China aims to capture Arunachal Pradesh/Southern Tibet in next 10-15 years

[MH.Yang]

If India can prove to the UN that the UN cannot implement the resolution in the Indian Ocean without India's support, the UN will naturally give India the right of permanent membership, No need India's application.

None permanent membership of the UN is obtained by application. Because no country in the world will like the addition of permanent members of the UN. If some countries say they like it, that is they like your money, and know that you are bound to fail.

 

[doorstar]

Because India bought French Rafale?

lol!

no because surrendra teli (aka modi) once lamented in a speech thusly: "we sacrificed thousands of lives for them (the UK) yet yet they refuse to help us get a permanent seat at the UN".

dumbbell was referring to the British raj soldiers who died during WW2 which has nothing to do with present day bharat. they were British subjects (few bengalis, mostly Punjabis, Pukhtoons, some blochis and mirpuris) who joined the Army to earn a living and did not volunteer to earn credits for a future Indian state

 

[magra]

And you think Britain and France are just a medium-sized country?
Have you never considered Britain's influence in the Commonwealth and Britain's influence in the financial industry?
Do you know the influence of France in Africa? France is also a representative of the European Union.
Ignorance, arrogance.
Britain and France are indeed at the same level as the USA, China and Russia.
As for the three countries you mentioned, they are not qualified.

Germany is the de-facto leader of Europe, not France or Brexit plagued Britain.
Surely, UK and France have some cultural ties with former colonies. However, there is a lot of hidden resentment too. For eg, Indians derive pleasure in UK's waning influence in the world.

You are deluded if you think UK and France are at same level as US or Russia. If global politics is a movie, then US is a main lead and UK, France are the support leads.

China would never allow reform of the United Nations.
China would lose its prestigious position of United Nations permanent member.
United Nations is a prestigious club of the winners of World War 2
As for the losers of World War 2, the world doesn't give a damn for them.

Not only China, none of the P5 would allow reform as no nation once having the veto power would want to share or lose it. Hence, it is no use expecting these nations to willing agree on reform. The only way is to let UN degrade itself to a completely irrelevant body and then create a true representative world body.

study the aftermath of WW2 and you might learn as to why US, UK, Russia, China, France have the status they have and about the insignificance of India too.

btw why would the Allies have given the same status as themselves to Germans and the japs whom they had just finished thrashing/defeating?

I know all about the history and giving veto to these 5 nations made sense in the aftermath of WW2. But today it is a very different time. Present realities are completely different. In the 16th century, Spain was a big power due to the gold it was collecting from Americas, but today it is a middling nation. Time changes, power changes.

 

[magra]

Many people have misunderstandings. They believe that the P5 can block the UN resolution because it has the veto power. In fact, on the contrary, because they have the ability to block UN resolutions, the UN agrees that they have the veto power to avoid unnecessary consumption by P5.
Therefore, whether to cancel the veto power of P5 will not actually affect the ability of P5.
The core right of P5 comes from the right to make proposals, which means that without P5 to make proposals, any opinions will not be discussed by UN, which is the special right to P5 can use the name and power of UN.
P5 also has the right of compulsory action, which means that P5 can legally use force without UN authorization.

The reason why I say that Japan and India are not eligible to become permanent members is that the United Nations can implement resolutions in East Asia without Japan, and the United Nations can implement resolutions in the Indian Ocean without India.
Since they are dispensable, why give them rights? Because India bought French Rafale?

Whatever extra rights P5 has in UN are discriminatory in nature to the other nations. Whatever arguments you gave are in support of this. World would not continue to tolerate a discirminatory regime forever.

 

[MH.Yang]

Whatever extra rights P5 has in UN are discriminatory in nature to the other nations. Whatever arguments you gave are in support of this. World would not continue to tolerate a discirminatory regime forever.

We need to face the reality that the privilege of P5 is fair to other countries. If it is the kind of fairness you said, for example, let Madagascar and other countries lead the P5, do you think the P5 will join this international framework? If the P5 is separated from the constraints of the UN framework, it will be the most unfair to other countries. Peace as far as possible is the greatest fairness to all countries that UN can bring.

 

[magra]

We need to face the reality that the privilege of P5 is fair to other countries. If it is the kind of fairness you said, for example, let Madagascar and other countries lead the P5, do you think the P5 will join this international framework? If the P5 is separated from the constraints of the UN framework, it will be the most unfair to other countries. Peace as far as possible is the greatest fairness to all countries that UN can bring.

So basically the P5 is holding world to hostage, that give us extra powers or we will not let peace be there in the world, right?

 

[MH.Yang]

So basically the P5 is holding world to hostage, that give us extra powers or we will not let peace be there in the world, right?

Don't you know what the USA has done in the era when the USA has no rivals? China can support the abolition of the P5 privilege and even all nuclear weapons. But don't you know what the world will be like?
I am a communist, but even a communist will admit that the world still needs a lot of time to move towards real equality.

In fact, Indians also know this truth. India's call for UN reform is actually to gain prestige and political capital. You are not really responsible for the future of the world.
Your country is like a politician who swindles political interests by shouting unrealistic slogans, and lack of real responsibility for the future of mankind. This is one of the reasons why India is still not qualified to become a major force of the UN.

 

[magra]

Don't you know what the USA has done in the era when the USA has no rivals? China can support the abolition of the P5 privilege and even all nuclear weapons. But don't you know what the world will be like?

Yes, I know what US has done when it was a sole superpower. However, it is not sole superpower today.
What bad outcome do you foresee if no one is permanent member of UN and no has veto, but major decisions are taken by majority vote.

In fact, Indians also know this truth. India's call for UN reform is actually to gain prestige and political capital. You are not really responsible for the future of the world.
Your country is like a politician who swindles political interests by shouting unrealistic slogans, and lack of real responsibility for the future of mankind. This is one of the reasons why India is still not qualified to become a major force of the UN.

India demands a stake in the world based on present realities. We are not the same impowerished newly independent nation of 1947, so why should we allow lesser powers like UK, France to have much more rights and privileges than us.

 

[MH.Yang]

Yes, I know what US has done when it was a sole superpower. However, it is not sole superpower today.
What bad outcome do you foresee if no one is permanent member of UN and no has veto, but major decisions are taken by majority vote.


India demands a stake in the world based on present realities. We are not the same impowerished newly independent nation of 1947, so why should we allow lesser powers like UK, France to have much more rights and privileges than us.

China has always wanted the world to move towards a multipolar era, but some countries are still service for imperialist superpowers. Do you know who these countries are?

I have just given the answer that India lacks the necessity for grant rights.
And I don't think India's ability exceeds that of Britain and France.

 

[magra]

China has always wanted the world to move towards a multipolar era, but some countries are still service for imperialist superpowers. Do you know who these countries are?

I have just given the answer that India lacks the necessity for grant rights.

India is not in service of any power, we have mostly made independent foreign policy decisions since indepedence. Even today, we are friends with all sides - US, Russia, Israel, Iran etc

China does not get to decide what is necessary or not for India. That is only for India to decide. And no one can grant rights. Equality is our right and we will take it.

 

[MH.Yang]

India is not in service of any power, we have mostly made independent foreign policy decisions since indepedence. Even today, we are friends with all sides - US, Russia, Israel, Iran etc

China does not get to decide what is necessary or not for India. That is only for India to decide. And no one can grant rights. Equality is our right and we will take it.

In my opinion, the only possible way for India to obtain permanent membership is by replacing Britain.

Only by replacing seats can the veto be prevented. The PRC also avoided the veto of the USA and the Soviet Union by replacing Taiwan's seats.

 

[SuvarnaTeja]

Not so fast. The residents of southern Tibet are not Han. Unlike the Taiwanese, they are not the people we must achieve reunification. It is Low priority.
Before controlling southern Tibet, we must get the support of the local people. Otherwise we'd rather keep waiting.
If we have been unable to get the support of the local people, we may support their independence. China will not control land that does not support Chinese rule, because it is asking for trouble.

China will annex Tibet and five fingers before it annexes Taiwan.

 

[Wood]

View attachment 777828

Haha.. very funny picture.

While India does get muscled by US from time to time (like with importing oil from Iran), it is not part of NATO alliance or anything. India has ostensibly denied US a military presence in the sub continent. US and India cannot even agree on trade terms like the NATO partners can. For such reasons, I'd say that the picture is not accurate.

 

[magra]

In my opinion, the only possible way for India to obtain permanent membership is by replacing Britain.

Only by replacing seats can the veto be prevented. The PRC also avoided the veto of the USA and the Soviet Union by replacing Taiwan's seats.

Any such reform would be vetoed by one of the P5
1. Extending permanent membership to India (will be vetoed by China at Pak's behest)
2. Disabling veto power (will be vetoed by all P5)
3. Disabling permanent membership (will be vetoed by all P5)
4. Replacing UK with India in P5 (will be vetoed by UK, France, China)

Only solution I see is a completely new organization which replaces UN altogether.

 

[Maula Jatt]

Any such reform would be vetoed by one of the P5
1. Extending permanent membership to India (will be vetoed by China at Pak's behest)
2. Disabling veto power (will be vetoed by all P5)
3. Disabling permanent membership (will be vetoed by all P5)
4. Replacing UK with India in P5 (will be vetoed by UK, France, China)

Only solution I see is a completely new organization which replaces UN altogether.

only after WW3 lol

and Chinese will veto India on their own, they don't need Pakistan's lobbying for that...