India UNSC membership. Withdraw Pakistani UN membership?

[KeenGuy]

no india should not have security council seat with UN.

 

[SekrutYakhni]

Thinking as an American than "YES"
Thinking as a Pakistan than "NO"
Thinking critically than "Still wait"

 

[AVADI]

The news was 2004, and indian - china relationship is very unstable. I dont think china will support indian without solving the disputed land issue. So, consider the countries who have possibility to get UNSC seat and rank the possibility from high to low will be: German>Brazil>Japan>india.

BTW: If china would support india on UNSC, I think Hu Jin Tao will be eaten by live by chinese people.

Added: And by the way, china said support india is bcoz we know US willnt agree this, we dont need jump to the front, it is the fight between Russia and US. Japan is in the same case, with US supporter but not Russia. But, if US changed his mind, I think chinese leaders know what should they do very clearly.

Funniest line ever it is a known fact that Chinese people cant do a damn about their leaders.

 

[Creder]

Imran how much funding does Pakistan recieve from UN and its institutions, just answer that

 

[IceCold]

Instead of leaving it, we should make sure India does not get one because a permanent seat for India in the UN means bad news for Pakistan, India will then try its best to make sure Pakistan is declared a failed and a terrorist state. Pakistan should raise the issue of unsettled disputes between the two sides. Leaving does not make sense imo.

 

[chinapakistan]

Funniest line ever it is a known fact that Chinese people cant do a damn about their leaders.

Sorry to tell you, many polician who damaged china's interests has be unlike some country the polician can do whatever they wanna do, like playing 4P with infancy girls or making a dirty money garland.

 

[A$HU]

We don't object to Indian entrance to UNSC permanently, however, India should not have right of veto.

Why?

 

[A$HU]

no india should not have security council seat with UN.

But soooner or later it will eventually have one.

 

[Sino-PakFriendship]

Why?

France, UK and USA are malicious to China. They support Tibet independence.

Why China allow another anti-China state to join UNSC permanent club with right of veto?

 

[gogbot]

France, UK and USA are malicious to China. They support Tibet independence.

Why China allow another anti-China state to join UNSC permanent club with right of veto?

why did any of them allow China to join in the first place.
Or even the Soviet Union.

The UN exists so that every nation can represent itself on an international forum.

India simply seeks a greater representation for its greater importance in the world . Economically politically and Militarily.

There is no need to spout the portfolio in this thread, but simply put the rest of the world is increasingly needs India cooperation on issues such as trade, Climate change, Food or water shortages , nuclear proliferation, space etc.

And FYI

Get over your small mindedness, already
You have been informed countless number of times by Indian members on the forum, that India has no interest in raising the Tibet issue, and has even recognized Tibet as part of China .

The more you want to antagonise India and push it away from China, the more yo end up shaping an foreign Policy that resembles your paranoia .

China is India's largest trading Partner, Neighbour and regional power, And as such an important to India. As a rival or otherwise , our cooperation ensures peaceful existence.

If China does as you ask and block India from any sort of gain, You may be touting the victory horn, But all you end up doing is create an enemy , that will reciprocate such behaviours in Kind.

 

[gogbot]

no india should not have security council seat with UN.

Then start a new thread to discuss that, this thread asks a specific question given certain circumstances.

If you wish to question the circumstances that is a totally different question all together.

So stick to topic or do not post.

 

[Sino-PakFriendship]

why did any of them allow China to join in the first place.
Or even the Soviet Union.

The UN exists so that every nation can represent itself on an international forum.

India simply seeks a greater representation for its greater importance in the world . Economically politically and Militarily.

There is no need to spout the portfolio in this thread, but simply put the rest of the world is increasingly needs India cooperation on issues such as trade, Climate change, Food or water shortages , nuclear proliferation, space etc.

And FYI

Get over your small mindedness, already
You have been informed countless number of times by Indian members on the forum, that India has no interest in raising the Tibet issue, and has even recognized Tibet as part of China .

The more you want to antagonise India and push it away from China, the more yo end up shaping an foreign Policy that resembles your paranoia .

China is India's largest trading Partner, Neighbour and regional power, And as such an important to India. As a rival or otherwise , our cooperation ensures peaceful existence.

If China does as you ask and block India from any sort of gain, You may be touting the victory horn, But all you end up doing is create an enemy , that will reciprocate such behaviours in Kind.

1. Because we are Nuclear Big 5

2. Because our ancestors make big contribution on defeating Axis in WWII.

 

[gogbot]

1. Because we are Nuclear Big 5

2. Because our ancestors make big contribution on defeating Axis in WWII.

1.So, India tested its Nukes right after China, And is the only state outside of the Big- 5 to have a Fussion bomb.

The only state outside the Big-5, to have free nuclear trade , while not having signed the NSG .

2.Indians fought to keep that supply route to China open, so that allied supplies could continue to reach china. Had our ancestors simply refused to help the Britsh, What was it the British would have done with Hitler Closing in on England. Indians chose to fight and we did.

We fought the Japanese in Bruma and the Germans in North Africa.

If they are the only two reasons , are the contributions or sacrifices that My ancestors made any less valid.

 

[Bingo!]

The worlds largest democracy.

1st in irrigated land area.

1st in conventional arms imports.

2nd largest army.

2nd largest labour force.

2nd largest English speaking population.

2nd in usable lands.

2nd largest population representing 18% of world population
among 223 nations.

3rd largest muslim population of the world.

3rd on list for Composite Index of National Capability.

4th largest internet users.

5th biggest forex reserves.

5th largest in electricity production and consumption.

7 th largest country in the world.

8th in world heritage sites.

one of the 9 nuclear powers.

12th biggest GDP in the world.

23rd largest exporter.

reasons are plenty to rightly represent in an International forum.


PS: dont repond with "blah blah blahs" and unlogical answers please.!!!

 

[keeninterest]

Stepping out of the UN is not an option for pakistan, which in the end amounts to self imposed isolation when none is required out of which nothing concrete will be achieved and I seriously doubt such a move will be allowed to happen both by the bigger powers and by the pak army which has very strong interests to be protected. One has to think on lines as to what Pakistan brings on board to the UN, the reason behind it and the replacement.

Pakistan today contributes extensively to the UN peace keeping force, now the main reason that gets done is because of the handsome salaries that get earned, and these postings are either seen as an appreciation to the good one has delivered at the home front or are delivered as a reward because the juniors were able to keep themselves in the good books of the seniors. Can this be replaced if Pakistan were to withdraw, yes, though there remains a quota to the extent one country can deploy but when faced with constraints UN can increase on the number of people that can be deployed from each country and there are many countries including India which will be more than happy to chip in.

The other and a more important aspect is a nuclear Pakistan, and that to an extent is the bargaining muscle that Pakistan has, now if a nuclear weapon armed state were to walk off the UN then that in itself would be diluting the UN to an extent which will possibly bring bad press across the globe for the UN but I feel with very strong USA interests vested in Pakistan with a polity and military completely aligned with those interests, that would be a maneuver very difficult to bring about. The down side in here if done could be that this will bring about a suspicion on the intent of Pakistan and a possibility of Pakistan being painted as a rouge state, the last thing you want to do is go against the USA’s interests in a world over shadowed by the might of the USA.

Will India get the UNSC seat? Yes, how soon? Seems like within this decade, at max with a decade and a half, had the bush administration been around the world press would have been abuzz with India being brought to the UNSC, and the sole reason of that happening will be the compulsion for the USA to do it, or else china will become a headache at the world stage for them a little too difficult to handle, and they need a counter balance.

As the things stand today, china is no where a problem one sees and they will fall in line as they fell when the nuke deal happened, and pranab mukherjee has been quoted as saying, “(Chinese) President Hu Jintao reiterated the assurance given by Chinese Premier (Wen Jiabao) to Prime Minister (Manmohan Singh) in April last year that China understands and supports India's aspiration to play a bigger role in the UN, including in the Security Council” link.

The problem is the USA which wants an assurance coming from India that we will align to their way of strategizing, and be in their loop on all major issues and this is an assurance very difficult to come by though one might see a behind the door understanding but in a vibrant democracy where a regime change happens every five years that is very difficult to come about. How will this part be negotiated, very difficult to say but yes India will to an extent give in on its independent foreign policy.

Someone said, Pakistan should be brought in for being a muslim state, answer for that is, that wont be happening since that claim has been staked by the kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and there is no bigger voice for the muslims than that of the Saudis.

adding to the post i made there, here is a confirmation coming from china.

China to back India's UNSC bid.