WWII, the United Nations' Security Council — the supreme peace and security body — has had only five permanent members — the US, Britain, China, France and Russia, the ostensible winners of the war and the most powerful nations to emerge in the post-war era. But WWII ended in 1945 and, especially with the disintegration of the Soviet Union in 1991, the geo-political landscape today is vastly different from what it was 65 years ago. Brazil, Germany, India and Japan have formed a group known as G4 whose goal is to expand the number of permanent seats on the council. Although there is a long way to go before any fundamental change can be made to the make-up of the Security Council and there is no consensus on exactly what that change will be, change must be made if the UN is to retain its relevance in a world that is very different from the one that existed at the time of its founding. Much of what was known as the “underdeveloped” or “developing” world in 1945 has now joined the ranks of the “developed” world. The economic center of the world has migrated from Western nations and now includes countries scattered about the world, with disparate cultures and unique concerns. Taking into account such fundamental changes in the world's geopolitical realities, the emerging bi-polar world of 1945, clearly, can no longer be the foundation for the UN's world view. There is no denying the continued international relevance of the five permanent members of the Security Council, but even those members must accept the increased complexity of today's world and the rise in prominence of countries that were once considered “Third World.” If the UN does not reflect the world as it exists today, then it will slowly lose its relevance. __
