Power and Principle: UNSC Reforms

[Chinese-Dragon]

Let this go, it can't end well. I don't even understand what the problem is.

I'm sure we can discuss this in a civil manner.

 

[S10]

You said that the Chinese foreign ministry had pledged to support India for a permanent seat at the UNSC.

Yet you have given us no sources to support this claim, you have just stretched some words to convey a meaning that was not explicitly given.

If you have something better then I would love to hear it.

I've provided you with a source on page 5 and there was another posted that posted more on page 6. You simply could not see it because you were selectively blind and/or choosing to comprehend to wording to how you like it. Let me ask you clearly, what does "expanded role" mean for India when it is already a non-permenant member in UNSC? Does it remotely sound anything like rejection to you?

"The Chinese government values India's influence and role in international and regional affairs and is willing to see a greater Indian role in the international arena, the United Nations included."
Asia Times Online - The best news coverage from South Asia

Of course, you can continue to play the ostrich, but the message is pretty clear.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Of course, you can continue to play the ostrich, but the message is pretty clear.

Not to me.

Call me cynical, but I would prefer to wait until an explicit statement is given, to support your argument that China backs India for a permanent seat and thus (in your words) veto power at the UNSC.

Instead of reading too much into a vague statement like that, which quite clearly, does not explicitly state that China is supporting India for a permanent seat and veto power.

I'd like to hear from other members here as well on this issue.

 

[S10]

I used to be pro-China/India friendship (ask Cardsharp), but now I'm not. Geopolitical realities and all that.

What does that make me then?

Do you look at the world as black and white? If not friends, then one must be an enemy?

In that case, I'm surprised WWIII hasn't occured yet.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Do you look at the world as black and white? If not friends, then one must be an enemy?

In that case, I'm surprised WWIII hasn't occured yet.

No, I do not think that way at all.

And you vastly overestimate how politically powerful I am, if you think I can somehow cause WW3.

 

[S10]

Others I agree with but not the first. There are just as many hard right defeatists on Chinese forums are there are hard left nationalists. I try to maintain objectivity and provide facts, but the facts support the left most of the time. Unlike some, I do not believe that objective = unbiased. Truth is often biased. You do not give the same classroom time to ancient Greek physics and Newton's physics.

Extremism on both ends of the spectrum are not healthy attitudes. You can express your nationalist views without coming off as a pompus a-hole to other countries/cultures. Like I've said, I am often guilty of the same charge, but recognizing it is a different matter.

Bad:
"India is a dirty sh*thole full of people taking dumps on rail tracks, lol!"

Good:
"India has not yet reached the same sanitary standards compared to China."

It's not that hard is it?

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Extremism on both ends of the spectrum are not healthy attitudes. You can express your nationalist views without coming off as a pompus to other countries/cultures. Like I've said, I am often guilty of the same charge, but recognizing it is a different matter.

Bad:
"India is a dirty sh*thole full of people taking dumps on rail tracks, lol!"

Good:
"India has not yet reached the sanitary standards compared to China."

It's not that hard is it?

Not hard at all.

 

[below_freezing]

Extremism on both ends of the spectrum are not healthy attitudes. You can express your nationalist views without coming off as a pompus to other countries/cultures. Like I've said, I am often guilty of the same charge, but recognizing it is a different matter.

Bad:
"India is a dirty sh*thole full of people taking dumps on rail tracks, lol!"

Good:
"India has not yet reached the sanitary standards compared to China."

It's not that hard is it?

Yes. I have also tried to be objective and avoid exaggerations like that, and I always back my claims with statistics. Some cannot avoid doing that, and instead use low class insults.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Not to me.

Call me cynical, but I would prefer to wait until an explicit statement is given, to support your argument that China backs India for a permanent seat and thus (in your words) veto power at the UNSC.

Instead of reading too much into a vague statement like that, which quite clearly, does not explicitly state that China is supporting India for a permanent seat and veto power.

I'd like to hear from other members here as well on this issue.

Anyone want to comment on this?

Has China said that it will support India for a permanent seat and veto power at the UNSC?

From the evidence, no such statement has been given.

 

[LaBong]

Okay come down you guys, India's not getting permanent membership with veto in atleast next 5 years, if that soothes you guys.

India will get it when the seat becomes insignificant to her.

 

[tanlixiang28776]

Okay come down you guys, India's not getting permanent membership with veto in atleast next 5 years, if that soothes you guys.

India will get it when the seat becomes insignificant to her.

The day the seat becomes insignificant to India is the day India has more power than the permanent members of the UNSC.

In other words its highly doubtful.

 

[LaBong]

The day the seat becomes insignificant to India is the day India has more power than the permanent members of the UNSC.

In other words its highly doubtful.

No it isn't necessary. China isn't the most powerful country in world, but UN can't twiddle her finger against China(actually they can't do that against India as well).

However India offcourse needs to be one of the major economic and military powers to attain such feat.

 

[applesauce]

No it isn't necessary. China isn't the most powerful country in world, but UN can't twiddle her finger against China(actually they can't do that against India as well).

However India offcourse needs to be one of the major economic and military powers to attain such feat.

thats cause China is part of the P5, the UN cant doing anything against those 5 members(i mean really they're the one running the place) and by extension their closest allies(hint/: Israel). india doesnt need the seat to protect itself per say, rather its useful for extending influence and national prestige

 

[True Lies]

india can keep crying, but at the end of day, such a loser nation will never become a UNSC permanent member.

on the other hand, I would strongly agree to admit Germany to the permanent membership of UNSC.

if india is selected then south asian region will become stronger. germany is nato partner but india is SCO observer.

 

[LaBong]

thats cause China is part of the P5, the UN cant doing anything against those 5 members(i mean really they're the one running the place) and by extension their closest allies(hint/: Israel). india doesnt need the seat to protect itself per say, rather its useful for extending influence and national prestige

Well no, UN can't do anything against Germany or Japan as well.

India needs the seat to use it against more-susceptible nations. There's off-course a difference between protecting herself and projecting her influence on world. However I honestly think India's isn't yet in a position to project her influence outside South-Asia, if India gets the seat in next five years, it'll be because of extensive lobbying and indulging in buying spree.