India lashes out against ‘powerless’ UN Security Council

[samlove]

United Nations: Calling the Security Council ineffective and powerless, India has lashed out against its lack of accountability and transparency in mandating peacekeeping operations and blamed it for the rising casualties among peacekeepers.

“We are dismayed at the opaque manner in which the Security Council continues to mandate peace operations, without any accountability or transparency,” India’s Permanent Representative Asoke Kumar Mukerji said Monday at a General Assembly session on peacekeeping operations.

“The human costs of this failing are evident in both the rising number of casualties among UN peacekeepers, as well as an alarming growth in the number of civilians, now reaching 60 million according to the Secretary General, whose lives are being disrupted by the conflicts that an ineffective Security Council is powerless to resolve,” Mukerji added.

As of the end of September, 85 peacekeepers have died this year.

Mukerji appealed to Assembly President Mogens Lykketoft to “take the lead to prioritise agreement on an early reform of the Security Council during this 70th Session.”

He also reiterated India’s consistent demand the implementation “in letter and spirit” the UN Charter provisions that require the Security Council to consult with troop-providing countries when issuing peacekeeping mandates.

Speaking at the session, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon also backed the call for better coordination between the Security Council and the troop-contributors. “A shared understanding of the tasks involved between the Security Council and the troop and police contributing countries was required, as was cooperation with national actors and local communities,” he said.

The session was centered on Ban’s report on implementing the recommendations of the High Level Independent Panel on Peace Operations (HIPPO) which was headed by Jose Ramos-Horta and included Abhijit Guha, a retired Indian lieutenant general.

Mukerji said that implementation report had great importance for India, which is the largest overall troop contributor to UN peace operations, with over 185,000 troops that have served in 48 of the 69 UN missions. India currently has 7,794 personnel under UN’s blue flag.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi has offered to increase India’s troop-contribution by 10 percent when he participated at a summit on peacekeeping last month, Mukerji said. India would also be adding three police battalions with a high proportion of women and provide training for peacekeepers from other nations, he added.

Mukerji welcomed the “renewed focus on prevention and mediation” in Ban’s plan for implementing the HIPPO. All the 42 speakers at the session supported the emphasis on political solutions to end or prevent conflicts to maintain peace.

South Asian countries are among the largest contributor of personnel to the UN peacekeeping operations. Bangladesh, which is currently the largest contributor, has 9,432 personnel in UN missions, Pakistan 7,533 and Nepal 5,346.

Pakistan’s Permanent Representative also welcomed the proposal for better consultations with troop-contributing countries. Like many others, she opposed deploying peacekeepers for counter-terrorism operations.

Bangladesh Deputy Permanent Representative Sadia Faizunnesa called for involving all the countries sending troops to the UN operations in implementing the HIPPO recommendations.

(Arul Louis, IANS)

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

So India is using the deaths of Peacekeepers for "political point scoring"? Trying to push their old narrative of the UNSC being weak and powerless (subtext: without India), so they can get their hands on a P5 seat?

You attack the Security Council, then you beg to join it at the same time?

How will adding India suddenly make the Security Council better? Because Modi/India is an upstanding beacon of morality?

Have you even read the International News headlines today? India is mentioned (multiple incidents in Delhi) but it has nothing to do with their moral worth being so much better than that of the P5. The opposite in fact.

To be clear I don't believe morality has anything to do with geopolitics, in geopolitics only national interests matter. No country deserves to get on a moral high horse above the others, and especially not India.

And especially not while using the deaths of Peacekeepers for political point scoring.

 

[Srinivas]

So you attack the Security Council, then you beg to join it?

How will adding India suddenly make the Security Council better? Because Modi/India is an upstanding beacon of morality?

what is your point ?

India has a point in lashing out at UN security council, because India is one of the main contributor of troops.

What do you want us to do, just stay silent and suffer like chinese citizen in front of CCP?

No one is begging for UNSC seat, it will come ... we have no issues in this regard.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

No one is begging for UNSC seat, it will come ... we have no issues in this regard.

Except it won't.

According to the UN charter, you need the unanimous support of ALL the P5 members to have any chance of reform. If even one P5 member doesn't support it, there is no chance of it passing.

Why do you think Modi came to China to beg for it?

PM Modi asks China to back India's bid for UNSC seat, NSG membership - DNA India

 

[Srinivas]

Except it won't.

According to the UN charter, you need the unanimous support of ALL the P5 members to have any chance of reform. If even one P5 member doesn't support it, there is no chance of it passing.

Why do you think Modi came to China to beg for it?

PM Modi asks China to back India's bid for UNSC seat, NSG membership - DNA India

Don't bring china into it, there are other ways once reforms are implemented.

As I said earlier chinese opinion do not matter.

 

[Donatello]

And India wants to be part of this 'powerless' UNSC?

 

[navtrek]

Except it won't.

According to the UN charter, you need the unanimous support of ALL the P5 members to have any chance of reform. If even one P5 member doesn't support it, there is no chance of it passing.

Why do you think Modi came to China to beg for it?

PM Modi asks China to back India's bid for UNSC seat, NSG membership - DNA India

For how long can any of the P5 oppose it tell me 20-30 years beyond that i dont think its possible. You can only delay it eventually everyone has to agree and expand the UNSC. The world will change economies will change power will change its only a matter of time.

 

[third eye]

So you attack the Security Council, then you beg to join it?

How will adding India suddenly make the Security Council better? Because Modi/India is an upstanding beacon of morality?

Have you even read the International News headlines today? India is mentioned (multiple incidents in Delhi) but it has nothing to do with their moral worth being so much better than that of the P5. The opposite in fact.

To be clear I don't believe morality has anything to do with geopolitics, in geopolitics only national interests matter. No country deserves to get on a moral high horse above the others, and especially not India.

Its been a while since I read a post with so many contradictions .

 

[I M Sikander]

Clearly shows indians desperation to get a permanent seat in UNSC.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Its been a while since I read a post with so many contradictions .

I always hear Indian members here claiming how the P5 is so bad and unfair, and India has some kind of moral right to join.

Makes no sense whatsoever. Have you read the International News today?

Tell me how does Modi joining the P5 give any sort of moral legitimacy? He's literally the only one there who is primarily known as a mass murderer.

Geopolitics is all about national self-interests, not morality, and India is the LAST country in the world to get on a moral high horse.

I don't think China deserves to be on a moral high horse either, no developing country does. What gives you the right? Because you have a lower life expectancy, higher child mortality rates, higher maternal mortality ratios, higher malnutrition rates, etc. does that give you the right to get on a moral high horse over the P5?

 

[ganesh623]

So you attack the Security Council, then you beg to join it?

How will adding India suddenly make the Security Council better? Because Modi/India is an upstanding beacon of morality?

Have you even read the International News headlines today? India is mentioned (multiple incidents in Delhi) but it has nothing to do with their moral worth being so much better than that of the P5. The opposite in fact.

To be clear I don't believe morality has anything to do with geopolitics, in geopolitics only national interests matter. No country deserves to get on a moral high horse above the others, and especially not India.

Have you got anything to contribute on topic ?

Its about south asian peace keepers loosing their lives, un-necessarily.

Clearly shows indians desperation to get a permanent seat in UNSC.

Do you even take any effort to read the article.
India was speaking on behalf of indians, pakistanis, and bangladeshi peace keeping forces who loose their lives, and other troubles.
But your hatred for india seems to have blinded you to the level that you see nothing.

 

[SrNair]

So you attack the Security Council, then you beg to join it?

How will adding India suddenly make the Security Council better? Because Modi/India is an upstanding beacon of morality?

Have you even read the International News headlines today? India is mentioned (multiple incidents in Delhi) but it has nothing to do with their moral worth being so much better than that of the P5. The opposite in fact.

To be clear I don't believe morality has anything to do with geopolitics, in geopolitics only national interests matter. No country deserves to get on a moral high horse above the others, and especially not India.

Dont worry .We will play with that thing eventually .Geopolitical interests.
We have a lots of options.

I always hear Indian members here claiming how the P5 is so bad and unfair, and India has some kind of moral right to join.

Makes no sense whatsoever. Have you read the International News today?

Tell me how does Modi joining the P5 give any sort of moral legitimacy? He's literally the only one there who is primarily known as a mass murderer.

Geopolitics is all about national self-interests, not morality, and India is the LAST country in the world to get on a moral high horse.

I don't think China deserves to be on a moral high horse either, no developing country does. What gives you the right? Because you have a lower life expectancy, higher child mortality rates, higher maternal mortality ratios, higher malnutrition rates, etc. does that give you the right to get on a moral high horse over the P5?

And who told you that we are soo eager about our moral high horse ?
A Chinese should be the last one to talk to us about moral high horse .The only thing that support s you is your economy .Whenever it faces a catastrophe these entire friends will turn against you .
But in our case we are open democracy and that itself gave a favourable opinion about us among the real top echleons(Then what would be their response if our economy also touch that top notch level).We started our journey with zero balance and 99% of poverty in 1947 .But with in 70 years we reduced that in to 12 % with out any so called 'cultural revolution'.
West under US created NSG after 1974 Indian test and so did created MTCR after Agni test .
But now we are an exceptional case .


Like I said we have a range of options .Our emerging status allow us that feast and just wait for that.

 

[applesauce]

Don't bring china into it, there are other ways once reforms are implemented.

As I said earlier chinese opinion do not matter.

except when it comes to the UNSC china's option don't just matter, they are critical to any changes. its is your opinion that doesn't matter. I think if india continues to grow it will get a seat sooner or later. later is a guarantee if india continues to try with japan though, cause china will never let that through while it can help it.

 

[Areesh]

Do you even take any effort to read the article.
India was speaking on behalf of indians, pakistanis, and bangladeshi peace keeping forces who loose their lives, and other troubles.
But your hatred for india seems to have blinded you to the level that you see nothing.

Our troops are better off in whatever condition than Indians speaking on their behalf. So talk about your troops only.

 

[dadeechi]

I always hear Indian members here claiming how the P5 is so bad and unfair, and India has some kind of moral right to join.

Makes no sense whatsoever. Have you read the International News today?

Tell me how does Modi joining the P5 give any sort of moral legitimacy? He's literally the only one there who is primarily known as a mass murderer.

Geopolitics is all about national self-interests, not morality, and India is the LAST country in the world to get on a moral high horse.

I don't think China deserves to be on a moral high horse either, no developing country does. What gives you the right? Because you have a lower life expectancy, higher child mortality rates, higher maternal mortality ratios, higher malnutrition rates, etc. does that give you the right to get on a moral high horse over the P5?

India in 2015 is more qualified to stake the claim for the permanent seat on UNSC than PRC in 1971.

China got her UNSC seat as US wanted China's stature upgraded to confront USSR.

Now it's India's turn to receive the same from US to confront China.