首页
外语
计算机
考研
公务员
职业资格
财经
工程
司法
医学
专升本
自考
实用职业技能
登录
外语
Critics and supporters of the United Nations have sometimes seen worlds apart. But since last year, almost all of them, whether
Critics and supporters of the United Nations have sometimes seen worlds apart. But since last year, almost all of them, whether
admin
2011-02-11
41
问题
Critics and supporters of the United Nations have sometimes seen worlds apart. But since last year, almost all of them, whether multilateralist or unilateralist, American or European, have come to agree that the organization is in crisis. This week, a blue ribbon panel commissioned by the body’s secretary-general, Kofi Annan, released its report on what to do about it.
The U. N. ’s sorry state became most obvious with the Iraq war. Those favoring the war were furious that after a decade of Security Council resolutions, including the last-chance Resolution 1441 threatening "serious consequences" if Iraq did not prove its disarmament, the U. N. could not agree to act. Anti-war types were just as frustrated that the world body failed to stop the war. But Iraq was not the U. N.’s only problem. It has done little to stop humanitarian disasters, such as the ongoing horror in Sudan. And it has done nothing to stop Iran’s and North Korea’s pursuit of nuclear weapons.
Recognizing the danger of irrelevance, Mr. Annan last year told a 16-member panel, composed mainly of former government ministers and heads of government, to suggest changes. These fall broadly into two categories: the institutional and the cultural. The former has got most of the headlines -- particularly a call for changing the structure of the Security Council. But changes in the U. N. ’s working practices are crucial too.
Everyone agrees that the Security Council is an unrepresentative relic: of its 15 seats, five are occupied by permanent, veto-wielding members (America, Russia, China, Britain and France) and ten go to countries that rotate every two years and have no veto. But that the council’s composition is a throwback to the world order immediately after the Second World War has been agreed on for decades, without any success in changing it. Japan and Germany, the secondand thirdbiggest contributors to the U.N. budget, believe they are entitled to permanent seats. So does India, the world’s second-most- populous country, and Brazil, Latin America’s biggest. Unlike in previous efforts, these four have finally banded together to press their case. And they are joined in spirit by the Africans, who want two seats for their continent.
But each aspirant has opponents. Italy opposes a permanent seat for Germany, which would make Italy the only biggish European power. It instead proposes a single seat for the European Union, a non- starter since this would require Britain and France to give up theirs, and regional institutions cannot be U.N. members under the current U.N. Charter. Spanish-speaking Mexico and Argentina do not think Portuguese-speaking Brazil should represent Latin America, and Pakistan strongly opposes its rival India’s bid. As for potential African seats, Egypt claims one as the representative of the Muslim and Arab world. That would leave Nigeria, the continent’s most populous country, and South Africa, which is richer and a more stable democracy, fighting for the other.
The panel has proposed two alternatives. The first would give six countries ( none is named but probably Germany, Japan, India, Brazil and two African countries) permanent seats without a veto, and create three extra non-permanent seats, bringing the total number of council members to 24. The second, which would expand the council by the same number of seats, creates a new middle tier of members who would serve for four years and could be immediately re-elected, above the current lower tier of two-year members, who cannot be re-elected. The rivals to the would-be permanent members favor this option.
While Security Council reform may be the most visible of the proposals, the panel has also shared its views on the guidelines on when members may use force legally, tinder the U. N. Charter, they can do so in two circumstances only: Article 51 allows force in a clear case of self-defense, and Chapter Ⅶ permits its use when the Security Council agrees. While the panelists have not proposed major changes to these two parts of the Charter, they have offered refinements.
Though the Charter was written to govern war between countries, the panel argues that even without revision, Chapter Ⅶ lets the Security Council authorize force for more controversial, modem reasons like fighting terrorists and intervention in states committing humanitarian horrors. It even considers "preventive" wars against serious but non-imminent threats potentially justifiable.
But the panel also says any decision to use force must pass five tests: the threat must be grave; the primary purpose must be to avert the threat; force must be a last resort; means must be proportional; and there must be a reasonable chance that force will succeed without calamitous consequences. All common-sense stuff, but the panel proposes making these tests explicit (if subjective and unofficial), thus raising the quality of debate about any decision to go to war.
On top of this, the report urges the U.N. to make better use of its assets in the fight against terrorism. One of the obstacles to an effective counter-terrorism strategy has been U.N. members’ inability to agree on a definition of terrorism. The panel tries to help by defining it as "any action that is intended to cause death or serious bodily harm to civilians or non-combatants"; Arab countries may continue to press for exemptions in the case of "foreign occupation". The report also deals with what it sees as a possible "cascade of nuclear proliferation" in the near future. It recommends creating more incentives for countries to stop enriching uranium.
"...they have offered refinements" in paragraph 7 means that ______.
选项
A、the panelists have attempted to make changes to the Charter
B、the panelists have proposed minor alternatives to the Charter
C、the panelists have examined the Charter thoroughly enough
D、the panelists have made the Charter more logical in expression
答案
B
解析
语义题。原文第七段说这个16人小组没有对宪章进行大的修改(major changes),但是进行了refinements,根据前后的逻辑关系,可见offered refinements意为进行了小的修改,故选B。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/20eO777K
0
专业英语八级
相关试题推荐
WHYSHOULDanyonebuythelatestvolumeintheever-expandingDictionaryofNationalBiography?Idonotmeanthatitisbad,as
1Manypeopleseemtothinkthatsciencefictionistypifiedbythecoversofsomeoftheoldpulpmagazines;theBug-eyedM
A、safeguardnationalsecurityoftheUnitedStates.B、competewithNorthKoreainnuclear-weaponscapacity.C、cooperatewiththe
GoingForth,TheNationsMultiplyUnevenlyDespitewars,famines,andepidemics,Earth’spopulationisboomingaheadtonewr
1Therearevariouswaysinwhichindividualeconomicunitscaninteractwithoneanother.Threebasicwaysmaybedescribed
1Therearevariouswaysinwhichindividualeconomicunitscaninteractwithoneanother.Threebasicwaysmaybedescribed
TheAmericanConstitution,theoldestwrittenoneintheworld,startedtotakeeffectin
Thecostsassociatedwithnaturaldisastersareincreasingrapidly.Asaresult,officialsingovernmentandindustryhavefocus
Crimehasitsowncycles,amagazinere-portedsomeyearsbefore.Policerecordsthat【M1】______.werestudiedforfiveyearso
Heiswaitingfortheairlineticketcounterwhenhefirstnoticestheyoungwoman.Shehasglossyblackhairpulledtightlyint
随机试题
文化变迁
有关蛋白质中氨基酸残基排列的书面表达,下面哪项是恰当的
患者,女,36岁,已婚。带下量多,色白,质黏,无味,纳少便溏,神疲肢倦,舌淡苔白腻,脉缓弱。治疗应首选
牛黄是脊索动物门哺乳纲牛科动物牛肝脏的胆结石。在胆囊中产生的称“胆黄”或“蛋黄”,在胆管中产生的称“管黄”,在肝管中产生的称“肝黄”。牛黄完整者多呈卵形,质轻,表面金黄至黄褐色,细腻而有光泽。中医学认为牛黄气清香,味微苦而后甜,性凉。可用于解热、解毒、定惊
下列哪项不属于场地的大市政?[2006-13]
()优先于普通股的股票称为优先股。
下列关于会计政策、会计估计及其变更的表述中,不正确的有()。
《中英续订藏印条约》
Completethenotes.UseNOMORETHANTHREEWORDSforeachanswer.
Inmostpartsoftheworld,therelationbetweenpopulationandresourcesisalreadyunfavorableandwillprobablybecomeevenm
最新回复
(
0
)