Croupier,
May well be so, but imagine this - "new" Europe comprises the 3 most historically expeditionary, and ambitionist regimes that the world has ever seen over the last 250+ years:
Russia, France and Germany.
If the UN and the Security Council continues to exist in the future, the Security Council will need to be changed to correlate itself to all the new geo-political boundaries that now inhabit the world.
For starters, the Permanent Members will need to be changed to reflect the following:
1) STAYING
Britain
United States
Russia
China
2) GOING
France
3) INCOMING PERMANENT (OR SEMI-PERMANANT)MEMBERS
Japan
India
Pakistan
Indonesia
Mexico
Brazil
Germany
Nigeria
South Africa
Of these groupings:
1)
Mexio and Brazil reflect the growing Latin /Iberian influence of Spain, as does the southern parts of the United States and California;
2)
Pakistan, Nigeria and South Africa all form part of the British Commonwealth;
3)
the Muslim community is represented through Pakistan and Indonesia;
4)
the world's 2 largest democracies are represented in the form of India and the United States;
5)
the 2 former Axis powers of WW2 (and current G7 members) are represented in the form of Germany and Japan;
6)
Africa is represented by 2 members, Asia by 5 members (and the near Middle East, by 1 member), (extended) Europe by 3 members, and the Americas by 3 members; and
7)
all the major religious groupings are represented, as are all the major population groupings in the world, every continent, and all major language groupings (French is a declining language spoken, as a primary language, by <100m people in the world).
In addition, a further 7 nations would be elected on a rotating 2-year basis to serve on the Security Council, bringing total membership to 20. Of this number:
1)
the 4 permanent members would have powers of limited veto and permanency;
2)
the 9 semi-permanent members would have rights of permanency but not powers of veto; and
3)
the 7 elected members would have voting rights.
For Council decisions to be passed, the following votes would be required:
1)
15 if 2 permanent vetoes were exercised;
2)
13 if 1 permanent veto was exercised; and
3)
11 if 0 permanent vetoes were exercised.
- Forums
- General
- the new cold[warm]war
the new cold[warm]war, page-4
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 15 more messages in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)
Featured News
Featured News
The Watchlist
SER
STRATEGIC ENERGY RESOURCES LIMITED
David DeTata, Managing Director
David DeTata
Managing Director
SPONSORED BY The Market Online