Obama supports India on UN Security Council

[ajtr]

Germany, Japan fume at Obama's UN nod​

NEW DELHI: With India having got the US's coveted backing for a permanent seat in the United Nations Security Council, two major aspirants to the high table are fuming. Both Germany and Japan went public with their annoyance at their claims being overlooked and made their displeasure known to the US.

In an interview to a TV channel, US ambassador to India Tim Roemer admitted as much. He said the two nations had asked why India had been accorded special treatment and the reasons US saw it as a valued partner. The ambassador indicated that the resistance pointed to the distance that needed to be travelled for UN reform to become a reality.

He also suggested that US backing for India's case showed Washington's determination to pursue its ties with India that president Barack Obama outlined during his visit.

While India has managed to wrest an important pledge from president Obama that may take some time to be realized, it is still crucial. So far, Washington had only supported Japan for a permanent seat at the UNSC even though it opposed the G4 (a group that included Japan, Germany, Brazil and India).

With Obamas announcement on Monday, the US has shifted its own stance to accommodate India. But that doesn't mean the G4 to which India has tacked its own aspirations is in the clear yet.

Security Council reform is not only about putting India into the body. The issues at stake are what should be the ideal size of a new UNSC; whether the new members would have veto rights, the number of permanent and non-permanent members, its relations with the UN General Assembly, whether there should be regional representation.

Officials said the UN's body debating the inter-governmental negotiations will restart their deliberations soon. The US show of support will make a difference to India and Japan. Not to Germany, which is opposed by Italy and by many other countries who say giving a permanent seat to Germany would put a third seat in Europe (fourth, if you count Russia as a European power), at a time when European power is in decline. Besides, EU was asking for a separate status for itself in the UNGA, they argue.

Africa is a problem too. There is general consensus that Africa should have two seats in the UNSC, but which two countries? Even the African Union is divided on that. There can't be UNSC reform without the Africans because then the world runs the risk of all 53 African countries boycotting.

Then there is China. The Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson on Tuesday, when questioned, said, China values India's status in international affairs and understands India's aspirations to play a greater role in the United Nations and is ready to keep contact and consultations with India and other member states on the issues of Security Council reform.

But even if China can be made to digest an Indian membership, as at the NSG, its not going to be so easy for Japan, which even has South Korea opposing it. Brazil is opposed by Mexico and Argentina (since its the only Portuguese-speaking country in a Spanish-speaking continent), and of course, Pakistan opposes India. These countries had formed the Coffee Club, later renamed United for Consensus, and will most likely be resurrected again, perhaps with tacit Chinese support.

How many permanent members should the new UNSC have? The US wants around 19 members (in both categories). The G4 position is more sensible that's India, Brazil, Japan and Germany, two African countries and three added to the non-permanent list. There are other ideas floating around UK, France and Liechtenstein proposed an interim arrangement for 10 years and a review thereafter. The Chinese are more non-specific and have just said they want more seats for developing countries.

Veto? India will fight to the end for the veto. But many countries say they can live without it, because the veto is not used anymore and lobbying for support is the way to go in the Council. But veto, like nuclear weapons, is a currency of power. That battle, therefore, will continue.

With all these roadblocks, why is India optimistic? Its eminently doable, said sources on background. India's recent bid for the non-permanent seat fetched it 187 votes. That was huge. It signalled, if nothing else, that the world is ready for UNSC reform and that India has a better chance than most. Last week, India won what is believed to be the most difficult vote in the UNGA Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ) with a whopping 164 votes, leaving Japan trailing at 146, China at 130 and Pakistan at 114. These, say officials, are all signals of support.

The trick is now to convert all this into a usable text in the UNGA and lay on the diplomatic charm. Indian officials, chuffed at their recent successes, now exhibit a rare can-do spirit. India sees change happening by 2012.

Read more: Germany, Japan fume at Obama's UN nod - The Times of India http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...-UN-nod/articleshow/6898211.cms#ixzz14se8U4FE

 

[ajtr]

Security Council reform should not stop with India: Brazil​

Brazil today welcomed US President Barack Obama's support of India's bid for a permanent seat on the UN Security Council, but called for the elite decision-making body to include other emerging countries as well.

"It is very positive that President Obama mentioned India because that shows that he has an open mind in relation to developing countries," Brazilian foreign minister Celso Amorim told journalists.

"But apart from that, any reform of the United Nations can't be done with only one country," he said.

Amorim was speaking during a two-day visit to Mozambique by outgoing Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, a stop en route to this week's G20 summit in South Korea.

"I am very happy for India, which is a good partner of Brazil," Amorim said.

"The fact that he is mentioning India by name, that the US are accepting a developing country, pulls the door open for other big emerging countries like Brazil or others in Africa."

Obama said yesterday at the close of a three-day visit to India that the world's largest democracy should take its "rightful" place as a permanent member at the Security Council.

Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States are the 15-seat UN body's only permanent members, and the only with veto power.

Other countries have for years been lobbying to reform the Security Council's membership structure.

India, Brazil, Germany, Japan and South Africa are often named as credible candidates, but analysts say reform is unlikely to come soon.

 

[tony4562]

Reaction from Brazil, Japan and Germany is hardly surprising. I think India would eventually get its seat as a permanent member, but she would have to wait as the process could last decades. And in the end when India finally get it, the seat might not be as coveted, prestigious or exclusive as India would like it to be. China for one has made it clear that any reform should strengthen the voices of the third world and add to the balances between the continents. This means in practicality that China wants to see Brazil, Nigeria, and Indonesia (representing the muslim world) to be admitted as new permanent members along with Japan, Germany and India. US for sure would not like it, not to mention a proposal to rotate the veto power. Then all the prospective power-wanna-be's are facing stiff oppositon from their regional rivals, Pakistan opposing India, Malaysia opposing Indonesia, Argentina opposing Brazil, Italy opposing Germany, S.Korea opposing Japan and S.Africa opposing Nigeria. And lastly and most importantly, although no one of the current members has voiced opposition to the idea of expanding the membership, none is in earnest really enthusiastic about it.

 

[ajtr]

Ringing endorsement for 'risen' India

Countering skeptics' perceptions that the visit would be more style than substance, United States President Barrack Obama concluded his three-day India trip to India on Tuesday after sealing billions of dollars in deals for American companies.

Promising the creation of thousands of jobs for his citizens, he also paved the way for the American high-tech sector to find a lucrative market in India, the world's second-largest country by population.

As a quid pro quo, Obama endorsed India's claim for a permanent seat in an expanded United Nations Security Council, mollified India by finally expressing his admonition for Pakistan for harboring terrorism, and promising India an important place in the US's Asia strategy. In the process, Obama also managed tochieve the US strategic objective of befriending a power like India into containing China, and launched a charm offensive by insisting that the US and India were indispensable partners in the 21st century.

Obama's nine-day Asian trip also includes visits to Indonesia, South Korea and Japan.

According to their joint statement at the end of the visit, Obama and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh ''called for an efficient, effective, credible and legitimate United Nations to ensure a just and sustainable international order. Prime Minister Singh welcomed President Obama's affirmation that, in the years ahead, the United States looks forward to a reformed UN Security Council that includes India as a permanent member."

In celebration of a new-found strength in the US-India relationship, Obama said that in his view India was not a rising power anymore, but "has already risen", while "India's emergence is good for the US and good for the world".

After skirting the issue of terror infrastructure in Pakistan for the two days, Obama on the last day of his visit, addressed India's perhaps most urgent concern by admitting that Pakistan's terror networks were unacceptable.

"We will continue to insist Pakistan's leaders that terror safe havens within their borders are unacceptable, and that terrorists behind Mumbai attacks are bought to justice," he said.

Indeed, few expected Obama's India trip, coming immediately after the embarrassment of the electoral setback in the mid-term elections, to produce any earth-shaking bilateral agreements. Yet, concluding the three-day visit - the longest foreign trip for him while in office - as he headed for Indonesia, he not only departed with a bag full of economic dividends, but perhaps also altered the history of India, the US and Pakistan.

The biggest dividend came from "several landmark" deals worth $10 billion that the industry of the two countries signed on day one. They mean that Boeing will sell dozens of aircraft to an India carrier and GE will sell hundreds of electric engines. Besides that, new business was promised for Harley Davidson, Duke Medicine of Durham, and Bell Helicopter.

While these deals were big news for the flagging American economy, for Obama the real deal was that they would create 54,000 new jobs for Americans, who are staring at a shortfall of 300,000 new jobs as the unemployment rate hovers near 10%.

Calling India a creator and not a poacher of US jobs, Obama said the relationship between the countries had evolved to a stage where India was "creating jobs, growth, and higher living standards in both our countries."

Still, declaring that these deals barely scratched the potential of India as a future market for America, Obama announced major trade reform that removed from a restricted list three of India's remaining four defense and space entities - the Indian Space Research Organization, the Defense Research & Development Organization and the Bharat Dynamics.

According to space industry experts, this not only gives India's space and missile programs access to cutting-edge technology, it also opens up India's multi-billion dollar high-tech market to US manufacturers of dual-use technology.

Obama also supported India's phase-in to full membership in the world's major non-proliferation regimes that include the Nuclear Supplies' Group, the Missile Technology Control Regime, the Australia Group and the Wassenar Arrangement (for dual-use and conventional arms control).

However, wrapping up his praise for India, Obama also asked the country to behave like a "responsible big power". He criticized India for not participating in the global fight against violations of democratic rights in Myanmar, and not implementing enough sanctions on Iran for continuing with its nuclear program.

In his address to the members of the parliament on Monday, he said, "If I can be frank, in international fora, India has often avoided these issues. But speaking up for those who cannot do so for themselves is not interfering in the affairs of other countries."

Obama also lamented India's increasing dependence on the eastern part of the world for trade and added that US values India more in Asia.

"India and the US can be partners in Asia," he said. "Today the US is playing once again a leadership role in Asia - strengthening old alliances; deepening relationships, as we are doing with China; and we are re-engineering with regional organizations in which India is also a partner. Like your neighbors in South Asia, we want India not to 'Look East', we want India to 'Engage East'," he said.

"In Asia and around the world, India is not simply emerging, India has already emerged. And it is my firm belief that the relationship between US and India-bound by our shared interest and values - will one of the defining partnerships of the 21st century," he said.

Asia Times Online :: South Asia news, business and economy from India and Pakistan

 

[SHASH2K2]

Qureshi to India on UNSC bid: It's a long way to go​

India might be upbeat about U.S. President Barack Obama's recent endorsement for a permanent UNSC seat, but Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi has only one message for the Indian government — Hunooz Dilli door ast.

Mr. Qureshi invoked Delhi's most revered sufi saint Nizamuddin Auliya while commenting on Mr. Obama's clear backing for India's aspirations for a permanent Security Council seat.

"I have a message for the people in Delhi — Hunooz Dilli door ast," Mr. Qureshi told a news conference at the Foreign Office, using the quote attributed to Nizamuddin Auliya that means "It's still a long way to Delhi'

The Persian phrase is often used to describe a task that cannot be easily accomplished.

Mr. Qureshi suggested that India's efforts to gain a permanent membership could be a long-drawn and complicated process despite Mr. Obama's backing for the move.

Mr. Qureshi was responding to questions about the proposed expansion of the U.N. Security Council and Mr. Obama's recent endorsement for India's efforts to join the world body's key decision-making organ.

Mr. Qureshi, who addressed the news conference with his visiting Italian counterpart Franco Frattini, said Pakistan wants a "comprehensive, democratic and representative" expansion of the Security Council.

He said he had spoken to his Chinese counterpart about Pakistan's reservations on India's bid to gain permanent membership of the body and President Asif Ali Zardari is also expected to raise the issue during his ongoing visit to China.

Pakistan has already expressed its opposition to Mr. Obama's backing for permanent membership of the Security Council for India, saying the move has implications for peace and security in South Asia.

Pakistan has listed India's strained relations with its neighbours and alleged violation of U.N. resolutions on the Kashmir issue as reasons why it shouldn't be granted membership of the Security Council.

Mr. Qureshi also said Pakistan and Italy have unanimity of views on the expansion of the Security Council on the basis of regional representation.

He added that the two countries were working closely on many international issues.

Mr. Frattini said the Security Council should not be expanded only to increase the number of permanent members.

Italy is in favour of reforming the Security Council and would not block the membership of any country but the process should be based on "regional representation", he said.

Replying to a question about the Kashmir issue, Mr. Frattini said, "Yes, it is a problem for Pakistan and needs to be addressed".

He said it is in India's interest to have "excellent relations" with Pakistan and that New Delhi should work for "positive movements" to resolve the dispute.


All I would say is Dilli is very far but its for you guys .

 

[S.A.T.A]

Mr. Qureshi invoked Delhi's most revered sufi saint Nizamuddin Auliya while commenting on Mr. Obama's clear backing for India's aspirations for a permanent Security Council seat.

"I have a message for the people in Delhi — Hunooz Dilli door ast," Mr. Qureshi told a news conference at the Foreign Office, using the quote attributed to Nizamuddin Auliya that means "It's still a long way to Delhi'

The Persian phrase is often used to describe a task that cannot be easily accomplished.

To quote from a Mirza Ghalib couplet "Dil ke khush rakhne ko, Ghalib ye khayaal acha hai"

 

[RAM]

Britain backs India's UNSC campaign


Britain on Thursday extended its support to India in its campaign for becoming a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, a move that comes close on the heels of a U.S. backing.The support came at a meeting between Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and his British counterpart David Cameron at a meeting in Seoul on the margins of the G20 summit.External Affairs ministry spokesman Vishnu Prakash, briefing reporters on the meeting, recalled that Britain had earlier supported India's case for non-permanent membership of the UNSC.


The Prime Minister and Mr. Cameron had been meeting regularly even before the latter's state visit to India recently.
The two had met in Toronto in June after his election as Prime Minister of Britain and in 2006 when he had come to New Delhi after his election as leader of the opposition.The spokesman said the two countries shared a strategic partnership from 2004 which was converted into an enhanced partnership during Cameron's visit in July.The U.K. has been India's major trading partner with trade at $11 billion and British investment in India placed at $6 billion.
Britain is the fourth largest investor in India.


The India-U.K. CEO's forum, co-chaired by Ratan Tata and Peter Sands, Chairman of the Standard Chartered Bank, has been activated and it formed the bed rock of the bilateral economic relationship.


The Prime Minister also met his Ethiopian counterpart Meles Zanawi and Mexican President Felipe Calderon.Mr. Zenawi was appreciative of the excellent support India gave in the area of hi-tech programme as New Delhi proposed to set up a vocational training institute in Ethiopia.

 

[no smoking]

I agree that Obama has shown intentions of a greater strategic partnership with India, but nowhere has he mentioned that Washington will be given as a gift to India!!

Therefore, Washington Post remains to be a newspaper of the US till date.

I appreciate you are a non smoker.

But then your post does indicate you are smoking. It may not be tobacco, but it surely smacks of Afghanistan's Best!:emot0:

Well, what i am asking is the supporting source for the story- Nehru reject the offer instead of Obama's support.

Honestly, Obama's support is just a lip work.

 

[anoop_mig25]

Malaysia opposing Indonesia, Argentina opposing Brazil, Italy opposing Germany, S.Korea opposing Japan and S.Africa opposing Nigeria

why they are opposing each other i do not logic of italy and south korea

 

[ajtr]

WSJ is running a poll: Should India be granted a UNSC seat.....

Please cast your vote here
http://online.wsj.com/community/groups/world-forum-748/topics/should-india-granted-permanent-seat

 

[ajtr]

Does India crave international recognition?​

In fact, Obama's predecessor, George W Bush, openly played to India's ego and to Pakistan's longing for security while unveiling his momentous decision to sell F-16 s in March 2005 to Islamabad . The same day his administration patronisingly offered to help make India a 'major world power in the 21st century' . The Indian elation that greeted the offer helped obscure the larger implications of the F-16 decision.
That decision marked the beginning of a major US rearming of Pakistan with largely India-centric weapon systems. Such lethal supply to Islamabad has continued to date even as the US has emerged as the single largest arms seller to India since 2008. Indian diplomacy has not only failed to persuade Washington to stop arming a terror-exporting Pakistan , but also has put up with the US building parallel intelligence-sharing , defence cooperation and strategic relationships with Islamabad and New Delhi.

US policy effectively has moved from hyphenation to parallelism. The new approach involves following separate parallel tracks with India and Pakistan, thereby allowing the US to push its interests better. That approach also permits the US to prop up the Pakistani state without causing a crisis with India, with Obama pledging more than $10 billion in aid to Islamabad since last year.

Merely acknowledging India's claim to a permanent seat costs the US nothing, other than displeasing Pakistan. The US long ago acknowledged Japan's right to UNSC permanent membership, but that hasn't brought Tokyo closer to that goal. In truth, Washington has yet to endorse any proposal for UNSC enlargement that can be put to vote. In fact, no existing permanent member favours enlargement in reality (as opposed to rhetoric). And it is doubtful that new veto-holding permanent members will ever be added to an institution that emerged from the ruins of a world war. But that has not stopped India from chasing dreams.

Having been non-aligned , India is set to become multi-aligned , while tilting more towards Washington, even as it preserves the core element of non-alignment — strategic autonomy. Obama, for his part, will be remembered for using his power of oratory to recast himself as India's friend in the same class as Bush. He came with very little to deliver and more to take, yet cast a spell on India.