Magazine article New African

UN Reforms Could Expose World Peace to New Dangers

Magazine article New African

UN Reforms Could Expose World Peace to New Dangers

Article excerpt

"The notion of broadening the UN Security Council could expose world peace to new dangers and would initiate a cold war that may soon turn hot. It would be a grave mistake should such steps be taken. However, if the proposed reforms are indeed for promoting peace and democracy among the nations in the world, the powers of the Security Council should be the sole responsibility of the General Assembly," writes the Libyan leader, Muammar AlGathafi (his own correct spelling).


As long as democracy has not been adopted for the so-called United Nations Organisation, which is the highest political institution in the world, nobody will take notice of or care for any talk or call concerning democracy in any state across the world. So long as the treatment is oriented towards the UN Security Council, the world is not serious in reforming the UN.


The nations of the world are represented by the existing General Assembly. Yet, this General Assembly amounts to nothing more than a Hyde Park Speakers' Corner, a fantasy. It is nothing but an unnecessary drain on expenses to cover the intercontinental trips made by state delegates to New York to take part in its ridiculous funny act.

It has no powers, no responsibilities and no respect. It provides only insults and disdain for the nations which send their representatives to the General Assembly, without making any binding decision regarding the security and peace of their peoples. All binding decisions are issued by a limited group in the UN Security Council which does not represent the whole world. Even this limited group is subject to a veto from any of the owners of the right to veto.

By a single decision, a single veto and a simple signal from a state that has a permanent seat, all the efficiencies of the UN will be nullified ... and all decisions are made void and stopped immediately after the use of veto. The will and decisions of approximately 200 member nations in the General Assembly, which has no power, will be snubbed.


The so-called UN Security Council is an ugly, forceful and horrible instrument of dictatorship ... it is as an executioner's whip with no appeal against its judgment even if its judgment is unfair, biased and harmful.

The reform of the UN, and the realisation of democracy therein, necessitates that the powers of the Security Council be transferred to the General Assembly wherein all states are members, that binding democratic decisions should be those of the General Assembly, and that the Security Council shall only be an instrument for the execution of such decisions.

The problems

(1) The European Union, for example, is now heading to be a single state represented by one foreign minister, one market, a single currency and one army. Let us imagine that such a unitary state has several permanent seats on the UN Security Council. It has two permanent seats at present, and if Germany were to acquire the veto, to which it is a candidate, such a union will have three permanent seats and this in itself constitutes a dangerous international problem.

If Germany is granted such a seat, what will be the position of Italy? Italy will be aggrieved and deprived of its right. This is another problem. Suppose that Italy is given a seat, how can a single union be granted four permanent seats? This is another big problem. Let us imagine that the former Soviet Union possesses numerous permanent seats in the Security Council and let us also imagine that the American Union, "the United States of America", does now possess several permanent seats, what will the case look like? …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed


An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.