Iran fails to get seat but Saudi Arabia and Congo do

[pqr]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11729848

 

 

Makes one wonder.....

[Murphy101]

Not really.

The UN over all is a farce.

[Teachin'Mine]

There were 11 countries and 10 seats. My question is why were there only 11 countries on the ballot? Who decided which countries were in the running - nomination?

 

Hopefully some good can come out of this. Even if they attend meetings with a closed mind, they still have to hear what's being said.

[lovemyboys]

There were 11 countries and 10 seats. My question is why were there only 11 countries on the ballot? Who decided which countries were in the running - nomination?

 

Hopefully some good can come out of this. Even if they attend meetings with a closed mind' date=' they still have to hear what's being said.[/quote']

 

You know it would be nice to have some hope in this situation but with the other countries represented at the same table, it looks pretty dismal, most have abysmal history wrt women.

 

The corruption at the UN is so complete it's just disgusting to think of the money we pour down that hole. :glare:

[Teachin'Mine]

That's only 10 seats out of a total of 41 members. I've tried to find out the names of all the countries represented, but haven't found them yet. I would imagine European nations and others with better women's rights are well represented. Just to play the devil's advocate, so to speak, would it be better if the nations which have lousy to no women's rights never heard any opposing views? That's where I'm hoping some good comes from this. :)

Edited November 12, 2010 by Teachin'Mine

[alpidarkomama]

Not really.

The UN over all is a farce.

 

:iagree:

 

AMEN!

[pqr]

. Just to play the devil's advocate' date=' so to speak, would it be better if the nations which have lousy to no women's rights never heard any opposing views? That's where I'm hoping some good comes from this. :)[/quote']

 

I don't think it would make any difference at all.

 

Those nations will tout their position and claim that this PROVES that they are committed to women's rights.

[LibraryLover]

I love me a good anti-UN thread.

 

But not really.

[Teachin'Mine]

I don't think it would make any difference at all.

 

Those nations will tout their position and claim that this PROVES that they are committed to women's rights.

 

They make those claims now without any "proof". I guess time will tell if anything good comes from this.

[pqr]

They make those claims now without any "proof". I guess time will tell if anything good comes from this.

 

History would indicate that no good will come of it. I wish I was wrong, really I do but remember that Libya was on the Human Rights Comittee as was Iran(?)

[asta]

That's only 10 seats out of a total of 41 members. I've tried to find out the names of all the countries represented' date=' but haven't found them yet. I would imagine European nations and others with better women's rights are well represented. Just to play the devil's advocate, so to speak, [b']would it be better if the nations which have lousy to no women's rights never heard any opposing views?[/b] That's where I'm hoping some good comes from this. :)

 

This isn't the issue.

 

They already show up and listen, they just don't have a permanent seat, and therefore don't have veto power. Once you give someone a permanent seat, they have veto power. It only takes one veto to tube an entire resolution. The only nations with veto power are China, France, Russia, UK & USA. This wouldn't seem like that big of a deal except that there is a lot of back room dealing and "proxy war" fighting (eg: if Russia is angry at the US, they may veto something Iran wants vetoed, etc.).

 

 

a

[pqr]

That's only 10 seats out of a total of 41 members. I've tried to find out the names of all the countries represented' date=' but haven't found them yet. [/quote']

 

Of the 41 board members: 10 from Africa, 10 from Asia, 4 from Eastern Europe, 6 from Latin America and the Caribbean, 5 from Western Europe and 6 from contributing countries.

From the African Group were Angola, Cape Verde, Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Ethiopia, Lesotho, Libya, Nigeria and Tanzania.

From the Asian Group Bangladesh, China, India, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Japan, Malaysia, Pakistan, Republic of Korea and Timor-Leste .

From the Western European and Other States Estonia, Hungary, Russia, Ukraine, Denmark, France, Italy, Luxembourg and Sweden

From the group of Latin American and Caribbean States Argentina, Brazil, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Grenada and Peru .

From among the “contributing countries,” Mexico, Norway, Saudi Arabia, Spain, United Kingdom and United States

 

High hopes????

Edited November 12, 2010 by pqr

[Teachin'Mine]

Thank you for the explanation Asta. I didn't know about the one vote veto.

 

So again, if there were 10 seats available why were there only 11 in running? Why didn't those who are truly concerned with human and women rights put their name in the hat?