By: Kai Lun (3), Jason Tan (7), Yu Ze (15)

Our Stand

What stayed the same NO Permanent Army Veto power of Security Council Members

No Permanent Army Just like the LON, the UN had no permanent army This meant that existing army was from contributing states (mainly poorer countries e.g India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, ethiopia etc…) Further more many soldiers sent were inexperienced troops Many contributing countries used this a measure to train troops

Some contributing countries also saw this as a means of employing unemployed people Hard to enforce military sanction that the UN puts forth

Veto power of the security council members Just like the UN decisions had to be unanimous Meaning that so long as one out of the five permanent members vetoed against the motion, it would not be passed Since each member would have their own personal interest at heart, many of the motions would end up not being passed

E.g Hungarian uprising, Czechoslovakia crisis

Improvement Membership of the US

Unlike the LON the UN had the membership of the US which provided them with military and financial resources that the UN lacked