There will be NO expansion of the exclusive club

[Hafizzz]

Security Council seat will test India’s mettle
Asia Times Online :: South Asia news, business and economy from India and Pakistan

The truth is that none of the five permanent members - the US, Russia, China, Britain and France - genuinely wants an expansion of the exclusive club, no matter the changed realities of the contemporary world order. Thoughtful Indians admit that an expansion of the Security Council and their country's induction as a permanent member is a long haul.

 

[KS]

Britain, France back India's UN Security Council bid

Russia - Do I need to give a link .?

 

[Hafizzz]

Britain, France back India's UN Security Council bid

Russia - Do I need to give a link .?

LOL. As long as 1 permanent member disagrees then there will be no change at all.

 

[WAQAS119]

Britain, France back India's UN Security Council bid

Source Deccan Herald!!!!!!!!!!

The Deccan Herald is a popular English-language daily newspaper in the Indian state of Karnataka. It is published by the Printers (Mysore) Private Limited and has a number of editions in Bangalore, Hubli, Mysore, Mangalore and Gulbarga.

Deccan Herald - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

We are the best

 

[Hulk]

New members will be added for sure but not with same powers I guess.

 

[ankur]

its not just india who is eying for a permanent UNSC seat. japan, brazil, germany also wants to become the non permanent member in UNSC.
so why point out india everytime.

 

[Hulk]

People who are in race can try to win, they might or might not win is a different question. It is still better then people who are not at all in race.
Famous quote.

"Girte hain sheh-sawar hi maidan-e-jung mein. Woh tifl kya gire jo ghutnon ke bal chala karte hain"

 

[somebozo]

The UNSC permanent club is reserved for victors of WW2. And if that rule has to be broken down there there are far more eligible candidates than India. Germany & Japan would like a comeback and the Arabs would demands a seat for themselves probably headed by Saudi Arabia as SA had never been under colonial rule.

 

[KS]

Source Deccan Herald!!!!!!!!!!

The Deccan Herald is a popular English-language daily newspaper in the Indian state of Karnataka. It is published by the Printers (Mysore) Private Limited and has a number of editions in Bangalore, Hubli, Mysore, Mangalore and Gulbarga.

Deccan Herald - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

We are the best

You laughed too soon:

Of the five permanent members (P-5) with powers to veto any resolution, three - Britain, France and Russia - have openly supported India's case, thanks to India's intense lobbying.

BBC NEWS | Americas | Analysis: India's Security Council seat bid

Now the joke is on you.

 

[KS]

The UNSC permanent club is reserved for victors of WW2. And if that rule has to be broken down there there are far more eligible candidates than India. Germany & Japan would like a comeback and the Arabs would demands a seat for themselves probably headed by Saudi Arabia as SA had never been under colonial rule.

Ever heard of the G4_nations.

Even among them..India has the least opposition in becoming a permanent member.

And were you joking when you said Arabs would want a seat for themselves.?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

The longer it takes to enact UNSC reforms the lower the chances of SC expansion with veto powers for the new members. People have mentioned Germany and Japan as being interested, but there are several second tier nations (Turkey, South Africa, Argentina, Arab States, ASEAN members etc.) that are developing rapidly and will gain more and more clout internationally and will either start demanding a stake for themselves or opposing the extension of discriminatory privileges (veto) to a select few more.

True SC reform would involve the removal of veto powers from the existing members, not increasing members with veto powers, something along the lines of the what the Coffee Club is proposing. More members with veto is a recipe for inefficiency and logjam in the SC, given that the number of competing interests will increase by many magnitudes, and any one of the nations could halt progress on issues brought in front of the UNSC.

 

[JamesBond]

True SC reform would involve the removal of veto powers from the existing members, not increasing members with veto powers, something along the lines of the what the Coffee Club is proposing. More members with veto is a recipe for inefficiency and logjam in the SC, given that the number of competing interests will increase by many magnitudes, and any one of the nations could halt progress on issues brought in front of the UNSC.

That is wishful thinking AM. Why would power hungry nations such as US/UK/China/India/Russia/France etc. let go of the trappings of the current set up?

If anything, I see the current set up being expanded rather than abolished with or without veto.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

That is wishful thinking AM. Why would power hungry nations such as US/UK/China/India/Russia/France etc. let go of the trappings of the current set up?

By the same token, why would they dilute their power and allow others (especially countries like Brazil and India that do not tow the Western line - see Brazil's opposition to the new round of sanctions on Iran in conjunction with Turkey) to put a spanner in the works of the SC, when they have a hard enough time convincing China and Russia to go along on many issues?

 

[JamesBond]

By the same token, why would they dilute their power and allow others (especially countries like Brazil and India that do not tow the Western line - see Brazil's opposition to the new round of sanctions on Iran in conjunction with Turkey) to put a spanner in the works of the SC, when they have a hard enough time convincing China and Russia to go along on many issues?

Because if they don't, whatever little relevance UNSC has today will also be finished very soon.

Elephant in the room: UNSC needs rising powers like India more than India needs the UNSC. If they don't include India, it will be entirely their loss. Whatever little relevance they have left after the Iraq war, especially, will also be lost if a country of over a billion people and growing economic and political clout in the world stage, is not given the voice it deserves.

The truth is AM, in nearly 15 years of time from now, india will be where China is today. Now think...can they really afford to ignore India in such a scenario?

 

[JanjaWeed]

five members can not hold onto this permanent seat thing for too long. it's not easy to subdue the voices of emerging nations anymore. look at G8.. from G6 it became G7 & after G8. now even G8 is formality & all major economic decisions are taken by G20.