India calls for UN Security Council reforms this year

[Gibbs]

Whether India gets a permanent seat in the UNSC or not only time will tell but she has already established herself in a different league and for the bigger global roles.

We're discussing here about her possibility or the lack of it getting a permanent seat in the UNSC.. Other bigger roles are irrelevant to the subject

No ...... UN reforms will stop because you said so.

What ?

 

[Fattyacids]

Hello Dude .... how are you doing ?

overweight

 

[Razia Sultana]

We're discussing here about her possibility or the lack of it getting a permanent seat in the UNSC.. Other bigger roles are irrelevant to the subject

Just a hypothetical example: If UNSC unanimously decides to take action against Sri Lanka for later's human rights violations and India, as a non security council member, says NO....... can UNSC proceed with the action????? No.
This is what I meant about India's role.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

The UNSC reforms have been delayed for decades already, I don't know what they think has changed?

All countries work for their own national interests.

Diluting veto power is NOT in the interests of the P5, why would they voluntarily dilute their own veto power?

 

[Srinivas]

overweight

Lots of lime juice and morning jog will do good for you !

 

[Jaat Rock]

They see us rollin, They hatin

 

[SrNair]

It's not that simple in global power politics, If thats the case then both Japan and Germany would have been included much before.. Size of the economy does not matter, Thats a different case.. US is simply looking for massive markets, to Sell some of thier tech and India is a prime market for them, The Likes of China does not go shopping for US tech in nuclear or otherwise.. So their alternate is India.. And to counter balance China's growing influence but that will never be at the cost of the advantage they have in the UNSC..

Like is said India is nothing for them compared to Britain and France and you forget these are veto wielding members, Numbers doesnt really require, One vote then thats it.. And as i mentioned in my first post India also have unresolved territorial disputes with one UNSC member and a with another influential member of the UN community in Pakistan.. Neither the US, Britain or France would want another muddle to deal within the UNSC, They are already having thier hands tied with Russia

This is not only about economic power .This is about our sheer large size.
Remember we were successful for a waiver from NSG the very same organization that created after 1974 test against us.Now we have a waiver we are.already in a way for a elite.membership in NSG.

Do you know what was the.Bush opinion after these deal with MMS in a meeting ?We dont have any problem even.if we wont acquire some reactor from US .All they need is our friendship.
We dont need US nuke tech for us.We already have our own indigenous tech including advanced Thorium research .
If they want our market we will ask.for some favour including UNSC seat.
After all there is no free lunch.
Cards are on our side.In coming years we will increase our support to UN and will develop heavy influence in there.
Germany and Japan are known allies of West.But we wont become an ally like that.
@Gibbs The journey.is just begin.Just wait and watch dude.We will be there .World cant ignore the world largest democracy and her influence and soft power.
They came for us in the name of nuke deal.Next time they will come with our membership.

 

[Gibbs]

Just a hypothetical example: If UNSC unanimously decides to take action against Sri Lanka for later's human rights violations and India, as a non security council member, says NO....... can UNSC proceed with the action????? No.
This is what I meant about India's role.

Yes it would.. The only chance India would have is to convince the general assembly not to pas the resolution for it to go to the UNSC.. The UNSC is the sole arbitrary body of the UN.. India will have no say what so ever if the UNSC is unanimous.. No offense but you seem to have a very limited knowledge about how the system works

This is not only about economic power .This is about our sheer large size.
Remember we were successful for a waiver from NSG the very same organization that created after 1974 test against us.Now we have a waiver we are.already in a way for a elite.membership in NSG.

Do you know what was the.Bush opinion after these deal with MMS in a meeting ?We dont have any problem even.if we wont acquire some reactor from US .All they need is our friendship.
We dont need US nuke tech for us.We already have our own indigenous tech including advanced Thorium research .
If they want our market we will ask.for some favour including UNSC seat.
After all there is no free lunch.
Cards are on our side.In coming years we will increase our support to UN and will develop heavy influence in there.
Germany and Japan are known allies of West.But we wont become an ally like that.
@Gibbs The journey.is just begin.Just wait and watch dude.We will be there .World cant ignore the world largest democracy and her influence and soft power.
They came for us in the name of nuke deal.Next time they will come with our membership.

That is for India to achieve.. I dont have either view, Good if India does achieve her potential in the world but mate non of that counts for her inclusion in the UNSC that is the subject we're discussing here.. As it stands and given the very clear viewpoints she has little or no chance, Unless other wise proved

 

[unbiasedopinion]

All countries work for their own interests.

Tell me how it is in the interests of the P5 to dilute their own veto power?

Even having only 5 veto powers is a headache, almost nothing can get done.

So how on Earth would it help to double the number of vetoes? That would make the P5 weaker in the UNSC, and make it even more impossible to get anything done. No wonder the UNSC reforms have been delayed for decades.

Thats a valid point then there is less relevance of UN in today;s world especially security council.

US invaded Iraq without UN resolution
Russia's episode of Ukraine is the latest.....

so security council as the name suggests is the irony as it does everything except security of weak from powerful. Why to have Security council then? Moreover when the current members failed to do justification to the very existence of the security council?

But it exists so we have to just think of making it more relevance. The same kind of voices were raised about India specific nuclear deal. It happened and now India is recognized nuclear power.

But I agree it may not be this year but has to happen sooner. Modi is not going to wait. He will push for it.

Maybe not, but being in the P5 means you can veto any resolution you like. Which means being able to keep anyone out of the P5 if it serves our interests to do so.

Veto is useful, no UNSC resolution can be passed against a veto member.

Why do you think the G4 want it too?

I am tempted to ask, Has any binding resolution ever passed against India?

 

[SrNair]

UNSC is not a place to practice democracy, it's absolute power.

Then we will.play by your rules.Will show the absolute power.

 

[Gibbs]

Thats a valid point then there is less relevance of UN in today;s world especially security council.

US invaded Iraq without UN resolution
Russia's episode of Ukraine is the latest.....

so security council as the name suggests is the irony as it does everything except security of weak from powerful. Why to have Security council then? Moreover when the current members failed to do justification to the very existence of the security council?

But it exists so we have to just think of making it more relevance. The same kind of voices were raised about India specific nuclear deal. It happened and now India is recognized nuclear power.

But I agree it may not be this year but has to happen sooner. Modi is not going to wait. He will push for it.


I am tempted to ask, Has any bidding resolution ever passed against India?

Do you mean binding resolutions ?

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

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Thats a valid point then there is less relevance of UN in today;s world especially security council.

US invaded Iraq without UN resolution
Russia's episode of Ukraine is the latest.....

so security council as the name suggests is the irony as it does everything except security of weak from powerful. Why to have Security council then? Moreover when the current members failed to do justification to the very existence of the security council?

But it exists so we have to just think of making it more relevance. The same kind of voices were raised about India specific nuclear deal. It happened and now India is recognized nuclear power.

But I agree it may not be this year but has to happen sooner. Modi is not going to wait. He will push for it.

Well we'll see for ourselves soon enough, India has called for UNSC reforms "this year". (Though they have been calling for it for over a decade so far).

Granted, the UNSC is pretty useless.

Yet so many countries are so desperate to become permanent members!

The reason is the veto power. Having the power to veto ANY resolution at the world's high table, what's not to like? That's why so many countries want it. And that's why the countries who have it want to keep it.

 

[Razia Sultana]

Yes it would.. The only chance India would have is to convince the general assembly not to pas the resolution for it to go to the UNSC.. The UNSC is the sole arbitrary body of the UN.. India will have no say what so ever if the UNSC is unanimous.. No offense but you seem to have a very limited knowledge about how the system works

Thats again a matter of debate. The UN has been made redundant many a times by the powerful nations. The existing P5 are equally responsible for such a pity state of the UN and thats why there is a demand of reform in the UN and given that India most undoubtedly is a deserving candidate. Today India is seeking permanent membership but 5 yrs down the line UN would seek India.

 

[SrNair]

Yes it would.. The only chance India would have is to convince the general assembly not to pas the resolution for it to go to the UNSC.. The UNSC is the sole arbitrary body of the UN.. India will have no say what so ever if the UNSC is unanimous.. No offense but you seem to have a very limited knowledge about how the system works



That is for India to achieve.. I dont have either view, Good if India does achieve her potential in the world but mate non of that counts for her inclusion in the UNSC that is the subject we're discussing here.. As it stands and given the very clear viewpoints she has little or no chance, Unless other wise proved

Achinese member already said this is about absolute power.Yes this is about absolute power .Germany and Japan.for some extent Brazil is also saturated.
But we Indians and our India already attracting a lot of attention, both necessary and unnecessary from these world with 30 crore poverty from 125 crore people .First lesson you should know about these geopolitics is there is no morality and moral.principles in here.
If you have an economy ,advanced indigenous technology and a might military then you will.become the creator of rules and laws.After 1974 Pokhran test they sanctioned us and create 45 member NSG to.isolate us.What didthey got ?I would say nothing .They banned our scientists from even.attending seminars and conference.Now tell.me what was the climax ?
Within 5 years except US and China all others will be behind us .Tommorrow if there is an international crisis erupt in our sphere of influence and if we show noon cooperation attitude towards UNSC what would they do.?
Like a US professional told in here before everyone will keep utter silence and neutrality.But we need at least two decades for that.

 

[Gibbs]

Thats again a matter of debate. The UN has been made redundant many a times by the powerful nations. The existing P5 are equally responsible for such a pity state of the UN and thats why there is a demand of reform in the UN and given that India most undoubtedly is a deserving candidate. Today India is seeking permanent membership but 5 yrs down the line UN would seek India.

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