Pierre wrote:
FEOS wrote:
Good. Now maybe someone else can start doing the heavy lifting in the ME peace process.
If your country would stop sending military aid to Israel and if you would stop abusing your right to veto any decision in the SC, maybe other countries would have a chance.
Or how about letting Israel represent itself in the SC so they have a say as to the decisions that are made ABOUT them? Gee I wonder who opposes their admission
"The Security Council
Because the Security Council established the diplomatic parameters for solving the Arab-Israeli conflict, UN Resolutions 242 and 338, many people outside the UN still believe it can play a useful role in bringing peace to Middle East. A careful analysis of the Security Councils actions on the Middle East, however, shows it has been little better than the General Assembly in its treatment of Israel.
Candidates for the Security Council are proposed by regional blocs. In the Middle East, this means the Arab League and its allies are usually included. Israel, which joined the UN in 1949, has never been elected to the Security Council whereas at least 15 Arab League members have.13 In fact, Israel was the only one of the 185 member countries ineligible to serve on the Security Council.
Every UN member state belongs to one of the five regional groups. Geographically, Israel should be part of the Asian bloc, but Arab states such as Iraq and Saudi Arabia have successfully prevented Israel's inclusion. A breakthrough in Israel’s fifty-year exclusion from UN bodies occurred on May 30, 2000, when Israel accepted an invitation to become a temporary member of the Western European and Others (WEOG) regional group. This historic step helped end at least some of the UN’s discriminatory actions against Israel and opened the door to the possibility of Israeli participation in the Security Council. "
Taken from
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jso … el_un.html