Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

News United Nations security council

  1. Japan

  2. Germany

  3. India

  4. Brazil

  5. Other

  6. None

Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. Nov 7, 2005 #1


    User Avatar
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    There has been talk of increasing the number of permanent members in the Security Council. The countries who have made the strongest demands for permanent seats are Japan, Germany and India.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UN_Security_Council" [Broken]
    So, what are your opinions on the expansion of the security council? Should the number of permanent members be increased and if so, which countries should be alloted seats as permanent members? Should these new members also have the veto power, or should the veto power be abolished all together?
    Last edited by a moderator: May 2, 2017
  2. jcsd
  3. Nov 7, 2005 #2


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    This sounds like a place to start, perhaps the UN might actually get something done.
  4. Nov 7, 2005 #3


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    Perhaps more members are necessary in order to get a broader representation of opinions and perspectives.

    Perhaps the veto of any one nation should be subject to a vote by the security council and subject to over-riding by a majority of members 2/3's 3/4's.

    from the wiki article -
    and there is also the issue for the western nations:
    The difficulty of conflicting political interests, e.g. US, Russia and China during the 'Cold War' period seems to indicate the need for a 'better' system.
  5. Nov 7, 2005 #4
    I hate the security council!!
    Isnt UN supposed to represent all the countries? But why does it give preference to a select few?
  6. Nov 7, 2005 #5


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I'd go for that.
  7. Nov 7, 2005 #6
    me to, I think that is a pretty fair way to do it. (ya know, the whole checks and balances thing)
  8. Nov 7, 2005 #7
    No, just the imporant ones (i.e. ones with political power). What would give you that silly idea. :rolleyes:
  9. Nov 7, 2005 #8
    I voted for others. Liechtenstein in particular. It doesn't always have to be the big boys.
  10. Nov 7, 2005 #9
    It definitely needs reform. I would support more members in the security council if the veto were changed to allow for overrides. As it stands the UN is nearly dis-functional due to the whims of the 5 permanent members.
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook