Five seats are up for grabs in 15-member U.N. Security Council

Thank goodness the ballots are secret. Now if we can just get rid of the five useless permanent members.

Like many Asian countries,Japan holds that the permanent members on the council wield too much clout in a world that has changed since the United Nations was created. It is essential that the Security Council be re-created to reflect the present international situation, with a reform in the composition of both its permanent and non permanent memberships,

I'm hoping NZ gets the nod. The Kiwis never win anything except rugby games and deserve a crack at the big table!

One of the most divisive issues remains Syria, where Russia has steadfastly opposed resolutions condemning the Assad regime, although it backed a measure on allowing UN humanitarian aid deliveries without Damascus’s consent.

Of course it has to.

The Kiwis never win anything except rugby games

I'm sure they were voted "most scenic part of Australia" a few years back! ; )

Its to bad the security council cant come up with a way to remove the the true pariahs Russia and china from their permenant seats. They cause more misery and suffering in the world than anyone else in history has!!

The UN is useless. Get rid of it.

The UN is useless. Get rid of it.

I'm not sure if you are American or not, but the Americans like to say this about the UN. But let's consider their positions right before the Iraq war. The UN was putting pressure on Sadam, telling him he had to let in the weapons inspectors with unfettered access. The pressure was enough to make Sadam computer. The inspectors were being unfettered in Their search. However, they were unable to find any WMDs, and for good reason - they didn't exist anymore.

But no, that wasn't good enough for the Americans, because they 'knew' Sadam had WMDs. So hey said the UN was useless, and unilaterally invaded a sovereign nation, based on lies and impatience.

So who is more useless? An organization that was working towards a peaceful solution to what turned out to be a non-existent problem? Or a country that unilaterally invades in the name of 'defends' based on lies?

Well I'll answer my own question. In this case the US is more useless. I much prefer an organization that works towards a peaceful end.

@Strangerland There are many of us here in the states that never endorsed Bush's war.

Just underlines the total uselessness of the UN. look at the countries leaving Rwanda - human rights record. argentina - just defaulted on debts. and those to be added Angola - corrupt to the core Venezuela - really? and still the wars rage and thousands die and Annan is on telly occasionally spouting off some banal rubbish and UN "peacekeepers" get accused of rape or other awful behaviour.......

It is time to reform the UNSC to make it reflecting better the world political situation. For exampel it is enough With one permanent EU seat within UNSC, It can replace the French and the Brittish. Then of course it would be desirable to give one moore permanent seat to an Asian country, and because Japan is the second biggest economy in Asia it should be Natural to give Japan this seat. Also to decrease the tension among the east asian countries it should be a strategiet selection. Also Africa and South America should have one permanent seat. If we want to have a moore functional and operativ UNSC there is time for reforms.

The Kiwis never win anything except rugby games I'm sure they were voted "most scenic part of Australia" a few years back! ; ) LOL yeah and with almost 20% of Kiwis now living in Australia, they might as well just make it another state of Australia