- Joined
- Aug 10, 2009
- Messages
- 3,582
- Likes
- 2,538
my consistent stand on this UNSC perm membership for india has always been on the following conditions ;-From the article, what I see is that PRC might not oppose India's permanent membership in the UNSC, but PRC does not see Japan as worthy of being a permanent member of the UNSC.
One must keep in mind that despite the industrial prowess of Japan, it is reliant on imported raw materials, and if PRC wants, it can crush a significant portion of Japans raw materials import avenues.
India needs to be pragmatic as to who it tags along.
(A) we go it on our own ( merits ) .....no one tags along with us and we dont join some sort of beggar grouping even if some of the nations are quite rich
( eg germany , Japan )
(B) the idea of 4 nations applying for membership was MM Singh's and sonia-ji's idea and it is a beggarly idea where they were even willing to accept a kind of second-class perm membership of UNSC, devoid of veto power , so there would be 2 types of permanent members , those with veto and those like india who would remain "HAVE-NOTS" . ......my consistent stand has always been that india should not accept some beggarly 2nd class membership and we stand alone and we do not apply for it , they come to us
(C) if we dont qualify on our own,standing alone, then we simply dont qualify, let it be ! !.... and we dont waste time and resources going the beggars' route of asking and asking again ..... we strengthen our economy, strengthen our military industrial complex including our ISRO to be more self sufficient ....and we will go independent of what unsc may decide in future ....in other words we will cooperate when it suits us and we will go our way when that suits us and we dont owe them a thing !
(D) then we sit back and enjoy bollywood movies which hopefully will be better than the slapstick stuff we see nowadays .
invitation to comment and if you feel what ive written is interesting, you may "clicke" :-
@angeldude13 @ @Ancient Indian @bose @brational @blueblood @anupamsurey @ersakthivel @Blackwater @bengalraider @cobra commando @DingDong @Hari Sud @Kunal Biswas @LETHALFORCE @mhk99 @Neil @OneGrimPilgrim @pmaitra @Rowdy @Sakal Gharelu Ustad @Srinivas_K @sorcerer @TejasMK3 @Yusuf @jackprince @Bangalorean @indiandefencefan @aliyah @hit&run @VIP @Razor @Blood+ @Screambowl @Sylex21 @ @thethinker @tsunami @Zebra @sgarg @Rashna @sabari @laughingbuddha @rock127
addendum
well Sir , you have your point of view but i consider it somewhat cap in hand or perhaps turban in hand ? perhaps you had written it before i had made some changes and additions to my original post as i was within the time frame allowed for that ......i think India will look like a bunch of dogs ( puppies ? ) if we join with others and why ?If we part ways with Germany, Japan and Brazil now for the sake of a permanent seat with veto then it is a mistake and we might end up losing a good amount of goodwill and friendship earned with these nations. I say, UNSC membership is not bigger than their friendships. Lets play the waiting game. They themselves (P5) will agree to reform UNSC at one point of time and will include India. Why do we need to pick the fight and earn distrust from partners ?
If UNSC does not include more members it will lose reliability and relevance and the P5 very well knows this. Just wait and watch what they are going to do....
you mean unlike prc, we cant qualify on our own , is that the mentality among your peers ? always asking for something instead of qualifying ?
goodwill with germany ??? - to me it's not worth a piss !
your way is whatever it is and i suppose i'll have to tolerate it , i only hope that the majority of indians would prefer some spine and stand alone
either they invite us in , or we stay somewhat dis-interested ....yes 1.5 billion ( our pop figure before too long ) will gradually distance ourselves from that organisation .
Last edited: