India abandons UN Security Council seat ambitions

[conworldus]

Is there a list of criteria that has been defined to gain entry as a UNSC permanent member? If so, please provide a link....

You seem pretty sure that size of the economy is the main factor even though Japan seems to be in the same boat as us...

No. The UNSC was meant for the victors of WWII. India is not in it because its contribution to the war is negligible comparing to others (and not mentioning all these Indian soldiers who joined the Axis side).

Now that you want in, you need to have reasons. If economy is not a reason, then what can be?

 

[JingDong]

The UNSC was meant for the victors of WWII ?

Perhaps, you meant "is" or "will always be", not "was".

Well, best of luck.

 

[Aramsogo]

No. The UNSC was meant for the victors of WWII. India is not in it because its contribution to the war is negligible comparing to others (and not mentioning all these Indian soldiers who joined the Axis side).

Now that you want in, you need to have reasons. If economy is not a reason, then what can be?

Yeah, the part about joining the Axis (guys like Chandra Bose) certainly doesn't help. And you basically have the Axis countries like Japan and Germany trying to join an Allies Victory Club. If anything, the P5 are all trying to re-assert their place in the post-WW2 world order (with the possible exception of the UK. They seem to have just given up).

 

[Peshwa]

No. The UNSC was meant for the victors of WWII. India is not in it because its contribution to the war is negligible comparing to others (and not mentioning all these Indian soldiers who joined the Axis side).

India was offered the UNSC seat post WW2 only to be rejected by our pacifist leader Nehru.....so I think your point above is irrelevant...

but yes, the general norm to define the p5 is the "victors" of WW2, though I have my own opinions wrt. some of the "victors"....But thats irrelevant since its in the past and the P5 are not going anywhere...

Now that you want in, you need to have reasons. If economy is not a reason, then what can be?

I think its a combination of factors....economy alone cannot define the basis for inclusion in the UNSC....

A combination of economic clout, military strength, nuclear weapons, political stability, demographics (ie. India represents 1/6th of humanity as well as a sizeable number of religious presence) all should be considered when including new members...

Besides....All P5 minus China seem to think we qualify just fine....so I am not surprised you have your doubts...

 

[Peshwa]

Yeah, the part about joining the Axis (guys like Chandra Bose) certainly doesn't help.

I think you're giving it more importance than it deserves.....I dont think any of the world powers including China actually care about that factor...

If the Axis vs. Allies concept was still fresh in minds of countries or a factor that still motivates the current world, you wouldnt have countries like China and US having billion dollar trade relations with Germany and Japan...

Its best you rethink upon that line of argument...

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

India was offered the UNSC seat post WW2 only to be rejected by our pacifist leader Nehru.

I recall that part being an urban rumor .

dated September 28, 1955: UN seat: Nehru clarifies

 

[Abingdonboy]

Yes of course, despite ALL FIVE PERMANENT members of the security council already agreeing to India's candidacy:
China backs India's aspirations for UNSC
Russia supports India's claim for permanent UNSC seat - Hindustan Times
US resolution backs India's UNSC bid
Britain backs India's UNSC bid for permanent seat
India deserves permanent seat in UNSC: Sarkozy - Times Of India


And stating this publicly aswell as a call from the rest of the world:

Call to reform UN Security Council - World News - MSN News UK


And despite representing more than 17% of the ENTIRE WOLRD'S POPULTION:

List of countries by population - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

because ONE article says so, India isn't going to get a permanent seat?!!


Yeah, dream on.

 

[notsuperstitious]

Oh come on, such a big and fundamental change will be tough and will take time. There will be many ups and downs on the way. This system has existed for decades and does not cause any problems for India, its not like we need it yesterday.

But the system is unfair and needs reform and hence we will seek its reform, will NEVER drop it, even if the entire world is against us. Why Pakistani newspapers would like to print - ''India to hand over Kashmir on a silver plate'', does not make it true.

 

[my2cents]

If thats true then we should start conducting test which we are feared would cause international outrage like ASAT, ICBM like Surya etc.

Lets not do it for the sake of UNSC seat but do it to create fear in our enemies.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

The whole UN will be disbanded once ww4 starts

 

[tvsram1992]

No. The UNSC was meant for the victors of WWII. India is not in it because its contribution to the war is negligible comparing to others (and not mentioning all these Indian soldiers who joined the Axis side).

Now that you want in, you need to have reasons. If economy is not a reason, then what can be?

China was a victor in WWII?
I heard it was captured/attacked by Japan once

 

[tallboy123]

well then,now india can resume nuclear tests of megatons yield...
test every thing asat icbm..
and we don't need to sign any ctbt or npt

after india test them everything changes

only strength respects strength

 

[Night_Raven]

The whole UN will be disbanded once ww4 starts

You have to be alive after WW3 to see that

 

[Vibs]

Has anyone found a Non-Pakistani media reporting this article?If yes, please post. I'm still searching.

 

[Punjabbi Munda]

BS news,no credible link only 2-3 Pakistani sources.
Cut the crap!