# UN Securtiy Council **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [August 5, 2001, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/un-securtiy-council/74990 "2001-08-05T15:28:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Andy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/aeb1de/32.png) [@Andy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Andy)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2001, 8:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/un-securtiy-council/74990/21 "2001-08-07T08:19:49Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by dqa \*…he nuances are trickier to come by when I only see stories on the issue every few weeks. > > Special Relationship - You’re right, I doubt Bush would risk relations with Latin America for the UK’s sake, in the way Reagan did during the Falklands War. On the bright side, you can still claim a special relationship with Canada. Most of it, anyway. Yeah, the eurosceptics are often portrayed as being racist, xenophobic reactionaries. There are obviously a few who fit this category, but I think the main feeling in the eurosceptic camp is one of implacable opposition to further degradation to national sovereignty. It’s a tough emotive issue. As for the special relationship (cringe), the UK is a bit like an old girlfriend, dumped years ago but still hanging on. ---
**Author:** ![puk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ea5d25/32.png) [@puk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puk)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2001, 10:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/un-securtiy-council/74990/22 "2001-08-07T10:03:42Z")
Andy, it seems a bit strange that you first state to _hate_ the EU but then balk at the use of Europhobe irt your position. Would you care to explain? If you look at developments, a common european foreign policy is definitly christalising. e.g. - Europe took one line at the climate conferences - The Shengen agreement dictates a common immigration policy - the agricultural policies - A common monitary policy - etc. When talking about homogenisation, it means that common policies are being developed. No blenders are involved, trust me 🙂 All these policies affect some part of the overall foreign policy. A common foreign policy is really an inevitability. Barring the EU falling appart or Britain leaving the Union, this foreign policy will also extend towards the security council eventually. If we’re talking timeframe, I’d say ten to fifteen years, but that’s just a WAG. ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2001, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/un-securtiy-council/74990/23 "2001-08-07T22:07:12Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by China Guy \* > \*\*It’s been a long time, but IIRC the Republic of China (Taiwan) left the UN in protest > \*\* No, Taiwan had no choice in it: it was a 1:1 replacement, in keeping with BOTH PRC and ROC policy of the time. Taiwan walked out of the \* proceedings\* when it became clear that the General Assembly was about to logroll them. > [@](#): > > Resolution 2759 passed by the General Assembly at its 26th session on October 25, 1971: > > The General Assembly, > > RECALLING the principles of the Charter of United Nations, > > CONSIDERING that the restoration of the lawful rights of the People’s Republic of China is essential both for the protection of the Charter of the United Nations and for the cause that the United Nations must serve under the Charter, > > RECOGNIZING that the representatives of the Government of the People’s Republic of China are the only lawful representatives of China to the United Nations and that the People’s Republic of China is one of the five permanent members of Security Council, > > DECIDES to restore all its rights to the People’s Republic of China and to recognize the representatives of its Government as the only legitimate representatives of China to the United Nations, **and to expel forthwith the representatives of Chiang Kai-shek from the place they unlawfully occupy** at the United Nations and in all the organizations related to it. > > (boldface mine) IOW the PRC had been the “legitimate” China all along, and all those RoC government employees had been just squatters in the “Chinese” delegation space for no good reason all that time. Talk about getting dissed. BTW – that is how the GA can “expel” someone in the absence of a report from the Security Council recommending sanctions: just call the delegation “illegitimate” and yank their credentials. José WAG: If Taiwan had formally declared independence at some point before 1971, it may have retained a UN membership but would have been forced to vacate the Security Council Seat and it would have been handed to the PRC anyway ---
**Author:** ![Andy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/aeb1de/32.png) [@Andy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Andy)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2001, 1:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/un-securtiy-council/74990/24 "2001-08-08T13:18:51Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by puk \* > Andy, it seems a bit strange that you first state to _hate_ the EU but then balk at the use of Europhobe irt your position. Would you care to explain? Quite simple really. I detest the EU as it stands now (can anyone name the other two cities in the world other than Brussels where part of the legislature meets in secret?) but have no hatred of europe, things european or the european people. I like the idea of free trade, if only it were a reality. In actuality, the EU is protectionist and is not interested in free market economics (just look at the CAP, although I’m not saying that they are the only ones in the world guilty of these gross market distortions). > [@](#): > > Europe took one line at the climate conferences I think this was by necessity and wholeheartedly agree with this approach. Negotiating a global treaty would have been nigh on impossible if every country needed to negotiate with every other country. The countries in the EU broadly agree that climate change needs addressing. Fair play. > [@](#): > > The Shengen agreement dictates a common immigration policy It did no such thing, it merely allowed free movement of citizens of the Schengen countries between their countries. > [@](#): > > The agricultural policies A madness which will undoubtedly end in the near future as it will be totally unsustainable if expansion to the east goes ahead without creating a separate class of EU member. > [@](#): > > A common monetary policy Economic and monetary union is probably the strongest argument, although thankfully we Brits have managed to steer clear of this experiment. We’ll be blackmailed inot joining eventually of course, but hopefully I will have left the country by that time. The UK security council status will go soon without doubt. I assume that the government will want to extract some hellish dividend from the other EU countries. It could be a bit tricky to ‘sell’ to the electorate too. ---
**Author:** ![puk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ea5d25/32.png) [@puk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puk)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2001, 2:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/un-securtiy-council/74990/25 "2001-08-08T14:37:13Z")
Well Andy, I’m pretty thankfull you Brits have stayed out of the monitary union too. It saved the rest of Europe a lot of grief. Do I understand correctly that you think that because the policies are flawed the EU should be detested? So if, heaven forbid, the UK would ever have a faulty policy, you would be screaming bloody murder too, right? But seriously, we agree that homogenisation is taking place. Why do you feel this is a bad thing? (or is this material for a different thread?) ---
**Author:** ![Andy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/aeb1de/32.png) [@Andy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Andy)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2001, 3:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/un-securtiy-council/74990/26 "2001-08-08T15:06:59Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by puk \* > So if, heaven forbid, the UK would ever have a faulty policy, you would be screaming bloody murder too, right? I’d be hoarse. I hate the EU because little of what it proclaims to be doing ‘for the people’ is actually what the people want. They don’t know what the people want and frankly don’t care. _Their_ big social and monetary experiment is all that matters. > [@](#): > > But seriously, we agree that homogenisation is taking place. Why do you feel this is a bad thing? I’m not sure quite what you mean by homogenisation. If you mean the subsuming of national parliaments in favour of the Brussels overlords, then I’m sure you’re right. That is, after all, the whole point of the european experiment. This will of course lead to a lessening of national identity and we’ll all magically become happy EU citizens, there’ll be no more wars in europe and we’ll all enjoy riches beyond our wildest dreams to boot. If you mean cultural homogenisation, that would take centuries to achieve and I doubt it’s a realistic goal, even for the fervent europhiles. The EU acts more and more like the old Soviet Union every day. Blasphemy laws to restrict freedom of speech anyone? > [@](#): > > Or is this material for a different thread? Very probably, but who’s gonna start it and support the EU?😉 ---
**Author:** ![manhattan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/manhattan/32/7_2.png) [@manhattan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/manhattan)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2001, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/un-securtiy-council/74990/27 "2001-08-08T15:46:59Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Andy \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > Or is this material for a different thread? > > Very probably, but who’s gonna start it and support the EU?😉 \*\* Yes, it is. And whoever starts it to support the EU should do it, all together now, in Great Debates! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/un-securtiy-council/74990.md?page=1)