Austria, Denmark, Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Romania, Spain and Sweden are pushing to explore the idea of moving from unanimity to qualified majority in foreign policy.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 33 points 2 months ago (22 children)

Why should anyone have veto? Same goes for UN. The only thing it does is letting few being free to do whatever they want. Would terrorist country like US or Russia decide to nuke some smaller country? They have veto, so why not!

  • source
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [–] 43 points 2 months ago (15 children)

    The UN is a diplomatic platform, not a global government. The idea is that if the particular countries couldn't veto, they'd leave the organisation altogether instead. Having everyone take part in the same diplomatic organisation is the main goal, not producing actionable resolutions.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 2 months ago (14 children)

    So what is the point of it then? Small country roes something terrible, they get condemned. US murders people without any oversight.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 28 points 2 months ago*

    The point is to have a dialogue and to allow the largest influences to shape the dialogue. It's not meant to have any power beyond diplomatic conversation. The most hostile countries to the US still get in a plane and fly to New York to participate. Think about that.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (10 children)

    Because getting small countries to stop helps reduce war deaths.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 2 months ago (9 children)

    Who gets the big countries to stop killing the small countries?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    If nothing else works, other big countries. However, it is generally a high bar to get two big countries to go to war with each other.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (5 children)

    No one. That's supposed to be NATO's job.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 15 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    The veto is the sole reason these institutions still exist. There's no way in hell any member would give up that power.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] [S] 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    You should put more thought into the arguments you make, because clearly 11 members would.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 child)

    Cool, in the EU all countries have veto power. In the UN, all permanent members of the security council have veto power. You just need one of them to refuse to give up that power. In the EU, I believe this could somewhat work, but in the UN ? No way the US, China, Russia, France or the UK would give it up without leaving the institution.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment