This leaves the UN as is, or as revised, or a new organization.
What should be the criteria of membership? Should a new government include everyone as the UN now does?
The United States constitution excludes monarchies and the like:
The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government ...
United States Constitution Article IV, Section 4
A similar rule would exclude Saudi Arabia from a new UN or other international government, but include Iraq and China.
Interestingly, that would also exclude America's "yes-man" -- Great Britain.
Should international legislation be based on the current UN two-fold system in which, on the one hand, individual states, no matter how small, have one vote when they become temporary members of the UN Security Council;
I think the new organisation shouldn't have something like a Security Council. All decisions should be made by *all* members (with "one country, one vote"). Having something like the Security Council make the decisions means that international legislation would be made not by the international community, but by only a handful of countries.
but which other states are permanent members and have a "states' right" of veto?
No country should have veto power; veto power only means that the will of the international community can be overruled by a single country. That's not democracy, that's dictatorship.
Jeroen "Politicial Observations" van Baardwijk
_________________________________________________________________________ Wonderful-World-of-Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com
_______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
