India says UNSC should have 25 members

Discussion in 'Foreign Relations' started by ejazr, Apr 11, 2012.

  1. ejazr

    ejazr Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2009
    Messages:
    4,518
    Likes Received:
    1,378
    Location:
    Hyderabad and Sydney
    India says UNSC should have 25 members | Firstpost

    United Nations: India has said the 15-nation UN Security Council should be expanded to include about 10 more members, cautioning that delay in reforming the powerful world body will be at the international community’s “own peril”.

    Participating in the 8th round of intergovernmental negotiations on UN Security Council reforms here, India’s Permanent Representative to the UN Ambassador Hardeep Singh Puri said India is of the view that reform and expansion of the Security Council are essential if it is to reflect contemporary reality.

    A reformed UNSC, with expansion in the permanent and non-permanent categories, will enhance the Council’s credibility and effectiveness in dealing with global issues.

    “We delay reform of the Security Council at our own peril…Early reform of the Council must be pursued with renewed vigour and urgently enacted,” Puri said yesterday.

    Puri outlined India’s view that an expanded Council should have a total of 25-26 members.

    He said structural reform of the Council should respond to the pressing need for credible improvements in the global governance architecture. “The clamour for such change is increasing by the day. Even as we speak concrete developments are being witnessed in other international institutions such as the IMF, World Bank,” he said.

    There is emerging consensus that reform will be complete only when the question of the veto in all its aspects and manifestations is comprehensively addressed, he added.

    Noting that considerable time has already been spent in exchanging views on how and when to start real negotiations, Puri said deliberations so far have shown that a large majority of the UN membership wants expansion of the Council in both the permanent and non-permanent categories.
     
    Son of Govinda and Mad Indian like this.
  2.  
  3. sob

    sob Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2009
    Messages:
    6,359
    Likes Received:
    3,665
    Location:
    New Delhi
    What is the use of 25 members. As long as the veto is with P 5, SC can have as many or as few as members as possible, it does not make a difference.
     
  4. SLASH

    SLASH Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2011
    Messages:
    1,156
    Likes Received:
    458
    Atleast than more nation will be able to voice their opinions about global issues. One step at a time.
     
    ganesh177 likes this.
  5. Kunal Biswas

    Kunal Biswas Member of the Year 2011 Moderator

    Joined:
    May 26, 2010
    Messages:
    27,616
    Likes Received:
    28,453
    Location:
    BHARAT, INDIA, HINDUSTHAN
    More issues and delays..
     
  6. amoy

    amoy Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2010
    Messages:
    5,524
    Likes Received:
    1,548
    Tell me who shall be enrolled in the 25 elite club apart from India and P5
     
  7. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,287
    Location:
    BANGalore
    G4 has to get permanent seats. Rest are all fill in the numbers as they are right now.
     
  8. Sunder singh

    Sunder singh Regular Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2012
    Messages:
    535
    Likes Received:
    143
    Location:
    FROM NAINITAL NOW IN CHENNAI
    it will bcom fish market
     
  9. LalTopi

    LalTopi Regular Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2012
    Messages:
    582
    Likes Received:
    299
    Its the P5 that needs to be reformed more than the whole Security Council. India needs to assert (i.e. not just ask nicely) its rightful place and France and Britain's memberships need to merged into one EU vote.
     
  10. panduranghari

    panduranghari Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2012
    Messages:
    1,790
    Likes Received:
    1,245
    UNSC is outdated as barter economy. How should the reformed council look like? No veto. No permanent membership. ???
     
  11. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    31,663
    Likes Received:
    17,162
    Location:
    EST, USA
    I am not really too bothered about the size of the UNSC. All I care about is that since India is 1/6th of humanity, it should have the veto.
     
    ganesh177 likes this.
  12. Armand2REP

    Armand2REP CHINI EXPERT Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,397
    Likes Received:
    2,314
    I don't have a problem with it if you do away with vetos and base the council on military contribution.
     
  13. trackwhack

    trackwhack Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2011
    Messages:
    3,757
    Likes Received:
    2,573
    what credibility does the UNSC have when UK and France are two of the 5 members. They never agree on anything anyway, someone or the other keeps vetoing every proposal.
     
    panduranghari likes this.
  14. sukhish

    sukhish Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2009
    Messages:
    1,091
    Likes Received:
    262
    G4 is not getting permanent seat. at the most India will get it. nobody wants to add 4 more permanent seats. only India will get it.
    I don't even think the other G4 members are even trying hard other than india.
     
  15. no smoking

    no smoking Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2009
    Messages:
    3,174
    Likes Received:
    422
    It is not about who shuld get it. It is all about the price you pay. India can only get its permanent seat by paying a price instead of talking.

    You may don't like it. But the truth is India alone cannot set up another international organisation. US can do that alone, China and Russia combination can, but india can't.
     
    sob likes this.
  16. sob

    sob Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2009
    Messages:
    6,359
    Likes Received:
    3,665
    Location:
    New Delhi
    Going by our track record on the Libya and Syria issue and the endless foot dragging over Iran, we are better of than being a permanent member of the UNSC and making a fool of ourselves.
     
    Tolaha and Mad Indian like this.
  17. ajay_ijn

    ajay_ijn Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2009
    Messages:
    422
    Likes Received:
    28
    instead of veto power, why not have system where every country can vote or have voting rights depending on size of population.
     
  18. GromHellscream

    GromHellscream Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2012
    Messages:
    274
    Likes Received:
    33
    Location:
    WOW
    Not realistic at all.
    It's more reasonable depending on the complex power of a country, which includes political, ecnomic, military, science/technology and etc.
    But if we are talking about seats in permanent club, there is some much simplified measure to judge if one is qualified or not.
     
  19. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,287
    Location:
    BANGalore
    UN is not a democracy to allow that.
     
  20. Mad Indian

    Mad Indian Proud Bigot Veteran Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2012
    Messages:
    12,830
    Likes Received:
    7,524
    Location:
    Podigai Hills.
    India - a supah powah wannabe now is a permanent member wannabe. Keep dreaming and smoking. The world Will ask us to have that status if we really deserve. It can't be achieved by begging. :nono:
     
    panduranghari and sob like this.
  21. sukhish

    sukhish Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2009
    Messages:
    1,091
    Likes Received:
    262
    I concur with your assememnt. But India is slowly and surely making advances in science, military etc.
     

Share This Page