Policy paralysis may cost India UN permanent seat

[newdelhinsa]

Our foreign policy is independent of any outside influence and many even in China are envy about it, I can post a link to prove it.
Original Post By newdelhinsa

LOL. Those two links I posted were from INDIANS, and they show how India has bowed not only to the USA but to China as well.

Even your Defence Minister Anthony is whining that China has violated India's borders 500 times in the past two years alone.

Blah Blah Blah.....

Have some guts to answer what I wrote. Your LOL is a sign that you are now clueless. Ask your supervisor to help you.

What you have wrote is another propaganda rant which doesn't even address we are talking.

 

[Luffy 500]

If india is given a seat in UNSC then so should Zimbabwe and somalia.

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

If india is given a seat in UNSC then so should Zimbabwe and somalia.

Actually, how about no UNSC, let any decisions be done the traditional way, i.e no veto, all nations of the UN vote, no more dead lock on Palestinian issue, what do you say?

 

[ashokdeiva]

If india is given a seat in UNSC then so should Zimbabwe and somalia.

thanks for your very informative post,
next time when BD pole vaulters are shot, you can cry

 

[Luffy 500]

Actually, how about no UNSC, let any decisions be done the traditional way, i.e no veto, all nations of the UN vote, no more dead lock on Palestinian issue, what do you say?

I agree, that would be an ideal scenario. But the babus ruling you want this UNSC solely for this
veto power. Apart from this special veto privilege the UNSC has no value. But I will support any
country including india that will strive for a veto less UNSC.

 

[GR!FF!N]

Typical lying Indian media.

And did you even read the article? The Chinese official was talking to the Indian Communist Party, and saying that India should ditch the rest of the G4 (Japan in particular) if they wanted support.

And India did NOT do so. So what do you think is going to happen?

If there were no obtacles, India would be a permanent member already. But as usual, Indian superpower dreams are clouding the reality.

yes i read it..and we ditched japan or not,it is a different question.but the claim you are making that China will give veto..that is completely lie.thats what i needed to prove..now don't cry..run back home...

 

[Hulk]

If india is given a seat in UNSC then so should Zimbabwe and somalia.

Dude we are talking about India not Bangladesh.

 

[faithfulguy]

Permanent seat in UNSC has no value, specially if we want to conduct a foreign policy based on our interest.
It is India's best interest if it is not in UNSC, any way it's a worth less body having no significance.

Again, sour grape. In reality, UNSC is the only relevant agency in the UN. Without UNSC, UN has no significance. UNSC theoretically can declare India a rogue nation and a illegal country. It can even settle on dispute territory such as Kashmir if it choose to. In affect, it makes the international law. So that is the significance. And that is why India begs to join

 

[faithfulguy]

If Brazil India and Japan becomes too powerful in days to come....then avoiding them in SC will be something which can only be termed as creating their own lobby, which will in turn diminish the true function of SC. Security council will not be a dictating forcethat time and I don't think people of these countries are so ignorant....

The first word in your post is the key word, "if" So we are talking about sometimes in the future that we do not know when. Until then, India should work hard and wait patiently. As the statements after the word "if" has no come to pass.

 

[TopCat]

If India is considered, why not Bangladesh? As a responsible member of the international community Bangladesh deserve more to be a permanent member than India. I am sure China, USA, UK will prefer Bangladesh than India. Our govt should make this case louder that if India is allowed then Bangladesh must be allowed too.

 

[faithfulguy]

Actually, how about no UNSC, let any decisions be done the traditional way, i.e no veto, all nations of the UN vote, no more dead lock on Palestinian issue, what do you say?

This method had failed. Read up on league of nations. UNSC needs the involvement powerful countries to make it effective. And India is not one of these countries.

 

[Rajaraja Chola]

If you are arguing your case for the inclusion of India into the UN, then stick to India's case and why she should be represented. What does any of it have to do with Bush, China and the nuclear deal? We have seen China stand up to the USA on more than one occasion. Need you be reminded about the Korean war?

Yeah like I said earlier, it makes sense to have the UN expanded. Not just India, but Brazil and Japan deserve a voice too. Actually Japan deserves it way more than you or Brazil. So quit acting like you are the only nation deserving of this right.

Now prove to me China stood up to USA in 1979? Chinese were American's pet in 79 in their great game against soviet... After the USSR break up , the next target was china.. Just dont blabber for the sake of it... Its so called standing up after 30 years USA "helped or made" china UN permanent seat...
Japan will get UN seat if china agrees,.... Chinese japanese rivalry is at a another level....

 

[illusion8]

If India is considered, why not Bangladesh? As a responsible member of the international community Bangladesh deserve more to be a permanent member than India. I am sure China, USA, UK will prefer Bangladesh than India. Our govt should make this case louder that if India is allowed then Bangladesh must be allowed too.

Yeah why not!!! Bangladesh should become a veto power in the UNSC

 

[Lonely Hermit]

Again, sour grape. In reality, UNSC is the only relevant agency in the UN. Without UNSC, UN has no significance. UNSC theoretically can declare India a rogue nation and a illegal country. It can even settle on dispute territory such as Kashmir if it choose to. In affect, it makes the international law. So that is the significance. And that is why India begs to join

Sour grapes ?
Tell me kind sir one instance when UNSC was able to act effectively, the UNSC was formed after world war 2 and the victors where given permanent membership and veto power. That scenario does not apply to today's world because question arise why so few should hold so much power. The UNSC is an outdated body which has not been able to implement for what it was made for it's better to scrap the whole organisation and start anew .

On topic it is better it will be better if India is not part of this organisation, we cannot conduct the same foreign policy that we conduct now. We will have to take sides if we become permanent members just think about it if an issue like a vote on Iran comes to the table what we will do. If vote along with China and Russia we upset western world or vice versa.

 

[arp2041]

If India is considered, why not Bangladesh? As a responsible member of the international community Bangladesh deserve more to be a permanent member than India. I am sure China, USA, UK will prefer Bangladesh than India. Our govt should make this case louder that if India is allowed then Bangladesh must be allowed too.

bhai pehle ghar toh sambhal lo, fir UNSC me bheth k duniya sambhalna.