Security Council

Lobbyists have been pushing to add either four or six permanent seats to the UN Security Council. The four would go to Germany, Japan, India, and Brazil. In the event of six, two African countries would join. The African countries most often mentioned are South Africa, Egypt, and Nigeria. Ok, I can see Germany and Japan. They got shafted for losing the War, which was fair. They have spent the last 50 years and a considerable amount of US money developing themselves into economically and politically significant countries. Each of them are key in regional decision making. As for India, I can see the potential. They are an up and coming nation with a huge market and nuclear weapons. But everyone has nukes these days, and overpopulated is not the same thing as important. If India gets a seat I would definitely recommend that they not be given veto power. Brazil? They are a world leader. In soccer. Does that count these days? I don't think so. The two African seats are pity seats. Period. No one would argue that Nigeria has the capability or right to exert influence in the same way that Russia or the United Kingdom can. There is not any African country that has shown it is capable of even slowing down AIDs, let alone advise global matters. That is why there are extra seats that rotate. Every one gets a voice sometimes, but a permanent seat means that you should be consulted on every important decision. Sorry Egypt, that isn't the way we feel about you.