Talk:Reform of the United Nations

International relations: United Nations High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject United Nations.

Security Council reform article

I am considering starting an article devoted to Security Council reform. My main concern is that content on UN Security Council and Reform of the United Nations will overlap, requiring people to update both pages to keep up with the news. This way, we could put a link to the Main article: Reform of the UN Security Council on both pages, and just update that main article as news breaks. However, we could end up updating all three. Hmm. Rad Racer 15:13, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Whose opinion?

"For the UN to become more democratic in a direct sense, four things would presumably have to happen:..."

Whose opinion is this? Is this just a personal opinon of the editor, or based on some official documents of any country or organization? World3 24 Apr 2005

I noticed that too. It was odd espescially considering number 3 didn't seem to have anything to do with being more democratic. Jimbobsween 04:26, 16 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Probably the former. 24.54.208.177 03:51, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  - I would like to see this changed, to be honest. If we can find a quote for it, fine, otherwise I find some parts aren't really focusing on the idea of democracy as a whole, but one person's idea democracy. Personally - no offense intended to the voting structure of the US - number one is ONE idea of how democracy should be formed, and democracy by population instead of state isn't necessarily "more democratic". What I'm trying to get at is... I don't think this should be a part of this topic. At least, not unless its a quote of a particular UN representative's ideas on reform. Alphamatrix 22:01, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"For the UN to become more democratic in a direct sense, several issues would have to be addressed, including:

Representation would need to be based more on population vote and UN democratic and free elections to the Secretary and Assembly, rather than the present strict one state, one vote principle. Another proposal is to establish a consultative United Nations Parliamentary Assembly (UNPA) as an intermediary step towards a world parliament within the UN structure. An assembly where Liechtenstein has the same voting power as India is far from equally representational (generally considered a key aspect of democracy).
The United Nations Security Council veto power needs to be either reformed or removed. Again, this could remove a form of counter-representationalism, where the permanent Security Council members have their opinions weighted above others. However, it is not clear, given the very extensive powers of the General Assembly under the UN Charter—as clarified by the Assembly's own 'Uniting for Peace' resolution of 3 November 1950—that an effective Security Council is a necessary precondition to an effective United Nations Organization.
The UN would have to be given some power of governance over its members, just as a national government has power of governance over its citizens. This would imply having the power to impose sanctions on members who would not follow the UN's determined courses of action and resolutions (including the human rights' resolutions).
As implied in the previous item, the UN might also exclude from its membership those nations which it determined to be grossly violating the human rights of its people, including the right to periodic democratic, universal, secret-ballot elections (upheld in Article 25 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights).

It is likely that the small countries, which make up the majority of the current members of the General Assembly, would oppose the first of these changes (some of these might oppose the fourth), while the current permanent members of the Security Council would oppose the second, and probably the third as well. However, reformers have proposed that with incremental and simultaneous attention to these points, it is possible that the interests of the large and small nations might be reconciled through compromise in order to avert the anarchy and relative powerlessness of the present system which hamper the interests of both large and small nations. For example, if the veto power were progressively limited while also basing the weighting of the General Assembly more on population, large and small nations might be more trusting of the system to assign more supranational authority to the votes of the General Assembly and judgments of an empowered World Court."

I've removed this for the moment, until we can find a source for it.Alphamatrix (talk) 05:48, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Something I read from a site

"I studied the issue of possible UNSC reform when I wrote my Law Honours thesis, and I read some material in int'l law articles re proposals to intro major permanent regional power seats for Africa, Asia and Latin America which were to be alternated every few yrs- ie African seat between Nigeria, Egypt and SA, Asian between India, Indonesia and Pakistan, Latin American- Brazil and Argentina. Also, there've been discussions thruout the yrs to increase the SC's size to anything up to 20-25 above the current 15. Of course, whether any of this proposed change happens is very open to question, given the dinosaurically slow nature of any reforms actually occurring in such a cumbersome bureaucracy."

Anyone know anything about this?

Definitey, Plans A and B from Kofi Annan's ideas on UNSC reform include increasing UNSC membership to 24, but that's been included now in the UNSC reform page, I think. Alphamatrix 22:02, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The position of Italy

I have edited the sentence regarding Italy, and thus removed refers to the source (a reuters article), because the information is untrue. Italy does not oppose Germany, but the whole reform, based on the introduction of new permanent seats, and so of new privileges. Semi-permanent membership, which means that countries from the same region alternate themselves in the council every few years, would result in a more democratic and plural reform.

the reforms discussed seem unrelated to the problems?

The problems of the UN are corruption and the lack of accountability and transparency that allows it to occur. How can the measures discussed in this article be "reforms", if they don't address the problems. Perhaps this article should be be "Proposed changes to the United nations".

Cold war

What is the "Role of United Nations Security Concil in Cold War"? what is thw impact of the "UN Security Concil in Cold war" ?

What countries are part of the UN?

What countries are part of the UN? --CyclePat 20:28, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your kidding right? Jcdams 21:40, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In case your question *was* serious, check out United Nations member states and list of unrecognized countries. —Nightst a llion (?) 15:54, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Section on Democratization

In reading through this article, the section on "democratization" and "improving diversity" seems not so much to address reforms currently being considered for the UN reform, but a what a UN that would function more as a "world government" might look like. Some bits have certainly been discussed (mainly proportional voting and elimination of the veto) as serious revisions of the GA or SC, but the bits talking about "world government" seem to fall a bit beyond the scope of this article. I thought I would see if there are any comments/objecftions to this change before I removed some of this and cleaned up that section. Auric04 19:00, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Citations

Is anyone willing to help me verify the information in this topic? I'd like to see some citations in the article, and check that the information is creditable, not just opinion. Alphamatrix 22:09, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Democratization Reform Proposal

I would like to propose the following concept for reform (or replacement) of the United Nations:

www.UnitedDemocraticNations.org

I am posting it here for two distinct purposes, first to pose it as a possible inclusion on the article page, second to elicit feedback.

gary —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 206.86.193.170 (talk) 19:59, 17 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

NPOV: Ways the United Nations can be reformed

This entire section reads as not a npov. If its kept at all, it probably should be rewritten as something else other than a gripe about the UN's failings from the perspective of the United States. ChronoSphere (talk) 13:29, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What Vandalism?

What on earth meaning is Vandalism?The reason is not understood. whether information added why was deleted.It is possible to correct it appropriately no understanding of you of my English. Though I think that the name of countries or information on the number necessary for the resolution is profitable. --大和屋敷 (talk) 04:57, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

BIAS

Another problem with the United Nations is that finances are not controlled by the overwhelming monetary contributors. In theory, democratizing the budget by allowing all members to vote on it would be the ideal. However, as in voting matters concerning non-fiscal issues, blocs are formed that effectively quell reform. I'm deleting this since it is biased saying that there is an ideal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.62.20.190 (talk) 16:10, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How about adding the CEB

http://www.unsceb.org/content/about

Cantab1985 (talk) 08:11, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dr's in Yemen front UKAre there Dr's in Yemen

Are there Dr'in Yemen working for the UK 2600:1700:3400:3F40:30F8:4A2A:AA4E:F50E (talk) 23:44, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What? Rynoip (talk) 00:05, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Myanmar

Do you believe the tragedies of the rest of Myanmar? They can't do anything and they are a group that can't be used 202.191.107.56 (talk) 17:37, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Im not sure what do you want to add into the article and also why are you mentioning Myanmar. Rynoip (talk) 00:05, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this section

I think the Calls for diversity and democracy section should be deleted, there is no references and it is highly biased. Rynoip (talk) 00:07, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]