Comments on: “The UN has failed” Part 1 http://theyescampaign.org/the-un-has-failed-part-1/ Vote Yes at www.VoteWorldParliament.org Thu, 10 Mar 2011 19:09:08 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: John T. Dale Jr. http://theyescampaign.org/the-un-has-failed-part-1/comment-page-1/#comment-208 John T. Dale Jr. Thu, 10 Mar 2011 17:57:22 +0000 http://theyescampaign.org/?p=20#comment-208 This is a video that raises very vital issues. However, the interviewer did not know enough to bring out possible options for UN reform that were not discussed. For example, D'Escoto and the other speakers at the UN Genera Assembly are right about the need for Security Council reform, but why do they then not discuss the plan of Professor Joseph Schwartzberg that the Security Council, instead of just coordinating with regional organizations, itself be turned into a regionalized Council, thereby achieving 100 percent global representation on the Council? For another example, the voting structure in the UN General Assembly is one-nation/one-vote. That structure itself negatively affects the political and moral credibility of the General Assembly. Thinkers such as Richard Hudson and Joseph Schwartzberg have authored very well thought-through papers outling better voting structures in the General Assembly that would weight a nation's vote based on population and contributions to the UN system. Why does he not speak out for these types of ideas? For a third example, why not involve the Peoples of the United Nations directly through regional or global referendums on vital global decisions? D'Escoto's and his wife's open frustrations with the UN are right on target, but we need intellectual and political support for reasonable solutions. D'Escoto's overall negative conclusion that the UN cannot be reformed is, ultimately, silly. Of course it can be reformed and MUSAT be reformed. What other realistic option is there? If there is not enough unanimity among governments to reform the UN, why would anyone think that the same nations would be willing to do something even more radical, like invent a whole new universal organization? This is a video that raises very vital issues. However, the interviewer did not know enough to bring out possible options for UN reform that were not discussed.

For example, D’Escoto and the other speakers at the UN Genera Assembly are right about the need for Security Council reform, but why do they then not discuss the plan of Professor Joseph Schwartzberg that the Security Council, instead of just coordinating with regional organizations, itself be turned into a regionalized Council, thereby achieving 100 percent global representation on the Council?

For another example, the voting structure in the UN General Assembly is one-nation/one-vote. That structure itself negatively affects the political and moral credibility of the General Assembly. Thinkers such as Richard Hudson and Joseph Schwartzberg have authored very well thought-through papers outling better voting structures in the General Assembly that would weight a nation’s vote based on population and contributions to the UN system. Why does he not speak out for these types of ideas?

For a third example, why not involve the Peoples of the United Nations directly through regional or global referendums on vital global decisions?

D’Escoto’s and his wife’s open frustrations with the UN are right on target, but we need intellectual and political support for reasonable solutions.

D’Escoto’s overall negative conclusion that the UN cannot be reformed is, ultimately, silly. Of course it can be reformed and MUSAT be reformed. What other realistic option is there? If there is not enough unanimity among governments to reform the UN, why would anyone think that the same nations would be willing to do something even more radical, like invent a whole new universal organization?

]]>