What's new

Do not remain on the wrong side of history, India tells Pak

ratolz

BANNED
Joined
Jul 20, 2009
Messages
178
Reaction score
0
Do not remain on the wrong side of history, India tells Pak - US - World - NEWS - The Times of India


WASHINGTON: India has urged Pakistan not to remain on the "wrong side of history" in an "inevitable" recasting of the UN Security Council

membership as the world body finally began focusing on a reform model favored by a majority of the states in the teeth of opposition from Islamabad and a few other disgruntled capitals.

A UN panel meeting on the subject on Wednesday was the scene of testy, but indirect, exchanges between the Indian permanent representative and his Pakistani counterpart, who had earlier opposed not only creating "new centers of privilege" in the world body, but even the focused session to discuss the issue.

"While membership categories is one of the five key issues, and it is certainly one of the most contentious ones, there is little justification to accord it a preferential status vis-à-vis the other issues," Abdulla Haroon complained bitterly, as Pakistan continued procedural stalling on the matter, fearful that progress in the discussion would result in India gaining an entry into the permanent security council category.

Pakistan favors a proposal to increase only the non-permanent category, if at all.

That stalling brought out a taunting retort from the Indian envoy Hardeep Singh Puri, who, without naming Pakistan, challenged the "nay-sayers" to a straw poll to see which proposal had greater support. "To remain in this negative mould only defers the inevitable; it does not change it," Puri said in cutting remarks clearly aimed at Pakistan, urging it and other opponents to join in focusing attention ahead "and not revisit old and discredited arguments."

While the wrangle between the two sides over action against Pakistani terrorists attacking India dominates debates in the sub-continent, Islamabad's obduracy in blocking India's progress is a regular feature in the international arena. At the UN, Pakistan, supported by Italy (which is opposed to Germany's promotion) and a few other countries have suggested a majority of member are against expansion.

Puri said "only 12, or at best 15," delegations have ever objected to an expansion in the permanent membership. The rest, even the P-5, have not objected, not once, in repeated rounds of open negotiations.

"The reality is they, the minority, are equally aware of the fact that it is they who stand on the wrong side of the tide. Hence their vociferous objections, in the forlorn hope that stridency can substitute for a lack of numbers," Puri said, offering a straw poll on the issue.

Under the proposal backed by the so-called G-4 (India, Germany, Japan, and Brazil), the UN SC membership would increase by 6 permanent and 4 non-permanent members. Two each of the new permanent members would be from Asia and Africa, and one each from Latin America and Europe. The four new non-permanent seats would be equally filled between Asia, Africa, Latin America and Eastern Europe.

The new permanent members would have rights and responsibilities "on parallel" with existing permanent members, including the right to the veto. However, they would not exercise the veto power until the question of the extension of the right of veto to new permanent members is decided through a review after 15 years from the date of entry into force of the reform measures.
 
Ok, the farce started again, as the 5 members all really enjoyed expansion of the security council. India looks jewed again this time. Do you actually believe any perm member want to see the expansion?

china, russia, us, britain, france <-> india, germany,japan,brazil

Guess who will win? :rofl:

Besides, our veto is Pak's too. :smokin:
 
Cant help but cringe at that statement. Indian officials seem to whine and cry uncontrollably when Pakistan makes any move in the international arena. Who will guarantee India behaving with an ounce of professionalism or maturity when given the veto power? Indian officials are used to make a lot of noise over nothing and this will only come back to haunt them.

But good luck. I am sure the UN would take into account that India has not only never given a toss about UN Kashmir resolutions, but is in direct violation of them.

This will only help to make the UN more counter-productive and than it already is.
 
Ok, the farce started again, as the 5 members all really enjoyed expansion of the security council. India looks jewed again this time. Do you actually believe any perm member want to see the expansion?

china, russia, us, britain, france <-> india, germany,japan,brazil

Guess who will win? :rofl:

Besides, our veto is Pak's too. :smokin:
Permanent member positions:
France, Russia, UK are in favor of promoting India
US, China: neutral.

Vote: 3-0
 
Permanent member positions:
France, Russia, UK are in favor of promoting India
US, China: neutral.

Vote: 3-0

Scene 1, somewhere in Delhi:

PM Singh couldn't believe his ears, he feels dizzy but he is clearly not thirsty, the former first layd's face just looks so beautiful, he managed to listen to the her statement for a few minutes, but he can not maintain his concentration anymore, his adrenalin starts to flow, he can clear feel his heart pounding, he now sees India proudly sits between the five members in the UN, no, it's not 5 any more, now it is 6. it's not a dream, is it? it is real, it is really happenning to India, he can't think of anything anymore, his mind is full with the grand hindustan on the worldmap...

Scene 2, somewhere who knows:

US: hey, say it, what you guys going to do about it. Who will screw it, you know we can't do it.
Russia: uhm, we are in the money with them Indians cauz uhm we are selling a lot of weapons to them. The money is for mother Russia.
China: uhm, we are screwing them right now in the border area, we can't do it. you know. we chinese don't stoke fire with gaseline.
Britain: Don't look at me to expect to do this bloody business. After all, India is our former colony.
France: WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAT? You guys got to be freaking kidding me. What's in it for me?

silence.


Chinese Hu: uhm, I think we can use some french commercial jets.

The next morning, a news come up somewhere in French newspaper: French government maintains the positions and firmly believes that the current security countil is fully capable to maintain international balance and are fully prepared and commited to peace in the world.

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
 
India have too many border problems with too many countries to be a serious contender at this stage, these problems will have to be resolved - perhaps it would be better if the G8 could accomodate the Indian with a full seat, this will make UNSC seat a given.
 
Opposing the "creation of new centers of privilege" is not being on the wrong side of history, it is in fact being on the right side and the moral side.

The Indian envoy needs to get out of his colonialist mindset, defending the creation of more 'centers of privilege' as somehow being 'on the right side of history'.

Then again, what else is new - the majority of the population of India appears to condone the occupation and subjugation of the Kashmiri people by force, and blatantly deny them the right to self determination promised in the UNSC, and agreed to multiple times by India in the past. Ironically a violation of commitments made in the same global forum to which India now aspires to gain permanent membership to.

With that kind of hypocrisy and depravity embraced as a nation, I suppose the Indian envoy felt justified in making his disingenuous rant.
 
India have too many border problems with too many countries to be a serious contender at this stage, these problems will have to be resolved - perhaps it would be better if the G8 could accomodate the Indian with a full seat, this will make UNSC seat a given.

From what I understand, the proposals on the table at this point do not have the permanent members being included with a veto either.

Would permanent membership without veto not largely be symbolic?
 
people can only delay our seat in security council.. but they cant stop it... its just a matter of time we vl get the seat... lets have some patience....
 
Well yes, certainly India should have a seat in the UNSC, it is after all not the only contender, Japan, Brazil, Ukraine and Pakistan also have aspirations -- would the Indian advocate the case of Pakistani membership? or would that constitute being on the wrong side of history, one wonders.
 
WASHINGTON: India has urged Pakistan not to remain on the "wrong side of history" in an "inevitable" recasting of the UN Security Council membership as the world body finally began focusing on a reform model favored by a majority of the states in the teeth of opposition from Islamabad and a few other disgruntled capitals.

[...]

"While membership categories is one of the five key issues, and it is certainly one of the most contentious ones, there is little justification to accord it a preferential status vis-à-vis the other issues," Abdulla Haroon complained bitterly, [...]

That stalling brought out a taunting retort from the Indian envoy Hardeep Singh Puri, who, without naming Pakistan, challenged the "nay-sayers" to a straw poll to see which proposal had greater support. "To remain in this negative mould only defers the inevitable; it does not change it," Puri said in cutting remarks clearly aimed at Pakistan, urging it and other opponents to join in focusing attention ahead "and not revisit old and discredited arguments."

While the wrangle between the two sides over action against Pakistani terrorists attacking India dominates debates in the sub-continent, Islamabad's obduracy in blocking India's progress is a regular feature in the international arena. At the UN, Pakistan, supported by Italy (which is opposed to Germany's promotion) and a few other countries have suggested a majority of member are against expansion.

Typical TOI puerile reporting style.

Who writes this stuff? 12 year olds?
 
Scene 1, somewhere in Delhi:

PM Singh couldn't believe his ears, he feels dizzy but he is clearly not thirsty, the former first layd's face just looks so beautiful, he managed to listen to the her statement for a few minutes, but he can not maintain his concentration anymore, his adrenalin starts to flow, he can clear feel his heart pounding, he now sees India proudly sits between the five members in the UN, no, it's not 5 any more, now it is 6. it's not a dream, is it? it is real, it is really happenning to India, he can't think of anything anymore, his mind is full with the grand hindustan on the worldmap...

Scene 2, somewhere who knows:

US: hey, say it, what you guys going to do about it. Who will screw it, you know we can't do it.
Russia: uhm, we are in the money with them Indians cauz uhm we are selling a lot of weapons to them. The money is for mother Russia.
China: uhm, we are screwing them right now in the border area, we can't do it. you know. we chinese don't stoke fire with gaseline.
Britain: Don't look at me to expect to do this bloody business. After all, India is our former colony.
France: WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAT? You guys got to be freaking kidding me. What's in it for me?

silence.


Chinese Hu: uhm, I think we can use some french commercial jets.

The next morning, a news come up somewhere in French newspaper: French government maintains the positions and firmly believes that the current security countil is fully capable to maintain international balance and are fully prepared and commited to peace in the world.

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
can you please repeat?
 
Typical TOI puerile reporting style.

Who writes this stuff? 12 year olds?

Chidu Raj - Pakistan hater extraordinaire.:rolleyes:

I have read him enough over the years to where I know it is a Chidu Raj article before the first paragraph is over.

'Puerile' is very apt. :agree:
 
Opposing the "creation of new centers of privilege" is not being on the wrong side of history, it is in fact being on the right side and the moral side.

The Indian envoy needs to get out of his colonialist mindset, defending the creation of more 'centers of privilege' as somehow being 'on the right side of history'.

Then again, what else is new - the majority of the population of India appears to condone the occupation and subjugation of the Kashmiri people by force, and blatantly deny them the right to self determination promised in the UNSC, and agreed to multiple times by India in the past. Ironically a violation of commitments made in the same global forum to which India now aspires to gain permanent membership to.

With that kind of hypocrisy and depravity embraced as a nation, I suppose the Indian envoy felt justified in making his disingenuous rant.

Yea why don't you same said for Baluchistan? where PAK oppressing them and using their natural resources and those people are poor?

and NA and and your so called azad Kashmir ? did you ever know weather they wanted to live with you or not? its only you think they want to live with PAK.

If is your only mindset which makes you believes all other likes you, but reality is opposite , if you have guts , do vote and see weather *** wants to live with you or not , why dont do publicite their.

if you look into history you will find PAK is all wrong doing weather is nuclear black market, terrorism etc.

That's why India today stand in World Good countries and see where PAk stands in world country order.
 

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom