AN EXPANSION OF SECURITY COUNCIL – THE NEED OF THE HOUR

AN EXPANSION OF SECURITY COUNCIL – THE NEED OF THE HOUR

The world today stands at a crucial crossroads. There are increasing incidences of rogue states happening. We had Iraq led by Mr Saddam Hussein, who invaded Kuwait and annexed it in the year 1990, before he was taught a lesson and freedom of Kuwait restored by The United Nations Organisation (U.N.O.) chiefly led by the United States of America. Then there was the daring attack on the centre of the Western Might on September 11^th, 2001 carried out by Islamist Jehadists, which was in terms of it’s meaning and the number of casualities the single largest terrorist attack that the world has ever seen. And now we have the simmering Korean Crisis. The differences between the Communist North Korea supported tacitly by The People’s Republic of China and and to some extent Russia AND the Capitalist South Korea, which is in alliance with the United States, Japan and other countries belonging to this block, are increasing and may anytime escalate into a war, and in the worst case scenario into a nuclear war.

These were just three glaring examples, instances which have shaken the world. There are numerous other problems looking straight into the eyes of World Peace and Harmony. Increasing globalization and advancement in technologies has resulted in the development of reactionary movements across the globe, which are fuelled by outdated ideologies or governed by irresponsible dictatorships, but are most of the times armed with the latest weapons and defence technology. And the issues mentioned above are only part of the problem. There is also a growing concern as to how long will the nations of the world allow always The USA to take the lead role in the world affairs, as if managing the World’s problems, and taking the responsibility of leadership is USA’s birthright and it’s monopoly.

One of the important characteristic changes that the world needs today is the Structural Changes in the Security Council (the most important decision making body) of the United Nations Organisation (U.N.O)-the apex body dealing in and managing world affairs. The practice has been that the Security Council (The Body of UNO) should consist of only 5 permanent members, namely The United States, Russia, United Kingdom (U.K.), France and China (Initially Nationalist China, but was later on replaced by Communist or Mainland China). These permanent members have the veto right, which means if any of these five members negates some decision, then it can never take place consensually.

It is high time that the changed realities of the World are taken into account and the Security Council is expanded to include ideally five more members or at least three more nation states as permanent members. The countries which deserve permanent memberships are India, Brazil, South Africa AND Japan, Germany or alternatively Canada, Australia. The important criteria that should be set to test the eligibility of a candidate nation for a permanent seat in the security council can be as follows -:

1)    What is the population of the nation state? Is it substantial? Ideally above 10-15 crores.

2)    What are the prospects of economic growth of the nation state? Is it a developed economy or developing one? Ideally the nation should be a highly developed economy or a rapidly developing one.

3)    What’s the status of the nuclear power ability of the country? Does it already possess atom bombs? Or is in the process of making them? If the nation possesses nuclear bombs or is capable of making them and is a sophisticated defence power then it goes in favour of the Nation. But in that case,  the country must strictly satisfy the the substance to be stated in point 5) below

4)    Which geography the country belongs to? Whether that continent has already been represented or not? If the continent is not represented the country’s for the candidature becomes stronger.

5)    Last, but the most important the Country should be a responsible one which is committed to world peace, and in no ways should disturb or destroy Regional or global peace. The country must preferably be a matured democracy, or at the least should have good human rights records. If this point is not satisfied, then that country should never be made a permanent member, come what may. Other points are flexible.

THE CHOICE OF NATIONS-:

As stated above this can be the choice of new permanent members of the security Council –

1)    INDIA

2)    BAZIL

3)    SOUTH AFRICA

AND

4)    JAPAN

5)    GERMANY

OR

     4)   CANADA

     5)  AUSTRALIA

REASONS FOR THIS SELECTION –

1)    India satisfies all the criteria. Definitely Asia needs at least one more representation.

2)    Brazil because it satisfies all the criteria and South America should be represented as well.

3)    South Africa, as Africa direly needs a representation, Africa has been exploited and looked down upon for centuries, this is the least we can do assuage the damage. Moreover South Africa symbolizes the victory of Racial Equality over Apartheid through peaceful means, and today it stands for a rainbow society, where all people live with harmony. And South Africa fairly satisfies other criteria.

4)    I suggest the names of Japan and Germany, with lot of caution, anxiety and confusion. These were the nations who brought the world almost to the brink of destruction in the 2 world wars. They have been historically highly irresponsible. Before   they are given permanent seats, great care and caution should be taken and assurance achieved.

5)    Another alternative can be Canada and Australia, these two peaceful countries are giant economies as well but hardly ambitious.

XXX