• huginn
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 months ago

    Because there isn’t a UN without America, China and Russia.

    France and the UK could leave and the UN could exist but those 3? Not a chance.

    Each of those larger nations carries so much weight that their influence on global politics would outshine any body that tried to legislate without them.

    The UN could exist technically but it would have no teeth at all. It has few enough as is.

    • Venia Silente@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      Still, doesn’t sound like a good argument to give those nations veto power over all decisions. Like, currently the way things are reading a motion could come it to have the UN acknowledge that, say, Palestinians are still human beings, and the US could veto that - and then what?

      • huginn
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        That can’t happen - go read the declaration on human rights. The question is never if they’re humans: it’s if the state is recognized. Their rights as humans aren’t contested.

        Taiwan is still not recognized as a country only because China refuses to do so.

        This is better than the alternative.