UNSC seat: US throws water over India's hopes

[India Rising]

This IMO - is what is wrong with india's thinking, you have a raging Naxalite insurgency that is active in 1/3 of your districts, there main demand amongst others is that india does nothing for the poor.

Until this and other core problems are not addressed, the membership of the security council is a mirage and a wishful dream.

gets your fact right mr. rafi .. only 123 out of 545 districts are naxalites affected , in which only 40 are severly affected.. jharkand alone has 21 districts affected...lol

 

[qwerrty]

Conclusion

There is no consensus for UN reform, probably won't be done in our lifetime.

agree !

US don't want brazil in usnc
russia, france wont let germany, japan in..
china #### japan

if india allowed in, china will support brazil and germany to get in too to stir thing up.....so, the best thing to do is stay the same..lol

 

[kak1978]

Are you saying that as long as a country has a big population then she qualifies for a Permanent U.N. seat ?

Tell us what can India do for the world that other countries cannot ?

Japan, Germany and Brazil are far richer than India and can use their
wealth to help many poor countries around the world while we doubt
that India can match that !!!

You wouldn't have said that if you experienced democracy.

 

[nwmalik]

India has a reasonable chance of a seat in UNSC (without veto), but it is possible with local regional support along with international support.
So SAARC is very important.

 

[Fact_ur_mine]

Washington: The U.S. has cautioned against expecting any breakthrough "anytime soon" on the UN Security Council reforms, dampening India's hopes for a permanent seat just a week after President Barack Obama backed its quest for this prestigious slot.

A top U.S. official also clarified that Obama's endorsement of India for permanent membership in the UNSC during his visit to New Delhi was not a last minute decision, but had been well thought out. It was kept hush-hush, since the endorsement was a big news item, he said.

 

[Rafi]

gets your fact right mr. rafi .. only 123 out of 545 districts are naxalites affected , in which only 40 are severly affected.. jharkand alone has 21 districts affected...lol

Asia Times Online :: South Asia news, business and economy from India and Pakistan

Up to 40% of India's land area, with one-third of the population, is subject to some sort of Naxalite activity. This is especially so in the poor, eastern part of the country, where post-independence elites in the west, to whom such rural regions have been economically unimportant, have historically paid little attention.

 

[Fact_ur_mine]

India's Naxalite insurgency: Not a dinner party | The Economist

Yet the Maoists are much stronger elsewhere. Boasting an estimated 14,000 full-time guerrillas, and many more semi-trained sympathisers, they loosely control tracts of Jharkhand, Orissa and Chhattisgarh. They have also overrun a smaller, but spreading, area of West Bengal, where the Maoist struggle began in 1967—in the village of Naxalbari, from which the guerrillas, or Naxalites, take their name. On February 15th the Maoists stormed a camp, killing 24 Bengali police. The government estimates that they have influence in over a third of India’s 626 districts, with 90 seeing “consistent violence”. According to the Institute for Conflict Management, in Delhi, the insurgency cost 998 lives in eight states last year—compared with 377 lost in the better-known conflict in Kashmir.

Than Mods says, indians post off topic comments

 

[true_indian]

India's Naxalite insurgency: Not a dinner party | The Economist

Yet the Maoists are much stronger elsewhere. Boasting an estimated 14,000 full-time guerrillas, and many more semi-trained sympathisers, they loosely control tracts of Jharkhand, Orissa and Chhattisgarh. They have also overrun a smaller, but spreading, area of West Bengal, where the Maoist struggle began in 1967—in the village of Naxalbari, from which the guerrillas, or Naxalites, take their name. On February 15th the Maoists stormed a camp, killing 24 Bengali police. The government estimates that they have influence in over a third of India’s 626 districts, with 90 seeing “consistent violence”. According to the Institute for Conflict Management, in Delhi, the insurgency cost 998 lives in eight states last year—compared with 377 lost in the better-known conflict in Kashmir.

@Rafi..You gotta understand one thing..When they say affected they don't mean they are controlled by Naxalites. There are hardly 7000-8000 maoists in the entire country..They live in Jungles and attack like cowards. They are not mainstream.. India has been very lenient about them being democracy and all.. If India deploys army, there on't be any Naxalism even remotely...

 

[Peshwa]

This IMO - is what is wrong with india's thinking, you have a raging Naxalite insurgency that is active in 1/3 of your districts, there main demand amongst others is that india does nothing for the poor.

Until this and other core problems are not addressed, the membership of the security council is a mirage and a wishful dream.

First off, lets get one thing clear....What are the parameters of being eligible for UNSC?
If poverty levels were a factor, please explain why China has been a member since 1950s and through periods when an impoverished India still had better Per capita income than China while being equally poor?

Here I think there are 4 parameters once can look at to evaluate a global power as well as find the 4 factors existing in the P5 that make a good roadmap for being considered for the UNSC....

Science/technology/ Innovation
Cultural Influence
Military might
Economic might

Except for Tech...India has significant influence in the other 3 categories

UNSC membership is based on power of the nation....ie. how much can the nation, its economy, its military and its political muscle influence the world dynamis.

And the naxalite problem is an Indian internal matter...it does not diminish India's influence in the world....
Besides...where has it been mentioned that the Naxalite problem is a hindrace to or its elimination is a precursor to India being included in the UNSC? Please dont make up qualifiers....

I would be interested in hearing why you think India does not qualify leaving its internal matters aside...

 

[Hafizzz]

It can create jobs in the US....have you been living under a rock Maiser?

Besides...we have done our share in building the poor nations....
1.5Billion in development to Afghanistan....
$2 Billion in loans to BD at extremely competitive interest rates....\
Close to $25MM in flood relief to Pakistan in their time of need....

And that is just the tip of the iceberg....

I think we have proven ourselves economically.....need I elaborate on why our military power adds to this....and lastly, yes...the voice of 1/3rd of humanity does hold weight....

"It can create jobs" ? The other way around, Bhai !!! India have been stealing jobs from USA and Western Europe.

 

[Peshwa]

"It can create jobs" ? The other way around, Bhai !!! India have been stealing jobs from USA and Western Europe.

Hafiz...You're posting news about the recent Obama visit and its strategic implications....and tend to ignore the main reason for Obama's visit?

Indian investment and trade with the US had helped create jobs in the US....

WASHINGTON, USA: India, often accused by American politicians of hijacking jobs from "Buffalo to Bangalore", has actually created about 60,000 jobs in the US in the last five years with investments topping $26.6 billion, says a new study.

These investments included 372 acquisitions worth $21 billion by 239 Indian companies and 127 greenfield investments worth $5.5 billion between 2004 and 2009, said the report, "How America Benefits from Economic Engagement with India", released on Tuesday by Congressman Jim McDermott.

India created 60000 jobs in US: Study - CIOL News Reports

 

[Vajra_Yuddh]

Hafiz...You're posting news about the recent Obama visit and its strategic implications....and tend to ignore the main reason for Obama's visit?

Indian investment and trade with the US had helped create jobs in the US....



India created 60000 jobs in US: Study - CIOL News Reports

Bro, let us slowly continue the good work that we've been doing. It is not hidden from the world and as we give it more time, anti-seat voices will become murkier as our work will speak more.

I think we need more time. Besides, as I said before since we got good friends in the council already, we need not worry about anything immediate.

 

[Hafizzz]

Hafiz...You're posting news about the recent Obama visit and its strategic implications....and tend to ignore the main reason for Obama's visit?

Indian investment and trade with the US had helped create jobs in the US....



India created 60000 jobs in US: Study - CIOL News Reports

LOL.

Do a search and see how many US jobs went to India.

 

[CardSharp]

US throws water over India's hopes for UNSC seat -

WASHINGTON/ NEW YORK: The US has cautioned against expecting any breakthrough "anytime soon" on the UN Security Council reforms, dampening India's hopes for a permanent seat just a week after President Barack Obama backed its quest for this prestigious slot.

A top US official also clarified that Obama's endorsement of India for permanent membership in the UNSC during his visit to New Delhi was not a last minute decision, but had been well thought out. It was kept hush-hush, since the endorsement was a big news item, he said.

"I would caution against expecting any kind of breakthrough anytime soon," assistant secretary of state Robert Blake told journalists in New York and Washington during a digital video press conference.

"I think the President and others have made it clear that this (reform) is going to be a long and complicated process and that we're committed to a modest expansion both of permanent and non-permanent seats," he said.


The official said the only "real change" Obama announced was US support to India's permanent seat in the 15-membered wing of the UN, but "we have always been clear that this is going to be a long-term and very complicated process."

Blake, however, asserted that no condition has been imposed on India in lieu of the support for the Security Council berth. "No, there's not conditionality."

He also answered questions on a range of issues including terrorism, Pakistan and China.

Blake said it is in interest of Pakistan to crack down on terrorist groups operating inside the country.

"The President (Obama) was very clear that Pakistan itself has been the chief victim of international terrorism. And so it's very much in its own interest to crack down on these groups, which increasingly are operating as a syndicate and it's very difficult to really distinguish between them," he said.

Blake also said Obama's enthusiasm for a stronger Indo-US relationship is not to "counterbalance" China's growing influence over Asia.

"I don't think you heard anybody say that in the course of the President's three-day visit (to India), we're looking to counterbalance China in any way," he added.

On nuclear issues, Blake said US said it considered India as a partner in its global non-proliferation efforts.

"One of the criticisms in the past has been that US sometimes regarded India more as a target than a partner in non-proliferation, I think the steps President (Obama) announced in the course of this visit showed definitely that we now see India as a partner in the global non-proliferation space

"Not only in terms of the actions, but also in terms of our growing efforts in the nuclear area," he added.

Elaborating on UNSC reforms, he said there are many contenders for permanent seats as India, Japan, Brazil, South Africa and Germany.

"There's the whole question of the veto. And so we need to have a detailed and serious conversation with all of our friends who are competing for these seats," he added.

Read more: US throws water over India's hopes for UNSC seat - The Times of India US throws water over India's hopes for UNSC seat - The Times of India

Well this settles one important question I had before. Obama was not clear on whether his endorsement of a permanent seat would include veto. It looks like none of the veto welding members are happy about expanding veto powers.

 

[Abhishek_]

my .02, India should not be adamant about the veto power at this stage. We can always work from the inside to change UNSC as time goes on.
bhaagte chor ki langoti hi sahi (Essence: Take what you can, worry about the rest later)