In recent years the permanant presence of the UK on the Security Council has increasingly looked like a WW2 anacrohnism with many Nations being postulated as replacements or additions to better reflect the real world of the 21st century. I would suggest that these latest RN cutbacks might be the straw that breaks the Camels back wrt such a membership vis a vis world opinion. Is this something that a UK government might actually care about enough to lead to a change in funding levels? Also given current trends in what year do you think the RAN will overtake the RN in size thus providing the opportunity for an exchange of signals similar to the USN/RN exchange of 1944?
0 Kudo
UK & UN Security Council
| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
 astonishd |
UK & UN Security Council |
Lead | |
|
Posts: 80 ( 9-May-2007 11:28:56) |
|
||
|
Rob |
RAN and RN | ||
|
Posts: 646 ( 9-May-2007 11:45:26) |
Also given current trends in what year do you think the RAN will overtake the RN in size thus providing the opportunity for an exchange of signals similar to the USN/RN exchange of 1944?
I don't see that happening at all (well obviously I can't forecast 100 years or so) without a massive change in RAN funding or RN funding. Let's not forget it is likely that by 2017/2018 the RN will have two massive carriers. |
||
|
Rob |
Security Council | ||
|
Posts: 646 ( 9-May-2007 11:47:27) |
I also doubt that the UK would be replaced (iirc the UK could veto such a move), if anything then more nations will join in addition to current members.
|
||
|
Mikey |
1944 Exchange of Signals? | ||
|
Posts: 1429 ( 9-May-2007 11:47:30) |
Please illuminate?
IMNSHO the UN itself is an anachronistic joke and should be replaced by a 'league of democracies' or some such. Any country wanting to join would have to demonstrate minimum levels of democratic accountability and respect for the rule of law before admittance. |
||
|
shaun |
UK & UN SC | ||
|
Posts: 179 ( 9-May-2007 12:03:46) |
Regarding the UK... I don't think that the size of our military is the issue. I think our position is anachronistic from WW2 to some degree, but we keep our relevance by the vast number of operations and interdictions we undertake elsewhere in the world.
Only when our capability (in terms of number of escorts, fast jets and SH) diminishes to the point where we're unable to deploy any force larger than a catering unit will someone be eyeing up our position on the UNSC. We need to remain relevant by: i) getting involved ii) having suitable equipment and numbers to enable i) |
||
|
used to be remf |
the biggest threat of the UK's vote....... is the UK! | ||
|
Posts: 478 ( 9-May-2007 12:06:49) |
by following this silly euro-piffle.
if this continues then we will trade away our own vote willingly for some daft EU super-vote. which in my opinion would be treasonous, as it would be against the interests of the UK. As long as the UK maintains the following three items there can be no serious outside challenge to the UK SC vote: 1) Fourth biggest economy. 2) Second biggest military spender (3rd if you include china's hidden billions). 3) An emphasis on power projection (it's no good having a million strong peasant army if you cannot influence a nation without contiguous borders). we are our own worst enemy in this. regards REMF |
||
|
used to be remf |
a metric i threw together regarding power and the SC | ||
|
Posts: 478 ( 9-May-2007 12:29:56) |
y own personal feelings:
Security Council membership should be considered on three premises by order of importance. 1) military power * 2) diplomatic influence ** 3) economic power *** * modified dependant on the expeditionary emphasis of armed forces (-2 to +2) ** modified dependant on democratic tradition (-2 to +2) *** modified dependant on regional status (-2 to +2) (1) - Military Power (prejudice = +5) 1 = US - (10 + 2 = 12) = 17 2 = China - (9 - 2 = 7) = 12 3 = India - 8 - 1 = 7) = 12 4 = Japan - (7 - 2 = 5) = 10 5 = UK - (6 + 1 = 7) = 12 6 = France - (5 + 1 = 6) = 11 7 = Germany - (4 -1 = 3) = 8 8 = Russia - (2 + 0 = 2) = 7 9 = Brasil - (1 - 1 = 0) = 5 (2) - Diplomatic Influence (subjective) (prejudice = +2) 1 = US (10 + 2 = 12) = 14 2 = China (9 - 2 = 7) = 9 3 = UK (8 + 2 = 10) = 12 4 = France (7 + 2) = = 11 5 = India (6 + 0 = 6) = 8 6 = Japan (5 + 1 = 6) = 8 7 = Germany (4 + 1 = 5) = 7 8 = Russia (3 - 1 = 2) = 4 9 = Brasil (2 + 0 = 2) = 4 (3) - Economic Power (prejudice = 0) 1 = US -$10.98 trillion (10 + 2 = 12) = 12 2 = China - $6.449 trillion (9 + 1 = 10) = 10 3 = Japan - $3.567 trillion (8 + 1 = 9) = 9 4 = India - $3.022 trillion (7 + 1) = = 8 5 = Germany - $2.271 trillion (6 + 1 = 7) = 7 6 = UK - $1.664 trillion (5 + 1 = 6) = 6 7 = France - $1.654 trillion (4 + 1 = 5) = 5 8 = Brasil - $1.379 trillion (3 + 2 = 5) = 5 9 = Russia - $1.287 trillion (2 + 0 = 2) = 2 Total - 1 = US - 43 2 = China - 31 3 = UK - 30 4 = India - 28 5 = France - 27 6 = Japan - 27 7 = Germany - 22 8 = Russia - 13 9 = Brasil - 11 i personally would not have more than six permanent veto wielding powers. i've been unfair to France twice over; 1) they are of a military match to the UK 2) they are of an economic match too but either way they end up as one of the big six |
||
|
astonishd |
Re: UK & UN Security Council | ||
|
Posts: 80 ( 9-May-2007 12:40:01) |
Well REMF i think yes the UK is its own worse enemy in this. If you let your semi global military power fade away as has been the case for the last 20 years then i think notwithstanding veto provisions the overwhelming balance of world opinion (something i think the eurocentric press of the EU poorly serves its members in knowing)will demand the consolidation of the franco/UK membership into a single EU vote. Active replacements lobbying include japan, brazil, india, germany and indonesia. I would see japan and india as very strong candidates with brazil a real chance if it can fix its economy.
As far as the 1944 signal is concerned i believe when the USN overtook the Rn in size in 44 a USN task group flashed the RN unit nearby "how does it feel to be the 2nd largest navy in the world?). The RN unit replied (erroneously i believe) "how does it feel to be the second best navy in the world?" In any event 99/100 for attitude. I see the OZ defence budget just got a 10.6 % increase versus UK? Speculating a 2030 RAN could be 6 SSN, 2 LPH(large), 2 LPD(large), 14 DDG/FFG, 15 OPV, 6MCMV, 2 AOR/E how big is an RN 2030 likely to be? |
||
|
astonishd |
Re: a metric i threw together regarding power and the SC | ||
|
Posts: 80 ( 9-May-2007 12:46:59) |
You seriously underate Asian nations across a whole range of issues. Eg China less diplomatic power than UK? LOL you are smoking and inhaling?
Japan less military power than all the countries you listed? I dont think so. Japan will soon have the second greatest airforce in the world bar none as just a small example of their growth. Beware the Euro googles i think. |
||
|
hulahoop7 |
RAN | ||
|
Posts: 1188 ( 9-May-2007 13:07:06) |
So the RAN are getting SSNs are they?
I'd like to see something real.... Here is something real.. the RN HAS now 3 LPH / CVs, 2 v large LPDs, 4 LSDas, 25 escorts. 8 SSNs .. oh and 4 boats which could end life on earth. |
||
|
astonishd |
Re: RAN | ||
|
Posts: 80 ( 9-May-2007 13:27:31) |
HA
Not for much longer. By the way this is not an RN/RAN pissing competition as YOU are trying to turn it into it is highlighting why the RN should not continue down the path it is on for instance you quote 25 escorts for the RN. Its my understanding that figure is already gone. I can remeber not that long ago when the figure of 50 escorts for the RN was considered sacrosanct. Oh and by the way their is a very real chance the RAN will buy an SSN as its next generation sub. ie in time for 2030. wake up grow up |
||
- Battleship Vs Battleship
- Should Battleships Be Back In Service?
- The United States Navy
- The Royal Navy
- The European Navies
- The Commonwealth Navies
- The Asian Navies
- Aircraft Carriers
- Fighting Ships Of The World
- Submarines
- Designing A Navy/Ship
- The Land Forces
- The Air Forces
- The Naval Fiction Board
- The Politics Of War
- Naval Help
