The Foreign Service Journal, September 2006

Critics will be loath to see the General Assembly strengthened, noting that the U.S. is frequently heavily outvoted there and has no veto. However, they should remember that most GA resolu- tions are only recommendations, or expressions of opinion. In addition, war and peace decisions are reserved to the Security Council. But as a means of reas- suring skeptics, the areas of “decision,” such as on the budget, should require 3/4 votes in the assembly rather than simple majorities. An Expanded Security Council If the U.N. Charter were to be redrafted from scratch, I would argue strongly for an expanded Security Council (20 countries instead of the current 15) drawn from three categories of membership. One category would consist of the five countries with the largest budget assessments, which currently in- cludes the U.S., Japan, Ger- many, the U.K. and France. A second group could encompass the five most populous members not already included in the first; today that would be China, India, Indonesia, Brazil and Pakistan, in that order. A third category of, say, 10 members could be elected by the General Assembly by majority vote in order of number of votes received. Such a charter would serve geographic diversity by placing selection of Security Council members in the hands of the General Assembly. It would also free the institution from the traditional “Buggins’ turn” system, under which regional groups currently get to decide candidates for top positions on a rotational basis with F O C U S S E P T E M B E R 2 0 0 6 / F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L 31 Adopting population- based, weighted voting could help rescue the General Assembly from its sleepy irrelevance.