UN Security Council Reforms

The Japan-India declaration, though modeled on a previous March 2007 Japan-Australia Joint Declaration on Security Cooperation, represents a paler version of its Aussie counterpart. Substituted in its preamble is a reference to "similar perceptions of the evolving [regional security] environment" as opposed to the more forthright characterization of "shared security interests" in the Japan-Australia declaration.

So our deal refers more to a concerted effor tot deal with piracy and terrorism.

what is the military dimensions? now that USA is prompting Japan to militarize and possibly go nuclear? wording is not important, any news on Japan letting India checkout the AEGIS? or was it a rumor?

The military dimensions are therefore nothing more than one or two military exercises a year. The two countries are not binded in any way to help in each other's defense.

I have no information on sharing of the AEGIS system.

then what is the meaning of a security pact, it is comprehensive and more than the articles you posted?? also why did Japan change the location of the current Naval exercise?


http://www.indianexpress.com/news/Ey...ty-pact/376748

http://www.hindu.com/2008/10/19/stor...1959491100.htm

A security pact is just a term they use, it is not an alliance. It is not more comprehensive. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

since you are a foreign policy major shouldn't you know all alliances start from security pacts??

Firstly, I have nothing against UPA or even NDA. Secondly, calling UPA spineless does not mean the ones who elected them are spineless too. If I call a minister lethargic or corrupt, will the person who elected him become lethargic ad corrupt too. Let's not get bogged down by technicalities.

We could have abstained from voting.

We will. But what after that? Will we start taking sides too? We have been militarily neutral all these years.

I am not a foreign policy major, my studies deal with domestic regulations persay..

You are absolutely right about that, but the graveyard is littered with these "security pacts" and the VAST majority do not come into fruition.

then why do you depend on USA's security pact? Shouldn't your nation consider militarization than if your nation did not believe in them?, In reality your nation is probably more dependant on security pacts than any other nation on earth and always will be no until you have an independant military to face the North Korean and Chinese threat, what you post under the guise of being japanese will have very little impact on japanese governments decisions. Most nations honor security pacts, can you name some recent ones that went to the graveyard? As far as i know Japan has honored all their security pacts.

First we have only one alliance with only one country, and that is the US.

Second, our current military is more than capable of defending itself against our neighbors. Do not let the guise of "self defense" fool you into thinking that we are weak. We spend more on our military than many other countries. In fact, while only spending 1% of our GDP, we still spend more than every single country except from the US, China, France, and GB.

Third, how about the US with Afghanistan back during the Soviet Invasion and the US with Iran for starters.

No doubt about that. Japanese self defense force is easily one of the best funded Military force on the planet. The navy is excellent. A small deadly force, the self defense force.

Both failed due to change in the form of governance. The Taliban(anarchy replaced by despots) coming to power in Afghan and the Islamic revolution in Iran(constitutional monarchy replaced by theology).

The Hindu News Update Service





Tuesday, June 23, 2009

United Nations (IANS): India has reiterated its demand for "real reform" of the UN Security Council with expansion in both permanent and non-permanent membership of the world body's top decision making organ.

Noting that the overwhelming majority of member states has unambiguously sought "real reform" in two rounds of negotiations, India's Permanent Representative Hardeep Singh Puri on Monday hoped the third round of negotiations will be focused and action oriented.

In his intervention during an informal plenary meeting on the issue, he again spoke of the "inevitability of reform, and the futility of arresting the movement of history."

"Let me reiterate that attempts to merely make cosmetic changes, limit our efforts to actions that we know will not succeed, or block progress altogether through procedural manoeuvrings, are doomed to fail against the inevitability of a reform that is long overdue," Mr. Puri said.

"I urge those that seek to follow this unenlightened path to rise above their own self-interest and insecurities and join the overwhelming majority in the greater good for all of humanity," he added.

Predicated on the logical and principled position that there can be no discrimination within the same category of members of the Security Council, India's national position has been and remains that veto should be extended to new permanent members, Mr. Puri said.

However, taking into account concerns voiced by a large majority over the use of the veto, India had accepted that new permanent members should not exercise the right of veto until the question of the extension of the right of veto to new permanent members had been decided upon through a review, he said.

In order to improve and strengthen the relationship between the Security Council and the UN General Assembly, the Security Council must reflect contemporary realities, particularly in its permanent membership, Mr. Puri said.

"Only then can we address the problems of credibility and legitimacy of the UNSC, and ensure its accountability to the membership at large," he said.

"This reflection of contemporary realities is certainly not feasible without an expansion in both the permanent and non-permanent categories, and addressing the under-representation of developing countries," Mr. Puri said.

UN won't be reformed ,until USA, China, EU and Russia are not still major powers in the world any more!

EU is not on the UNSC, as China becomes more of a threat to the west, reform may come sooner than you think.

Both the US and China opposes additions to the UNSC, and you need both approvals.