The issue of Africa securing a seat in the UN security council. What are we going to benefit from it?
448872
Your list of countries is not complete. Majority of teh countries are themselves prey of poverty and hunger. First try to remove them than think about UNO Security Council
597819
There are a few good answers here, but in general many are not well-thought at all. Even Dan Rather had said it was inexcusable that the world media was focused on Bill Clinton's fling while 3 million people died in central Africa over a two year period alone. Africa's problems are immense, and perhaps that is the biggest problem: no one knows where to begin that will have any affect at all.\n\nTo be fair, President Bush has taken an initiative to begin helping those African nations that have taken steps to help themselves. This might seem harsh, sending aid to those that need it supposedly least, but in a way it is not. The countries that are in the worst shape are bad primarily because their leadership and their governing institutions are so rotten to the core that any money or aid sent to them will just be wasted or stolen or worse, and while that might make us feel less guilty it will not really help anyone (just like Live Aid, which gave most of the money raised to a genocidal and corrupt Communist government that was mass murdering its enemies under cover of a manufactured famine).\n\nIt is difficult to mobilize public support for Africa for a number of generally embarassing reasons. The continent has very few 'sexy' resources to trade so we Americans are not directly affected in our daily lives by turmoil (except for a few nations in central Africa, there is very little oil to make us pay more at the pump, we as a rule don't eat the food that they grow so we don't miss anything at the dinner table, we only buy diamonds at very rare occasions, all of the minerals are available from other sources, and for the last hundred years the migration from Africa has largely been to Europe so there is no indigenous ethnic lobby in the United States). The entire continent seems to be so mired in catastrophes of such monumental size that it looks absolutely hopeless, and even thinking of beginning any sort of radical help is completely daunting. Every time foreign armies have tried to intervene (France and England, Soviet Union and Cuba, USA in Somalia) the outcome is nothing but horror stories that would make Freddy Krueger throw up all over himself - prisoners hacked to pieces, infants have arms and legs cut off by rebels simply because they think it is fun, soldiers dragged through the streets to the cheers of little children, etc. Every time a major aid project begins, the material elements are immediately stolen and therefor nothing gets done.\n\nIf the United States is going to intervene, it will have to be with massive amounts of force and social reconstruction on every level, and it will look like colonialism. I can tell you that, from the way we are responding to the relatively benign American behavior in Iraq and the relatively weak opposition we are reacting to, WE DO NOT HAVE THE STOMACH FOR THIS!!!!!!!\n\nSometimes doing something poorly can be worse than doing nothing at all.
937372
It has stiffed the US's power.  Nearly every nation fears following the US on any initiative.  Hence we have genocide in Africa while the world watches and the US stands alone trying to drum up support for the African people.
1004989
Sigh.  It is frustrating to see though the West might have the best intentions, they still have no idea what is going on in Africa. How will redrawing borders solve any problems at all? It is certainly not borders that are causing the immense amount of poverty and disease that plagues Africa.  Redrawing borders will only cause confusion, especially considering that there are thousands of tribes in Africa: 73 in Zambia alone.  Most African tribes get along swell, and they got along even better before colonialism.  \n     What Africa needs is not United Nations intervention (Oh God that would be a nightmare), or religion, or democracy (almost, if not all the countries in Africa, are "democracies", at least assert that they are), or birth control, or whatever other easy solutions Westerners come up with.They need justice: an equal share of the worlds resources so that they can have money to feed their families, educate their children, and fight the diseases that plague their continent.\nBut, as Bono says, Westerners are good at charity, they are terrible at justice.  So, we'll see what happens.
1018961
depuis que la fifa à décidée de procédé à une rotation des continents pour l'organisation de la coupe du monde l'année 2010 revient alors de droit à l'Afrique alors ce serait en afrique du sud  plaise à dieu que papa mandela puisse assisté à cela
337118
Kofi Annan is a dweeb.\n\nThe United Nations holds virtually no power or authority, and frankly, they don't really support the USA on any issues (look up the US voting record in the UN, and look up the UN's final decision).  Yet America supplies most of their funding and stuff.\n\nThe concept is good, but the results have been poor, from a US perspective.
835821
You're spot on. The UN is acting as a country unto itself. Their inability to operate effectively is proof. They sit on their bloodstained hands when they are needed most and point fingers and accuse when they need to STFU and sit quietly. The graft and deception going on in the UN almost makes the governmental back room dealing a non-issue.
110062
This would be my chance  to give the  world a serialised  story  of the  true state of affairs in Africa , issues   on governonce , cultures  and  the people .\n\nReasons  being that in most cases  i  have  watched with  great disbelief  the amount of untruth printed  and  televised  in the mainstream media giving  the outside  world  a  very  dark picture of  actually is the true  status in  Africa.\n\nIf  only  i could get such a  chance .
451644
For whatever reason, many incidences of genocide and war in Africa are minimalized and do not receive the same amount of publicity that other world conflicts do (Rwanda, Uganda, DRC). They often involve third world countries that have little or no history of stable democracy and no valuable natural resources to speak of.\n\nI also believe that this incident demonstrates the ineptitude of the U.N. in dealing with international incidents. The media determines what is news and they do not wish for this to become a widely held opinion by making a big story out of it.\n\nThirdly, this is not a big political issue. Very few people have vested interests in Sudan (especially as compared to the current immigration controversy), meaning that very few votes can be gained/lost by action/inaction on the subject. As sad as it is to say, the primary responsibility of a politician (a politician, not a statesman mind you) is to get reelected, and so many politicians will not waste their time on an issue that will not earn them any votes.
1014656
The answer is simple on undebatible, the war against militant Islamics effects more people in more places then anything else.  If we fail, the results for our future generations will be dreadful.\n\nI have to sidetrack here and respond to an answer previously given by se_rodd\n---------------------------------------------------------------------------\n  The most important thing going on right now is the AIDS epidemic in Africa. The numbers are staggering on how much the continent of Africa is destroyed by the virus. What is more staggering is that the only thing needed to preven this is money. Instead the US would rather use its money to fighting an injust war instead of saving lives. \n---------------------------------------------------------------------------\nWhy the @#%# is Africa our responsibilty?  We give more money to Africa then all other nations combined.  And this is not enough for you?  What would happen in the worst case scenario and every single person living in Africa died from Aids, I don't see what the world would miss all that much.  What is the great importance of a continent full of people who can't even master the use of a condom.
878680
The goal of the United Nations was to increase discussion between nations in an effort to prevent global conflict.  But has it worked or does it really have any jurisdiction over its members, no.  Many nations, such as the United States of America, have failed to ratify much of the UN charter.  For example, the US has not ratified the International Criminal Court, a separate judiciary entity somewhat affiliated with the UN.  However, the UN does play a somewhat integral part in maintaining communication with outside nations. A great example is the UN's efforts to aid with peacekeeping in Darfur.  Though this is seemingly unsuccessful, the UN has worked to maintatin the prescence of peacekeeping troops in the region. \n\nHowever, this leads to more problems.  Throughout the years, peacekeeping troops have been known to rape their refugees and commit other inappropriate acts during their mission. This increases the negative opinion of the UN and its actions among nations.  In addition, when nations such as the US blatantly violate the charter and the UN declarations, it suggests the ignorance of global opinion. These events lead to greater tension between nations instead of increased pacifism, as the body is designed for. \n\nNo nation, due to the act of sovereignty, must abide by the laws of the UN.  This is solely because if the rules of the UN were more heavily imposed than national law, prominent UN nations, the UK, US, France, etc., would have greater precedence in the domestic politics of smaller nations, such as Swaziland.  This would lead to an almost imperialistic setting where global superpowers would be able to enact laws that colonized developing nations and poverished nations.\n\nI hope this answers your question!
333672
I would guess many NGOs would practice "diplomacy."  Same with IGOs.  They are of increasing influence in the world stage.
949755
yes , its quite better\nafrica is a poor country\nbut as wc 2010 is held there it'll make it lot of money\nit will help africa to overcome economically
605124
UNO, United Nations Organization
327429
We could, it doesn't really do us any good.  They are a peacekeeping operation, not a peace-making...there is a big difference.  The UN is too soft on too many issues.  I respect their ideas, they just need to be able to back them up..and they are not in the position to do that.  All who are UN members need to back them up, and it doesn't happen.  It's good for diplomatic purposes, but as we have seen lately, there can even be corruption there.
977806
No I don't think so as the UN has already chosen Ban Ki-Moon as the sucessor to Kofi Annan.\n\nThe debate has been long gone and over. You're a couple of months too late to start thinking about it now!
247139
Can we say Africa? And I dont think that the UN gave any money to help Rwanda after their civil war against the Tutsis or Hutus. I could be wrong about that one.