Absurd To Imagine India Still Not Part Of UN Security Council: Nicolas Sarkozy

[Abba_Dabba_Jabba]

As of 2015
People below poverty line: 169 millions (not 40 crore)
HDI: 0.609
Population:, 1.28 billions (not 1.23 billions)

The criteria for BPL family is 32/- per day income in urban and 26/- in rural area. And we are ranked above 120 in HDI, we are too dependant on technology from other countries. We have to be a regional power before claiming that seat.

 

[Bad Guy]

The criteria for BPL family is 32/- per day income in urban and 26/- in rural area. And we are ranked above 120 in HDI, we are too dependant on technology from other countries. We have to be a regional power before claiming that seat.

Criteria whatever be, our poverty ratio has only left 12.4% according to international standards.
If we are dependent on tech from foreigners, watch at security council members., They too. Even more is some aspects.
Our approach is well beyond region which made it enough reason to rank as fourth after US, Russia and China in GFP list. Much more than a Regional power if not world power like US, Russia or China.
What was China's conditions when they got UNSC seat? A completely war torn and hopeless nation were they.

 

[Abba_Dabba_Jabba]

@Bad Guy
1. Sorry for previous mistake it's 47/- Rupees for urban, and it is still not a proper criteria to define whether a person is poor or not. Plus the new report which the World Bank has presented recently was just to show the world that MDG goals has been achieved successfully, it is absurd that World Bank has actually shown wrong data to hide its functioning.

2. There was no criteria for those 5 UNSC members when they were selected as permanent members, just one thing differentiated them from others and it was that they were major power (except China) and on the winning side in WW2.

3. Apart from USA, there is no world power in the world currently. China is still struggling to leave it's footprint beyond Asia, Russia is a dead power and we can't even think about Britain & France both have a struggling economy and limited defense budget. India definitely will be a major candidate for the post but still it will take time, plus we have joined a group G4 and it has binded us to go with the members of this group. Plus the current UNSC members have problems with other G4 nation and will not be happy with their inclusion in the club.

 

[Abba_Dabba_Jabba]

@Hemchandra Vikramaditya : Yes the only thing which prevented India from getting the seat was that it was not an independent nation then, there are news and articles circulating which says that India was offered a seat but Mr. Nehru didn't accepted it, I don't know the credibility of the news so no comments on that. But still even in 1945-50 we were not in position to handle our own national problems such as poverty, illiteracy,etc..

 

[mike2000 is back]

One way or another India will get it that much is for sure but the way it gets it is important. wait for the day when the establishment come to India and offer the seat otherwise the entire institution looses credibility.

Lol Are you joking mate?
So the P5 will lose credibility unless India joins?
So India joining will suddenly make the UNSC more credible/fair right?
In that case Pakistan, Turkey, Brazil, Indonesia etc etc should also join, it will make the UNSC even more credible.

 

[takeiteasy]

Before imagining as world power and UN Permanent seat, let be at peace with the 20-25% minority population. Today, right-wing RSS is in power. We have raging Sakha members who believes "Modi is the country, RSS is the parliament and Manusmruti is the constitution" - Those poor infidel killers, who want to believe 7000 years ago India was a nuclear power! This blind religiousness also needs to be addressed.

India has an internal issue. The 800 or so years of religious conflict which is still going on. It is the hidden or potential war ground of world's two major religions - Islam and Hinduism. What is needed is the neutralization of this big issue.
Right-wing formula is simple - Coup, once the right-wing paramilitary membership has armed members across India gaining critical mass, thus triggering genocide of Muslims, Christians so as to be a land of the pure like Israel or Pakistan.
Instead of this violence, why not government formulate ways to reduce the religiousness of the population, instil liberal values to the people especially in north with the 250 years or more backward tribal/caste mentality.

When you imagine as world power, What needs to be erased is the primitive mentality that the fanatic Hindutva as the basis. An inclusive growth where the Muslims and Christians can believe the country and laws are equal for all. This can strengthen India.

 

[Nilgiri]

India should focus on getting to 5 trillion GDP and then 10 trillion GDP and more.

The medals of prestige will come automatically with much less effort over time. The longer it is denied to us, the proportional increase in UN irrelevance.

We should not divert undue efforts to some club of exclusives with little real meaning on the ground for our security and geopolitical strength. Better to focus on NSG and MTCR membership and focus on lubricating the logjams there....since that actually has the potential to matter for our economy and military expansion/modernisation.

Instead of this violence, why not government formulate ways to reduce the religiousness of the population, instil liberal values to the people especially in north with the 250 years or more backward tribal/caste mentality.

Why dont the muslims and christians show the way in reducing their religiousness? RSS is mostly a response to the behaviour of certain mostly Muslim and some Christian demographics asserting their differences and "religiosity" to the detriment of integration and common sense. Hate begets hate. You will never win a war of ego against a majority, so the onus is on minority to take the first step in accepting the reality of their existence and to compromise.

When you see large majority of muslims genuinely pushing for uniform civil code based on secular principles and succeeding (rather than having it thrust on them externally)....RSS will lose 50% of its support base right there.

But till that happens, minorities will have to live with the status quo and the process will be longer and full of more friction. Blaming who the majority votes for in retaliation for being forced to accept one way concessions for a long long time and trying to act like some higher moral ground will only continue to backfire on you. When you understand that and take concrete remedial steps (and not just words), then we can forge a truly inclusive country long term. Thats the plain and simple truth.

 

[PDF]

Well if it is absurd to imagine, I suggest to stop imagining. No one can escape reality.

 

[Sky lord]

The UN has a job to do, it was set up in order to prevent another World War.

P5 was elected on basis of the countries that won WW2.

In the last 70 years the world power structure has slowly shifted. If the UN wishes to continue doing its job it will have to accommodate newly emerged large powers and drop fading ones. If they don't do that then they become irrelevant and the work that should be done at the UN will be done at some other fora. There are so many available right now and new ones can always be created.

India is a mid level power right now and basically not a very aggressive or dangerous country, so it will not be a priority for the UN right now. However, if India continues to grow At the rate forecasted by IMF, World bank et al then in 10 to 20 years the UN will become irrelevant without india.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

The UN has a job to do, it was set up in order to prevent another World War.

P5 was elected on basis of the countries that won WW2.

In the last 70 years the world power structure has slowly shifted. If the UN wishes to continue doing its job it will have to accommodate newly emerged large powers and drop fading ones. If they don't do that then they become irrelevant and the work that should be done at the UN will be done at some other fora. There are so many available right now and new ones can always be created.

India is a mid level power right now and basically not a very aggressive or dangerous country, so it will not be a priority for the UN right now. However, if India continues to grow At the rate forecasted by IMF, World bank et al then in 10 to 20 years the UN will become irrelevant without india.

China in 1945 was utterly destroyed by WW2, and still in the middle of the Chinese Civil War (which would ravage on for many more years). Even today's Somalia is a paradise in comparison.

China joining the P5 in 1945 had nothing to do with riches or power (for we had neither back then), it was a mere technicality.

And that's all it still is. A technicality.

The P5 hasn't actually done much apart from safeguarding their own interests in the UN, the world is still torn apart by war and terrorism in every continent. Being a part of the P5 is nothing more than having veto power over UNSC resolutions, and many of the wars in the past few decades have actually been started by P5 members themselves. The wars in Iraq/Afghanistan/Libya/Georgia just to name a few.

 

[Sky lord]

China in 1945 was utterly destroyed by WW2, and still in the middle of the Chinese Civil War (which would ravage on for many more years). Even today's Somalia is a paradise in comparison.

China joining the P5 in 1945 had nothing to do with riches or power (for we had neither back then), it was a mere technicality.

And that's all it still is. A technicality.

The P5 hasn't actually done much apart from safeguarding their own interests in the UN, the world is still torn apart by war and terrorism in every continent. Being a part of the P5 is nothing more than having veto power over UNSC resolutions, and many of the wars in the past few decades have actually been started by P5 members themselves. The wars in Iraq/Afghanistan/Libya/Georgia just to name a few.

Well technically Taiwan not China till 1971 right?


Yeah, I agree with you , p5 has only been safeguarding their own interests and a lot of the wars were started by the P5 members themselves. I would assume that the role of the UN was to get "buy in" or some kind of equilibrium from the other P5 members when one of them started a war or made some aggressive move to safeguard their national interest. And this in turn has prevented a war between the P5 members themselves. which is the original reason for the UN - i.e. to avoid large power industrialized nation warfare.


As for the smaller countries, unfortunately the smaller and weaker you are the less anyone cares. The Congo has been having the worst possible humanitarian crisis and war for over a decade and the P5 give two hoots. The only reason Middle East is in the papers is because they took their war to the west...otherwise Iran and Iraq fought a bitter war with child soldiers and the works for 8 years and I don't think anyone cared a fig. When these same people land in Europe on boats we get 24/7 coverage. Such is the world unfortunately.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Well technically Taiwan not China till 1971 right?


Yeah, I agree with you , p5 has only been safeguarding their own interests and a lot of the wars were started by the P5 members themselves. I would assume that the role of the UN was to get "buy in" or some kind of equilibrium from the other P5 members when one of them started a war or made some aggressive move to safeguard their national interest. And this in turn has prevented a war between the P5 members themselves. which is the original reason for the UN - i.e. to avoid large power industrialized nation warfare.


As for the smaller countries, unfortunately the smaller and weaker you are the less anyone cares. The Congo has been having the worst possible humanitarian crisis and war for over a decade and the P5 give two hoots. The only reason Middle East is in the papers is because they took their war to the west...otherwise Iran and Iraq fought a bitter war with child soldiers and the works for 8 years and I don't think anyone cared a fig. When these same people land in Europe on boats we get 24/7 coverage. Such is the world unfortunately.

That's right, nobody cares. This is the reality of geopolitics.

Morality and charity is great when it comes to individuals. When it comes to states/governments however, that is never the case.

It's all about practical considerations on the ground, hard facts, and hard power.

Well technically Taiwan not China till 1971 right?

Mainland China was still the ROC in 1945. We became the PRC in 1949 when we won the Chinese Civil War. Regardless, the seat belongs to a country not a government, it passed from the ROC to the PRC in the same way the seat passed from the USSR to the Russian Federation.

The point remains that China in 1945 (or 1971) did not qualify for a P5 seat based on any metric of wealth or national power, simply because we fulfilled the criteria. We got the seat based on a technicality, and that's really all it is, back then and now.

It's not fair, but the world isn't fair. It never was.

 

[Sky lord]

The point remains that China in 1945 did not qualify for a P5 seat based on any metric of wealth or national power, simply because we fulfilled the criteria. We got the seat based on a technicality, and that's really all it is, back then and now.

You're probably right on that . 1945 India was not a sovereign state. Many believe that Nehru could have forced an amendment of the charter in the early days after independence in the late 40s. But he was not really cut out for the job so India lost out. Each country makes its own foolish mistakes and this was one was ours.

 

[XenoEnsi-14]

There was only one criteria to have been a member of the P5, i.e. to have been a major independent country on the allied side of WW2.

Don't tell me you think China was rich and powerful in 1945?

We were the most destroyed nation on Earth at that point, we got the P5 membership because we fit the criteria, nothing more.

It has nothing to do with a powerful economy, a powerful military, strong diplomacy, since China had none of those things in 1945.

Poor India, didn't exist until after the war.

 

[Bad Guy]

@Bad Guy
1. Sorry for previous mistake it's 47/- Rupees for urban, and it is still not a proper criteria to define whether a person is poor or not. Plus the new report which the World Bank has presented recently was just to show the world that MDG goals has been achieved successfully, it is absurd that World Bank has actually shown wrong data to hide its functioning.

2. There was no criteria for those 5 UNSC members when they were selected as permanent members, just one thing differentiated them from others and it was that they were major power (except China) and on the winning side in WW2.

3. Apart from USA, there is no world power in the world currently. China is still struggling to leave it's footprint beyond Asia, Russia is a dead power and we can't even think about Britain & France both have a struggling economy and limited defense budget. India definitely will be a major candidate for the post but still it will take time, plus we have joined a group G4 and it has binded us to go with the members of this group. Plus the current UNSC members have problems with other G4 nation and will not be happy with their inclusion in the club.

Probably by 2030, it's level would be same as that of US, Russia and China then.