What's new

Pakistan slams India, others for demanding permanent UNSC membership

Devil Soul

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Jun 28, 2010
Messages
22,931
Reaction score
45
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Pakistan slams India, others for demanding permanent UNSC membership
By APP
Published: February 7, 2017
1SHARES
SHARE TWEET EMAIL
Pakistan’s Permanent representative to the United Nations Maleeha Lodhi told the UN on Tuesday that the campaign by a group of countries for permanent seats on the Security Council defies the 21st century principle of achieving democratic representation through periodic elections.

Lodhi, without naming the countries, was referring to the group of four — India, Brazil, Germany and Japan – who have been demanding permanent membership of the 15-member body for the past 20 years.

UN Security Council rejects India’s anti-Pakistan proposal

“In the 21st century it is inconceivable to establish or run an institution, national or international, which does not embrace the fundamental principles of representation and accountability with periodic elections and fixed term and rotation…”, the ambassador said in remarks at the long-running Intergovernmental Negotiations aimed at expanding the Security Council to make it more representative.

“But here we are gridlocked in reforming the Security Council because some among us want a status that defies the basic norms of democratic representation and accountability,” the Pakistani envoy said, while asking the G-4 to be flexible in their demand for permanent seats.

Despite a general agreement on enlarging the council, as part of the UN reform process, member states remain sharply divided over the details.

Pakistan, a leader in the Uniting for Consensus (UfC) group, stands for creating a new category of members — not permanent members — with longer duration and a possibility to get re-elected once.

But the “Group of Four” have been campaigning for enlarging the council by 10 seats, with six additional permanent and four non-permanent members.

Lodhi said there was no disagreement over the demand that the council should “reflect the realities of the 21st century” to enhance its legitimacy. “But then some use this disingenuously as an argument to further their self-proclaimed candidacies for permanent seats based on contentious criteria for qualification,” she added.

The ambassador went on to say, “Their claim however does not stand the test of accuracy because many states compete with them and even surpass them in all such criteria,” adding that the criteria they lay out for permanent seats was exactly the same as provided in the UN Charter for the non-permanent members. “So, if the criteria is the same, why the difference in character and responsibility?”

Islamabad snubs discriminatory NSG membership proposal

The UfC, she said, has twice revised its proposal in a genuine spirit of compromise to find a solution that works for all. “Had there been flexibility in the unjustified demand for permanent seats, many member states would already have played a positive role in the Security Council.”

Lodhi added that Africa’s demand for permanent seats was different from the individual pursuit by a few countries because it was a consensus demand on behalf of a region. “Perhaps African countries have suffered the most by the deadlock created by those harbouring a false sense of entitlement,” she said.

“We believe the African demand can best be addressed in a just, equitable and pragmatic manner through the compromise solution offered by the UfC,” the envoy said.

The IGN process opened on Monday and will continue on Tuesday with the Ambassadors of Tunisia and Romania having been appointed as co-faciliatators of the process by the president of the General Assembly.
 
. . . . . . .
Madam nay bari bhego bhego kay lagae hain chithar (ofcourse without naming and shaming)
 
.
When did China get Permanent UNSC membership?? I don't think any one is getting permanent membership ever now.
 
. . .
there is only and ONLY one way of becoming worthy of the permanent veto seat and that is to beat the living daylights out of a major super power, not by begging for it like india does. germany and japan were super powers but russia, u.s. england and france beat the living snot out of them albeit it very expensive costs. Bear in mind, China did NOT have any veto power after the u.n. was formed. China only got it after China beat the living snot out of the united states in korea and stared the ussr down in many many military confrontations.

u.s., france, u.s.s.r. and england had no choice left BUT to hand the permanent seat along with the veto power to China on a silver platter!
2hfoobm.jpg
 
.
:) neither nsg nor unsc :coffee:

No NSG waiver (what really matters) for Pakistan. No MTCR either.

Oh look more shipments of so much uranium arriving at Indian ports from Canada and Russia arriving like clockwork....nothing of the sort for Pakistan....and not even planned in the future from higher than mountains friend (who gave NSG waiver to India....ouch!).

UNSC membership will be nice, but it can be bypassed if needed as long as we got friends there like in 1971 :D
 
.
No NSG waiver (what really matters) for Pakistan. No MTCR either.

Oh look more shipments of so much uranium arriving at Indian ports from Canada and Russia arriving like clockwork....nothing of the sort for Pakistan....and not even planned in the future from higher than mountains friend (who gave NSG waiver to India....ouch!).

UNSC membership will be nice, but it can be bypassed if needed as long as we got friends there like in 1971 :D
We make what you have to buy. Ours just end up in hundreds of warheads pointed and you! ;)
 
. .

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom