The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
One of the concerns of some students of the cycles of hegemonic wars in political geography are how to establish a system were we can avoid having hegemonic wars.
For instance, Britain and France can hardly claim to be individually as powerful as they were after WWII when they retained their colonial empires. However, we have the EU slowly configuring itself as a world power to replace Britain/France and (thankfully) avoiding the question of Germany as a world power.
The breakup of the Soviet Union has also somewhat diminished Russia, but it seems fanciful to claim Russia is not a world power given its size, its resources, its level of development and its military.
Then there's India which is not recognised as a world power but might well be. A UNSC with the US, EU, Russia, China and India as veto-wielding members would make a lot more sense than the current one. So maybe the biggest potential conflict is actually between Britain/France and India/Germany, and the EU could help resolve that peacefully if Britain decided to finally blend in.
In my opinion neither Russia nor China have any interest to start an overt confrontation with the US: that's just the US neocon propaganda in search of an adequate bogeyman.
The real problem with the current world system is that the hegemon, the US, has been busy dismantling it since the end of the Cold War. When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes
Allowing the objective of establishing the United Nations to be subverted is the whole point of the Security Council. China not ending up as a frontline containment state for the USSR was kind of an oops, but. I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.
How's that? The primary objective of the establishment of the UN was to prevent direct armed conflict between the great powers. Allowing it to act against the will of one of those powers would have the reverse effect.
In any case, I don't see the moral case for greater GA power. One country one vote is inherently undemocratic as is the representation of authoritarian governments. But that's fine, justice, fairness, and democracy aren't the point here.
I agree with Mig that the composition of the permanent members group is out of date and that you'd want a merger of the British and French seats into one EU one while giving India a seat. But the original make up was sensible. The US, France, UK, and Soviet Union were clearly the most powerful countries in the world at the time. China was hobbled by civil war, but as the most populous state it also got in. Who else would you have wanted - Brazil? Canada? (Germany and Japan were out for obvious reasons, India was still a colony)
The issue at hand in the mid-40's was not, of course, the make-up of the Security Council ... the system of permanent members consisting of the main victorious allies in WWII was pretty much automatic as soon as someone came up with it, and the system of rotating memberships with watered down voting rights fairly obviously the most that the other members could hope for ... but the powers of the Security Council.
Whether the institution as actually established was more effective in its role than it would have been otherwise ... quite possibly. Just because the US got its way does not mean that it was an unalloyed disaster that it did. I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.
by Oui - Dec 5
by gmoke - Nov 28
by Oui - Dec 612 comments
by Oui - Dec 610 comments
by Oui - Dec 41 comment
by Oui - Dec 2
by Oui - Dec 147 comments
by Oui - Dec 16 comments
by gmoke - Nov 303 comments
by Oui - Nov 3012 comments
by Oui - Nov 2838 comments
by Oui - Nov 2713 comments
by Oui - Nov 2511 comments
by Oui - Nov 24
by Oui - Nov 221 comment
by Oui - Nov 22
by Oui - Nov 2119 comments
by Oui - Nov 1615 comments
by Oui - Nov 154 comments
by Oui - Nov 1319 comments