U.N. Security Council deadlocked on Korean crisis

http://reut.rs/htSwHI  U.N. Security Council deadlocked on Korean crisis

The Japanese tweets related to the article  I would like to focus on are as follows:
しかも拠出金は日本が2番目に多く払ってるとか、もうね・・勘弁して欲しいRT中国のようなカスに拒否権持たせてる時点で機能するはずがない。最早骨董品の機関など、常任理事国だけ残して全部脱退すればいいのにRT @ImpacD 分かっちゃいたが、役立たず。RT @utataneko 国連安保理、中国が障害し機能せず http://bit.ly/hbFlIn

The above Japanese tweets can be tentatively translated into English as below:

As long as a scum like China still has veto power, UN will never function as it is expected. Every member nation should quit an obsolete organ like UN, leaving P5 behind.

Besides, Japan has been the second largest financial contributor to the United Nations. Oh, come on! 

My comments:

The winners of WWII shaped United Nations and its security council in 1945 when two nations and their few allies lost the war. Two nations were Japan and Germany who later grew up to be the major economic powers while the Soviet Union, one of the five permanent seats at the UN Security Council became defunct on December 8, 1991 and whose permanent membership has been automatically transferred to Russia.

The People's Republic of China currently holds a permanent seat at the Security Council but it was previously held by the Republic of China (ROC) until November 23, 1971.  Taiwan (who represented the Chinese people since the UN's founding in 1945) no longer represents at the organ.

We all know that WWII ended in 1945, 65 years ago.  Now when we face the drastically changed geopolitical realities, we still try to resolve the international disputes with the same old system handed down to us from our predecessors.  Yet only five permanent member nations still enjoy all the benefits of veto power regardless of what they have developed into now.

The reform of the United Nations Security Council is the much-discussed subject as http://bit.ly/VKSS6 describes the issue well.  

It is the time to review our maintenance system of international peace and security, beginning with P5 to see if every permanent member is qualified to remain in the Security Council as they tend to seek their own interests. We must pay some serious attention to the fact that we have so far failed to reform the UN Security Council simply because we have focused only on who should be added to the Security Council as a new permanent member.