India's permanent seat on the UNSC

[doppelganger]

I think exception was made for France, not for China.

I guess I was referring to timeline wise in terms of a cut off date. This many and no more.

Can you please explain what was done to facilitate France's entry? Are you referring to the fact that France was actually a defeated and occupied country of the second world war and yet made part of the security council? Though if you look at things, they are more powerful militarily than the UK, have a bigger nuclear arsenal, more sea faring and expeditionary capability (the UK could never hold the Falklands today without US intervention), and most importantly, has a nuclear policy that is independent and not US bound.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

The P5 have been "artificially delaying" the UNSC reforms process for over a decade now.

Even the G4 is openly complaining about it:

Delays in UNSC reforms will diminish its relevance: G4 bloc - Economic Times

PTI May 10, 2014, 02.42PM IST

UNITED NATIONS: The G4 bloc of Brazil, Germany, India and Japan has said "status quo" and "artificial delays" in implementing the UNSC reforms will diminish the relevance of the United Nations, even as Pakistan called the grouping a "minority" that wants to reconfigure the Security Council to secure "their national interests."

-----------

Anyway, it's all a moot point. The UNSC reform proposal is definitely going to include Japan, which will be vetoed by China. That will kill the entire reform resolution.

And China has already used our veto for far less. For example we vetoed the Syria resolution, despite threats and warnings from America and NATO. And Syria doesn't even matter much to us.

The bottom line for the P5 is that 5 vetoes already create too much of a headache as it is. Doubling the number of vetoes would make it exponentially worse. That's why none of the P5 have promised to expand veto rights.

 

[vostok]

I guess I was referring to timeline wise in terms of a cut off date. This many and no more.

Can you please explain what was done to facilitate France's entry? Are you referring to the fact that France was actually a defeated and occupied country of the second world war and yet made part of the security council? Though if you look at things, they are more powerful militarily than the UK, have a bigger nuclear arsenal, more sea faring and expeditionary capability (the UK could never hold the Falklands today without US intervention), and most importantly, has a nuclear policy that is independent and not US bound.

France was defeated in 6 weeks. At the same time, China was at war with Japan more than 10 years and has not been defeated. Therefore, France can not be considered the winner-country. She was taken there for political reasons, not because of War results.

 

[doppelganger]

The P5 have been "artificially delaying" the UNSC reforms process for over a decade now.

Even the G4 is openly complaining about it:

Delays in UNSC reforms will diminish its relevance: G4 bloc - Economic Times

UNITED NATIONS: The G4 bloc of Brazil, Germany, India and Japan has said "status quo" and "artificial delays" in implementing the UNSC reforms will diminish the relevance of the United Nations, even as Pakistan called the grouping a "minority" that wants to reconfigure the Security Council to secure "their national interests."

-----------

Anyway, it's all a moot point. The UNSC reform proposal is definitely going to include Japan, which will be vetoed by China. That will kill the entire reform resolution.

And China has already used our veto for far less. For example we vetoed the Syria resolution, despite threats and warnings from America and NATO. And Syria doesn't even matter much to us.

The bottom line for the P5 is that 5 vetoes already create too much of a headache as it is. Doubling the number of vetoes would make it exponentially worse. That's why none of the P5 have promised to expand veto rights.

Why Japan over India?

Japan and Germany after WWII? I don't think so.

 

[vostok]

Actually, I'm strictly against the revision of the Security Council. If someone wants to revise the UNSC, he will have to win a WW3.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Why Japan over India?

Japan and Germany after WWII? I don't think so.

Germany and Japan are currently recognized as "Great powers" that are not included in the P5 nations.

Great power - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Dark blue = Great powers with P5 membership

Light blue = Great powers without P5 membership

 

[doppelganger]

Germany and Japan are currently recognized as "Great powers" that are not included in the P5 nations.

Great power - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Dark blue = Great powers with P5 membership

Light blue = Great powers without P5 membership

I do not doubt their qualifications.

 

[Shotgunner51]

Why Japan over India?
Japan and Germany after WWII? I don't think so.

I do not doubt their qualifications.

Which is your view exactly my dear?

 

[doppelganger]

Which is your view exactly my dear?

I believe people do not change. Fundamentally.

It would be very foolish to allow Germany or Japan back as a military power.

 

[nair]

Actually, I'm strictly against the revision of the Security Council. If someone wants to revise the UNSC, he will have to win a WW3.

That is a good idea...... If that happens the P5 will be mostly countries from remote africa............

 

[Lord ZeN]

India for UNSC, lol they will serve cow dung and cow urine for everyone at UN council. No no it bad idea.
So tell me does cow dung and cow urine cure your cancer? Lol why eating cow dung and cow urine you Indian still died with cancer. Lol lol lol lol lol lol

A typical Chinese troll.

 

[ito]

Actually, I'm strictly against the revision of the Security Council. If someone wants to revise the UNSC, he will have to win a WW3.

What are your reasons for that? but it will be hard for P5 to not accept India's candidature if its come to the table, hence the delaying tactics

 

[airmarshal]

Not happening. They way its going between India and US, its going to raise concerns in China. China will lobby hard to not let this happen. Dont forget, China has a lot of influence too. They do things differently.

 

[ito]

That is a good idea...... If that happens the P5 will be mostly countries from remote africa............

If UNSC is not reformed, UN will loose its legitimacy. Imagine a world hence 25 years and India in it. India will be much stronger both economically and militarily than at least 3 of P5.

 

[vostok]

What are your reasons for that? but it will be hard for P5 to not accept India's candidature if its come to the table, hence the delaying tactics

My reasons? Security Council - club of winners-states (and France). The rest does not matter.