What's new

India Officially Admits That China Blocked It's Bid For UNSC !

Modi realizes India will not get UNSC seat till China sits in approval committee, so he openly calls out UN as an useless organisation which haven't achieved anything throughout its existence. If we can stop all import from China we will be in a better position than having a seat in security council.
Perhaps quiting UN may be the next best proposition for India.
Modi, think about it? :coffee:

Surgical strikes on Beijing throug Brahmos
Sounds great. 8-):sarcastic:

BTW can Brahmos refuel in midair?
Beijing unlike New Delhi is quite a distance away.
 
.
If it wasn't China it would have been US, UK, France or Russia, i doubt any of these countries want a chaotic country to be a member of UNSC, specially a country whose chances of being one country are almost none.
 
.
"Nemesis"?

Voldemort is Harry Potter's nemesis - they're evenly matched and can give each other a proper fight, worthy rivals that people will pay good money to watch go to war.

India is more like...

View attachment 711350
Actually, Harry is always the underdog. So it makes perfect sense unless of course you are loyal to Voldemort - who would that be - let me see -

latest
 
.
No surprises there, and their supporters give lip service. None of the five want change.
Hmm so it has come full circle...is it time to burst the bubble?
Mark my words, it’s just a matter of time when India joins the unsc.
We have backing of the majority of the free world.
@masterchief_mirza check out this level of confidence bro
 
.
Lol - shocking.
But India is a supapowa? Lolol
Actually, Harry is always the underdog. So it makes perfect sense unless of course you are loyal to Voldemort - who would that be - let me see -

latest
India is Harry Potter? At least Harry Potter was well fed and not shitting on the streets mate. Hahahahah
 
. .
African Union and Brazil deserves a seat more then India do. There's already Asian representation in UNSC.
 
.
Trading with India harms India more, since we now make money from Indians earned by starving Indians while still keeping you in the stone age. We provide incentive to your capitalist class to starve you for some few USD from exporting grain, and to fool you with religion while they export beef.
We do know you like to lick your own spit, so nothing new here.
Perhaps quiting UN may be the next best proposition for India.
Modi, think about it? :coffee:

M all for it, there is nothing like UN in this organisation. Its more like a gang of criminal.
 
. .
can't get in. The five permanent members have already denied it once.They agreed to take turns to say no.
 
.
China blocked India's bid for membership at UN Security Council, NSG: S Jaishankar

Jaishankar said China has opposed India's membership of the Nuclear Suppliers Group and to a permanent seat in the UN Security Council.


Geeta Mohan
New DelhiJanuary 28, 2021UPDATED: January 28, 2021 18:59 IST
S Jaishankar

lg.php
External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar. (Photo: Reuters file)

India has officially acknowledged that it is China that has been the biggest impediment to India gaining membership of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) and the United Nations Security Council (UNSC).
On Thursday, External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar said there is "duality" in China's behaviours towards India. He was addressing the 13th All India Conference of China Studies organised by Institute of Chinese Studies and IIT Madras China Studies Centre.
Jaishankar said, "There was China's opposition to India's membership of the Nuclear Suppliers Group and to a permanent seat in the UN Security Council. When it came to trade, promises of market access did not match delivery. The blocking of UN listing of Pakistani terrorists involved in attacks on India had its own resonance."
On tensions at LAC
Speaking of the increased tensions because of the Galwan Valley clash last June, where 20 Indian soldiers were killed, Jaishankar said, "For all the differences and disagreements that we may have had on the boundary, the central fact was that border areas still remained fundamentally peaceful."
"The last loss of life before 2020 was, in fact, as far back as 1975. That is why the events in Eastern Ladakh last year have so profoundly disturbed the relationship. Because they not only signalled a disregard for commitments about minimizing troop levels, but also showed a willingness to breach peace and tranquillity."
China is yet to explain to India why it has taken the steps it did at the LAC, Jaishankar said. "Significantly, to date, we have yet to receive a credible explanation for the change in China's stance or reasons for massing of troops in the border areas."


"It is a different matter that our own forces have responded appropriately and held their own in very challenging circumstances. The issue before us is what the Chinese posture signals, how it evolves, and what implications it may have for the future of our ties," he added.
In his speech, Jaishankar cautioned that any forward movement in ties can only be based on "mutuality of respect, sensitivity and interests".
"Any expectation that they can be brushed aside, and that life can carry on undisturbed despite the situation at the border, that is simply not realistic," he added.
The minister also emphasised that China has continued to be in "violation" of Indian "sovereignty" by building the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) that runs through India's undivided Jammu and Kashmir.
The discussion at the conference will primarily focus on the opportunities and challenges that lie ahead in a post-Covid world.
As neighbours, India and China have major interdependence with the latter becoming one of India's largest trading partners, a very significant source of investment, even of technology, a participant in projects and infrastructure building and a very substantial destination for tourism and education.

India actions against China speak for themselves, do you ever explained to your biggest neighbour why were you installing cameras on the border or why you joined the alliance with US against China. China doesn't need to give you a hoot when you desert your neighbour and decided to put Chinese sovereignty in the harms way to gain some brownie points. Creating and spreading shit in the neighbourhood is very India specific, hope they get the same on their face.
Have India didn't oppose China from joining missile control regime, what goes round comes round.
 
. . .
It's rubbish. I don't even know why they want UNSC permanent membership in a unipolar world. It's not as if the UN gets anything done. Just a prestige issue.
It is mainly to have veto power...not a prestige issue. UN is powerless only against superpowers...so for example it can't tell US what to do. Those with a seat at the UNSC happen to be some of the strongest countries on earth...this not only means that they are powerful on their own but it also gives them power to act through the UN...
...kind of like if u were in control of the white pieces and black pieces of the chessboard(chessboard being the geopolitical stage at a world level).

They can wield power in their own classic "might is right" fashion and go in guns blazing(like in Iraq)...or use UN to deem a country "dangerous" and impose sanctions of various kind(getting the whole world to abide by the rules they set), etc. So who wouldn't want a slice of that extra power? However those who already have such power wouldn't want to dilute it by giving it to another player(like India or others) bcuz one day such a veto power can be used against them.

In conclusion...UN is only useless to non powerful countries. For powerful countries it is another tool of wielding power in their belt...
...India wants that...but other countries who already have it...won't let India in.
 
.
It is mainly to have veto power...not a prestige issue. UN is powerless only against superpowers...so for example it can't tell US what to do. Those with a seat at the UNSC happen to be some of the strongest countries on earth...this not only means that they are powerful on their own but it also gives them power to act through the UN...
...kind of like if u were in control of the white pieces and black pieces of the chessboard(chessboard being the geopolitical stage at a world level).

They can wield power in their own classic "might is right" fashion and go in guns blazing(like in Iraq)...or use UN to deem a country "dangerous" and impose sanctions of various kind(getting the whole world to abide by the rules they set), etc. So who wouldn't want a slice of that extra power? However those who already have such power wouldn't want to dilute it by giving it to another player(like India or others) bcuz one day such a veto power can be used against them.

In conclusion...UN is only useless to non powerful countries. For powerful countries it is another tool of wielding power in their belt...
...India wants that...but other countries who already have it...won't let India in.
In theory, yes. But the US does whatever it wants. Also the UNSC reflects the world in 1945. Cold War is over. Let's say if USA wants to do something and Russia or China veto it in the UN. The US will still go ahead and do it and most likely UK and France (the other veto holders) will join it under NATO. Or if Russia wants to invade a small country closeby - who is going to veto it and what you going to do if they disobey the veto?

Is the UN going to send its forces to take over Washington DC or Moscow?

India is obviously not in that league. But it's irrelevant. If India acquires enough military and economic might over the next few decades - the UNSC won't matter. Sure, it can't veto a war between some African nations - but who cares?

That's my take. Many Indians will disagree.
 
.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom