China's United Nations Security Council Permanent Veto constrains China

[Indx TechStyle]

A Chinese battalion can easily crush a neighboring country's battalion. The UNSC takes this qualitative difference into account.

It takes both otherwise Israel could be a member. India's quantity can make it to get edge over quality of UK and France.

 

[Martian]

It takes both otherwise Israel could be a member. India's quantity can make it to get edge over quality of UK and France.

I did say he was half-right.

The other half was the qualitative aspect.

I never claimed the qualitative aspect was the sole determinant.

 

[rockey 71]

It doesn't matter. The Times of India is saying the same thing.

Agni-III test-fired, can reach Beijing, Shanghai - Times of India

----------


You are only half-right.

Your argument is based on a quantitative viewpoint.

However, you forgot to assess the qualitative strength of each country.

A Chinese battalion can easily crush a neighboring country's battalion. The UNSC takes this qualitative difference into account.

You are right, but still I stand for a fair organization - not one working for the powerful only. If things continue like this we ourselves will destroy human life.

 

[Martian]

You are right, but still I stand for a fair organization - not one working for the powerful only. If things continue like this we ourselves will destroy human life.

The system is not fair, but there is a solution.

Many African countries are friendly with China. Basically they have a proxy UNSC veto. They depend on China to defend African interests.

Furthermore, China has refused to join the International Criminal Court. China has also criticized the ICC for its unfair prosecution of African-only rulers.

 

[vayuu1]

Well, let's make predictions and see who's right.

I say India does not obtain a UNSC permanent veto in your lifetime or the next 200 years.

That's my prediction.

Just a small question, if India isn't so important, as u say it is,then what the hell are you doing on an Indian forum, that means u do care about india and u know deep down that it is on its way up, know I did caught u didn't I.

Chak De India

 

[Martian]

Just a small question, if India isn't so important, as u say it is,then what the hell are you doing on an Indian forum, that means u do care about india and u know deep down that it is on its way up, know I did caught u didn't I.

Chak De India

Since I write posts for Asiawind, it takes no effort to put the same post on IDF and DFI.

Also, there is no choice except to discuss India in Asia.

I'm certainly not going to discuss Japan, which is four tiny barren rocks with zero strategic depth.

At least India is three million square kilometers of land. While it's only 1/3rd the size of China's land area, it is the largest after China's. Thus, talking about India is still better than discussing even smaller countries.

 

[vayuu1]

Since I write posts for Asiawind, it takes no effort to put the same post on IDF and DFI.

Also, there is no choice except to discuss India in Asia.

I'm certainly not going to discuss Japan, which is four tiny barren rocks with zero strategic depth.

At least India is three million square kilometers of land. While it's only 1/3rd the size of China's land area, it is the largest after China's. Thus, talking about India is still better than discussing even smaller countries.

So india is not a smallest country as it seems acc to u afterall , koi nhi beta baki line pe to apne aap hi aa jayega.

Chak De India

 

[Martian]

So india is not a smallest country as it seems acc to u afterall , koi nhi beta baki line pe to apne aap hi aa jayega.

Chak De India

I never said India is the smallest country.

I said India is a small country and not in the same league as China, Russia, and the US in land area.

When the Big 3 in the UNSC are each three times larger than you in land area and far more advanced technologically, India's chance of persuading other nations that it belongs in the UNSC is pretty slim.

Furthermore, India needs China's approval to obtain a permanent seat at the UNSC. That will never happen. You Indians spend all of your time antagonizing China. There is a price to your behavior. You do not get a seat at the UNSC.

You Indians seem oblivious to the fact that China stands at the heart of the international order.

 

[Indx TechStyle]

Since I write posts for Asiawind, it takes no effort to put the same post on IDF and DFI.

Also, there is no choice except to discuss India in Asia.

I'm certainly not going to discuss Japan, which is four tiny barren rocks with zero strategic depth.

At least India is three million square kilometers of land. While it's only 1/3rd the size of China's land area, it is the largest after China's. Thus, talking about India is still better than discussing even smaller countries.

Whenever you'll be writing for World Affairs, please notice who makes more news, India or bigger countries like Canada or Australia. I know China is a way bigger country but even it's 1/3rd area isn't small.
There are 206 countries in the world out of which India is ranked 7th in area.

Moreover, one of the reasons of larger size of China a smaller size of India is expansionism.

China re occupied most of it's historically controlled places and then, even occupied more area in it's west. Meanwhile, India re occupied mainly important states during reunification in 50s(socialists made Myanmar an independent country).
If India would have reoccupied it's historically controlled places(and some parts of neighboring countries like Iran as China did with Central Asia), India could have reached near Australia.
But still,
India is 7th largest in world and 3rd largest in Asia (I'm assuming Russia an Asian country) and can easily hold a population of 2 billions (though we won't reach there, our fertility rate is low, population will decline after we have population growth rate at par with developed world),
India's size (miniaturized against Ancient India) is still enough large to nullify nuclear attacks. We still have fourth largest train network and second largest road network (larger than China). And we are still making bigger structures, infrastructure, launch pads, cities and large observatories and labs (covers lots area) and most important nobody has called us a small country before you. Yes, smaller than Russia, China, US, Canada, Brazil and Australia but not than anyone else.
And hey,

You have 3 times area of India but 90%+ of your population lives in 43% Eastern part of country. So, did you guys get any major advantage of acquiring huge chunk of land? When Chinese empire started with Zhou dynasty, it was even smaller than Rajasthan province of India. Today, you have acquired three times area than us. So, why sticking in East?
For sea food?

 

[Martian]

Whenever you'll be writing for World Affairs, please notice who makes more news, India or bigger countries like Canada or Australia. I know China is a way bigger country but even it's 1/3rd area isn't small.
There are 206 countries in the world out of which India is ranked 7th in area.

Moreover, one of the reasons of larger size of China a smaller size of India is expansionism.

China re occupied most of it's historically controlled places and then, even occupied more area in it's west. Meanwhile, India re occupied mainly important states during reunification in 50s(socialists made Myanmar an independent country).
If India would have reoccupied it's historically controlled places(and some parts of neighboring countries like Iran as China did with Central Asia), India could have reached near Australia.
But still,
India is 7th largest in world and 3rd largest in Asia (I'm assuming Russia an Asian country) and can easily hold a population of 2 billions (though we won't reach there, our fertility rate is low, population will decline after we have population growth rate at par with developed world),
India's size (miniaturized against Ancient India) is still enough large to nullify nuclear attacks. We still have fourth largest train network and second largest road network (larger than China). And we are still making bigger structures, infrastructure, launch pads, cities and large observatories and labs (covers lots area) and most important nobody has called us a small country before you. Yes, smaller than Russia, China, US, Canada, Brazil and Australia but not than anyone else.
And hey,

You have 3 times area of India but 90%+ of your population lives in 43% Eastern part of country. So, did you guys get any major advantage of acquiring huge chunk of land. When Chinese empire started with Zhou dynasty, it was even smaller than Rajasthan province of India. Today, you got three times area than us. So, why sticking in East?

This isn't 2,000 years ago. The Zhou Dynasty is ancient news. So is the Roman Empire.

You keep trying to turn back the clock into ancient times.

I'm trying to have a discussion about current events. China is the size that it is today. It is going to stay that way. Arguing that the United States was originally 13 colonies does not change the size of the United States today. Neither does an argument about the Zhou Dynasty.

You're stuck. India cannot grow larger than 1/3rd China's size. That's assuming China doesn't reclaim Outer Mongolia. If that happens, India is only about 1/4th China's size.

 

[vayuu1]

I never said India is the smallest country.

I said India is a small country and not in the same league as China, Russia, and the US in land area.

When the Big 3 in the UNSC are each three times larger than you in land area and far more advanced technologically, India's chance of persuading other nations that it belongs in the UNSC is pretty slim.

Furthermore, India needs China's approval to obtain a permanent seat at the UNSC. That will never happen. You Indians spend all of your time antagonizing China. There is a price to your behavior. You do not get a seat at the UNSC.

You Indians seem oblivious to the fact that China stands at the heart of the international order.

When china entered, unsc was it that stronger , no, even Japan and Germany were far ahead of u, it takes time and india eventually will be there, do you think china will remain like this or world will remain like this who knows ussr with all its might got divided, who knows what lies in future.

Chak De India

 

[Martian]

When china entered, unsc was it that stronger , no, even Japan and Germany were far ahead of u, it takes time and india eventually will be there, do you think china will remain like this or world will remain like this who knows ussr with all its might got divided, who knows what lies in future.

Chak De India

You have the same problem as Indx TechStyle. He wants to talk about 2,000 years ago.

You want to talk about 70 years ago.

None of the things that both of you say is relevant today.

The facts remain. The people of the world today see a huge Chinese landmass and advanced technology. Those are the benchmarks that India must meet.

Furthermore, India has to convince China (who is a UNSC gatekeeper with its permanent veto) to let you in.

I'm saying that an objective examination of the facts render India's application to the UNSC as a waste of time.

1. India cannot gain any more territory. China is to the north and Pakistan is off-limits as an important friend of China.

2. India can't build a turbofan engine or semiconductor chips. The world does not see India as an advanced nation.

3. China will not approve India's application for a permanent seat at the UNSC. You Indians are way too anti-Chinese.

For the three reasons above, India should give up its dream of a permanent seat at the UNSC. It simply will not happen in the real world.

 

[vayuu1]

You have the same problem as Indx TechStyle. He wants to talk about 2,000 years ago.

You want to talk about 70 years ago.

None of the things that both of you say are relevant today.

The facts remain. The people of the world today see a huge Chinese landmass and advanced technology. Those are the benchmarks that India must meet.

Furthermore, India has to convince China (who is a UNSC gatekeeper with its permanent veto) to let you in.

I'm saying that an objective examination of the facts render India's application to the UNSC as a waste of time.

1. India cannot gain any more territory. China is to the north and Pakistan is off-limits as an important friend of China.

2. India can't build a turbofan engine or semiconductor chips. The world does not see India as an advanced nation.

3. China will not approve India's application for a permanent seat at the UNSC. You Indians are way too anti-Chinese.

For the three reasons above, India should give up its dream of a permanent UNSC. It simply will not happen in the real world.

I am talking about future not past, I am saying nothing is forever.

Chak De India

 

[Martian]

I am talking about future not past, I am saying nothing is forever.

Chak De India

Two of those three obstacles are immovable.

In the far distant future, India may advance technologically.

However, India will always be a small country in relation to China.

Also, China will never give its approval for an Indian UNSC permanent seat. You Indians have created too much anger in China. You make anti-China comments about everything. You cannot erase your anti-Chinese record. Chinese have a long memory and they will never forget your obnoxious anti-Chinese comments on the South China Sea and every other topic (such as nuking Beijing and Shanghai).

 

[airtel]

Two of those three obstacles are immovable.

In the far distant future, India may advance technologically.

However, India will always be a small country in relation to China.

Also, China will never give its approval for an Indian UNSC permanent seat. You Indians have created too much anger in China. You make anti-China comments about everything. You cannot erase your anti-Chinese record. Chinese have a long memory and they will never forget your obnoxious anti-Chinese comments on the South China Sea and every other topic (such as nuking Beijing and Shanghai).

you are behaving like a 5 year old kid ,

India is not a small country & we are satisfied with our landmass ..................population density is more important than landmass , & our population density is low as compare to countries like Japan , korea , Singapore , France , uk , Germany etc , we are interested in oil of SCS .

we are investing in semiconductor technology as well as in turbofan engine ...........and yes you also dont have any reliable turbofan engine , most of the the famous semiconductor companies are non chinese ................example

1)Qualcomm= USA
2) Broadcom =USA
3 ) AMD = USA
4) MediaTek =Taiwan
5 )Nvidia = USA
6) Marvell = USA
7) Intel = USA
8) Apple = USA
9)Samsung = south korea


you are just providing cheap raw materials & cheap employees now you are fighting a war with USA & your neighbors so all these companies will shift their business outside china .

& yes India will grab this opportunity .

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...k-cr-okayed/articleshow/30420580.cms?from=mdr


http://www.thehindubusinessline.com...hip-manufacturing-in-india/article8467511.ece

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com...er-aircraft/articleshow/50173767.cms?from=mdr


China will be forced to approve India's application for a permanent seat at the UNSC. you dont have any other option , you can just delay the process but ultimately India will get UNSC membership .


AS far as making anti Chinese remarks are concerned you should read some history (from non Chinese sources ) you will get that ........read some history how your country created problems for India , how your country Helped our enemies , how your country illegally occupied our land .how your country cheated us .................you can not expect praise for this kind of behavior .

you are a war monger because you dont understand the meaning of war .
yes we will definitely use our weapons of mass destruction on our enemies ,
if you want to fight a war then be ready see the destruction of your country , be ready to sacrifice your life too , be ready to see the dead bodies of your family members & friends too ..................
dont fight if you are a coward ..

 

[Navnit Kundu]

You don't move and I don't move. Thus, we have the current status quo in the world. It's pretty dull and not much happens.

Clearly, if you have to take Taiwan, then you will have to 'move'. The current global status quo favors the US so they wont really mind your 'you don't move, I don't move' slogan, since it keeps the status quo intact, which reaffirms the US as the preeminent power on the planet. China being an anti-status quo power, will have to 'move' someday, otherwise your rhetoric about 100 years of shame will fall flat on its face.

 

[ersakthivel]

There are two reasons that Britain and France are part of the UNSC.

Firstly, Britain and France almost always vote in tandem with the United States. Thus, they are mere appendages of the US.

Secondly, Britain and France obtained their seats on the UNSC under a grandfather-type law. Since Britain and France were strong naval powers in the past, they were able to obtain a UNSC veto at the end of World War II.

Finally, the US, China, and Russia have not made a concerted effort to kick Britain and France out of the UNSC. The US wants its two little allies to vote along with the US. China understands the Europeans do not have an independent policy. Thus, it matters not whether the US has one vote or three votes.

----------

However, all of the factors that allowed Britain and France to sit on the UNSC do not apply to India.

The world does not recognize India as a major power.

Thus, India has failed repeatedly in its quest for a permanent UNSC seat.

As I have enumerated, there are many weaknesses that India probably cannot overcome.

In modern times, the countries of the world will not permit another UNSC seat without superlative qualifications.

1. India is simply too small a country. With a landmass of only 1/3rd of China, you are not China's equal.

2. India is constantly antagonizing China. Since China holds an existing permanent veto, China will keep vetoing India's attempt to obtain a UNSC seat.

3. India is an incredibly poor country. China's nominal per-capita GDP is five times higher than India's.

4. China's technology is light-years ahead of India's. China's semiconductor fab technology is at 28nm. India has ZERO semiconductor fabs. Your technology is NO nanometers.

As you can see, India is extremely unlikely to ever obtain a UNSC permanent veto.

UNSC is a dead instrument,

1,Once India expands its N sub fleets carrying 10000 Km N ballistic missiles,

2,expands its economy to global top 3 & have robust economic engagements with all countries , with a huge forex reserve,

3, Develop its own 5th gen stealth fighters, MBTS etc, etc,

No one can touch india in UNSC

Also no UNSC move will harm India's potential.

It is not UNSC seat which allowed the oil rich Saudis & underling Turks to fund ISIS.
Its not UNSC seat which allowed Putin to interfere,
Its not UNSC seat which made US, britain, France, china a mere useless bystanders in the war against ISIS in Levant,

So why worry over it??

India was sanctioned for its non NPT N weapon status till a few years back,

What happened?

Once economy picked up , NSG waiver came, now NSG membership awaits,
Also we are inside MTCR, while china's veto power still couldn't allow it entry into MTCR!!

So maintaining a balanced diplomatic relation with every one, while developing economy, military itself will do for india, what any UNSC seat can't do.

besides no one knows what is your true GDP, since most of your stats are forged, and there are many nations that have higher GDP per caipta than you,

Also no UNSC seat will allow you to swallow south china sea, if you dont have enough naval muscle & diplomatic , economic wherewithall to defend it.

Most of chinese diplomatic moves are infantile rants, that doesnt carry any conviction!!

If you want to know your true diplomatic weight, just recount the occasions china used its veto in UN in any definitive manner during gulf war , Kosova war, Afgan invasion, Vietnam war etc, etc, and used its military-diplomatic, UNSC muscle to bring about an out come favoring you,

All your veto power is used to safe guard international terrorist like hafeez Saeed from prosecution!!!

Most of the time china abstains in UNSC resolutions, because it knows fully well the "kick in the ass" it will get if it uses its veto to stall US-France-Britain combo!!!

And Russians dont trust you either , SO china can never expect full fledged support from them for its imperial desires , as well .

So other than blissfully abstaining you cant do anything in UNSC,

Same will be the case if india has a veto now, Without power-diplomatic equations it too will naively abstain and become a laughing stock paper tiger like china!!

In Kosova war the US bombed your own embassy, & you couldn't wag your little finger with your Veto!!!
lets see how you use your UNSC veto to swallow south chin sea!!!

 

[ersakthivel]

It doesn't matter. The Times of India is saying the same thing.

Agni-III test-fired, can reach Beijing, Shanghai - Times of India

----------


You are only half-right.

Your argument is based on a quantitative viewpoint.

However, you forgot to assess the qualitative strength of each country.

A Chinese battalion can easily crush a neighboring country's battalion. The UNSC takes this qualitative difference into account.

Just remembered what happened in vietnam and who crushed who!!!

 

[rockey 71]

The system is not fair, but there is a solution.

Many African countries are friendly with China. Basically they have a proxy UNSC veto. They depend on China to defend African interests.

Furthermore, China has refused to join the International Criminal Court. China has also criticized the ICC for its unfair prosecution of African-only rulers.

The fear is that China herself might eventually become imperialist. After all we are all human.

 

[adrenalin]

china is already a dctator, what more is there to become? PLA is doing genocide in tibet, han chinise are flooding tibet and kiiling peaceful buddhists. china is a failed rich country, which made money by selling cigerette lighters to world. it's not a country, it is a kingdom.