register Login
Chinadaily Forum Return to homepage

HanDongping's space [Favorite] [Copy] [Share] [RSS]

Readers’ Blog

The United National Security Council Should Stop Being a Bully

Popularity 4Viewed 6699 times 2013-3-15 22:46 |System category:News| world

Even though the cold war has been over for more than twenty years, the United Nations Security Council controlled by the United States continued to behave like a bully in the world.  On the one hand, the permanent members of United Nations Security Council have stockpiled huge nuclear arsenals, which has been the biggest potential threat to all lives on this planet.  They also allowed their friends and allies to have nuclear weapons.   According to some estimates, about twenty some nations in this world have nuclear weapons.   But on the other hand, they continue to sanction countries like Iran and People’s Democratic Republic of Korea for their aspirations to have nuclear weapons, mostly for self-defense purpose in the face of military threat from the U.S. and its allies.  

Some ordinary people on the streets in the People’s Democratic Republic of Korea asked journalists why other countries could have nuclear bombs but not their country?  Why other countries could test nuclear bombs and launched satellite freely.  But when the People’s Democratic Republic of North Korea tested its nuclear bomb and launched the Satellite, the UN Security Council would place sanctions against it. 

The whole  world should ask these questions.   Who give the United Nations Security Council the moral authority to decide who can have nuclear weapons and who cannot.   Why can not the People’s Democratic Republic of Korea, who were under constant threats from the joint military exercises by the U.S. and South Korea, develop its nuclear weapon program to defend itself?  Why can not Iran develop its nuclear weapon program when Israel has nuclear weapons and when Iran faces constant military threat from the U.S. and Israel?

The Representatives of the U.S. in the UN Security Council always claim that their sanctions only targeted the small elites of the People’s Republic of Korea.    That claim can fool the American people, but cannot fool the people in the third world countries.   When the U.S. invaded Iraq to topple Saddam Hussein, more than one million of innocent Iraqis paid the ultimate prices of their lives.   The livelihood of Iraqi people has been destroyed.    The Iraqi people are still suffering from the mess the U.S. invasion created there.   When the U.S. and other west nations instigated the civil war in Libya to topple Kaddafi, over 100,000 Libyans were killed as collateral damages, and Libyan infrastructure was decimated.   The Libyan people’s livelihood has been completely changed because of outside involvement in their internal affairs. 

Yes, we do not need more nuclear weapons in this world.   We do not need any more wars.  Our fragile natural environment can not sustain any unnecessary damages from military confrontations.    In order to protect our already overburdened and seriously damaged environment, which is the foundation of human life in this world, we need to gradually eliminate all the nuclear weapons as well as nuclear power plants which pose tremendous threat to all lives on our planet.     The way of the future should be to live with less and be happy with what we have, not to aspire for more consumption so that a small elites could make more profit from more economic growth.

The UN Security Council, particularly the permanent members of the UN Security Council, should stop being a bully in this world.   Instead it should start to exercise moral leadership in this world.   They should stop using sanctions against small and weak nations.  It is always the case that the powerful places sanctions against the weak, and therefore is morally unjust and unfair.   Because it is unjust and unfair, it seldom works.  The UN general Assembly should start discussing nuclear disbarment seriously.    It should pass a resolution to demand that permanent members of the UN Security Council to stop manufacturing and selling weapons to third world countries.   The UN General Assembly should demand that the UN Security Councils stop interfering in other countries’ internal affairs.    It should demand that the UN Security Council make a serious pledge to abstain from threatening small and weak countries by military force, and respect the sovereignty of small and weak nations.    

We need peace in this world.   But peace can only come from justice and fairness to all.   A small number of the elites from a small number of countries decide the fate of weak and small nations will not bring about peace and justice in our world.    Ordinary people all over the world should unite to fight for justice and fairness for all.  

(Opinions of the writer in this blog don't represent those of China Daily.)




Shake hands


Friends who just made a statement (2 Person)

Like 0 Share


Comment Comment (4 comments)

Reply Report voice_cd 2013-3-16 10:47
Your blog has been highlighted to the homepage of blog and China daily website.
Reply Report robert237 2013-3-16 14:09
I couldn't agree more. These is something basically wrong with the mental health of billionaires if all they want is more.
They are ruining this world.
Reply Report changamullah 2013-3-19 13:50
"Even though the cold war has been over for more than twenty years, the United Nations Security Council controlled by the United States continued to behave like a bully in the world.  On the one hand, the permanent members of United Nations Security Council have stockpiled huge nuclear arsenals, which has been the biggest potential threat to all lives on this planet.  "

No need to read past this first paragraph. Your initial assertion is quite wrong. China & Russia both have veto powers. Why not rant about why China and Russia is not doing enough as veto wielding members to safeguard other countries? Is it because you only feel safe on yank-bashing ground? There is a heck of a lot more to global geopolitics, including Russia & China's strategies, than simply laying all the blame at the door of one country. Otherwise it just sounds like a one-sided piece of cold war propaganda.
Reply Report drdrake007 2013-5-22 08:03
Last I knew these other countries who have nuclear weapons weren't making propaganda videos of a guy dreaming of nuking NYC.   So save your communist rhetoric for gullible people. North Korea is far from the poor innocent country you are trying so desperately to portray them as.

facelist doodle Doodle board

You need to login to comment Login | register


Professor of Warren Wilson College in the US.

  • 1
Recent comments
  • China Should Back North Korea’s Right to Defend itself 2016-3-3 15:51

    Thanks for sharing your story here, we have highlighted it in our blog homepage.

  • The Rise of China and Its implications for the world 2015-9-27 11:10

    Seanboyce on 2015-4-2 does, I think, raise an interesting critique of Professor Han's text. However, Seanboyce makes the same kind of ideologically "classless" (or de-classed, or "post"-class) argument as in Han's text when he (Seanboyce) calls for the perspective of his "post-modern model . . . or some other model" as opposed to a "modernism" or "modernistic" model of theorizing the world and China's "rise" within it. While Han certainly does not go into talking about "modernism" or "post-modernism," he does invoke similarly ambiguous slogans such as "a new world order," the "overwhelming majority of this world," the goal of the masses controlling their own "destiny" and "their own future," and so on. I think the problem in both Han's discussion as well as Seanboyce's critique is that neither of you have anything very clear and unambiguous to say about the question of CLASS in modernism, post-modernism or the new world of the future. In other words, neither of you address the problem of CAPITALISM and the worldwide mode of production founded on the exploitation of the worldwide working class, which is indeed, as Han at least suggests (and Seanboyce totally ignores), the overwhelming majority of the real people in the world. Until you begin to think through this CLASS question as the question of CAPITALISM, your talk about the future (as well as the present and the past) will remain vague and speculative.

Popular bloggers


GMT +8, 2016-6-27 13:55

Contact Us :

Office number : 86-10-84883534 , 86-10-84883548   Email:, Switch the # to @ when you send email to us.

Back to the top