“China ready to support Indian bid for UNSC”

[Chinese-Dragon]

wrong!! Dont know about others but vladimir putin at least clarified long back (2004) that india should have veto power

hinduvoice.net/cgi-bin/dada/mail.cgi?flavor=archive;list=NL;id=20041207161455

do a little googling before posting absurd claims

LOL that source is bad, even for this forum. Any direct statements from Putin himself?

Anyway as I said above, you need unanimous support from ALL the P5 nations (and 2/3 majority in the general assembly) before you can modify the UN charter. Both of which, will be immensely difficult to attain.

According to recent reports, the G4 could barely scrape together 80 pledges of support, FAR short of the 2/3 majority required.

 

[Jon Snow]

edited it with another link - from dawn.com with statement..... hope that's satisfactory for you..... I was replying to your claim that NONE of the p5 have allowed veto for india, not that all have

 

[Major Ram]

wrong!! Dont know about others but vladimir putin at least clarified long back (2004) that india should have veto power

India should have veto power, clarifies Putin, Russia's President

do a little googling before posting absurd claims
here's another link
Russia wants India in UNSC with veto power: Putin clarifies statement -DAWN - Top Stories; 05 December, 2004

Thank you for this useful post.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Thank you for this useful post.

Not bad. I would prefer an actual source that is not from the subcontinent, but let's assume that it is real for now.

1/5 - You're on your way.

Check your UN voting record regarding issues important to America, like the Iraq war, Libya or Iran. You've voted against them, on almost every one of these major issues.

It only takes one P5 member to stop the whole thing (you need unanimous support from all five). That's even assuming you can get 2/3 majority of the general assembly, which is extremely difficult.

You might get the permanent seat (though I doubt China would ever support that), but I think it will take till hell freezes over before all the P5 members all decide to let India have veto power.

 

[Major Ram]

Not bad. I would prefer an actual source that is not from the subcontinent, but let's assume that it is real for now.

1/5 - You're on your way.

Well, your Pakistani "Brothers" will not like, that you dont trust their media called Dawn.

Check your UN voting record regarding issues important to America, like the Iraq war, Libya or Iran. You've voted against them, on almost every one of these major issues.

Like I said, that if they have a problem with us then why they want to support us for UNSC in the first place?

It only takes one P5 member to stop the whole thing (you need unanimous support from all five). That's even assuming you can get 2/3 majority of the general assembly, which is extremely difficult.

Agreed. Hopefully we will do it someday.

 

[Dharmachakra]

Wooov
What a roller coaster ride for Indian UNSC seat...

Heck why should India care tooo much about it? given that every country is behaving on its own, and UN already lost its credibility where big countries bully the small ones.......

Lets not not get distracted from the needs of the day. In my opinion,UNSC should be kept out of table and lets work on economic activity while making every citizen a stake holder.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Like I said, that if they have a problem with us then why they want to support us for UNSC in the first place?

Agreed. Hopefully we will do it someday.

Because without veto power, you can't hurt any of their resolutions.

I am personally in favour of a two-tier UNSC. The veto powers and the non-veto powers.

It's not democratic, but then again the "democratic" argument has never really persuaded any of the P5 members to give up their veto powers.

 

[Major Ram]

Because without veto power, you can't hurt any of their resolutions.

That's not my question. Let me ask you again.

You're saying that India has always voted against US so they would not support Veto for India. And why China would support India for Veto.
I'm asking you that ifthey really have a problem with India then why would they support India for UNSC in the first place? (Just dont support India for UNSC so the question of Veto does not even arise.)

 

[ares]

Look for the actual quotes from the Chinese side, rather than the interpretation by the Indian media. Looks like India is stuck between a rock and a hard place.

1) If India continues to move forward with Japan as a part of the G4, there is zero chance they will get through. China, Russia and South Korea all oppose Japan's entry to the P5. Two of whom are veto members.


2) China never explicitly said that they would back India, if India ditches Japan and goes for an independent bid. So if India does indeed ditch Japan, they will have alienated a possible friend, and China is still under zero obligation to support India for a UNSC seat.

(Not that it matters, since the real power in the UNSC is the veto power. And so far, no one is willing to give that up.)

Pls point out the statement where chinese leaders have said will not support veto power for India..UNSC seat one package and not bits and pieces.

 

[Punjabbi Munda]

Because without veto power, you can't hurt any of their resolutions.

I am personally in favour of a two-tier UNSC. The veto powers and the non-veto powers.

It's not democratic, but then again the "democratic" argument has never really persuaded any of the P5 members to give up their veto powers.

Personally?Lol wtf,as if that matters!

 

[harpoon]

UN should realize that the world has changed a lot since 1945. UNSC is over represented by Western powers, Asia is under represented with no members from S.America & Africa. So along with India, Brazil(S.America) & RSA(Africa) should also be inducted to UNSC so as to bring balance at the table.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

UN should realize that the world has changed a lot since 1945. UNSC is over represented by Western powers, Asia is under represented with no members from S.America & Africa. So along with India, Brazil(S.America) & RSA(Africa) should also be inducted to UNSC so as to bring balance at the table.

Out of the G4 members, India has the smallest economy.

Germany and Brazil should definitely get in. I doubt any of the P5 will dilute their own veto powers though, so it will probably be a permanent seat without veto.

 

[Veritas]

Out of the G4 members, India has the smallest economy.

Germany and Brazil should definitely get in. I doubt any of the P5 will dilute their own veto powers though, so it will probably be a permanent seat without veto.

This debate had been brought up a zillion times, the Chinese poster typical reaction is setting a moving target for India, mostly Hey India not big economy, hey India have population crisis, hey India is boxed in South Asia because of Kashmir issue.

United Nations as a political body does not have any parameters set in stone, and mostly the entry or future entry of any country is and would be on the basis of "Perceived Geo-Political" importance. You can make a case for India or against it. The Chinese posters on this forum are too focused on the case against India.

 

[harpoon]

Out of the G4 members, India has the smallest economy.

Oh Please!! When you became the UN security council member, your economy was hardly the talk of the town. You became UNSC member on the basis of population, size and military power.

Germany and Brazil should definitely get in. I doubt any of the P5 will dilute their own veto powers though, so it will probably be a permanent seat without veto.

You want one more Western power at UNSC. If you find Germany eligible, then Japan is more than eligible as they have the 3rd largest economy in the world.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

United Nations as a political body does not have any parameters set in stone, and mostly the entry or future entry of any country is and would be on the basis of "Perceived Geo-Political" importance. You can make a case for India or against it. The Chinese posters on this forum are too focused on the case against India.

Actually, it does have quite strict parameters.

Charter of the United Nations: Chapter XVIII: Amendments

To amend the UN charter and allow new permanent members, you need unanimous support from ALL of the P5 nations, as well as a 2/3 majority in the general assembly. Both of which are extremely difficult to achieve.

You want one more Western power at UNSC.

You think I have a problem with the West? Who do you think is fueling our economic boom?