Military Review

Russian veto in the Security Council, goodbye?

193
Will the permanent members of the UN Security Council give up the right of veto "voluntarily"? About a hundred states supported the initiative to voluntarily reject the use of the veto when considering UN actions in response to large-scale crimes.


Russian veto in the Security Council, goodbye?


In July, 2017, the speaker of the Ukrainian Verkhovna Rada, Andrei Paruby, at a meeting with UN Secretary General António Guterres (Guterres), demanded that the Russian Federation be deprived of its veto right in the Security Council.

“He called on the UN to deprive Russia of its veto in the UN Security Council. The aggressor has no right to decide in the UN a question regarding the state he attacked ", - wrote Paruby on Twitter.

After meeting with the Secretary General, Mr. Paruby said that "Ukraine is in dire need of a strong and effective UN." According to Parubiy, Russia should be “deprived of the right of veto on matters that concern Ukraine.”

Earlier, in February, the head of the Foreign Ministry of Ukraine, Pavel Klimkin, spoke about the same thing. According to him, Russia should be deprived of the right of veto in the Security Council when making decisions related to Ukraine. He called for a “stop abusing the veto”.

From the Russian State Duma received a comment. Kazbek Taysaev, a member of the State Duma Committee on CIS Affairs, regarded Andrei Parubiy’s appeal as nonsense.

“Nobody will listen to the government, especially the Parliament of Ukraine, today. This is the most stupid statement that could be made "- said Taisayev.

The forecast, apparently, did not come true, because about a hundred states supported the call to restrict the veto in the UN Security Council. True, the case so far comes down to the propaganda of the so-called voluntary refusal of the permanent members of the UN Security Council of the right of veto when considering actions in response to genocide and other crimes.

The initiative of France and Mexico, supported by almost a hundred countries, includes a provision on the voluntary refusal of the permanent members of the UN Security Council to use the veto when considering actions in response to genocide and other large-scale crimes. This was announced by Jean-Baptiste Lemoyne, Secretary of State at the Minister of European and Foreign Affairs of France at a special meeting at the UN headquarters on the issue of the right of veto. “Nearly 100 countries support this initiative,” he quotes. TASS. “This means that more than half of the UN member states understand how profitable it is.”

France’s proposal, according to Lemoine, is “extremely relevant”, since “there are no guarantees that we will not encounter new tragedies similar to those we recently saw during the long years of the war in Syria”.

The Secretary of State also reminded that with the support of Paris in the Security Council several resolutions on Syria were put to vote, but they all failed because of the “veto series” imposed by Russia and China.

In addition, Monsieur Lemoine recalled that for four years Paris and Mexico had been promoting an initiative to restrict the veto in the event of genocide, crimes against humanity and large-scale war crimes. Such a restriction could be achieved through an “informal, voluntary and collective agreement of the five permanent members of the Security Council,” that is, the charter should not be changed.

Permanent members are only voluntarily self-limited in situations where it will concern mass atrocities.

The idea of ​​France and Mexico, the initiator emphasized, is based on "deep conviction that a veto is not a right or a privilege, but a responsibility."

The idea of ​​J.-B. Lemoine got a sequel this time. As noted by TASS, at the same meeting, Aurelia Frick, who heads the Foreign Ministry of Liechtenstein, reported that 114 countries signed a "set of rules" for members of the Security Council. Countries should be guided by this “code”. responding to "mass atrocities."

This initiative was developed by the “Panel for Accountability, Consistency and Openness of the UN”. According to the “Group,” states that are elected as temporary members of the Security Council undertake a voluntary commitment not to vote against resolutions regarding actions in response to genocide and other crimes. According to Frick, the “vault” complements the French-Mexican initiative.

“To date, he has been supported by 114 states, large and small, from all regions of the world, including most of the current members of the Security Council. All of these states, the overwhelming majority of UN members, have pledged themselves to take timely and decisive action against the worst crimes in international law if they serve in the Council. They also promised not to vote against credible resolutions put forward for this purpose. So the code is a tool to restrict the veto. ”


According to Ms. Frick, such initiatives are topical in situations when massive crimes are being committed in Syria, Yemen, South Sudan, Myanmar “without adequate action from the Security Council.”

There was another initiative to reform the UN Security Council. It came from the so-called four.

The composition and functions of the UN Security Council are inherited since the Second World War, recalls the French portal Ferloo.com with reference to the agency France Press.

This situation has been the subject of sharp criticism for many years. The Security Council consists of 15 members, including five permanent members: the United States, Russia, China, France, and the United Kingdom. 10 non-permanent members are elected for a two-year term.

In order to maintain international security, the Security Council may impose sanctions and authorize the use of force. Its decisions are binding on 193 Members of the United Nations. Resolutions adopted must be approved by at least nine members of the Security Council and must not be prohibited through the imposition of a veto.

In its operation, the report notes, the Council is still “heavily influenced by the five major nuclear powers, which often hold informal meetings” to build a “consensus”, subsequently endorsed by the rest of the Council.

Last week, on Thursday, the G4 group, consisting of Germany, Japan, India and Brazil, declared the need to reform the Security Council regarding permanent membership as soon as possible.

The highest UN body "does not reflect the evolution of world reality," it is noted in their joint statement. It "must reflect the current world in order to be able to respond to complex problems." The reform is overdue, it can no longer be postponed. Transformations should include changes in the “methods of work”.

G4, like other members of the UN, advocates permanent seats for Arab and African countries.

The veto, we add, has been discussed in the context of the topic of reforming the UN Security Council for a long time, and current initiatives supported by many UN member countries will therefore definitely not lead to “voluntary” refusal of some countries from the right of veto and especially to the passing away of such a right.

And it's not just in Russia, which annoys the "international community" with the use of the veto on the Syrian issue. China and the United States also oppose changes to the rules. France has few chances to insist on its, and especially just in relation to “goodwill”. Paris will not defeat Washington, Beijing and Moscow, and the latter will not “voluntarily” give power to the Security Council. Rather, it will be carried out a reform of Sobvoz on the prescription G4, than the members of the Security Council will begin to fulfill the will of Paris and Mexico. That Monsieur Lemoine promotes his idea already 4 of the year, speaks in favor of this assumption.

Observed and commented on Oleg Chuvakin
- especially for topwar.ru
193 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Mavrikiy
    Mavrikiy 26 September 2017 05: 58
    +13
    How is it in a joke: "But Putin will not approve you"? Here it is.
    1. Finches
      Finches 26 September 2017 06: 23
      +35
      Ukraine - everything is clear here - its opinion has not rested on the international arena, but France doesn’t have the peace of mind that they relate to the victorious countries in the Second World War relatively, at the level of the lowered ones, therefore they are puffing! It is necessary to reform the UN, but as Lavrov said, it is extremely cautious, because we remember that the collapse, or rather, bringing the League of the nation to impotence of functions on the world stage, was one of the forerunners of the world massacre!
      1. Deck
        Deck 26 September 2017 07: 01
        +17
        The warrior ended 70 years ago, the USSR fell apart 26 years ago. France now has a larger GDP with a population 2.5 times smaller than Russia. Therefore, in the Security Council we have to get angry mostly. Alas
        1. Finches
          Finches 26 September 2017 08: 37
          +44
          In the UN Security Council, they can and do count GDP, but they keep in mind the number of nuclear warheads and their delivery vehicles ... hi
          1. 210ox
            210ox 26 September 2017 09: 09
            +14
            So there can be no fair game. When are cheaters sitting opposite. What kind of "voluntary" refusal are we talking about?
            1. Shurik70
              Shurik70 26 September 2017 11: 16
              +12
              When, finally, Russia will call power in Kiev what they are - the militant fascist junta that seized power in Kiev and demand the punishment of European criminals financing the civil war in Ukraine at the UN?
              And when will officially call Donbas and Lugansk the successors of Ukraine?
              1. iConst
                iConst 26 September 2017 11: 48
                +3
                Oleg Chuvakin, apparently, is not aware that France, the “winner” of WWII, rolled this offer.
                A chicken egg shell theme is not worth it.
                1. Shurik70
                  Shurik70 26 September 2017 12: 07
                  +16
                  The United States and England insisted that France be called Hitler's ally, and claimed reparations from it. But Stalin insisted that she be called the victim. He is kind too.
                  How much was there in the "French resistance"? 375 US intelligence agents, 393 British intelligence agents, 3 thousand German anti-fascists, 3 thousand Soviet citizens, an unknown number of Spanish anti-fascists, White Guard emigrants.
                  Where are the French? 868 agents of de Gaulle. FOOD !!!
                  But on the front, on the side of Hitler, French DIVISIONS were noted. VOLUNTEERS !!! 13 thousand people were volunteers only (they didn’t take half - they didn’t go through the medical examination !!! During the war !!!). The French soldiers who were captured were sent not to the camps, but dressed in the uniform of the Wehrmacht and the army !!! And they fought for Hitler!
                2. KYM7KII
                  KYM7KII 26 September 2017 19: 37
                  0
                  judging by the number of comments worth
                3. fyvaprold
                  fyvaprold 29 September 2017 23: 39
                  0
                  Quote: iConst
                  France, WWII “winner”,

                  Oh yes, but they shaved their whores on their bald head, as if not atonement for Charlemagne. Heroes, plaque fly. laughing
            2. Ulan
              Ulan 26 September 2017 11: 55
              +5
              How what? Of course, about the “voluntary refusal” of only Russia and China.
              With regards to expanding the composition of the permanent members of the Security Council, India and Brazil are definitely FOR, but Germany and Japan, as aggressor countries of the Second World War and condemned by the world community, are NOT.
              Will cost.
              1. iConst
                iConst 26 September 2017 12: 24
                +3
                Quote: Ulan
                With regards to expanding the composition of the permanent members of the Security Council, India and Brazil are definitely FOR, but Germany and Japan, as aggressor countries of the Second World War and condemned by the world community, are NOT.

                From the common phrase "Pandora's box" is already sick, because we say that such a solution will open the "mess of the box."
                A line of those who consider themselves worthy of joining the UN Security Council will immediately be lined up.
                Let us analyze the current situation, from the point of view of the "looking after" the regions:
                European continent: Britain is understandable. France, this pseudo-WWII winner, in principle, is in place - they have constant antagonism with Germany and Britain. It's profitable.
                American continent: USA. Neither give nor take. All the same, for a long time they still will not allow anyone to go across in their “backyard”.
                Middle East: Russia. There are possible “graters” with China.
                Asian region: China. The counterweight to Japan.
                The appearance of India there is fraught with antagonism with China and the excitement of Pakistan, Iran and others. Plus, the influence of India on BV, and there we do not need competitors.
                The Australian continent: Australia is there alone and that’s it. No reason.
                Well, Africa remains. The question is who. SOUTH AFRICA? Egypt? So they get over - that means - nobody.
                1. Ulan
                  Ulan 26 September 2017 12: 26
                  +1
                  Someone who is part of the BRICS. Those. SOUTH AFRICA.
          2. persh11
            persh11 26 September 2017 10: 37
            +5
            What does the GDP have to do with Paris and London having no opinion but just backing vocals in the USA
            1. Mavrikiy
              Mavrikiy 26 September 2017 10: 59
              0
              Quote: persh11
              What does the GDP have to do with Paris and London having no opinion but just backing vocals in the USA

              You turn on the Internet. Where there is news in the world, GDP is mentioned there. Where fair, where the setup, but everywhere.
              In the world of caricatures, GDP came out - God. Enough?
              What about BEC VOCAPA. They sang with the USA in dissonance.
          3. Kent0001
            Kent0001 26 September 2017 11: 01
            +1
            I agree. And the paddlers in this, too, are more extras, so there they are.
        2. ImPerts
          ImPerts 26 September 2017 08: 38
          +14
          Quote: Deck
          France now has a larger GDP with a population 2.5 times smaller than Russia.

          There is such a layout:
          1. 79807420129
            79807420129 26 September 2017 09: 51
            +23
            Here France, even if it refuses VETO, especially since it entered the club of the countries of the victors in V.O.V. through the back door.
            1. Kent0001
              Kent0001 26 September 2017 11: 06
              +2
              More precisely through the passage. Now I understand Keitel’s sarcasm regarding the paddling when signing a surrender.
          2. andj61
            andj61 26 September 2017 10: 23
            +3
            Quote: ImPerts
            Quote: Deck
            France now has a larger GDP with a population 2.5 times smaller than Russia.

            There is such a layout:

            good This is so - if we take GDP at domestic prices, then we will be in 12th place, but if we take into account world prices, then in 6th! At the same time, it is considered not production but registered transactions. More intermediaries - more GDP. So the GDP of the USA, the Netherlands (the flower market of the whole world), Great Britain, and France, is inflated. And real production is much less. But this is all arithmetic, and it can hardly affect the realities of the world. France is puffing at least somehow to draw attention to herself, to return the role that she played back 80-90 years ago, but only such initiatives are obtained. I do not think that the United States, China, Russia, even Great Britain are delighted with this initiative. The United States put forward its initiative - more "fairly" to distribute contributions to UN funding. Japan, Germany, India, Brazil, Mexico - have long claimed the status of a permanent member of the UN Security Council. So the UN reform is expected, but the process is not fast and obviously not tomorrow.
            1. Awaz
              Awaz 26 September 2017 10: 43
              +7
              in the USA and England (I don’t know about France) even the fulfillment of marital obligations is taken into account in GDP, moreover, it is taken into account at the rates of the coolest prostitutes in the surrounding region. Just as the housewives are preparing food from semi-finished products, at the prices of the coolest restaurants in the district. In addition, to assure the notary in the United States the statement is worth good money and in Russia 500 rubles (less than 10 bucks)
              1. Ulan
                Ulan 26 September 2017 11: 58
                +2
                You can compare the services of dentists in the United States and in Russia.
                The difference is also at times.
                Thus, it is very difficult to estimate real GDP at comparable prices.
                1. user1212
                  user1212 26 September 2017 13: 03
                  +1
                  Quote: Ulan
                  Thus, it is very difficult to estimate real GDP at comparable prices.

                  Purchasing Power Parity (PPP GDP). Also not perfect, but closer to the truth
                  1. Ulan
                    Ulan 26 September 2017 22: 18
                    +1
                    Well, there is no other yet. Probably so far.
                  2. Awaz
                    Awaz 29 September 2017 12: 19
                    0
                    Well, yes, a hamburger in the United States costs 5-7 bucks in Russia, but 1-2 And even in the States they recognize that a Russian hamburger is more real than the muck that is stuffed in the USA and the rest of the world
          3. ariman1
            ariman1 28 September 2017 18: 04
            0
            at purchasing power parity? Or by what indicator? This same PPP how and by whom is it calculated? Oh, based on statistics from Rosstat. stunned)) In general, for those who understand, GDP is a bloated indicator. For example, I have 10 rubles. I gave them to you as a dog (+10 rubles to GDP), you gave them to the bank (+10 to GDP) the bank gave them on credit (+10 rubles), then you issued securities (+10 rubles) for these I took the paper on credit (+10 rubles); the borrower spent these 10 rubles on something (+10 rubles)
            Now consider - initially it was 10 rubles, and GDP was created on them 60 (and in reality - all 100-120) And all the created GDP is just bullshit and air
            but industrial production, for example, cannot be fooled. Or new technologies, number of patents, etc.
        3. yehat
          yehat 26 September 2017 09: 24
          +18
          GDP is not a real expression of a product, but the sum of all resale transactions and additional services. The higher the cooperation or the longer the chain of intermediaries, the greater the difference between GDP and real production indicators.
          So do not push too much on this indicator, especially in relation to the USA, France and England.
          1. Diana Ilyina
            Diana Ilyina 26 September 2017 09: 52
            +15
            yehat Today, 09: 24 ↑ New
            So do not push too much on this indicator, especially in relation to the USA, France and England.
            That's it! The GDP indicator is largely inflated, especially in the so-called developed countries such as the USA, Britain or France, which have the largest external debt to date. Their GDP is based on the robbery of other countries. The locomotives of the economy are now China, India and Germany. In the USA, you have not found a product with the brand made in USA for a long time, everything, except for food, is produced in China, India, Japan, South Korea or Germany. In general, US GDP is based only on the dollar and military bases around the world. It's no secret that the dollar is no more than the cost of the paper on which it is printed.
            So here is this Mr.:
            Deck Today, 07:01 ↑ New
            The warrior ended 70 years ago, the USSR fell apart 26 years ago. France now has a larger GDP with a population 2.5 times smaller than Russia. Therefore, in the Security Council we have to get angry mostly. Alas
            I want to say that you can rush around with your GDP like Khima with a sieve, but those who have nuclear weapons and a modern army really respect it, but there are few such countries in the world, you can count on the fingers ...!
            1. 34 region
              34 region 26 September 2017 10: 22
              +3
              09.52. Diana! But what about the late USSR that had nuclear weapons and a powerful army? What to do with the current DPRK that has acquired nuclear weapons? What to do with sanctions? We have nuclear weapons, but they do not respect us and impose sanctions against us !?
              1. Standard
                Standard 26 September 2017 10: 46
                +3
                Quote: Region 34
                We have nuclear weapons, but they do not respect us and impose sanctions against us !?

                Wrong.
                Fear. For them, this is respect.

                You are not fooling for the United States because of "democracy"? And because of what?
                Answer yourself - and you will be happy
              2. Diana Ilyina
                Diana Ilyina 26 September 2017 10: 48
                +25
                34 region Today, 10: 22 ↑
                09.52. Diana! But what about the late USSR that had nuclear weapons and a powerful army? What to do with the current DPRK that has acquired nuclear weapons? What to do with sanctions? We have nuclear weapons, but they do not respect us and impose sanctions against us !?
                If you remember, the USSR was under sanctions all the time of its existence! Especially after Stalin refused to sign the Bretton Woods agreement. However, no sanctions and isolation prevented the USSR from becoming one of the two superpowers. Cuba, North Korea, Iran live under sanctions all the time and nevertheless move their countries in the direction where they themselves consider it necessary. Yes, it’s hard for these countries to live, but what’s better, to lie under mattresses and relax, or still have your foreign policy and your development course ?! Personally, I prefer to live worse, but regardless of the policies dictated from Washington. Russia is a self-sufficient country with all kinds of resources. Another thing is that the governance of this country leaves much to be desired, but unfortunately we have what we have. At least I do not see an alternative to Putin so far, although you do not like it as far as I know. In general, I am for returning to the rails of building socialism, but in modern realities I do not see how this could happen. I definitely don’t want another revolution, especially since the result of the revolution is known in advance, this is a complete collapse of Russia in the current realities!
                1. 34 region
                  34 region 26 September 2017 11: 13
                  +4
                  10.48. Diana! Thanks for the helpful comment! A plus!
                2. Ulan
                  Ulan 26 September 2017 12: 00
                  +5
                  I fully support! A plus!
              3. Rostislav
                Rostislav 26 September 2017 11: 43
                +3
                They do not respect, this is when they do not pay attention. GDP certainly cannot complain about it. And they impose sanctions precisely because we really want to push us into the backyard three times, because so many have begun to listen to Russia.
            2. yehat
              yehat 26 September 2017 10: 33
              +2
              No, the scheme there is completely different.
              The US gesheft receives from mediation, from the fact that their economy suffered the least after WW2 and managed to stake out a convenient position (for example, in chemistry or in R&D) and from abuse of this position, and not just from "robbery"
              all sanctions are aimed at maintaining this situation, which would be normal if it were not for abuses that are already too great.
              1. Standard
                Standard 26 September 2017 10: 42
                0
                Quote: yehat
                US gesheft receives from mediation, ......, and not just from the "robbery"

                The main (general) gesheft is a deception with a "golden" dollar replaced by a petrodollar.
                This is the main general product of the United States.
                Strictly speaking, they have nothing more.
                1. yehat
                  yehat 26 September 2017 11: 09
                  +3
                  the main mechanism is different.
                  The United States produces a currency that everyone uses as a reserve.
                  the more operations, the more the dollar is needed.
                  all the fuss about the gigantic US gdp and their well-being is a banal virtual increase in GDP. The rejection of the gold standard removed the limitation of this race, but the rejection was inevitable. The question is different - in what form did the USA do everything.
                  They did this fraudulently, sharing the costs of transforming the financial system to everyone who uses the dollar and US guarantees in trade. Along the way, the United States constantly abuses patents and other consequences of the concentration of the arbitration clause (sanctions, embargoes, black lists, etc.). This is what is called a choking friendly hug. And then there is the CIA, which takes care of the destruction of everyone who is able to somehow change the current situation and 117 acts of aggression against foreign states like Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq, Vietnam, Panama, Grenada, Hawaii, etc.
        4. Artyom
          Artyom 26 September 2017 10: 08
          +1
          This is how you calculated the size of GDP is interesting?
        5. Setrac
          Setrac 26 September 2017 10: 14
          +2
          Quote: Deck
          France now has a larger GDP with a population 2.5 times smaller than Russia.

          The population of France with colonies is much larger than the population of Russia, while the production of France with colonies is much less than production in Russia.
          1. Stas157
            Stas157 26 September 2017 10: 40
            +7
            Quote: Setrac
            The population of France with the colonies is much larger than the population of Russia, the production of France with the colonies

            With which colonies, may I? You are not late in time? Yes, France itself is now a US colony. But the truth is not bad at the same time.
            1. 97110
              97110 26 September 2017 12: 22
              +1
              Quote: Stas157
              But the truth is not bad at the same time.

              I believe that while it lives. Here a bored Arab woman will get bored with such a "good" life ...
            2. Setrac
              Setrac 27 September 2017 08: 14
              0
              Quote: Stas157
              With which colonies, may I?

              With the very ones where the French foreign legion is fighting, google “French North Africa” for the common development, and those two ignoramuses that you have set the pluses, let them also be enlightened.
              1. Sergej1972
                Sergej1972 27 September 2017 10: 18
                +1
                There is no French North Africa. these are independent states: Morocco, Algeria, etc. Why google it? You were obliged to learn from the school course about the collapse of the French colonial empire in the 40s and early 60s.
                1. Setrac
                  Setrac 27 September 2017 17: 19
                  0
                  Quote: Sergej1972
                  these are independent states: Morocco, Algeria, etc. Why google it?

                  Wikipedia will not bring you to good, in French North Africa there were not only these three states.
                  They are as independent as Japan, Germany, South Korea ... Ukraine.
                  Quote: Sergej1972
                  There is no French North Africa.

                  But what is the French foreign legion doing in Africa?
                  Quote: Sergej1972
                  You from the school course were required to find out about the collapse

                  If your knowledge is limited to the school curriculum, you probably need to be silent here in a rag and not shine with your ... knowledge.
                  1. Sergej1972
                    Sergej1972 29 September 2017 15: 54
                    0
                    The French Legion is partially located in Djibouti as a foreign military base. Djibouti, by the way, was the last colony of France in Africa. And do not confuse the policy of neocolonialism with the presence or absence of colonies.
                  2. Sergej1972
                    Sergej1972 29 September 2017 16: 55
                    0
                    Japan, Germany, South Korea are not independent states and are not represented in the UN? Wow, I didn’t know.
                    1. Setrac
                      Setrac 29 September 2017 19: 34
                      0
                      Quote: Sergej1972
                      Japan, Germany, South Korea are not independent states and are not represented in the UN? Wow, I didn’t know.

                      Surprise
          2. Sergej1972
            Sergej1972 27 September 2017 10: 16
            +1
            France has no colonies now. There are overseas departments (overseas regions), overseas territories and New Caledonia. But they are part of France itself and a small part of the population of the French Republic lives there. Only about three million people.
            1. Setrac
              Setrac 27 September 2017 17: 19
              0
              Quote: Sergej1972
              France has no colonies now.

              France has colonies.
              1. Sergej1972
                Sergej1972 29 September 2017 15: 51
                0
                France has no colony.
                1. ImPerts
                  ImPerts 30 September 2017 09: 38
                  0
                  Quote: Sergej1972
                  France has no colony.

                  No, formally not. But they called it beautifully - overseas territories ...
                  I didn’t climb far:
        6. meandr51
          meandr51 26 September 2017 10: 17
          +8
          Who cares how much they eat frogs and croissants and clean each other's shoes? In the international arena, only the armed forces are important for influence, the amount of funds to bribe elites and the country's ability to survive in the conditions of the blockade. Everything else is lyrics.
          1. 97110
            97110 26 September 2017 12: 30
            +1
            Quote: meandr51
            Internationally important for influence

            only courage. In the 40th year, which of the above did not suffice France? And what today allows the DPRK to "influence" so?
          2. Deck
            Deck 26 September 2017 12: 36
            +2
            Everything that you listed they have, including nuclear weapons and delivery vehicles. And they also have allies with nuclear weapons, which we do not have.
            Almost a third of the country drives their cars (including their AvtoVAZ wink )
        7. Barbulator
          Barbulator 26 September 2017 10: 32
          +2
          Quote: Deck
          Therefore, in the Security Council we have to get angry mostly.

          And who is stopping France, the "mistress of the seas" or the states from renouncing their veto? But they would like Russia to renounce its right. Therefore:
          1. Russia will never do this!
          2. If everyone to whom it belongs renounces their rights, then the UN will not be needed by anyone, since the veto is the foundation of the organization.
          1. your1970
            your1970 26 September 2017 11: 46
            +2
            Quote: Barbator
            2. If everyone to whom it belongs renounces their rights, then the UN will not be needed by anyone, since the veto is the foundation of the organization.
            -Moreover, FINANCIAL is the most unprofitable of the United States. Now they can block using a veto - and then you will either have to press force or bribe (by all means) SIGNIFICANT the number of states in order to carry out any decision or block our / Chinese proposal. Given the fact that besides us states that do not like the United States - a carriage, an interesting situation may arise that, for example, country 404 will say "Or grandmother - or we will vote against" ( and such disgusting countries as a car)
          2. Deck
            Deck 26 September 2017 12: 55
            +2
            Speaking of the "mistress of the seas." France is able to build the Mistral and we are not. That is, the iron box and weapons are still back and forth, but there is no filling. Japan, the USA, South Korea, Spain and even Australia are building, but we cannot. The industry is slain. In 2000
            1. Barbulator
              Barbulator 26 September 2017 22: 01
              0
              Quote: Deck
              France is able to build the Mistral and we are not.

              Why's that? But what about our nuclear icebreakers, where and who built them? It’s just that it was more profitable for us to buy them than ourselves, and the filling is still ours! So it's drooling and snot.
              1. Deck
                Deck 26 September 2017 22: 47
                0
                Do you have any idea what is inside these ships and what are they for? I think no.
                Nuclear-powered icebreakers are being built by the BALTIC FACTORY-SHIPBUILDING LLC if cho.
                1. Barbulator
                  Barbulator 27 September 2017 08: 13
                  +1
                  Quote: Deck
                  Do you have any idea what is inside these ships and what are they for?

                  But how do you know this? They say that they are being built somewhere in either Haiti or Tahiti, and some Puerto Ricans are building it. And with the filling, three people know the whole person, well, at least you are among them.
            2. your1970
              your1970 27 September 2017 08: 33
              0
              Deck
              and you still don’t understand, FOR WHAT we bought the Mistral and WHY it was more profitable for us to have them not sold out?
              1) They took Hollande (we can if desired !!) - the whole serious business world made sure that it was not independent, manageable and could easily be thrown. Therefore, Hollande flew like plywood over Paris. Perhaps he was a big hindrance to us ..... Operations such as StraussKanovskaya carry out all over the world to all who need it.
              2) Did NOT receive ships - which we really do not really need
              3)GOT the technology we need - which in another way, we could not get
              4) showed to the whole world that France as a supplier of weapons is not the best option. It didn’t affect directly, the process is long, but .. "We found spoons, but the precipitate remained !!"
              5) hinted to the whole world - that we NOT We are dependent on the United States in the supply of arms and equipment, and our defense industry is working.
              6) a cherry on a cake - earned a little (penalties) !!
              7) and this is what is visible - the tip of the iceberg. What is in the depths - we learn in 50 years ...

              Z.Y. I won’t be surprised - if for this military Operation Serdyukov awarded. If so, in my opinion it is deserved.
              1. Deck
                Deck 27 September 2017 14: 29
                0
                But I don’t wonder why they were bought. I know that in the current state of shipbuilding and machine building we cannot build it (without imported components)
                1. your1970
                  your1970 27 September 2017 14: 54
                  0
                  Quote: Deck
                  But I don’t wonder why they were bought. I know that in the current state of shipbuilding and machine building we cannot build it (without imported components)
                  - But in the USSR there was everything? Or sanctions on
                  were pipes of large diameter not at the time of the USSR? Or in the Urals in the 80s there were no German pre-war machinery? Or did Ikarus buy it just like that? Finnish paper for printing and packaging food? Pencils (!!!) Kohinorovskie? Indian leather goods (officially purchased in the early 80s)? Finnish ships, German ships, power engines, turbines ...
                  I am silent about VAZs - the whole plant was bought
                  Just as the USSR could not do without imports, so we cannot. Yes, then the volumes were less, but they were also not cheap. For example:
                  Icebreakers, commissioned by the Soviet Union, built at the Värtsilä shipyard in Helsinki (Finland) (Wärtsilä Helsinki Shipyard):
                  With a Soviet-made nuclear power plant
                  Taimyr
                  Vaigach
                  Icebreakers of the Baltic type. Power in 10500 els.
                  “Captain Belousov” - 1954 assigned to the port of Mariupol (in 2009).
                  "Captain Voronin" - 1955
                  "Captain Melekhov" - 1956
                  Polar icebreakers. All icebreakers with diesel electric engine installation.
                  Power in 22000 els.
                  “Moscow” - 1960, was assigned to the port of Vladivostok, decommissioned in 1992.
                  Leningrad - 1962, was assigned to the port of Vladivostok, decommissioned in 1992.
                  “Kiev” - 1965, worked in Murmansk and Vladivostok, decommissioned in 1993.
                  Murmansk - 1968, worked in Murmansk and Vladivostok, sold in 1995.
                  Vladivostok - 1969, was assigned to the port of Vladivostok, decommissioned in 1997.
                  Power in 36000 els.
                  “Ermak” - 1974, was assigned to the port of Vladivostok, since 2000 it has been assigned to the port of St. Petersburg.
                  “Admiral Makarov” - 1975, assigned to the port of Vladivostok.
                  “Krasin” - 1976, was assigned to the port of Murmansk, in 1990 transferred to Vladivostok.
                  Icebreakers such as "Captain Sorokin":
                  "Captain Sorokin"
                  "Captain Nikolaev"
                  "Captain Dranitsyn"
                  "Captain Khlebnikov"
                  Icebreaking transport vessels
                  "Ivan Petrov" - 1989 (Arkhangelsk), a research vessel.
                  River icebreakers of the type "Captain Evdokimov", project 1191
                  Captain Evdokimov (ship) 1983 year (Arkhangelsk)
                  Captain Babichev (ship) 1983 (Reap)
                  Captain Borodkin (ship) 1983 (Harvest)
                  Captain Chudinov (ship) 1983 year (Astrakhan)
                  Captain Metsayk (ship) 1984 (Podtesovo)
                  Avraamy Zavenyagin (ship) 1984 (Dudinka)
                  Captain Demidov (ship) 1984 (Rostov-on-Don)
                  Captain Moshkin (ship) 1986 (Taganrog)
                  They themselves did not want to, or still could not build ships of this class in the USSR?
                  1. Deck
                    Deck 27 September 2017 17: 20
                    0
                    Could build and built. In the USSR, icebreakers and supertankers could be built. And what they themselves could not do (for example, diesel engines) were bought from friendly countries (these are those who are scoundrels today, whom we fed and they forgot their place). Well, they did the turbines themselves, in Ukraine.
                    By the way, why are you listing me the names of the icebreakers? I worked on most of them. By the way, your list does not contain BDK from Poland and MPK from GDR, floating workshops and floating vessels, etc.

                    The thing is that “worthless frog eaters” are a nuclear, space and industrial power that can do a lot of things that we don’t. And at least that's why it deserves respect. Well, in the ability to smear all neighbors with shit to some inhabitants of VO there are no equal.
                    1. your1970
                      your1970 27 September 2017 23: 33
                      0
                      By the way, your list does not contain BDK from Poland and MPK from GDR, floating workshops and floating barracks, etc.I listed you built in absolutely capitalist country ships, in no way the "villains we fed" - not from Poland / East Germany, but ordinary capitalists from whom the USSR did not hesitate to buy ships, and in large quantities ...
                2. Setrac
                  Setrac 27 September 2017 17: 21
                  +1
                  Quote: Deck
                  I know that in the current state of shipbuilding and machine building we cannot build it (without imported components)

                  There are simply no such countries that everyone can do on their own in nature. This is not a feature of our state alone.
        8. Awaz
          Awaz 26 September 2017 10: 34
          +4
          although frog eaters are formally richer than the Russian Federation, but for a long time they have meant nothing in world politics. Therefore, they do not care whether there is a veto or not. Yes, and the wealth of many is just a money bubble, if you look closely. Veto is most beneficial to Washington. They used it the most in the world, saving criminal regimes sponsored or sponsored by them. It is unlikely that Israel forgot who saved them. Therefore, the theme is vetoless.
        9. trahterist
          trahterist 26 September 2017 10: 53
          0
          What side is the notorious GDP (an analogue of the average temperature in a hospital that has nothing to do with the real state of the economy) of France itself ??? The military man steers, and nobody canceled vigorous loaves.
        10. FREGATEN
          FREGATEN 26 September 2017 10: 53
          0
          Why should we puff up? We have a veto! And no one will take him away ... so don’t get drunk with France ..
        11. Orionvit
          Orionvit 26 September 2017 11: 29
          +2
          Quote: Deck
          France now has a larger GDP with a population 2.5 times smaller than Russia

          Well, if they are “richer”, then they are “stronger and smarter”, and therefore Russia, “legs” to the top. Ahrenitelnaya logic. Who has more money, that means that he is always right, are you always guided by this rule in life?
          1. Deck
            Deck 26 September 2017 12: 23
            +2
            Who has more money, that means that he is always right, are you always guided by this rule in life?

            Of course, my dear !!! I live in Russia, and not in some kind of USSR!
            As for “richer”, it means “stronger and smarter” - this is so. There is money, then there is education and health care. There are educated people plus money minus theft - there are rockets, planes, aircraft carriers. We have money and theft in enemy countries, plus we have good weapons - you won (Iraq is an example).
            As for the paws up - this is about modern Russia. Without modernization of the economy, there will be no destroyers or satellites in orbit. But modernization of the economy is not possible without a change in policy, since with the "United Russia" and its leader you can only finish up the rest of the budget. By the way, in our 140 millionth country there are many people who could lead it. And to think differently is to be a vile Russophobe.
            1. Orionvit
              Orionvit 26 September 2017 12: 37
              +2
              Quote: Deck
              Of course, my dear !!! I live in Russia, and not in some kind of USSR!

              Everything is clear, I have no more questions. It is clear that in Russia there are a lot of problems that need to be solved, but to write a comment made up of the "election slogans" of the opposition is, of course, yes.
              1. Deck
                Deck 26 September 2017 13: 00
                +2
                Do you have a complaint to the Communist Party and Fair Russia? Don't understand what you didn't like? What can not be stolen? This is what the Bible says.
            2. your1970
              your1970 27 September 2017 08: 49
              0
              Quote: Deck
              There are educated people plus money minus theft - there are rockets, planes, aircraft carriers.
              -remind me:
              1) in which country on criminal cases is a bunch of top naval officers (the sum of thefts about 8 billion dollars), which are also accused of participation in thematic belay sexual feel parties in honor belay 200th anniversary of some of their admiral?
              2) in which country was the grandiose (much more fun than ours) scam during the construction of the Berlin airport? And the growth of corruption crimes from 7000 in 2007 to 42000 cases in 2015?
              3) in which country the president is trying to shove and arrange his wife for fictitious work in his apparatus, and it has been proved that such a case in this country is NOT an isolated case and there have already been cases of fictitious work of wives ..
              4) together with which company of which Scandinavian country did our three mobile operators bribe the daughter of the Uzbek president for a monopoly in Uzbekistan?
              5) which country illegally agreed with another country on the World Cup in football (if only not with us) and this is proved

              Answer himself - And they all have rockets, planes, aircraft carriers (except the Swedes) and a lot ....
              1. Deck
                Deck 27 September 2017 14: 33
                0
                So what follows from this? Either they steal less, or education is better!
        12. Dyagilev
          Dyagilev 26 September 2017 11: 34
          0
          And "if war is tomorrow," will anything change regarding France? In the same way, with tears in their eyes, they will meet any aggressor, unlike Russia, which so far today will give anyone a worthy rebuff. All of them are blind guides, they want the rest of them to go into the abyss.
        13. Akuzenka
          Akuzenka 26 September 2017 12: 11
          +1
          All one did not understand their logic. They want to voluntarily give up their “veto rights”. So let them refuse. What does Russia have to do with it? They want to reform it on a voluntary basis? So let them. And so it is clear that this is one of the pieces of the mosaic of their preparation for war. I hope that Russia will not want to “voluntarily” lose its “veto right” and that it will not stop preparing for war, according to an ancient saying. Because, Russia wants peace and it does not need war.
        14. Vasilenko Vladimir
          Vasilenko Vladimir 26 September 2017 12: 17
          0
          Quote: Deck
          France now has a larger GDP with a population 2.5 times smaller than Russia

          III ????????
          what's next?
          1. Sergej1972
            Sergej1972 27 September 2017 10: 22
            0
            PPP GDP is higher for the Russian Federation.
        15. AleksUkr
          AleksUkr 26 September 2017 12: 22
          0
          Quote: Deck
          France now has a larger GDP with a population 2.5 times smaller than Russia

          So work hard and boost your GDP. Tongue wagging, do not work ...
          1. Deck
            Deck 26 September 2017 12: 40
            +1
            Can it be easier to reduce the population? wink I will support the government in this work
        16. nov_tech.vrn
          nov_tech.vrn 26 September 2017 13: 18
          +1
          GDP was invented by a Russian emigrant to the United States in the thirties of the 20th century, the goal is to give some kind of guideline to show that the great depression ended, that this thing is artificial and does not determine true well-being, it was discussed almost immediately, everything else was dancing from the evil one
        17. lukewarm
          lukewarm 26 September 2017 13: 42
          0
          Quote: Deck
          France has a larger GDP with a population 2.5 times smaller than Russia

          laughing How does GDP relate to veto power? GDP is generally slippery. I’m not saying that France has a weak economy, but let’s leave the GDP ... to the Liberoids government. At least in the UN, thank God, they are not guided
          1. Deck
            Deck 26 September 2017 23: 00
            +1
            “France is not at ease understanding that they relate to the victorious countries in the Second World War relatively, at the level of omitted ones, and therefore they are puffing!” - Do you propose to conduct a discussion at the level of a petty criminal, like Mr. Zyablitsov?
            This is the "dropped" from the Normandy-Niemen regiment shoulder to shoulder with our grandfathers fought? Or 73 from De Gaulle's “Free France”?
        18. Mavrikiy
          Mavrikiy 26 September 2017 17: 15
          0
          Quote: Deck
          The warrior ended 70 years ago, the USSR fell apart 26 years ago. France now has a larger GDP with a population 2.5 times smaller than Russia. Therefore, in the Security Council we have to get angry mostly. Alas

          As always mistaken.
          The USSR did not fall apart, it was turned off. People stayed, and this is not enough.
          "To puff up" - fi !. Putin, if you remember, always quietly (does not broadcast) admonishes a miracle! Reaches fast enough.
        19. Anton Valerevich
          Anton Valerevich 27 September 2017 01: 09
          0
          Should war happen, France will drop enemies to death with truffles and foie gras? laughing
          You know, comparing the power of countries in terms of their GDP is like comparing who is stronger — the one who has more money, or the one who has a machine gun in his hands.
        20. Mikhail Zubkov
          Mikhail Zubkov 29 September 2017 21: 40
          0
          Board she board is! "Deck", you are a boardwalk! Do you even know what GDP is? And purchasing power parity? Did you live in France? Did you consume travel services there? And in the French ports? Like Marseille, and not only? Is there a comparison with Murmansk? Did the French consider public debt per capita? So this is the paradox - for some reason, all international debts are summed up in this notorious GDP. And the amount of wild travel fines from millions of tourists, too. So who is in the UN Security Council, where France, at the insistence of the USSR, was permanently divided, puffing up? They are afraid of us there, which means they respect us, but France is puffing up there!
      2. Stas157
        Stas157 26 September 2017 09: 21
        +11
        Quote: Finches
        UN must be reformed
        Any reform will be against the interests of Russia. The main question is, who are the reformers? Behind the West there are more than 100 states in the UN. And how many for Russia? Only one right of veto saves.
        The fact that Lavrov said that the UN needs to be reformed, but very carefully, it needs to be read differently. - Russia does not want any UN reform! Lavrov just did a good face for partners.
        1. Setrac
          Setrac 26 September 2017 10: 16
          +8
          Quote: Stas157
          Any reform will be against the interests of Russia.

          Who wants to reform the UN must win the Third World War.
          1. Standard
            Standard 26 September 2017 10: 38
            +2
            Quote: Setrac
            Who wants to reform the UN must win the Third World War.

            Class !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
          2. Ulan
            Ulan 26 September 2017 12: 03
            +2
            And move the UN headquarters from the US to a neutral country.
            1. Akuzenka
              Akuzenka 26 September 2017 12: 13
              +1
              Yes, for example, to the Mongolian People's Republic! To Ulaanbaatar!
              1. Ulan
                Ulan 26 September 2017 12: 18
                +3
                You will laugh, but initially I also wrote this, to Mongolia. But he deleted it, because he regretted Mongolia, and the United States would "send its aircraft carriers" there.
                But India is quite suitable.
                1. Standard
                  Standard 26 September 2017 20: 58
                  +1
                  Quote: Ulan
                  But India is quite suitable.

                  It is necessary not to Eurasia, but to Africa.
                  There will be an island of civilization, maybe emigration will decrease.
        2. Anton Valerevich
          Anton Valerevich 27 September 2017 01: 22
          0
          And if each of these 100 puppet states is divided by 100, you get 10000 puppet states, and so on to infinity.
    2. Plombir
      Plombir 26 September 2017 08: 03
      +4
      This is very important what the patient said for the whole head of parubia. You understand, a great man! As he says, so they will! Vysotsky also composed a song about him specially — there are few real violent ones, and there are no leaders. On, or in dill now tuyeva bunch of leaders. Some are still without reference.
      1. Snail N9
        Snail N9 26 September 2017 09: 03
        +4
        Parubiy and other "parrots-butt" voiced only what they put into their mouth the lord. Remember, kakly vomited before this gene assembly and squealed joyfully that “a big surprise” awaits Russia at this gene assembly. I think that the United States will put pressure on the "UN reform" to abolish the "veto". However, the mechanism of how they are going to do this is unclear, since "it is impossible to deprive a UN Security Council member of the veto, it is spelled out in the UN Charter, and the Charter can only be changed by unanimous decision of the five permanent members of the Security Council."
        1. Plombir
          Plombir 26 September 2017 09: 28
          +5
          A pin will never go to cancel the veto! Fussing around the UN has other goals.
          1. Awaz
            Awaz 26 September 2017 10: 37
            +2
            this is the right train of thought. The veto is most beneficial to the United States and they use it the most in the world. They save in this way their lured gangster regimes, and even Ukraine was also saved. Khokhlov would have to remember this.
        2. Kent0001
          Kent0001 26 September 2017 11: 15
          0
          Yes, there will be nothing. France and Mexico are not the countries that would seriously listen to them in this matter ... Yes, and India too ....
    3. Vend
      Vend 26 September 2017 10: 16
      +3
      They will take away the VETO right, this will be the beginning of the UN disbandment. . Russia can use a very good move - to quit the UN. I think it will be so, and then China. UN powers will pass to the BRICS. Although there may be another scenario.
    4. siberalt
      siberalt 26 September 2017 13: 28
      0
      According to the UN Charter, only the Security Council itself can make a decision on reforming the Security Council with the full unanimity of its members. The same applies to the dissolution of the Security Council. Anyone can leave, but whoever comes in his place will decide the remaining members, again with complete unanimity. Whether the United States wants to remain alone with its satellites against the rest of the world is another question. hi
  2. aszzz888
    aszzz888 26 September 2017 06: 22
    +3
    Paris cannot be defeated by Washington, Beijing and Moscow, and the latter will not “voluntarily” give up power in the Security Council.

    ... and why should the French get into a bottle from which they can no longer get out? ... PR, or from a lack of gray matter? ... bully
    1. Vladimirets
      Vladimirets 26 September 2017 06: 41
      +6
      Quote: aszzz888
      Paris cannot be defeated by Washington, Beijing and Moscow, and the latter will not “voluntarily” give up power in the Security Council.

      Naturally, the leading world players do not want to obey the will of “dwarfs" like Liechtenstein or Fiji, because there are more of them stupid.
    2. Amurets
      Amurets 26 September 2017 08: 18
      +7
      Quote: aszzz888
      .. and why should the French get into a bottle from which they can’t get out anymore? ... PR, or from a lack of gray matter ?.

      Both. Under pressure from Poland, the French did not give us the "Mistral." And then the Poles threw the French with an order for helicopters.
      Text copied from Nalin.Ru
      “On the air of RMF radio station, ex-President of Poland Alexander Kwasniewski admitted: Warsaw really promised to buy 50 H225M Caracal helicopters from the French Airbus Helicopters to compensate Paris for the losses caused by the disruption of the Mistral ships deal with Russia. The text was copied from the Nalin.Ru website.
      It became known that now Warsaw is going to buy helicopters from the Americans. In addition, Poland is likely to refuse to buy submarines from the French. As a response to the fact that French President Francois Hollande was offended by the "kid" with helicopters and did not come to meet with the Polish leadership. "The text was copied from the site Nalin.Ru.
    3. Snail N9
      Snail N9 26 September 2017 09: 26
      +3
      Why did the French "get into the bottle"? Actually, there are two reasons: 1-French carried out an analysis and saw that all of their external and, indeed, gradually and internal copies of the American. They have interests — international corporations and world banks — above all else, and everything else is secondary, why do they need a “veto” —all American gentleman will do for them if that. Well, and secondly, the French cockerel still sometimes, I want to put forward the "initiative", run ahead of the gentleman, looking back at his approval, and even PR-type and "we" matter "..
      1. Akuzenka
        Akuzenka 26 September 2017 12: 15
        0
        And how can they not copy it, if they are its satellites, no more. Not even allies.
      2. Awaz
        Awaz 26 September 2017 21: 07
        0
        Eaters of frogs from the late 30s of the last century have no power on a global scale. A place in the Security Council was given to them by Stalin. And for some time De Gaulle justified the advance invested by Stalin in him. However, the current generation no longer understands anything and, in terms of re-phoning the United Nations, would propose depriving such freeloaders of the right of veto and expel them from the Security Council.
        Churkin already hinted about this to these amphibian eaters, they don’t understand.
  3. Nashensky city
    Nashensky city 26 September 2017 06: 51
    +7
    In vain the French were included in the Security Council on a permanent basis. Roosevelt’s plan for the “four policemen” should be left unchanged
    1. yehat
      yehat 26 September 2017 09: 27
      +1
      I do not agree. France is needed in the Security Council.
      1. Nashensky city
        Nashensky city 26 September 2017 09: 50
        +6
        For what? To be another American vassal?
        1. Akuzenka
          Akuzenka 26 September 2017 12: 22
          0
          No, to distinguish the voices of American mongrel. And they yelp the same way, because you can confuse Germany with Italy or Sweden any there.
      2. Standard
        Standard 26 September 2017 10: 26
        +1
        Quote: yehat
        I do not agree. France is needed in the Security Council.

        What for? How is the "victorious" power?
        1. yehat
          yehat 26 September 2017 11: 15
          +1
          France has enough power to reckon with it. They have a foreign legion and AUG. There are nuclear weapons. If this force is not formally represented in the Security Council, there will be a lot of problems far greater than its presence on the council.
          1. Nashensky city
            Nashensky city 26 September 2017 12: 40
            +4
            [quote = yehat] [quote] They have an AUG. There are nuclear weapons [/ quote]
            India also has both. What problems are caused by the absence of India among the permanent members of the UN Security Council?
            1. yehat
              yehat 26 September 2017 17: 12
              +1
              india constantly in irregular sat members
              1. Nashensky city
                Nashensky city 26 September 2017 17: 36
                +3
                Quote: yehat
                india constantly in irregular sat members

                From 92 to the present, once they were in the Security Council
                Quote: yehat
                Foreign Legion and AUG. There are nuclear weapons. If this force is not formally presented in the Security Council, there will be a lot of problems

                What problems are you talking about?
          2. Sergej1972
            Sergej1972 27 September 2017 10: 24
            0
            She has nuclear weapons. And the Foreign Legion, with its small size, is the power to carry out police operations in Africa.
  4. inkass_98
    inkass_98 26 September 2017 06: 55
    +10
    UN reform is undeniably ripe. The organization is really a puppet of the United States, located in the United States and acts at its direction. And the talk should not even be about reform, but about the re-organization of an international organization, with a reflection of the real balance of power in the world. The Security Council has much more reason to sit in India and Brazil than France itself, and to add Germany and Japan as the main allies of the United States there - to make the work of the Security Council even more predictable and useless. And certainly it’s not worth responding to the calls of some half-fool from the now rapeseed-corn republic; such reforms are not being done on a whim of the hind left foot.
    1. kashtak
      kashtak 26 September 2017 11: 19
      0
      Quote: inkass_98
      UN reform is undeniably ripe. The organization is really a puppet of the United States, located in the United States and acts at its direction.
      so it will be if you cancel the "veto". perhaps this is the most effective measure against the dictates of one country. this proves the number of countries that signed the American declaration, even without discussion.
      Quote: inkass_98
      The Security Council has much more reason to sit in India and Brazil than in France itself, and to add Germany and Japan as the main US allies there - to make the work of the Security Council even more predictable and useless.

      About India and Brazil I agree. especially India. that would be objective. but France and Germany and Japan have a moot point. although the significance of old Europe is no longer underestimated, just as Japan is not worth it.
      Quote: inkass_98
      And certainly it’s not worth responding to the calls of some half-fool from the now rapeseed-corn republic; such reforms are not being done on a whim of the hind left foot.
      correctly, completely agree of course such organizations, if they are reforming, are not just on a whim. especially such as to say specific persons. the only question is who wrote the cheat sheet to him.
  5. Vard
    Vard 26 September 2017 07: 03
    +11
    What is characteristic ... these comrades do not understand that all this is just conceived against them ... They did not veto Libya ... and where is Libya now ...
    1. 34 region
      34 region 26 September 2017 10: 28
      0
      07.03. Ward! That's for sure. But there is another question. Well, how will Russia be blamed for this? Do not blame? But today they blame. And in relation to Georgia, and Syria, and Crimea, and Ukraine, ....
    2. Navigator Basov
      Navigator Basov 26 September 2017 17: 10
      0
      So France - one of the initiators of the intervention in Libya - is the first to refuse the right to veto. And really, why is it France? Genocide? No, not heard. Overthrow of objectionable governments? Here let’s do it without a veto.
  6. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 26 September 2017 07: 30
    +7
    «Called on the UN deprive Russia of veto power in the UN Security Council. The aggressor does not have the right to decide at the UN a question regarding the state he attacked. ”

    The UN has taken a peak and has begun to implement the "strict recommendations" of Ukraine. On this occasion, in Russia they say: "With a pork snout and in the Kalash ranks." And France with a young president, who really wants to show his self and raise the fallen rating, is too glimpse on the foreign policy horizon.
  7. mkop
    mkop 26 September 2017 08: 27
    +9
    According to the Group, states elected as temporary members of the Security Council commit themselves voluntarily not to vote against resolutions relating to actions in response to genocide and other crimes.

    That is, according to the “Group”, should states support any nonsense that might appear in these new “resolutions against genocide”? And in light of recent events, it may turn out to be such that the works of psychos from a psychiatric hospital may seem like a masterpiece of thought and objectivity.
    I have a feeling that the one who offers it still has not grown out of diapers, and is blissfully unaware of what politics is. The fact that this policy is not aimed at establishing "world peace." Many more countries are guided by a completely different idea in this regard - war in other countries - that’s good for them. It gives resources, money, increases the welfare of its citizens. And the lives of others - what are they worth? Nothing for them.
    One gets the feeling that people offering this have forgotten that the UN Council has a country like the United States. And that to refuse the right of veto to such countries as Russia and China is tantamount to simply withdrawing from this UN itself. It may not be immediately, but in a few years, the UN will become a body of suppression of those who disagree with US foreign policy and do not comply with their external interests. After all, look how simple it all becomes: they made up a story about genocide (violation of human rights, “non-infection” of the brain by democracy - emphasize the necessary), showed videos on channels like CNN, BBC and other “C”. And that’s all - they made a resolution, and the bombs even to the state of a traveled desert. The rest should not vote against - after all, genocide, democracy is not enough.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Snail N9
      Snail N9 26 September 2017 08: 51
      +4
      And so it is. The United States has long taken the course of the enslavement of all countries of the world through "international" organizations under its control. Unfortunately, they have nothing to oppose here because, thanks to their wealth, they create these organizations, give them control, prohibiting rights, and so on. There is only one way out - to create your own organizations together with China and other interested countries. Only this thing is long.
      1. Standard
        Standard 26 September 2017 10: 24
        0
        Quote: Snail N9
        Unfortunately, they have nothing to oppose here because, thanks to their wealth, they create these organizations, give them control, prohibiting rights, and so on.

        So the United Nations was by no means created by the United States.
  8. Conductor
    Conductor 26 September 2017 08: 30
    +7
    France!? Mexico!!! One country of compradors, another generally a cartel, or something else. But France, after the Second World War, keep quiet, remember the exhibition of the Aglitz photographer, Paris in the occupation, when the USSR fought, you peacefully lived.
    1. Babalaykin
      Babalaykin 26 September 2017 10: 39
      +2
      Not that they lived, they fought for Hitler

      There are no exact figures about how many Frenchmen fought against the USSR on the Eastern Front, there is only data on captured Frenchmen - there were 23 French citizens in Soviet captivity.

      https://topwar.ru/5524-neznakomaya-franciya-franc
      uzy-protiv-sssr.html

      It’s very profitable to send a couple of thousand to this front, a couple of thousand to that one. At the end of the war, profit, you are on the side of the winners, the losers are declared marginalized, but they do not really suffer from this.
      1. zoill
        zoill 26 September 2017 11: 54
        0
        there are quite accurate numbers: more than half a million!
  9. Conductor
    Conductor 26 September 2017 08: 34
    +3
    Register same-sex marriages, adopt children (adopt) That's when a fagot from love in the ass will give birth to a child himself (or a lesbian from licking), and then have children for yourself.
  10. ImPerts
    ImPerts 26 September 2017 08: 42
    +2
    Russia should be deprived of the right of veto in the Security Council when making decisions related to Ukraine.

    "President of the world" decided to tackle world problems ?!
  11. afrikanez
    afrikanez 26 September 2017 08: 43
    +6
    If it weren’t for the veto, a bunch of NATO would have turned the rest of the world into their slaves long ago. What is not clear here, what the West and the USA want.
  12. Conductor
    Conductor 26 September 2017 08: 47
    +2
    There is a good joke (from the time of the late Vitaly Churov) There is a meeting of the UN Security Council, here again, the doors are wide open, some militants break in, with machine guns, machine guns, - Who is Churov here !!! ??? That's it, that's it, that's it. - Vitalik, get down.
    1. Navigator Basov
      Navigator Basov 26 September 2017 17: 12
      +1
      Vitaly Churkin is he.
  13. netslave
    netslave 26 September 2017 08: 48
    +1
    “He called on the UN to deprive Russia of its veto in the UN Security Council ...”, Parubiy wrote on Twitter.

    That feeling, when you look at it from your own importance.
  14. Chater57
    Chater57 26 September 2017 09: 35
    +2
    I would set an example in the place of France - voluntarily renounced the veto and that’s it. It is strange that such a simple solution does not occur to the French.
    1. 97110
      97110 26 September 2017 12: 43
      0
      Quote: Chater57
      It is strange that such a simple solution does not come

      Madame Macron's head ...
  15. faiver
    faiver 26 September 2017 09: 40
    +3
    the French wouldn’t be better at yapping - remember one Libya, turned the country into hell knows that ...
  16. Altona
    Altona 26 September 2017 09: 53
    +7
    Quote: ImPerts
    There is such a layout:


    And there is such a deal.
  17. alekc75
    alekc75 26 September 2017 10: 09
    +1
    Why did Stalin give the frogmen a place in the United Nations ?????? to these parasites a place in a landfill
    1. Kent0001
      Kent0001 26 September 2017 11: 26
      0
      Probably because of De Gaulle
  18. boboss
    boboss 26 September 2017 10: 14
    0
    Well, what ... Syria has suffered a place in the Security Council ...
  19. Alexey Gavrikov
    Alexey Gavrikov 26 September 2017 10: 16
    0
    I counted a number of politicians in Ukraine and they are not comforting for this year. The year for Ukraine and Putin is the same and it is -6 + 7 + 7 = 20. So what will happen to Putin will be with Ukraine. But the politicians of Ukraine are not having a sweet end to the year.
  20. Standard
    Standard 26 September 2017 10: 18
    0
    Heading something, heading! Why only a Russian veto?
    Is the author such a beast or moderator of a topvar?
  21. Babalaykin
    Babalaykin 26 September 2017 10: 22
    0
    Changes to the rules are also opposed by China and the United States.

    How is the United States not profitable to change the current situation ?? Now three parties in the Security Council are de facto: Russia, China and the United States with the rest.

    Who can imagine in what situation the British and the French will vote against the Americans ????
  22. Offspring
    Offspring 26 September 2017 10: 24
    0
    The stages of acceptance of ideas - 1) This is nonsense, 2) Well, who knows, maybe it really is, 3) Yes, it always has been, and even in textbooks they say so.
  23. grandfather Mih
    grandfather Mih 26 September 2017 10: 29
    0
    Uye. Andlyusa Palubiy- "self-respect". "... about a hundred states supported the call to limit the veto in the UN Security Council." He did not fasten the width and .... The junta will be torn right now: in line!
  24. Altona
    Altona 26 September 2017 10: 38
    +2
    Quote: alekc75
    why did Stalin give the frogmen a place in the united nations?

    --------------------------
    I remembered Keitel's smirk, who saw the French representative at the signing of the Act on the unconditional surrender of Germany: "And you also" defeated us "?"
    1. Svetlana Ivanova-NT
      Svetlana Ivanova-NT 26 September 2017 10: 56
      +1
      Of course. Keitel is a great authority. Like the "talented" Goebels.
    2. weksha50
      weksha50 26 September 2017 20: 50
      0
      Quote: Altona
      "And you, too," won "?"


      I'm afraid to make a mistake ... But it seems he said so: "What, THESE were we defeated too? "...
      This "THESE" sounded pretty insulting ... And - in the case ...
  25. uskrabut
    uskrabut 26 September 2017 10: 42
    +1
    "Permanent members will only voluntarily limit themselves to those situations when it comes to mass atrocities"

    The question remains open, who will determine where the atrocities are carried out and the culprit of the atrocities? Such a sentence smacks of garbage.
    1. weksha50
      weksha50 26 September 2017 20: 48
      0
      Quote: uskrabut
      The question remained open, who will determine where the atrocities are carried out and the culprit of the atrocities


      Hmm ... Naturally, the "lamp of democracy" ... lol
  26. Andrey Porushar
    Andrey Porushar 26 September 2017 10: 46
    +3
    In fact, such countries as Russia, the USA, and China do not care at all about the UN, a bunch of outsiders and upstarts, who they just allow them to whine there, closing their formidable grin ... It's like a well-fed wolf, looks indulgently at the sheep. And if you take into account the moment that - the UN is a structure manipulated by the United States, the Russians can easily give up on any decision made there. There is Russia and there is the rest of the world, this is what you need to stand on!
  27. asavchenko59
    asavchenko59 26 September 2017 11: 05
    0
    This, God forgive me, France was among the winners in the 2nd World War and in the Security Council only thanks to I.V. Stalin, who felt sorry for De Gaulle crawling in front of him. And here she is thanks! Frogs, they are reptiles .....
  28. nickgv
    nickgv 26 September 2017 11: 06
    0
    Who is this Parubiy, and what are his rights (merits). Personal assistance to the coup in Ukraine? Thousands of victims on conscience? So sit the rest, to say the least. Moreover, do not meet with authorized UN. Otherwise, the UN begins to stink indecently.
  29. Livonetc
    Livonetc 26 September 2017 11: 06
    +1
    Quote: Deck
    The warrior ended 70 years ago, the USSR fell apart 26 years ago. France now has a larger GDP with a population 2.5 times smaller than Russia. Therefore, in the Security Council we have to get angry mostly. Alas

    They may dream of having their own GDP, but so far only the honey-like Olandis and muddy Macrons.
    And the population is less and less European.
    Soon, historically, French culture can only be seen in the museum.
    A different culture of cultures prevails.
    And indeed, the stability of France as a state is very doubtful at the present stage.
    I can only cry
    -Same Swee Ebdo!
    It’s a pity people, of course, but they’re reaping what’s going on.
  30. SergF123
    SergF123 26 September 2017 11: 16
    0
    The frogmen were allowed into the "winners" of fascist Germany because of pity, and they decided to spoil them!)
  31. demo
    demo 26 September 2017 11: 18
    +1
    “He called on the UN to deprive Russia of the veto in the UN Security Council. The aggressor does not have the right to decide at the UN a question regarding the state that he attacked, ”Parubiy wrote on Twitter.
    “No one will listen to the government, especially the parliament of Ukraine, today. This is a stupid statement that could be made, ”said Taysaev.

    That one statement is stupid, that the second.
    And the biggest stupidity is that Russia has missed its historical chance to “cancel” Ukrainization and regain its historical status.
    Street rules - if you don’t beat, then they beat you.
  32. yehat
    yehat 26 September 2017 11: 18
    +1
    no one forgot what the Soviet Union’s voluntary refusal from Gorbachev’s submission led to.
    millions of people suffered, for the sake of safety and well-being of which they built what they unilaterally abandoned. Did everyone forget about it?
  33. Rostislav
    Rostislav 26 September 2017 11: 33
    0
    The normal move is to voluntarily give up power. Typically, such a requirement, slightly disguised as a proposal, is made when they have the power to make it happen. And here is the usual chatter.
  34. solovald
    solovald 26 September 2017 11: 34
    0
    Mlyn, well, these are the paddlers, those are the "winners" in the 2nd World War, where do they climb? They would be silent in a rag ...
  35. zoill
    zoill 26 September 2017 11: 34
    0
    There are no mechanisms in the UN for the deprivation of this right, and voluntarily lose it - there are no fools either!
  36. Orionvit
    Orionvit 26 September 2017 11: 34
    +1
    In order to maintain international security, the Security Council may impose sanctions and authorize the use of force.
    The states bombed Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, without any UN sanctions, but on the contrary contrary. The question is, what does such an organization decide in general, where besides chatter at all levels, there is nothing.
    1. mkop
      mkop 26 September 2017 11: 40
      0
      An organization cannot bite a lactating hand. It can’t be all there. She will die without this hand.
      1. Orionvit
        Orionvit 26 September 2017 12: 17
        0
        Can't an organization bite off a lactating hand
        The UN budget is made up of contributions from all members of the organization, and not one. But the “partners” who, without looking, will vote for any majority of the US resolutions there, are another question.
        1. mkop
          mkop 26 September 2017 12: 31
          0
          I am in the know. Here are just a US contribution - 22% of the budget. This is a lot, if you count how many participants there.
  37. nikvic46
    nikvic46 26 September 2017 11: 40
    0
    The analyst should analyze, not shout, “Lelik is all gone ..” Paruby forgot where he was speaking, that is, he forgot that
    acts not in a punitive body, but in the UN. And if you follow its logic, France should be severely punished for their crimes in Libya. The law is neither about the Russian veto, nor about the veto of other countries.
  38. Vasilenko Vladimir
    Vasilenko Vladimir 26 September 2017 11: 51
    0
    on the voluntary refusal to use the veto when considering UN actions in response to widespread crimes.

    but let's be more precise with the wording in the proposal it says about genocide and other war crimes
    Well, apart from the fact that this is still a blah blah show about which even on the official UN website a word
  39. The comment was deleted.
  40. Music
    Music 26 September 2017 13: 19
    0
    Well, if you supplement the Security Council, then maybe Pakistan and India. Two enemies are quite balanced. And there will be fewer problems. And the rest of the ideas, of course, are interesting. But who will implement them?
  41. av58
    av58 26 September 2017 13: 20
    +1
    Nonsense. Macron wants to score political points in front of small countries, so he is vomiting. Under no circumstances will Russia and China give up the veto, so there’s nothing to discuss.
  42. Berg berg
    Berg berg 26 September 2017 14: 14
    0
    Ukraine, as the former part of the recipient Russia of the USSR, should generally be deprived of the right to vote at the UN. And later, as an under-country carrying out genocide with residents of Donbass, it should be withdrawn from the UN! Well, if Great Russia is deprived of a voice, then it will be released from all the obligations of UN participants on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons and high-tech developments to other countries. But I'm sure the UN will not do that.
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. Berg berg
        Berg berg 26 September 2017 14: 30
        0
        Members with the proposal of Russia to increase votes in the UN! From the fact that one of the "brothers" from the dill drug went crazy, now there are problems.
      2. valerij
        valerij 29 September 2017 21: 56
        0
        There are many members, but only five in the Security Council ..
  43. Cynic
    Cynic 26 September 2017 14: 30
    0
    Provocative topic headings in trend?
  44. Altona
    Altona 26 September 2017 15: 15
    +1
    Quote: Svetlana Ivanova-NT
    Of course. Keitel is a great authority.

    ----------------------------
    What does authority have to do with it? I am talking about Keitel's bewilderment as a representative of the Wehrmacht, where the French served about two more than in the Resistance.
    1. valerij
      valerij 29 September 2017 22: 00
      +1
      So the French worked in their factories for the glory of the Reich, 15-20% better than the Germans themselves. Well, while Keitel was in the process, he threw the French "And these also defeated us?" ..
  45. Vasily Krylov
    Vasily Krylov 26 September 2017 15: 15
    +1
    And chaos will come.
  46. Ilya Markelov
    Ilya Markelov 26 September 2017 16: 38
    0
    Stalin and Roosevelt created the United Nations, with only one goal - to prevent a conflict between the two superpowers and nuclear war. That in which both powers have not reached agreement cannot be accepted. Dot. This is the foundation of the basics. The Anglo-Saxons made a fuss and pushed such a veto to other nuclear powers, which in general is logical. If one of the nuclear powers is deprived of the right of veto, then why the UN at all? Russia in general is the only country in the world that has intensively developed nuclear weapons in recent decades, while the United States has the youngest nuclear ballistic missile, Triiden 2, developed in the early 60s, then Russia has a super-advanced robotic Sineva that is not vulnerable to any missile defense. Those. we are the only country in the world capable of guaranteed destruction of the States, there has been no nuclear parity in the world for a long time, there is a huge advantage in our favor and they cannot do anything about it. Their advantage is the manipulation and divorce of suckers inside Russia, they need to wait for the second Gorbachev and Yeltsin, so there is no point in aggravating it. But these cries of Ukrainians cause only shame, they are trying so hard to please the owner, not receiving anything in return, NOTHING, these are generally free slaves who do not even need to be fed. If in Japan or Poland they specifically were bashing like that, then here Ukrainians are worth nothing for them, it's just a disgrace!
  47. Msta
    Msta 26 September 2017 16: 45
    +2
    Mexico is also climbing .... Let them restore order in their own country, otherwise it is dangerous to walk the streets ...
  48. VIA_56
    VIA_56 26 September 2017 16: 55
    +2
    More than a hundred states ... Immediately I recall Chatsky's words: "And who are the judges?" Who are these sticks?
    Russia has conquered its RIGHT VETO with the blood of millions of those who died in the Second World War, which for us was and remains the Great Patriotic War. And this WE must decide who has the right to veto, and who should not sit next to him. Especially such creatures as Turchinov and Parubiy. Their place is generally behind bars for life. Yet this brown evil did not tell us what we have the right to and what not.
  49. Reserve buildbat
    Reserve buildbat 26 September 2017 17: 44
    +2
    The highest UN body "does not reflect the evolution of world reality," it is noted in their joint statement. It "must reflect the current world in order to be able to respond to complex problems." The reform is overdue, it can no longer be postponed. Transformations should include changes in the “methods of work”.

    Here I agree. It is necessary to reform, first of all, by throwing from the UN into the trash of the history of the FSA
  50. weksha50
    weksha50 26 September 2017 20: 40
    0
    "at the same meeting, Aurelia Frick, chairing Foreign Ministry of Liechtenstein, reported that 114 countries have signed a "set of rules" for members of the Security Council. This "code" of the country should be guided. reacting to "mass atrocities" "...

    Mdaaaaa .... Over 100 countries have signed ... Liechtenstein ... Monaco ... Trinidad and Tobago ... Ukraine ... Georgia ... Three Baltic sprats ... Well, and the like ... They want to arrange anarchy in the same UN ... If now there is no sense in it, then after removing the veto power from the permanent members of the Security Council, there will be no more sense ... Galdezh-gundezh and the adoption of any decisions that the US will make ...
    I wonder why Mexico, together with France, is promoting this idea of ​​limiting the veto? What is the interest of Mexico? Shit USA ??? request sad