unsc seat without veto power

[mukeshkumar007]

Before three or four day ago a committee to UNO submitted a report, which was organized to recommend the UNO to reconstruct the Security Council. I think all of you may know what it has suggested to UNO but I want to repeat it. It suggested the UNO general assembly to increase the six members in Security Council without veto power otherwise construct the eight members body for four year.
I don't know that how far this report may affect the India's effort to get the permanent seat in UNO Security Council. But in my views to give the permanent seat without veto power is indicating double thinking of Super power countries. If this report may be implemented then in UNO two row of power may be build. And that may not be a good sing for future.
If Super Power Countries really want to reconstruct and make stronger then the concept of veto power should be dismiss. For taking any decision majority system should be follow because it is more proper and republican then the veto power system. Because veto power makes a country more monopolist.
India should not accept any offer to get the permanent seat without veto power because there is no mean of permanent seat without veto power.

[rkumar]

I see no reason why we should not accept it even if there is no veto power..May be in next phase or after few years either others will also loose the veto power or else we will also have the veto power..So my view is that we should grab it..

Rajendra

[sphougat]

Dear Mukesh,

First of all it is UN (United Nation) not UNO. Secondly, different agencies media, newspapers trying to quote whatever feedback /information they are getting. In this world no system is perfect and it can not be. Now, the next session of the general assembly would be in October, 2005. By that time there would be lot of changes. OK, what do you think if India get permanent seat and veto power, then its fine. The one concept is there should be no veto power and every country should have voting value as per their population. Let me explain like this a small country having population of just below 100,000 people should have votong value 1, country like India population 1 billion. Voting value= 1 Billion/100000=10000.
USA 250 Million/100000=2500.
Still this is also not perfrect, because some countries are fully developed and some are very backword. So the only way to fit the formula "survival of the fittest". Whatever works that is right.

[rkumar]

Nothing is perfect..not even voting..what one really does in voting is to count the hands and not the brain used in raising the hands..Votes of intelligent and idiots have the same value....However, with all the pitfalls, democracy still is the best solution..

RK^2