and Syria. There should be an agreed upon definition of aggression that all permanent
members believe and then practice upon. The U.N. should intervene in certain
places when it doesn’t normally. China and U.S. should be able to agree with
each other when intervening in certain areas. This mutual agreement with each
other can prevent war form occurring and increase effectiveness.
The U.N. Security Council has a very
important job in the world and must be effective in controlling wars and in
order to do this, the Security Council needs to work together, the members need
to change, and the veto system needs to be amended. This will help the U.N.
succeed in its ultimate goals.
I agree with you about changing the veto power that the 5 prominent members of the security council have. I believe it creates problems internally. For one, it makes states with different views less likely to pursue their ideas because they know it will be vetoed. It essentially makes all other states powerless because the 5 prominent states of the security council have final say.
ReplyDelete