Would India allow US to use military bases?

[Indian_Patriot]

It is the US that made China an export powerhouse through investments, now its India's turn. We are going to use American help to transform our military and economy in a way that China has done over the last few decades..the Chinese shouldn't complain..that would be hypocritical.

 

[Steakhouse]

Yes, but there is a lot more pressure to deny a country worthy of entry vs. veto power on some resolution against sanctioning a country. These are not some childish games

Not a childish game as you infer but Russia and China surely not want any new member with the power that can ally with US to counteract both China and Russia under the resolution mandate by the UN.

 

[Foggy_Bottom]

Now tell me who would veto? The hardest thing is to get India's candidature on the table. Once it is on the table, it is given that India will become UNSC permanent member.

I can almost guarantee that you are speaking with some high school kid in @Chinese-Dragon , and all he will do is copy links and put emoticons behind it .

U.N security council and vetoing a deserving member is difficult vs. veto over some sanctions. That is why a delaying tactic has been used but no veto. It is only a matter of time India will get in.

 

[EL LOBO]

Oh really....then to India-Us friendship.

 

[Keel]

India will not get 2 votes for an UNSC permanent seat

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

I can almost guarantee that you are speaking with some high school kid in @Chinese-Dragon , and all he will do is copy links and put emoticons behind it .

No personal attacks please. Try to debate rationally.

 

[ito]

Sure. But the P5 are delaying any UNSC reforms, and have been doing so for over a decade now.

Delays in UNSC reforms will diminish its relevance: G4 bloc - Economic Times

May 10, 2014, 02.42PM IST

UNITED NATIONS: The G4 bloc of Brazil, Germany, India and Japan has said "status quo" and "artificial delays" in implementing the UNSC reforms will diminish the relevance of the United Nations, even as Pakistan called the grouping a "minority" that wants to reconfigure the Security Council to secure "their national interests."

---------------------------

Think about it, if the entire P5 was so eager to let new members in, they would have been in over a decade ago when they first started pushing for it.

Instead it is delays, delays, delays.

That said, I have no problem with India in the UNSC as long as it does not have "veto" power. And so far, no member of the P5 has promised to expand veto powers, let alone all of them.

That is what I said in my last post...getting India candidature to table is hardest given that there is Japan, Germany in G4 that have direct rivals in P5. Japan has China, Germany has France.

Anyway P5 cannot claim to represent the world if it continues to ignore 20% of world population.

 

[Foggy_Bottom]

Not a childish game as you infer but Russia and China surely not want any new member with the power that can ally with US to counteract both China and Russia under the resolution mandate by the UN.

Again this not some childish PDF game they play. They have no option but to allow deserving members because of the sheer pressure from those countries and optics behind it. If they wanted they would have veto them by now, instead they are just playing delay tactics.

 

[Indian_Patriot]

In a few decades when India has a nominal economy greater than the United States and an effective nuclear strategic triad tell me..will it really matter if India doesn't have the veto?

 

[Steakhouse]

I can almost guarantee that you are speaking with some high school kid in @Chinese-Dragon , and all he will do is copy links and put emoticons behind it .

U.N security council and vetoing a deserving member is difficult vs. veto over some sanctions. That is why a delaying tactic has been used but no veto. It is only a matter of time India will get in.

How so? UN not under US jurisdiction that US can dictate UN what to do.

 

[Foggy_Bottom]

No personal attacks please. Try to debate rationally.

Okay how about I say someone who attends high school?

Although your frequent posts taunting people about rape capitals is not personal I guess?

 

[Steakhouse]

Again this not some childish PDF game they play. They have no option but to allow deserving members because of the sheer pressure from those countries and optics behind it. If they wanted they would have veto them by now, instead they are just playing delay tactics.

If they allow India, then every nation deserve to join the P5 membership club, what make India any special compare to the rest of the nations in this world? Every nation with veto power P5 is a useless club with or without the original P5 membership.

 

[ito]

He imply China and Russia can veto any new member to be add into the P5 membership that US can't do anything about it.

Russia cannot because India buys 70% of its military exports.

China cannot because it cannot afford to have India as its overt enemy. Then there is also the question of 80 billion annual trade where China enjoys positive net surplus.

 

[Steakhouse]

Russia cannot because India buys 70% of its military exports.

China cannot because it cannot afford to have India as its overt enemy. Then there is also the question of 80 billion annual trade where China enjoys positive net surplus.

Not that convincing for both China and Russia to accept India into the club.

 

[GR!FF!N]

aahahahaa poor you, don't know what is going on

poor me??