Debatepedia partners with The People Speak Global Debates and the The National Debate Series: Boston (Nov. 10)
Debate Digest Nov 19th: Medical marijuana. Next Debate Digest article: Trying 9/11 terror suspects in NYC courts
Argument: Extending UN SC veto to more countries would reduce UN effectiveness
From Debatepedia
[Edit]
Parent debate
[Edit]
Supporting evidence
- Thomas Weiss. "The Illusion of UN Security Council Reform". Washington Quarterly 2003 - "those more interested in results than in process were quick to point out that a Security Council of 21 or 25 members would hardly improve effectiveness—a 'rump' General Assembly certainly would have increased the chances for what one observer poetically called a Sitzkrieg over Iraq. Moreover, the group would be too large to conduct serious negotiations and still too small to represent the UN membership as a whole."
- Nile Gardiner, Ph.D. and Brett D. Schaefer. "U.N. Security Council Expansion Is Not in the U.S. Interest". Heritage Foundation. August 18, 2005 - "The problems of the United Nations are myriad, but few if any would be resolved by expanding the Security Council. The Bush AdminÂistration has stated that expansion should only be considered if it does not impede the effectiveness of the Council.[5] However, even a modest expansion of the Council fails that test because it would make the Council even more unwieldy, contribute to gridlock, dilute U.S. influence in the Council, and likely result in a Council less supportive of the United States on many key issues."
