Is India a rightful claimant for the veto powers in UNSC?

[ankita]

The quest for a veto-wielding Permanent seat at the United Nation's Security Council by India is still on. India's leaders had been trying hard for the same, for over a decade spending Indian treasure and effort (including bribing third world UN diplomats), hoping that India would somehow join the UN's Big Five - USA, China, UK, Russia & France , in the UN's Security Council. The highest resistance that India is confronting at this moment in achieving the target is from United States and China (the two most important superpowers among the members of the UNSC).



In a recent development, China has made its stand clear that it will not oppose India’s bid in the UN, but at the same time it will not support also. So, now, India has to give effort only to get the US nod, since the fact remains that as a pre-eminent geo-political and economic superpower in the world, the US continues to wield enormous influence in the UN.



At present, the most significant question arising in the minds of the Indian diplomats might be: “Will the US give its nod”? Whereas on the contender side the question would be: “Is India a rightful claimant”? The debate is yet to finish and we have to wait for the final verdict to come into a conclusion. However, According to foreign experts, the US reluctance derives from four factors: Firstly, distrust of India dating back to the cold-war era among the hawks of the foreign establishment; Secondly, India's emergence as a nuclear power and defiance of the non-proliferation ideology preached by the US; Thirdly, the reluctance to upset both Pakistan and China; and fourthly, the perception that India has violated Security Council resolutions on Kashmir. Whereas Indians do believe that India is a right candidate for the permanent membership.



Following a line off research in this context, I found an interesting article on http://www.jantaraj.com , that explains why India should be taken as a permanent member of UN.



http://www.jantaraj.com/Ramnarayan/defa ... sp?pid=215



However, none of these above stated factors are insurmountable. In the post-September 11th world, the US has revisited its old stereotypes with regard to India. It now views India as a crucially ally in the war against terrorism, and a stabilizing influence in South and Central Asia. Apart from this, India is also optimistic about getting the two-third majority in a resolution by G-4 countries —India, Brazil, Japan and Germany — on the reforms and expansion of the UN Security Council.

As for now, we can only be hopeful, not confident, for India's emergence as a potential economic superpower

[CtrlAltDel]

why the " " at the end? arent u convinced abt yr own post?

[Ar!e$]

why the " " at the end? arent u convinced abt yr own post?

hehe galat emoticon daldiya hoga..

[blah]

When we have politicians like Mulayam, who for the sake of not ruffling the Muslim vote bank, would support a barbaric Fatwa and rogues like Narendra Modi and Bal Thackeray wielding the reins of power, for the sake of the world, India should be denied the veto.



I have no hesitation in my mind that the Congress sponsored worthies would block a resolution in the UNSC condemning the Janjaweed so as to win a few Muslim votes in South Delhi parliamentary election.



It is one thing to use the veto to brazenly further the position of one's country but altogether a different thing to use the world stage to pander to one's petty local constituency.



That said, I whole heartedly support India's bid to the UNSC, if for nothing else, China is on there too.

[Lucifer]

I am not in the mood to defend or attack the people mentioned in Blah's post. What I look for is fairness. What peeved me most was not the US denying Visa to a certain individual from Gujarat. It was the US not denying the same to a certain other from a neighbouring Nation - a nation that is a 'fine democracy' with a 'fine president' in the words of the President of a certain western brother.



This double talk is what is annoying.

[paris_dakar]

Although the process of getting a permanent seat is not exactly a 10 minute oil change, I have questions....



1. Are our leaders....(didn't vote for any of them) aware of the responsibilites that will be imposed on the country?



2. Is this merely an issue of prestige or are we really excited about reaching out to the world and doing our bit to make it a better place?



Maybe Im just high on something. What good will it do us if we just send somebody over there to sit their ass on a chair forever...like the other ponderous veto wielding powers??

[Mayavi Morpheus]

2. Is this merely an issue of prestige or are we really excited about reaching out to the world and doing our bit to make it a better place?

I think a UNSC seat shouldnt be looked at as an oppurtunity to help make the world a better place to live in. that all soungs good in bashans and to impress poor nations support us, but we dont need to be on UNSC to do any of that. UNSC seat is more about having a say in the issues around the world and using the council to further our stratergic interests.

[navin]

True…this is not an issue to be solved in ten minutes or ten days…..but no one can deny that with this opportunity, India will be in a position to put forth its internal issues also on the global front….and I think that is really worthy for the Indians….



Thanks Ankita for bringing up such a good issue to the forefront and also for giving a good reference for finding active local/national/international issues…..



While visiting the site for reference, I found several other topics also that needs serious attention. For e.g., "Naxalite Penetration In Hyderabad"

http://www.jantaraj.com/satyanarayanag/ ... sp?pid=426



Waiting for some good replies from the locals….speak out!

[Mayavi Morpheus]

…..but no one can deny that with this opportunity, India will be in a position to put forth its internal issues also on the global front….and I think that is really worthy for the Indians….

err... I was thinking that with a UNSC veto power we can ask countries interfering in our internal affairs to take a hike. Why'd you want international interference in internal affairs anyway?

[paris_dakar]

2. Is this merely an issue of prestige or are we really excited about reaching out to the world and doing our bit to make it a better place?

I think a UNSC seat shouldnt be looked at as an oppurtunity to help make the world a better place to live in. that all soungs good in bashans and to impress poor nations support us, but we dont need to be on UNSC to do any of that. UNSC seat is more about having a say in the issues around the world and using the council to further our stratergic interests.

I admit that am high on...but the UN (& its predecessor) came out of a sense of idealism amidst the grim realities of two devastating wars. Do we really need the UN to tell somebody to piss off? I believe India has always done that....but I also think that our leaders could've been a little more forceful in conveying that.



I wasn't hoping for utopia via India as an answer for my question...but really, I was just trying to see what people were thinking about it...I didn't think anybody addressed the larger questions. To say India needs it because it declares itself to be a secular country or blah blah...or to say that India should be/must be denied because of religious riots...isn't a very convincing argument to me, Me, ME!



If you take the sum total where do we stand...are we reprehesible or the sati savitri of the world? i'd say neither...but a lot better that China in ensuring human rights and don't have the stigma of a germany or japan...

So where do we stand...I'm beginng to get into a tizzy now!



Personally i think of it as an extra resonsibility.....but thats me. Spider man's grandpa's words ring true, "with great power comes great responsibilty"

[CtrlAltDel]

"with great power comes great responsibilty"

tell it to the f***ing communists in the center...

[paris_dakar]

Is communism, idealism gone horribly wrong or I don't know shit?



Is there really a future for the communists in India? I haven't seen anybody rise above the rest in the 5 years that I've been out of the country.



By the way, I read all you guys 's posts pretty often..some cool stuff goes on here.

[chalam]

More than any any other reason, the simple fact that we host 1/6th of the world population and have been a responsible democracy in the 60 years of our existence should get us a seat on the UNSC. the coveted seat has got more to do about power projection and a stake in decisions that are going to affect us sooner or later THAN with some vague sense of ego gratification. There's a whole set of countries out there who need a rep on the council that's more LIKE them than being some rich countries. I believe India fits this bill better than any other competitors with Brazil coming a close second. We will beat them simply by our population.

[mark]

More than any any other reason, the simple fact that we host 1/6th of the world population and have been a responsible democracy in the 60 years of our existence should get us a seat on the UNSC. the coveted seat has got more to do about power projection and a stake in decisions that are going to affect us sooner or later THAN with some vague sense of ego gratification. There's a whole set of countries out there who need a rep on the council that's more LIKE them than being some rich countries. I believe India fits this bill better than any other competitors with Brazil coming a close second. We will beat them simply by our population.

yeah that's what the UN needs to do to regain credibility; reward overpopulated countries with vetos!

[chalam]

when underpopulated countries can decide on the fate of the rest of the world, what happened to these wise ass comments ?

[mark]

when underpopulated countries can decide on the fate of the rest of the world, what happened to these wise ass comments ?

that sentence doesn't really make much sense, but i'll let that go for now.. just trying to make the point that having a massive population is actually a negative point in almost every way.. India has many things to be proud of, but that shouldn't be one of them. so be a good patriotic citizen and chop it off.

[chalam]

so u r the resident grammatician ( correct this now ) the present continuous takes you into your glorious past where you were prolly sleeping with messrs wren and martin



Anyways, its obviously tough to nail into your head that our population should not always be seen through the negative prism folk like u are used to, doesnt help. If we are really being considered for anything in the UN, rest assured that its cuz of our size and the effect a humongous India is going to have in the near future. I can explain that in more detail later if you promise to have given it a thought.

[mark]

when underpopulated countries can decide on the fate of the rest of the world, what happened to these wise ass comments ?

that sentence doesn't really make much sense, but i'll let that go for now.. just trying to make the point that having a massive population is actually a negative point in almost every way.. India has many things to be proud of, but that shouldn't be one of them. so be a good patriotic citizen and chop it off.

seriously sorry to hijack this thread on whether India should be given a veto (i think you should, if years of human rights abuses don't disqualify the US, France, UK, Russia or China from holding a veto then why exclude India? ps only joking) but this sort of veiled pride when it comes to population size is really silly, it's a problem goddamn it, not a race! I actually heard someone saying "in 2030 there'll be more Indians that Chinese" as if that was something to be proud of, or part of some sort of plan!

reminds me of post count wars here at Fullhyd.. It's not the numbers you got, it's how you've used em.

[mark]

so u r the resident grammatician ( correct this now ) the present continuous takes you into your glorious past where you were prolly sleeping with messrs wren and martin

Anyways, its obviously tough to nail into your head that our population should not always be seen through the negative prism folk like u are used to, doesnt help. If we are really being considered for anything in the UN, rest assured that its cuz of our size and the effect a humongous India is going to have in the near future. I can explain that in more detail later if you promise to have given it a thought.

yes, us "underpopulated" countries really should learn to see things through a positive prism, that massive Indian population does provide a large market for our crude oil.

[chalam]

yes, the exceeding numbers resulting in our teeming polis' is a problem if you choose to look at it that way, mate you ahve two choices, either u wallow in the concern that we are overpopulated and give up on it OR you choose to utilize this aspect and turn it into an advantage. I am not suggesting that we go breed like rats because we can, but that we turn these rats into something worthwhile now that we really cant help it. AND you and I both know the reasons for this spurge in our numbers, unless someone really did the chinese style gulag approach to control the hormone laden illiterates of the country, we cudnt have really evaded the problem.



And yes, using that for our advantage should be the next step and for a seat on the UNSC, I think it IS a valid reason. Why do you think the mighty US has finally come down to share their nuke tech with us for civilian purposes ?

[lonewolf]

"with great power comes great responsibilty"

... it works only with Spiderman, not with our politicians....

[paris_dakar]

More than any any other reason, the simple fact that we host 1/6th of the world population and have been a responsible democracy in the 60 years of our existence should get us a seat on the UNSC. the coveted seat has got more to do about power projection and a stake in decisions that are going to affect us sooner or later THAN with some vague sense of ego gratification. There's a whole set of countries out there who need a rep on the council that's more LIKE them than being some rich countries. I believe India fits this bill better than any other competitors with Brazil coming a close second. We will beat them simply by our population.

Touche, my friend! The geo-political impact of having a vote/veto combo at a world forum should give us the ability to be in charge of what goes on around us...and to some extent around the world. What are the economic ramifications, though? I mean both to our economy and our responsibility to the UN's budget.

[Thoughprovoking HP]

A somewhat different angle to this whole squabble.



If seen from a very unidimensional point of view, that of the strategic and political scenario in the South Asian region, India has a good case for a permanent seat in the UNSC. It one of the most powerful nation in the region, economically as well as militarily. It's a state with nuclear capabilities. It has a sound democracy in place. And it has played an important part in world affairs time and again.



But add another dimension to this - our national leadership since independence - and the whole thing seems so scary that I'd be a fool to give it a second thought. Right from what has recently come out in the open through the Mitrokhin Archives to the lack of assertion in the current leadership, it has been nothing but suspect. The KGB's sway over Indian affairs early on after independence; the Bofors deal; the stock market scam; the countless communal riots; refuelling of USAF planes after having declared itself neural in the first gulf war; the PM's of the last 2 governments getting bullied by the US & Britain (and the list is not exhaustive by any measure) - have shown time and again that inspite of having all the cards in their hands, India has never earned the respect of the international community. And this is one big factor that overrides everything positive that India has.



I'm sure to get a lot of brickbats and maybe even called unpatriotic for having said so. But the fact remains that even if India were to be given a permanent seat and a veto on the UNSC, it'll always be suspect to external machinations. And I would rather see India without the veto than see it become a puppet in the hands of some vested interests. Let the Indian leadership demonstrate its strength and maturity and then lay a claim for a permanent seat and veto powers.