[VIEWED 1306
TIMES]
|
SAVE! for ease of future access.
|
|
|
newuser
Please log in to subscribe to newuser's postings.
Posted on 06-16-05 4:46
PM
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
|
The United States has backed the idea of limited expansion of UN security council but it said Washington is likely to support adding TWO permanent members. There are at least five front runners Japan, Germany, India, Brazil, South Africa. When America says it wants 2 of them, the likelihood becomes 2 new members. So who would you prefer? I hope anyone interested in world politics including the IR and IP students/experts in sajha will participate in the discussion. Here is a link to verify the news first: - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4101112.stm newuser
|
|
|
|
newuser
Please log in to subscribe to newuser's postings.
Posted on 06-16-05 4:47
PM
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
|
Sorry guys 3 topics came at a time. Very funny.
|
|
|
sense
Please log in to subscribe to sense's postings.
Posted on 06-16-05 4:54
PM
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
|
Now what does that mean...shud the countries listen to US ideas or collectively as a UN?? please enlighten me with the ever growing influence of US on every decision of UN.
|
|
|
Sursab
Please log in to subscribe to Sursab's postings.
Posted on 06-16-05 7:14
PM
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
|
No, there is no need to listen to USA on every issue. But has to respect super power.US is a country which abet their loyal dogs and feed them to make strong. Laden is an example of the same when there was cold war with Moscow. Later on everybody abashed to know that the 9/11 was the result of their own. Lets not to go further. US is the biggest country in terms of UN funding. On the basis of same US always takes advantage though it does not pay money in full. It has got highest debt of UN and as we remember CNN paid some of the money to UN on behalf of US last year. Big countries (economically) like US, UK, Germany, France, etc do not pay the money that they actually need to pay. And the other issue is helping developing countries. As per the rule developed countries need to help developing countries with 7% of their GDP. But only four countries (Norway, Holland, Denmark and Finland) are doing so. Where is the morale of these so called big countries? Even US is no defference than Dr. Giri in some issues. But as a Nepali if we were asked to vote I personally favour Japan and India. Japan as a old friend, well wisher and big support. India as a neighouring country, dependence for economic growth and for soverginity. I know people will ask why India and not other country as we hate India by birth. We need to accept neighbour as we can not change it, join hands for economic growth and prosperity of nation. If we could take advantage of economic growth of two neighbouring countries (China and India), we would be in a position to even fight for a permanent seat in UN in few years to come but obiviously it is going the other way.
|
|
|
sajhakoraja
Please log in to subscribe to sajhakoraja's postings.
Posted on 06-17-05 7:47
AM
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
|
Sursab, the correct agreed amount of GDP for developed countries is .7%, not 7%. Big difference! Also, why not keep the same number of permanent members, just swapping out two current ones for two new ones? ;^P
|
|
|
deletedUser**
Please log in to subscribe to deletedUser**'s postings.
Posted on 06-17-05 11:10
AM
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
|
I vote for Brazil and South Africa -- their respective continents are not at all represented in the present permanent security council. Now, this is wishful thinking, but I wish they dropped UK from the council's permanent membership. There are already 3 countries from Europe, of which UK is culturally, lingually, and foreign policy-wise too, represented by the US anyway. They can then perhaps replace UK with one country from the Middle East.
|
|