India's Infatuation With the UN Security Council

[khakhi_chaddi]

Why Brazil?

Why Turkey?

Why Indonesia?

Why Iran?

Why Egypt?

Why Mexico?

Why Nigeria?

These countries could not even dominate their backyard. What good would they do in UNSC?

Even among G4, Brazil is let in only for providing representation to South America.Argentina, Venenzula,Chile and Columbia have an equal claim on South American leadership.

Turkey is a turkey without NATO. Could not dominate Europe and Arabs would not let it dominate middle east.

Indonesia could barely take care of its defence, let alone its region where India, Australia, and Malaysia wield equal or more influence.

Iran! seriously!! Barring propaganda, they could not stand up in straight fight with Azerbaijan. Their Mullahs have degraded their military and most of what you see is blatant propaganda. Midgets subs, Erkoplanes, and paper machie Qaher are micky mouse weapons.


Egypt!! Another Big LOL. The country could not keep itself together, and could not project power. Saudi Arabia and UAE are more fit to become UNSC members as they at least have good airforce, even if their land army is sh!t.

Mexico is Bhutan of North America. USA ensure that whole of North American continent is militarily useless.

Nigeria!! another LOL . The country may split in two and is rife with countrywide insurgency. Also its military power is less than that of SriLanka.


All P5 members are there because they deserve it, even though some like Britain and France do not deserve Veto power. Britian does not have an independent Foreign policy, and none of these two are capable of beating back even half decent opponent (due to chronic underfunding of military).

Of the current claimants of permanent seat, Brazil's case is weakest. It is not a military power,neither capable of projecting power, nor an economic power. Apart from that, it s not growing.

Germany has strongest case. It is practically only growth engine of Europe, and is pulling whole continent, including two permanent members.

Japan case is stronger from military and Economic pov, but has least chance of going through (due to China).

India has very strong case, and India's case would become even stronger with passage of time.



Oil is not climbing back to $80 pb in near future (this decade), and Russian Economy is not coming back to $2 Bn mark in this decade.




India could become sixth largest economy by end of this year or early next year. Difference between India and France is just of $130 Billion.

My selection is based on population of countries & being representative for different region, religion & culture of world rather than size of economy or political/military strength.

Why Brazil?

Why Turkey?

Why Indonesia?

Why Iran?

Why Egypt?

Why Mexico?

Why Nigeria?

These countries could not even dominate their backyard. What good would they do in UNSC?

Even among G4, Brazil is let in only for providing representation to South America.Argentina, Venenzula,Chile and Columbia have an equal claim on South American leadership.

Turkey is a turkey without NATO. Could not dominate Europe and Arabs would not let it dominate middle east.

Indonesia could barely take care of its defence, let alone its region where India, Australia, and Malaysia wield equal or more influence.

Iran! seriously!! Barring propaganda, they could not stand up in straight fight with Azerbaijan. Their Mullahs have degraded their military and most of what you see is blatant propaganda. Midgets subs, Erkoplanes, and paper machie Qaher are micky mouse weapons.


Egypt!! Another Big LOL. The country could not keep itself together, and could not project power. Saudi Arabia and UAE are more fit to become UNSC members as they at least have good airforce, even if their land army is sh!t.

Mexico is Bhutan of North America. USA ensure that whole of North American continent is militarily useless.

Nigeria!! another LOL . The country may split in two and is rife with countrywide insurgency. Also its military power is less than that of SriLanka.


All P5 members are there because they deserve it, even though some like Britain and France do not deserve Veto power. Britian does not have an independent Foreign policy, and none of these two are capable of beating back even half decent opponent (due to chronic underfunding of military).

Of the current claimants of permanent seat, Brazil's case is weakest. It is not a military power,neither capable of projecting power, nor an economic power. Apart from that, it s not growing.

Germany has strongest case. It is practically only growth engine of Europe, and is pulling whole continent, including two permanent members.

Japan case is stronger from military and Economic pov, but has least chance of going through (due to China).

India has very strong case, and India's case would become even stronger with passage of time.



Oil is not climbing back to $80 pb in near future (this decade), and Russian Economy is not coming back to $2 Bn mark in this decade.




India could become sixth largest economy by end of this year or early next year. Difference between India and France is just of $130 Billion.

My selection is based on population of countries & being representative for different region, religion & culture of world rather than size of economy or political/military strength.

 

[Cry.me.a.River]

My selection is based on population of countries & being representative for different region, religion & culture of world rather than size of economy or political/military strength.
.

As I said before, UNSC is not a hippy concert where principles of equal representation works. It was always about wielding hard power, and only countries with military and economic clout deserve and need UNSC permanent seat.

We needed these stupid feel good excuses a decade and a half back. Today, we could push our case on basis of our power and clout.

 

[khakhi_chaddi]

As I said before, UNSC is not a hippy concert where principles of equal representation works. It was always about wielding hard power, and only countries with military and economic clout deserve and need UNSC permanent seat.

We needed these stupid feel good excuses a decade and a half back. Today, we could push our case on basis of our power and clout.

But thats how UNSC should be.

 

[Cry.me.a.River]

But thats how UNSC should be.

Why it should be that way?

There is already a General assembly (Talk and rant shop) for equal representation. UNSC is there for imposing sanctions and authorize peacekeeping missions and military actions. Only countries capable of executing those decisions and against whom such a decision could not be taken due to their strength should be part of UNSC.

Law of Jungle watson. Law of Jungle.

 

[khakhi_chaddi]

Why it should be that way?

There is already a General assembly (Talk and rant shop) for equal representation. UNSC is there for imposing sanctions and authorize peacekeeping missions and military actions. Only countries capable of executing those decisions and against whom such a decision could not be taken due to their strength should be part of UNSC.

Law of Jungle watson. Law of Jungle.

Going forward the world will be multi polar. Gone are the past days of few countries dictating others.

 

[Cry.me.a.River]

Going forward the world will be multi polar. Gone are the past days of few countries dictating others.

No it would not. It would still be unipolar or Bipolar.

Seriously! How many countries are emerging? India? China? anyone else?

Russia, which use to be a pole has collapsed with collapsing Oil Prices. Brazil is stagnant for five years and is not showing a sign of revival. There is not even a half decent pole in whole of Africa.Europe and Japan are declining and would continue to decline as Japanese and Europeans have stopped reproducing.

India and China are only player that have got added to big table, China as a power in its own and India as a junior swing power. It does not mean that there would be a dozen poles in world.

 

[khakhi_chaddi]

No it would not. It would still be unipolar or Bipolar.

Seriously! How many countries are emerging? India? China? anyone else?

Russia, which use to be a pole has collapsed with collapsing Oil Prices. Brazil is stagnant for five years and is not showing a sign of revival. There is not even a half decent pole in whole of Africa.Europe and Japan are declining and would continue to decline as Japanese and Europeans have stopped reproducing.

India and China are only player that have got added to big table, China as a power in its own and India as a junior swing power. It does not mean that there would be a dozen poles in world.

Go and check growth rate of some African countries from 2000 to 2015. It is higher than India.

 

[Cry.me.a.River]

Go and check growth rate of some African countries from 2000 to 2015. It is higher than India.

African countries have low base. Indian and China were never ,never ever, two of fastest growing Economies. They are noted in media because they are fastest growing economies which have a substantial base.

A $50 billion economy could grow add a $55 Billion next year and growth rate becomes 10% real (probably 20% nominal), but for India, China, Japan, Germany, USA, France, Britain; 5 Billion would be lost in rounding off growth figure.

 

[Djinn]

India joining SC wont bode well for China. India is on a collision course with China or at least harbors every intention of being China's counterweight. For China to keep it's sway in regional and international politics, it's imperative that it prevent India from acquiring veto. Fortunately China is well aware of Indian designs and will not create further problems for itself, the first it did by allowing India into NSG group, the answer to which India gave by testing China specific ICBM. If China is to protect its interests globally and regionally without any complications then not allowing India's entry into SC as a permanent member is China's best bet.

 

[TMA]

Give one seat to Europe Union instead of Britain & France, and use the space created for India.

Or better to have a 15 member security council with no veto powers & resolutions to be passed by 2/3 majority.


Oil price above 100 was a aberration due to quantitative easing. It will stay in 40-60 range in future. Russia will remain a trillion dollar economy. Next economy to blow up will be Saudi Arabia.

or why not all members of UN be on the UNSC and for resolution to be passed by 3/4 majority?

 

[dadeechi]

or why not all members of UN be on the UNSC and for resolution to be passed by 3/4 majority?

You mean democracy in UN...This will never happen.

 

[Abingdonboy]

Thats what I say..create new rules ..there should be 8-9 seats.Invite those countries which have military power and will work for global peace..Big draw back of Present team of UNSC is they are least bothered about ISIS.
All top 8 countries should be given seat.
My top 8 list include:
USA
China
russia
india
france/brazil
germany/brazil
britain/brazil
pakistan
australia.

What is your view?

Pakistan? Australia?

Neither of these nations will ever be global powers and are poodles for bigger powers, they have no right to claim a permenant seat.