What's new

India calls for UN Security Council reforms this year

Do you mean binding resolutions ?

As far as i know there are about 7 UNSC resolutions passed on India mainly regarding Kashmir

Binding resolution is the one which is passed under chapter 7 of UN charter.

They are enforceable by force if required...eg UNSC 1441 resolution of Iraqi WMDs

Non Binding resolution are the one, which are only applicable, if acceptable to all the parties in a dispute.

Resolution on Kashmir are under chapter 6 of UN charter, i.e non binding, non mandatory, non timebound.
 
Last edited:
.
Binding resolution is the one which is passed under chapter 7 of UN charter.

They are enforceable by force if required...eg UNSC 1441 resolution of Iraqi WMDs

Non Binding resolution are the one, which are only applicable, if acceptable to all the parties in a dispute.

Resolution on Kashmir are under chapter 6 of Un charter, i.e non binding, non mandatory, non timebound.

Thank s for the clarification
 
. .
No it's not.. It's very clear cut.. A non permanent UNSC member has no say what so ever if the resolution in the UNSC is unanimous.. Sorry you seems to way over estimate capabilities within the system for India.. What ever UN mandates that have been made redundant have been by those in the permanent five.. The only other action others can make is to ignore resolutions when it comes to domestic matters, Not When issues are International

And when it comes to domestic matters sovereignty surpasses any UN mandate how ever big or small the country is.. That is why certain western powers try to circumnavigate this barrier to interfere with arbitrary porcesses such as R2P and extra judicial human right resolutions


Just imagine a scenario.How the UNSC can accomplish their world rule when there is a nation that happens to.be the largest democracy and has a national power that is greater than other 3 in P5 moving on their own ?
Insignificant of P 5 would be astonishing.
We changed NSG ( a group created to.isolate India) and now we are a recognized nuclear power.
They will come again.This time for our support in UNSC,permanent support.
 
.
Do you mean binding resolutions ?

As far as i know there are about 7 UNSC resolutions passed on India mainly regarding Kashmir
Yes..binding....sorry that was typo..7 UNSC resolution passed with India as party but how many are binding and against India?

If I remember correctly..they are none which speaks volume.
 
.
Just imagine a scenario.How the UNSC can accomplish their world rule when there is a nation that happens to.be the largest democracy and has a national power that is greater than other 3 in P5 moving on their own ?
Insignificant of P 5 would be astonishing.
We changed NSG ( a group created to.isolate India) and now we are a recognized nuclear power.
They will come again.This time for our support in UNSC,permanent support.

LOOOL Bro calm down, there isnt going to be any change in UNSC permanent membership anytime soon to be honest, im afraid.. The thing is, like most members here said, None of the P5 members will like to dilute/reduce their own influence, So they might pay lip service to the other G4 members to keep them happy/hopeful, but when it comes to putting these words into practice, nothing will move/change.lol Moreover if we were to look at economic weight/power/influence/technology/advancement/development/world trade etc etc then the other countries have a better chance of getting the seat than India(i.e Germany and Japan), since India lags far behind them in every sector/field. So India should calm down and be level headed, while focusing on improving its living stabdards/economy and national wealth, after this all other things will come naturally to it, but India is still a long way from this.

Also, its true that the countries that got their permanent seat is those who were lucky enough to be victorious during the second world war i.e U.S, Russia, Britain, China and France. All of them were big independent countries back then who played a crucial role during the war. Its true India should also have been included since Indian soldiers also participated in the war effort under our rule/control though. But India wasnt independent back then. The only independnet countries in Asia was China and Japan. So China automatically got a seat due not only to their own war effort(almost 50% of Japanese casualties was in the country) only the soviet Union suffered comparable loses to China(over 20 million deaths both countries suffered during the war, wayyy more than any other country involved), Japan unfortunately was on the loser side. So had India been an independent country, they will have also been included i have no doubt about this.

However we must also recognize that it was because of us that India itself wasn't occupied by Japan and we also helped unite India and make it the big territorial country it is today as we conquered many lands which never belonged to India and incorporated it in our Indian Empire (though many nationalistic Indians will like to deny this, looking only at the bad/negative things we did in the country which is unfair), had we not done this/ruled/colonise India, then there will be no India as we know it today, it will be at least 5 to 8 different countries. True talk/facts, so no offence.

In short there will be no inclusion of new members in the UNSC anytime soon. No argument about this.:agree::cheers:
 
. . .
LOL, no one joins the UNSC to do good. Its already quite useless.
All everyone wants is that power of veto for their own interests.
 
.
LOOOL Bro calm down, there isnt going to be any change in UNSC permanent membership anytime soon to be honest, im afraid.. The thing is, like most members here said, None of the P5 members will like to dilute/reduce their own influence, So they might pay lip service to the other G4 members to keep them happy/hopeful, but when it comes to putting these words into practice, nothing will move/change.lol Moreover if we were to look at economic weight/power/influence/technology/advancement/development/world trade etc etc then the other countries have a better chance of getting the seat than India(i.e Germany and Japan), since India lags far behind them in every sector/field. So India should calm down and be level headed, while focusing on improving its living stabdards/economy and national wealth, after this all other things will come naturally to it, but India is still a long way from this.

Also, its true that the countries that got their permanent seat is those who were lucky enough to be victorious during the second world war i.e U.S, Russia, Britain, China and France. All of them were big independent countries back then who played a crucial role during the war. Its true India should also have been included since Indian soldiers also participated in the war effort under our rule/control though. But India wasnt independent back then. The only independnet countries in Asia was China and Japan. So China automatically got a seat due not only to their own war effort(almost 50% of Japanese casualties was in the country) only the soviet Union suffered comparable loses to China(over 20 million deaths both countries suffered during the war, wayyy more than any other country involved), Japan unfortunately was on the loser side. So had India been an independent country, they will have also been included i have no doubt about this.

However we must also recognize that it was because of us that India itself wasn't occupied by Japan and we also helped unite India and make it the big territorial country it is today as we conquered many lands which never belonged to India and incorporated it in our Indian Empire (though many nationalistic Indians will like to deny this, looking only at the bad/negative things we did in the country which is unfair), had we not done this/ruled/colonise India, then there will be no India as we know it today, it will be at least 5 to 8 different countries. True talk/facts, so no offence.

In short there will be no inclusion of new members in the UNSC anytime soon. No argument about this.:agree::cheers:


India was united even before the Brits came here.Then regular outside invasion cause the destruction of Indian empire .First it was during Emperor Ashokas time .Entire India united .
Now what happened to us in the past is not be a subject in here.What is important is how we are scoring in the present
international set up.
Both Germany and Japan you mentioned in there isalready saturated.I mean they cant growlikeus.Within 5 years we will surpass UK andFrance and also Russia.
If P5 dont intend to change their status they will automaticallydilute themselves .Because might is right in this world.
You are right India is still behind of these nations like Germany ,Japan etc.But we already have more or equal clout like them in this world.And still we have 30 crore people and not developed yet.Now when we at least manage to reduce the poverty size in to 5 crore what would be size of our economy ?Food for thoughts.

US came to us and help us for a waiver in NSG (same group that created for isolating us ).Now we can trade nuke resources with entire world.
So this is not about past.This is about present.And we are winning here.
 
.
India was united even before the Brits came here.Then regular outside invasion cause the destruction of Indian empire .First it was during Emperor Ashokas time .Entire India united .
Now what happened to us in the past is not be a subject in here.What is important is how we are scoring in the present
international set up.
Both Germany and Japan you mentioned in there isalready saturated.I mean they cant growlikeus.Within 5 years we will surpass UK andFrance and also Russia.
If P5 dont intend to change their status they will automaticallydilute themselves .Because might is right in this world.
You are right India is still behind of these nations like Germany ,Japan etc.But we already have more or equal clout like them in this world.And still we have 30 crore people and not developed yet.Now when we at least manage to reduce the poverty size in to 5 crore what would be size of our economy ?Food for thoughts.

US came to us and help us for a waiver in NSG (same group that created for isolating us ).Now we can trade nuke resources with entire world.
So this is not about past.This is about present.And we are winning here.

It's good to optimistic.. But over optimism alone will not bag you a seat in the UNSC P5.. Not as it stands now

Nothing is impossible though, But very unlikely
 
.
It's good to optimistic.. But over optimism alone will not bag you a seat in the UNSC P5.. Not as it stands now

Nothing is impossible though, But very unlikely

Yesterday news ...
Obama endorses India’s bid for UNSC permanent membership: White House - The Hindu

Even China China Supports India's Bid for Permanent Seat at UNSC

Pakistan's desperate calls shows something is cooking up behind the curtain . Don't you agree ?

India's permanent UNSC seat unacceptable, Nawaz Sharif tells Barack Obama - The Times of India
 
.

Pls read the thread from the beginning.. You will get the gist of it.. There are dozens more statements from the US, China, Britain not only supporting India but also Germany and Japan

Global real politics does not work on diplomatic statements
 
.
It's good to optimistic.. But over optimism alone will not bag you a seat in the UNSC P5.. Not as it stands now

Nothing is impossible though, But very unlikely

You are right.But a NSG waiver was next to impossible in 2000 and it became a reality in 2008.Till now the deal with US is not finished ,so forget about a nuke reactor from at least few coming decades.And we are in a procedure for exporting nuke reactor to friendly countries.
 
.
Pls read the thread from the beginning.. You will get the gist of it.. There are dozens more statements from the US, China, Britain not only supporting India but also Germany and Japan

Global real politics does not work on diplomatic statements

Japan , Germany getting support then it's good for G4.

What is diplomatic statements ? When white house says something that is diplomatic statement when President of USA says then again it is diplomatic statement.

In your view what is official statement ?

Ohh modern day Chankya and real successor of Henry Kissinger ! Please enlighten us on 'real' basis of Realpolitik.
 
Last edited:
.
Back
Top Bottom