Time to change the U.N. charter?

"Today marks the halfway point in the UN security council's 30-day ultimatum," and this commentary in the Guardian newspaper by David Clark, former special adviser in Britain's Foreign Office, argues:

"Unfortunately, as Darfur illustrates, the UN system is singularly ill-suited to upholding its own stated values. Four of the countries that forced the threat of sanctions to be removed from the security council resolution - Russia, China, Pakistan and Algeria - have extremely poor human rights records. Two are permanent members with the power of veto, commercial ties to the Sudanese government and a strong interest in defending the inviolability of state sovereignty against the humanitarian imperative. Why do they enjoy this privilege? Because almost 60 years ago they happened to be on the winning side in a war.

He suggests changing the U.N. charter to allow sanctions or the use of force to be authorized by the U.N. member states as a whole, instead of by only the Security Council.