Austria, Denmark, Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Romania, Spain and Sweden are pushing to explore the idea of moving from unanimity to qualified majority in foreign policy.

  • HubertManne@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    11 hours ago

    yeah super majorities are so hard to get seems kinda nuts that they required 100%. could do two thirds or even three fourths. I mean three fourths is really hard to get.

  • Kokesh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    20 hours ago

    Why should anyone have veto? Same goes for UN. The only thing it does is letting few being free to do whatever they want. Would terrorist country like US or Russia decide to nuke some smaller country? They have veto, so why not!

    • itisileclerk@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Or terrorist country like USA decide to kidnap President of another country and steal their Oil, for example.

    • Klear@piefed.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      41
      ·
      20 hours ago

      The UN is a diplomatic platform, not a global government. The idea is that if the particular countries couldn’t veto, they’d leave the organisation altogether instead. Having everyone take part in the same diplomatic organisation is the main goal, not producing actionable resolutions.

      • Kokesh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        19 hours ago

        So what is the point of it then? Small country roes something terrible, they get condemned. US murders people without any oversight.

    • BestBouclettes@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      20 hours ago

      The veto is the sole reason these institutions still exist. There’s no way in hell any member would give up that power.

      • Tango@piefed.caOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        18 hours ago

        You should put more thought into the arguments you make, because clearly 11 members would.

        • BestBouclettes@jlai.lu
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          18 hours ago

          Cool, in the EU all countries have veto power. In the UN, all permanent members of the security council have veto power. You just need one of them to refuse to give up that power. In the EU, I believe this could somewhat work, but in the UN ? No way the US, China, Russia, France or the UK would give it up without leaving the institution.

          • Rat_in_a_hat@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            16 hours ago

            I think that’s what OP meant. That changing the veto rule with the EU is something that’s possible. Your prior comment made it seem like the whole EU wouldn’t exist

  • Hugucinogens@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    17
    ·
    edit-2
    18 hours ago

    Sounds like the powerful nations in the Union, want more hierarchical power, and hierarchical structures,

    “Because we need to be Strong!”

    “The World has Changed, and We must not be Left Behind, we must not Become Weak!”

    Now where have I heard that before…

    • Tango@piefed.caOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      18 hours ago

      Counterpoint: vetoes are generally anti-democratic.

      • Hugucinogens@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        18 hours ago

        Fascism ---------- Democracy ---------- Anarchy

        . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .⬆️

        . . . . . . . . . . . . .Vetoes are here. . .

        Vetoes are anti-Democratic, in the sense that they protect vulnerable minorities, from powerful majorities.

        Centralization, unification, and empowerment, makes power structures much, much more vulnerable to corruption.

        The ability of parts of the world to impose their will on the weaker, instead of letting them advocate for themselves, is what unavoidably walks the walk to fascism, literally every single time in history.