Monday, 6 August 2007

Britain to loose Security Council Seat (eventually)



I’m surprised that more colleagues haven’t picked up on today’s Times story which advised that;

‘Britain’s seat at the UN Security Council will eventually be handed to the European Union, Lord Malloch Brown, the Foreign Office Minister, has suggested.

The former diplomat was brought in by Gordon Brown to help to overhaul foreign policy was already under fire for suggesting that Britain and America would no longer be “joined at the hip”.

He faces fresh controversy after it emerged that last October, when he was Deputy General Secretary of the UN, he spoke approvingly of growing EU representation on a visit to Brussels last October.

According to a report by the EU Observer, he told Brussels diplomats that the EU was heading toward one single seat within the UN institutions. He said: “I think it will go in stages. We are going to see a growing spread of it institution by institution. It is not going to happen with a flash and a bang.” He added that he hoped that it would happen “as quickly as possible. I’m a huge fan of it.”

I wonder what the reaction would be in France if there was a suggestion that they also gave up theirs?

I’m not going to go into a swivel eyed Euro rant, but wouldn’t this effectively be the end of our ability to make independent foreign policy decisions or at best create monumental confusion. Could there be a situation where we in alliance with the US and others proposed to undertake an action somewhere in the world and Russia and China abstained but the EU vetoed. Unlikely I know but what then?

What would have happen if the Argentine invaded the Falklands now under this scenario and an EU resolution was tabled that said we shouldn’t recover our own sovereign territory and should reach a negotiated settlement?

But the killer is that it is a now member of Her Majesty’s Government that made these comments, not a functionary of the ‘Empire’.

GORDON has already broken HIS party’s commitment to a referendum on the ‘tidying up exercise’ citing the benefits of the arrangement and bleating on about the (frankly mutable) Red Lines - but surely the ability for this Country to determine it’s own foreign policy and to independently represent its own interests in the world should be the thickest and reddest line of them all. And yet one of HIS ministers has suggested that we loose some or all of that ability.

I’m sure that there are many more implications that I am frankly too impatient to sit down and think through, so I leave you to ponder for a little while and then possibly get rather cross.

5 comments:

pommygranate said...

Grendel

I just can't imagine a scenario whereby Britain gives up its seat and France retains its own. Political suicide. And Brown is far cannier than that.

Grendel said...

The saving grace is that France probably wouldn't give up their seat and therby for the reasons that you mention we wouldn't loose ours

Harry Hook said...

As always, the protagonist is Germany which has ambitions for a permanent seat on the Security Council.

Crushed by Ingsoc said...

The UN Security Council needs reform anyway.

It's hard to justify permanent members of the security council- or at least it being the current five.

Britain's place is defensible.
It makes sense, from a practicality point of view, for the permanent memvers to be those whose accetance is neccary to retain world peace.
This means the countries who;

a. Are leading economic powers.
b. Have nukes.

This is reality, so countries which fit both criteria, should be permanent members.

On that basis, France should go (way behind the UK in share of world trade), but this may not be practical.

India comes in, Australia should come in too.

Anonymous said...

On the basis if the logic given above I could follow the "new" permanent members but you lost me with Australia. I am an Aussiephyle to be sure but I found this as illogical as anything I have ever heard. Did you mean to spell that as China which has population, trade, economic power and nukes?

Finally, I can see no UN that does not have a British seat. There has been NO nation in the European sphere that has done more in the past 250 years to maintain world peace. Germany on the other hand...! And France of course has meant well!