JDG wrote
... let's consider a reasonable definition of the US's friends as
being those countries with which the US has a formal Alliance ...
Of the 32 or so of these ...
That fails to provide much legitimacy. It is the same argument as
that in favor of the United Nations.
That is because alliances are with countries. In terms of persuasion
(not law), such an argument is like having a legislative body that
depends on history, that is to say on which state or country got in,
such as the US Senate or the UN General Assembly. Such an institution
only provides a little legitimacy.
Legislative houses based on population provide more legitimacy.
However, they do not necessarily provide a way to reflect changes in
power that comes from changes in per capta riches rather than changes
in population. (That is why I have suggested that a third type of
legislative body.)
In this particular case, people who have attacked the notion that
`many supported US action' point out that the population of most of
those countries is small, and that the countries are dependent on the
US. So the persuasion fails.
The unstated argument is that countries that `count' for persuasion or
for providing legitimacy are rich as well as having sizeable
populations, such as France and Germany.
In the current United Nations General Assembly, France and Latvia both
have one vote. (The UN is a two chamber organization; in the upper
chamber, the victorious countries with munitioning ability in WWII,
have a veto -- that is history-based power. Some other countries,
without a veto, get to join them.)
If UN General Assembly votes were based on population, France would
receive less than 1% of the total votes, the US about 5%, and China
about 20%.
If the votes were based on the current apportionment for UN dues, the
US would receive 23% of the total, France less than 4% and China less
than 3%. (Actually, in this sort of power distribution, I think that
votes should be based on what is apportioned and *paid*, just as in a
population-based legislature, votes should be based on the living, not
on the dead.)
--
Robert J. Chassell
[EMAIL PROTECTED] GnuPG Key ID: 004B4AC8
http://www.rattlesnake.com http://www.teak.cc
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
