US backs India on UNSC seat despite Syria vote

[abhishekgoel80]

I believe this talks about the UNSC seat is immaterial and inconsequential.

Going by the BRICs report we will grow much stronger very soon within five years .i.e. 3rd largest economy and the third largest military power.

As per IMF India was the fastest growing economy in 2010 (10.4%) just a

we are improving are infrastructure, education sector and health sector. Our soft power is any day more than China. (Movies, films large english speaking population etc).

Let the lokpal movement get success our growth rates will be faster.

If we had power and prestige the priviledge and responsibility will automatically come along. We already have friends and trust all over the world they will automatically look towards us for help and intervention.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

BTW, What do they mean by saying that? You're right, it could mean anything. Rather than taking it negative, we took it positive. And your government did not say anything like "not supporting" either.

What do you think Politicians mean, when they deliberately avoid making explicit promises?

Heck, even when Politicians do make explicit promises (like during their election campaigns), they often disregard it later.

Basically, the Chinese government is holding out to see how much strategic leverage it can get, for either supporting or shutting down the resolution.

That's how Politics works. "If you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours."

 

[IndoCarib]

What do you think Politicians mean, when they deliberately avoid making explicit promises?

Heck, even when Politicians do make explicit promises (like during their election campaigns), they often disregard it later.

Basically, the Chinese government is holding out to see how much strategic leverage it can get, for either supporting or shutting down the resolution.

That's how Politics works. "If you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours."

If China goes back on its promise, then it will lose credibility. Are you suggesting China can not be trusted ?

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

If China goes back on its promise, then it will lose credibility. Are you suggesting China can not be trusted ?

I think countries should keep their promises, unless it is overwhelmingly against national interest.

So luckily, we didn't actually make any promises here. Apart from some vague statements about aspirations for an "increased role", which could mean anything. There are hundreds of roles in the UN, from peacekeeping roles to humanitarian work.

And even if you somehow get an explicit promise from China (lol), you will still need a 2/3 supermajority in the general assembly, which might actually be more difficult than getting unanimous support from the P5.

 

[Gautam]

What do you think Politicians mean, when they deliberately avoid making explicit promises?

Heck, even when Politicians do make explicit promises (like during their election campaigns), they often disregard it later.

Basically, the Chinese government is holding out to see how much strategic leverage it can get, for either supporting or shutting down the resolution.

That's how Politics works. "If you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours."

I'm not sure how is this scratching relevant here.
Giving promises to the local public is different and talking in an international affair is different. If they do not want to support, they should make it clear. Simple.

I'm sure they are not scared to do it. No one is pressuring them.

If you don't want to support, then better you be clear. And if that's not the case then it means that you do support. Or you can give me a statement which says clearly that we don't support India.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

I'm not sure how is this scratching relevant here.
Giving promises to the local public is different and talking in an international affair is different. If they do not want to support, they should make it clear. Simple.

I'm sure they are not scared to do it. No one is pressuring them.

If you don't want to support, then better you be clear. And if that's not the case then it means that you do support. Or you can give me a statement which says clearly that we don't support India.

Oh, if only politics was so simple.

Again, you need unanimous support from ALL the P5 nations, and a 2/3 supermajority in the general assembly.

If any single P5 member, is non-committal, then it won't pass. Veto won't even be needed, just not voting in favour of the resolution will be enough.

 

[harshad]

if you dont want to include india as a permenant member,then which country do you want to include ? somalia

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

if you dont want to include india as a permenant member,then which country do you want to include ? somalia

Brazil and Germany are good choices.

 

[jdme]

I wonder if Indians really have such low self esteem that they cannot stop talking about UNSC? It doesn't matter in 21st century.

 

[harshad]

Brazil and Germany are good choices.

ok so a country with a big military might and decent economy is not worth joining unsc permanent membership,germany is also opposed by some non permenant members

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

ok so a country with a big military might and decent economy is not worth joining unsc permanent membership,germany is also opposed by some non permenant members

Both Brazil and Germany, have larger economies than India.

Secondly, you do know that India is claiming Chinese land (Aksai chin) as a part of Kashmir right?

We are geostrategic rivals. How is it in China's interests, to see India as a permanent member of the UNSC?

 

[Gautam]

Oh, if only politics was so simple.

Again, you need unanimous support from ALL the P5 nations, and a 2/3 supermajority in the general assembly.

If any single P5 member, is non-committal, then it won't pass. Veto won't even be needed, just not voting in favour of the resolution will be enough.

Agreed. But any of the P5 members have not denied it either which is my original point.

I'm still waiting for you to give me a statement which says that we don't support India.

Oh, if only politics was so simple.

Again, you need unanimous support from ALL the P5 nations, and a 2/3 supermajority in the general assembly.

If any single P5 member, is non-committal, then it won't pass. Veto won't even be needed, just not voting in favour of the resolution will be enough.

Agreed. But any of the P5 members have not denied it either which is my original point.

I'm still waiting for you to give me a statement which says that we don't support India.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Agreed. But any of the P5 members have not denied it either which is my original point.

I'm still waiting for you to give me a statement which says that we don't support India.

Like I said, there has been no explicit statement from the Chinese foreign ministry, promising either support or opposition.

Which in this particular case, is problematic for you, because you need ALL the P5 members to vote in favour of the proposal. If even one abstains, then it won't pass.

 

[Gautam]

Like I said, there has been no explicit statement from the Chinese foreign ministry, promising either support or opposition.

Which in this particular case, is problematic for you, because you need ALL the P5 members to vote in favour of the proposal. If even one abstains, then it won't pass.

Did you read the link that I gave you? That link says, China is not against India's bid for seat in SC.

Should I take it as they are against? What are you talking man?

 

[cyphercide]

Don't understand what the fuss is all about.India spearheaded and followed the Non Alignment Movement precisely because it didn't want to meddle in International conflicts.Why put yourself in the position that forces you into picking sides? We were fence-sitters before and nothing has changed in that posture till this day.We refused to condemn the situations in Myanmar or Libya as President Obama rightly pointed out during his speech addressing the Indian Parliament.Our position on international affairs has been one of noninterference and rightly so.

It's important to recall that many countries that are doing exceedingly well currently are ones that do not want be conformed with existing blocs like Germany and Canada whereas all nations barring China in the Security Council is in a state of decline.Let's be content with the position that we are in, a nation that has favorable support from Western(who are currently ignoring our growing business ties with Iran)as well as Middle-Eastern countries(who are currently ignoring our growing ties with Israel). Admission into the UNSC will in all likelihood would prove counterproductive to our ambitions.